The "Charter on Punishments Imposed by Magistrates" is addressed to specific law enforcement bodies - Magistrates' Courts. Consists of 13 chapters, including 181 articles.
The “Charter on Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace” contains a list of punishments for misdemeanors against the order of government, violations of decency during the priestly service, against public amenities, violations of the charter on passports, the charter of construction and communications, the charter of fire, the charters of postal and telegraphic, against public health , personal safety, offenses for insulting honor, threats and violence, against the rights of nepotism, against someone else's property.
Punishments for these offenses could be reprimands, remarks, suggestions, monetary penalties not exceeding three hundred rubles, arrest for not more than three months and imprisonment for not more than one year. Article 2 regulates additional punishment, which consisted in "taking away the tools used to commit the offense, or other things that belonged to the guilty person" See: art. 2 "Charter on punishments imposed by magistrates" - In the book. "Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries in 9 volumes". T.8. M., 1991, p.395.
The most common form of punishment is arrest. The difference between arrest and imprisonment was that those sentenced to arrest could be used at work only at their request.
In most of the articles, arrest and monetary punishment are side by side as an alternative, which was calculated on the difference in the property status of the defendants. The poor in this case were arrested, and it was more profitable for the rich to pay a fine.
The "Statute of the Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace" was the main code of norms that determined the punishments that justices of the peace could impose. And the application of punishments under other legal acts had to be consistent with this Charter.
The extenuating circumstance under article 11 was age: juvenile offenders were reduced by half, and juveniles were released from punishment. In the case of punishment, juvenile delinquents were re-educated in special shelters.
An aggravating circumstance was a high social position (Article 14).
A flaw in the "Charter on Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace" is a large number of reference norms, as well as the fact that many chapters determine punishment for violation of other charters (on passports, construction and communications, and others). At the same time, specific articles of these charters are often not indicated, which led to significant inconvenience in using the "Charter on Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace." Some articles are poorly developed and do not take into account cases that are often encountered in practice.
A separate system of responsibility and proceedings for criminal offenses (minor criminal acts). When considering certain issues, there was a blanket reference to the Code (with a combination of crimes, with the disappearance of qualifying circumstances, necessary defense ...). Cancellation of class punishment. Features of the Charters: humanity, democracy and ease of use, the abolition of corporal punishment for women, branding, gauntlets in the army and limiting the use of the rod, the following system of punishments was fixed: 1) reprimands, remarks and suggestions; 2) monetary penalties not exceeding 300 rubles; 3) arrest for not more than three months; 4) imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year.
The prohibition of return to the soldiers as a form of punishment. The use of corporal punishment has been significantly narrowed: 1) a ban on the use of corporal punishment as additional punishment; 2) prohibition to replace deprivation of liberty with rods; 3) rods for everyone (whips, whips, gauntlets, sheleps, etc. were cancelled). In general, the term for all corrective punishments was reduced by 1/3. Appropriate changes were made to the Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments.
To the punishments determined by this Statute, joins in certain cases, specifically indicated, the removal of tools used to commit a misdemeanor, or other things belonging to the guilty person. Those sentenced to imprisonment are used for work established for worker's houses (Const. of custody, art. 282-291 and 947-945). Those sentenced to arrest are engaged in work only of their own free will. They are kept separately from other prisoners. Priests and monastics sentenced to arrest or imprisonment are not sent to places of detention, but to their diocesan authorities for the execution of the sentence by order. In those places where correctional asylums are established, juveniles from ten to seventeen years of age may, in exchange for imprisonment, be transferred to these asylums for a period determined by the justice of the peace, but not to leave them there after reaching the age of eighteen.
Those sentenced to monetary penalties, in case of insolvency to pay them, are subject to: instead of a monetary penalty of not more than fifteen rubles - arrest for not more than three days; instead of a monetary penalty in excess of fifteen and up to three hundred rubles - arrest for not more than three months. Peasants and philistines who are unable to pay monetary penalties may be given to public works or to earn money on the basis of the rules set forth in Article 188 of the General Regulations of February 19, 1861 (vol. IX, Prod. 1863) and in Article 651 - and the Charter on taxes. Insolvent persons of other classes are given to public work or to earn money only if they so request.
For offenses committed without intent, justices of the peace are allowed to make the guilty, depending on the circumstances, reprimand, remark or suggestion. Severe punishments are determined for unintentional misconduct only in the following cases: when this Charter imposes a punishment specifically for negligence and when the misconduct consists in negligent failure to perform any special duty imposed by law.
Misdemeanors are not imputable at all when they are committed:
- accidentally, not only without intention, but also without any care or negligence;
- in infancy up to ten years;
- in madness, insanity and fits of illness, leading to insanity or complete unconsciousness;
- compelled by force majeure and
- for the necessary defense.
Minors from ten to seventeen years of age are assigned half the amount. A Justice of the Peace who has not reached fourteen years of age may, without subjecting to punishment, send him to his parents, guardians or relatives for home correction.
When determining the measure of punishment for misdemeanors, the justice of the peace appoints it according to the circumstances accompanying the criminal act, which reduce or increase the guilt. In doing so, the following rules are observed:
- when a guilty person is convicted to imprisonment in prison, this punishment is imposed within the limits of the highest and lowest measure, determined by the subject articles of this Charter;
- when imposing an arrest, when the maximum limit of this punishment is set in the amount of more than three days, it cannot be determined in the amount of three or less days, and
- when imposing a pecuniary penalty determined by law in only one higher amount, it may be mitigated at the discretion of the judge.
Circumstances that reduce the guilt of the defendant are mainly recognized:
- dementia and extreme ignorance;
- strong irritation, which occurred not from the fault of the defendant himself;
- extreme and lack of any means of subsistence and work;
- former impeccable behavior;
- voluntary, before the decision of the verdict, remuneration suffered harm or loss and
- confession and sincere repentance.
Circumstances that increase the guilt of the defendant are mainly recognized as:
- deliberation in the actions of the perpetrator;
- a certain degree of his education and a more or less high position in society;
- the repetition of the same or the commission of a similar offense before the expiration of a year after the sentence was sentenced, and
stubborn denial and, especially, arousing suspicion against the innocent.
When two or more persons participate in the commission of a misdemeanor, those of the guilty who committed it themselves or incited others to do so are punished more severely than their accomplices.
In the case of a combination of offenses, the guilty person is subject to that of the punishments determined for the committed offenses, which the justice of the peace recognizes as more severe for the guilty person. Imprisonment is always recognized as a punishment more severe than arrest or a monetary penalty. The totality of offenses is considered in any case as a circumstance that increases guilt. In case of a combination of offenses against the statutes of the Treasury Department with other criminal acts, the rule set forth in Article 1126 of the Charter of Criminal Procedure is observed.
An attempt to commit a misdemeanor stopped by the defendant's own will is not subject to punishment. 18. Misdemeanors against the honor and rights of individuals, referred to in Articles 84, 103, 130-143 and 145-153, are subject to punishment only on the complaint of those who have suffered insult, harm or loss, or their spouses, parents or guardians in general those who should take care of them.
Theft, fraud and misappropriation of other people's property between spouses, as well as between parents and children, shall be subject to punishment only upon the complaint of the person who has suffered the loss.
Some of the offenses referred to in Articles 18 and 19 do not entail punishment in the event of reconciliation of the offended or injured person with the person guilty of the offense.
The perpetrators are released from punishment when theft, fraud and appropriation of other people's property within two years, deforestation within a year, and other misdemeanors within six months from the time they were committed did not become known to the justice of the peace or the police, or when within the same there was no production on them.
The punishment determined by the verdict is canceled:
- for the death of the condemned and
- due to reconciliation with the offended in the cases specified by law (Article 20).
For the harm or losses caused by misconduct, the perpetrators are obliged to reward on the basis of civil laws (vol. X. part 1). In the event of the insolvency of the remuneration awarded for payment and for monetary recovery, compensation for damage or loss is first covered from his property and all indisputable claims addressed to the guilty person are fulfilled, and monetary recovery is applied only to the rest of his property after that.
When the misdemeanor consists in the failure to comply with the law or the prescriptions acting by virtue of the law of the authorities, then the guilty, regardless of penalties, are sentenced to the execution, as far as possible, of what they missed.
Types of misdemeanors: 1) against the order of management, 2) against decency, 3) against public amenities, 4) violation of the charter on passports, 5) violation of the charters of construction and communications, 6) violation of the charter of the fireman, 7) violation of the charters of the postal and telegraphic, 8) against public health, 9) against personal security, 10) insult to honor, threats and violence,! 1) against family rights, 12) against someone else's property (unauthorized use, damage, etc.).
Transformations aimed at creating market relations required their legal support and protection. There was a need to bring Russian legislation into line with the legislation of advanced European countries. This could be achieved in the presence of a well-established judicial and legal system with a strict division of powers between all its components. This goal was pursued by the judicial reform of 1864.
The judicial reform is considered the most radical of all the reforms carried out by the government of Alexander II. It most clearly reflected the basic elements of bourgeois law.
The main legislative acts, which radically changed the system of the judiciary and legal proceedings in the country, entered into force on November 20, 1864. This "Institution of Courts"(bodies) - the law on the judiciary; "Charter of Civil Procedure", determined the order of the civil process; "Charter of Criminal Proceedings" law on criminal procedure; and "Charter on the punishments imposed by magistrates" - code of substantive law, which should have been guided in their law enforcement practice by justices of the peace.
The main principles on which the new judicial system was built are as follows: 1) separation of the judiciary from the administrative; 2) independence and irremovability of judges; 3) the all-estate court, that is, the introduction of a single court for all estates and equal responsibility of all estates before the court; 4) the law is the basis of the activities of the courts; 5) publicity, competition and oral court proceedings; 6) collegiality in decision-making. The essence of these principles was briefly expressed by the royal decree to the ruling Senate on the promulgation of new laws and on their implementation. "We wish, - it said - establish in Russia a speedy, just, merciful and equal court for all our subjects, elevate the judiciary, give it proper independence and generally establish among our people that respect for the law, net of which social welfare is impossible and which should be a constant leader of the actions of everyone and everyone , from highest to lowest."
judiciary
The old judicial system, which was basically created under Catherine II and reorganized in 1801, was cumbersome and inefficient, and did not meet the requirements for it for a long time. There were county courts for all classes (county zemstvo court for nobles, county reprisal for state peasants, city magistrates for townspeople). Instead of the abolished second-tier courts (at the provincial level), there were chambers of criminal and civil courts in the provincial centers, and from which it was possible to appeal decisions of a lower instance. In addition, court courts for nobles and officials operated in the capitals. The entire system was headed by the Senate as the highest court. There were also special courts: military, spiritual, commercial. In conscientious courts, where two representatives from each estate sat, disputes between estates were considered.
The plurality of judicial bodies, their class character, the lack of clarity in determining the jurisdiction of cases gave rise to the complexity and confusion of procedural norms. In 1864 the old judiciary was abolished, and the new judiciary introduced by the "Institution of Courts" took on the following form. It consisted of 2 structures: 1) local courts(for solving minor cases) - volost and world", 2) common courts, which included District Court and Tribunal. At the head of the judiciary was Senate.
Justices of the Peace were established in order to unload the main link - general courts - from minor cases. An example for them was the Magistrate's Court of England, where the government appointed "respectable and respectable people" from the local population to the positions of justices of the peace, who did not receive a salary for their work. But in Russia justices of the peace elected by zemstvo county and city self-government bodies(Zemsky Assembly and the City Duma) and approved by the Senate. A person who met certain qualifying requirements could become a justice of the peace: age(at least 25 years old) education(higher or secondary), settled way of life(who has lived in the area for at least 2 years) with at least 3 years of experience in the judiciary and proprietary(property qualification). It could be land - from 400-1600 acres in different provinces, real estate or capital from 15 thousand rubles of annual income.
The space of activity of the world court was world district(county with cities), divided into plots. The district justice of the peace received a small salary for his work from the Zemstvo fees. Led by an elected magistrate refused a salary, he was awarded the title honorary magistrate. He could continue to manage the district, or he could consider cases in the absence of the district police officer or at the request of the victims. Retired military and state officials, former high-ranking judicial officials (senators and chairmen of the judicial chambers), district and provincial marshals of the nobility also became honorary magistrates.
Jurisdiction in civil cases in the world court was determined by the price of the claim. Cases could be considered here, the damage in which did not exceed 500 rub. From criminal cases of world jurisdiction cases of offenses against public order, personal insults and thefts up to 300 rubles were subject. In these cases, justices of the peace, according to the "Charter on Punishments Imposed by Justices of the Peace", could do remarks, reprimands, monetary penalties(for an amount not exceeding 300 rubles), arrest(up to 3 months) and imprisonment(for a period not exceeding 1 year).
The main goal pursued by the World Court is reconciliation of the parties. The magistrate acted in it both as an investigator and as the sole arbiter of the case, and the investigation and trial were carried out simultaneously and, as a rule, in one session. The verdict of the magistrate was considered final, except for the decision on imprisonment, that is, not subject to appeal by way of appeal. Inconclusive sentence(about imprisonment) could be appealed in the second instance - congress of magistrates of the district.
The congress (at a meeting of 3 judges) reviewed the case on the merits. This meeting was attended by a deputy prosecutor of the district court, who gave an opinion on the case on the basis of the statutes of civil and criminal proceedings. The verdict of the district judge could be approved or reviewed within the limits of the recall (that is, the statement of the party that appealed against it). The verdict of the congress of justices of the peace was considered final and could only be challenged on appeal in the Senate.
The magistrate of the district himself executed the sentence, resorting to the help of the police if necessary. All office work in the world court (petitions, applications, responses, etc.) was carried out on plain paper and without any duties, like the production itself, which was absolutely free.
In 1889, the institute of magistrates underwent some reorganization. They remained only in the capitals, and locally, in 43 provinces, their functions were transferred to zemstvo chiefs and city judges, who combined judicial powers with administrative ones. The county congress of zemstvo chiefs was recognized as the second instance, in which all members of the district court and city judges participated. The congress was headed by the district marshal of the nobility. The cassation instance for such a court moved from the Senate to the Provincial Presence. But after the reform of P.A. Stolypin in 1912, the world courts were restored. The revival of this judicial institution began in our time, from the end of 1998.
District Court and Court of Justice. Everything that exceeded the jurisdiction of the magistrate's court was subject to the jurisdiction of the general courts. The main authority here was district Court. It was established, as a rule, one per province or united several counties in large provinces. A total of 104 judicial districts were created. The district court consisted of two divisions: civil and criminal cases. In each division, cases were considered collegiately by at least 3 judges. This composition is called crown court. At the same time, the transition of members of the court from one department to another was practiced.
The criminal department, in addition to the crown court, included jury trial. Particularly serious cases were transferred to his jurisdiction, cases of crimes that entailed punishment in the form of deprivation of all rights of the state. All other cases were judged by the Crown Court.
The second instance in general jurisdiction was judicial chamber, one for several provinces. They were created 11, then their number increased to 14. It was divided into departments of criminal and civil cases, which were chaired. The Trial Chamber acted as court of first instance for state crimes and official crimes. When considering such cases in the sessions of the judicial chamber, the presence of class representatives(leaders of the nobility, city mayors and volost foremen).
Like a second instance court the tribunal considered on appeal decisions and verdicts of district courts (on complaints of the parties and on protests of prosecutors). She also exercised general supervision over the activities of district courts.
At the end of the 1880s. as a reaction of the authorities to the revolutionary terror, cases of political crimes, terrorist acts were withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the judicial chambers and transferred to the Senate (Special Presence), and cases of armed resistance to the authorities, attempts on officials - to the jurisdiction of military justice. The role of the gendarmerie has increased in the investigation of political cases and terrorist acts. Thanks to these and other measures, terror was neutralized, but in the 1890s. the ideology of individual terror of Russian revolutionaries was replaced by the ideology of class terror - Marxism. The old methods of struggle proved to be ineffective.
Senate was at the head of the judiciary. He played the role cassation instance and, like a judicial chamber, was divided into 2 departments, criminal and civil cases. The Senate was located in St. Petersburg and received complaints from the parties and protests from prosecutors against final verdicts. The Senate was also declared the highest body of judicial supervision for all newly created judicial bodies (institutions).
Judges Institute. The law provided that judicial positions could only be held by Russian subjects but only lawyers with special education(having certificates of universities or other higher educational institutions on the completion of the course of legal sciences or "passed the exam in these sciences"). They should have had work experience in the judiciary in the ranks of not lower than a secretary of a district court for 3 years or a barrister (lawyer) for 10 years, with excellent performance from the place of service (“certificate of accurate, proper and impeccable performance of one’s duties”). University graduates could be appointed to the position of a judge if they served in the courts for 4 years candidates and have reached the age of 25. This service was free. Candidate's experience could only be acquired by fairly wealthy people. But there was no property qualification for judges holding office, who received a very decent monetary reward for their work.
The law equated judicial activity with public service. Judges moved up the ranks (district judge, deputy chairman of the district court, chairman of the district court, member of the department of the judicial chamber, senator, etc.). They were awarded orders, upon retirement they received state pensions. The rights and privileges assigned to the judges belonged to their families as well. Assuming office, judges bring oath of allegiance to the Emperor who confirmed their appointment, and pledged to faithfully fulfill the law. Guided by the law, the judges did not have the right to interpret it, but could also rely on dictates of conscience. The judges were obliged to act impartially, to respect the dignity of the defendant.
However, the position of judges differed from that of other officials of the empire in one important circumstance. The law went into effect principle of irremovability of judges. Only a criminal court could remove a judge from office. All other cases are own resignation letter. Was not limited and limiting age judges. In the event of a serious illness, the judge was given a year to recover. Only after his passage could a resignation without a petition follow. Irremovability was the main guarantee of the independence of judges from the administration.
The judge must have high moral character. The law forbade the holding of judicial positions by people under investigation or trial, tried, expelled from service by court, from the spiritual department for vices, from societies or noble assemblies by the verdicts of the estates to which they belonged. Insolvent debtors and those under guardianship for extravagance could not become judges.
For their deeds, the judges carried responsibility: disciplinary(reprimand, remark, warning, arrest for 7 days, transfer to a lower position), material(salary deduction) and criminal. Introduced and removal of judges parties for reasons of material or other interest in the case or because of family ties.
Control and verification work
On the history of the national state and law
Option number 1.
Essay question:
Exploring the features of Ancient Russia, determine what was the nature of the social system: tribal, feudal, slave? Justify your answer.
Completed:
Student of the 403 study group of the FZO
Kolesnikov Alexander Evgenievich
Home address: Kirov region,
Yaransk, st. Lagunovskaya, 26-34
Place of work and position:
security department FBU IZ-43/3
Checked:
Associate Professor of the Department of State and Legal Disciplines
major of internal service Ph.D.
Perepinos Julia Alekseevna
Date of passing the test:
Vologda, 2010.
Introduction3
1. Essay-reasoning : 4
Exploring the features of Ancient Russia, determine what was
nature of the social system: tribal, feudal,
slaveholding? Justify your answer.
2. Practical part. Tasks.6
3. Comparative table. 9
Conclusion.22
Bibliographic list.24
Introduction
The history of state and law is both a legal and a historical science. It studies the general historical patterns of development of the state and law. The state, being an organization of public power, and law as a system of generally binding norms expressing the will of the state elevated to law, are two interrelated social phenomena.
Turning to the history of Russia and Russia helps not only to see the present through the prism of the past, but also to answer the eternal questions: who are we, where did we come from, where are we going, in the name of what. Knowledge of the past helps to understand the present and explains the tasks of the future. A people familiar with its history lives consciously, is sensitive to the reality surrounding it and knows how to understand it. Knowledge of national history is the path to national self-consciousness.
To study the question posed, to give a more complete and objective answer to it, I used the following IOGP methods:
historical method - the study of the issue in chronological order, i.e. in development;
comparative method - comparison of state-legal phenomena in Ancient Russia and modern Russia.
This work reveals the stages of the political history of Ancient Russia, its social system. The application of law in specific situations, on the basis of various legal documents in certain periods of the development of Russian society, is considered. A comparative analysis of the constitutions of Russia from the beginning of 1918 to 1977 was carried out.
This work will be useful for students of secondary and higher educational institutions as an additional tool for doing independent work, preparing for seminars and tests.
Task number 1.
Essay-reasoning:
Exploring the features of Ancient Russia, determine what was the nature of the social system: tribal, feudal, slave? Justify your answer.
Exploring the features of Ancient Russia, the processes taking place in the Old Russian society, you begin to understand that the nature of the social system was complex and mixed. . Even from the period of Indo-European unity, the Slavs carried out developed family relationships, single-marriage and types of consanguinity, according to the father, kinship. The patriarchal Proto-Slavic family, populating the whole, constituted a community united by ties of consanguinity, in other words, a clan. The clan community bore a common name from its ancestor (ending in - ichi, -ovichi, -vtsy), jointly owned property and was managed by her elder (headman, lord, ruler), who maintained peace and harmony in the community, sorted out misunderstandings in its environment and disposed of the work of its members.
The tribal communities of the Eastern Slavs were characterized by the absence of private property, all property was collective.
The emergence of the Old Russian state is associated with the decomposition of the primitive communal system, which the tribes of the Eastern Slavs experienced in the 6th century. Tribal and kinship relations are replaced by territorial, political and military ties.
With the division of labor and the increase in its productivity, it becomes possible to exploit the labor of others. In the rural community, the process of social stratification begins, the emergence of the top, which grew rich due to the exploitation of neighbors and the use of slave labor.
By the 8th century 14 tribal unions were formed on the territory of the Slavic tribes. The union was headed prince and princely squad.
The form of social relations of the Slavs in the VII-VIII centuries. spoke military democracy . Its features include:
Participation of all members of the tribal union in solving the most important issues;
The special role of the people's assembly as the highest authority;
General arming of the population (people's militia). The ruling class was formed from the old tribal aristocracy- leaders, priests, elders - and wealthy members of the community.
Pursuing military and political goals, tribal unions united into even larger formations - "unions of unions" .
The ancient Russian (Kiev) state in its form was early feudal monarchy . It lasted until the middle of the 12th century. In the second half of the XI - the beginning of the XII century. on its territory began to form semi-state principalities: Kiev, Chernihiv, Pereyaslav.
The political system of the ancient Russian state combined both the institutions of the feudal formation and the primitive communal system. Later, under Yaroslav Vladimirovich (1019–1054), feudal features were further developed. At the head of the state was the prince, who ruled in Kyiv. He was the oldest of the kind Rurikovich, the princes of tribal unions were to obey him. These, as a rule, were the sons and nephews of the Grand Duke.
As a result, we see that in the process of stratification of Slavic society into classes and the further development of social relations, the characteristic features of tribal relations are preserved. This is the participation of all members of society in solving important issues when “ military democracy", and the preservation of the institution of the genus with" early feudal monarchy". In both cases, the entrance to the ruling elite was, as in tribal relations, from the warriors who defended their settlement ( princely retinue). And the head among them was the prince ( first among equals). With all this, the princes were not the owners of the lands, but managers, upon whose death or their change, the princely squad was deprived of its privileges given by the former prince.
Task number 2. Practical part.
Solve problems. The correct answer is considered to be a complete answer to the question with a mandatory reference to the relevant article, chapter, part of this source.
Task #1
Use the text of the Long Edition of Russkaya Pravda.
On Beloozero in the village of Vysokoye, the boyar Nikifor was killed in a fight. The killers were not found. Who will be responsible for the crime committed? What is the punishment for this crime?
According to paragraph 3, 6 Pr.RP. to impose on the village of Vysokoye on Beloozero a double penalty in the amount of 80 hryvnias for the murder of the prince's husband (boyar Nikifor) in a litter or at a feast. According to paragraph 4 of ARP. must pay in how many years can.
Extract from the "Long Russian Truth":
p. 3. If someone kills the prince's husband in a fight, and the killers are not looking for, then the virus - 80 hryvnias - is paid by the community in whose district the murdered man was raised. If an ordinary person is killed, the community pays 40 hryvnias.
Clause 6. But for a murderer who has invested in the community's payments for others, the community pays according to the layout only when he committed the murder in a quarrel or at a feast.
Clause 4. If any community begins to pay wild (general) vir, when there is no killer, then let him pay it in how many years he can.
Task #2
Use the text of the Military Article of 1715.
Soldier of the Rostov Regiment Nikita Bobylev appeared before a military court on charges of losing his uniform. At the trial, he testified that, being drunk, he sold his uniform to the merchant's son Alexei Antipin.
What decision should the court make?
According to chapter 6 art.59 AB. to subject the soldier of the Rostov regiment Nikita Bobylev to the punishment of gauntlets and payment of the cost of lost property.
To oblige the merchant's son Alexei Antipin to return the uniform he illegally acquired, as well as to pay a fine in the amount of triple the cost of the uniform, or, according to the invention of the person, he will be punished with gauntlets.
Extract from the Military Article of 1715.
Chapter 6 article 59 . Is there anyone who loses his uniform, sells his gun, or gives it away as a mortgage, he has in the first and suddenly cruelly with gauntlets, and is punished with a patch of the lost, and in the third he will be shot. Likewise, the one who buys from a soldier, or accepts such things, not only what he accepted or bought, return packs without money, but also three times as much as it costs, he must pay a fine, or, according to the invention of the person, he will be punished with gauntlets.
Interpretation. For weapons are the most important elements and methods of the soldiers, through which the enemy has to be defeated. And whoever does not take care of his gun, this bad sign of his soldiership will show, and little desire to have a signifier, so that he can properly send his position in battle; For that sake, it is worthy to eat it so cruelly to punish, which helps the soldier in this, for he makes the soldier unfit for the service of his sovereign.
Task #3
Use the Judicial Statutes of 1864.
In 1869, in the county town of N, a retired titular councilor P. stole a bronze candlestick worth 15 rubles from collegiate assessor Ch. In which court will the case be heard? What decision will the court make?
Loading...