Dreisiegler letter
A decree of the Republic of the Three Leagues ( Rhaeto-Romanic La Republica da las Trais Lias Republica for short), a former state in what is now Graubünden in Switzerland , was called a Dreisiegler letter . The document was referred to as a three- seal letter because all three groups legitimized the document with their seal . The Dreisiegler letter was passed on February 6, 1574 by the Parliament of the Republic, the Bundestag (Dieta da las lias). The affiliated municipalities of the republic verified the document in a referendum . This made the letter state law. The Dreisiegler letter forbade the spontaneous gathering of armed groups for the purpose of setting up a spontaneous criminal court. The establishment of such criminal courts has increasingly undermined the authority of the courts of the judicial communities. The Bundestag forbade the incitement, rioting with flags, armed forces and weapons as well as "traveling to the communities" as punishment for body and property. (For the term «travel» see Reisiger and Reisläufer ). Such riots were popularly known as Fähnlilupf . The state law had only a very limited effect. The republic lacked an institution to enforce this law.
background
The republic of the three federations was a free state , consisting of the «church federation», the «gray federation» and the «ten judges federation». Each of these leagues consisted of different high courts or judicial communities that remained sovereign. These were organized very differently. Often they were rulers of the lower nobility, or they were given by the sovereigns as fiefs to the lower nobility. For example, the communities in the Lower Engadine were part of the Church of God, but also in the territory of the Habsburgs . Long-established families such as the Planta family or the Salis family had the actual power of rule .
The republic did not have a central army and it was the task of the judicial communities to maintain militias . These were provided by the local population of the communities. Especially in the age of the Reformation , the subjects often rebelled against the rulers by spontaneously setting up a criminal court against them and also condemning them. Often the members of several militias allied against a common enemy or adversary. In disputes between the population and the rulers, judgments in favor of the rulers were often decided by the courts. With the help of the militias, the population rebelled against it.
This led, for example, to an uprising in the Lower Engadine against the pensioners of France in 1565 . The lower nobility had made troops available to France in return for annual pensions. There was a dispute about missing pay. Johann von Planta had received rule over Rhäzüns as a pawn from the Habsburgs in 1558 . But in 1560 the population refused to pay homage to Johann von Planta . The matter went before the high court and this decided in favor of the Planta. The population had to pay tithing to them. This led to the Fähnlilupf before Chur in 1572 , which ended with the arrest, conviction and execution of Johann von Planta by an arbitrary criminal court. Neither the republic nor the allied Confederation approved the condemnation and saw it as an erosion and loss of power of the ordinary courts and as a slide into anarchy . The Dreisiegler letter was the direct consequence of this.
Individual evidence
- ↑ Martin Bundi: Dreisiegler letter. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland , accessed on June 7, 2020 .
- ^ Anton Henne: Swiss chronicle in four books: examined from the sources and presented. Verlag von Huber und Comp., St. Gallen and Bern 1841, Volume 3, p. 789.
- ^ Hansjürg Gredig: Johann von Planta (Wildenberg). In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland , accessed on June 7, 2020 .
- ^ Silvio Färber: Criminal Court. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland , accessed on June 7, 2020 .