a safe haven in the shadow of war? – mia korpiola 71 The Court also wrote to Chancellor Oxenstierna mentioning the lack of its own insignia in its memorandum and requesting that they be sent His Royal Majesty’s explanation of the matter of the seal as soon as possible (medh dedh förste).176 Almost a month later, the King replied to the Court of Appeal that the matter of the seal had been delegated to Chancellor Oxenstierna.177 Oxenstierna and the Court of Appeal obviously worked quickly and determinedly, as only five weeks later, on 1 September, the Court used its new seal, which was inspired by that of the High Council of King ErikXIV.178 In its final form, the 1615 Statute of Trials gave instructions on the ratification of the documents issued by the Court, also mentioning its seal using two different expressions which probablywere meant as synonymous (wår Nämds Insegle; Hoffrättens Secrete).179 Thus several matters of both practical and symbolic importance to the new Court and its staff were only resolved in anticipation of the autumn law term after the Court had brought them to the attention of the King and his Chancellor. As mentioned above, one of the main reasons for the establishment of the new Court was the impending departure of the King for the Baltic theatre of war.180 Administration of justice, usually in the hands of the monarch and his Chancery, was now to be delegated more or less permanently. From all that transpires, the division of labour between the king and his judges-assignees seems not to have been well-defined or thought out in detail in advance. It may have been thought that the powers of the Court of Appeal as delegated by the King were more extensive during his absence rätten skall att serdeles Insigle hafue och bruke, till all försegla alla domar och andre breff medh, som af rätten vtgå kunna, Så begäre wij fördenskuldh ödmiukligen, att E. K. M:t wille sigh nådigest förklare, huadh E. K. M:t teckes der till bruka lathe.” 176 RA, SHA, B I a 1, Memorandum of the Court of Appeal to Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna, 30 June 1614, fol. 18r. 177 RA, SHA, E I:1a 1b, Letter from Gustav II Adolf to the Court of Appeal, 25 July 1614, fol. 69v: “hafwer Wij låtit gifwa wälbe:nte Wår Cantzler all besked om det.” 178 Resolution of the Court of Appeal on its Court Fees, 1 Sept. 1614, RA, SHA, E I:1a 1b, fol. 70r. See also Martin Sunnqvist’s chapter in this book. 179 Art. 13, Rättegångs-Process (1615), inKongl. stadgar, ed. Schmedeman, pp. 151-152. 180 See also Afzelius, Ivar 1914 p. 171. Diffuse Division of Labour between the King and his Judges-Assignees
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=