Article citation
information:
Rutkowski, M. Navigability of the Vistula and other rivers as revealed in
projects of Polish administrative authorities during the early 1860s. Scientific Journal of Silesian
University of Technology. Series Transport. 2016, 92, 111-121. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: 10.20858/sjsutst.2016.92.11.
Marek RUTKOWSKI[1]
NAVIGABILITY OF THE VISTULA
AND OTHER RIVERS AS REVEALED IN PROJECTS OF POLISH ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES
DURING THE EARLY 1860S
Summary. The
aim of this article is to describe the proposals from administrators during the
mid-19th century to improve the regulation of, and the rafting status on,
the Vistula and other main watercourses in the Kingdom of Poland. The
deliberation process is also shown, especially in order to reveal the genuine
attitude of the Tsarist-controlled Polish authorities towards these requests.
Keywords: regulation of rivers; Kingdom of
Poland; 19th century
1. INTRODUCTION
Probably
the last moment in the history of partitioned Poland occurred when local Poles,
faced with the power of the Russian invaders, tried to exert effective
influence on diverse matters concerning the regulation of their rivers,
especially the Vistula, at the time of the reopening of the Third State
Council of the Kingdom of Poland in the early 1860s[2].
This event, among other activities, allowed Warsaw’s administrators to
focus their profound efforts on water transport issues
in the country. This article aims to examine the administrative requests
and proposals regarding river regulations and rafting, which were submitted by
members of the Polish administration and considered within the structures of
the Third State Council. The content has been solely based on archive
material kept in the Central Archives of Historical Record in Warsaw[3].
2. REQUEST BY ACTUAL STATE COUNCILLOR MICHAŁ LEWIŃSKI FOR FURTHER
REGULATION OF THE VISTULA RIVER, SUBMITTED IN 1861
The problem of
navigability of the Vistula River was subject to previous endeavours of several
separate state committees, which were established specifically for the analysis
of the general state of its current, as well as in relation to the field
of interest of other formal and permanent bodies of state administration. By
the end of the 1850s, however, it clearly occurred
that the majority of such efforts had not brought about any of the anticipated
results[4].
Under these circumstances, it is no wonder that, just after an initial
reactivation of Polish quasi-independent administrative authorities (including
the so-called Third State Council of the Kingdom of Poland), while analysing
the general state of national transport, members of the Department of Tax
Administration of the State Council turned their attention to the very poor
state (from their point of view) of Polish water transport. It was, therefore,
noted in the official minutes of meeting of above-mentioned Department of
Tax Administration that the overall state of river navigability was
completely unacceptable, including the current of the main Polish water artery,
the Vistula River. During fruitful conversations, the Department of Tax
Administration suggested a variety of measures aimed at improving the navigability of Polish rivers, despite not
eliminating the substantial cause of the consistently observed and sustained
poor condition of Polish watercourses. According to members of the Department
of Tax Administration, the poor condition of the local water transportation
system was due to the insufficient level of funding earmarked in the
Polish state budget.
On the other hand, in 1861, there
appeared, among Polish higher administration staff members, to be a certain
mood of a slightly optimistic nature with regard to the expected course of
future works in this field. As such, it was clearly stated in Department of Tax
Administration proceedings that “one should hope for a competent authority to
address its postulates corresponding to the conclusive validity of the object
itself to which the state budget will deliver the most appropriate
opportunity”. Thus, as early as 1861, the simple necessity of carrying out a
detailed analysis of the development of any future works, which focused on the
process of detailed improvements in the navigability of the Vistula River (and other
rivers in the Kingdom of Poland), was predicted[5].
This anticipation proved to be fully
correct. Indeed, by early autumn of 1862, the new project in this regard was
signed by Lewiński. Recognizing the importance of
proper care for all modes of transport, the author of this paper has expressed
his conviction regarding the priority role of watercourses - mainly of the
Vistula River, but also other currents
- in terms of the development of the transport network in the Kingdom of
Poland. The main reason for the adoption by the author of such a position
relates to the fact that the main Polish export products were “raw” or
“unprocessed” materials, which, as a general rule, should not have been carried
using relatively expensive land transport; instead, it would have been much
better to have transported them by water, as it was the cheapest form of public
transportation. Here, Lewiński not only referred to
the previously expressed statements of the Department of Administration and
Finance of the Third State Council (which not only revealed that general
budgetary spending on state communications in the Kingdom of Poland proved, at
the time, to be of lesser value than any tax income in this regard), but also
suggested the necessity of the state treasury to spend the exact “amount
of any funds required” on transport. This last remark, however, was not
originally supported formally by any statement/request by the Department
of Tax Administration of the Third State Council, given that, for some legal
reasons, it was unmanageable in relation to the budget of the Kingdom of Poland
for 1863. Rather, the view was that it would not have been possible to have
implemented it any sooner than in the budget plan for the 1864 fiscal year.
Furthermore, the lack of any long-term budgetary funds for the purpose of
“cleaning” and regulation of the Vistula River and other navigable water
currents, according to Lewiński, would have
eventually resulted in the possibility of simultaneous failure with regard
to developing some kind of stable state budget based on the full balance of all
the incomes and expenditures. In the opinion of this particular state
councillor, this might have resulted from the acknowledgment of the fact that
the alleged increased traffic in transit would automatically mean larger
national fiscal revenues[6].
Based on these
legal observations in the fiscal field, Lewiński
added that, in 1861, Warsaw’s administrative authorities expressed their desire
to include a series of public works in the “public interest” into the state
budget, including projects concerning the Polish water transport system.
However, even if this idea had been met with some kind of positive reception
from the Russian Tsar Alexander II, “this did not come into effect, and could
not come, since the lack of binding [i.e., balancing] of the budget was a main
objection to it”. To solve this problem, Lewiński
proposed abandoning the situation in which the budgetary reserve would not be
used correctly, while it could easily be directed for use solely for the pro-development
of the Kingdom of Poland, i.e., “to increase the prosperity of that country and
the well-being of its inhabitants”. Finally, then, Lewiński
suggested using the fiscal reserve of the Kingdom of Poland, to the exact
amount of RUB 300,000, while targeting spending on important communication
purposes. In his opinion, after the assigning of this amount of money from the
general resources of the state treasury, one could use it for six consecutive
years in order to clean up the stream of the main river in the Kingdom of
Poland, remove local dangerous reefs and achieve an overall “settlement”
regarding the Vistula River. By excluding the general budget reserve of
the Kingdom of Poland regarding the needed for the above-described purposes, Lewiński understood that it was necessary to facilitate the
“segregation of entire funds totalling RUB 18,000 from the general reserves”
and include them in the state budget under a specific “obligatory” name. This
amount of money was, moreover, to be secured by a guarantee concerning the
unconditional recognition of the interdiction of spending it for any other
purpose[7].
In turn, with the emergence in the 1860s of some
shortfalls in the Polish state budget, which served as a pretext for his
actions, Lewiński tried to convince Warsaw’s
authorities to use some of the state’s financial reserve to develop water
transport usage. This money had to be used for the purposes of “cleansing” and
improving navigability of some of the main watercourses in the Kingdom of
Poland, with particular emphasis on improving the conditions of travelling on
the Vistula River.
Lewiński’s prescription did
not go unnoticed. Between 11 and 23 October 1862, a demand was sent to the
Department of Tax Administration by Lewiński to annually
allocate 300,000 silver roubles to clean and regulate the Vistula River was
sent to the Secretary of State at the Third State Council, Stanisław Zieliński, on the
strict order of “the Great Prince [Romanov, i.e., Tsarist] Governor” and the
President of Warsaw’s State Council. Furthermore, this petition was supposed to
be presented at a later date (i.e., after primary deliberation) for final
consideration by the General Assembly of the State Council[8].
Shortly after
submitting Lewiński’s elaboration to the Department
of Tax Administration of the Third State Council, this legislative body met on
the 15 and 27 October 1862. According to the minutes drawn up during this
meeting, the following persons were present: Chairman of the Department, i.e.,
State Councillor Adam Bagniewski, State Councillor Dembiński, Permanent Member of the State Council Węgleński, Gruszecki, Legal Secretary of State Konstanty
Mountain and Vice Representative of the Second Class Dangel.
The participants generally agreed on several researched matters, with most
of them recognizing the role of transport in the development of domestic and
foreign trade, as well as confirming “that products of our country are such
that they mainly require [usage of] river communication”. This resulted in the
direct confirmation of a decidedly negative impact regarding the unresolved
transport status of the Vistula and other rivers in the Kingdom of Poland in
respect of delivering goods and items by water. In conclusion, the Department
of Revenue almost wholly agreed with the postulates of Lewiński
by confirming the urgent and constant priority in making Vistula and other
rivers navigable to support the proper development of the economy of the
Kingdom of Poland. Thus, all members of the Department of Tax Administration
supported the application to allow RUB 3,000 from the reserve funds in the
Polish budget for this purpose. To everyone’s surprise, the Department of
Revenue did not respond by indicating the precise rules of secretion and usage
of these funds. The administrative authorities also refused to accept the
full extent of the postulation made by Lewiński
regarding the six-year period of financial support for Polish water
communications (i.e., from 1863 to 1869)[9].
Apparently, they did not want to take any responsibility for decisions
concerning the navigation status of the rivers as well as flood control, which
would possibly have a long-term nature.
The whole matter,
however, was very carefully examined by the then Head of the Board of Land and
Water Communications of the Kingdom of Poland, Major General Stanisław Kierbedź. Between 16
and 30 October 1862, in an official letter, numbered 4,172 (and while returning
to the main headquarters of the State Council, as stated in the formal meeting
minutes of the Department of Tax Administration), he sent his own basic
statement to the Secretary of State at the State Council. Here he
clarified his opinion regarding the request for “the appointment of funds of
three hundred thousand silver roubles required for regulation of river
navigation in the Kingdom”.
Referring to
the absence of fixing the Department of Revenue within precise legal frames, as
well as determining time frames and rules for the allocation of funds required
for proceeding with the process of regulating rivers in the Kingdom of Poland, Kierbedź argued, from an official standpoint, that the fund
recently allocated in the Kingdom for the regulation of rivers was at least
clearly insufficient, and that the proposed period of six years of constant
work on regulating the Vistula River seemed to be appropriate in order to bring
this watercourse to the point at which navigation on it would be publicly
available and properly conducted. Such a plain opinion was justified by the
Chief Executive of Land and Water Communications Administration in relation to
the observation of local natural conditions. In Kierbedź’
belief, it was the “very nature” of the Vistula River that prompted any
effective regulatory work regarding this watercourse to be gradual as well as
without any significant interruption. Any action of an accelerated nature,
therefore, would not provide the intended results. Indeed, as evidenced by the
activity of Austrian authorities, which (on becoming acquainted with the
problem based on long-term experience) rather decided to undertake regulations
on their part regarding the border banks of the Vistula River over a prolonged
period of 20 years. Incidentally, this was the subject of ongoing bilateral
Polish-Austrian negotiations.
Deliberating about
the very core of activities to improve the navigable conditions of Polish
rivers, Kierbedź specified that he was also referring
to the specific control system and the so-called “additional resources” to be
introduced, in turn highlighting the absence of accurate data, which were
essential for clarifying what should equal the exact amounts of money to be
allocated for the effective regulation of the Vistula River. On the other hand,
when assessing the scope of work done so far, and the very “nature” of the
Vistula River, the official head of the Polish transport authorities
expressed his belief that the amount of RUB 300,000 per year would be fully
sufficient to initiate the proposed works along the main river of the Kingdom
of Poland. Moreover, it seemed to Kierbiedź that part
of the entire sum could be spent on improvements to other significant waterways
of the country; i.e., he was particularly referring to the regulation of the
full length of the Bug River. These other works were equally, at least in Kierbedź’ opinion, required in Poland, especially given
“the importance of communications”. On concluding his military post, Kierbedź stated on 30 October 1862 that the
appointment of funds for regulating currents, not only on the Vistula River,
but on the other rivers of the Kingdom of Poland, was absolutely necessary.
Furthermore, the period of six years, which was pointed out to be fully
sufficient to bring the Vistula River to full regulation, “was not
consistent with the nature of this river”. As such, it should be significantly
extended. Meanwhile, the amount of funds established for the regulation
process of the rivers in the Kingdom of Poland should be recognized and
accepted as sufficient in the first years of implementing the entire process of
regulating watercourses[10].
From this detailed description of
the entire administrative legislative path of the original request made by Michał Lewandowski, which led to the petition to undertake
new works on navigability and cleansing/regulating Polish watercourses, it can
be seen that it was finally supported in an official way by the Department of
Tax and Administration of the Third State Council of the Kingdom of Poland.
Furthermore, Kierbedź, the Head of the Board of Land
and Water Communications, located in Warsaw, effectively postulated the
considerable prolongation of its scope.
Fig. 1.
Example of the specification of Polish and Russian measures used during the building
of river embankments and dams
3. PETITION OF STATE COUNCILLOR DOMINIK DZIEWIANOWSKI TO INCREASE FUNDS IN ORDER TO IMPROVE VISTULA
RIVER RAFTING, SUBMITTED IN 1864
Once again, the
issue of rafting on the Vistula River focused the attention of the Third State
Council of the Kingdom of Poland at the end of 1864. Namely, on 1 and 13
November 1864, the State Secretary of the Third State Council referred the
letter no. 5389, which was addressed to the new Head of the Board of Land and
Water Communications, Major General Ernest Szuberski,
in which he described the substrate and the preliminary procedure connected
with Dominik Dziewianowski’s project. As officially
stated in his request, Dziewianowski proposed to
finance multiple plantings along the Vistula riverside using “credit taken from
the budget of revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year of 1865”. In addition,
referring to the signal from the Department of Tax Administration regarding the necessity
to obtain a detailed explanation on the part of the Board of Land and Water
Communications, Stanislaw Zieliński asked at the same
time for a referral to an administrative meeting of at least one
representative of Warsaw’s Department of Transport Services[11].
On 2 and 14
November of that year, Dziewianowski formally
presented, at the meeting of the General Assembly of Third State Council, “the
request for increasing funds required for ensuring rafting on the Vistula
River”. According to Dziewianowski, at a time when he
wrote his dissertation, the Vistula River was “totally neglected and ran wild”.
Still, the applicant regarded the watercourse as a major trade route in Poland.
Dziewianowski recognized the opportunity to
improve general rafting on Vistula’s current, not only by further
conducting not very useful works to
improve and strengthen river banks (which, otherwise, absorbed millions of roubles),
but rather by systematic and persistent “securing” by “planting” the very banks
of Vistula. The latter solution was thus seen as bringing some visible positive
effects, which consumed a relatively small amount of state funds. Among the
positive effects of this regulatory approach to the banks of the Vistula, Dziewianowski referred to the absence of the application
of sand in the riverbed, which typically occurred in relation to the following:
·
each magnification of the water level
·
steady definition of the fixed edge bank of the river
·
the possibility of growing up in almost every village
in the coastal area, which contained a large amount of plants destined for
planting on the shore
·
raising banks of the river, which would lead to a
narrowing and deepening of the Vistula riverbed
·
the fact that with the completion of the plan for
building/constructing the Vistula embankments, approximately 925,200 hectares
of land (with a value of approximately RUB 3 million) could be recovered for
agricultural usage.
Taking into account
all of above arguments, Dziewianowski particularly
proposed to use part of the RUB 50,000 loan, incurred for the purpose of
improving the general conditions of rafting on the Vistula River, to paying for
implanting banks along this river. The proposed sum was equal to RUB 7,500. The
second conclusion boiled down to the usage of the somehow unexpected extra
amount of roubles, which came out of penalty taxes, that was to occur in the
previously planned state budget of 1865, namely, for them to be collected in
respect of an additional fund destined for spending on the same purpose, i.e.,
for “planting” banks of the Vistula River[12].
On 4 and 16
November of 1864, in other words, the only two days after the meeting of the
Third State Council in this matter, Secretary of State Stanislaw Zieliński posted a positive resolution concerning the
application from Dziewianowski to increase the
amounts allocated for the improvement of rafting on the Vistula River. Zieliński sent his note directly to the Department of
Revenue, asking its members to carry out a further in-depth analysis of the issues
presented. The idea was that Department of Tax Administration had to submit its
finally accepted conclusions for formal consideration and decision by the
General Assembly of the State Council, doing so as part of the general
assessment in the yearly report of the Board of Land and Water
Communications in Warsaw for 1863[13].
As a result, the
required meeting of the Department of Revenue took place on the 17 and 29 November
1864, where the main purpose of the agenda was to give a more detailed position
on the issue of legal and economical clarifications regarding Dziewianowski’s formal application to improve conditions
for rafting on the Vistula River. Those participating in this meeting were
State Councillor Łaszczyński, as Chairman, State
Councillors Borzecki and Paprocki,
Representatives Leśkiewicz, Vidal and Rogoziński, and Vice Representatives Gruszewski
and Helpert[14].
Consequently,
at its 29 November 1864 meeting, the Department of Revenues analysed the
request from Dziewianowski, not only with the
participation of the applicant himself, but also in the presence of a
member of the Board of Land and Water Communications, namely, Lieutenant
Colonel Wasilewski. An employee of the State
Transport Services, Wasilewski was sent to this
meeting by his superior, Ernest Szuberski, in order
to give the necessary explanations of a technical nature.
During the joint
work on the related project, Dziewianowski raised a
number of further arguments in support of his idea. Dziewianowski
further emphasized the importance of using water transport for the carriage of
certain goods, especially timber and cereals, thus explaining his interest in
improving rafting on the Vistula River. He also pointed to the once-known kind
of universal knowledge about the need for protective plantings along the banks
of rivers, as well as explained the frequent absence in applying this
solution over time. According to Dziewianowski, given
the relatively significant construction costs of embankments and dams (which
were a major concern, especially in relation to the relatively low transport
budgets in the Kingdom of Poland of the 1840s and 1850s), successive and gradual proceeding with watercourse
plantings would solve the obvious problem of financial shortages, while
ensuring proper protection and regulation along the banks of river currents.
Additionally, Dziewianowski focused on an estimated
budget needed to realize his application, as a kind of necessary financial
minimum that was required to carry out the whole action of planting banks along
the Vistula River. Moreover, Dziewianowski explained
the very idea of submitting his basic proposal in terms of two core objectives:
firstly, the need for a reminder of the inherent necessity for the final
submission for approval, as originally developed a few years before 1864
regarding the draft law on coastal plantings, and, secondly, the necessity to
implement the already approved Polish-Austrian Treaty on regulatory works
regarding the section of the Vistula River’s banks between Cracow and Sandomierz.
At a joint meeting on 29 November 1864, acting
on the behalf of the Board of Land and Water Communications, Lieutenant Colonel
Wasilewski presented the firm position of his
institution in this matter. The Vistula River would not be able to lead to an
actual full regulation of the main watercourse in the Kingdom of Poland. Wasilewski explained that any complete “settlement” of that
river would only be possible through systematic work carried out over the
entire length of its current. Referring to the plantings themselves, a
representative of the Board of Communications merely advised that this planting
would only be useful in conjunction with many other regulatory endeavours[15].
In this extent, the said representative meant dams, without which anticipated
plantings would become quickly subject to washing by the river current and,
thus, completely destroyed. Besides, according to some calculations by
transport authorities, the cost of planting square bushes or small willows in
the mid-1860s stood at approximately RUB 0.25. As
such, it appeared that, for the proposed amount of RUB 7,500, one could cover
approximately 3,000 square fathoms of the Vistula River annually with planting.
As the Lieutenant Colonel reported, this amount could be increased to
approximately 500,000 square fathoms of plantings per year, provided one could
get actual support and help from the private owners of coastal areas. However,
one member of Warsaw’s Board of Communications assumed that, due to the evident
inability to build the expected number of dams, spending to the extent of
RUB 7,500 for the purpose of planting banks along watercourses would not at all
be meaningful or necessary. In addition, Wasilewski
confirmed that the transport authorities, which he represented, had just
commenced a rapid process of preparing themselves to start regulatory works
defined by the terms of a special convention, which the Government of the
Kingdom of Poland had signed with the Austrian Empire. Such actions were to be
enforced by a specific “urgency of things”. As of the autumn of 1864, the Board
of Land and Water Communications not only had organized the required
cooperation funds, but also “demanded presentation
[by the government] of all the successive projects”.
In his turn and in
specific reaction to Dziewianowski’s request, Łaszczyńsk, as the Chairman of the Department of
Revenues of the Third State Council, submitted on 29 November 1864 to the
meeting of members of his faculty important information concerning the previous
draft project regarding regulation of the Vistula River. The described proposal
was dated as of 1857 and was made by Major General Jan Kanty
Józef Smolikowski, who was
then the Chief Executive in the 13th District of Communications (of the Russian
Empire). This project was originally calculated to last 25 years, while its
costs were equal to the overall amount of approximately RUB 14 million. As a
result of the submission of such a proposal, the then Tsarist Governor of
the Kingdom of Poland, Prince Mikhail Gorchakov, decided to appoint a special
committee (initially working under his own supervision), whose purpose was “to
devise the most practical and the most cost-effective way of regulating and
cleansing the watercourses of the Vistula and Bug Rivers”. It was clearly a
duty of the newly appointed Gorchakov research team to develop two separate
regulation/drainage projects: one for the Vistula River itself and another
for the Bug River. During its proceedings, the committee also ordered
preparation of some accurate situational plans, including the levelling of
the Vistula, and made some arrangements concerning funds provided at the time
for the general improvement of navigation along the Vistula. Another action
taken by the Gorchakov river commission was to examine several draft projects
intended to make the Vistula banks more secure, as well as improve its
coastal embankments. Another result of the endeavours by this research group
was to develop new projects concerning the protection of river banks via
widespread planting of osiers, mapping out trails of waterways, especially for
towing, and describing the rules in force for the River Police. As Łaszczyński further explained, the fruitful works of the
Gorchakov committee were interrupted by unexpected “disorders” of the early 1860s, particularly the January Uprising of 1863, and
ultimately the decision of the Administrative Council of 1864, where
discussions were finally terminated.
After careful
consideration and review of these important circumstances, the Department of
Tax Administration of the Third State Council came to the conclusion that the
best way to implement the demands and requests from Dziewianowski
would be to fully analyse and then implement at least a few projects regarding
draft laws, as previously proposed by the Gorchakov river commission, which
was abolished in 1864. After all, it was a common thought among members of the
Department of Revenue that, in order to commence the large-scale planting of
river banks, it was necessary introduce some entirely new laws on such issues
as the way of performing such plantings and the rights and obligations of
private individuals who claim possession of riverside lands.
Similarly, another Dziewianowski project touched on the problem regarding the
condition for granting an autonomous amount of RUB 7,500 for the purpose of
planting river banks with osiers and willows, which was rated negatively (on
the grounds of unsuitability and undesirability). This happened with members of
the Department of Tax Administration, who based their approach in this case on
the opinion of Lieutenant Colonel Wasilewski. This negative
attitude was justified here by the supposed existence of the theoretical
capability of spending for this very aim with a suitable sum of money, which
came straight from the Board of Land and Water Communications, as opposed to
the state budget. Finally, in assessing the overall petition of Dominik Dziewianowski, the Department of Tax Administration decided
on 29 November 1864 to submit, for final consideration by the General
Assembly of the Third State Council, its proposition of general rejection of
the requests and suggestions of this particular state councillor. Instead,
it was instead suggested to finally return to the draft laws that were issued
already by the Gorchakov committee, as established in 1857 and closed in 1864[16].
To this extent, Polish state authorities responsible (among others) for the
development of watercourses in the Kingdom of Poland instead decided to
withdraw to already abandoned and blocked ideas, as represented by a recently
resolved committee, rather than to follow new solutions proposed by one of his
less important and influential members.
4. CONCLUSION
Taking place in the early 1860s, the above-described of singular Polish
administration staff members could not alter, in the opinion of the author of
this article, the generally poor shape of the Polish water transport system. In
the context of a rapidly changing political situation, characterized by a very
lively attitude, the activities of individual reformists had to be either
postponed in time or confronted with regard to rather critical suggestions
relating to Warsaw’s central civil administration and the local Board of Land
and Water Communications. Even if the improved regulation of rivers, as well as
the security of rafting, could be estimated as a sort of common, mutual and
genuine interest of both petitioners and authorities, this concept evidently
did not match with reality.
References
1.
Central Archives of Historical Record in Warsaw. Second State Council of the Kingdom of
Poland: 1832, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836, 1837, 1838. Signatures: 103, 104,
105.
2.
Central Archives of Historical Record in Warsaw. Third State Council of the Kingdom of
Poland: 1862, 1863, 1864. Signature: 256.
3.
Rutkowski Marek.
2001. II Rada Stanu Królestwa Polskiego 1833-1841.
Struktura i działalność. Studium Uzależnienia Prawno-państwowego. Białystok:
Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Zarządzania. [In Polish: Second State
Council of the Kingdom of Poland 1833-1841. Study of Legal and
Administrative State Dependency. Bialystok:
Publishing House of the University of Finance and Management].
4.
Rutkowski Marek.
2004. Zmiany strukturalne w Królestwie Polskim wczesnej
epoki paskiewiczowskiej. Studium efektywności
administracyjnej, społecznej i gospodarczej zniewolonego państwa. Białystok:
Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Zarządzania. [In Polish: Structural
Changes in the Kingdom of Poland in the Early Paskievic
Era. Study of the Administrative, Economic and Sociological Effectiveness of a
Subdued Country. Bialystok:
Publishing House of the University of Finance and Management].
5.
Rutkowski Marek.
2015. Zarządzanie logistyką w Królestwie Polskim. Zabezpieczenie
przeciwpowodziowe, mosty i opłaty wodne. Białystok: Agencja Wydawnicza Ekopress. [In Polish: Logistics Management in the Kingdom of
Poland. Flood Protection and Bridges, Water Charges and Fees. Bialystok: Ekopress Publishing Agency].
Received 21.02.2016;
accepted in revised form 20.07.2016
Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology.
Series Transport is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License