——- Original Message —–
From: “AniaG” < ania @ arni.pdi.net >
To: < narodowa@narodowa.pl >
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 3:48 PM
Subject: “A Few Remarks on Farmer Excess ”, 1913 r. > GA.PA National Gallery

Today I am sending you a historical exhibit, very informative about the changes in our country. It is the beginning of the 20th century: This is my grandfather’s dissertation on defending the agricultural state against the bourgeoisie “A few remarks on the luxury of the farmer”, Gziki d. XI, 1913. He was probably preparing a speech, because he was active in the Agricultural Circles. It was in 1913. My grandparents then owned the Gziki estate. I am sending you a scan of the first page of the manuscript and the transcribed text in its entirety.

There are mistakes because I tried to keep the original spelling. Here it must be remembered that my grandparents lived under German rule all their lives.

Regards,

Anna Gabor, Toruń

Gziki on November 13

A few remarks about the farmer’s luxury

Mainly, the farmer’s profession will be persecuted by other professions, because it spends a lot of money on representation and other personal whims, which sins will ruin many lives. On the sides unfriendly to the farmer, the farmer will be accused mainly of luxury (luxury). I inform the gentlemen in advance, in order to avoid some personal mistakes, that I do not keep an eye on the wealthy, ie truly rich people. The rich can even exist and maintain excess. Since I mean here only the host who takes care of the daily piece of bread himself and often has to work hard for him, so I leave the rich to the rich, because the excess of a rich man is directly necessary for the first: his excess capital to get into the hands of poorer than him, and even art, without the excess of rich people, it would have to fall.

If you want to understand the host’s excess well and may even criticize him, you have to share him. And there are two separate types.

Firstly, luxury through possession of rural property located further from the city, i.e. in a word, a legitimate or necessary luxury, which by people who do not understand the farmer’s position will accuse farmers unlawfully of luxury.
Secondly, unhealthy or sinful luxury, ie life above the state of property. Unfriendly parties of the farmer everywhere, farmers loudly attribute their bankruptcy to property, and the fact that we live above the state of property, that we will often be persuaded to spend absolutely unnecessary. I do not deny that there are similar cases in our profession. We have reckless and stupid people in every profession, so also in ours. But let another professional, for example, a factory owner, a merchant, a clerk, etc., rob anyone at once, he will not come to the mind of all the factory owners, and let the clerk of the merchant challenge them only by shrugging their shoulders, even shrugging the bankrupt and slaughtered for it. But the farmer will come to such a position. It will be immediately broadly and unfriendly debated, for the entire state, that is, for all farmers. This is a great injustice. Each profession has its thinkers, rational people but also hotheads. It cannot be denied that a farmer with too little capital takes over the farm and soon uses foreign money because of which: agriculture rejects a small percentage of its income and borrows money in comparison with a larger percentage that is consumed by such a farmer. Does it happen but does not happen in every other profession.
Yes, but with the difference that when the landlord announces the bankruptcy of the estate, he could not be honestly said, he was not the landlord at all. Nobody can think of why and why the bankruptcy occurred. Maybe even without his fault. But how will it happen to the merchant. The word (false speculation. Buda will be closed for half a year. After half a year he goes on.
In fact, the farmer belongs to the most reliable class of the population and only under the influence of duties is he sometimes forced to leave his four walls and the farm for a few hours.
Let’s take a closer look at these trips. No other profession carries so much representation duties as the role of a farmer. Well, to the landtag to the kreitag tz kreisdeputorter (here it is written in gothic in German 10 words difficult to read) what are the names of all the offices that call the farmer from the house. The largest number of these offices is free and costs a lot of time, and time, like any other professional, is also money for a farmer. A townsperson can meet such offices cheaper because he will walk a few houses and he is there, in the worst case he will reach threefold by electric tram, and that’s it. The farmer has to count the wagon in such cases, and the wagon costs 8-10 marks a day at least. It is this cart, the unremovable weight of the farm, which lays a stone on the stomach of the townspeople. They consider it a luxury. The farmer is supposed to walk a few miles into town.
Both of them would be happy to do this, but they are to bring from the city various small things necessary for the household and backyard farm needed. The townsperson will send maids for a couple of houses and she will know what she needs every day. The farmer, while in town, has to go to the hotel to eat, which is the same reason for the accusation of excess. If a townsperson gets a guest, he will receive him with coffee or tea, and if he is very hospitable, he will send a neighboring baker to buy cakes for a couple of houses.
It is impossible in the countryside. The farmer has to welcome his guest a long way away. What people often consider a farmer to be a luxury, i.e. a luxury, is often an unbearable burden that many farmers would gladly remove if it were only possible.
They accuse the farmer of sometimes going to an inn. This is an undeserved objection. In every profession there are slackers, but in the farming profession, compared to the townspeople, there is greater solidarity. It is part of the entire agricultural system. If a farmer came all day in fever or cold, in the rain or on snow, he had to be glad that in the evening he could chat with his mother and let us chat by a warm stove.
Anyway, the farmer is also human and has the need to go down with other people from time to time and talk to each other or share his economic perceptions with our neighbors. Or after settling the errands, he stays for an hour and he shaves a few beers already in the hustle and bustle of the townspeople! The hosts can afford, etc., sharp accusations. And the townsperson? Everyday frühzorgen (that is, everyday matters) belongs to business, because she meets people with whom it would be easy to do something. The so-called Vesperszoster is supposedly indispensable to raise the strength during the day of strain. In the evening, the theatr Concert comes, and finally to the pub for the Schlaftrunk, because without it, the townsperson, like the host, would not be able to fall asleep without the evening prayer.

The townsperson belongs as Geszeftman in general, as long as his political tendencies allow associations located in the city whose meetings are two on a weekday and three on Sundays. Naturally, his wife must belong to such a whole world of happy associations (where gossip plays a significant role. It belongs to the good tone, it belongs to the representation. He will go to the theater for some better play, big noise. The farmer crashes. They accuse us that our children are for expensive upbringing. It is true that he is expensive. But we can do otherwise. at home and therefore the children cost him very little. We in the villages cannot do that. Our rural school is not enough, we have to send our children to city schools where salary fees and a lot of money cost. And when the host takes more than one mouth to direct his children to people who can serve society, he is accused of luxury. What a terrible wrong. More than one farmer would send his son to university, but due to the high costs he is unable to do so. And this is what every burden looks like, combined with great money sacrifices, which is bad for farmers, disposed people call luxury.
If I, as a farmer and farmer, at these points given here, I have defended our economic profession in any way, then I cannot ignore and sharply rebuke the unreasonable understanding of my duties and the right to representation and passing the rules of reason. Every tailor makes his lands as much as he gets into his business. How far is the matter of a farmer to cut representation in the principles of reason? This is the only thing he is allowed to spend, which brings in a percentage of his own capital invested in the property. What will spend more is disregard and has a sad result. If, for example, the capitalist, living in the city, owns 100,000 M, with his percentage, so that he and his family have to live on it all year round. There are those who do not calculate it and do not have enough interest and will charge capital. These are not sane people, and you cannot follow them. Now let’s take the following example.
A farmer with 100,000 Mk. buys himself a fortune for 300,000 Mk. The greater number of farmers, then, forget to count and there are misconceptions that now regulate their entire appearance not to 100,000 Mk, but to the entire 300,000 and think that as the owner of the property he has become a completely different man, and moreover his wife. This is basically a false view and has very sad results. A wise farmer cannot add up to his 100,000 Mk of property value after purchasing the property and appear accordingly. This 200,000 Mk t. Is his debt owed to his creditors. They make a living and the 200,000 Mk they represent.
This farmer even has to pay taxes on this debt of 200,000 Mk for all his property, and if I believe that he and this debt must be represented by 200,000 Mk, then he has a triple expense for those two-thirds of the value of the property which is not owed to him only by the other.
His purse and his fortune would not be able to withstand this excess of demands for a long time. Let us draw the border even further here, as, unfortunately, it has often happened in recent times and it happens that the buyer of property for 300,000 Mk. Has and counts only 50,000 Mk. The one who, by mistake or out of false ambition, represents 300,000 Mk, rules from his 50,000 Mk far too much representative power. It is simply not possible.
The new taxation law, ie Selbsschätzung (meaning your own respect), has also learned a lot of such representatives of foreign money because the occurrence will be counted as income from which taxes are paid. Not one new exit car, not one libery, and more than one boisterous hospitality is not necessary, such as drainage and introduction of thoroughbred and renowned cattle.
We will have a passion for our profession and a love for our land in which the ashes of our fathers rest, it is certainly the last one, i.e. the attachment to our host will show us exactly how to conduct ourselves. And we will punish the best by the calm and moderate presence of more than one person who harms our honor.

J.Wojciechowski

Note:
When rewriting, I tried to keep the old style and spelling of the prepared speech, so there were some errors and differences from the spelling used today. Some of the errors may have arisen because of difficulties in reading the manuscript.

Anna Gabor, Toruń