From that time on there continued a ceaseless struggle between the people and the boyar. At one time the people would drive the boyar’s herds off their downs and at another his servants would drive theirs away. The forests taken over by the boyar were guarded both by the people’s and his foresters among whom there ensued frequent quarrels leading to fights. This so infuriated the boyar that he ordered his servants to kill any animals they found on the pastures he had taken as his own and one forester whom he found on his sectioned-off part of the forest he ordered to be tied to a tree and flayed with thorny switches until he almost died.
This was already too much for the community to bear. There were many voices raised in favor of dealing with the boyar according to their oldest precepts of apportioning punishment to an incorrigible and pernicious citizen who was a murderer and a thief, by driving him away from the vicinity of their land and tearing down his house. A large majority of the citizens favored this procedure and it is certain that matters would right then have come to a crucial point for the boyar, if it had not been for Zakhar Berkut who expressed the opinion that it was against democratic principles of justice to pass sentence upon an individual until he had been given an opportunity to present his side of the situation and that it was only fair the boyar be first called to their town meeting and tried by the folk-court, which after a proper and thorough deliberation would hand down a final decision in the matter. This sensible and sage advice was heeded by the Tukholians.
Certainly there was no one in all the gathering who was more aware than Zakhar Berkut of the full significance of this momentous occasion. He realized that the moment had arrived when the test of all that he had spent his life-time in teaching and establishing, would be revealed in the decision passed by the people’s court. Had it been purely a question of simple justice, he could rely upon the judgment of the folk-court with-
58
