Labor contingent of the Southern Kuzbass Corrective Labor Camp of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1947-1953: number, employment, composition of the working fund.

Ryabova Yuliya Vladimirovna PhD in History Associate Professor, Department of “Management in Social and Economic Systems, Philosophy and History”, Ural State Transport University 66 Kolmogorova str., Yekaterinburg, Sverdlovsk region, 620034, Russia YuRyabova@usurt.ru Other publications by this author

The issues of the emergence, formation and functioning of the camp sector in the economy of the Soviet state still remain in the field of view of modern researchers. Despite the fact that the peak of the study of this problem occurred in the second half of the 1980s - 1990s, when access to previously classified archival materials became available, today historians' interest in this controversial and controversial topic is still present. Currently, regional studies are of particular importance, revealing the essence and nature of individual penitentiary institutions that are part of the Gulag system. This approach allows us to identify the specifics of forced labor, both in different industrial sectors and in individual localities.

It should be noted that the idea of using convict labor in modern society continues to exist, but in completely different conditions — in the realities of the rule of law. Recently, statements by Russian statesmen (for example, Director of the Federal Penitentiary Service A. Kalashnikov and Minister of Justice K. Chuichenko) have been increasingly appearing, which suggest using prisoners instead of migrant workers from abroad, which will help solve the problem of labor shortages in some regions of the country^[1]. The establishment of correctional centers at large industrial facilities or construction sites will allow the realization of the right to serve a sentence in the form of correctional labor, and will also have important social and economic significance. In this regard, the researchers' appeal to the issues of the use of prisoner labor in the recent past is of particular importance, since it allows for an analysis of existing historical experience and prevents the recurrence of negative phenomena that infringe on human rights.

Currently, domestic and foreign historiography has sufficient material that reveals the essence of the Soviet camp system and the economy of forced labor. From the 30s to the mid-80s of the XX century. Soviet historical science did not even mention the existence of a camp economy, the so-called "special agent" and his work, which takes place in all spheres of industrial production. Documents testifying to the forced labor use of convicted citizens were kept in state archives under the heading "secret" and "top secret".

The archival revolution of the mid-80s of the XX century became the frontier that marked the starting point in the study of the Soviet totalitarian system as a whole. Collections of previously classified documents have appeared in the press ^{[6, 10, 15, 19]}, revealing the essence of Soviet totalitarianism, the industrial and economic activities of the GULAG, the Soviet penitentiary system, political repression, mass deportation of peoples and other previously inaccessible issues. A considerable amount of statistical data characterizing the quantitative characteristics of the camp system began to be introduced into scientific circulation (for example, the number of special contingent by individual groups, the number and location of ITL and colonies, the volume of camp production by industry, etc.).

Of particular interest to society and researchers were the testimonies of direct participants in the events, the memories of repressed and former prisoners of the Soviet correctional labor system. At the initiative of the members of the All-Russian public organization Memorial, information was collected and disseminated about the victims of political repression, and the first memory books appeared. The number of monographs, collective works, and dissertations on Stalinism increased. Significant contributions to the study of various aspects of Soviet totalitarianism were made by such domestic researchers as A. V. Bakunin ^[1], A. P. Butenko ^[4], V. A. Berdinskikh ^[2], M. G. Detkov ^[7], V. N. Zemskov ^[8], G. M. Ivanova ^[9], A. S. Kan ^[11], A. S. Smykalin ^[16], O. V. Khlevnyuk ^[18], S. Ertz ^[20] and others. Regional studies have become widespread, revealing the essence of the forced labor system directly at the locations of correctional labor institutions (mainly in Siberia, the Urals, and the Far East), allowing to identify both private and general trends, supplement already known information about the activities of the repressive apparatus of the Soviet state, and identify specifics. The works of Kustyshev A. N. ^[12], Morozov N. A. ^[13], Papkov S. A. ^[14], Upadyshev N. V. ^[17] and other authors are of undoubted interest.

In particular, in the territory of Western Siberia, in the Kemerovo region, starting from the late 1920s - early 1930s, an entire network of correctional labor institutions was located. It included the department of correctional labor colonies of the NKVD in the Kemerovo region, the Siberian camp, Gorshorlag, verification and filtration camps of the NKVD of the USSR No. 0314 and 0315, Kuzbasszhilstroy, Kemerovo, Aralichevstroy, Tomusinsky ITL, special "Kamyshlag", Sevkuzbasslag and Yuzhkuzbasslag. Kuzbass historians (L. I. Gvozdkova, A. A. Mit, S. G. Marchenko and others), based on information from the local departmental archives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia, addressed the problem of the placement and functioning of these correctional labor institutions in Kuzbass, but some of the issues revealing the peculiarities of the penitentiary practice of the Kemerovo region in the Stalin years, requires additional studying.

Within the framework of this article, the author considers it necessary to address the issue of the number and composition of the working fund, the labor use of the imprisoned contingent of one of the largest logging camps in the region — the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR. The chronological framework of the article is defined in 1947, the time of the formation of the ITL, and 1953, the period of the beginning of the transformation of the Gulag.

The beginning of the activity of the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR dates back to the late Gulag period, by 1947 the camp was organized on the basis of Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 409 of March 1, 1947 and Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR No. 00241 of March 4, 1947 on the site of the logging trust "Yuzhkuzbassles" ^{[10, Vol. 2, pp. 314-318]}. Throughout its existence, ITL has been repeatedly subjected to structural reorganizations and changed departmental subordination. Geographically, the camp was located in the south of the Kemerovo region in a remote area of Mountainous Shoria, where the impassable Siberian taiga, alternating with logs, ridges and swamps, formed the basis of the natural landscape. The climatic conditions of this area were also characterized by severity.

The basis of industrial production of ITL was logging, the volume of which depended on the provision of coal mines in the south of Kuzbass with the necessary timber, in particular, fastening timber. It was to fulfill this production task that the camp was formed. But the activities of the Yuzhkuzbasslag were much broader and included the functioning of such industrial areas as woodworking, represented by sawmilling and the production of consumer goods, and agriculture. At the Abagursky, Shushtalepsky and Malinovsky sawmills located on the territory of ITL, sawn timber was made from roundwood, which was poisoned by customer enterprises, as well as private individuals who concluded an agreement with Yuzhkuzbasslag. The production of consumer goods (chairs, cabinets, beds, etc.), organized in the workshops of the camp, brought the camp a stable monetary income, and the products were in high demand among the population.

The organization of agricultural production in the ITL was a necessary measure, since remoteness from the main supply bases, irregular food supplies, spoilage of products during long-term transportation led to an irregular supply of food. The development of crop production took place in extremely unfavorable natural conditions, which significantly increased labor costs and prevented high yields. Animal husbandry was in more favorable conditions, since the natural features of the Mountain Shoria favored the breeding of cattle.

In addition to these leading areas, construction of residential and industrial facilities was carried out on a regular basis in the South Kuzbass ITL, contributing to the formation of the necessary base for forest exploitation and other types of industrial work. As a result, the camp turned into a large industrial and economic complex, which increased its production capacity annually until 1953.

The main labor force of the ITL were prisoners, but due to the extreme limitations of the source base, it is very difficult to determine its exact number. Domestic researchers, based on data from various archives, provide the following information on the total number of the contingent. L. I. Gvozdkova ^{[5, p. 513]}, referring to the documents of the current archive of the Department of Internal Affairs of the Kemerovo region and their own calculations, the number of convicts held in 1947 does not indicate, but in 1948 reads 18970 people, in 1949 — 18,810 people, in 1950 — 22,403 people, 1951 — 22,830 people, 1952 — 23035 people. S. Filippov and S. Sigachev ^[15] operate with the following figures: on 01.01.1948 — 13,877 people, on 01.01.1949 — 20072 people, on 01.01.1949 — 20,072 people, on 01.01.1950 — 18,364 people, on 01.01.1951 — 21,211 people, on 01.01.1952 - 23,539 people, on 01.01.1953 — 24,629 people, on 07/15/1953 — 13,599 people. According to the data of the current archive of the Federal Penitentiary Service for the Kemerovo region, with which the author worked, the average annual list of prisoners in 1947 amounted to 6830 people^[2], at the end of 1950, 1951 and 1952 — 20935 people, 23539 people, 24629 people. accordingly^[3]. There is no information on the average annual list in 1948 and 1949 in the documents of the departmental archive.

For comparison, we present data on the number of workers of the predecessor of the Yuzhkuzbasslag, the Yuzhkuzbassles Trust, which operated from 1940 to 1946. Precisely due to the shortage of workers and the systematic failure to implement the logging plan, it was closed, and a camp was created on its production base.  In 1940, there were 4,498 people in the test, in 1941 — 5,539 people, in 1942 — 4004 people, in 1943 — 5,015 people, in 1944 — 5,443 people, in 1945 — 5,444 people, in 1946 - 4,520 people.^[4] As we can see, the average number of workers over the years of the company's operation ranged from 4 thousand to 5.5 thousand people. A comparative analysis of the number of ITL and trust personnel shows a sharp increase in the workforce to 18-23 thousand people, which resolved the issue of personnel shortage in the logging industry in the south of the Kemerovo region.

But when evaluating the above data on the number of the Yuzhkuzbaslag contingent, it is necessary to take into account the different approaches that were used when calculating the contingent by the compilers of statistical documents in ITL. This could be a "list number for a certain date" or an "average number for a certain period". Unfortunately, the statistical information provided above by L. I. Gvozdkova, S. Filippov and S. Sigachev does not contain data on the principle of counting, which can lead to visible discrepancies. In addition, the statistical criterion under consideration is dynamic. It can change almost daily, which is associated with the release or mortality of the contingent, or, conversely, the arrival of new stages. Nevertheless, the statistical data provided, which historians have managed to find, allow us to form an idea of the extent of the use of forced labor in the South Kuzbass ITL, to trace the dynamics of changes in the numerical composition of the main working fund.

Of interest for the study is not only the total number of the contingent, but also their employment in the production sector of the Yuzhkuzbasslag. The archive of the GUFSIN contains data on the number of convicts of the Yuzhkuzbasslag employed in production. So, in 1947 there were 3,222 people, in 1948 — 10,387 people, in 1949 — 12,229 people, in 1950 — 11,745 people, in 1951 — 12,612 people, in 1952 - 13,363 people.^[5] Comparing these data with the total number, we see that not all prisoners held in the camp performed production functions, although the existing system required the maximum use of their labor. This largely depended on the established category of working capacity. Since 1935, the categories "A" were established — those employed in production, "B" — those employed in economic service, armed guards, administrative staff, "C" — sick, temporarily released, recovering, "D" — not working for external reasons. In 1949, according to the Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR No. 0418 dated June 25, 1949. "On measures to improve the physical condition and labor use of prisoners held in the ITL and the ITK of the Ministry of Internal Affairs" the following categories were defined: the first – those fit for physical labor, the second – physically disabled prisoners fit for light work, the third – those with severe illnesses or injuries that do not allow them to work (disabled people)^[6]. In practice, prisoners were not always assigned the group of working capacity to which they corresponded. On the one hand, the ITL administration was interested in increasing the number of able–bodied labor resources, on the other hand, prisoners could simulate or exert pressure on members of the medical commission in order to reduce their physical profile.

Tables 1 and 2, based on documents stored in the current archive of the Federal Penitentiary Service for the Kemerovo Region, provide information on the labor use of the imprisoned contingent by category, which allow you to see the planned and actual ratio. The main emphasis on the fulfillment of work tasks fell on persons of group "A", and since 1950 — the first category, who were engaged in basic industrial logging operations. The actual use of their labor varied on average from 65.3% to 73.4%. In the period from 1947 to 1949, there was a tendency to increase the number of prisoners involved in production, and since 1950, on the contrary, a decrease, reaching its minimum value by 1953. As for the plan, it had a steady decline from 83.1% in 1947 to 69.9% in 1952. The employment of group "B" or the second category in the economic service was between 11.6% and 14.5% of the total ITL contingent, which exceeded the planned figures. The employment of prisoners of group "B" or the third category in basic jobs was difficult due to illness. In 1947-1948, their number reached the highest figure for the entire period under review, which is due to the large influx of physically weakened troops. In subsequent years, the actual number of this group of prisoners decreased annually.

Table 1 – Labor use in the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1947-1949 (%)

Source: TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 27; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 12. L. 25(94); F. 14. Op. 1. D. 14. L. 152.

Table 2 – Labor use in the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1950-1953 (%)

Source: TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 16. L. 200-201; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 21. L. 14-15; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 30. L. 323-324; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 263-264.

Every year there were a number of prisoners in the Yuzhkuzbasslag who did not work in production for objective reasons. These reasons included intra-camp transfers from some units or camp sites to others, as well as a lack of clothing supplies, especially in winter, when felt boots, warm pea jackets, mittens and hats were required to work in the forest. Often, the lack of security for the organization of work cordon zones in the taiga, the lack of a work front due to the unpreparedness of forest sites, illness or being on vacation and in quarantine led to forced labor stoppages. From the above list of reasons, we see that part of the absenteeism of the contingent was due to the fault of the ITL administration, which did not provide the necessary conditions for the performance of production tasks — security, clothing and shoes, the front of work.

But some of the convicted contingent, held in the South Kuzbass ITL of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, did not go to work without a good reason. The total mass of the camp contingent included the so-called refuseniks, who individually or as part of a group did not go to work. In most cases, this phenomenon was of a protest nature and led to the disorganization of the camp system, negatively affecting production. Another group of prisoners who are not involved in the labor process are discipline violators who are in punishment cells and punishment cells for violations or crimes committed in the camp.

Tables 3 and 4 provide information on the reasons for absenteeism of prisoners of the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1947-1953. Analyzing these data, we can say that every year the main reasons why the contingent did not perform a labor function changed. In 1947, the leading reason can be called the lack of provision of clothing, in 1948 and 1949 — the failure to present the front of work, in 1950 and 1952 — the detention of prisoners in punishment cells and punishment cells, in 1951 — the lack of security, in 1953 — intra-camp transfers. During 1947-1953, the labor losses associated with those held in the shrapnel isolation unit (SHIZO) and refuseniks remained consistently high. But the largest number of non-fulfillment of their work duties by prisoners occurred in 1953, when, after the death of I. V. Stalin, the structural reorganization of the GULAG camps began and a mass amnesty was announced.

Table 3 –The number of prisoners working for other reasons in the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1947-1949 (group "G") (thousand man-days)

Source: TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 27; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 12. L. 25(94); F. 14. Op. 1. D. 14. L. 152.

Table 4 – The number of unemployed prisoners for various reasons in the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in 1950-1953 (average number) (people).

Source: TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 16. L. 200-201; F. 14. Op. 1. d. 21. L. 14-15; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 30. L. 323-324; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 243.

The camp administration tried to reduce the number of labor downtime of the contingent. Since the end of 1951, the creation of permanent commissions for the study and elimination of the causes leading to downtime of the workforce began in Yuzhkubasslag. Losses from the irrational use of prisoners for no good reason, including mass downtime, began to be considered material damage to the state and were subject to investigation and punishment of the perpetrators^[7]. There has been increased control over the work of convicts with the first category of working capacity. Their use in household and auxiliary work was strictly prohibited. In addition, refuseniks and malingerers who did not comply with production standards were not provided with general nutrition, and physically healthy prisoners placed in a detention center had to perform labor functions under heavy guard. In order to reduce the loss of working time, intra-camp troop transfers should be carried out only on weekends^[8].

It should be noted that a special category of the repressed population — special settlers - was present in the ITL working fund. The sources available to the author contain extremely scant information about their numbers and activities. It is known that the special settlers previously worked as part of the Yuzhkuzbassles trust, and in the autumn of 1947 they were transferred to Yuzhkuzbasslag. In the ITL, special commanderies operated at each camp department, which were subordinate to the camp personnel department ^{[3, p. 249]}. In 1949, there were 1,144 people at the camp.^[9] Another group contained in the ITL were prisoners of war, but in archival documents there is only one mention of their number — 95 people in 1947.^[10]

It is a mistake to believe that the only labor force of the ITL were prisoners and repressed citizens. Among the workers of the Yuzhkuzbasslag, there were also freelancers, but their number decreased annually. In 1947, their number was 5852 people, in 1948 — 4332 people, in 1949 — 3950 people, in 1950 — 3835 people, in 1951 — 3937 people, and in 1952 it decreased to 3733 people.^[11] As a rule, the camp administration used freelance workers to perform specialized jobs, as well as those requiring a responsible approach or urgent execution. They often became foremen, forest receptionists, course managers, engineers, and site managers, but they did not always want to occupy grassroots leadership positions due to the hostile attitude of prisoners^[12].

In 1953, after the announcement of a mass amnesty, there was a sharp reduction in the number of the camp contingent. Only in the 2nd quarter of 1953, 10 thousand prisoners were released from the Yuzhkuzbasslag^[13], and during 1953 — 16,147 prisoners^[14]. The loss of the number of convicts was accompanied by a deterioration in discipline, a weakening of the detention regime, and mass refusals from work. Up to 2 thousand people were not brought to work every day^[15] As a result, labor losses for mass refusals amounted to 21517 man-days, for individual — 38738 man-days, for those held in penal isolation cells — 73 thousand man-days^[16].

In addition, there was an outflow of qualified personnel from the contingent used in priority logging production, as well as servicing mechanized transport and carrying out repair work. To prevent disruptions in the work of the Yuzhkuzbasslag, measures were taken to reduce the number of workers in additional production (agriculture, consumer goods manufacturing, economic services), urgent training in demanded specialties was organized and accelerated forest exploitation work began^[17]. The camp's production activities should not have stopped, and it should have continued to fulfill the state task.

To solve the current personnel shortage, the leadership of the Yuzhkuzbasspecles, in accordance with the Order of the Ministry of Forestry and Paper Industry No. 13–ps dated May 13, 1953, organized a recruitment of freelance personnel as soon as possible, both from among the former contingent and according to the organizational set^[18]. To receive the workforce, the camp departments were actively rebuilt, the construction of residential apartments for family workers, dormitories, log and panel houses, cultural and household facilities began. According to the results of 1953, the plan for putting the living space into operation was fulfilled by 169.3%^[19], but the quality of living conditions did not meet sanitary and hygienic requirements (dirt, dampness, cold, crowding), and social facilities (hospitals, kindergartens, schools, repair shops, etc.) practically did not There was. The shops had a limited range of goods, there were interruptions in the supply of food, which caused dissatisfaction with the arriving workers.

During 1953, 7,217 people were employed in ITL: 949 amnestied, 386 seasonal workers, 2,869 permanent workers who arrived by recruitment, 943 workers accepted under a contract, 2,370 people hired on the spot upon application^[20]. The incoming personnel in the conditions of the mountainous taiga area were extremely slow to master logging specialties. Due to the insufficient organization of the production process on the part of Yuzhkuzbasspecles, workers faced a number of problems: they did not know their work duties, did not have paybooks, were not distributed among labor teams, did not receive safety training, etc.

As a result, in some divisions (in Abagursky, Malinovsky, Kondomsky, Mundybashsky), the unauthorized departure of freelance workers began^[21] — 333 people left, including 262 people according to the organizational set^[22]. In total, 1,646 people left their place of work for the whole of 1953, including 580 people who entered the organization. In the spring of 1954, due to the expiration of the contract, most of the workers left, which led to the reverse process of converting the housing stock into places to accommodate prisoners^[23]. As a result, the practice of using freelance personnel in logging as the leading labor force has stopped. People voluntarily did not want to work in a remote taiga area that did not have the necessary social and household infrastructure, and perform physically demanding work in harsh climatic conditions.

Summing up, we can conclude that the basis of the labor fund of the South Kuzbass ITL of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR were prisoners, whose number increased annually and by 1952 reached more than 24 thousand people. The use of the labor of the convicted contingent contributed to the rapid reduction of the shortage of personnel in the logging industry in the south of the Kemerovo region. The labor activity of the convicted contingent in the camp was carried out in four industrial areas: logging, sawmilling, agriculture and the production of consumer goods, but timber harvesting was the leading and priority. In the period from 1947 to 1953, from 65.3% to 73.4% of the total number of prisoners were used in production, 11.6%-14.5% — in household services, the remaining 13-25% did not work for various reasons. Among the reasons for labor downtime, one can distinguish both respectful ones related to the lack of working conditions, and disrespectful ones based on sabotage and violations of discipline by prisoners. In addition, as part of the ITL working fund, there were freelancers, the number of whom was decreasing annually and by 1952 their number had decreased from 5852 people to 3733 people. But the mass amnesty of prisoners, announced in the spring of 1953, and the reorganization changes of the Gulag system led to a sharp reduction in the total list of the camp contingent, which jeopardized the production activities of the camp, which not only was not eliminated, but also continued to fulfill its tasks. In 1953-1954, the transition from forced labor to voluntary labor was carried out, but it was not successful due to staff turnover associated with workers' dissatisfaction with working and living conditions. There was a reverse transition to the use of labor of the convicted contingent, because at that time it was the fastest way to eliminate staff hunger and perform production tasks.

Note

^[1] The Federal Penitentiary Service wanted to open a correctional reforestation center for convicts in Siberia. Interfax. 20. 05.2021. URL: https://www.interfax.ru/russia/767879 . (date of request: 11/10/2023); The Head of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation approved the idea of replacing migrant labor with prisoners. Interfax. 05/24/2021 URL: https://www.interfax.ru/business/768416 . (date of request: 10.11.2023).

^[2] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 156.

^[3] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 16. L. 201; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 21. L. 15; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 30. L. 324.

^[4] Comp. according to the GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 3. L. 64; F. 14. Op. 1. d. 4. L. 87; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 5. L. 53; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 6. L. 60; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 7. L. 59; F. 14. Op. 1. d. 8. L. 99; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 9. L. 93.

^[5] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 66-67; F. 14. Op. 1. d. 11. L. 102-103; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 14. l. B/n; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 16. L. 140(222)-141(223). F. 14. Op. 1. D. 20. L. 86(92)-97(93). F. 14. Op. 1. D. 30. L. 243-244.

^[6] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 19. L. 294-295.

^[7] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 58. L. 133.

^[8] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 58. L. 133-134.

^[9] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 14. L. B/n.

^[10] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 66-67.

^[11] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 10. L. 66-67; F. 14. Op. 1. d. 11. L. 102-103; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 14. l. B/n; F. 14. Op. 1. D. 16. L. 140(222)-141(223). F. 14. Op. 1. D. 20. L. 86(92)-97(93). F. 14. Op. 1. D. 30. L. 243-244.

^[12] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 38. L. 81.

^[13] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 262.

^[14] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 276.

^[15] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 3(43).

^[16] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 273-274.

^[17] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 91. L. 84.

^[18] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 36. L. 90.

^[19] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 37. L. 2.

^[20] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 38. L. 76.

^[21] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 6. Op. 1. D. 88. L. 144.

^[22] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 38. L. 76.

^[23] TA GUFSIN CO. F. 14. Op. 1. D. 46. L. 113.