Towards political independence from the Prince-Bishop
Geneva achieved its independence from the prince-bishop in the years around the turn of the 15th to 16th century. In 1439 the Episcopal see fell to the house of Savoy and the bishop became the Commune's magistrates' sole interlocutor. After 1450, the Genevan fairs were losing to their French competitors, weakening Geneva's economy and impacting on its political climate. A flurry of diplomatic measures as well as the presence of Swiss and German traders making up for French defections mitigated this degradation. Contacts established at an economic level with the Swiss Cantons[1] lead to the opening then reinforcement of relations between Geneva and the Swiss Confederacy. At the beginning of the 16th century, the fallouts of this rapprochement were being felt at political and religious level. Thus, when the relations between Geneva and the house of Savoy deteriorated, it fell to the Swiss Cantons to adjudicate their difference at a time when some Genevans, favouring a reinforced alliance with the Confederacy clashed with partisans of a rapprochement with the house of Savoy. The escalation of tensions between Genevans and Savoyards lasted until February 1519, at which date Freiburg signed a Burgrecht[2] with the Genevan independentists but this agreement was annulled three months later under pressure from the federal diet[3] who had no wish to alienate Savoy. The Duke of Savoy's punitive measures against the “patriots” were ruthless. From 1519 to 1525, after the arrest and execution of the leader of the insurrection, Philibert Berthelier[4], the Duke of Savoy took over the dispensation of civil justice, arrogated the right to appoint the syndics, thus asserting the house of Savoy's dominance over Geneva. Such decisions highlight the role and the symbolic import of political and judicial functions when authorities overlap. In the end, the Swiss Cantons came out in support of the independentists and, in February 1526, some Genevan fugitives sign a Burgrecht with Bern and Freiburg. Back in Geneva, bypassing the authority of the Little Council where several members supported the Savoyards, the fugitives persuaded the General Council to ratify the Burgrecht. Militarily and politically supported by the Swiss Cantons, Geneva was taking its first step towards autonomy, severing its links with the house of Savoy.
From 1526, in order to comfort their positions, the victors sought to drive out external influences and to control the Commune's decisional instances. The break with the house of Savoy also brought about some modifications to the political institutions and to the judiciary. The changes affected the organisation of the councils and the syndics' election formula that had been set in the 14th century. With a view to control the Councils, the independentists took a leaf from their adversary's book. Lessons learnt in 1529 lead to the creation of the Council of the Two Hundred[5], a new decisional outfit inserted between the General Council and the Little Council to narrow the influence of Savoy's partisans within the councils. The changes also affected the judiciary. In 1727, in order to restore peaceful relations with the city, the bishop handed over to the magistrates his rights of civil justice. In 1529, in order to exercise this new right of justice and to replace the statutorily Savoy vidame, the city set up a Lieutenant's court comprised of a lieutenant of justice[6] and four auditors. Thus the city's political emancipation from Savoy caused institutional changes resulting in the mutually regulating composition of the councils and the concentration of civil and criminal judicial powers in the hand of the city magistrates.
The impact of these changes was largely felt during the second stage of Geneva's political emancipation. Indeed from 1528 to 1535, the wresting of autonomy from the prince-bishop Pierre de La Baume[7] evolved around incidents and events coloured with confessional issues but triggered off by conflicts between the bishop and the Little Council about the conduct of criminal cases. Two cases bring out more clearly the jurisdictional conflict between the bishop and the Commune. In the first instance, namely the murder of Freiburg canon Peter Werli[8], the bishop demanded that the case be investigated by the officialité[9]. The city magistrates, in their capacity as judges of criminal cases refused to give way and took over the case. With his authority in jeopardy, the bishop left the city in July 1533. The second case in 1534 proved more political since one Jean Portier[10], secretary to the bishop's court was accused of treason in collusion with the bishop. The secretary was prosecuted, condemned and executed, the letters of grace granted by the bishop notwithstanding. The disregard for his right of grace and the magistrates' refusal to bend to his will caused the complete break-down of the relations between the city and the bishop. For the purpose of this case that should have been investigated by the procurator fiscal – a spawn of the bishop's court – an attorney general[11] was appointed to replace him and act for the public prosecution during the proceedings. Finally on 1 October 1534, facing the absence of a bishop suspected of having betrayed them, the communal authorities declared the Episcopal see vacant and turned the Episcopal seat into a prison. In 1535, the city was coining money and had assumed all regalian rights: Geneva had become a sovereign republic. The “lordship” of Geneva as embodied by the Little Council replaced the Episcopal principality and appropriated the bishop's property and lands. The links with the Empire were loosened but would fully disappear only with the demise of the Ancien Régime.
