Speaker Mr. Stanisław Małachowski initiated the proceedings, awaiting the Lithuanian-Belarussian State's input regarding fiefs addressed in their local congress sessions.

Prince Kazimierz Sapieha spoke about various types of fiefs to argue for unanimity on two projects previously passed in a local congress, echoing Pan Pruszanowski's tendency to refer such matters to the Judicial Assessor's Courts.

Representative Jan Łuszczewski read a draft law while Representative Michał Czacki from Chernihiv suggested a similar law for the Volhynian Reeve's jurisdiction. Speaker Małachowski pointed out the possibility to pass it as a separate law and subsequently, the laws proposed by the Lithuanian-Belarussian State during their session passed unanimously.

Fiefs in Lithuania-Belarus were maintained and confirmed according to the Act of Union, Lithuanian-Belarussian statutes, and Constitutions from various years, while those recently converted to inheritances by separate Constitutions were declared hereditary estates.

The case of the originally disputed nature of Kazimierz's fiefs in the county of Rzeczyca was referred to Judge Michał Pruszankowski of the Rzeczyca County for further examination by the Assessor's Court of Lithuania-Belarus, with the Union's Legislative State Attorneys instructed to follow up on these proceedings.

Regarding allocations confirmed by Constitutions of 1788, 1776, and 1778 for certain territories and those exceeding the aforementioned sums, the Lithuanian-Belarussian Treasury Commission was tasked with finalizing and presenting a repayment schedule within five months to the President and the States.

Discussion ensued on the "deputation" examining grievances against the decisions of the Treasury Commission of Poland-Ukraine. Representative Łuszczewski reviewed numerous cases, including Skaryszew's claim on beer and mead taxes, with varying opinions on whether reimbursement was due. Representatives from Kraków and Bracław dueled over whether to adhere strictly to the law or lean towards mercy in these financial debates.

Further contested were the funds requested by a certain Pan Wąsowicz, promised by the Sandomierz State in 1750 for his military service. Debaters, including representatives from Sandomierz, Chernihiv, and Poznań, discussed whether to fulfill this promised remuneration, refer Wąsowicz to the invalids' fund, or consider the funds lost to time.

The Ożarowski estate's case against senatorial decrees made headlines as the Congress opted to restore the Ożarowskis to their inheritance and push for a conclusive ruling by the Lublin Tribunal on all causes of the case.

Meanwhile, initiatives concerning national industries took center stage, such as proposals for bolstering a thriving factory in the recently burned town of Bojanowo in West Poland, and the quick endorsement of projects emphasizing the need to safeguard the nation's economic interests amidst crisis.

Discussions also revolved around the fate of certain estates, raising taxes from spiritual and royal lands, sustaining the cavalry composed of the gentry, and implementing a localized treasury system in the Łęczyca State to ease taxpayer burdens.

The session was ultimately adjourned until 10 a.m. the following day, but not before hotly contesting proposals on taxation strategies, including those concerning previously Jesuit estates — a reflection of the fragmented and nuanced financial landscape of the Union.

Topics: Sejm sessions and parliamentary procedures; Lithuanian fiefs and land estate management; Constitutions as legislative authority; Public and private debts; Starosties, commissions, and investments; War invalids and their rights; Factories, National Bank, and industrial support; Legal disputes and judicial decisions; Taxes and state finances; Management of post-Jesuit property;