翻刻
信濃国伊奈郡上穂村赤須村与同国同郡
宮田村中越村諏訪形村山論裁許之事
上穂赤須両村訴趣惣名太田切入之内中御所
北御所両山者自古来相手方と入会二而双方売
木伐出候所宮田村より届ニ不及猥ニ杣入山伐
荒旨申之宮田中越諏訪形三ケ村答候者右
入会と申掛ヶ候山者場処違ニ而候檜尾より北之方
中御所北御所黒川山三ケ所者地頭立山二而
元禄三年之検地帳ニ御立山と書載有之
私領二渡候己来地頭より数度入山師売
木ニ致非入会縦申之右就不分明辻甚太郎
差出し遂見分候論処保科肥後守領分
之時入会ニ申付候證文有之候其後延宝年
中己来右山内より売木伐出時御預り所
故千村平右衛門江御勘定奉行より印形之證
状数通有之且亦上穂相給近藤淡路守より
元禄年中材木伐出候書付有之彼是
所伐出し木数及六万本余宮田定檜尾よりうつ
木ヶ嶽谷川迄之山内二而伐出入会たる由申とい
得共山内挟り右木数可伐出分内之山ニ者決テ
不相見中御所北御所二而伐出段無紛旁以
入会山たる事明白二候其外申争境目双方
ともに無證拠二候依之今般詮議之上南者
うつ木ヶ嶽之谷川を界イ東北之方者黒
川山峯通進押通し双方五ヶ村可入会黒川
現代語訳
信濃国伊那郡上穂村・赤須村と同国同郡宮田村・中越村・諏訪形村との山論裁許の件
上穂・赤須両村の訴えの趣旨は、惣名太田切の内にある中御所・北御所両山は古来より相手方と入会であり、双方で売木を伐り出していたところ、宮田村より届け出もなく勝手に杣入りして山を伐り荒らしたと申している。宮田・中越・諏訪形三ヶ村の答弁では、入会と申し掛けている山は場所違いであり、檜尾より北の方の中御所・北御所・黒川山の三ヶ所は地頭立山であって、元禄三年の検地帳に御立山と書き載せてあり、私領に渡って以来、地頭より数度入山師を入れて売木を行い、入会ではないと申している。
この不分明につき辻甚太郎を差し出して見分を遂げたところ、論争地は保科肥後守領分の時に入会に申し付けた証文がある。その後延宝年中以来、右山内より売木を伐り出す時は御預かり所ゆえ千村平右衛門へ御勘定奉行より印形の証状が数通ある。また上穂を相給する近藤淡路守より元禄年中に材木を伐り出した書付がある。これらにより伐り出した木数は六万本余に及ぶ。
宮田では檜尾よりうつ木ヶ嶽谷川までの山内であって、伐り出しは入会であると申しているが、山内が狭く、右の木数を伐り出すべき分量の山内ではどうしても見えず、中御所・北御所で伐り出した段は紛れもなく、ともに入会山であることは明白である。
その外申し争いの境目については双方ともに証拠がない。これにより今般詮議の上、南はうつ木ヶ嶽の谷川を界とし、東北の方は黒川山峯通りを押し通して、双方五ヶ村が入会すべき黒川
英語訳
Regarding the mountain dispute arbitration between Kamiho Village and Akasu Village in Ina District, Shinano Province, and Miyata Village, Nakakoshi Village, and Suwagata Village in the same district and province.
The complaint from both Kamiho and Akasu villages states that the two mountains of Nakagosho and Kitagosho within the Ōtagiri area have been jointly used (iriai) with the opposing party since ancient times, with both sides cutting and extracting timber for sale. However, Miyata Village has entered the mountains without proper notification and has been cutting timber recklessly, causing damage to the forest. The three villages of Miyata, Nakakoshi, and Suwagata respond that the mountain claimed to be jointly used is in the wrong location. The three places - Nakagosho, Kitagosho, and Kurokawa-yama north of Hinoo - are lord's mountains (jitō-tateyama), recorded as "lord's mountains" (otate-yama) in the land survey record of Genroku 3, and since becoming private domain, the lord has repeatedly sent mountain workers to cut timber for sale, making it not a jointly used area.
Regarding this unclear matter, Tsuji Jintarō was dispatched to conduct an inspection of the disputed area. It was found that when this area was under the domain of Hoshina Higo-no-kami, there exists documentation establishing it as jointly used land. Subsequently, from the Enpō period onward, when cutting timber from the aforementioned mountain area, since it was under government custody, there are several stamped certificates from the accounting magistrate to Chimura Heiuemon. Additionally, there is documentation from Kondō Awaji-no-kami, who administered Kamiho, regarding timber cutting in the Genroku period. Based on these records, the number of trees cut exceeds 60,000.
Miyata claims that the area from Hinoo to Utsuki-ga-take valley is their mountain territory and that the cutting was done under joint usage rights. However, given the narrow mountain area, it clearly cannot accommodate the extraction of such a large quantity of timber, and it is undeniable that the cutting was done at Nakagosho and Kitagosho, making it clear that these are jointly used mountains.
Regarding other disputed boundaries, both sides lack evidence. Therefore, after this investigation, it is determined that the southern boundary shall be the Utsuki-ga-take valley, and the northeastern boundary shall follow the Kurokawa mountain ridge, with all five villages having joint usage rights to Kurokawa...