民主革命时期中共"地委"组织考论

民主革命时期的中共地委组织是党的组织体系中的一个重要组织层级和管理机构。它经历了一个从初创、探索到重建、全面发展和基本定型的历史过程。在初创和探索时期(1921～1927),地委组织从制度上看呈逐渐严密、从设置上看呈逐渐增多的特点,而总的看,地委的组织层级地位尚不明确,地委的设置从全国的组织体系看还表现为临时性和不稳定性。在重建、全面发展和基本定型时期(1938—1949),地委组织确立了省(边区)和县之间一个地方层级的地位,地委的组织制度在早期探索的基础上逐渐完备和定型,地委在全国的地方党的组织体系中的组织和层级地位在法律上(党的章程及有关文件)和实践上得以确立。     

House of Lords Committee Accommodation and Its Use: Restoration and Renewal in the 19th and 20th Centuries*

Following the 1834 fire, the work of house of lords committees continued virtually without interruption, at first in temporary accommodation and, from 1846, in rooms in the new palace designed by Charles Barry. This article charts the history of house of lords committee activity and the varied use of its accommodation at Westminster from 1834 to the present. Major committee work immediately following the fire included an inquiry into prison reform. Barry's accommodation was scantily fitted out, and quickly needed technical and other adaptations. Committees themselves changed too, with the heaviest phase of private bill activity needed for the creation of the railways tailing off by the late 1860s. Following a low point in committee activity between 1940 and 1970 committee work has developed in fits and starts from 1971 onwards. The further expansion of committees following the Jellicoe committee report of 1992 was accommodated by the reform of private bill procedure, which helped free up committee rooms, and in October 2009, the establishment of the Supreme Court meant that the law lords no longer sat judicially in the large committee rooms 1 and 2. Since 2012, however, the further expansion of committee activity has not been matched by an increase in its accommodation.     

Did 1979 Make Much Difference? An Alternative View of Select Committee Reform in the 1970s and 1980s*

An emphasis on the distinctive nature and effectiveness of the post-1979 ‘departmental’ select committee system has tended to dominate the academic literature. This article demonstrates that, on the contrary, many of the most important elements of these changes in the parliamentary environment were already in place by the mid 1970s, and, in particular, that MPs were working effectively to challenge government on select committees well before the advent of the departmental committees. It therefore concludes, contrary to the impression given by conventional accounts of the development of select committees, that the 1979 changes should be seen largely as a sensible restructuring; they were not, as has been claimed, the key event in the advance of select committee scrutiny, but, instead, should be regarded as one step in a gradual process of reform and improvement that began in the mid 1960s.     

“名实分离”：雍正帝对大学士选任制度的改革——兼谈阁权的“变异”

雍正帝在大学士选任制度上进行了一系列新尝试。其举措出现了外任大学士、协办大学士、额外大学士等多种形式,他一方面通过提高大学士品级巩固大学士文臣首领的地位;另一方面,也通过"名实分离"的方式虚化和拆解阁权,使原本单一的"阁权"发生变异。     

The British Parliamentary Labour Party and the Government of Ireland Act 1920

Immediately after the First World War the British Labour Party was forced to reconsider its relationship with an increasingly militant Irish nationalism. This reassessment occurred at the same time as it was becoming a major political and electoral force in post‐war Britain. The political imperative from the party's perspective was to portray itself as a responsible, moderate and patriotic alternative governing party. Thus it was fearful of the potential negative impact of too close an association with, and perceived sympathy for, extreme Irish nationalism. This explains the party's often bewildering changes in policy on Ireland at various party conferences in 1919 and 1920, ranging from support for home rule to federalism throughout the United Kingdom to ‘dominion home rule’ as part of a wider evolving British Commonwealth to adopting outright ‘ self‐determination’ for a completely independent Ireland outside both United Kingdom and empire. On one aspect of its Irish policy, however, the party was adamant and united – its opposition to the partition of Ireland, which was the fundamental principle of Lloyd George's Government of Ireland Bill of 1920 which established Northern Ireland. Curiously, that aspect of Labour's Irish policy was never discussed in the party at large. All the running was made by the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) in the house of commons in 1920. The PLP's outright opposition to the bill acted as balm throughout the wider party, binding together the confusing, and often contradictory, positions promulgated on the long‐term constitutional future of Ireland and its relationship with Britain.     

Sir John Coxe Hippisley: That ‘Busy Man’ in the Cause of Catholic Emancipation

The late 18th and early 19th centuries represent a critical time for the emergence of modernity in western political life. Of particular interest is the confluence at that time of increased religious toleration with political reform. Research for an earlier study, Parliamentary Politics of a County and its Town: General Elections in Suffolk and Ipswich in the Eighteenth Century (Westport, 2002), led to an examination of Sir John Coxe Hippisley, MP (1747–1825). In many ways, his political career is an exemplar of the broader conflicts of contemporary English political life writ small. Set between 1790 and 1818, Hippisley's parliamentary career is fascinating, for while he was an active and precocious supporter of catholic emancipation, he represented Sudbury in Suffolk, a borough with a high proportion of protestant dissenters. His constituents found Hippisley's enthusiasm for catholic emancipation repugnant, but not so much so that they could not be convinced to continue to vote for him if the price was right. Consequently a constant and expensive wooing of his constituents marked his parliamentary career. On a national level, Hippisley's constant and public pursuit of catholic emancipation, coupled with his equally avid quest for preferment, led to a series of quixotic contradictions in his political behaviour. Hippisley and his political adventures thus represent a crucial development stage in the movement for religious freedom in England and the west, as well as providing an illuminating case study on the dynamics of local politics in the time leading up to the first great age of reform.     

The Intervention Crisis of 1862: A British Diplomatic Dilemma?

In the fall of 1862, William Ewart Gladstone opened a cabinet debate whether Great Britain should intervene in the American Civil War. Influenced by the staggering death toll and lack of results, the British cabinet contemplated a humanitarian intervention. Coinciding with the debate was a cabinet crisis in France over French policies toward Italy and more importantly the overthrow of the Greek king. The revolution in Greece reopened the Eastern Question and forced the Palmerston Government to carefully consider its foreign policy. By closely looking at the chronological overlap of the intervention debate, the French cabinet crisis, and the Greek Revolution, this article shows the interplay of the entangled global crises during the fall of 1862 and their impact on trans-Atlantic diplomacy. The British Government had to determine whether the situation in North America or the containment of Russia and the Eastern Question required attention more urgently. The British Government determined that threats closer to home mattered more.     

新中国成立初期的上海里弄整顿

新中国成立初期,作为基层社会管理体制支撑的居民委员会出现了三大危机:组织衰败、劣化、蜕化问题。为此,中国共产党在基层里弄中发动了一场规模宏大的清理整顿工作。在这次整顿工作中,政府通过赋予街居组织以体制支撑,造就了街居组织对非单位人的有效控制;通过对干部、群众的双重清理,传统基层统治权威代表较为彻底地从基层社会权力空间中退出,居民的认同也转向新的街居组织。至此,居委会的效能获得全面提升,政府与居民之间的政治沟通不畅问题迎刃而解,而居委会也因此焕发了生机。     

熊梁进步党内阁的成立与失败

二次革命期间,进步党处于北洋派和国民党竞相争取的有利地位,获得了上台组阁的机会,经过许多曲折,终于成立以熊希龄、梁启超为核心的新政府,立完派第一次掌握了部分中央政权。新内阁提出了雄心勃勃的大政方针,但也副署了取消国民党议员资格的命令导致国会解散。一种流传很广的说法是袁世凯利用承德盗卖文物案胁迫熊希龄副署,本文经过考证认定这种说法是错误的。熊、梁等进步党内阁派早已存在开明专制思想,而且对民初议会政治实践不满,他们希望在袁世凯的支持下走开明专制的道路。但是在国会解散后不久,失去支持的熊梁内阁也在北洋派的压力下黯然倒台,标志着这种依附性的开明专制道路完全破产。     

日据大连时期“关东州”方面委员制度探析

方面委员制度是日据“关东州”时期关东厅于1930年12月在大连设立的。主要工作是针对辖区内的贫困者进行调查,并开展保护救济,是所谓“社会事业”的重要组成部分。但是这样的福祉对处于日本殖民统治下的中国人是根本无法真正享受到的。