论文部分内容阅读
目前学界在针对清代“就地正法”之制产生时间的讨论中,《清史稿》“咸丰三年”(1853年)说被否定。实际上,有关争论混淆了晚清“就地正法”之制与“就地正法”适用范围。“就地正法”本为军法,秦汉时期便有类似的记载。咸丰三年,清政府扩大适用军法“就地正法”的范围,预以治乱匪之法治盗匪,惩治盗匪的“就地正法”章程便由此产生,故“就地正法”之制产生于咸丰三年没有问题。因为对“恭请王命,就地正法”产生误会,铃木秀光“就地正法”产生于道光二十八年(1848年)的说法值得商榷。
At present, in the discussion of the birth time of the system of “local law and order” in the Qing Dynasty, the academic circles said “history of the Qing Dynasty” and “Xianfeng three years” (1853) were denied. In fact, the controversy has confused the scope of application of the “local law” system and the “local justice law” in the late Qing dynasty. “Local law ” This is the military law, Qin and Han Dynasties have a similar record. Xianfeng three years, the Qing government to expand the application of military law “local law ” range, pre-rule banditry law and order banditry, punish banditry “local law ” charter will be produced, therefore “System produced in Xianfeng three years no problem. Because of ”misunderstanding “ Christine Wang, local law ”misunderstood, Suzuki Hideki “ local justice ”was born in twenty-eight years (1848) is debatable.