SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY
Online ISSN : 2423-9283
Print ISSN : 0038-0113
ISSN-L : 0038-0113
Volume 54, Issue 6
Displaying 1-16 of 16 articles from this issue
  • Yoshiki ENATSU
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 753-779,894
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The "Manshukoku" government tried to abolish the traditional land system, and establish a "modern" land system in Manchuria. The main task of this project was to determine one owner per piece of land. However, existing rights and customs on land were so complicated that two or more people sometimes claimed ownership on the same land. It is interesting to study the actual situation of land ownership in Manchuria prior to the 1930s by examining the problems this project faced. This paper especially considers the problems of permanent tenancy (yong-dian-quan 永佃権) in the former Jin-zhou manors. The Jin-zhou manors were owned by the Qing Imperial Household Department and were disposed of in 1905-09. After the 1911 revolution, there was an interesting lawsuit concerning permanent tenancy between the former manager (zhuang-tou 荘頭) and the tenants of the Jin-zhou manor in Suizhong prefecture. The Land Bureau of "Manshukoku" conducted research on this problem and completed a report. This paper is based on the Land Bureau report and discusses the following points: The Qing government expropriated the lands in Jin-zhou, and established the Jin-zhou manors in 1669. The government gave the right of permanent tenancy to the peasants who had been cultivating the land. Also, some Qing soldiers belonging to the Han banners were appointed as the managers of the manors. The managers were not able to either raise rent or deprive the tenants of their farm land. As a result, the managers' right to control the land conflicted with the peasants' right of permanent tenancy. The Qing government sold the manors' land to private citizens in 1905-09. In Ling village of Suizhong prefecture, both the manager, LING Yun-ge, and the tenants of the manor insisted that they should have the right to purchase the manor's land and acquire land ownership. Finally, they agreed to split the manor land in half But, the peasants were still permitted to retain permanent tenancy on the land which LING now owned. After the 1911 revolution, LING Yun-ge appealed to the government to deny permanent tenancy to the peasants. At the same time, the peasants campaigned to maintain their rights of permanent tenancy. The above dispute was not settled until the "Manshukoku" period.
    Download PDF (2682K)
  • Yuiti NORITAKE
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 780-799,893
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The purpose of this article is to investigate the historical meaning of the moratorium acts made by sengoku daimyo Gohojo in 1560. During the Middle Ages, the peasants would demand the moratorium acts at the time when the candidate succeeded to Tenno, Shogun, Lord. 1560 was the year when HOJO Ujimasa succeeded to sengoku daimyo. At that time the peasants in Gohojo ryokoku demanded that they didn't need to pay nengukuji only by money, zeni, and that they could rescind the debts, etc. These peasants' revolts prevailed over Gohojo ryokoku. Facing to these big revolts, the Gohojo couldn't but enforce the moratorium acts. They included the following contents, (1)The peasants could bring back their wives and children who had been serving their terms, (2)The peasants didn't need to pay their debts, (3)The peasants could get back their patches which had been lended for a period. But on the other hand, it could be applied in the following cases, because if the acts had been applied in these cases, Gohojo's rule of the peasants might have been destroyed, (1)Apart of nengu which was taken after by daikan and bugyo, (2)Kurazeni lended by the Gohojo, etc. And it is worth paying more attention to the fact that these acts included also the ptovision which meant that while paying nengu, the peasants could substitute rice for a half of it. The Gohojo put both tax reform and rescinding the debts into excution at the same time by these moratorium acts. This is how they could emphasize that they made wise administration for the peasants revolts. This point is the most important political meaning in these moratorium acts.
    Download PDF (1892K)
  • Fumiaki HAMA
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 800-830,891-89
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Recent trend in studies of the labor history which became to be called "The New Labor History" in the United States established a new viewpoint. Because it set a high valuation on the long established work habits and the elements of different native cultures which the immigrant laborers brought into America, and considered them to have had a very important historical significance as constituting a counter culture towards capitalism. The new perception has influenced Japanese historians deeply, and consequently, many studies of the immigrant laborers in the second half of the 19th century and the turning point of the century have been accumulated in Japan. On the contrary the Japanese economic historians had formerly focussed on the period of the first half of the 19th century, because it was the period of the industrial revolution. Even though they made progress in the excellent studies, they neglected those of the immigrant laborers in this period. Therefore the neglected should be now remedied. Then the purpose of this paper is to analyse the problem of the immigrant laborers in the antebellum period with special reference to the riot caused by the Irish immigrant laborers in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. This riot is important. Becausc it is said to have been the first riot in American history when federal troops were called to suppress the rebelling laborers. Also because it has very important economic aspects in itself. Thus this paper will examine firstly the course of the riots which occurred repeatedly in this canal minutely, secondly survey the circumstances of the so called canal era in which the canal project was developed, and thirdly clarify the economic situations of the immigrant laborers who were engaged in the construction of this canal. After by analysing the substance of the canal scrip which was issued by the canal company from 1834 and examining the relation between the issuance of the scrip and the riot which occurred simultaniously, this paper will conclude that the failure of the company's management resulted in the serious damages and suffering to the immigrant laborers, and that these were the causes which made the riot repeated. Taking account of the facts that only a few canal succeeded in the management and the most part of laborers in a canal construction sites were the Irish immigrants, the riot of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal was not exceptional case of the riots accompanied with the canal construction. Similar cases seem to be found in almost other canals too. Therefore such a case was the one which the immigrant laborers who came into America, "Land of Freedom", in the period of the primitive accumulation of capital were generally obliged to encounter.
    Download PDF (2896K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 831-850
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (2079K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 851-853
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (391K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 853-856
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (523K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 856-859
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (571K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 859-862
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (543K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 862-865
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (523K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 865-869
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (652K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 869-872
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (544K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 873-875
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (403K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 875-878
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (545K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Article type: Article
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 879-881
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (433K)
  • Article type: Bibliography
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 891-894
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (216K)
  • Article type: Index
    1989 Volume 54 Issue 6 Pages 895-901
    Published: March 31, 1989
    Released on J-STAGE: November 22, 2017
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (305K)
feedback
Top