At the time of the Great Kanto Earthquake, Shinpei Goto added a new meaning to the concept of “reconstruction”: “to make things better than they were before the disaster.” However, this concept of “reconstruction” was also subject to criticism. What was he trying to assert by proposing the concept of “reconstruction” in the first place? To this end, the focus of this paper is on three main positions regarding “reconstruction.” The first is Shinpei Goto, who proposed the concept of “reconstruction” and led the Imperial Capital Reconstruction Plan; the second is Miyoji Ito, who proposed the theory of “restoration” at the Imperial Capital Reconstruction Council; and the third is Tokuzo Fukuda, a social policy scholar who stood for the theory of “reconstruction” but sharply criticized Goto. The results revealed that the different ways of referring to the concepts of “reconstruction” and “restoration” gave priority to different policies.

抄録全体を表示

Article 30 of the Meiji Constitution pertaining to petitions filed by imperial subjects specified that "rules" for concrete procedures were to be established; and the Parliament Act (Gi'inho 議院法) concerning petitions to the congress, and the Petitions Act (Seiganrei 請願令) pertaining to petitions filed with the Emperor and administrative bureaus were promulgated as a result. This article examines the process of promulgating the Petitions Act by discussing why the act was passed in 1917. in addition, the article discusses the new link that was established between the Emperor and his subjects (or rather, the nation) through the enactment of the petition system through an examination of the conditions before, during and after the enactment of the Constitution. Because the act of petitioning the Emperor was prohibited prior to the Constitution's enactment, focus was placed more on appeals to administrative bureaus at that time. However, in the process of enacting the Constitution and studying European practices, petitioning the Emperor came to be interpreted as being important as petitioning the legislature and administrative bureaus. After the Constitution was enacted, petitioning the Emperor became the subject of a debate between Ito Hirobumi (伊藤博文) and Ito Miyoji () within the process of preparing an imperial household system. The argument concerned how petitioning should be understood in terms of the "will of the people": Would it be a means of "procuring the will of the people" or "probing the will of the people?" Furthermore, heated debates arose on how the Emperor and the legislature should be positioned within the framework of the Constitution. For example, what would be the interrelationship between petitioning the two (i.e., expressing the "will of the people") and perceptions concerning the relationship between the monarch and his subjects. The promulgation of the Petitions Act was also interpreted as a measure responding to a changing society and as a law protecting the rights of imperial subjects. Consequently, the Petitions Act, which attempted to systematically lay out the petition process, was a piece of legislation that "probed the will of the people" and, as a matter, was the first law of its kind to do so under the Constitution. Furthermore, the Act represented a new linkage between the Emperor and the nation, through the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal, who was put in charge of handling petitions filed with the Emperor.

抄録全体を表示

This paper is intended to clarify what plan Hirobumi Ito envisaged regarding the bicameral system, and then how his plan was evaluated. Before his investigation of the constitutions in European countries, Ito thought that it was necessary to take a certain satisfactory measures toward the Lower House as well as the discontent warriors. Therefore, he set up the Senatorial House as if it were the "bulwark of the Throne". His plot of the legislature was not so workable, considering the role of the legislature, that it can be called the "negative" bicameral system plan. Then, Ito learned from Stein and Mosse the significance of the bicameral system of the assembly, and also learned that the bicameral system was a preferable legislature. Ito concluded that "law" should be established through the "kyosan" of the bicameral system of the assembly consisting of the Lower House representing the will of people and the Senatorial House showing achievements and knowledge. He made up such a legislative process as playing an important role in a constitutional government. He intended to set up the bicameral system as "eternal institution" consisting of the Lower House members to be elected by the people and the Senatorial House members to be appointed among the bureaucrats. His thought that this sort of a legislative system plot could be called the a "positive" bicameral system plan. It was no doubt pioneering in those days that Ito proposed the necessity of the adoption of bicameralism based on a functional legislative process.

抄録全体を表示

During the late Meiji era, the Imperial Household Research Committee headed by Ito Hirobumi 伊藤博文 drafted laws and ordinances pertaining to the imperial family system. Imperial Ordinance pertaining to state documentary forms (Koshikirei 公式令) enacted in 1907 is one of the most representative laws the Committee was involeved in. The present article outlines the process involved in the enactment of this ordinance and examines its impact on issues pertaining to the commissioner of coronations, in order to focus attention upon the emergence of debate over the relationship between the "imperial court" and "provincial offices" during the era of Meiji Constitutionalism and upon the perceptions held by the two entities. Deputy Governor Ito Miyoji , who interpreted the Imperial Household Research Committee's focus to be one prescribing imperial affairs through a judicial system, worked to reinterpret its affairs in a "constitutional" context by recognizing the existence of ambiguous margins when attempting to categorize matters into those of the imperial court and those of the provincial offices. The Koshikirei was revised to expand the scope of the Imperial Household Ordinance (Koshitsurei 皇室令) further than the Committee's original draft submitted to the Emperor, leading to the creation of the imperial rescript and the imperial writ documentary forms, in addition to the Imperial Household Ordinance itself. This enactment process not only gave rise to contradictions between existing imperial ordinances and the Imperial Household Ordinance, but also became the cause of a debate regarding the commissioner of coronations that occurred later on during the early Taisho era. The commissioner of coronations was responsible for state ceremonial affairs, including the Emperor's enthronement ceremony and Daijo-sai 大嘗祭, the first fruits festival celebrating imperial succession. Regulations Governing the Accession to the Throne in the Imperial Household Ordinance enacted in 1909 provided that the commissioner of coronations shall be appointed by the imperial court, and in 1913, the commissioner was established through imperial order. The above official interpretation also stirred debate concerning the relationship between the imperial court and provincial offices, in addition to its form of promulgation. The Diet and the Cabinet, which constituted the "provincial" entity at the time, debated over the positioning of the two entities. The matter was also referred to the Privy Council after the Imperial Household Ministry filed for mediation. Consequently, both parties came to recognize the subtly inseparable nuances between what should be considered "imperial" and "provincial", which had seemed clearly distinct and in principle contrasting from the time of the establishment of the cabinet system.

抄録全体を表示

The political change after the "May 15 Incident" marked an important turning-point in the modern history of Japan. It put an end to party-based cabinets, a practice that had persisted for about eight years, and brought about "national cabinets," the first of which was formed under Saito Makoto. At that time the Seiyukai commanded an absolute majority in the Lower House (which actually did have wide legislative power), but from then on the importance of political parties declined. Political parties, especially the Seiyukai, could not regain power for the following reasons. The Seiyukai had to pay attention to the other party, the Minseito, as it feared that a determined opposition against the ministry would leave the Minseito as the ruling party. As such, the Minseito could have dissolved the Diet, thereby possibly damaging the Seiyukai. At the same time, the Seiyukai, itself bothered by factional disputes, feared that opposition against the ministry would further its own intra-party factional tensions and thus lead to a loss of the party's majority in the House. The Seiyukai did indeed hold institutional power, for it dominated the Lower House and thus held great legislative power. But, such power lasted only as long as the party's majority in the House lasted, and that majority could easily be lost in the event of the dissolution of the Diet or disunity inside its own ranks. Thus, the Seiyukai adopted the strategem of a "peaceful transfer" of power, whereby it would support the ministry over a certain period and then have power transferred to it in reward for this support. If such a strategy had proven successful, The Seiyukai could have regained power, maintained its party unity, and avoided the dissolution of the Diet. The Saito Cabinet, aware from the start of the party's weakness, intended to make a reverse use of this strategy to manipulate the party. Thus, the Seiyukai could not force the cabinet to accept a "peaceful transfer" of power, and so the party leaders' internal authority over party members declined. The dissenting faction within the Seiyukai then by itself virtually came to an agreement with the ministry. The Seiyukai thus split up and lost its majority in the House. The National Cabinet attempted to attain political stability by exploiting conflicts between the groups which supported the government and between the dissenting factions within these groups.

抄録全体を表示