明治三七年一月五日の「大阪朝日新聞」に掲載された第一回目の「天声人語」は、前年一二月の勅語に代表されるような対露強硬論の高まりの中でその名と記述を形成している。当時の「大阪朝日」の紙面では数少ない言文一致体と、それによって記される、書き手の責任を回避するような信憑性の希薄な情報によって、対露強硬論は展開されたのである。「天声人語」はそのような形で連載をスタートしたが、現在のそれは、結末に対する期待を予め孕んだ記述の束ではないという点において、もはや連載ではなく<場>として認識されていると言えよう。

抄録全体を表示

In this paper, the author analyzes how the Liberal Party (自由党) and the Constitutional Reform Party (立憲改進党) changed their position on the gun system (郡制) ; from mere reform to abolitionism and how abolitionism was accepted in local politics. The two parties submitted the gun system reform bills to every session of the Imperial Diet. They argued that the chief gun executives (guncho 郡長) should be publicly elected and that in the gun assembly elections, indirect election and the favorable system for landlords should be abolished. However, the goverment rejected them. To pass the bill, the Liberal Party deleted the provision for publicly-elected guncho, and in compensation,demanded that the restrictions on appointing guncho should be loosened. The Progressive Party 進歩党, the former Constitutional Reform Party, also followed the same line, and the reform bill passed the House of Peers in 1899. After the proclamation of the gun revisions, however, the Ministry for Home Affairs would not loosen the restrictions on appointing guncho, and the members of the House of Representatives became interested in readjusting administration and the finances rather than having a share in gun organization. The parties then began to argue for the promotion of autonomy for towns and villages, not gun. In local politics, because the gun revisions had abolished indirect elections, the gun assembly elections were separated from the prefectural assembly elections, and the voting rate of the former dropped lower and lower. From a fiscal point of view, the resources for gun often preceded those of towns and villages. Thus the gun system grew apathetic towards gun autonomy and the abolition of the system was not a question of vital importance for local politics.

抄録全体を表示