弘前市は1894年に政府から弘前城址を借りて弘前公園を開設した。旧藩主の津軽家がこれを管理した。本稿ではその後の弘前公園の所有と管理の変遷を明らかにし、その背景を考察した。1896年に弘前市近郊への師団設置が決まり、津軽家はその土地の一部と城址の交換を申請したが、許可されなかった。津軽家は城址の取得を希望していた。1898年に弘前公園の一部が再び陸軍省の所轄地となり、1902年に津軽家は公園の管理を辞退した。津軽家は城址取得が困難と判断し、城址との関係を絶った。その後は弘前市が公園を管理し、1906年に公園用地の購入を出願し、認められた。その背景の一つは、藩祖の銅像建立の用地確保があった。

抄録全体を表示

1894年に弘前市は弘前城址に弘前公園を開設した。本稿では、1908年の皇太子の行啓と1915年の天皇の行幸を機会として特に進められた公園整備の内容を明らかにした。行啓の前に、城門と橋の修繕や色の塗り替えがされた。また地均し、芝生や休憩所の整備があった。しかし崩落していた石垣はそのままだった。行幸の際には全面的な公園整備が進んだ。特に石垣の積み直しと天守閣の元の位置への移転に多くの費用が費やされた。このほか濠の浚渫、城門や城郭建築の修繕、道路や排水溝の整備、木柵や生垣などの設置が進められた。ただし従来の城址が有していた雅趣の欠乏を指摘する意見もあった。

抄録全体を表示

本論では、弘前城址が公園になる経過とそれに伴う天守の位置づけを明らかにした。その結果は次の通りである。弘前城址は陸軍省によって管理されていた。旧藩主津軽家の意向を背景として、弘前市が城址を借用して公園にすることを政府に申請した。それが認められて公園が誕生した。津軽家は公園の維持管理とその費用を負担した。公園化ととともに、天守は博物館として利用された。その後、天守の下の石垣が崩落したことから、弘前市は天守の払い下げを政府に申請した。それが許可され、天守を移築した。その一連の費用も津軽家が負担した。

抄録全体を表示

The political process from the first year of Meiji to the fourth is regarded as the development of centralization by means of the policy which makes fiefs the same local administrative district as prefectures ("Sanchi-itchi"). And the core of it is to dismember "Shizoku" (ex-Samurai) by "Chitsuroku-shobun". The subject of this paper is to make it clear that "Chihanji" (land administrators) abolished fiefs of their own accord or intended to do so when they found that policy unable to realize because of "Sizoku"s strong request of the maintenance of their privilege. The execution of "Chitsuroku-shobun" was an important authority of "Chihanji", which made him meet with accute opposition of "Shizoku" and "Chitsuroku-shobun" insufficient. This is the cause of the difficulty of the realization of "Sanchi-itchi". They found a way out of the financial deadlock in the dismemberment of "Shizoku" by returning them to the farm and changing their stipend into securities. But because of the strong request of the maintenance of their priviledge, both the ways were insufficient, so that the financial condition of fiefs were still in difficulty. Thus "Chihanji" was confronted with the difficulty of the realisation of "Sanchi-itchi", so that he lost his confidence of managing fiefs. And he decided to abolish fiefs at their own will or accepted "Haihan-chiken" as unavoidable. In the case of the former, most of them did it after the promulgation of "Hansei". (institution of a fief) in September the third year of Meiji. For "Hansei" compeled the reform to make old fiefs new which was the same as "Fu, Ken" mainly from the regulation of a finance whose core is "Chitsuroku-shobun" to raise funds to redeem the debts of fiefs.

抄録全体を表示

The object of this article is to study the historical features and significance of the "Peerage Capital" which has not been fully discussed. We can summarise its characteristics at the stages of capitalistic development as follows. The characteristic at the first stage of capitalistic development (the original capital accumulation) was that main peers invested their money and annual revenue in banks and companies, or managed their business under the control of the "Souzoku" (relatives from early times) system in spite of their being also "Rentner". In regard to the next stage of capitalistic development (establishment and development of capitalism), we can point it out that not only they invested their money actively in securities, but also they took part in the management of the companies to some extent. And they obtained and maintained some amount of rent from tenant farmers and changed the former "Souzoku" system to "council" system (consisted of their former relatives, etc.). As to the stage of monopolistic capitalism, we can point out the remarkable development of "Peerage Capital" such as mine-owners. They mainly took the ranks as princes and marquises (sometimes counts) who had heavy responsibility as the major peers among all peers. They maintained a certain social influence as "Peerage Capital" possessing both credit and fortunes. While most of the other peers were to be reckoned as so called "middle class" people. The characteristics of Japanese "Peerage Capital" were mainly due to the pecuriarity of Japanese peerage. So the most important obligation of Japanese peerage was to protect the Emperor. Let's investigate further this problem from the two sides-privileges and regulation of Japanese peerage. lt was true that Japanese peerage had such privileges as the right to be member of the House of Peers, to take greater honors, to establish a household regulations by law, etc. These privileges were not small in general. Therefore they had been always in the fear of the special punishment since the establishment till the abolition of peerage institution, besides the criminal law. In other words Japanese peers were more strongly regulated than English ones because the Japanese Emperor was powerful as a political sovereign. Such a contradictory image was also due to the process of creation of Japanese peerage. By "Hanseki Hokan" (institutional "abolition of feudal system"),feudal lords were separated from local public government organs and were limited to manage their private household affairs. On the other hand, they were appointed a new public position-"Kazoku" (peerage). This duality prevented them from devoting themselves to be a big capital like "Zaibatsu".

抄録全体を表示

Through the Boshin (_??__??_) War of 1868, the Meiji Government tried to defeat the remaining Shogunate powers by the military force, and to build up a new centralized State of the Emperor's rule with the 8th Century Ritsuryo(_??__??_). The mobilization of military powers took the form of dispatching the Chinbushi (Suppressor), and resulted in the forming of the judicial court which actually was none other than the suppressor's office combined with the civil administration, and further in the establishment of Fu (_??_) as one of the three new administrative district divisions of Fu (_??_), Han (_??_), and Ken (_??_).
Hakodate-Fu (Prefectural Government at the District of Hakodate) was established as an executive organization of civil administration for the development of Ezochi (or Hokkaido). But when it was captured by the remaining Shogunate naval force, the Meiji Government mobilized the military power of the Aomoriguchi Suppressor, and succeeded in uniting and strengthening the military powers of the new Government at the district of Hakodate by the decisive victory of the Boshin War.
In order to clarify the historical significance of the establishment of the Hakodate-Fu prefectural government, the present author has studied the Shimizudani Kinkô Monjo (or the Diary and Notes of Mr. Kinkô Shimizudani, who was the prefectural governor of Hakodate-Fu) (in the National Diet Library, at the branch of the documents of Constitutional Government), and discussed the process from the Ansei period to the new Meiji Era, around the years 1854-1869.

抄録全体を表示

I. It is widely known that among many studies about "Kinsatsu" (金札, note issued by "Ishin" government) there are two opinions-one is to put the emphasis on the character of "Shokusan-kogyo" (殖産興業, encouragement of industries) and the other is on the defrayment of government expenditure. Of course we cannot deny the former, but we think the latter fitted to the fact. In spite of the importance of the latter, however, it is not yet fully proved. So the author tries to make it clear that "Kinsatsu" was defrayed for the government expenditure. II. It has been so far neglected to consider "Kinsatsu" from the point of the attitude of people. The author intends to explain how "Ishin" government deceived people to manage them to be familiar with "Kinsatsu", through the study of the way of issuing "Kinsatsu", the situation of currency of it, the plan of exchange of new coin and note, and so on. III. It is no doubt that "Ishin" government was confronted with the financial difficulties, but it has been not yet fully cleared because of few historical materials on it. About the 1st and 2nd financial years we can say it was under the absolutely difficult finace. The 3rd and 4th, when the centralized institution of local finance was established, being different from them, the author tries to explain how the financial difficulties were, through the study of some plans of budget and some accounts of "Suitoshi" (出納司, the department taking charge of receipt and expenditure of treasury). Thus the author clears how "Ishin" government managed to deal with the difficulties by the deception of "Kinsatsu" as well as the severe collection of taxes and made "Haihanchiken" (廃藩置県, abolition of feudal clans and establishment of prefectures) inevitable.

抄録全体を表示