“新异之政治现象”:清季军机大臣副署制度与权力博弈  

“New and Unusual Political Phenomenon”:The Power Game Between the Advisory Parliament and the Grand Council on the Countersignature System in the Late Qing Dynasty

作　　者：章博[1] Zhang Bo

机构地区：[1]华中师范大学中国近代史研究所,湖北武汉430070

出　　处：《史学月刊》2024年第4期45-58,共14页Journal of Historical Science

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“清末的权力结构变迁与统治危机研究”(22JJD770030)。

摘　　要：军机大臣副署制度于光绪三十四年十一月正式实施,关于副署的目的与含义,清廷无明确说明。这为副署责任问题留下了很大的解释空间。资政院开院后,因国会召开时间、咨议机构权限等问题,与军机大臣展开了一系列角逐。虽然双方博弈的本质是争夺权力,但从法理角度考虑,他们不得不借力于制度,副署责任因此成为他们辩驳的主要依据。资政院认为副署是效仿“西法”,并依此质疑军机大臣“侵权”“失职”;军机处则坚持副署是恢复“旧制”,因此斥责资政院“擅议”。双方的博弈无疑恶化了清季政局,但客观上亦推进了制度建设的进程。The countersignature system of the Grand Council was officially implemented in November of the thirty-fourth year of Guangxu,while the purpose and meaning for the establishment of the system were left unexplained by the Qing court.This lack of clarity had left considerable room for interpretation regarding the issue of countersignature responsibilities.After the establishment of the Advisory Parliament,a series of competitions unfolded between the Parliament and the Grand Council on the opening time of the parliament,the authority of advisory institutions,and other relevant matters.Although the essence of their game was power struggle,they had to resort to the support of the system when considering from the legal perspective.Therefore,the countersignature responsibilities became primary foundation for their debates.The Advisory Parliament argued that countersignature copied the “Western Method”,questioning the Grand Council's behavior of “infringement” and “negligence of its duty”,while the Grand Council insisted that countersignature was a restoration of the “old regime”,criticizing the Advisory Parliament for “overstepping its authority”.The game between the two institutions undoubtedly worsened the political situation of the late Qing dynasty,however,it objectively pushed forward the process of institutional building.

关 键 词：清季 副署制度 军机大臣 资政院 

分 类 号：K25[历史地理—历史学]