1703125777 (51)James C. Scott, Comparative Political Corruption, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1972, p. 4.

1703125778

1703125779 (52)N. H. Leff, “Economic Development Through Bureaucratic Corruption”, American Behavioural Scientist, Vol. 8, No. 3 (1964), pp. 8－14; Samuel Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968; J. S. Nye, “Corruption and Political Development: A Cost－Benefit Analysis”, in Arnold J. Heidenheimer et al, eds., Political Corruption, A Handbook, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1978, pp. 564－578.

1703125780

1703125781 (53)James C. Scott, Comparative Political Corruption, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1972, p. viii.

1703125782

1703125783 (54)James C. Scott, Comparative Political Corruption, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1972, p. 2.

1703125784

1703125785 (55)B. Brenan, “The Office of District Magistrate in China”, Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 32 (1897), pp. 36－65; Ernest Alabaster, “Notes on Chinese Law and Practice Preceding Revision”, Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 37 (1906), pp. 139－141.

1703125786

1703125787 (56)Etienne Balazs, Political Theory and Administrative Reality in Traditional China, London: University of London, 1965, pp. 68, 73.

1703125788

1703125789 (57)例如，Robert M. Marsh,“The Venality of Provincial Office in China and in Comparative Perspective”, Comparative Studies in Society, Vol.4, No.4(1962), pp. 454－466; Edgar Kiser& Tong Xiaoxi,“Determinants of the Amount and Type of Corruption in State Fiscal Bureaucracies, An Analysis of Late Imperial China”, Comparative Political Studies, Vo.25, No.3(1992), pp. 300－331。

1703125790

1703125791 (58)Anne Deysine, “Political Corruption: A Review of the Literature”, European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 21, No. 2 (1980), pp. 447－462, 448.

1703125792

1703125793 (59)James Myers, “China’s Modernization and Unhealthy Tendencies”, Comparative Politics, Vo. 21, No. 2 (1989), p. 197.

1703125794

1703125795 (60)Chü T’ung－tsu, Local Government in China Under the Ch’ing, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962, p. 197。另可参见James T. C. Liu,“The Sung Views on the Control of Government Clerks”, The Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol.10, No.2－3(1967), pp. 317－344。

1703125796

1703125797 (61)Chü T’ung－tsu, Local Government in China Under the Ch’ing, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962, p. 197.

1703125798

1703125799 (62)Adam Y. C. Lui, Corruption in China during the Early Ch’ing Period, 1644－1660, Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong, 1979, pp. 24－25.

1703125800

1703125801 (63)Chü T’ung－tsu, Local Government in China Under the Ch’ing, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962; Chü T’ung－tsu, Law and Society in Traditional China, Paris: Mouton, 1965; Sybille van der Sprenkel, Legal Institutions in Manchu China: A Sociological Analysis, New York: Humanities Press, 1962; Derk Bodde & Clarence Morris, Law in Imperial China: Exemplified by 190 Ch’ing Dynasty Cases, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1967; Roberto M. Unger, Law in Modern Society: Toward a Criticism of Social Theory, New York: The Free Press, 1976.

1703125802

1703125803 (64)William Alford,“Of Arsenic and Old Laws: Looking Anew at Criminal Justice in Late Imperial China”, California Law Review, Vol.72, No.6(1984), pp. 1180－1256; Kathryn Bernhardt & Philip C. C. Huang, eds., Civil Law in Qing and Republican China, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994; David C. Buxbaum,“Some Aspects of Civil Procedure and Practice at the Trial Level in Tanshui and Hsinchu from 1789 to 1895”, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.30, No.2(1971), pp. 255－279; Philip C. C. Huang,“Between Informal Mediation and Formal Adjudication: The Third Realm of Qing Justice”, Modern China, Vo. 19, No.3(1993), pp. 216－240; Philip C. C. Huang, Civil Justice in China, Representation and Practice in the Qing, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996; Shuzo Shiga,“Criminal Procedure in the Ch’ing Dynasty, part 1”, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, No.32(1974), pp. 1－45; Shuzo Shiga,“Criminal Procedure in the Ch’ing Dynasty, part 2”, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, No.33(1975), pp. 115－138; Shuzo Shiga,“Criminal Procedure in the Ch’ing Dynasty, part 3”, Memoirs of the Toyo Bunko, No.34(1976), pp. 16－26; Matthew H. Sommer,“Sex, Law and Society in Late Imperial China”, Ph. D. Dissertation, Department of History, UCLA, 1994；郑秦：《清代司法审判制度研究》，长沙：湖南教育出版社，1988。

1703125804

1703125805 (65)《清代巴县档案汇编》这本已整理出版的档案资料选集，为我们提供了了解衙门吏役在行政过程中经常使用各种伎俩对当地民众进行敲诈勒索的诸多例子，然而这方面的例子常常构成了此书当中有关衙门吏役的全部档案实例。这说明选编此书的中国的档案保管人员和学者们完全将衙门吏役视为贪腐之辈。参见四川省档案馆编：《清代巴县档案汇编（乾隆卷）》，北京：档案出版社，1991。

1703125806

1703125807 (66)Maurice Bloch, “Introduction”, in Maurice Bloch, ed., Political Language and Oratory in Traditional Society, London: Academic Press, 1975, p. 2.

1703125808

1703125809 (67)译者注：这一变动发生在清康熙四十六年（1707）巴县知县孔毓忠任内，这十二个新划分出来的下属辖区，具体为仁、义、礼、智、忠、孝、廉、洁、慈、祥、正、直等十二里。

1703125810

1703125811 (68)隗瀛涛主编：《近代重庆城市史》，成都：四川大学出版社，1991，第393页。

1703125812

1703125813 (69)在“冲、繁、疲、难”四字当中，巴县知县这一官职不符合的只有“疲”字（“疲”指该地有着大数额的欠税未交）。参见周询：《蜀海丛谈》，成都：巴蜀书社，1986，第82页。［译者注：清代在雍正年间正式确立了以“冲、繁、疲、难”四字来评定全国各地方官缺之等级的制度，亦即“冲”“繁”“疲”“难”四项俱全者为“最要缺”，兼有三项者为“要缺”，兼有二项者为“中缺”，具备一项或四项皆无者为“简缺”，此后不断加以发展完善，成为清代地方上最重要的选任制度之一，一直被执行到清朝灭亡。参见刘铮云：《“冲、繁、疲、难”：清代道、府、厅、州、县等级初探》，《中研院历史语言研究所集刊》第64本第1分（1993），第175—204页；张振国：《清代道、府、厅、州、县等级制度的确定》，朱诚如主编：《明清论丛》（第11辑），北京：故宫出版社，2011，第382—400页。］

1703125814

1703125815 (70)隗瀛涛主编：《近代重庆城市史》，成都：四川大学出版社，1991，第395页。（译者注：英文原书在引用《近代重庆城市史》一书中的这两个人口数字时，做了约略化处理，分别写为218000和990500，今据《近代重庆城市史》一书中的数字更正。）

1703125816

1703125817 (71)隗瀛涛主编：《近代重庆城市史》，成都：四川大学出版社，1991，第383页。（译者注：“85%”这一数字比例，原本是《近代重庆城市史》一书作者针对嘉庆朝前期和中期外来移民在四川省总人口中所占的比例所做的间接估算，然后将其用于粗略估算嘉庆十七年时外来移民在巴县人口总数中所占的比例。因此，本书所援引的“85%”这一数字，并非严格根据人口材料所做的精确计算结果。）

1703125818

1703125819 (72)隗瀛涛主编：《近代重庆城市史》，成都：四川大学出版社，1991，第396页。

1703125820

1703125821 (73)译者注：1875年初，英国驻华使馆翻译马嘉理（A. R. Margary）擅自率人闯入云南，在云南腾越地区的蛮允附近与当地少数民族发生冲突，并开枪逞凶，结果被当地人打死，史称“马嘉理事件”，又称“云南事件”或“滇案”。次年即1876年中英双方在烟台就此事件举行谈判，英国乘机提出“驻寓重庆查看川省英商事宜”的要求，并通过同年7月正式签署的中英《烟台条约》，取得“派员驻寓”重庆的特权。1890年3月31日，中英又签订《烟台条约续增专条》，英国正式取得了“重庆即准作为通商口岸”的开埠特权。次年3月1日，重庆海关建立，由英人霍伯森担任重庆海关税务司的职务。不久之后，法、美、德、日等也相继派员“进驻”重庆。参见隗瀛涛、周勇：《重庆开埠史》，重庆：重庆出版社，1983。

1703125822

1703125823 (74)Madeline Zelin, “The Rights of Tenants in Mid－Qing Sichuan: A Study of Land Related Lawsuits in the Ba Xian Archive”, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 45, No. 3 (1986), pp. 499－526.

1703125824

1703125825 (75)王笛：《跨出封闭的世界——长江上游区域社会研究，1644—1911》，北京：中华书局，1993，第133—139页。

1703125826

[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.703125777e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]