论文部分内容阅读
关于治外法权还是领事裁判权的提法在近代中国史学界始终是绕不开的话题,而对于两者的界分又往往是民族情感远超于简单的词义上的差异,进而影响其所关涉主旨的讨论——近代中国对外国人的管辖权问题。以美国为例,由领事法庭到驻华法院的转变这一过程所彰显的一方面是是其在华特权的进一步扩大,中国主权的进一步沦丧,另一方面也是在法治传统下对本国在华公民最大程度的约束,在客观上也为中国法制近代化提供有益的参考。
The formulation of extraterritoriality or consular jurisdiction has always been a topic that can not be detached in the history of Chinese historiography in modern China. However, the boundary between the two is often the difference in terms of meaning far beyond simple semantic meaning, which in turn affects its main thrust Discussion on the Jurisdiction over Aliens in Modern China. Take the United States as an example. The process of the transition from consular court to court in China shows on the one hand the further expansion of its prerogatives in China, the further decline of China’s sovereignty and the fact that under the rule of law, Citizens’ maximum restraint objectively provides a useful reference for the modernization of China’s legal system.