杨天宏
论文题目：口岸开放与社会变革:近代中国自开商埠研究
作者简介：杨天宏，男，1951年03月出生，1998年09月师从于四川大学罗志田教授，于2001年06月获博士学位。
摘 要
本文旨在重建近代中国自开商埠的历史并对之略作史学诠释。
鸦片战争之后半个多世纪，西方国家通过武力威逼，迫使中国开放了大量通商口岸，建立起侵略中国的条约体系框架。条约口岸是一个具有双重作用的历史存在，作为强权政治的产物，它对中国的国家主权构成了侵害；作为一个社会窗口，它又展示了西方近代化事物。近代国人对列强在华开埠通商的认识经历了由一味敌视到承认其“利害参半”甚至“利大于弊”的转变，在这一过程中，自开商埠的思想主张酝酿成熟。甲午战争之后，中国面临的危机加深，为拯救国家民族危亡，维新运动兴起。在民族主义的驱动下，对外实施“商战”的呼声高涨，自开埠作为一项国家政策，开始提出并逐渐付诸实施。
最早开放的自开商埠是三都澳、秦皇岛和岳州。清末中国政府主动筹开的口岸共计36处，加上民国初年陆续开放的口岸，近代中国自开商埠的总数达52处，数量几与条约口岸相埒。其发展速度及业已形成的规模表明，自开商埠已逐渐取代条约口岸，成为近代中国对外开放、从事通商贸易的主要形式。
华洋公共通商场的开辟、海关局署的设置和有关制度章程的制订构成了自开商埠建设的基本内容。自开商埠并不完全与条约口岸对立，有些方面甚至借鉴了条约口岸的具体做法，例如在基础设施建设方面，宁波华洋公共通商场就被当作原型，如法炮制。但自开商埠坚持不设租界，外国人租借埠内土地受到严格的时空限制，埠内工程由中国地方政府及绅商局董组成的商埠总局规划指导，所有行政、警政事务均由中国人自理，这一切，使自开商埠“权自我操”的本质特征得以凸显。
尽管暴露了诸如区域分布不合理以及疏密失当等结构性缺陷，自开商埠毕竟拓展了近代中国对外贸易的场域，使既有的商贸网络有了更大的区域覆盖面，增强了中国口岸城镇的贸易功能。商贸活动开始在新的结构中展开。对各主要埠头进出口贸易货物总值、进出口贸易的商品结构、进出口贸易的平衡状况、海关关税的收支数额所作份析表明，经过清末民初30余年的建设发展，自开商埠在中国对外贸易中的存在已不容忽视。商业贸易直接促进了商埠所在城市近代工业、交通、金融、城市建设的初步发展，虽然同条约口岸相比，自开商埠的发展还有许多不如人意之处，但毕竟朝着“近代化”的方向走出了重要的一步。
物质层面的近代化建设构成了一定的基础，在此基础上，文化教育、思想观念、社会生活、时尚风俗也都逐渐脱离传统，发生近代性变化。不过，由于自开商埠近代化事业的物质基础并不充分，加之区域经济文化发展的不平衡性以及传统因素的制约，对表现在非物质层面的自开商埠近代性变化程度的估计尚不宜过高。“两个世界”的分野明显可见：在同一商埠内，社会“精英”的文化、观念、生活方式有自己的表现形态，构成一个“世界”，其他社会阶层的生活则表现出显著区别，构成另一个“世界”；就所有自开商埠进行考察，省会级与州县或乡镇级显然不能划入同一发展序列。这种差异与不平衡性，是中国城镇由传统走向近代这一社会发展过程中的正常现象。
清季自开商埠的政策并未因辛亥年间王朝更替而中断。民国政府建立后，继续实施这一政策，并统一规划了原本由各埠自行制定的自开商埠章程，使开放政策得以在更深的维度上持续发展。后来南京国民政府取消租界、废除治外法权的斗争取得一定成功，与自开商埠提供了中国无需这类外人强加给中国的东西也能维持正常的贸易及其它方面对外交往的成功经验，有着内在的逻辑关系。
自开商埠政策的实施是近代人为抵制西方列强侵略而主动进行的一次大规模“商战”。自开商埠的主持者在尝试开埠时面临着一道历史难题，即如何处理政治与经济的关系。开埠作为一项国家政策，无疑具有政治含义，但很多规定性又纯属经济层面的，须按照经济规律办事。然而，自开商埠的主政者在很大程度上混淆了政治与经济的界限，将一些属于经济范畴的问题完全纳入政治解决的轨道，致使经济受制于政治，难于正常发展。由于这一因素及其它相关因素的制约，自开商埠的实施力度及成效均受到明显影响。
尽管如此，我们仍不能接受包括自开商埠在内的中国近代对外“商战”均已失败的意见，充其量只能说成功程度不够。未能改变近代中国贫穷、落后状况的责任，不能仅仅由发起“商战”的近代国人承担。
全文共6章25节，凡38万字。
Abstract
The
Opening of the Ports and the Reforms of the Society
------A Study of the the TPOVC in Modern China
The author’s purposes are to reconstruct the historical facts of the Trade Ports Opened Voluntarily by China (hereafter as the TPOVC ) in modern Chinese history and to explain them.
In over half a century after the Opium War, Western Powers compelled China to open many ports and set up a treaty system with the eventual aim to invade China. Treaty ports historically had double functions. On the one hand, they jeopardized China’s sovereignty, on the other hand, they were the windows through which Chinese could see some modern western things. Chinese people’s understanding of the Western Powers’ compelling China to open trade ports underwent an important change from adopting a totally hostile attitude to admitting that it was both beneficial and harmful, and even admitting that it was more beneficial than harmful. During this course, the thought of setting up the TPOVCs began to become mature. After the War of 1894, the crisis of China became more serious, so the reform movement arose. Having been driven by nationalism, the appeal to implement a“Trade War”surged up. It was in this background that the TPOVCs began to be advocated and be put into effect as a country policy.
The earlier TPOVCs were Sanduao, Qinghuangdao and Yuezhou. In Late Qing Dynasty 36 ports were opened voluntarily. More than 20 other ports opened in succession in the early Republic of China, thus the total number of the TPOVCs were 52 which were almost equal to that of treaty ports. Their speed of development and scale indicated that the TPOVCs had gradually taken the place of treaty ports and become the main form to open the door to trade in modern China.
The basic contents of the TPOVCs construction were to set up the facilities of trade port, to found customs office and to formulate relevant regulations. The TPOVCs didn’t completely oppose treaty ports, in some respects they even drew detailed methods from the latter. For example, the construction of Ningbo’s trade market was even copied as a prototype by the TPOVCs But concessions were not permitted to be set up in the TPOVCs. How long the foreigners could lease land was also restricted. The projects of the TPOVCs were directed by the General Bureau composed of local governors, gentry and businessmen. All administration and security affaires were handled completely by Chinese, which embodied fully the essential characteristic of “Chinese controlling the rights themselves”.
Although the TPOVCs had structural shortcomings, e.g. they were not reasonably distributed, some new foreign trade regions were opened up, the former trade network was enlarged and the functions of foreign and domestic trad were strengthened. Trade began to develop in a new commercial structure. The analysis of the total trading value, the commodities structure, the balancing condition of import and exporttrade and the income and expenditure of customs taxes indicated that the TPOVCs’ effect in foreign and domestic trade of China couldn’t be ignored after about thirty years’ development. Trade directly urged the initial development of modern industry, transportation, finance and city construction. Although the development of the TPOVCs couldn’t be fully satisfied in comparison with treaty ports, great strides to approach the modernization had been made after all.
The accumulation of material wealth formed a base on which culture, education, ideology, life styles and fashions gradually deviated from the traditional ways and modern changes took place. But the modernization level of the TPOVCs shown in the non-material respects shouldn’t be overestimated because of the lack of full material basis and the imbalance of development in different places as well as the restriction of traditional factors. The dividing line between the “two worlds ”could be seen clearly. The culture, ideology, social life and fashion of the elite in one TPOVC had their own style which formed one “world”, and those of other social stratas had different styles which formed another “world”. Besides, the TPOVCs of the county or town level couldn’t be obviously juxtaposed with those of the provincial level. The difference and imbalance should be seen as a normal state in the course of social development from so call “feudal” ages to modern times.
The policy of the TPOVC formulated by Qing Dynasty wasn’t cancelled after the Revolution of 1911. In the early Republic of China, the same policy was still put into effect and the regulations formerly established by respective TPOVCs were unified which led the opening policy to be practiced further. It could be said that the later successes of Nanjing National Government’s canceling the concessions, abolishing the exterritorial ties had logical relations with the successful experiences provided by the TPOVCs that China could cope normally with the trade and other foreign affairs without those things obtruded by foreigners.
From history point of view, the TPOVC was a large-scale initiative “Trade War ” launched by modern Chinese to resist the invading of Western Powers. The persons implementing this policy faced a historical problem while trying to open the ports. That was how to deal with the relations between politics and economy. No doubt, the TPOVC had political implications as a country policy, but something important belonging to economical category had to be done in accordance with economical law. However, the sponsors of the TPOVCs confused the demarcation line between politics and economy to a great extent and made political factors play an overwhelming role which led to the wholly political solutions to some economical problems and placed a large obstacle to normal economy development.
Due to the restriction of this factor, the effect of implementing the TPOVC was seriously limited. However, we still can’t accept the idea that the whole “Trade War” had already failed. At most it can only be said that the degree of success was not enough. The responsibility of not succeeding in changing modern China’s poverty and backwardness should not be shouldered only by those who launched the “Trade War”.
