【作者】 何小平；

【导师】 袁林；

【作者基本信息】 陕西师范大学 ， 专门史， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 论文的研究对象不是清代租佃关系从顺治朝至宣统朝的“大历史”,而是清代租佃关系从成立至消灭的“小历史”。论文不是对史实的考证与描述,而是对租佃关系当事人之间权利义务关系的考察与分析。虽然历史的归纳法是论文研究的基础,但是论文的基本研究方法终究是法学的方法,准确地说首先是民法学的方法,其次是法律社会学的方法。新的研究方法与新的研究对象的选择,必然会带来研究内容的巨大差别,以东南地区为中心,建构清代民田租佃关系的习惯法遂成为论文的研究目的。长期被学者轻视甚至忽视的租佃关系从成立至消灭必须具备的实体与形式条件、当事人的权利义务关系、法律后果等内容及其所蕴含的法律原则则是论文研究的主要内容。清代租佃关系习惯法的历史是从租佃关系的成立开始的。与现代没有不同,清代要有效成立租佃关系同样必须具备适格的当事人、客观必要事项、合意的形式以及合意的公示等方面的要件,但是在每一个要件的内容及其所蕴含的精神方面,清代却与现代存在非常大的不同。在清代,适格的当事人只能是家长,其他家成员不能成为租佃关系当事人。显然,在当事人的范围方面,清代要远比现代小,但却要比古罗马大(在清代可以成为家长的母亲或妻子不可能成为罗马法上有完全人格的“家父”)。要成立有效的租佃关系,与现代同样都必须具备租地与地租二个客观必要事项以外,清代东南地区大量的租佃关系还必须具备租价这个客观必要事项。租价的存在显然与等价性思想或平等原则相悖,而这完全是弱肉强食的丛林规则在习惯法上的体现,也是诚信不足使然；公权力对私法自治或当事人意思自治的消极立场,使得官府对租价的零星干预不能从根本上改变租价作为所有类型租佃关系(即一田两主关系、永佃关系与期限租佃关系)必要事项的地位。至于达致租佃关系合意的形式,口约由于其在形式上的缺陷遭到了当事人与官府的抛弃,诚信也因此失去了成为租佃关系基础原则的可能,而诚信却是整个民法法律体系的基石,且口约在现代则可以有效成立所有类型的租佃关系。不完全的书面契约也由于缺乏诚信基础与有限的契约形式以及契约在公示上的缺陷,使得契约形式的合意同样不能从根本上避免交易风险。不公平的交易条件与诚信的缺乏使得私法自治原则从租佃关系成立之初就面临被滥用的风险。租佃关系成立的法律效果就是双方当事人对各自义务的履行,而静态的履行义务的内容已有不少的研究,但只有经过民法学方法的整理与归纳,不成体系的研究内容才可能呈现出前所未有的清晰。业佃之间不平等的权利关系也得以清楚地展现出来,佃人(一田两主关系中的皮主似乎是例外)无疑在诸多方面都处于不利的交易地位,官府制定法对当事人义务的履行调整得少且效果不佳。不等价的给付义务与信守合同观念的缺乏,使得当事人——主要是佃人——的违约有一定的必然性。而对当事人在履行中违约行为(即给付障碍)的考察,并将违约履行与履行义务联系起来分析,不仅使本论文不同于其他学者的研究,而且自然成为本部分讨论的重点。无论是迟延交租、拒绝交租还是不良交租,都是佃人基于意思自治原则在面对不公平交易条件的正常反应。佃人始终在想法设法扭转失衡的业佃关系,而业主以及官府对于佃人的违约行为(除拒绝交租外)也多采取容忍或放任的态度,似乎也不存在现代民法上的损害赔偿责任问题。经过业主、佃人以及官府三方的博弈,在法律上当事人之间不平等的权利义务关系在事实上趋向于平等,等价性思想实现的同时却牺牲了或许更为重要的信守合同的原则。法律与事实不一致的状况,使得当事人之间的权利义务关系也始终处于不稳定状态,交易安全也很难得到保证。租佃关系在履行中的变更则又进一步加剧了当事人之间关系的复杂性。对作为“继续性债务关系”的租佃关系来说,当事人与租佃关系事项的变更是不可避免的事情,而佃人处分租佃权利与地租变更显然是变更的二个重点。学者均注意到了业主对皮主用益、处分皮业的行为无权干涉,但却不见有学者关注皮主优先赎回皮业的权利是对业主撤佃权的直接剥夺,而必定会被现代民法禁止的皮主的优先权则从根本上动摇了所有权的根基。无处分权的期限佃人与永佃人也不时以“先斩后奏”的方式迫使业主承认变更的后果,这被学者认为是佃人摆脱对业主依附关系的表现,然而佃人非法的处分不但在程序上剥夺了业主选择佃人的权利,更严重的是对信守合同原则的违反。官府的关注点不是禁止期限佃人与永佃人的非法处分行为,而是试图禁革皮主合法(但有时不合理)的处分权。以稳定与赋税为优先考虑的官府对具有高度流通性格的一田两主关系的过分忧虑也是非常自然的事,而受到主客观条件的制约,类似鱼鳞册的登记制度也不可能适用于租佃关系。当事人对程序与形式问题的轻视,不仅损害了业主的权益,而且更不利于公平、安全的租佃关系法律的建立。没有为学者注意的佃人可以处分部分租地的行为,使租佃关系变得更加复杂,因此不利于交易安全；而出于降低交易风险的目的,现代法律规定佃人只能转让全部租地上的租佃权利。与现代法律通常禁止有偿转让不同,清代佃人在处分租佃权利时几乎全部都是有偿的,不公平的业佃关系通过租价传递给新的佃人,而新佃人多次性而非一次性给付旧佃人租价则增加了履约的风险。交易安全原则也由于一些不合理的交易习惯而遭到损害。地租变更是另一个在租佃关系存续中当事人必须面对的挑战。佃人在借助不同的事由——或是租地的变化、或是经济状况的变迁、或是朝廷恩旨、或是荒歉——请求地租的减少,但荒歉由于其重要性,成为佃人可以声请减租的最普遍的事由。作为法定减租事由的朝廷恩旨却由于难于落实而最终失去了作为减租事由的地位。集体请求减免地租的方式出于其极佳的效果,在出现荒歉、朝廷恩旨等地租变更事由时,常常被佃人采用,作为现代法律主要方式的个体请求(无论是当事人协议,还是诉讼官府)在清代却并不常见。即使存在荒歉不减租的约定或习惯法,也不能阻止在荒歉发生时佃人减租甚至免除地租目的的实现,而根据清代法律,除非业主情让,即使租地绝收,业主也不必免除佃人全部地租。信守合同的原则又一次遭到损害。面对佃人聚众要求减免地租的行为,除非致死人命或破坏到地方秩序的稳定,官府通常采取的是漠然处之的态度。地租变更的后果当然首先表现为地租额的减少,但是基于当事人对数字的敏感,交租方式的变更成为更加稳妥的选择。最后,无论佃人最终是否能够达致减租的目的,延缓交租在事实上都是业主对佃人的优待。无论是面对佃人的变更还是地租减免的请求,业主更多的时候只能默默地忍受,而在权利上失衡的业佃关系则通过佃人的努力得到了部分修正,现代民法所称的等价性思想在事实上得到了部分实现。与佃人的处分相比,业主转让租地时的风险不在形式上而主要在实体上,下面二个长期被学者忽视的问题就需要澄清：一是业主不能不经佃人同意转让租地。收取租价的业主转让租地属于权利与义务的概括转移,由于关系到租价的转移承担问题,因此应该得到佃人的同意或承认；但清代的流行习惯是只需知会而无需佃人同意。二是业主转让租地时租价的承担问题。尽管流行与现代法律同样的“买卖不破租佃”的习惯法,但在租价的转移承担上,清代却存在由不同当事人承担租价返还义务的习惯,与现代法律押租一般由受让人(即新业主)承受不同,因此非常容易发生交易安全上的问题。至于当事人的死亡与分家,通常只是当事人内部代表人的法定变更,一般不会影响到交易安全,这或许是家长制的好处之一清代租佃关系习惯法的历史结束于租佃关系的消灭,但是与现代法律有很大的不同,清代的期限租佃关系很少因为租期届满消灭。一方当事人(特别是业主)可以基于不同的事由单方终止租佃关系是租佃关系最普遍的消灭方式。欠租无疑是终止所有类型租佃关系最有力的事由,但一些地方“皮主欠租骨主只能追租不能撤佃”的习惯法却是对业主所有权粗暴的侵犯,现代所有权的绝对性或恢复原状的弹性对清代一些地方的骨主却并不适用。在租佃关系消灭方面,清代当事人拥有远比现代当事人更大的自由,官府只有在因租佃关系致死当事人或其家属时,才会断令强制终止租佃关系。在租佃关系消灭的后果方面,欠租的返还显然是当事人返还的中心环节。与欠租以及迟延交租的利息必须返还的现代法律不同,清代的佃人在许多情形并不需要返还欠租,至于交租迟延的利息似乎从来就没有必须返还的习惯。这既与信守合同原则没有被佃人严格遵守有关,也与约定的地租额可能“显失公平”有关。佃人藉此“取得”以扭转失衡的关系,业主则藉此“损失”以顺利终止租佃关系。等价性思想也因此得以在当事人之间实现。在租佃关系消灭时,当事人需要返还收执的租佃契约,甚或签订契约,这些做法都是诚信不足的表现,但却有利于交易安全,只是上面的做法似乎并不流行。大量的租佃关系是以口头形式消灭的,这与租佃关系几乎全部以书面契约形式成立形成鲜明的对照。论文的最终结论是：官府的漠视使得清代租佃关系始终处于民间习惯法状态,没有成为制定法,租佃关系的法律因此具有自治、独立的特点。不仅由于租佃关系事项的不公平,而且更因为履约诚信的缺乏,在官府制定法缺位的制度环境下,基于民间习惯法或当事人约定成立的租佃关系,与事实上践行的租佃关系常常并不一致；在官府的零星干预下,通过业主与佃人之间的博弈,清代租佃关系的习惯法始终摇摆于法律与事实之间。现代私法的四大基本原则在清代的租佃关系习惯法中也呈现出另一番景象：一是私法自治。清代同样存在私法自治或当事人意思自治原则,只是清代当事人的意思自治是家长的意思自治,而非所有家成员的意思自治。二是等价性思想。在租佃关系成立时当事人约定的不平等事项,在履约过程中得到了部分的修正。至少在一定程度上,当事人在法律上的不平等关系在事实上趋于平等。三是信守合同。等价性思想的缺乏,使得利益遭受损失的一方当事人不可能发自内心的遵守合同的约定,因此信守合同的观念与意识在清代的当事人心中始终不曾普遍确立。四是交易安全。当事人对形式与程序问题的轻视,以及制定法的缺位与交易诚信的先天不足,使得交易安全在租佃关系中不能全面实现。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Research Subject of this thesis is not’The Great History of the Tenancy Relationship during the Qing-Dynasty’, but’The Small History of the Tenancy Relationship’itself, which is from the establishment to the termination of the Tenancy Relationship, during the Qing-Dynasty. This thesis is not only about the textual research and description of the historical facts, but also about the investigation and analysis of the rights and obligations of the Parties. Although the induction of history is the basis of the study, the basic research method of this thesis is inevitably the law method, being the first method of the science of civil law, whilst the second is the method of legal sociology. A new research method and research subject will bring a great difference in the research content. Therefore, to construct the customary law of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty is the basic purpose of the thesis. The core content of the thesis, which has long been neglected by scholars, is the condition of the establishment, performance and termination of the tenancy relationship, the relationship of the rights and obligations, the legal consequences and the legal principles in the tenancy relationship.The history of the customary law of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty begins with the establishment of the tenancy relationship. The Party during the Qing-Dynasty was clearly not less responsible than the Modern Party, concerning the freedom to conclude the tenancy relationship. However, the autonomy of The Party during the Qing-Dynasty did not include the autonomy of all family members, but was the autonomy of a patriarch or patriarchs which was more than the autonomy of a***patriarch in ancient Rome. Thus, only a patriarch or patriarchs could become a qualified Party, in the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty. The establishment of the tenancy relationship must possess the essential objective matters. Like modern tenancy relationships, the establishment of the tenancy must also possess two essential objective matters i.e. the land and the rent. A great deal of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty needed to have another essential objective matter, i.e. the lease price. The lease price obviously contradicts the current equivalent thought in modern private law. The existence of the lease prices totally reflected, not only the different strength of both parties in customary law, but also a lack of trust. The sporadic intervention of the government does not fundamentally change the status of the lease price as the essential objective matter of all types of the tenancy relationship:.i.e.’the yi-tian-liang-zhu(一田两主)relationship,’ the permanent tenancy relationship and the time-limited tenancy relationship. The form also is a necessary condition to establish the tenancy relationship. The rejection of the statute law and the distrust of the parties for a verbal agreement, resulted, not only in very few cases, in the conclusion of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty, but also the loss of the trust as the basic principles in the tenancy relationship. The inconsiderable status of the verbal agreement and the truth in the tenancy relationship, during the Qing-Dynasty, differs from modern law and Roman law. During the Qing-Dynasty, only the written contract was the trustworthy form in the tenancy relationship. However, the risk of the tenancy relationship cannot be avoided by the written contract which includes lack of truthfulness and some other defects in the publicity of the single contract form. Because of the reasonable, but not equal lease price, the lack of trust and some defects in the publicity of the contract form, the performance risk had been buried in the tenancy relationship, when it was established.The effect of the establishment of the tenancy relationship is the performance of the duties. The author induces comprehensively some duties which the parties should perform, especially investigating and analyzing the performance and acceptance of the third person, the successive performance, etc. At the same time, the author also analyzes the unsuccessful role of the statute law in the performance of duties. In the performance of these duties, apart from the pi-zhu(皮主),the other types of tenants are in an unequal status. Because of the equivalent obligations and the lack of the idea of abiding by the contract, the breach of contract of The Parties (especially the tenant), is inevitable. It is the instinctive and rational response that the tenant delays in performance, badly performs and refuses to pay the rent, due to facing unfair trading conditions. The tenants always take legal or illegal measures, to reverse the imbalance in the tenancy relationship, while, at the same time, the owners and the governments endure or indulge the performance of the tenants. The compensation for breach of the contract in modern civil law never existed in the customary law of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty. When the legally unequal relationship between the owners and the tenants actually tends to equalize, through the games between the parties in the performance of contract, the principle of abiding by the contract, lost its position in the tenancy relationship. Some more serious consequences, being the relationship of rights and obligations between the owners and the tenants has been in an unstable state, which is aggravated by the alteration of.the performance.It is inevitable that the parties and the matters in the tenancy relationship alter during the existence of this relationship. The two focuses of the alteration are obviously the right of disposition of the tenant and rent relief. The pi-zhu(皮主)performs independent usufruct and right of disposition, without owner restraint. The priority in the redemption of the pi-ye(皮业)which the pi-zhu(皮主)enjoys is the deprivation of the right of termination by the owner. The other types of tenant, who illegally transfer the lease, directly deprived the owner of the right to select a new suitable tenant. The concern of the Government is not to ban the illegal action of the other types of tenant, but to ban the legal action of the pi-zhu(皮主).It is very natural that the Government, which pays prime attention to the political stability and the taxes, worries too much about the’yi-tian-liang-zhu(一田两主)relationship’. The registration system may not apply to the tenancy relationship, because the government was restricted by subjective and objective conditions. However, because the parties underestimate the procedures and the forms, not only the right of the owner has been damaged, but also it becomes difficult to establish a fair customary law of the tenancy relationship.The alteration of the rents is another challenge which the parties must face. The tenants could request for the reduction of the rents for some different reasons, of which a bad harvest is one of the most powerful reasons. The individual request for the reduction of the rents was not common during the Qing-Dynasty. Attributing to a good effect, the collective request for the reduction of the rents is often used by the tenants, when a bad harvest happens. The contract and the customary law, when the rents could not be reduced during a bad harvest, could not cease in the realization of the purpose of the reduction of the rents, when abiding by the contract principles was once again violated. In the face of the assembled parties, who ask for the reduction of the rents, the Government usually takes an indifferent attitude. Whether it is the facial expression of the tenant, or the reduction of the rents in the request, the owner usually could only suffer in silence. The tenants would reverse the imbalance in the tenancy relationship, through’games with the owners’. Meanwhile the principle of the equality of modern civil law has, in fact, been partly realized.The risk in which the owners transfer their land occurred not in the form and mainly in the entity of the following two problems, which have long been ignored by scholars, still needs to be clarified here:Firstly, according to the principle of fairness, the owners could not transfer their land, without the consent of the tenants. However, the owners could transfer their land without the consent of the tenants in the customary law of the tenancy relationship.Secondly, the return of the lease price is undertaken by ’new owner modern civil law’. However, it is fraught with risks when the return of the lease price is undertaken by different parties in the customary law tenancy relationship. The cessation of the parties and the separation generally will not affect the security of transactions, which may be one of the benefits patriarchally.The history of the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty ended with the termination of the tenancy relationship. However, the termination of the time-limited tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty, which was very different from the modern law, is infrequently due to the expiration of the lease. The unilateral termination by the parties, especially the owners, is the most common way to terminate the tenancy relationship. The most powerful reason was undoubtedly the overdue rent when the parties terminated all types of the tenancy relationship. In the termination of the tenancy relationship, the parties in the Qing-Dynasty had more than the freedom of modern parties. Only when the parties, or their family members, were ousted from the tenancy relationship would the government intervene in the termination of the tenancy relationship. The return of overdue rent, apparently is a central part in fulfilling the obligation of the return. The tenants not only did not need to return the overdue rent, in many cases, but the return of the interest on delayed payments never happened. This custom about the return was not only associated with one in which the parties did not strictly abide by the contract, but was also associated with unfairness regarding the amount of the rent. However, the equivalence thought is achieved between the parties. In the termination of the tenancy relationship, the parties need to return the tenancy contract, or sign the contract of the termination of the tenancy relationship, which show lack of good faith and harms the transaction security. The verbal form in the termination of a large number of the tenancy relationships contrasted sharply with almost all of the written contract forms in the establishment of the tenancy relationship.Finally, in conclusion, I will state that mainly, the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty was always in a state of non-legal customary law, not only because of the unfair matters of the tenancy relationship, but also because of the lack of good faith in the performance of it, the tenancy relationship which was based on the customary law and the contract, was often not uniform with the tenancy relationship, in the practice&in the absence of the positive law. Through’the games between the owners and the tenants’, which was accompanied by sporadic government intervention, the tenancy relationship during the Qing-Dynasty always oscillated between the law and the facts.The Four basic principles that the modern private law, presented in the customary law of the tenancy relationship, during the Qing-Dynasty:The first was the autonomy of private law or the autonomy of will, which also existed in the Qing-Dynasty. The autonomy of will in the Qing-Dynasty was the autonomy of the will of the ’paterfamilias’, rather than all family members.The second was the equivalence thought. The unequal matters which were agreed upon by the parties in the tenancy relationship were partly amended in the performance of the tenancy relationship, while, at the same time, the inequalities in the law between the Parties, at least partially, tended to equality in the fact tier.The third was the abiding by contract. The lack of the equivalence thought had prevented the party, who suffered losses from complying with the’from the bottom of the heart’contract’, so the consciousness and idea of the abiding by contract had not been generally established in the hearts of The Parties in the Qing-Dynasty.The fourth is the transaction security. The underestimation of form and procedure, the absence of the statute law and ’good faith’, made transaction safety no to be fully realized.更多还原