Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T04:57:58.621Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Jerome Alan Cohen
Get access

Extract

Whatever else the nineteen sixties may be remembered for—the proliferation of macroweapons, microstates or miniskirts—historians of the decade might allot a footnote to the more modest, but less disconcerting, proliferation of English language studies of Chinese law. Thirty years ago a survey of then recent research on Chinese law revealed “an increased interest on the part of Chinese, Japanese, and Western scholars.” The author noted that, although “[t]he amount of work achieved … constitutes as yet but a slight beginning in what is still a largely unworked field,” it “clearly indicates the potential contributions which further researches can make to our understanding of the evolution of Chinese social, economic and political life and institutions.” No one rose to dispute the author's conclusion that Chinese law offers “a rich source from which to derive a more realistic appraisal of the forces actually at work in Chinese society at different epochs.…” Yet, except in Japan, where all scholars of things Chinese received additional stimulus from the adventitious circumstances of international politics, the cumulative impact of the Sino-Japanese War, World War II, the Chinese Civil War and the triumph of Communism slowed the development of what had been a promising academic field.

Type
New Developments in Western Studies of Chinese Law: A Symposium
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , May 1968 , pp. 475 - 483
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Peake, Cyrus H., “Recent Studies On Chinese Law,” Political Science Quarterly, LII (1937), p. 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 For Japanese scholarship on Chinese law before 1953, see Fairbank, John K. and Banno, Masataka, Japanese Studies of Modern China (Rutland, Vt. and Tokyo, 1955), pp. 73–80Google Scholar; for publications during the period 1945–1960, see Katsuaki, Hirano, “Sengo ni okeru Chūgoku hō kankei bunken mokuroku” [A Bibliography of Post-War Publications on Chinese Law], Hogaku shirin, LVIII (1961), pp. 178–199Google Scholar; and for a convenient listing in English of Japanese language books and articles on Chinese Communist law, see “Japanisches Schrifttum zum Recht der Volksdemokratien Asiens,” Osteuropa-Recht, VI (1960), pp. 303–305Google Scholar; and Uchida, Hisashi, “Japanisches Schrifttum zum Recht der Ostblockstaaten,”Google Scholarid., IX (1963), pp. 239–264.

8 See, e.g., Greenfield, D. E., “Marriage By Chinese Law and Custom In Hongkong,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, VII (1958), pp. 437—451CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McAleavy, Henry, “Dien in China and Vietnam,” JAS, XVII (1958), pp. 403–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Twitchett, Denis, “The Fragment of the T'ang Ordinances of the Department of Waterways Discovered at Tunhuang,” Asia Major, N.S., VI (1957), pp. 23–79Google Scholar; and “The Fan Clan's Charitable Estate, 1050–1760,” in Confucianism in Action (Nivison and Wright, ed., Stanford, 1959).Google Scholar

4 Staunton, George T., Ta Tsing Leu Lee, Being the Fundamental Laws … of the Penal Code of China (London, 1810).Google Scholar

5 Alabaster, Ernest, Notes and Commentaries on Chinese Criminal Law (London, 1899)Google Scholar; “Notes on Chinese Law and Practice Preceding Revision,” Journal of the North China Branch, Royal Asiatic Society, N.S., XXXVII (1906), pp. 83–149Google Scholar; “Dips into an Imperial Law Officer's Compendium,” Monumenta Serica, II (1936), pp. 426–436.Google Scholar

6 Jamieson, George, Chinese Family and Commercial Law (Shanghai, 1921).Google Scholar

7 In 1946, ten years after his retirement as Dean of Harvard Law School, Pound, at the age of seventyfive, became adviser to the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of China for two years. See Pound, , Some Problems of the Administration of Justice in China (Nanking, 1948)Google Scholar; “The Chinese Constitution,” New York University Law Quarterly Review, XXII (1947), pp. 194–232Google Scholar; “Progress of the Law in China,” Washington Law Review, XXIII (1948), pp. 345–362Google Scholar; “Comparative Law and History as Bases for Chinese Law,” Harvard Law Review, LXI (1948), pp. 749–762Google Scholar; and “The Chinese Civil Code in Action,” Talane Law Review, XXIX (1955), pp. 277–291.Google Scholar

8 See, e.g., Martin, W. A. P., Traces of International Law in Ancient China (N.P., 1881)Google Scholar; Jernigan, T. R., China in Law and Commerce (New York, 1905)Google Scholar; Bryan, R. T. Jr., An Outline of Chinese Civil Law (Shanghai, 1925)Google Scholar; Blume, W. W., “Christian Legal Education in China,” China Law Review, I (1922–1924), pp. 131–134Google Scholar; and “Legal Education in China,” id., pp. 305–311; and Lobingier, C. S., “The Corpus Juris Of New China,” Tulane Law Review, XIX (1945), pp. 512–552Google Scholar, which lists that author's numerous prewar essays.

9 See, e.g., Wu, John C. H., The Art of Law (Shanghai, 1936)Google Scholar; Chu, Boyer P. H., Commentaries on the Chinese Civil Code (Shanghai, 1935)Google Scholar; and Cheng, F. T., The Chinese Supreme Court Decisions (Peking, 1923).Google Scholar

10 For sporadic exceptions, see Yang, Chao-Lung, “Powers of Chinese Courts,” Vanderbilt Law Review, I (1947) pp. 16–46Google Scholar; Kwei, Yu, “Some Judicial Problems Facing China,” Washington Law Review, XXIII (1948), pp. 363–374Google Scholar; Cheng, Tien-Hsi, “The Development and Reform of Chinese Law,” Current Legal Problems, I (1948), pp. 170–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chen, Chiven, “The Foster Daughter-In-Law System In Formosa,” American Journal of Comparative Law, VI (1957), pp. 302–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Liu, Chin-Sui, “The Chinese Council of Grand Justices,”Google Scholarid., VII (1958), pp. 402–408.

11 See especially Meijer, Marinus J., The Introduction of Modern Criminal Law in China (Batavia [Jakarta], 1949)Google Scholar; Van der Valk, M. H., Interpretations of the Supreme Court at Peking, Years 1915 and 1916 (Batavia [Jakarta], 1949)Google Scholar, and Conservatism in Modern Chinese Family Law (Leiden, 1956)Google Scholar; Hulsewé, A. F. P., Remnants of Han Law, Vol. I (Leiden, 1955)Google Scholar; Van Gulik, Robert H., T'ang-yin-pi-shih, “Parallel Cases from under the Pear-tree” (Leiden, 1956).Google Scholar

12 Philastre, P. L. F., Le Code Annamite, etc., 2 vols. (Paris, 1876; second ed., 1909).Google Scholar

13 Hoang, Pierre, Notions Techniques Sur La Propriété En Chine (Shanghai, 1897)Google Scholar; and Le Mariage Chinois Au Point De Vue Légal (Shanghai, 1898).Google Scholar

14 Pelliot, Paul, “Notes de bibliographie chinoise, II: Le Droit chinois,” Bulletin de l'École Française d'Extrême Orient, IX (1909), pp. 123–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Deloustal, Raymond, “La justice dans l'ancien Annam,” Bulletin de l'École Française d'Extrême Orient, VIII–XIII (1908–1913)Google Scholar; XIX (1919); XXII (1922).

16 Boulais, Guy, Manuel de code chinois (Shanghai, 1924).Google Scholar

17 Maspéro, Henri, “Le Serment dans la procédure judiciaire de la Chine antique,” Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques, III (1934–1935), pp. 257–317.Google Scholar

18 Escarra, Jean, Le Droit chinois (Peking, 1936)Google Scholar. This work has been translated into English: Browne, Gertrude R., tr., Chinese Law (Seattle, 1936)Google Scholar, reprinted (xerox) (Cambridge, Mass., 1961). For other useful work by Escarra, see, e.g., “Western methods of researches into Chinese law,” Chinese Social and Political Science Review, VIII (1924), pp. 227–248.Google Scholar

19 For happy exceptions, see Balazs, Étienne, Le Traité juridique du “Souci-chou” (Leiden, 1954)Google Scholar; and Gernet, Jacques, “La Vente en Chine d'après les contrats de Touen-houang (IXe–Xe siècles),” T'oung Pao, XLV (1957), pp. 295–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 See, e.g., Bünger, Karl, Quellen zur Rechtsgeschichte der T'ang Zeit (Peiping, 1946)Google Scholar; “The Punishment of Lunatics and Negligents According to Classical Chinese Law,” Studia Serica, IX (1950), pp. 1—16.Google Scholar

21 See especially Kroker, Eduard J. M., “Rechtsgewohnheiten in der Provinz Shantung,” Monumenta Serica, XIV (1955), pp. 215–302Google Scholar; “Dienst-und Werkverträge im chinesischen Gewohnheitsrecht,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, CVII (1957), pp. 130–160Google Scholar; and “The Concept of Property in Chinese Customary Law,” Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, 3d series, VII (1959), pp. 123–146.Google Scholar

22 Seattle, 1960.

23 Paris and The Hague, 1961.

24 Cambridge, Mass., 1962.

25 London, 1962.

26 Cambridge, England, 1963.

27 See, e.g., Kristovich, Public Administrator v. Shu Tong Ng, 228 California Appellate 2d 160 (1964), certiorari denied by the United States Supreme Court, 381 U.S. 902 (1965); and Louknitsky v. Louknitsky, 123 California Appellate 2d 406 (1954); these were respectively an inheritance case and a divorce case in which, had expert testimony on Chinese law been produced, it would have facilitated enlightened judicial decision-making. See also Reghizzi, Gabriele Crespi, “Legal Aspects of Trade with China: The Italian Experience,” Harvard International Law Journal, IX (Winter, 1968), pp. 85–139Google Scholar; Li, Victor H., “Legal Aspects of Trade with Communist China,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, III (1964), PP. 57–71Google Scholar. In negotiating the recent treaty on outer space, one of the frustrations experienced by members of the American delegation to the United Nations arose from their inability to find within the United States Government someone trained in both law and Chinese studies who could verify the accuracy of the Chinese version of the treaty, which had been prepared by the U.N. Secretariat. The United States finally had to rely on the approval of the delegation of the Republic of China.

28 See Buxbaum, David C., “Preliminary Trends in the Development of the Legal Institutions of Communist China and the Nature of the Criminal Law,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, XI (1962), pp. 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cohen, Jerome A., “The Criminal Process in the People's Republic of China: An Introduction,” Harvard Law Review, LXXIX (1966), pp. 469–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hsiao, Gene T., “Communist China: Legal Institutions,” Problems of Communism, XIV (1965), pp. 112–121Google Scholar; Lee, Luke T., “Chinese Communist Law: Its Background and Development,” Michigan Law Review, LX (1962), pp. 439–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ginsburgs, George, “Theory And Practice of Parliamentary Procedure in Communist China: Organizational and Institutional Principles,” University of Toronto Law Journal, XV (1963), pp. 1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ginsburgs, G. and Stahnke, Arthur, “The Genesis of the People's Procuratorate in Communist China, 1949–1951,” China Quarterly, No. 20 (1964), pp. 1–37Google Scholar, and “The People's Procuratorate in Communist China: The Period of Maturation, 1951–54,” China Quarterly, No. 24. (1965), pp. 53–91.Google Scholar

29 See the articles by Buxbaum, Cohen, Hsiao, Lee, and Ginsburgs and Stahnke cited in note 28; also Buxbaum, David C., “Horizontal and Vertical Influences Upon the Substantive Criminal Law in China: Some Preliminary Observations,” Osteuropa-Recht, X (1964), pp. 31–51Google Scholar; Hsia, Tao-tai, “Justice in Peking: China's Legal System on Show,” Current Scene, V (1967), pp. 1–12Google Scholar; Lin, Fu-shun, “Communist China's Emerging Fundamentals of Criminal Law,” American Journal of Comparative Law, XIII (1964), pp. 80–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Tao, Lung-sheng, “The Criminal Law of Communist China,” Cornell Law Quarterly, LII (1966), pp. 43–68.Google Scholar

30 See Hsiao, Gene T., “The Role of Economic Contracts in Communist China,” California Law Review, LIII (1965), pp. 1029–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pfeffer, Richard M., “The Institution of Contracts in the Chinese People's Republic,” China Quarterly, No. 14 (1963), pp. 153–177, and No. 15 (1963), pp. 115–139Google Scholar; and “Contracts in China Revisited, With a Focus on Agriculture, 1949–63,” China Quarterly, No. 28 (1966), pp. 106–129.Google Scholar

31 See Chiu, Hungdah, “Communist China's Attitude Toward International Law,” American Journal of International Law (hereafter AJIL), LX (1966), pp. 245–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “The Theory and Practice of Communist China With Respect to the Conclusion of Treaties,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, V (1966), pp. 1–13Google Scholar; “Communist China And The Law Of Outer Space,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly, XVI (1967), pp. 1135–1138Google Scholar; “Certain Legal Aspects Of Communist China's Treaty Practice,” Proceedings of the American Society of International Law (hereafter Proceedings) (1967), pp. 117–126Google Scholar; and “Communist China's Attitude Toward the United Nations: A Legal Analysis,” AJIL, LXII (1968), pp. 20–50Google Scholar; Cohen, Jerome A., “Chinese Attitudes Toward International Law—And Our Own,” Proceedings (1967), pp. 108–116Google Scholar; Edwards, R. Randle, “The Attitude Of The People's Republic Of China Toward International Law And The United Nations,” Papers On China, XVII (Harvard University, 1963), pp. 235–271Google Scholar; Hsia, Tao-tai, “Settlement Of Dual Nationality Between Communist China And Other Countries,” Osteuropa-Recht, XI (1965), pp. 27–38Google Scholar; and Johnston, Douglas, “Treaty Analysis And Communist China: Preliminary Observations,” Proceedings (1967), pp. 126–134Google Scholar. For an interesting article by a political scientist, see Leng, Shao-chuan, “Communist China's Position On Nuclear Arms Control,” Virginia Journal of International Law, VII (1966), pp. 101–116.Google Scholar

32 See articles by Crespi Reghizzi and Li, note 27, and Hsiao, Gene T., “Communist China's Foreign Trade Organization,” Vanderbilt Law Review, XX (1967), pp. 303–319.Google Scholar

33 Cohen, Jerome A., “Interviewing Chinese Refugees: Indispensable Aid To Legal Research on China,” Journal of Legal Education, XX (1967), pp. 33–62.Google Scholar

34 See Cohen, Jerome A., “Chinese Mediation on the Eve of Modernization,” California Law Review, LIX (1966), pp. 1201–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Buxbaum, David C., Osteuropa-RechtGoogle Scholar, note 29, and “Chinese Family Law in a Common Law Setting,” JAS, XXV (1966), pp. 621–644Google Scholar; Ma, Herbert H. P., “The Chinese Control Yuan: An Independent Supervisory Organ of the State,” Washington University Law Quarterly (1963), pp. 401–426Google Scholar; and Tsao, Wen Yen, “The Chinese Family from Customary Law to Positive Law,” Hastings Law Journal, XVII (1966), pp. 727–765Google Scholar. For an historian's analysis of some Ch'ing judicial decisions, see Harrison, Judy F., “Wrongful Treatment of Prisoners: A Case Study of Ch'ing Legal Practice,” JAS, XXIII (1964), pp. 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35 Cambridge, Mass., 1967.

36 Cohen, Jerome A., The Criminal Process in the People's Republic of China, 1949–1963: An Introduction (Cambridge, Mass., 1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Justice in Communist China (New York, 1967).Google Scholar

38 Chinese Law, Past and Present (New York, 1966).Google Scholar

39 Guide To Selected Legal Sources of Mainland China (Washington, D. C., 1967).Google Scholar

40 Cambridge, Mass., 1968. This volume was sponsored by the Joint Committee on Contemporary China's Subcommittee on Chinese Law, whose origin and activities are discussed below.

41 See, e.g., “The People's Courts in Communist China,” American Journal of Comparative Law, XI (1962), pp. 52–65.Google Scholar

42 See Dicks, Review of Ni Cheng-ao, kuo-chi-fa-chung-te ssu-fa kuan-hsia wen-t'i [Problems of Jurisdiction in International Law], International and Comparative Law Quarterly, XV (1966), pp. 913–915.Google Scholar

43 See “Voluntary Surrender In Chinese Law,” in Law In Eastern Europe, XIV (1967), pp. 359–394Google Scholar; “Movables And Immovables And Connected Subjects In Chinese Law,” id., VII (1963), pp. 167–206; “[The Law Of Inheritance In] China,” id., V (1961), pp. 297–364; “Security Rights In Communist China,” Osteuropa-Recht, IX (1963), pp. 210–235.Google Scholar

44 Eduard J. M. Kroker has continued to be productive; see “Sachenrechtliche Gewohnheiten in der Provinz Feng-t'ien (China),” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft (hereafter ZVR), LXII (1960), pp. 1–84Google Scholar; and “Rechtsgewohnheiten in Hei-lung-chiang (China),” ZVR, LXVI (1964), pp. 29–156Google Scholar. In addition, see, e.g., Mäding, Klaus, Chinesisches traditionelles Erbrecht (Berlin, 1966)Google Scholar; Bauer, Wolfgang, “Die Frühgeschichte des Eigentums in China,” ZVR, LXIII (1961), pp. 118–184Google Scholar; and Miyazawa, Koichi, “Über einige Vorschriften allgemeinen Charakters des ‘Kai-Yüan-lü’ etc.”, Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (hereafter ZGS) LXXVII (1965), pp. 119–138Google Scholar. For recent studies relating to problems of modernization, see, e.g., Middendorff, Wolf, “Strafgerichtsbarkeit und Kriminalität auf Formosa,” ZGS, LXXVIII (1966), pp. 3–39Google Scholar; and Tse-chièn, Wang, “Die Aufnahme des europäischen Rechts in China,” Archiv für die Civilistische Praxis, CLXVI (1966), pp. 343–351.Google Scholar

45 See Engelborgh-Bertels, Marthe et Dekkers, René, La République populaire de Chine, cadres institutionnels et réalisations. I: L'histoire et le droit (Bruxelles, 1963)Google Scholar; Engelborgh-Bertels, , “L'Assimilation De L'Esprit Du Droit Occidental En Chine,” Co-existence, IV (1967), pp. 77–93Google Scholar; Dekkers, , “La vie juridique,” in Le régime et les institutions de la république populaire chinoise (Bruxelles, 1960) pp. 56–68.Google Scholar

46 See “Lo Studio Del Sistema Giuridico Cinese Contemporaneo,” L'Est, No. 3 (1967), pp. 165–205Google Scholar; and “Diritto Cinese E Rivoluzione Culturale,” Rivista Di Diritto Civile, XIII (1967), pp. 301–305Google Scholar. Also recall the article by Crespi Reghizzi, note 27.

47 See Aubin, Françoise, “Index de ‘Un code des Yuan’ de P. Ratchnevsky,” Mélanges publiés par l'Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises, II (1960), pp. 423–515.Google Scholar

48 “Notes on Chinese Law and Practice Preceding Revision,” Journal of the North China Branch, Royal Asiatic Society, N.S. XXXVII (1960), pp. 139–141.Google Scholar

49 Building on earlier versions, the Law Revision Planning Group of the Council for United States Aid of the Republic of China has published very good English translations of the basic legislation in force on Taiwan today and has thereby done a great deal to alleviate problems of coping with Republican terminology. See Laws of the Republic of China, First Series (Taipei, 1961)Google Scholar, Second Series (Taipei, 1962).

50 For discussion of inadequacies in the translations of legal materials published by both Peking's Foreign Languages Press and agencies of the United States Government, see Jerome A. Cohen, Review of A. P. Blaustein, Fundamental Legal Documents of Communist China, Yale Law Journal, LXXII (1963), pp. 838, 842.Google Scholar