The Prusso-Austro-Russian Alliance of Doom for Poland gets an unlikely enemy

dreadnought jenkins

Also, on the page previous in the encyclopedia Brittanica link, it talks about the executive.

The other two links, I admit are either patriotic or very freedom loving and are maybe viewed through rose tinted glass (maybe even the Wikipedia). However, I stand by what I wrote about the constitution. Both Encyclopedia Brittanica and God's Playground are good sources.

Please dont tell me that Encyclopedia Brittanica is controlled by Polish Mafiosi as well, because if that's true, I'll blame you Thande. Oh yes, I will:D.
 

stevep

dreadnought jenkins said:
Ah the May 3rd of 1791 constitution :rolleyes:(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_3_Constitution).
Always been a favourite of mine.
Did so many things, but survived only a year, as it was removed in the War of the Defence of the Constitution.
The May 3rd constitution did:

-remove Liberum veto

-put the peasants under government protection(keeping Serfdom minimised)

-called for a standing army (100 000)

-made public offices and officer ranks open to all free men (towns people and nobles)

-national Education (including elementary schools and scholarships for the poor)This was the first in the world, though it may not have been part of the constitution, it was implemented for a time

-gave the king more power, but also put the Sejm on a better footing

-political equality (ie. voting rights) to townspeople and Schlazta (which was about 10%, which according to Wikipedia, is about the same in the States at the time)

-bicameral Sejm(which was to be extensively reformed), King and council are excecutive

-independant judiciary (a police force was founded to root out corruption)

-recognized both Lithuanians and Polish as equal members of the state

-guarranted all religions and tolerance, though recognized Catholocism as the major one

-Instituted income tax (10% on nobles, 20% on church)

-made the crown an elective hereditary monarchy, which would pass to the house of Wettin of Saxony on the death of Stanislaw August

The Kings council would be made of five ministers, one for: police, internal affairs, foreign affairs, war, and treasury. The ministers were appointed by the King, but held responsible by the Sejm. All acts by the king had to be signed by the minister responsible for whatever it was about. On top of the five ministers and the king, there was the Roman Catholic Primate (bishops were apart of the upper house) who was also president of the ministry of Education. Finally the crown prince and the marshall of the Sejm would also be present, but they would have no voice. Two secretaries would also be present. Since the ministers had to cosign the Kings acts, they, not the king, were held responsible.

Obviously, since it was made in 1791, it happened after the first partition, but the momentum was there, it just needed the proper kick (first partion), and a strong ally (which it didn't so that's why it failed). It was inspired by America and Britain, but also heavily by French philosiphers (Montesquieu separation of powers).

It was the second modern codified national constitution (America came first) and was quite progressive. It was to be followed by an Economic constitution and a moral constitution (bill of rights) but Russia and Prussia put a stop to that.

These were the kind of Reforms that were sleeping under the surface, that could have transformed Poland into a modern and efficient state.:rolleyes:Hopefully, even without the first partition, something similiar like this could come to the surface.
Click to expand...

dreadnought jenkins

Interesting. Much of it matches with what I vaguely remember reading when I was interested in the situation about 20-25 years back. Goes a bit further than I would have thought possible at the time. Interesting about the income tax, especially its impact on the church. A fairly dramatic change for the period of time. [Do you happen to know would that be the Catholic church or any church revenues?] Interesting that although the Catholic church still has a degree of preference there is tolerance of other faiths, which would be highly important in Poland's position at the time.

Most famously was the removal of the notorious Liberum veto. However there's a lot of other things that would make a big different to modernising and strengthening the state. May well have been opposition from internal vested interests but the 1st partition did shake up a lot of people. Hence may have seen a lot of the reforms come to pass if intervention by its neighbours hadn't occurred.

Not sure what the attitude of Austria would have been to the reforms. Joseph, who was de-facto emperor for most of the period IIRC, was very much a supporter of reform for Austria but changes that would strengthen Poland might have been thought of as a mixed blessing.

Steve
 

abas

dreadnought jenkins said:
-political equality (ie. voting rights) to townspeople and Schlazta (which was about 10%, which according to Wikipedia, is about the same in the States at the time)
Click to expand...
AFAIK the townspeople got very limited equality: they were allowed to vote in matters they were directly involved (taxes, when they were taxed etc.)
-recognized both Lithuanians and Polish as equal members of the state
Click to expand...
:confused:
stevep said:
dreadnought jenkins

Interesting. Much of it matches with what I vaguely remember reading when I was interested in the situation about 20-25 years back. Goes a bit further than I would have thought possible at the time. Interesting about the income tax, especially its impact on the church. A fairly dramatic change for the period of time. [Do you happen to know would that be the Catholic church or any church revenues?] Interesting that although the Catholic church still has a degree of preference there is tolerance of other faiths, which would be highly important in Poland's position at the time.
Steve
Click to expand...
That was Catholic church, don't know about others. In any way the others had little to tax.
 

dreadnought jenkins

abas said:
AFAIK the townspeople got very limited equality: they were allowed to vote in matters they were directly involved (taxes, when they were taxed etc.)
:confused:

That was Catholic church, don't know about others. In any way the others had little to tax.
Click to expand...
Ya the one about recognising the Lithuanians and Poles as equal members was the Union of Lublin. :p

You actually seem to know more than I do. Was there anything I missed about the constitution that was important?
 

Prem_Rack

Thande said:
There is a general belief, not entirely jokey, that Wikipedia is run by a Polish mafia (or at least, has a lot of activist Polish nationalist types on board) who try and present the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as some sort of modern pluralistic democracy vs the evil Russians and Germans. Therefore I am disinclined to trust any Wiki article about how great Poland's 1791 constitution (which they conveniently never had a chance to enact) is.
Click to expand...

http://www.polishconstitution.org/index1.html

Here's the English text
 

Zireael

-recognized both Lithuanians and Polish as equal members of the state
Click to expand...
:confused:
Click to expand...

The thing is, although in theory both halves were equal, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was more controlled by the 'Korona' (eng. Crown) (=Poland) than the Lithuania. For example, the 'marszałek koronny' (Crown marshal) was more important than his Lithuanian counterpart.
First efforts to equalize them came around the time of the Swedish 'deluge', however, it was the 1791 constitution which tried to make the theory the real law.

Addendum: sorry for necroposting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top