Constitution draft of 1915

The Constitution Draft of 1915 (新憲草, sjing-hjans-ts′u′; lit. "new constitution draft") was a proposed basic law for Themiclesia forwarded by Liberal prime minister Lord of Mik that year. The draft dealt with topics such as fundamental rights and liberties and the forms of government. It was defeated in the House of Lords later that year on the argument that everything enshrined in the document has already been achieved. Constitutionalism has long been a tenet of the Liberal Party in Themiclesia and was supported by social notables in the period, opposed by Conservatives who believed that the "constitution" of Themiclesia was the accumulated customs and expeirences that guided governments to correct outcomes in resolving political difficulties.

Draft

The Draft itself presented a set of rights and liberties enjoyed by all Themiclesians and a parliamentary form of government.

Citizenship

The phrase "Themiclesian citizen" is used for the first time in any draft legislation. It is defined to include:

1. Subjects of the crown and peers, which by this point comprise of virtually all Themiclesians in Themiclesia-proper
2. Subjects of the crown's autonomous vassals, which consist of ethnic minority groups in the east and north

Rights and liberties

The draft provided that all Themiclesians should enjoy the following rights:

1. To be represented in the House of Commons by an elected representative, and to participate in free and fair elections to choose a representative;
2. To receive education to become literate and numerate;
3. To receive compensation for injuries to body and property;
4. To be treated equally before the law, irrespective of sex, stock, and place of residence;

It also stated that the following liberties were recognized:

1. To private conscience and secret correspondence;
2. To public speech and press;
3. Movement into, out of, and within the realm;
4. Not to be arrested without valid cause or punished without the accustomed process;
5. To participate in lawful assemblies;
6. Not to be punished or subject to special treatment due to religious belief;

For the autonomous vassals:

1. The crown commits not to pass laws that place uncompensated difficulties on their way of life.

Legislative

Under the Draft, legislative power was exercised by the Emperor with the assent of the House of Commons and House of Lords. Both houses were granted the powers:

1. to table, debate, and pass bills;
2. to accept petitions;
3. to make rules and regulations pertaining to itself and regulate debate, provided they do not impair the "representative faculty" of parliament;
4. to command the presence and testimony, under penalty, of anyone it deems able to provide information to itself, including government ministers and public servants;
5. to meet and adjourn at a time and place it sets;
6. to withdraw confidence in government ministers;
7. to grant pardons and honours;

To the House of Commons, the bill granted the following exclusive powers:

1. to table bills raising revenues;
2. to impeach public officials;

Also, members of the House of Commons are declared immune to arrest when Parliament is sitting.

To the House of Lords, the bill recognized the powers:

1. to regulate the peerage and their entitlements;
   • to confirm the appointment of the Marshal of Peers;
   • to permit or reject the appointment of peers in certain civil and military offices;
   • to control the expropriation of peers' real and personal property;
2. to regulate the royal family, royal finances, and entitlements;
   • to confirm the appointment of the Comptroller of the House
   • to appoint Privy Councillors;
3. to table bills raising revenues from peers;
4. to try impeachments and make judgment;
5. to try civil and criminal processes between peers;

For cases between commoners and peers, the draft appointed that they should be tried in ordinary courts; however, the jury impanelled should be half peer and half commoner.

Executive

The Draft makes strides in defining and confining executive power according to the customary limits already established in the middle of the 19th century.

1. The Emperor, House of Lords, and Council of Correspondence are made responsible for executing laws and given power to supervise the entire civil service;
2. The Council of Correspondence, which is where policy power is located, is responsible collectively to Parliament, and its members personally are responsible to the house that represents himself, i.e. peers are responsible to the House of Lords, and commoners are responsible to the House of Commons;
3. The Council of Correspondence may motion for ordinances as authorized by statutes, to be tabled at the House of Lords before presentation to the Emperor;
4. The Emperor is named as commander-in-chief of the Consolidated Army and Navy; the Council of Correspondence represents the monarch relative to them;

Judicial

1. Judges of civil, criminal, and disputes in jurisdictions are to be appointed from the accredited members of the Themiclesian Bar;
2. Judges may not be dismissed or subject to punishments except for breaching the law or taking of bribes;
3. The Themiclesian Bar is protected against disbanding;

Royalty and peerage

1. The Draft did not include a section about the emperor, whose functions are mentioned as they pertained to the branches of government;
2. The Draft endorses the "accustomed rules" regarding the succession and the appointment of royalty as peers;
3. The Peerage of Themiclesia is established form the five central and palatine peerages;
4. Palatine states are officially dissolved;

Other provisions

• Capital punishment is forbidden.
• The Privy Council is retained according to established customs.
• The Gentlemen-at-Arms and its various departments are retained, but members no longer enjoy privileges to enter the civil service.
• The Principal Counsels are retained.
• It is forbidden to make subventions to religious institutions or religious education.
• In the event that a public interest shall require a greater restriction of common liberties than by the defence of the rights of individuals, such legislation should be printed in the public gazette before debate commences in either chamber of Parliament.
• The Council of Correspondence may make emergency ordinances against statutary law with the assent of the House of Lords, when the House of Commons is prorogued or adjourned. Once they resume sitting, such measures are to be tabled at the House of Commons; if they are not accepted, they would be void ab initio.
• All submissions to the Emperor must be submitted to the House of Lords at the same time.
• The Emperor's legal actions must be witnessed by the Privy Council and at least one member of the House of Lords to be valid.

Debate and rejection

Liberal prime minister the Lord of Mik (密侯, mik-go) presented the draft to the House of Lords on Mar. 2, 1915, much to the Conservatives' dismay. The Liberal majority in the House of Commons, though endorsing the bill, did not wish to pass it officially until the House of Lords had passed it, since they did not wish to give the impression that the upper house could control the draft. Conservative leader the Lord of Sloi refused to speak about the bill initially but later relented to opening debate on the floor. They asserted that the proposed constitution introduced no new protections other than those already recognized in spirit. Sloi, in particular, emphasized that no amount of legislation could replace a common understanding about what each individual was free to do and entitled to receive, and a common will to tolerate what is different but not injuirous. He further said that these values declared in the Draft would only be cheapened or controverted if subject to debate. Mik, on the other hand, pressed the argument that a positive act of the legislature enhanced the people's powers and make them more aware of their agency in determining the affairs of state. Ultimately, Mik's government fell at the end of 1915, and the bill did not pass either house; however, it was cited as a reference by both parties as a norm of government in later decades.

Commentary

Background

For a constitutional monarchy, a written constitution was not regarded as strictly necessary. This view was especially espoused by the Lord of Gar-lang, who led what is now widely accepted as the first government that was accountable to an enfranchised public. Initially, Emperor ′ei regarded Gar-lang's governing style, which sidelined the throne, to be a temporary concession to an angry aristocracy and war-weary public; Gar-lang also thought, initially, that he served to press for an orderly end to Themiclesia's empire, since imperial projects had become financially and politically untenable. However, ′ei surrounded himself with counsellors from the previous era, so Gar-lang felt unable to resign without risking his legacy. He took advantage of the custom that only peers, who were economically disposed to sympathize with himself, should be ministers to prevent the emperor from resurrecting an imperialist government. Failing this, peers also controlled the vital office of the Keeper of Seals (符璽令, bja-snji′-ringh) and Council of Peers (門下省, men-gra′-srjêng), without whose recognition imperial rescripts were without effect. Gar-lang publicly advocated for peers to support peace-inclined candidates for appointment to the Council of Protonotaries, which drafted those rescripts. Aristocratic control of the political process by the peerage and gentry continued beyond ′ei's reign and survived his sons, Emperor Krjang′ (r. 1821 – 25) and Ng′jalh (r. 1825 – 41).

Between 1800 and 1830, emperors generally acceded to the results of this political system and appointed prime ministers that were at least not repugnant to the aristocracy. In the case of Lord Sghjang (庠君) who feigned pacifism to secure appointment, the aristocracy blocked every legislative proposal, including palace renovations, until the emperor dismissed him. After 1832, Hallian domination again became politically controversial, and the merchant class were particularly dissatisifed with the government's inaction towards Camian piracy and by extension the poor state of national defence. This sentiment combined with an expanding awareness of developments in political theory abroad, promoting progressive politicians advocating greater political inclusion. These messages achieved notable resonance within the merchant community, who supplied almost half of government revenues. The Lord of Ran was a key figure in the rise of party politics in Themiclesia, since he acquiesced to the political process but desired to introduce reforms from within the system. He argued that Themiclesia was, in substance, not different from the constitutional monarchies of Casaterra, such as Anglia and Lerchernt and Sieuxerr. He further claimed, dubiously, that he was the Lord of Gar-lang's disciple. With league action from the merchant community, the franchise was opened to all males above the age of 30 who could prove quite substantial means.

The Conservatives, mostly peers and landholders large and small, were not, as a rule, opposed to a dependable military; however, they resented being taxed to fund it. On the condition that the Liberals did not raise land tax heavily and in view of the waxing share of merchant contributions to the economy, the peers permitted dissent and policies not purely pacifist, which was advocated by Gar-lang as the "one true way" to reduction of military expenditure. Ran argued strenuously that expectant concessions to foreign powers, domestic and colonial, not only hurt merchant revenues, thus shifting fiscal burden to the aristocracy, but also projected an image of weakness abroad, which would, in the long run, only make "everything" more costly and defeat the Conservative desire to reduce taxation. Despite achieving a significant support base, Ran's premierships were beleagured by accusations of revanchism to revive the empire and concomitant fiscal horros.

See also

• Themiclesia