民國以來，中國工業一直有穩定的成長，回顧有關工業史的研究，偏向調查報告、統計及現象的分析說明，近年海峽兩岸對工業的研究則多是有關區域的或個別的企業。因此，專門探討工業政策之形成、制定、執行及其成效的研究比較欠缺，難與工業史或經濟史的研成果相比。筆者擬以北伐完成迄抗戰爆發前國民政府的工業政策作整體細部性的分析。本論文主體有五章，除了緒論和結論外，第一章論述國民政府成立前工業發展的特質，及中國工業化的障礙，藉以說明國民政府制定工業政策的背景。第二章首先說明國民政府中負責工業發展之主要機關及其組織和職掌，再析述國民政府工業政策之形成、制定。第三章就稅制及融資、國際貿易、交通運輸建設、人力資源問題、政府行政效率等五項直接影響工業消長的重要因素，評估國民政府工業政策執行上的一些問題。第四章敘述國營工廠籌辦經過，以瞭解政府所遭遇的困難。第五章就戰前工業發展狀況、工業動員準備來檢視工業政策的成效。民間輕工業既已迅速發展，政府依法保護獎勵與管理監督，在國家經濟資源有限的情況下，1935年以後始集中力量發展重工業。戰前十年不是「輝煌的十年」，中國從事經濟建設所遭遇的挫折，除了長久以來的政治動亂和天災外，還有東北淪陷、世界經濟危機的沉重打擊，顯示出在工業成長率與北洋政府時期略同的表面下，另有意義，國民政府的保護、獎勵、標準化政策及工業化相關條件縱有其局限性或嚴重缺失，對改善工業發展環境和促進私營工業，仍發揮一定程度的效用；但就改善中國工業體質而言，國民政府是失敗的，也沒有機會盡心盡力。在重工業發展上，國民政府因為政治因素而分散力量，又為經濟考量而延誤時機，成就無多。依據戰前十年經驗，如欲強化中國工業體質，首要之務是幫助工業界籌得充足的資本，並設法掃除國人的投機心理。

汪兆銘（精衛）為近代中國上一極受爭議的歷史人物，他的一生經歷，幾乎涵蓋了半部的民國史，從早期同盟會革命運動開始，汪便是國民黨內的重要人物，許多中國現代的歷史事件都與汪氏有關。受到其後來與日本合作成立偽政權事影響，導致後人對其歷史評價不一，至今仍缺乏對其之專題研究以供定論之參考。在汪氏畢生的政治生涯中，曾參與六個「國民政府」，都曾扮演極重要的角色。而且多與蔣介石在國民黨內之間權力的爭衡和政見異同息息相關。是以兩人分裂抗衡之時期之外，亦有妥協合作的時期。兩人之間的合作有兩次，第一次是民國14年廣州國民政府時期，後因「中山艦事變」而分離；第二次是民國21年以後南京國民政府時期，至24年國民黨四屆六中全會時汪氏被刺後出現分歧。這段時期，正是國難嚴重，致力救亡圖存時期。兩人合作，共同應付國難。至於完全分裂是在27年底汪氏在投敵而至另組「國民政府」之後。本研究之主旨在探討汪、蔣二次合作的緣起與過程，及汪氏參與南京國民政府時期的表現。當時中國主要問題是在於「對日」。故本文循「對日」問題為主線，以民國20年(1931)至民國25年(1936)為斷限，作為研究的範圍。除第一章為前言及第六章為結論外，第二章〈汪兆銘參與南京國民政府之經過〉，敘述汪兆銘參與南京國民政府的過程，以便說明汪、蔣何以二次合作。第三章〈一面抵抗一面交涉〉，敘述汪兆銘的「一面抵抗、一面交涉」對日政策的由來，及其實行的經過與挫折。第四章〈汪兆銘與國民政府的安內攘外〉，敘述汪、蔣合作下的「安內攘外」政策，說明汪氏「救亡圖存」之主張與分析對日妥協綏靖的外交。第五章〈汪蔣合作走向分歧〉，敘述汪、蔣合作關係的後期演變及分歧的因果。

近代以來，中國農業現代化以農藥利用、肥料推廣、品種改良及機械化發展為最主要方式。其中農業機器之利用，與機器產業乃至工業、製造業有密切關係，可說是溝通工農部門的關鍵。故本文以農業機器產業為線索，關注農業現代化中工業及其他現代部門參與的情形，及其所發揮之「農工並進」作用。 　　農業機器大約自十九世紀末期傳入中國，二十世紀初有少部分商人注意到斯業前景可期，著手製造販售。到1920年代，受到國外農機利用蓬勃發展的影響，江南地區機器業者也有不少轉而生產農業機器。這些以農業機器為主要產品的新式機器廠，發展出標準型號、大量生產，以及成立事務所、刊登廣告、參與展覽會、辦理講習等種種經營與行銷方式，更由於農業機器帶來的大量利潤，吸引資本家投資設廠，也使之轉型為新式企業組織。因此來自農村市場的機器需求，支持了工業部門的機器製造業進展。 　　除了民營事業的推進，政府當局也創辦公營製造廠、推廣模範灌溉與合作運動，國家力量促成農業機器利用的擴大。戰時儘管受到一定影響，但汪精衛政府在1940年代復籌措鉅資成立新式農業機器工廠；重慶政府則在同時間成立中國農業機械公司。前者在戰後改組為農林部無錫農具廠，對戰後江南的復員工作及農業生產極為重要；後者則在戰後接受聯總援華物資，承擔「全國農機擴建事業」在各地建立機器廠的任務。大略言之，近代中國農業機器產業之發展，是民間先於政府，但隨後在農業機械化之目標下，國家力量又主導產業成長，這種趨勢在1950年代以後達到高峰。 　　整體而言，近代中國農業機器業，並非如過去所認識的規模狹小、技術落後，反而是獲利豐厚的產業；由於在經濟發達地區更容易出現農業機器的利用，故而上海、無錫及常州等地密集普遍的機器工廠，能提供農業機器維修保障，因此以江南為例，可以看出農業機器產業不僅是農業機械化的基礎，也是機器產業提昇技術、擴大獲利之關鍵，二者互為因果。本文以江南為中心，但在空間方面注意到與東北經驗之比較、在時間方面也注意到戰時淪陷區的經營及戰後延續情形，擴大既有研究的時空範圍；通過對農業機器產業的探討，可以觀察工業與農業發展之互動關係，亦為近代中國經濟發展補充另一觀點。

In the year 2004 South Africa celebrated its first ten years of democracy, which reflected the success of the struggle for the liberation of this country. The year 1960 was considered as a year of strong resistance throughout South Africa. Political leaders like Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Robert Sobukwe, Raymond Mhlaba, Chief Albert Luthuli, Walter Sisulu, Ahmed Kathrada, Lionel Bernstein, Dennis Goldberg and others played a vital role in leading the black people to resist the plan of the current Prime Minister Hendrick Verwoerd, who deprived Africans of their citizenship by forcing the Bantustan system upon them. On the 6th June 1960 more than four thousand Pondos from eastern Pondoland (Bizana, Lusikisiki, Flagstaff and Ntabankulu) met at Ngquza Hill with the intention of discussing their problems. They demanded the withdrawal of the hated system of the Bantu Authorities Act, the representation of all South Africans in the Republic's Parliament, relief from increased taxes and the abolition of the pass system. Before these problems were tabled before the people, a military force had occupied Ngquza Hill. The peaceful meeting was turned into a massacre of innocent people, when police shot victims, tear-gassed them and beat them with batons. Eleven people were killed, many of them were shot in the backs of their heads; and more than 48 casualties were hospitalized and arrested. The Paramount Chief, Botha Sigcau, was blamed for the massacre because he was seen as supporting the government, and this led to the uprising in Pondoland from 1960 to 1963. This event happened three months after the Sharpeville shooting of the 21st March 1960. More than 200 casualties were reported and 69 unarmed protesters were shot dead outside the police station. The ANC and PAC, the liberation movements of the day, were banned and a state of emergency was declared. The Nationalist government suspected the African National Congress of being behind the revolt in Pondoland. The ringleaders of the Pondo Revolt were Mthethunzima Ganyile, Anderson Ganyile, Solomon Madikizela and Theophulus Ntshangela. They listed the Acts that were to be protested against as follows: The Bantu Authorities Act of 1951, the Bantu Education Act of 1953, the Pass Law System of 1952, as well as rehabilitation and betterment schemes. These Acts were imposed by the National Party through Paramount Chief Botha Sigcau. All were detrimental to the future of the Pondo people. Church leaders such as Beyers Naude, Ben Marais and Bartholomeus Keet of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC), Archbishop Geoffrey Clayton and Archbishop Desmond Tutu of the Anglican Church, Rev Charles Villa-Vicencio of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa, Allan Boesak of the Dutch Reformed Mission Church (DRMC) and others played a major role in confronting and challenging the Nationalist government, which justified apartheid as grounded on Scripture. Not all church leaders opposed this policy: the Dutch Reformed Church was the bedrock of apartheid, along with other Afrikaans speaking churches. This dissertation will serve as a tool to determine the involvement of the church regarding the Pondo Revolt in South Africa from 1960 to 1963. / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / M.Th. (Church History)

In the year 2004 South Africa celebrated its first ten years of democracy, which reflected the success of the struggle for the liberation of this country. The year 1960 was considered as a year of strong resistance throughout South Africa. Political leaders like Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo, Robert Sobukwe, Raymond Mhlaba, Chief Albert Luthuli, Walter Sisulu, Ahmed Kathrada, Lionel Bernstein, Dennis Goldberg and others played a vital role in leading the black people to resist the plan of the current Prime Minister Hendrick Verwoerd, who deprived Africans of their citizenship by forcing the Bantustan system upon them. On the 6th June 1960 more than four thousand Pondos from eastern Pondoland (Bizana, Lusikisiki, Flagstaff and Ntabankulu) met at Ngquza Hill with the intention of discussing their problems. They demanded the withdrawal of the hated system of the Bantu Authorities Act, the representation of all South Africans in the Republic's Parliament, relief from increased taxes and the abolition of the pass system. Before these problems were tabled before the people, a military force had occupied Ngquza Hill. The peaceful meeting was turned into a massacre of innocent people, when police shot victims, tear-gassed them and beat them with batons. Eleven people were killed, many of them were shot in the backs of their heads; and more than 48 casualties were hospitalized and arrested. The Paramount Chief, Botha Sigcau, was blamed for the massacre because he was seen as supporting the government, and this led to the uprising in Pondoland from 1960 to 1963. This event happened three months after the Sharpeville shooting of the 21st March 1960. More than 200 casualties were reported and 69 unarmed protesters were shot dead outside the police station. The ANC and PAC, the liberation movements of the day, were banned and a state of emergency was declared. The Nationalist government suspected the African National Congress of being behind the revolt in Pondoland. The ringleaders of the Pondo Revolt were Mthethunzima Ganyile, Anderson Ganyile, Solomon Madikizela and Theophulus Ntshangela. They listed the Acts that were to be protested against as follows: The Bantu Authorities Act of 1951, the Bantu Education Act of 1953, the Pass Law System of 1952, as well as rehabilitation and betterment schemes. These Acts were imposed by the National Party through Paramount Chief Botha Sigcau. All were detrimental to the future of the Pondo people. Church leaders such as Beyers Naude, Ben Marais and Bartholomeus Keet of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC), Archbishop Geoffrey Clayton and Archbishop Desmond Tutu of the Anglican Church, Rev Charles Villa-Vicencio of the Methodist Church of Southern Africa, Allan Boesak of the Dutch Reformed Mission Church (DRMC) and others played a major role in confronting and challenging the Nationalist government, which justified apartheid as grounded on Scripture. Not all church leaders opposed this policy: the Dutch Reformed Church was the bedrock of apartheid, along with other Afrikaans speaking churches. This dissertation will serve as a tool to determine the involvement of the church regarding the Pondo Revolt in South Africa from 1960 to 1963. / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / M.Th. (Church History)