The fight for the senate and the method of electing the president of the Republic of Poland

The fight for the senate and the method of electing the president of the Republic of Poland

It flared up immediately after the departure of the Bolsheviks. However, the example of many Western democracies has borne witness, that the upper houses cannot stop mature social reforms (although they may delay immature), not only PPS but also peasant clubs – the latter due to the land reform, declared themselves against this institution. Głąbiński, on behalf of the National People's Union, resigned from the name of the senate to put it next to the chamber of deputies (that is the Seym) Guard of Rights with attribution to correct and send harmful resolutions for reconsideration. Dubanowicz insisted on the Senate. The thing depended, of course, on this, what power will this house get, will she be eligible and by whom; by the general public, or by organizations, local governments, partly by the Seym; or maybe appointed by the president; or composed of whirlpools (episcopal, rectors etc.). Socialists would adopt a bicameral system, if the second chamber became a chamber of labor, representing the fighting proletariat, then there was a weak power struggle between the proletariat and the nation. On the other hand, the dispute over the senate was connected with the question of the president's position. Hardly anyone was willing then – following the model of the survey – to grant the head of state the right of veto, or dissolving the Seym at its own discretion. He spoke for the senate (in the mouths of nationalists) this consideration, that the parliamentary demagogy should be counterbalanced by a representative body, than an aspirant to the role of a dictator. But it was this personnel factor that gave the left wing tacit support from Piłsudski and the Piłsudski region, which was reflected in the manner of regulating the election of the president. The survey recommended the American method – by electors; nationalists wanted to imitate the French model, i.e.. election by the National Assembly, i.e.. Joint Legislative Chambers; the socialists were in favor of the electoral system; Liberation by inciting Piłsudski, it was universal election, i.e.. plebiscite, i.e.. former election of viritim, only without the crowds at Wola. In addition, there were disputes over the position of the commander-in-chief: the right was in command, that a leader must be responsible, so it can't be the president; Liberation and the socialists stigmatized such arguments as a malicious game against Piłsudski.

The left wing was encouraged not only by the position of the Belweder Palace, but also the lack of a clear majority in the Sejm. The language of importance were the deputies from the Constitutional Labor Club, and sometimes also from the Townspeople's Club. This is due to their ideological tactics, that the constitution would come out of the forge as a compromise, and it will be difficult to find out if it is a strong government, or strong public spirit. In day 21 October, MPs from peasants and workers, after the vote was in the minority, they arranged an inn obstruction. Former and later ministers took part in it, club leaders, a 11 November [1920 r.] The liberation went even further in contempt for representation, demanding the dissolution of the constituent. The project was returned to the Commission several times; whole, one can say, the intelligentsia in the country was behind the senate, universities supported this postulate, except in Warsaw, who was silent. Hart of Trąmpczyński made it, that the dam was broken in January, The Liberation conclusions failed, National Workers' Party (for a referendum on the senate issue), socialists and peasants to exclude this matter from the constitution. The obstruction happened again 15 brand [1921 r.]. Right, wishing to give an example of consent before the Silesian plebiscite, she renounced the introduction of virilists to the senate and agreed to it, that the Seym will be able to force its will against the Senate by a majority 11/20, and not 3/5 votes.

Without such intoxication, as in 1791 r., but feeling dutifully fulfilled, the envoys followed Trąmpczyński's lead to the cathedral – ask God, to bless their further work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *