Search results

1

Andrew Uffindell, „Wielcy generałowie wojen napoleońskich oraz ich bitwy 1805–1815”, Wydawnictwo Rebis, Poznań 2007, ss. 394

100%

Kowalczyk R. W.

Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

|

2009

|

vol. 06

2

Wpływ rosyjskiej polityki protekcyjnej na sytuację gospodarczą Królestwa Polskiego w latach 1877–1914

100%

Kowalczyk R. W.

Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

|

2009

|

vol. 06

EN

Protection policy was established in 1877 after the fiasco of the 20 year period of progressive liberalisation policy, forwarded by the then Minister of the Treasury Michał Rejtern. In 1877, when deciding on customs, Russian Treasury used fiscalism, but the success of this particular solution caused a shift to protective and prohibitive policy. Russians wanted an independence from import, at the same time developing production, output of resources and agriculture used for the industry in the Russian Empire. After the change of the economical doctrine in 1877, the Kingdom of Poland’s market became attractive to the foreign capital investments. The investments, however, took place only in those sectors of economy which were included in the Russian government’s protective policy. The instruments of protective policy, such as customs and differential tariffs caused an increase of investments in many branches, contributing to theirs development. The development in the chemical industry, heavy industry and even in some of the branches of agriculture was especially dynamic. The protective policy was more favourable to the heavy industry in southern Russia than to the great ironworks in Kingdom of Poland. This, however, was related to the fact that iron ore layers in Krivoy Rog were common and had significant quantity of iron while layers in Częstochowskie were too small to suffice even for the needs of the ironworks of Sosnowiec – Częstochowa industrial district, whereas Świetokrzyskie layers had too low content of iron and contained many impurities. Additionally, Russia did not develop heavy industry in the Ural Basin, either. Without the protective policy, however, the rapid development of the heavy industry branches (metallurgy, mining and metal machine industry) would have been impossible in the Kingdom of Poland. The extension of protective policy into the cotton industry resulted in imposing of high tariffs on cotton from the southern states of USA and Egypt. The enterprises from Kingdom of Poland were forced to buy cotton from central Asia and Transcaucasus. It increased the costs of textile industry; the export to the peripheral markets of Russian Empire, however, would not have been possible in that scale without the tariffs and the development of the textile branch in Kingdom of Poland might not have been as significant as it was. In general, Russian custom policy had positive influence on affluence of investments of foreign capital into many branches of Kingdom of Poland’s industry, contributing to its dynamic upgrowth.

3

Inicjatywy ziemian i przemysłowców ziemiańskich w wybranych sektorach gospodarki Królestwa Polskiego w drugiej połowie XIX i na początku XX w.

100%

Kowalczyk R. W., Łódzki U.

Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

|

2010

|

vol. 07

EN

Landowners were mostly actively engaged in the agricultural and food industries related to modernization of their estates and for which they participated in all aspects of this industry. They were involved, however, in the only manufacturing industrial branch of the agricultural and food industry – i.e. sugar-making. However, their factories were of a mainly agricultural character and of rather small size. These included: distilleries, dairies, potato dryers etc. Landowners occupied themselves only in new businesses related to agricultural production. They did not want to invest in companies connected with the production of products such as candies, chocolate, cakes or pasta that were found mainly in towns and industrial areas. Landowners also got engaged in businesses not connected with farming. Investment of landowners’ capital was considerable in the mineral industry. In most cases these were brickyards which did not demand considerable investments and were located within their estates. Landowners were also involved in coal mining. These investments were rather temporary in nature as they were capital-consuming, risky and demanded long term expenditures. Landowners also invested in iron-ore mining, mainly in the Świętokrzyski Industrial District. This business was not very capital-consuming with extruded iron-ore being sold off to local steelworks. In 1897, out of 79.63% of mined iron-ore, 32.69% belonged to landowners. In 1913 it was only 7.83% out of 35.93% of mined iron-ore. Landowners who became industrialists were very rare. They included for example: Juliusz Tarnowski, the owner of Końskie Wielkie Factory and Stanisław Ciechanowski, the owner of many lands, mines (“Maria”, “Barbara”, “Walerya”, “Władyslaw”, “Grodziec”), cement works (“Grodziec” located in Grodziec near Będzin). These two people were connected to German investment Joint-stock Company Puszkin Steel-works and Milowizer Eisenwerk A.G., affiliate of upper Silesian Friedenwshütte, one of the part of concern Oberschlesische Eisenbahn-Bedarfs A.G. (Oberbedarf). Landowners were also often engaged in many initiatives aiming at development of the region. They initiated different kinds of projects concerning such areas as building railways (both narrow-gauged and broad-gauged) mainly in agricultural regions such as Kujawy, Lubelszczyzna, areas north of Warsaw (gubernia płocka) and many others. As a result landowners were engaged in many sectors of the economy and not only in industry. They did not invest much capital and the capital they withdrew was spent on the modernization of their farms, estates.

4

„Polityka solna” Rzeczpospolitej szlacheckiej u progu rozbiorów

100%

Kowalczyk R. W., Uniwersytet Łódzki W. F.-H.

Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

|

2012

|

vol. 10

EN

Article relates to question of “salt policy” of The Republic of Noble; attempt to reform of the system; the government and the ruler want of increasing budget income. Attempted reforms have been analyzed and reasons for their failure highlighted. Weakness of Republic and its lasting in the shackles of feudal prerogatives did not permit such success of “salt policy”, as in neighboring countries of central-east Europe: Russia, Prussia and Austria. Due to this reason “Polish” salt was eliminated from the foreign markets while the king resigned from expansion on home market – Prussian territory and Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The Noble Republic for several hundred years could not create a significant instrument of income from “salt policy”; Austria – country of strong central structures, which in 1772 took over “Polish” salt mines – both Krakows and Russians – achieved this goal in several months.

5

Polityka fiskalna i gospodarcza Józefa II

100%

Kowalczyk R. W.

Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

|

2011

|

vol. 09

FR

Succédant à Marie-Thérèse, au gouvernement indépendant d’Autriche, Joseph II a décidé de réformer l’état des Habsbourg et d’en faire une région économique intégrée et homogène. Il a commencé la réforme des finances publiques équilibrant le budget par des emprunts à l’étranger et l’impression du papier-monnaie. La réforme a commencé à porter ses fruits mais a été interrompue par la guerre contre la Turquie. Au début du règne de Joseph II, l’Empire d’Autriche a été divisé en quatre régions économiques : Tyrol et du Vorarlberg, Galicie, puis le territoire douanier de 1775 (Basse et HauteAutriche, la Bohême, la Moravie, la Silésie, la Styrie, la Carinthie, la Slovaquie) et la Hongrie. Joseph II a essayé de les unir en encourageant le transfert de technologie (connaissances), la colonisation, la production nationale. Il a initié la modernisation de l’agriculture. Cependant, la résistance de la noblesse principalement hongroise et polonaise, a a limité ces solutions aux seuls domaines royaux. Joseph II n’a pas décidé de supprimer les corporations. En conséquence, la Bohême et la Basse et Haute-Autriche étaient les régions les plus industrialisées. Il y avait là-bas et dans les autres pays de l’Empire d’Autriche des centres commerciaux et de l’industrie textile qui étaient d’un niveau comparable à celui de la France et la Prusse. Le retrait des réformes de Joseph II a conduit à l’effondrement financier et économique qui a freiné le développement de l’Autriche pour quelques années. Ce n’est que dans les années 1820 que l’Autriche a commencé à sortir de la stagnation.

Refine search results

5 Studia z Historii Społeczno-Gospodarczej XIX i XX Wieku

5 Kowalczyk R. W.

1 Uniwersytet Łódzki W. F.-H.

1 Łódzki U.

1 2012

1 2011

1 2010

2 2009

Andrew Uffindell, „Wielcy generałowie wojen napoleońskich oraz ich bitwy 1805–1815”, Wydawnictwo Rebis, Poznań 2007, ss. 394

Wpływ rosyjskiej polityki protekcyjnej na sytuację gospodarczą Królestwa Polskiego w latach 1877–1914

Inicjatywy ziemian i przemysłowców ziemiańskich w wybranych sektorach gospodarki Królestwa Polskiego w drugiej połowie XIX i na początku XX w.

„Polityka solna” Rzeczpospolitej szlacheckiej u progu rozbiorów

Polityka fiskalna i gospodarcza Józefa II