竹林事件的餘續－戰後竹林地的接收與處理

臺灣史的研究通常以政權斷代來劃分，因此臺灣歷史常因為不同的統治者而遭撕裂，讓我們無法看清臺灣歷史的延續性格。但政權雖然不同，生活在臺灣這塊土地上的人民卻是一樣，而且在政權變革的時候，傳統的生活方式或是以往政權施諸他們身上的統治方式，政權儘管已經改變，仍會影響他們，甚至支配他們的活動方式，而形成有延續性格的臺灣人的歷史。因此，要瞭解臺灣歷史發展的延續性，跨越政權的研究是相當必要的。「竹林事件」是日治時期臺灣人反抗日本殖民統治者的表現，可說是日本殖民者利用國家強權剝奪臺灣人權利的最佳寫照。但學者研究斷限著重於日治時期的掠奪，清楚地告訴我們在日本帝國統治之下，臺灣人的生命財產毫無保障。但是對於日本政府如何經營這塊土地，這塊土地上人民的生活方式有沒有影響到日本政府的經營，並未提及；又對於戰後國民政府來臺接收，竹林地如何解決等問題也未著墨。本文以日治時期的竹林事件為中心，將時間拉到戰後初期。戰後臺灣新的統治者－國民政府的代理人臺灣省行政長官公署面對竹農要求取回土地業主權之請求，因經過四十多年，難以釐清產權問題，所以決定將竹林地收歸國有，敦促緣故者成立竹山林業合作社來承租土地而獲得解決。但是日本統治下，數十年的經營型式，使瑞竹與頂林地區形成完全不同的經營方式，無法共同在竹山林業合作社下共存。因此，很快地依照日治時期留下的劃分基礎，分成頂林與瑞竹兩個合作社。雖然依據不同的經營型式分成兩個合作社，而日治時期對瑞竹地區採取共營共生的經營，仍然影響瑞竹合作社對社員的認定，產生出已遷出瑞竹林業區域的緣故人和未遷出的人長期的爭執。最後經過協調，已遷出的緣故者雖獲得入會，但卻只能獲得二分之一的權利。這也是日治時期對於不在區域的緣故人的利益認定。即戰後國民政府對竹林地的處置，基本上是延續日治時期的方式。所以以政權為斷限來研究臺灣史，將無法看出臺灣歷史發展的延續性格，歷史將會隨政權而變遷，臺灣人的主體歷史將無法呈現，因此，跨越政權的研究是相當必要的。

關鍵字

竹林事件；日治時期；戰後初期；瑞竹地區；頂林地區

並列摘要

The study of history in Taiwan is usually divided by specific periods, which explains why the Taiwanese history is arbitrarily torn apart by different rulers and why no continuity of the Taiwanese history can be manifested. But the fact is: in spite of different political powers, the residents in this island remain unchanged. What is more, the traditional life styles or the approaches they have received from the past rules, though the regime has changed, still have great effects on them and even dominate their manners of performing activities, thus forming a unique Taiwanese history with continuity in characters. Therefore, it is quite necessary to do a cross-dynasty research for a better understanding of the historical continuity in Taiwan. The ”Bamboo Hill Incident” is a reflection of anti-Japanese campaign done by Taiwanese people under the Japanese colonialism. It is also a good reflection of the Japanese imperialism, which takes advantage of the strong national power, robbing Taiwanese people of basic human rights. Unfortunately, the past researches focus too much on the part of robbing, revealing how Taiwanese people under the Japanese imperialism lose capability to secure their life and possessions. They do not mention how the Japanese government managed the island and whether the specific life style of the people on the land affected the Japanese government's strategy on how to manage the land. Neither do they mention how the National Government coming to Taiwan after the war dealt with the issue of bamboo hills. This paper centers on the bamboo hill incident during the Japanese ruled Taiwan, extending the discussion to the beginning moments after the war. The new ruler of Taiwan after the war-the Taiwanese Administrative Office, agent of the National Government-has to face the bamboo farmers' request that they take back the possession of the bamboo hills, a long-term problem yet to be resolved for 40 years. The final decision is: the bamboo hills are delivered to the authority of the nation, asking the pleaders to form Zhusan Forestry Cooperation (竹山林業合作社) and to rent the land from the government. Deeply affected by the Japanese management for decades, however, Ruizhu (瑞竹) and Dinglin (頂林), which develop a totally different managerial style, can never coexist peacefully under Zhusan Forestry Cooperation. So, based on the division set up in the Japanese-ruled period, two cooperation units are established: Dinglin and Ruizhu. Though the cooperation units are given independent control, the managerial Co-Run-Co-Own approach adopted in the Japanese-ruled period still affects the criteria of judging membership, leading to a long-term controversy between the people in question who move out of Ruizhu and those who stay. After negotiation, the people in question who move out are granted with the right to be a member, only to be entitled with 50% rights a usual member does which is also the rule that was applied to the people in question in different districts. The way the National Government dealt with bamboo hills after the war was basically the same as the one adopted in the Japanese-ruled period. That is, it is impossible to view the continuity in characters of Taiwan if the research is restricted to a specific dynasty. As history changes with who reigns, the physical history of Taiwan will vanish. Therefore, we simply cannot do without the help of the cross-dynasty research on history.