本文对近百年来“新政”的当事人与后世研究者关于“新政”中断原因的见解逐条予以分析，进而指出，腐朽的清朝统治者迟至２０世纪初年才推出“新政”，加重了改革的难度与风险。而政治改革即预备立宪的具体操作如何，就成了问题的关键。慈禧太后的后继者载沣等人不是尽力化解矛盾，而是激发矛盾，在较大程度上引发了反清革命高潮的到来。历史的结局往往由多种因素促成之，后世研究者大可不必为“新政”的中断而叹息，更不必指责辛亥志士的英勇行为。虽然改革者与革命者总是势同水火，但改革与革命的历史作用往往呈互补状态 This article analyzes the opinions of parties involved in the “New Deal” in the past century and later researchers on the causes of the “New Deal” interruption, and points out that the decadent Qing dynasty ruled out the “New Deal” as late as the twentieth century, aggravating the reform Difficulty and risk. The concrete operation of political reform, that is, the preparation of constitutionalism, has become the crux of the issue. The successor of the Empress Dowager Cixi, who did not try to resolve the contradictions, but to stimulate contradictions to a large extent, triggered the climax of the anti-Qing revolution. The outcome of history is usually driven by many factors. Later generations of researchers need not to sigh for the interruption of the “New Deal,” but need not accuse Xin Haizhi of heroic behavior. Although reformers and revolutionaries are always on the same boat, the historic role of reform and revolution is often complementary