LAW AND ORDER
In every nation which aspires to be regarded as civilised the
supremacy of the law and the maintenance of order are matters of
supreme importance. The most perfect code of law ever devised is quite
evidently of no importance unless adequate means exist for enforcing
its provisions, and although justice may be lauded as a most admirable
object of attainment, yet, unless the courts of the country are
independent, hold the scales evenly and use the sword with
impartiality, justice will remain merely a sentiment, and there will
be no practical exemplification of it. I have considered in this book
as tersely as possible most of the factors of civilisation in Japan.
Let me briefly deal with this matter of law and order.
When the Revolution was effected in 1868 the whole legal procedure of
the country was thrown more or less into a condition of
disorganisation. Prior to 1868, as my readers will have seen, feudal
principles prevailed in Japan. The feudal lords, or Daimios,
administered justice, or what passed for it, within their own
territories, and they were answerable to the central authority. In
theory the feudal lords were commissioners of the ruling sovereign
from whom they derived their authority; in practice they were very
largely a law unto themselves, and their subjects had little or no
practical chance of redress in the event of their suffering any
injustice. It is very difficult to ascertain whether there was in
reality a legal code of any kind in existence and under the ken of
these feudal lords. The legal system then in vogue appears to have
been based for the most part on custom and usage. A writer on the
subject has remarked that the few written laws were of a thoroughly
practical character. Unfortunately I have not had an opportunity of
acquainting myself with the nature of these laws. They were probably,
like everything else in the country, imported from China, and indeed
the Chinese legal system has been supreme in Japan until recently, and
even now I am not quite certain that much of its influence does not
remain. I have read that the fundamental principle underlying the
written laws referred to was that: "The people should obey the law,
but should not know the law." The code was accordingly a secret one. I
have not space, nor indeed have I any inclination, to deal with what
is, after all, an academical question as to the law prevalent in Japan
prior to the Revolution. It was probably for the most part, just as in
other countries when feudalism existed, a kind of rough-and-ready
justice, which perhaps served its purpose well at the time, and
depended more as regards the matter of justice upon the administrator
of it than upon the code itself. Though the Revolution took place in
1868, it was not until 1871 that the Daimios were deprived of all
their administrative authority. The whole of the country was then
divided into districts under the control of the central Government,
and all relics of feudalism and class privileges, which had been
numerous, were ruthlessly swept away. In due course a civil code,
commercial code, code of civil procedure, and code of criminal
procedure were issued. One or two of these codes were found not to
work well in practice, and they have been submitted to and revised by
committees specially appointed for that purpose.
As I stated in the chapter on the Constitution the independence of the
judges is recognised and provided for. The legal system of Japan at
the present time is eclectic. As I have said, the Chinese system of
legal procedure long obtained, and its influences may perhaps to some
extent still remain. Nevertheless Japan has gone to various countries
and selected what she deemed good in each for her present legal
system. The jurisprudence of both France and England have been largely
drawn on. In reference to the civil law custom is, as might have been
expected in view of the circumstances of the country, still strongly
relied on. There has often been a difficulty in ascertaining custom
owing to the changed and changing conditions of the nation, and in
reference thereto very much the same procedure has followed as in this
country where the question of custom is so frequently pleaded in the
courts of law. Some of the German system of jurisprudence has also
been included in the Japanese legal system. As I have elsewhere
observed, the suggestion to abolish extra-territoriality, and with it
the foreign courts in Japan, met with a considerable amount of
opposition from the foreign community there who believed that they
would not be able to obtain justice in the Japanese courts. These
fears have been shown to be groundless, and it is now generally
recognised that the foreigner in Japan need have no fear of going into
a Japanese court where he is, whether it be a civil or criminal
matter, certain to obtain a perfectly fair trial.
Closely connected with law is the matter of police. In Japan the
police of the country are entirely under the control of the State,
just as are the constabulary in Ireland. The police are under the
orders of the Minister of the Interior, who has a special office for
dealing with the matter. The cost of the force is, however, paid by
each prefecture, the State granting a small subsidy. According to the
latest statistics, the police force of Japan amounted to something
under 35,000 officers and men. When we consider that this body of men
is responsible for the enforcement of the law and the preservation of
order among some 47,000,000 people, it will, I think, be admitted that
the number is not excessive. The social condition of the Japanese
police, if I may use such a term, is higher than that of the police in
this and other countries. In Japan the police force had its genesis
after the abolition of feudalism, and, as a matter of fact, a large
proportion of the first members thereof belonged to the Samurai class.
The social position and intellectual attainment of these young men
gave what I may term a standing to the police force in Japan which it
has not yet lost. Of course, nothing like the same class of men is now
attracted to it, the salaries are comparatively small and the work is
not over-congenial for people whose ideas are such as those of the
Japanese.
I may mention, as an interesting feature in this connection, that the
Government have established a police and prison college in Tokio,
where both police and prison officials are effectively trained for the
discharge of their duties. This college was established when
extra-territoriality was abolished, with the view of ensuring a higher
training in view of the additional responsibilities that would devolve
upon the police and prison officials.
From police I naturally come to some consideration of prisons. There
are a large number of people in this country who have the idea in
their mind that prisons are a weak point in all foreign countries, and
that it is only in England that these regrettable institutions are
properly managed. In fact the idea now seems to be prevalent here that
we have gone too far in the direction of making prisons comfortable,
and that excellent alliteration "Coddled Criminals" has more than once
done duty in print in this connection. I consider that the present
prison system in Japan is regulated and administered on sounder
principles than those that obtain in this country. There are in all
about 140 prisons in Japan. All the old prisons in the country were
constructed of wood and arranged on the associate system. A separate
cell system is, however, specially provided for foreign criminals, who
are given clothes, bedding, and other articles to which they are used.
The Government, a few years ago, commenced the construction of a
number of new prisons, for the most part built of brick, in which a
mixed system of separation and association, according to the offences
of the prisoners, will be employed. The windows of these prisons were
directed to be made especially large, so that the prisoners might have
plenty of light and air. This is a matter in which some foreign
Governments, that of this country included, might well take a lesson
from Japan.
It is pleasing to be able to state that since 1899 the inmates of the
prisons have been decreasing in number. There is nothing quite
analogous to the ticket-of-leave system in this country. Parole is
suggested by a prison governor to the Minister of Justice in reference
to any prisoner whom he may deem worthy of the privilege, provided
that prisoner has completed three-fourths of the sentence imposed
upon him and has shown a disposition to live more worthily. I do not
quite know how this latter fact is made plain in gaol, but at any rate
the prison governor has to be convinced of it. A prisoner thus
released remains under police supervision during the remainder of his
sentence.
In Japan the death penalty is not confined to murder. It may be
inflicted for robbery with violence, homicide, wounds inflicted by
children upon their fathers, mothers, and grand-parents, as well as
for arson. This sounds a somewhat drastic blood code, but when I state
that the average number of persons executed in Japan does not exceed
thirty a year, it will be seen that either the crimes mentioned are
infrequent or that the punishment of death is only inflicted in
extreme cases.
One interesting feature of the Japanese prison system is the granting
of medals to criminals who have shown an amendment of their lives by
good conduct and diligence at their work. The privileges enjoyed by
persons possessing these medals are so interesting that I will
transcribe them here:--
1. All medallists are supplied with superior kinds of garments and
other articles.
2. Each medallist is allowed to send out two letters per month.
3. Medallists enjoy the privilege of bathing prior to other prisoners,
hot water being used in accordance with the general custom of the
Japanese people.
4. The supply of accessories is increased in quantity every week for
medallists, according to the number of medals granted, to the extent
of an increased expense of two sen or less for one meal per person.
This increase is granted once a week to the possessor of two medals,
and three times a week for each possessor of three medals.
5. The allotment of earnings is made in the following proportion, the
remainder being applied to prison expenses:--
Three-tenths to each felon to whom one medal has been granted.
Four-tenths to each misdemeanant to whom one medal has been awarded.
Four-tenths to each felon having been granted two medals.
Five-tenths to each felon possessing three medals.
Six-tenths to each misdemeanant granted three medals.
There is no need for me to deal with the question of punishment of
criminals in Japanese prisons. I may, however, remark that in respect
of foreign criminals every effort is made to treat them in accordance
with their conditions of national life in regard to bathing, food, &c.
In reference to the question of prison labour, which has become
somewhat of a vexed economic problem in this country, the Japanese
authorities do not appear to experience much difficulty. The object of
the prison system of labour is to give the prisoners a careful
training, and to encourage diligence, so that on their return to the
world they may not experience difficulty in obtaining employment. The
labour is of two kinds--Government, and for private individuals. In
the latter case the necessary labour is obtained from the prisons
direct, the employers supplying the material. I think this part of the
system is perhaps open to question, as it has been found in other
countries productive of grave abuses.
The discharged prisoner in Japan, as in other countries, finds a
difficulty in obtaining employment, and several societies similar to
those in existence here have been established with a view of assisting
discharged prisoners. I have not sufficient information to enable me
to say what measure of success these societies have achieved. In a
country like Japan, which is endeavouring to perfect all her
institutions, I hope that the discharged prisoner problem will be
solved otherwise than by philanthropic societies. The criminal who has
completed his sentence ought to be deemed to have purged his offence,
and has a right to return to the community and obtain work until, if
ever, he again misconducts himself.
I hope my few remarks on the subject of the means taken in Japan to
maintain law and order will tend to convince my readers that in every
detail of her administration Japan has shown a capacity for adapting
what is good in foreign nations and moulding it for her own purposes.
The foreign community in Japan has long since got over its state of
panic in regard to the danger of suing and being sued in Japanese
courts, and the possibility of being an inmate of a Japanese gaol. The
years that have elapsed since the treaties were revised have
demonstrated clearly that, if anything, extra consideration is shown
to the foreigner in all the details of the administration of the law
in Japan. I remarked at the beginning of this chapter that the
supremacy of the law and the maintenance of order are matters of
supreme importance in every civilised country. Japan has recognised
this fact, and she has acted upon the recognition thereof with most
admirable results.