EUROPEANS IN JAPAN
Like everything else in Japan, the status and position of the
foreigner have been materially changed, in fact revolutionised, of
recent years. When the country was, in the first instance, opened
after its long period of isolation from the rest of the world,
treaties were signed with Great Britain, the United States, France,
and nearly all the other European Powers, whereby Japan agreed to open
seven ports, subsequently known as "treaty ports," to foreign trade in
which ports foreigners were to be permitted to reside and to carry on
their business. Foreigners were at the same time--not by the wish of
the Japanese Government, but as the outcome of the pressure put upon
Japan by the various Powers--granted extra-territorial rights, that is
to say they were exempt from the jurisdiction of the Japanese courts
of law. This being the case foreign courts were constituted in Japan
with jurisdiction over the subjects of the nation which set up the
court. In these courts foreigners sued and were sued, and crimes
committed by and against foreigners were tried. As regards Great
Britain a Supreme Court for China and Japan was constituted whose
headquarters were at Shanghai. There were Consular Courts and a very
involved kind of legal procedure generally established, mostly by
Order in Council, which I need not consider in detail as it is now
effete. There was, moreover, as regards Great Britain at any rate, a
Bar practising in these courts, one member of which, Mr. F. V.
Dickins, is justly remembered not for his forensic but for his
literary efforts in the direction of depicting the inner life of the
Japanese people. Into these foreign courts all the jargon, the quips
and quibbles of English law were imported. These courts were, not
unnaturally, an eyesore to the Japanese people. I may observe in
passing that these extra-territorial courts still exist in China, and
though the Supreme Court of China and Japan has been shorn of that
part of its title which refers to Japan it remains, and is likely for
some time longer to remain, the supreme legal tribunal of the English
residents in the Chinese Empire. But besides extra-territorial courts
there were extra-territorial post-offices. The English, the American,
and, I think, the French Governments had post-offices in Japan which
transacted postal duties of all kinds just as if they had been in
London, New York, and Paris instead of in a foreign country. There may
have been some excuse for this in the early days; but these foreign
post-offices remained until quite recently, depriving Japan of a
portion of her revenue at a time when she had developed a magnificent
postal service of her own. Over and above foreign courts and
post-offices there were actually foreign municipal bodies. A certain
amount of ground at the treaty ports was constituted a foreign
settlement wherein the foreigners resided. Within these settlements a
municipal council was formed, which regulated everything therein. In
these settlements the Japanese Government had no more power or
authority than they had in Battersea. These settlements were in
effect foreign territory on the Japanese soil, to use what seems to be
a paradox.
In exchange for the privilege of extra-territoriality granted to
foreign residents in Japan, they were placed under restrictions. These
included not being able to travel in the country outside a radius of 25
miles from the treaty ports unless provided with passports, which, I
may remark, there was never any difficulty in obtaining, and not being
permitted to live beyond the same radius. Foreigners engaged in trade
in Japan had a great advantage in regard to a very low scale of customs
duties, not more than 5 per cent. _ad valorem_, but they were strictly
prohibited from owning land. This system of extra-territoriality was
extremely unpopular with the whole of the Japanese people, and a
constant movement was in force in the country for the abrogation of
what the Japanese considered an invidious distinction and in the
direction of making every person who voluntarily took up residence in
Japan answerable to the law of the land and under the jurisdiction of
the Japanese courts. The revenue of the country was also, of course,
injuriously effected by the post-office privileges already referred to
as well as by the differential treatment of foreigners in regard to
import duties. As was to be expected, any proposal for the abolition of
extra-territorial rights and the revision of the regulations in regard
to import duties met with a strenuous opposition from the foreign
residents in Japan. On the other hand, it must be confessed that the
Japanese people opposed any compromise in the direction of granting
foreigners facilities in return for the privileges that were asked to
be waived. The proposal to allow foreigners to own land was vigorously
inveighed against. So was a suggestion to establish mixed courts--the
kind of compromise, by the way, which would probably have equally
irritated foreigners and natives. It is, I think, satisfactory to be
able to relate that in the end and after many years of agitation it was
the British Government which took the initiative in the matter, and
some ten or twelve years ago concluded a treaty with Japan wherein the
privileges of English courts, European municipalities, and differential
import duties were abandoned, while in return proprietary rights,
except in regard to land, were granted to foreigners.
There are, mayhap, some persons at the present day who are not aware
of the fact that for a good many years after Japan was to a limited
extent opened to foreigners several of the Powers retained an armed
force in that country for the protection of foreign residents. Great
Britain, for instance, had a large number of marines at Yokohama. The
presence of these troops was extremely unpalatable to the Japanese
authorities, but of course pleasing to the foreign residents, who
opposed their withdrawal just as they opposed the abrogation of
extra-territoriality. I am afraid the reason for the removal of this
armed force as far as Great Britain was concerned was economic rather
than founded on any particular principle. Be that as it may, in 1873
Japan was successful in assuring the British Government that she was
able and prepared to protect all foreigners residing in the country,
and in that year the last foreign soldier was withdrawn from Japanese
territory.
Those who remember the agitation--and a very fierce and noisy and
provocative agitation it was--in opposition to the revision of Japan's
treaties with the foreign Powers with a view of getting rid of
extra-territoriality will have a lively recollection of the
pessimistic forebodings of the speakers and writers in reference to
the future of the foreign community in that country were the exclusive
privileges they then enjoyed taken away from them. The gentlemen who
uttered these sentiments were no doubt sincerely convinced of their
truth, but I am glad to be able to relate that time has shown them to
have been false prophets. There may be, and no doubt are, foreigners
in Japan who bemoan the good old days, but I am confident that the
great mass of the foreign community now recognises the fact that the
revision of the treaties and the withdrawal of extra-territorial
privileges were inevitable and that no evil results have ensued in
consequence. The Japanese courts of law have neither terrorised nor
oppressed foreigners. They have, on the contrary, sought to hold the
scales of justice evenly, and I believe that these courts now enjoy,
as I am sure they deserve, the fullest confidence in their integrity
and justice of every foreigner residing in the country.
I have noticed a tendency on the part of writers on Japan to refer to
the foreign community in that Empire as if it were a community bound
together by some particular principle and working in unison for some
definite object. Of course such a view is nonsensical. The foreign
community in Japan, in which for the purpose of my remarks I do not
include the Chinese, is one composed of a large number of
nationalities which have very little in common, and amongst whom a
good deal of rivalry prevails. It may have been that when the question
of revising the treaties was being keenly agitated, self-interest, or
what was deemed to be self-interest, occasioned a sort of fictitious
unity among foreigners, but at the present time, so far as my
observation has gone, there is very little real unity among the
foreigners in Japan. The English, of course, predominate in numbers,
and they have also the major portion of the trade in their hands.
Whether such a condition of things will much longer obtain is a moot
question. I am of opinion, as I have elsewhere indicated, that the
trade of Japan will very largely pass into the hands of the Japanese
themselves, and that the foreign element in Japan is accordingly not
only unlikely to increase in number but is almost certain to diminish.
In the early days when Japan was first opened to the Western world and
English traders went there to push their commodities, we heard a good
deal about the peculiar ethics of Japanese commercial morality. The
European merchant either was, or affected to be, shocked at the loose
commercial code of honour of those with whom he was brought into
contact in Japan, and he expressed himself accordingly. However much
or little ground there may have been for these accusations many years
ago I am not in a position to judge. In forming any opinion in this
matter, if that opinion is to be correct, it is, I think, essential to
remember the conditions of society in Japan when it was first opened
to European trade. In old Japan there were four recognised classes of
society--the Samurai, the farmers, the artisans, and the merchants.
The last two were somewhat looked down upon by the others. It is,
accordingly, hardly to be wondered at that the condition of industry
and commerce was the least satisfactory feature in the initial stages
of national development. Despised alike by the gentry and the
peasantry, the traders were in a somewhat sorry plight when Japan was
thrown open. The low social status of the trading class in Japan was
due to the feudal ideas which prevailed for so many centuries. The
people were impressed with the productive power of the soil, and
jumped at the conclusion that the merchant class must necessarily be
immoral, since it purchased the produce of the soil at a low price and
sold it at a profit. Very similar ideas have prevailed in countries
other than Japan. It is not so very many years ago that in England a
man of good family, much less a member of the aristocracy, going into
trade was looked upon with no very favourable eyes. We know that the
ideas that not so very many years ago obtained in this country in
reference to this matter have entirely altered. Trade is now
considered to furnish most excellent scope and opportunities for the
energy and capital of all classes of the community. And the same ideas
have been working in Japan. The merchant there is no longer a member
of a despised class. The scions of the most ancient families in Japan,
as in England, have embarked in trade and brought to their business
those high ideals which they have derived from their ancestors. The
criticisms of commercial morality in Japan which were so prevalent not
very many years ago are now entirely obsolete. I fear, however, that
the effect of them still to some extent remains, and that there are a
large number of people in this country who even now believe that the
Japanese, from a commercial point of view, are what is termed
"tricky." I hope my remarks on this head may serve to disabuse the
minds of some of those persons who still entertain these extremely
erroneous ideas.
I do not think that there is a very large amount of social intercourse
between the Europeans in Japan and the Japanese themselves. The
European in the East, or at any rate the Englishman in the East, so
far as I have been able to judge, always appears to me to assume an
air--it may be an unconscious air--of superiority to the inhabitants
of the country in which he resides. That this is frequently extremely
galling to them there can be no question. Any one who has conversed
with the intelligent native of India must be aware of that fact.
Whether the greatness of the Anglo-Saxon race be in some degree or in
a large measure due to the belief that the Anglo-Saxon has in himself
is a question I need not consider. But I think there can be no doubt
of the fact that this sense of superiority, however much or little
justification there may be for it, is a characteristic not likely to
be appreciated by foreigners, and especially Orientals, and I think I
am justified in remarking that the Japanese do not at all appreciate
it.
The European may impress the Oriental in one of several ways; he has
for the most part done so by his great military or naval prowess. That
is the way in which Great Britain has impressed the natives of India.
The English are in that country as a conquering race. They have
practically never been defeated, and the respect which they have
obtained is the respect that the weak have for the strong. In Japan
such a state of things is no longer possible. The results of the
Russian War have rendered it impossible for all time. An Oriental
nation has met a European Power on the field and on the high seas, and
soundly thrashed it. There is, however, another way in which the
European might impress the Oriental. The former professes to have a
purer religion and a higher code of morals. He has sought to impose
his religion upon every race with which he has been brought into
contact, and if he has not sought to impose his moral system, he has,
at any rate, severely criticised that of the people with whom he has
been brought into contact, and compared it with his own to their
disadvantage. In Japan, where there is a large foreign community, the
thinking, logical Japanese has had abundant opportunities for studying
not only the principles of Western religions and Western morality, but
also the practice of them by Western residents in his own land.
The result has been to give him much food for reflection. He reads the
criticisms of Europe upon the Yoshiwara and the Japanese attitude
generally towards prostitution, while he has ample evidence of the
fact that many of the patrons of the Yoshiwara are to be found among
the European community in Japan. And so of religion. The various
Christian denominations of the Western world aspire to convert Japan,
and send missionaries there for that purpose. The Japanese gives them
a fair field, and he has shown no aversion to investigate their
dogmas. At the same time he sees that a large proportion, I might
perhaps say the majority, of the European residents in Japan do not
trouble to attend the Christian places of worship, while many of them
make no disguise of their contempt for Christianity in general and the
missionaries in particular. What conclusion, may I ask, can the
logical, reasoning Japanese come to in these matters?
There can be no doubt whatever that the foreign residents in Japan
have accomplished a great work in regard to the development of the
country. The settlements established by them at the various treaty
ports and the administration of those settlements as municipalities
reflected great credit upon all those concerned, and was a splendid
object-lesson for the Japanese people. Great Britain, too, may, I
think, be congratulated on the men she has selected to represent her
at the Japanese Court. There is no man to whom both Great Britain and
Japan are more indebted than the late Sir Harry Parkes. I cannot
remember during how many years he was the British Minister at Tokio,
but during the whole of his term of office he used his best endeavours
in the direction of showing Japan the way she ought to go in the path
of progress, and in rendering her all the assistance possible in that
direction by procuring for her the very best assistance of every
description. I strongly advise every person interested in Japan and
its development to peruse the Life of Sir Harry Parkes, by Mr. F. V.
Dickins and Mr. Stanley L. Poole. One interesting feature in Sir Harry
Parkes's career I may record here, as I have had it on the authority
of a gentleman conversant with the facts. Sir Harry was always a
_persona gratissima_ with the Japanese Government, and about the year
1877 he and the late Admiral Sir A. P. Ryder, then Commander-in-Chief
on the China station, had a conversation respecting, in view of the
aggressive policy of Russia in the Far East, obtaining a British
coaling station much further north than Hong Kong. Admiral Ryder
mentioned as an appropriate place the island of Tsu-shima, so famous
in the recent war with Russia. Sir Harry Parkes promised to use his
good offices with the Japanese Government to obtain permission to
occupy this island with a view of its ultimate cession to Great
Britain. The permission was duly obtained, and Admiral Ryder thereupon
cabled home to the Admiralty for the necessary permission to take over
the island. His request was promptly vetoed, and Great Britain,
accordingly, lost for ever the opportunity of obtaining an admirable
coaling station and a splendid strategical position in the Far East.
It is quite certain that Japan does not now regret the refusal of
Great Britain to accept her too generous offer.
Europeans have been in Japan, and very much in evidence, during the
past half-century or so, but I do not think that the residents in the
country have exercised much influence upon Japan. During that period
there have been enormous changes; the whole life of the nation has, in
fact, been revolutionised. But these changes have not been wrought, or
indeed greatly affected, by the European residents in the country. The
changes have emanated from Europe and America--not that portion of
Europe and America which went to Japan for its own objects. I make, of
course, a particular exception in regard to those naval and military
and scientific men to whose exertions Japan owes so much of her
advancement. But I do say of the ordinary trader or merchant that he
has come to Japan, and left it without producing much effect, if any,
on the development of the nation, or leaving behind him any influences
of a useful nature.
The European in Japan necessarily suggests some allusion to that large
and annually increasing number of persons who visit the country. Their
residence in Japan is usually of very limited duration, but, however
short it may be, it is apparently quite long enough to enable them to
form pronounced views upon many and varied matters connected with the
country and the people. I have no hesitation in asserting that the
erroneous opinions so prevalent in Europe in regard to Japan and the
Japanese people are largely the outcome of the far too numerous books
that have been written and published in reference to that country of
recent years. "Ten Days in Japan" may be an alluring title for a book
of travel, but quite evidently ten days are not sufficient to form an
opinion and promulgate it upon every phase of Japanese life, nor for
the solution of many vexed problems. And yet, so far as my perusal of
these books has gone, the shorter the period a man or woman has spent
in Japan the more pronounced his or her views in regard to the
country. The matter is hardly worth referring to were it not that
these opinions, hastily arrived at and apparently as hurriedly rushed
into print, have been accepted by some people as incontrovertible
facts. Another class of work that I think a reader should be warned
against is the book of the man who has lived in Japan for a time and
seen life only from a certain standpoint. The book of a bishop or a
missionary may be and often is of undoubted value in reference to his
work and matters connected with his work, but when the writer gets
outside this particular province and deals with subjects his knowledge
of which must be at the best second-hand he is almost certain to
perpetrate some flagrant mistakes, and occasionally indite the most
egregious nonsense. I shall not particularly apply these remarks, but
I think it necessary to utter this word of warning as the literary
effusions of some very estimable men and women in regard to Japan have
given occasion for many false misconceptions being entertained in
regard to that country.
[Illustration: A MINISTERING ANGEL
FROM A PRINT BY TOSHIKATA]
The cry of "Japan for the Japanese" has undoubtedly been heard in that
land, and during the agitation over the revision of the treaties the
foreign community appeared to be under the impression that the policy
emphasised in that cry was the one which Japan desired to attain. For
myself I do not believe it. I am positive that Japan to-day has no
desire to exclude foreigners, or to revert into her old position of
isolation. I believe, on the contrary, that she desires to welcome
foreigners and to give them every facility within proper limits for
pursuing their enterprises. At the same time she has no desire for the
foreign adventurer, prospector, or embryo company promoter. She
does not wish, in fact, that Japan shall be exploited either in
respect of minerals or any other purpose with the object of directly
or indirectly pouring wealth into London or any other city. The
enterprising gentlemen from England and other countries who have
sought to obtain concessions of various kinds in Japan have failed in
their object. Their efforts would probably only have brought discredit
on the country, and could hardly by any possibility have aided in its
material advancement. There is only one word of advice that I should
feel inclined to proffer the European in Japan, and that is to refrain
less from exercising his caustic wit at the expense of the Japanese
people. A nation which has passed through such drastic changes as have
characterised Japan in the last two or three decades can no doubt
furnish abundant opportunities for the jibes of the flippant, and the
humour of those who consider they are endowed with a pretty wit. But
the exercise of sardonic humour and an excessive sarcasm tends to
promote ill-feeling and serves no useful purpose. The right spirit, in
my opinion, for any man to regard Japan is as a nation struggling to
obtain and assimilate all that is best in the world and aspiring to be
in fact an eclectic power. It can at least be said of Japan that it is
the only nation in the world's history which has entertained such
aspirations and has sought to give effect to them.