A history of the Japanese people

by F. Brinkley; Dairoku Kikuchi

The great clans which took part in bringing about this restoration of the administrative power to the Emperor did not altogether trust one another. Hitherto, all political commotions had been planned for the sake of some prominent family or eminent leader, and had resulted merely in altering the personnel of those occupying the seats of power. It was not unnatural that history should have been expected to repeat itself in 1867, especially since the clan mainly responsible, Satsuma, overshadowed all its associates with one exception. Therefore, to many onlookers it seemed that the Tokugawa Government had been overthrown to make room for the all-powerful southern feudatory. In order to provide a safeguard against such a danger, the young Emperor was asked to make oath that a broadly based deliberative assembly should be convened for the purpose of conducting State affairs in conformity with public opinion. This "coronation oath," as it was subsequently called, came to occupy an important place in political appreciation, and to be interpreted as a promise of a national assembly. But most assuredly it was not originally intended to carry any such meaning. Its framers never contemplated a parliament in the Occidental sense of the term. Their sole object was to place a barrier in the path of their own selfish ambitions.

ABOLITION OF FEUDALISM

It is more than doubtful whether the abolition of the feudal system found a place in the original plan of the leaders of progress. Looking back to remote centuries, they may well have imagined that the unification of the empire under one supreme ruler, administering as well as governing, was not incompatible with the existence of the fiefs. But when they examined the problem more closely, they recognized that a universally operative system of laws, a central treasury, and the supreme command of the nation's armaments were essential to the end they had in view, namely, strength derived from unity. Hitherto, each feudatory had assessed and collected taxes within his fief according to his own free-will, had exercised the right of legislation, and had held the command of all troops within his territories.

The continuance of such conditions would have defeated the purpose of the reformers. This they recognized. But how were these prescriptive privileges to be abolished? An Imperial mandate might indeed have been issued, but even an Imperial mandate without the means of enforcing it would probably have proved futile. In fact, compulsion in any form could not be employed: the only resource was persuasion. The feudatories of Satsuma, Choshu, Tosa, and Hizen were the four most puissant in the empire. They were persuaded to surrender their fiefs to the Throne and to ask for reorganization under a uniform system of law. This example found many imitators. Out of the whole 276 feudatories only seventeen failed to make a similar surrender. It was a wonderful display of patriotic altruism in the case of some, at any rate, of the daimyo. But, at the same time, many undoubtedly obeyed the suggestions of their chief vassals without fully appreciating the cost of obedience. It had long been their habit to abandon the management of their affairs to seneschals (karo), and they followed the custom on this occasion without profound reflection.

With the samurai at large, however, the case was different. For them, the preservation of the fief had always been the prime object of interest and fealty. To uphold it concerned their honour; to preserve it, their means of livelihood. Nothing could have been more remarkable than that these men should have quietly acquiesced in the surrender of legislative and financial autonomy by their chiefs. The most credible explanation is that on this great occasion the samurai obeyed their habitual custom of associating some form of self-immolation with every signal deed.

THE NEW ORGANIZATION

The total abolition of feudalism may be said to have now come in sight, but the leading progressists adopted all precautions to consummate their programme without disturbance. They resolved to preserve, at the outset, the semblance of the old system, and to that end the ex-feudatories were nominated to the post of governor in the districts where they had formerly exercised autonomic power. The samurai, however, were left in possession of their incomes and official positions. It was enacted that each governor should receive yearly one-tenth of the revenue of his former fief; that the emoluments of the samurai should be taken in full from the same source, and that the surplus, if any, should go to the Central Government.

The latter was organized with seven departments, namely, Religion, Home Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Army and Navy, Finance, Justice, and Law. This Cabinet was presided over by a premier—necessarily an Imperial prince—and by a vice-premier. Moreover, it was assisted by a body of eighteen councillors, who comprised the leaders of reform. Evidently, however, all this was only partial. It is true that the fiefs (hari) had been converted into prefectures (ken), and it is also true that the daimyo had become mere governors. But, on the other hand, the local revenues continued to pass through the hands of the governors, and in the same hands remained the control of the samurai and the right of appointing and dismissing prefectural officials. A substantial beginning had been made, however, and presently another appeal being addressed to the ex-daimyo, they were induced to petition for the surrender of their local autonomy. The same plan was pursued in the case of the samurai. It was essential that these should cease to be hereditary soldiers and officials and should be reabsorbed into the mass of the people from whom they had sprung originally. Following the course which had proved so successful with the feudatories, a number of samurai were induced to memorialize for permission to lay aside their swords and revert to agriculture. But neither in the case of the feudatories nor in that of the samurai were these self-sacrificing petitions carried into immediate practice. They merely served as models.

CLAN REPRESENTATION

It may well be supposed that the ambitions of the great clans by which this revolution has been effected proved somewhat difficult to reconcile. The Satsuma feudatory was the first to take umbrage. He contended that, in selecting the high officials of the new organization, sufficient account had not been taken of the services of his fief. With considerable difficulty he was satisfied by his own appointment to an office second only to that of prime minister. This incident led, however, to an agreement under which each of the great clans, Satsuma, Choshu, Hizen, and Tosa, should be equally represented in the Government. Thus, the "principle of clan-representation received practical recognition in the organization of the Government. It continued to be recognized for many years, and ultimately became the chief target of attack by party-politicians." It was further arranged, at this time, that each of the above four clans should furnish a contingent of troops to guard the sovereign's person and to form the nucleus of a national army.