LOCAL ADMINISTRATION
The whole of Japan proper is divided into forty-five prefectures. The prefectures of Tokio, Kioto, and Osaka are called Fu, whilst all others are called Ken. The difference is more a matter of sentiment than anything else, for there is no difference whatever for any practical purposes. The administrative systems of Hokkaido, Okinawa, and Formosa each diverge from those of Japan proper to some extent, though they are gradually being made similar to those of the main islands. I therefore put those three Islands, Hokkaido, Okinawa, and Formosa, outside the scope of the present paper for the sake of convenience. Each prefecture is presided over by a governor appointed by the central Government. It is partly an administrative district of the state and partly a communal district having its communal administration supported by local taxes. For this latter aspect each prefecture has a local assembly, members of which are elected by direct votes of electors of the prefecture. Each prefecture is divided into counties, and the counties (Kreis) into rural and urban village communities (Gemeinde). Larger urban communities are incorporated as cities and are made independent of counties. Counties are prefectures on a small scale. Each of them is presided over by a Gun-cho, whose office is very similar to that of a French sub-prefect. But counties also have their communal sides like prefectures and have representative assemblages. The communal side of counties, however, is not very important, because communal affairs on a large scale are discharged by prefectures, and ordinary communal affairs are mostly discharged by village communities. Cities and village communities are the real 'self-governments' of the people. Each of them has a representative assemblage, and elects its own executive officials. The composition of these officials differs in cities and village communities; that in the cities is, of course, more complicated. Even amongst the cities there is a great difference in the degree of importance, because there are many cities which are extremely small, inasmuch as a town having a population over twenty-five thousand could as a rule be incorporated as a city. The existing ordinances for the constitution of these local governments are very much like those of Prussia—in fact, the ordinances for those of the cities and village communities are in a great measure founded upon those of Prussia. The chief points of difference are that, unlike Prussia, our prefectural governments subordinate direct to the central Government, with no intermediary which represents the latter and superintends the former, and that, unlike Prussia, there is in Japan no 'Gutsbezirk' (signorial community) side by side with ordinary communities.
THE CONCLUSION
Such is the political organism of Japan. My description, however, is only the merest skeleton of it. That such a skeleton should be endowed with the proper spirit requires that the whole nation from the sovereign down to the lowest member of the community should be animated by sincerity and loyalty and supported by a liberal and tolerant régime. That Japan is doing her best in those respects, I can only ask my readers to infer from their own observation of the admitted progress that she has been fortunate enough to accomplish so far.
I may, however, explain some of the more important points bearing on the question. The emperor is extremely popular amongst his people at large. I may say that it is not mere popularity in the ordinary sense of the word, but a popularity which is more of the nature of reverence. This reverence for the emperor on the part of the people is manifested in their extreme loyalty. On the other hand, the emperor has not the least inclination to take advantage of it and abuse it for selfish purposes. His majesty entertains the keenest sense of duty in regard to his position, not as a person privileged to do whatever he may choose, but rather as a person to whom is intrusted the great task of taking care of the people over whom he reigns. Thus there exist between the sovereign and his subjects mutual confidence and love, which cannot fail to prove the greatest blessing to the country in any hour of national emergency.
As to the position of the Diet versus the Government, party landmarks are not so strong in Japan as among most of the Western nations. True it is that in Japan also there are several political parties, but the Government is not 'a party government' as it is in England or America. In that respect the Government of Japan most resembles that of Germany. According to the constitution, the Ministers of State are responsible only to the Emperor, but every practical statesman knows that no government can be satisfactorily carried on without concurrence of the Diet so long as there is such a body, and therefore in Japan, also, every Ministry has to do its best to count on such good relations with the parties as it can secure; but, nevertheless, party feeling does not run so high, and party struggles are not so severe as to make the formation of a Cabinet depend on party issues.
The cause of all this is plain so far as we are concerned. The emperor does not interfere with politics, but when at the hour of supreme necessity he manifests his will, his subjects, one and all, instantaneously obey it, and rally around the throne, forgetting for the time being any differences of personal opinion. It was so at the time of the Sino-Japanese war, and again in the Russo-Japanese war. This state of things is due, amongst others, to the liberal administration of the Imperial régime. The press, speech, and right of meeting are for all practical purposes entirely free. Personal freedom is guaranteed by the constitution. Taxes are levied, but no abuse of authority is known. The people at large have no real grounds of complaint or grievance against the Government as such, and have absolutely none against the Emperor. Moreover, Japan knows no difficulty in matters of religion, and consequently no party based upon religious notions exists to give trouble to Government. If this or that section of the people has any disputes with the Government or between themselves, those are essentially questions of some temporary and passing character. Hence in Japan it is not a difficult matter for the people at large to unite themselves under a common national policy in a time of national emergency.