Emperor of Japan: Meiji and His World, 1852’1912 (78 page)

Not all officials were won over by this promise of an easy solution to the financial crisis. Sasaki Takayuki, urging the importance of strict economy for all classes of society, blamed the upper classes for the taste for luxury now exhibited by the peasants: “They hear about the extravagant and frivolous ways of upper-class society, and they mistakenly suppose that this is what is meant by culture and freedom; in that way the whole country has come to imitate them [the upper classes].”
²⁵

Meiji’s eventual decision to reject the councillors’ recommendation that rents be collected in rice from the farmers was probably influenced by Sasaki and Motoda, both Confucianists.
²⁶
He also benefited from the advice of It
ō
Hirobumi, with whom he discussed the matter of rice payments on September 15.
²⁷
It
ō
seems to have realized that his only chance to overcome Iwakura’s advocacy of the rice tax was by enlisting the emperor’s support.

On September 18 the emperor summoned the ministers and gave them a rescript in which, though expressing appreciation for their efforts to resolve the financial crisis, he declared unambiguously his opposition to what he termed an “extremely alarming” plan. The only solution to the crisis was, as he had said many times, to practice strict economy, and he enjoined the councillors to consider ways of implementing his wishes.

Before issuing the rescript, the emperor had privately revealed to Sasaki and Motoda his opposition to the plan. He was sure that imposing a rice tax would cause extreme resentment by the farmers and that no region of the country would be immune to their rebellions. He noted in particular that it had been publicly announced in May 1880 that rents (in money) had been fixed until 1885. If they abrogated this declaration and returned to the old system of payment in rice, the public would lose confidence. This indeed was the chief reason not to revert to payments in rice.
²⁸

The third problem that faced Meiji at this time concerned the creation of a parliament and a constitution. In the first of the five oaths he swore at the beginning of his reign, he had promised that a legislative body would be created in which measures would be decided after open discussion. Regardless of the context in which the oaths were proclaimed in 1868, by this time they had acquired the character of an imperial promise that a parliament would be created and would operate within the framework of a constitution.

This was not the first time that the government had considered writing a constitution. As far back as May 1872 a member of the Sa’in, Miyajima Seiichir
ō
(1838–1911), had urged that a constitution be drawn up defining the powers of the ruler. He believed this was necessary because, having learned of the polity of other countries, “ignorant people” were insisting on their rights in the name of individual freedom; some were even calling for a republic. Under present conditions, it was difficult to know how to deal with such people, but once the powers of the ruler were clearly defined by a constitution, anyone trespassing on them could be punished by law. Miyajima insisted that he did not favor a constitution that prescribed one-man government by the ruler; this would be oppressive to the people and would hamper modernization. The ideal solution would be joint rule by the sovereign and the people, but the level of education was still so low it was unlikely the people possessed the necessary intelligence to elect suitable representatives. So, Miyajima concluded, the sovereign should personally draw up a constitution but take into account the principle of joint rule. This proposal was forwarded to the Sei’in,
²⁹
and preparations began for writing a constitution.

In June 1872 Got
ō
Sh
ō
jir
ō
(1838–1897), the president of the Sa’in, and Ijichi Masaharu (1824–1886), the vice president, jointly proposed the creation of a lower house (
kagi
-
in
) as provided for in the Oath in Five Articles. Unless there were two houses—the upper house representing the nobles and samurai and the lower house, the common people—there could be no budget or even a foundation for the laws. The lower house, modeled on those in Europe and America, should serve as a forum where open discussions and public opinion could be heard. Although the Sa’in approved, it postponed acting on the proposal until the following year.

In 1873 the emperor commanded the Sa’in to draft a constitution that would serve as the foundation of the nation and provide the essentials of government. The Oath in Five Articles might, of course, be described as a constitution for all ages, but it also was necessary to have a constitution that would serve as the basic law of the land.

Little progress was made despite the general agreement that a constitution was desirable. In September 1876 the emperor sent a message to the Genr
ō
-in commanding the members to prepare a rough draft that, though faithful to Japanese traditions, would benefit from the study of the constitutions of other countries.
³⁰

Soon afterward Prince Taruhito, the president of the Genr
ō
-in, was appointed by the emperor to frame a first draft. He and the committee he appointed completed a draft in October. Despite the leisurely pace with which the draft had been compiled, it was evidently much discussed. General Grant, who arrived in Japan a year later, observed in his conversation with Meiji that “the theme now so popularly advocated by the press and some of the people of this country seems to be that of Elective Assembly.” He offered these comments:

I do not know whether the proper time for it has come or not. But such assemblies are very good for all countries in due time…. An assembly will have to be established in this country sooner or later, and therefore the government ought to hold out to the people this idea, and educate them to the fact that in due time such an assembly shall be established for them. The people shall know that it is coming and they should be educating themselves for the responsibility. But you must always remember that privileges like this can never be recalled. When you give suffrage and representation you give them forever. Consequently in establishing such an assembly too great caution can not be taken. It is exceedingly dangerous to launch out too suddenly. You do not want to see anarchy as the result of any premature creation of an assembly.
³¹

Coming from the former president of a country that was proud of its democratic traditions, these views struck a responsive chord among Japanese statesmen. Yamagata, a conservative military man and statesman, strongly favored a constitution and a legislative body, and in August 1880 Iwakura Tomomi, another conservative, proposed to the emperor the creation of an office for examining constitutions. It was rather late in the day for such a proposal, but Iwakura evidently had decided that the time had come for implementing the provisions of the emperor’s Oath in Five Articles:

At the very outset of his reign, His Majesty intuitively grasped the world situation, and he swore in five articles that he would effect extraordinary reforms. In this manner he greatly enhanced the imperial rule and initiated the glorious achievements of the Restoration. All state affairs since then have been carried out in accordance with his oath.
³²

Iwakura went on to propose the compilation of a constitution, but first, he insisted, the constitutions of all European countries should be examined in detail, so that there would be no flaws in the Japanese constitution.

The caution with which Iwakura made his proposal suggested that his real object may have been to postpone action, but It
ō
Hirobumi, a more progressive man, was no less cautious. His superior knowledge of European history enabled him to give more positive reasons than Iwakura’s why Japan should possess a constitution.

It
ō
pointed out that the influence of the French Revolution had by now been felt in every other country, sometimes resulting in a rejection of the past and a commitment to distinctly new ways and sometimes even leading to disorder. Some enlightened rulers anticipated changes without waiting for a revolution. But however the influence of the French Revolution made itself felt, no country has been able to escape the assumption that the ruler must share power with the people. European books, with their new theories of government, had flooded into Japan, reaching the remotest hamlet. It
ō
declared that there was no way to check the new concept of government.

He offered specific proposals concerning the future composition of a bicameral parliament, with the upper house to be composed of nobles and samurai and the lower house, of common people. He believed that it was extremely desirable for the sovereign and people to share the rule, but he insisted that changes not be made hastily. It
ō
was particularly desirous that the emperor take an active part in all deliberations.
³³

The draft constitution on which Prince Taruhito had begun to work in 1876 was not presented until December 1880, and the prince envisaged a further long period of study of other countries’ constitutions.
³⁴

Prince Taruhito’s draft constitution contained no note of urgency. Like Iwakura, It
ō
and others, he seems to have considered that a gradual approach to democracy was better than prompt action. But many people felt otherwise. In April 1880, at a convention in
Ō
saka, members of the Aikoku-sha (Society of Patriots) passed a resolution calling for the convening of an assembly and spread word of this decision throughout the country. In March, delegates from twenty-four prefectures met in
Ō
saka and adopted as its name The League for Establishing a National Assembly.
³⁵

The league attempted to present a petition to the emperor asking for the convening of an assembly. Although frustrated by the government and the Genr
ō
-in, the attempt was not without effect. Iwakura, who had insisted that changes must be gradual, suddenly began to urge speed in creating a constitution. His haste was occasioned by fears, aroused by the petition, of possible danger to the imperial household if no action was taken.
³⁶
In December 1880 the league decided to form a political party, the Jiy
ū
-t
ō
(Freedom Party). The struggle of this and similar parties to create a national assembly lasted through the 1880s.

Chapter 34

The year 1881 was one of the most eventful years of Meiji’s reign. It opened calmly with the emperor’s ritual worship of the four directions, but changes were soon apparent even in the New Year ceremonies. He and the empress accepted congratulations both from the princes of the blood and high-ranking officers and from their wives. Later that day, the ministers of foreign countries, also accompanied for the first time by their wives, paid their respects.

No reason was given for the change, but presumably it reflected Japanese diplomats’ knowledge of European court usages. The change immediately aroused problems. If Japanese women were to attend court on such an important occasion, what would be the appropriate attire? It was eventually decided that they should wear a trailing outer robe (
uchikake
) and trousers (
hakama
), but diplomats’ wives who did not own these items of formal Japanese dress would be permitted to wear foreign clothes. Next, what should be the relative positions of husband and wife when advancing toward the throne? Should the wife trail behind the husband, as was customary when a Japanese wife accompanied her husband? It was decided that the couple should advance together, the husband on the right and the wife on the left, although left usually took precedence over right. These and similar decisions were not lightly reached. The officials in charge of protocol were creating traditions that would govern etiquette at the court for many years to come.

Sasaki Takayuki, one of the men closest to the emperor at this time, described the change in these terms:

This year for the first time husbands and wives offered New Year congratulations to the emperor. Most of the wives, however, stayed away. Foreigners think of participating in such ceremonies as a great honor, but people of our country have quite different reactions. Wives either actively dislike such experiences or avoid them because of unfamiliarity. Again, in foreign countries they do not allow women who were originally performers or prostitutes to mingle in upper-class society, not even if they are legal wives. Their practice, which I find admirable, is to look down on such women and not permit them ever to appear in public gatherings. In our country, too, this was the custom before the Restoration, but at the time of the Restoration many women of base birth became consorts of important men in the government, and this unfortunate practice has continued to this day. It is natural, then, that some people argue that it is inappropriate for such women to offer congratulations to the emperor. It is essential today that we revert to our former, admirable ways.
¹