s which distinguish the Japanese from other
Eastern nations. To assert, as do some psychological experts, that
the mental constitution of races is as distinct and unchangeable as
their physiological or anatomical characteristics is, to my mind, a
fact not borne out by the history of the world. Physiological or
anatomical distinctions are apparent, and can be classified; mental
idiosyncrasies do not lend themselves to cataloguing. It is, I know,
possible to draw up at any particular period a list of what I may term
the idiosyncrasies of any race at that period. A writer in a London
newspaper some little time back attempted to do so in reference to
Oriental races generally. He enumerated the degraded position of
women, the licentiousness of the men, the recognition and prevalence
of prostitution, the non-desire of the youth for play, contempt for
Western civilisation, and general hatred of foreigners. Admitting
these charges to be correct, the characteristics detailed are, I may
point out, merely ephemeral incidents. A contempt for Western
civilisation and hatred of the foreigner, for example, which was
certainly at one time pronounced in Japan, are rapidly passing away.
The position of women in that country has also greatly improved, just
as it has improved in Europe, while as regards prostitution and
licentiousness Europe has, in my opinion, no need to throw stones.

There are undoubtedly a large number of persons who are convinced, or
have been convinced, by the arguments of others, that the progress of
Japan is a mere mushroom growth which cannot last. A few years ago one
of the leading English papers in Japan attempted, to some extent, to
voice this opinion in an article striking the note of warning for the
benefit of the West against putting too much faith in those writers
who had intimately studied Japan from within, and whose works were in
general appreciation not only for their literary style, but for the
vivid insight they gave into everything respecting the country. Quoth
the journal in question:--

"In the case of such writers as Sir Edwin Arnold and Mr. Lafcadio
Hearn, it is quite apparent that the logical faculty is in abeyance.
Imagination reigns supreme. As poetic flights or outbursts the works
of these authors on Japan are delightful reading. But no one who has
studied the Japanese in a deeper manner, by more intimate daily
intercourse with all classes of the people than either of these
writers pretends