volution of thought
as that expressed in the proclamation of 1868 had taken place in the
minds of the leaders of society, when contact with foreigners had
fostered the necessity of national union, when the spirit of loyalty
of the Samurai had changed to loyalty to his Emperor, when his
patriotic devotion to his province had changed to patriotic devotion
to his country, then it became apparent that the petty social
organization, which was antagonistic to these national principles,
would soon be crushed.

If there is any form of society which is diametrically opposed to the
spirit of national union, of liberal thought, of free intercourse, it
is feudal society. A monarchical or a democratic society encourages
the spirit of union, but feudal society must, from its very nature,
smother it. Seclusion is the parent of feudalism. In our enlightened
and progressive century seclusion is no longer possible. Steam and
electricity alone would have been sufficient to destroy our Japanese
feudalism. But long before its fall our Japanese feudalism "was an
empty shell." Its leaders, the Daimios of provinces, were, with a few
exceptions, men of no commanding importance. "The real power in each
clan lay in the hands of able men of inferior rank, who ruled their
masters." From these men came the present advisers of the Emperor.
Their chief object at that time was the thorough unification of Japan.
Why, then, should they longer trouble themselves to uphold feudalism,
this mother of sectionalism, this colossal sham?

[Footnote 1: Translation given in the English State Papers.]

[Footnote 2: Consular Report of the U.S.A., No. 75, p. 626.]

CHAPTER IV.

INFLUENCES THAT SHAPED THE GROWTH OF THE REPRESENTATIVE IDEA OF
GOVERNMENT.

We have seen in the last two chapters how the Shogunate and feudalism
fell, and how the Meiji government was inaugurated. We have also
observed in the memorials of leading statesmen abundant proof of
their willingness and zeal to introduce a representative system of
government. We have also seen the Kogisho convened and dissolved.

John Stuart Mill has pointed out, in his Representative Government,
several social conditions when representative government is
inapplicable or unsuitable:

1. When the people are not willing to receive it.

2. When the people are not willing and able to do what is necessary
for its preservation.

"Representative institutions necessarily depend for permanence upon
th