The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prevalebit. MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1886. Japan"s Reformed Policy.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1328, 30 August 1886, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prevalebit. MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1886. Japan"s Reformed Policy.

A very interesting article appeared in a late issue oi the London Times regarding the recent change in the system of Government in Japan. This change is the second great one of its kind in Japan’s modern annals. The first occurred in 1868 when feudalism was abolished and the office of the Shogun, or military regent who carried on the actual work of Government the Mikado, though nominlally absolute sovereign taking no part in public affairs, —effaced. The Government was modelled on European lines and the Mikado, freed from a seclusion that had been maintained for ages, became once more a palpable reality; going abroad among his subjects, presiding over the Council of State and once mors holding the reins of executive authority. This was the first great change in Japan—a step from the old state of things iff feudal times towards the establishment of a monarchy on constitutional principles as understood in Europe. But the progress made by Japan made it evident that something more than the new regime would shoitly be requisite. Hence the second great change, which was decreed in December last. If this change is less abrupt

than the first it still shows the steady advance made by Japan in the matter of political progress. The Government as now reconstituted consists of the Emperor; the Minister President of State, the Cabinet and the Senate. Of its new features the most important and radical is a well defined partition of Legislative and Executive authority, hitherto combined, theoretically at least, in the person of the Mikado, but now, by bis own decree, separated in such a manner that while executive power remains in the hands of the Crown, the initiative in all legislation is handed over to the Cabinet, the Sovereign’s share under the latter head extending only to the power of sanction. “ The real significance of this change,” says the Times, “ is wider than it might at first appear. For although, as we have seen, during feudal times the Emperor,J immured in his palace at Kiato, ruled Japan in name only, virtually delegating to the Shogun the whole reigning power and only exercising his Sovereign authority on the rarest occasions, yet, by a sentimental myth jealously kept up through a long roll of ages, it was always held that he and he alone was the fountain of all power and authority, legislative as well as executive, in his realm. So also, after the _ restoration, the same fancy was preserved! Great as the powers of the Daijo Daijin really were, no large change was ever wrought except as emanating directly from the revered and divinely-decended Mikado. Now, however, we see for the first time a distinct and irrevocable abdication of the most important part of the Imperial birthright—namely, that which secured legislation. The time-honored principle of personal government by the Mikado has nevertheless been adhered to in some important and practical respects. Henceforward the Head of the State will take an active part in public affairs. In the Cabinet,

whose members are appointed or dismissed by himself, he will ‘ personally give direction to all matters of State.’

He will ‘ hold each of his Ministers in

;he strictest responsibility to himself,’

so that they may ‘in very truth serve as His Majesty’s instrumentsand he will affix the sigft manual to all documents and decrees.” Next in importance to the Emperor comes the Minister President of State, who is vested with a very wide range of power. Not only does he lead the Cabinet and fill the office of chief adviser to the Crown but he also exercises a large measure of authority over the whole executive. It has yet to be seen whether the powers concentrated on

this office are not too much for a single individual, however able and experienced, |but the step, whether it prove wise or unwise, is understood to have been dictated by the absolute necessity, taught by recent experience, of securing political uniformity in the various departments. In the Cabinet consisting, beside the President, of nine

Ministers of Executive Departments, the most significant deviation from the old system is that which makes each Minister directly responsible to the Emperor for all matters within the limits of his competence. No Parliament yet exists in Japan, and none can be established before the year 1890. But the system we have described is being enunciated with an emphasis which suggests the inference that it is not proposed lor some time to suffer the policy and life of a Cabinet to depend upon the retention of a Parliamentary majority. Among other important provisions in the new arrangements are those which assign to individual Ministers increased power,

and a wider sphere of action in their own departments, along with a certain discretion in the choice of matters to be submitted to the Cabinet, and the right to communicate [personally with the Emperor in Council on questions in which they are individually responsible. The fourth factor in the Government, the Senate, possesses little or no real power, being a purely consultative body, consisting of 40 members nominated by the Crown, mostly chosen for special attainments or past experience in the public service. It is powerless either to originate measures or to veto them. It will be seen from the foregoing particulars that the changes lately effected in Japan’s scheme of Government mark a highly important and interesting epoch in her political history. There yet remains the question of popular representation to be dealt with, but the power and ability with which the Japanese have up to the present time treated the problems which have come before them leaves but little room for doubt that this question also will be satisfactorily met.