an enlightenment dialogue with fukuzawa yukichi

An Enlightenment Dialogue with Fukuzawa Yukichi: Ogawa Tameji's Kaika Mondo, 1874-1875Author(s): Michael A. CusumanoReviewed work(s):Source: Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 37, No. 3 (Autumn, 1982), pp. 375-401Published by: Sophia UniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2384391 .Accessed: 07/05/2012 07:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Sophia University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to MonumentaNipponica.

http://www.jstor.org

An Enlightenment Dialogue with Fukuzawa Yukichi

Ogawa Tameji's Kaika Mondo, 1874-1875

by MICHAL A. CUSUMANO T l > HE polemical tract titled Kaika Mondo RjE4J ('Questions and Answers About Enlightenment') was written in two parts during 1874 and 1875, ostensibly to introduce Western civilization to post-Restoration Japan.'

The text was one of the earliest works of the Japanese Enlightenment and has been praised for espousing the 'theory of natural equality'.2 Yet twentieth-century Japanese scholars have failed to consider the primary intentions of the author, an obscure figure named Ogawa Tameji ;J')II p. It was surely evident to the discern- ing Meiji reader that Kaika Mondo was propaganda encouraging the adoption of reforms initiated by the new government. More importantly, the treatise ascribes to the imperial regime complete authority to guide-that is, to restrain-the Japanese public in any endorsement of Western concepts of individual or political liberty.

Whether or not 'enlightenment' and 'despotism' are compatible was a problem encountered not only by progressive, absolutist monarchies of eighteenth-century Europe. Loosely defined, this question can arise whenever a non-democratic regime permits the influx of ideas or information that run contrary to the maintenance of arbitrary government. A debate on this issue took place in Japan during the 1870s after the government of an emperor restored to nominal direct rule in 1868 promoted the adoption of Western technology and customs. During the subsequent decade Western ideas critical of absolute monarchy and rigid social classes were also introduced through themes such as the social contract, the ideal relationship between government and citizens, theoretical human equality, education as social

THE AUTHOR is a doctoral candidate in Japa- nese history at Harvard University. He wishes to thank Professor Albert M. Craig of the same university for first suggesting that he study Kaika Mondo and other such literature in Meiji Bunka Zensha F

I The text of Kaika Mond6 is reproduced in Meiji Bunka Zensha (MBZ], xxiv, Bummei

Kaika Hen jZOAR&W, 1930, pp. 107-67. 2 MBZ, p. 4; Nagai Hideo ,kAX, Nihon

no Rekishi: Jiya Minken Fl *OM : 8 *, Sh6gakukan, 1976, xxv, p. 107; Maruyama Masao, Studies in the Intellectual History of Tokugawa Japan, University of Tokyo Press, pp. 311-12.

376 Monumenta Nipponica, xxxvii, 3

emancipation, progress and order in history. How Japanese intellectuals responded to such concepts demonstrates existing political realities as well as the character of Japan's brief but spirited Enlightenment movement.

Fukuzawa Yukichi MRIM3, 1835-1901, the most celebrated popularizer of Western civilization in the Meiji period, was also a stern critic of the imperial regime during the mid-1870s. He argued that the government should not be the main initiator of reforms aimed at raising Japan's level of civilization, and preferred private effort with a 'spirit of independence' and citizens freed from traditional subservience to the ruling authorities. Fukuzawa severely criticized the Meiji government's reluctance to abandon a paternal attitude and despotic practices that had vitiated the previous regime, daring to suggest that any government ruling through force was illegitimate by reason of the social contract. The upshot of this position was to berate Japanese scholars trained in Western studies who implicitly condoned government policy by accepting posts in the new bureaucracy. Fukuzawa's stand led to a public dispute with his peers in the Meirokusha *? ('Sixth Year of Meiji Society'), a forum founded in 1873 for discussing Enlight- enment ideas.

A related matter of considerable interest is that Kaika Mondo was, in essence, a dialogue with Fukuzawa. The author of this tract joined several Meirokusha members to rebut Fukuzawa's contention that governmental despotism was in- herently incompatible with personal or national Enlightenment; this aspect of the text is revealed for the first time in the present article. There is a further disclosure: the tract's rebuttal is constructed while lifting whole sections, as well as mimicking and manipulating topics, from works published by Fukuzawa between 1865 and 1875. Kaika Mondo thus served not only to circumscribe the ideals of the Japanese Enlightenment, but with considerable humor and skill it also mocked their chief spokesman, Fukuzawa Yukichi.

To the reader a century later, the debate described above provides a glimpse of early Meiji polemics, of how intellectuals with different perspectives approached a fundamental contradiction: Enlightenment through authoritarian means. The present article will first discuss the political and intellectual context of Kaika Mondo, then examine the implicit as well as explicit arguments of the author. Section I summarizes twentieth-century appraisals of the tract and the 1874 Fukuzawa-Meirokusha debate, and includes information regarding the identity of Ogawa Tameji. Section II analyzes the two parts of Kaika Mondo as they cor- respond to the Fukuzawa corpus.

I Kaika Mondo: Within the Japanese Enlightenment It is not known how contemporary readers reacted to Kaika Mondo during the early Meiji period. Since 1930 the tract has been made available by inclusion among representative writings from the Japanese Enlightenment published in Meiji Bunka Zenshui ('Complete Collection of Meiji Culture'). Ishikawa Iwao H);Ig,

CUSUMANO: An Enlightenment Dialogue 377

Title page of Kaika Mond.-

ti)

Title page of Kaika Mondo.

the editor of this volume (xxiv), introduces Kaika Mondo while relying heavily on Ogawa's preface and subtitles of the fifteen dialogues:

The first part of the text was published in 1874, and the second part in 1875. It was therefore one of the first Enlightenment works in Tokyo.... As the title indicates, by employing the two figures Kyuihei lW* and Kaijir6 0190,05, the treatise attacks conservative old customs and advocates reasons for the necessity of Civilization and Enlightenment [bummei kaika 3ZOIFA{E]. Kaijiro, rather clever and progressive for the times, replies to the questions of the conservative, bigoted Kyuihei, citing copious examples in an exhaustive clarification of Enlightenment so that his interlocutor may easily understand. Kaika Mondo deals largely with practical subjects, touching upon the government; foreign relations; learning; food, clothing, and shelter; transportation and communications; natural philosophy; land deeds; money and

378 Monumenta Nipponica, xxxvii, 3 paper currency. Regrettably, there is nothing known about the author, Ogawa Tameji.3

This is indeed how Kaika Mondo appears on the surface: an early Meiji tract that might as well have been anonymous, adopting a question-and-answer (mondo) format for a casual discussion of Western civilization and its introduction into Japan. Although the work is more complex than it at first appears, the characterizations reinforce the impression that it is a straightforward exposition of Enlight- enment ideals. For instance, the name Kaijir6 can be translated as 'Enlightenment', and Kyuihei as something like 'Old Fogey'. The former name is a word-play on the term kaika, also usually translated as 'Enlightenment', while the latter suggests the disparaging homonym kyuhei 0n". As a noun kyahei means 'old evils' or 'old abuses', and as an adjective it involves connotations of 'old-fashioned' or 'behind the times'. This pejorative term often appears in reformist writings after the Meiji Restoration. For examples of its use, a reference dictionary of the Japanese language cites two of Fukuzawa's works, Gakumon no Susume *r1U6ttb ('An Encouragement of Learning'), 1872-1876, and Bummeiron no Gairyaku tZPJW P* ('An Outline of a Theory of Civilization'), 1875.4 Both texts are of central importance to the dialogues and to the characterizations in Kaika Mondo, although a simple equating of Fukuzawa and Kaijiro, however obvious a comparison, proves to be misleading.

Ogawa's tract is pedagogic, even didactic, yet the information presented therein is full of political implications. Both of the characters involved represent opposite positions: Kaijiro supports the government, Kyuihei is critical. Their disagreement is the point of departure for each dialogue, with Kyuihei gradually weakening and eventually conceding defeat. But scholars who have commented on Kaika Mondo, beginning with Ishikawa, either have failed to see or have ignored the propagandistic nature of the text as well as its relation to Fukuzawa. As a result, they have misunderstood and thus misrepresented the author's intentions. For example, in an account of 'the movement for freedom and people's rights', Nagai Hideo asserts that, without Kaika Mondo and similar popular tracts, the concepts of human liberty and freedom would not have been so rapidly diffused in Meiji Ja- pan.5 In a now-classic study of Japanese political thought from the seventeenth through the nineteenth centuries, Maruyama Masao quotes from the tract to ap- plaud the author's 'theory of natural quality' and 'concept of invented order'.

In his Kaika Mondo, Ogawa Tameji, a popularizer of the Enlightenment ideals, re- marked: 'When heaven created man, it did not discriminate, saying, "this man is a daimyo so he must have four eyes and eight limbs" and "this man is an eta [outcaste] so he can have only one eye and two limbs." When we see that all human beings have

MBZ, p. 4. 4 Nihon Kokugo Daijiten *MVtnA,

Sh6gakukan, 1973, vi, p. 117. See also Carmen Blacker, The Japanese Enlightenment: A Study

of the Writings of Fukuzawa Yukichi, Cam- bridge U.P., 1969, p. 39.

s Nagai, p. 107.


two eyes and four limbs, is it not clear that in human relations a man with the rank of Junior Grade Fifth Order and a plain old peasant called Gombei or Hachibei are equal in status?' This theory of natural equality led Tameji to a concept of invented order. 'Now there is the question of man's actual situation. This involves such classifications as noble and base, rich and poor, family background, rank, and status. Among men there are nobles, members of the samurai class, rich families, and the poor. But these differences are not based on the commands of Heaven. They are all rules ordained by human beings themselves. They are merely situations that prevail in the world of men.'6

The above quotations affirm that Ogawa spoke in simple terms of natural equality and criticized specious class distinctions enforced by the Tokugawa regime. It is another matter, however, whether he did this from an abstract belief in human rights, or rather as an attempt to justify Meiji reforms that were instituted for less noble reasons. Of course, some combination of beliefs or at least rationalizations on Ogawa's part is likely. Suffice it to say here that Kaika Mondo justified an array of government measures revising Japanese customs for daily living, education, foreign relations, as well as precepts for social and political organization. The Restoration began this process of reform after the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate, then between 1869 and 1871 all feudal domains were disbanded and the country was centralized under the imperial government. This facilitated new tax and education measures, judicial reforms, the introduction of universal male conscrip- tion, and a complete reorganization of the government bureaucracy. Class restrictions dividing society into the nobility, samurai, peasants, and merchants or townsmen were abolished in 1870.

From a Western perspective, such measures were progressive and served as a background for the promulgation of a constitution and parliamentary government in 1889-1890. But several international and domestic factors encouraged these changes. Considerable actual or perceived pressure from foreign powers was laid on Japan to 'modernize' its legal and political systems, just as economic and social reforms were necessary to build up the nation's collective wealth and strength. Revolutionary measures required propaganda to pacify disgruntled samurai and peasants who challenged the imperial regime on numerous occasions during the 1870s. Government leaders, forming an oligarchy drawn mostly from the former domains of Ch6shui and Satsuma, were also opposed by other factions calling for a share in political power. The motivations of these groups were a combination of Western ideals of democracy with probably stronger undertones of the Japanese tradition of consensus government, in addition to frustration at being excluded from inner power circles after the Restoration.

The political and intellectual milieu of early Meiji Japan was therefore highly complex. Any assessment of how 'enlightened' a particular policy or individual was must consider a variety of possible motivations. This holds true for the Meiji government and for Ogawa Tameji. There is, to be sure, a type of 'Enlightenment'

6 Maruyama, pp. 311-12.


displayed in Kaika Mondo, but to see this in proper context, we must ask why the author makes statements to the effect that the current regime 'in every way follows the justice of Heaven.... Is this not a benevolent government for which we should be grateful?' Or, 'The central government is the government of Japan.... Thus, for men of wisdom to be selected from throughout Japan to become government officials is a natural principle.'7

The chronology of such comments and other events is of critical importance. The first part of Kaika Mondo appeared in March 1874, the same month in which was published the issue of the Meirokusha journal devoted entirely to refuting Fukuzawa's condemnation in January of governmental authoritarianism and its implicit acceptance by scholars in public office. Fukuzawa's critique, found in the fourth and fifth essays of Gakumon no Susume, was most likely a protest against press restrictions promulgated in October 1873.8 Government leaders had become sensitive to criticism of their reluctance to send a punitive expedition to Korea, and decided to prohibit public disagreement with official policy and to outlaw moral teachings that could be interpreted as antigovernment and demagogic.9 Several high officals left the government over the Korea question, including Itagaki Taisuke tWailJt of the former Tosa domain. Itagaki and his supporters then submitted in January 1874 a petition to the imperial government calling for the immediate institution of a popularly elected assembly. Motivation for the memorial was linked to domain factionalism and to the defeat of Itagaki and others in the Korea debate,10 although the petition borrowed the terminology of democratic thought in the West and complemented the arguments offered by Fukuzawa in the same month.

Several themes or events thus formed the context of Kaika Mondo: the potential challenge of a broad movement calling for representative government; Fukuzawa's condemnation of imperial despotism; the debate between Fukuzawa and Meiroku- sha members over the respective roles of intellectuals and government in the Enlightenment process. The Fukuzawa-Meirokusha debate is especially relevant because it takes up the problem of whether it was possible to create a Western- style Enlightenment in Japan under an absolutist government. Fukuzawa's critique dealt with this as both a practical and an abstract question. On one level, he felt that it was contradictory and cynical for scholars of Western learning to join a despotic regime, although he himself had worked as an expert in foreign affairs and languages for the Tokugawa shogunate and in this capacity had traveled to the United States and Europe prior to the Restoration. Nine of the ten charter members of the Meirokusha had been trained in Western subjects while retainers

MBZ, p. 113. 8 Regarding the level of discussion in

Gakumon no Susume, see Earl H. Kinmouth, 'Fukuzawa Reconsidered: Gakumon no susume and its Audience', in JAS, xxxvii:4, August 1978, pp. 677-96.

9 William Braisted, tr., Meiroku Zasshi:

Journal of the Japanese Enlightenment, Har- vard U.P., 1976, p. xli.

10 Maruyama Masao ALUM5, 'Jiya Min- ken Undo-shi' 0 FtRMX%b, in his Sencha to Sengo no Aida f' a fA*O, Misuzu Shob6, 1976, pp. 310-12.


of the shogunate (the exception was Mori Arinori *tKL), so this background was hardly unusual."1 Of his Meirokusha peers, however, Nakamura Masanao rP'HIEi was the only other original member besides Fukuzawa to refuse a post in the Meiji administration. This insistence on remaining a private citizen and criticism of those intellectuals who became public officials not only isolated Fukuzawa from other members but also were contrary to government efforts to recruit scholars for the Enlightenment movement. Ogawa's primary motive in writing Kaika Mondo seems to have been to oppose Fukuzawa's criticism of the government and of intellectuals in public office.

On a more abstract level, while Gakumon no Susume shows a strong preference for Western ideals, Fukuzawa was not satisfied with the superficial imitation of Western civilization that had become fashionable after 1868. The Japanese public, he claimed, still lacked 'the spirit of independence' which distinguished citizens of a truly enlightened society: 'It is indeed the all important value, that is, the spirit of civilization, which in turn is the spirit of independence of a people . .. if a people lack this spirit of independence, the outward forms of civilization are useless.'12 Fukuzawa held that the masses in Japan still remained dependent on the government, just as they had been under the shogunate, and only individual effort could break this tradition because the imperial bureaucracy was unwilling to introduce democratic institutions. Whatever the accuracy of these contentions, or the wisdom of the policy chosen by the Meiji oligarchs, the essential point regarding Kaika Mondo is that these arguments were raised in the January issues of Gakumon no Susume. Fukuzawa was especially hard on scholars of Western learning who offered the imperial government what he felt was indiscriminate praise:

... every commendable trifle about the government is praised in bold letters.... They look up to the government as if it were some god.... They use empty phrases which are unworthy of equal human beings. Yet no one thinks it shameful. From their writings alone we might surmise that these people were all madmen. Yet the publishers of these newspapers and the writers of these memorials are almost all scholars of Western learning ... they are oppressed and blindly led by the spirit of subservience.... It is generally correct to say that in Japan there is only a government, and as yet no people.13

It is difficult to imagine a bleaker picture of the post-Restoration era: a linger- ing 'spirit of subservience', a new government with no real citizens, worshipped 'as if it were some god' by scholars who seemed to be little more than 'madmen'. Fukuzawa then damns the Meiji reforms as the policy of a despotic government forced upon a submissive populace. Japan's movement toward 'Civilization and Enlightenment' was to him a mere facade if citizens were no less dependent upon

1 Braisted, p. xx. 12 Fukuzawa Yukichi , Fukuzawa

Zensha XNffi 1FZ], Iwanami Shoten, 1926, II, p. 37; Fukuzawa Yukichi, An Encourage-

ment of Learning [EL), tr. David A. Dilworth & Umeyo Hirano, MN Monograph 33, 1969, p. 30.

13 FZ III, pp. 30-31; EL, p. 25.

382 Monumenta Nipponica, XXXVII, 3

their rulers than the masses had been under the Tokugawa system. Fukuzawa also declares that the imperial government was even more sinister than the regime it had replaced:

... the governments of the past used force, but the present regime uses both force and intelligence. In contrast to the former, the latter is rich in techniques of con- trolling the people. Past governments deprived the people of power; the present regime robs them of their minds. Past governments controlled men externally, the present regime controls their interior as well. The former was a devil to the people, the latter is now a god."4

These and other comments were read by Meirokusha members employed by the imperial government; Kat6 Hiroyuki )oLZ, for example, was the official lecturer on Western books to the Meiji emperor. Their responses to Fukuzawa were measured, indicative of the respect accorded to him. The Meirokusha members also chose to refute Fukuzawa in the second issue of their journal before discussing the Itagaki memorial in the following issue.

Kato opens the series of refutations, addressing Fukuzawa as 'my esteemed friend'. He then states that it is necessary to stimulate and cultivate civilization both from within and outside the government, asserting, 'It is always appropriate for scholars in Western studies to serve the government if they are inclined to do SO.'15 Similarly, Mori Arinori proposes that 'the government, being the government of all the people, is established by the people and for the people,' with no distinction between government and citizens. He claims that the responsibility for promoting civilization is held by those who understand its essence, regardless of their political affiliations. Tsuda Mamichi R3;IXI observes, 'The people, being the people within the country, are factors within the country ... the government is like the spirit while the people are like the body.'16

The most articulate response is made by Nishi Amane NAN. He contends that Fukuzawa fails to prove that there is a connection between the future independence of Japan and a current need for scholars to remain in private life rather than in government. Nishi agrees that Japan has suffered through a long tradition of despotism and lethargy; the Meiji Restoration itself originated in a spirit of 'Expel the barbarians and honor the Emperor,' and was characterized by an 'oppression and servility' to which the people felt well accustomed. The Restoration 'strongly affirmed Western institutions,' even though attitudes and traditions are not likely to be changed quickly. Nishi also admits that it will take generations of Japanese scholars to penetrate 'the inner mysteries of so-called Western scholarship', but argues that it is unfair to fault scholars for joining the new government, as it is often their only source of income. He also believes it preferable to have intellectuals in government office rather than their being isolated or considered 'mad and deranged', as in the middle of the Tokugawa period. Nishi then denies

14 FZ III, p. 38; EL, p. 31. 15 Braisted, pp. 21-22. 16 Ibid., pp. 23-24.


Fukuzawa's contention that scholars of Western learning adopt an attitude of 'fawning servility' before the government, although admitting that such 'flattery and servility may usually be traced to Shint6 scholar-politicians.'17

While there is no direct connection between the Meirokusha articles and Ogawa's tract, Kaika Mondo was clearly another rebuttal of Fukuzawa. Yet one can only guess how the author of Gakumon no Susume would have reacted to this indirect refutation. Surely Fukuzawa would have used language much stronger than 'fawning servility' to describe the mentality of its author. Ogawa's announced mission was to 'enlighten' the ignorant masses, yet his main function was to act as an apologist for official policies. Already in the tract's preface deference to the Meiji regime is evident:

The emperor now conducts a fair and upright government based upon universal justice. Indeed, this may be called the good fortune of the masses. Nonetheless, the ignorant poor still stubbornly defend the old practices, adhering to evil customs ... this is due to their inability to penetrate and understand true principles [shinri X39]. If so, will the stupid people ever understand those principles? Everyone knows to value ajewel over a rock, or ajust government over a deceitful one. Of those who have any understanding of this, I wonder how many recognize its principle? Accordingly, each person should be instructed, each household enlightened. Schools should be established, education must flourish. Moreover, the people should be made to perceive truth for themselves. This is the debate between Kaijiro and Kyflhei. Finally, it is the reason for composing this tract.'8

Despite the simple explanation given above, several motives inspired the writing of Kaika Mondo. One was to disseminate information about the West and the Enlightenment in Japan. This was mixed with an appeal for support of government measures. Ogawa also tried to refute the contention that the Meiji government was despotic and that scholars should protest by refusing to join it. The author is especially clever in his use of Fukuzawa's writings, as these materials and topics were borrowed and rewritten in a more vernacular style than that used in works such as Gakumon no Susume. For example, Kaika Mondo employs the copula de gozaru instead of nari, and often paraphrases or substitutes elementary synonyms and kana for erudite Chinese characters. Nevertheless, the Meiji reader familar with Fukuzawa's publications could hardly have failed to notice the re- semblance in Ogawa's text.

The propagandistic nature of Kaika Mondo was surely obvious, except perhaps to an unsuspecting peasant-indeed, to someone like Kyiuhei-who might not have grasped the political import of the tract. Such a reader would have been overwhelmed by Kaijiro's confidence and knowledge, not to mention constant reassurances that the government knew best how to look after the people and the country. With this type of readership, Ogawa no doubt found success, yet

17 Ibid., pp. 25-27. 18 MBZ, p. 107.


to a considerable extent the persuasive power of Kaijiro's arguments is the power of texts such as Fukuzawa's Seiyo Jijo 04*1 ('Conditions in the West'), 1866- 1870, and Gakumon no Susume. Overall, direct borrowing or paraphrase from Fukuzawa amounts to about one-tenth of Kaika Mondo (which runs to sixty closely printed pages as reproduced in Meiji Bunka Zenshu). Most of this borrowed material is woven into the long orations of Kaijiro, which make up about three- fourths of the text. The remainder is allotted to Kyuihei, and even this part includes Fukuzawa's criticisms of Meiji officials. Kaijiro thus cannot simply be equated with Fukuzawa. The implicit characterization of the latter in Kaika Mondo is more a combination of 'Mr Enlightenment' and 'Mr Old Fogey'.

Little is known about Ogawa Tameji. He is listed in no major biographical reference, although he published several other texts between 1873 and 1890 which provide some clues to his vocation and personality. His first listed publication appeared in December 1873 and was titled Usagi no Mondo AV)PUN& ('Dialogue of the Rabbits'). This short pamphlet is another Enlightenment satire employing the question-and-answer format. Ogawa was also credited as editor of a translation, published in 1873, of Francis Wayland's The Elements of Moral Science, 1835. During 1874 he published, along with the first part of Kaika Mondo, two books explaining the Western convention of written contracts, in addition to three educational texts: Gakumon no Hi *P"1Jo (the English title is given as 'The Way of Intellectual Improvement'), Kunmo Hito no Michi VIIVAOD ('The Route to Moral Instruction'), and Bunsho Jizai * M*E ('Free Composition').`9 Ogawa's last-known publication is dated April 1890 and titled Kotsuyobun: Kairyo Buntai 3)f19A AZ;O ; ('Letters for Correspondence: Improved Style'). This is a continuation of his previously published instructions on how to write formal letters for various occasions.

Several of these works list the author as a Tokyo commoner (heimin *1K) and give a local address. One preface is dedicated to 'Ogawa Sensei'; since most of the publications deal with education or moral training, it is not unlikely that he worked as a teacher, perhaps in a primary school. He is not mentioned in the record of government employees and officials during the first decade of the Meiji period.20 None of his known publications was officially sponsored by the government.

19 This last work had a complicated pub- lishing history. Bunsho Jizai 3Z*AtE is an elementary textbook, several hundred pages in length, for writing holiday greetings, invita- tions, appointment notices, responses, and the like, in formal Japanese. Originally published in July 1874, three identical versions appeared in December 1875. One lists the same pub- lisher and distributors as the earlier edition while bearing the title Shogaku Kaika Kango 4i'MILAV3 ('Chinese for Primary-School Enlightenment'). Another gives the author as

'Ogawa Akira' with the title Bunsho Jizai. Still another lists Ogawa Tameji, yet the title is Shogakuyobun: KaikaKango ;J-* : 1I; g-V ('Letters for Primary Schools: Enlightenment Chinese'). A work similar to the original Bunshd Jizai is dated August 1883 and titled Nichiydbun: Bammin Hikkei HSAZWMEAK ('Letters for Daily Use: A Popular Hand- book').

20 Meiji Shoki no Kan'in Roku Shokuin Roku ; 1977, i-InI (1869- 1880).


Ogawa's works nonetheless reveal a basic pattern in education, career, and probable outlook. Apparent knowledge of English and Chinese composition indicates a broad education such as a progressive samurai might have received prior to the Restoration, as in the case of Fukuzawa and most Meirokusha members. Several texts deal specifically with elementary composition in Chinese style, suggesting a moderate stance toward Westernization, at least compared to the attitude of reformers who proposed the abandonment of Chinese studies or re- placement of Japanese with a Western language. Kaika Mondo also reflects the increasing trend in Meiji Japan not to discard traditional education, but to add information about Western learning and customs to the curriculum in Japanese schools.

Whatever his occupation may have been, Ogawa was a self-styled pedagogue and Enlightenment polemicist, perhaps motivated by the hope of financial gain as much as by the spirit of Civilization and Enlightenment. This would explain the appearance of Bunsho Jizai under different titles or authorship, recycling similar materials, and lifting from Fukuzawa's writings and mimicking their author. Ogawa also must have enjoyed good relations with publishers and book retailers. It required some cooperation to re-issue the same texts under different titles, and all of his publications had a relatively wide distribution in Tokyo and Osaka because dozens of retailers are listed for Bunsho Jizai and other works. Kaika Mondo was published in Tokyo by Sanshoya =#f, with three distributors in Tokyo and eleven in Osaka. The main Tokyo agent was Maruya Zenshichi A1 *-t, a branch of the Maruzen company for which, coincidentally, Fukuzawa worked as a consultant regarding the importation of Western books.21 It is somewhat ironic that Kaika Mondo and other Ogawa publications were distributed by a major book retailer that also employed Fukuzawa.

II A Dialogue with Fukuzawa Yukichi

Nearly all of Kaika Mondo corresponds to essays written by Fukuzawa between 1865 and 1875, although only the most flagrant cases of lifted material essential to Ogawa's argument will be presented here. Selections from the relevant Fukuzawa texts are reproduced for comparison. Some attempt is made to recreate the flavor and atmosphere of the dialogues, since this may help to show why the tract has not been recognized for the controversial document that it is.

The first part of Kaika Mondo, published in March 1874, corresponds to Fukuzawa's Tojin Orai kAIA ('Comings and Goings of Foreigners'), ca. 1865, Seiyo Jij1, and issues of Gakumon no Susume appearing between May 1872 and January 1874. The most important dialogues deal with the interpretations of Japanese history, human equality, Western learning and education. The sequel, published in May 1875, corresponds to the third chapter of Bummeiron no Gairyaku, March 1875, as well as to issues of Gakumon no Susume published from

21 Kimura Ki *i4-, Maruzen Gaishi A* A , Maruzen, 1970, pp. 66, 70, & 98.


February through July 1874. Topics include the evolution of civilization and the necessity of government, the social contract, mutual responsibilities of government and citizens, and the structure of the Meiji bureaucracy.

While both parts of Kaika Mondo rebut Fukuzawa, the second half includes more philosophical arguments as Ogawa responds to a change in Fukuzawa's style of critique after January 1874. The fourth and fifth issues of Gakumon no Susume were impassioned protestations against the authoritarianism of the new regime. In view of the press laws of October 1873, these criticisms were perhaps illegal, and Fukuzawa thereafter chose not to attack the Meiji government directly. The next issues of Gakumon no Susume, followed by the scholarly treatise Bummeiron no Gairyaku, thus undertake a theoretical analysis of government and the history of civilization. Yet these works also reinforced the earlier condemnation of despotism and the compromising of moral and intellectual principles by scholars who joined the Meiji administration.

Part One, March 1874

Kaika Mondo begins innocuously. Kyiihei complains that changes since 1868 have been too rapid for him to follow:

Somehow, Kaijiro Kun, I don't understand at all what is happening these days. The reason is that a few years ago the shogun returned the government to the emperor, who now rules the country personally. Though I had believed in the ways of the past and the customs we used to observe, and that everything would turn out well, unexpectedly, the world of today is completely unlike that of old.22

Kyfihei is particularly concerned that centralization of the government will lead to oppression of the peasantry by a greedy, insensitive bureaucracy. This, he claims, happened in China when power was seized by the Ch'in A. 'Thereafter, the imperial act of abolishing the domains and establishing prefectures is in imitation of the first Ch'in emperor. In the end, it will become the bane of the lower classes.'

Kaijiro responds with a lecture on Japanese history. He claims that the Ashikaga and Tokugawa shoguns usurped the sovereignty that had once belonged to the emperor, hence centralization is historically justifiable. Gradual recognition of this, plus the need to have a government that would 'compare to America and England', led to the Meiji Restoration:

When the number of people who advocated a just and true government on behalf of the emperor increased, the shogun's position became untenable. Finally, in the fall of 1868 the affairs of government were returned to the emperor.... Since the shogun had done so, it was only natural for the daimyo to return their lands to the emperor also. Until then they had unwittingly held stolen property; yet once this was understood, there should have been no hesitation to rectify their error. Is not such a return to the emperor an excellent deed, rectifying an age-old injustice ?23

22 MBZ, p. 108. 23 MBZ, pp. 109-10.


Subsequent portions of Part One calm Kyulhei's fears of railroads and tele- graphs, or that Westerners want to seize control of Japan.24 Kaijir6's responses paraphrase Fukuzawa's explanations, in Seiyo Jijo, of steam engines, telegraphy, and electricity.25 To deny that foreigners have evil designs on the Japanese archi- pelago, Ogawa also uses arguments on political economy from Tojin Orai.26 No reference is made to Fukuzawa or to these two works.

Another topic taken up in Kaika Mondo is Western learning and education. Kyuihei complains that the letters of the Roman alphabet look like 'wriggling worms'. He laments the neglect of Japanese and Chinese classics, criticizing government leaders for being 'lovers of the West' and importing foreign civilization indiscriminately. Kaijir6 answers patiently: 'These things called letters represent the thoughts of people. As tools for understanding the principles of the world, they are used in place of what are called words.' He observes that to use Chinese characters it is necessary to learn many thousands, requiring years of study. In contrast, the Japanese syllabaries and Roman letters can be learned in about a month.

Since they are tools for learning the principles of the world, they are just like tools of a carpenter or a painter. Now if a carpenter and painter only possess a lot of tools but do not know how to build a house or paint a wall, their tools are useless. Besides, if the investigation of mere tools consumes several years, how utterly foolish and stupid it is! This is the inconvenience of Chinese characters.27

To someone who has read Fukuzawa recently, Ogawa's tract at this point may seem somewhat familiar. Compare the above quotation to the opening statements in the second issue of Gakumon no Susume, published in November 1873:

Letters are the instruments of learning. They are like the hammers and saws used to build a house. Although hammers and saws are indispensable tools for building a house, a person who only knows their names but not how to build a house cannot be called a carpenter. For this reason, a person who only knows how to read letters but does not know how to discern the principles of things cannot be called a true scholar.28

The above is an example of how Kaika Mondo corresponds to various Fukuzawa texts. But as Kaijiro continues this discussion, material is lifted almost directly from the first issue of Gakumon no Susume, published in May 1872. Ogawa's ren- dition is in the left column, the original Fukuzawa text in the right.29

Learning does not essentially consist in such impractical pursuits as study of obscure Chinese characters, read-

Learning does not essentially consist in such impractical pursuits as study of obscure Chinese characters, read-

24 MBZ, pp. 119 & 126. 25 Nihon no Meicho: Fukuzawa Yukichi 4c*041*4RIV, Chuo Koronsha, 1963,

xxxin, pp. 378-82.

26 MBZ, pp. 120-21; Blacker, p. 122. 27 MBZ, p. 122. 28 FZ III, p. 9; EL, p. 9. 29 MBZ, p. 122; FZ III, pp. 2-3; EL, p. 2.


ing ancient texts which are difficult to make out, composing Japanese verse, and writing poetry. Although these subjects may be greatly to people's benefit, they should not be esteemed as highly as the Confucian and Japanese Learning scholars have esteemed them since ancient times. Among the Chinese Learning scholars, those who have been skilled in practical matters have been few indeed. Rare also has been the chonin who, if he was well versed in poetry, was also successful in business. Con- sequently we observe that thoughtful chonin and peasants, when they see their own children concentrating on books, fear as good parents that they will eventually bring their bodies to ruin. This is not without reason. And it proves that such forms of learning are ultimately without practical value and will not serve daily needs.

ing ancient texts which are difficult to make out, or enjoying and writing poetry. These kinds of interests may be useful diversions, but they should not be esteemed as highly as the Confucian and Japanese Learning scholars have esteemed them since ancient times. Among the Chinese Learning scholars, those who have been skilled in practical matters have been few indeed. Rare also has been the chonin who, if he was well versed in poetry, was also successful in business. Consequently we observe that thoughtful chonin and peasants, when they see their own children concentrating on books, fear as good parents that they will eventually bring the family fortune to ruin. This is not without reason. And it proves that such forms of learning are ultimately without practical value and will not serve daily needs.

The next section of the Kaika Mondo text was taken from Gakumon no Susume with no changes at all:

Such impractical studies should thus be relegated to a secondary position. The object of one's primary efforts should be practical learning that is closer to ordinary human needs. For example, a person should learn the 47-letter kana syllabary, methods of letter writing and of accounting, the practice of the abacus, the way to handle weights and measures, and the like. And there are many additional things to be learned. Geography is the guide to the climates not only of Japan, but of the many countries of the world. Physics is the science which investigates the properties and functions of the myriad things of the universe. Histories are books which study the condition of the countries of the past and present by detailed chronicling of the historical ages. Economics explains the financial management of self, family, and the state. Ethics expounds the natural principles of personal moral cultivation and of social intercourse.30

Ogawa here pauses briefly to hint at his debt to Fukuzawa: 'It has already been stated in the publications of Gakumon no Susume that everyone, whether high or low, must know these things.'31 But there is no explicit mention that Fukuzawa has been extensively quoted or paraphrased in this dialogue and elsewhere in

30 MBZ, p. 122; FZ III, pp. 2-3; EL, p. 2. MBZ, p. 122.


Kaika Mondo. Instead, Kaijiro merely proceeds to enumerate the benefits of Western learning and then asserts, 'All these subjects have gone unnoticed by the Japanese until now since they were all invented by Westerners.' Ogawa (left column) now copies and rewords the text of the first issue of Gakumon no Susume (right column).32

For the purpose of studying each of these areas, a person should investigate translations of Western books. In many cases he can use kana. But a lad who is young and talented in letters should be taught to read Western languages. By grasping the practical matters of each science, which vary in subject matter and content, he can search for the truth of things and make them serve his present purposes. The above-mentioned subjects are ones common to man, and matters which everyone should have an interest in, without distinction of high or low, rich or poor. After acquiring such learning, the four classes will pursue their occupations without obstruction and gradually prosper. Eventually they will become an unrestrained, independent people.

For the purpose of studying each of these areas, a person should investigate translations of Western books. In many cases he can use kana. But a lad who is young and talented in letters should be taught to read Western languages. By grasping the practical matters of each science, which vary in subject matter and content, he can search for the truth of things and make them serve his present purposes. The above-mentioned subjects are ones common to man, and matters which everyone should have an interest in, irrespective of rank or position. After acquiring such learning, men will go on to create social distinctions as a matter of course. Each will then be able to manage his own family business, and the individual, family, and nation will achieve independence.

The subjects treated above have been of a general nature and involve no star- tling declarations either by Fukuzawa or by Ogawa. Yet if in fact Fukuzawa read Kaika Mondo, he would, no doubt, have been upset to see his writings copied, paraphrased, and truncated in a pro-government tract. He would have been even more displeased to know that his works contributed to the reputation of the tract and its author. For example, in another section Kaijir6 denies that physical differences exist among people which might justify a continuation of the Tokugawa division of society into classes. These arguments, such as the following quotation by Kaijiro, have been cited by Maruyama33 to show Ogawa's liberal spirit:

This position of equality has been from the beginning the purpose of Heaven. It is called human rights. These rights include the free exercise of one's will, the pursuit of peace and tranquility, and the free possession of goods; only when these rights bring harm to others or violate society's laws may they be obstructed. It is something that everyone has received equally from Heaven.... Among the classifications of high and low, rich and poor, lineage and status, there are the nobility, samurai, wealthy,

32 MBZ, p. 123; FZ III, pp. 2-3; EL, p. 2. 33 See n. 6, above.

390 Monumenta Nipponica, XXXVII, 3 and poor. But this is not something ordained by Heaven. We ourselves have deter- mined it. This is merely a condition in the world of human beings.34

Human rights and equality were progressive concepts for a Japanese to profess in the 1870s. On another level, however, Ogawa is merely defending a government directive that was complex in motivation, for the Meiji abolition of the four classes and other reforms were not motivated solely on humanitarian grounds. In any case, Kaika Mondo does little more than paraphrase statements by Fukuzawa, such as the famous dictum, 'It is said that heaven does not create one man above or below another man,' appearing in the first issue of Gakumon no Susume. This 1872 essay states categorically that, despite the persistence of social and personal distinctions, all men are created equal:

Nevertheless, as we broadly survey the human scene, there are the wise and the stupid, the rich and poor, and noble and lowly, whose conditions seem to differ as greatly as the clouds and the mud. The reason for this is clear. In the Jitsugokyo AM we read that if a man does not learn he will be ignorant, and that a man who is ignorant is stupid. Therefore the distinction between wise and stupid comes down to a matter of education.35

Compare the parallel segment in Kaika Mondo. The speaker is Kaijiro, lecturing Kyiihei on the connection between education and social status:

If we examine the created distinctions between high and low, rich and poor, they usually depend on a person's talent. The reason for this is clear. An old book says that if a man does not learn he will be ignorant, and that a man who is ignorant is stupid. Therefore the distinction between wise and stupid comes down to a matter of education.36

As can be seen, the last part of each quotation is practically identical. The following portion of Kaijiro's monologue is also taken almost unchanged from Gakumon no Susume:

Moreover, there are difficult and easy professions in society. The person who performs difficult work is regarded as a man of high station. One who performs easy work is called a person of low station. All work involving intellectual effort is more difficult. Consequently, such persons as scholars, government officials, merchants who manage large businesses, farmers who employ many hands, are considered noble and of high station. Being such, their households are naturally wealthy, and they seem to tower above and out of reach of the lower classes of society. But when we inquire into the reason for this, we find that these differences are entirely the result of whether they have or do not have the powers which learning brings. It is not because of some decree of Heaven. As the proverb says: heaven does not give riches and dignity to man himself, but to his labors. Therefore, there are no intrinsic distinctions between high and low, rich and poor.37

MBZ, p. 1 1 1. 35 FZ III, p. 1; EL, p. 1.

36 MBZ, p. 111. 37 MBZ, pp. 111-12; FZ III, pp. 1-2; EL, p. 1.


An elaborate defense of the Meiji regime is thus constructed. The first part of Kaika Mondo borrows Fukuzawa's persuasive arguments on behalf of Enlighten- ment, scrupulously omitting criticism of the government except when Kyuihei is speaking. The peasant critic is devastated, humbled. Recognizing the folly of his former beliefs, 'Mr Old Fogey' ends his exchange in Part One by fully submit- ting to the guidance of the imperial authorities. The eager 'Mr Enlightenment' provides a joyful closing.

KYUHEI: I have gradually come to admire your understanding. In fact, as you have spoken, I have come to see how the aim of the present government is to let all the people live in peace, prosper financially, and enjoy great happiness. It seems as if I have been awakened from a dream! Until now I did not realize there were such principles; instead, I thought the present was so different and terrible, and the government was evil. In contrast to you, I expressed such bigoted views that I now feel ashamed and disgraced. KAIJIRO: Let us be happy that you understood my humble words and they have had the effect you claim. It is the custom in today's society blindly to speak ill of the past, without understanding why. Although there are many people who imitate this current trend, you, in the bottom of your heart, were thinking about the emperor. Thus you thought that numerous practices were evil and so you advanced these various arguments. But my words have penetrated your heart. Your complete discarding of former opinions is truly the nature of the Japanese, and I admire your noble spirit. Thus, for reasons such as you have mentioned, if each person upholds the objectives of the government and also studies, how many interesting and enjoyable things will become possible, how high a position may one attain! KyuThei Kun, if you consider the matter well, I mean really well, should we not shed tears of gratitude that we live in such times?38

Part Two, May 1875

Kaika Mondo reopens with the role of government critic assigned again to Kyuihei. He now addresses Ka-iro as a child would address an adult. 'Well, Kai San, what I understand least are the duties of the present government officials.' He compares the Meiji and Tokugawa regimes, and concludes that the current system is more confusing and ineffective than its predecessor. The loftily titled ministries under the new emperor are but hollow shells. Proclamations in formal Chinese are incomprehensible. 'For the peasants this is like following an unfamiliar mountain road in the darkness. Who manages our household registers? Who protects our homes? Who receives our taxes? Who judges our petitions to the government?'39

This is the renewed setting. The befuddled peasant will now be instructed in the philosophy and origins not only of the imperial regime but of government in general. In 'Seifu no Seiritsuki no Mondo' 0IEiODA licD;e I ('Dialogue on the Origins of Government'), Kaijiro begins by describing a Hobbesian, primeval

38 MBZ, p. 128. 39 MBZ, p. 130.


society forced to create a social contract, and thus government, to insure its own survival.

Let's talk about the principles of government. For instance, a group of men and women discover a certain uninhabited land and move there. They soon build houses, cultivate the earth, gather firewood in the hills, hunt animals in the fields, catch fish in the sea-each person with his or her own plan for clothing, food, and shelter. Putting forth great effort, they furnish from nature means for clothing, food, and shelter, and with the surplus they are able to save, trade among themselves to each one's pleasure and to increase everyone's happiness.40

Within such utopian surroundings, the inhabitants should have no worries. But when just one person begins to steal or to monopolize necessities such as firewood or grain, the system degenerates into a contest to seize the possessions of others. In the ensuing chaos, 'Since their way of life will eventually be destroyed, on the basis of discussion the unified group suppresses any evildoers through the power of the majority, and makes laws for their punishment. That is partly the way government was established.' According to Kaijiro, the Meiji regime also started in this manner:

If we study all the countries of the world and investigate their origins, we will find that not one of them departs from such principles. As regards the origins of its formation, even the government ruling Japan does not differ in general from these principles. And so from the very beginning the authority of the government is the authority of the people. Without doubt this is something the government has received from the people themselves.4"

Discussions on patterns in historical evolution and the place of Japan in world history were common among Japanese intellectuals during the 1870s. This formi- dable subject is taken up by Fukuzawa in Bummeiron no Gairyaku, part of which is based on F. P. Guizot's General History of Civilization in Europe, 1837, translated into Japanese in 1872 as Seiyo Kaika Shi l Whereas Fukuzawa's treatment of this theme, corresponding to sections I and XIV of Guizot's text, is lengthy and fairly difficult for the general reader to follow, Kaika Mondo presents a simplified version for the benefit of Kyiihei:

As for the types of political systems in all the countries of the world, there are many differences owing to their different natural characteristics and general customs. Still, if we distinguish among them, there are basically three forms: monarchies, aristocracies, and republics. In a monarchy, generations of hereditary rulers hold all political authority. In an aristocracy, those of high status within the country gather together and conduct the affairs of government. In a republic, all the people within the nation, regardless of their social status, participate in political affairs.

Japan is neither a republic nor an aristocracy, hence Kaijiro declares that he will deal only with monarchical forms of government:

40 MBZ, p. 132. 41 MBZ, p. 133.

CUSUMANO: An Enlightenment Dialogue 393 There are two different types of monarchies. One is called an absolute monarchy [kunshu seiji Ziktp, and the other is called a limited monarchy [kunshin d6ji

1Rrp]. In an absolute monarchy, there are no limits to the sovereign's authority; the country as well as its people are the possessions of the monarch. He may give away or take the property of citizens, and he holds the power of life and death over his subjects.42

'From ancient times,' observes Kaijiro further, 'all the governments of Japan and China have been absolute monarchies.' When the sovereign was benevolent, the people were well treated. When he was not, the people suffered a tyranny worse than the torments of hell. 'Therefore, an absolute monarchy completely contravenes true principles. It is a barbaric [yaban If] form of government. Needless to say, the people living under such a government are ignorant and illiterate.' Yet these statements in Kaika Mondo come close to condemning the Meiji regime and citizenry as 'barbaric'. The emperor held absolute sovereignty, at least nomi- nally, and ruled through an oligarchy remaining from the leaders of the 1868 Restoration. Kaijiro anticipates, then disclaims, this criticism, while asserting that democratic proposals are currently under consideration by the central government:

The present government has carefully examined these principles, and is removing all the evils present until now, thereby conducting a just and fair administration. And so although the present regime may seem to be an absolute monarchy, if you view the actual situation, the government is what is called a limited monarchy. Discussions are regularly being held on the theme that the government is entirely the people's government, and that the government's work is entirely the people's work.43

Kunshin doji literally means 'joint rule by sovereign and subjects', but is here translated as 'limited monarchy'. As Kaijir6 explains, the term implies some mea- sure of law to limit the power of the sovereign:

In a limited monarchy, there are fixed rules which restrict the authority of the ruler, and all government affairs are carried out on the basis of discussion between the sovereign and the people. This is a civilized and enlightened political system, such as the one people admire so much in Britain. It accords with true principles and is in fact a superb form of government.44

Approval of the British system is also found in Bummeiron no Gairyaku. Fukuzawa favored restricting governmental power while preserving Japan's national polity, which he saw as symbolized in the unbroken imperial line. But more importantly, he asserts, 'Every government in the world is the product of convenience .... Among the forms of government that have been tried in the

42 MBZ, p. 133; Fukuzawa Yukichi, An Outline of a Theory of Civilization, tr. David A. Dilworth & G. Cameron Hurst, MN

Monograph 51, 1973, p. 39. 43 MBZ, pp. 134-35. 44 MBZ, p. 134.


world since the dawn of history, we can list absolute monarchies, constitutional monarchies, aristocracies, republics, and so forth. A priori arguments cannot decide which forms are best.'45 To Fukuzawa, the form of government is deter- mined initially by practicality, based upon the needs of a given populace.

Ogawa's exposition of the types of government is largely consistent with the discussion in Bummeiron no Gairyaku, although his motives differ from Fukuzawa's. Kaika Mondo stresses the need for government and maintains that the imperial regime, conforming both to moral standards as well as to Western political theory, admirably fulfills its role under the social contract to provide for the peace and happiness of the people. Ogawa thereby places the onus upon citizens to obey government directives as an obligation under the social pact. Kaijiro buttresses these arguments by citing the historical legitimacy of imperial rule and contrasting the generosity of the present regime with the tyranny of the Tokugawa shogunate.

The basis of Kaika Mondo's dialogue on the social contract is Essay Seven of Gakumon no Susume, March 1874, titled 'Kokumin no Shokubun wo Ronzu' PIMIX 03 in' ('The Duties of the Citizens of the Nation'). This issue describes the nation as a social contract in which people 'join together with the other citizens of the nation'. Each person takes on a double responsibility: 'to enact and im- plement the laws of the nation', adopting 'the mentality of being a master'; and to remain under the government with the obligation to obey its laws, adopting the mentality of a 'guest'. A person's primary responsibility is to 'honor the laws of the land, and not forget the principle of the equality of men.' If an individual's rights are to be respected, he must honor the rights of others. This requires that all citizens acknowledge the authority of the government and its right to enact as well as to enforce laws.46

Fukuzawa here seems to retreat from his outrage publicly expressed a mere two months earlier: 'Since this authority ultimately derives from the citizens, a person not connected with administration of the government should not criticize its affairs.' In contrast to what he had written in January 1874, this issue of Gakumon no Susume is limited to an abstract, cautious discussion of natural rights, human equality, and the duties or obligations of the social contract. In apparent concession to the spirit of the Meirokusha rebuttals, Fukuzawa also agrees that there is no distinction between government and citizens:

... the citizens of a nation are at the same time the government itself. Since not every person can directly administer the affairs of state, this is entrusted to the government, which makes a pact to serve as the representative of the people. Ac- cordingly, the people are the real masters and bosses. The government is their representative and manager.... Therefore the government receives the mandate of the people. According to its pact, it must seek to promote the rights of all, without distinction between high and low, and must not exhibit even one degree of injustice and selfishness in its correct application of the law and punishment of crime.47 45 FZ IV, p. 44; Fukuzawa, Outline, p. 39. 46 FZ III, pp. 53-54; EL, p. 41.

47 FZ III, pp. 54-55; EL, pp. 42-43.


Having established that the basis of government is a social contract, Fukuzawa then contends that not all regimes live up to this agreement: 'It is an ideal situation when both the people and the government fulfill their respective roles .... But when this is not the actual situation, those who are the government may transcend their limits to execute a tyrannical rule.'48 By suggestion, the Meiji officials are implicated, although Fukuzawa does not recommend another revolution or the surrender of personal integrity before the government. As an alternative, he urges the public to persevere in the support of 'just principles' (seiri iEl) and thereby place moral pressure on the administration to reform despotic practices:

The third course of action is to sacrifice even one's life to uphold just principles. It means to trust confidently in the moral principles of the Way of Heaven. It means that no matter how bitter the law under which they are made to suffer by tyrannical government, they must endure that suffering without letting their spirits break. Neither taking up arms nor using one-handed power, they should only bring pressure to bear upon the government by advocating just principles.49

The high standards Fukuzawa set for the Meiji regime are seen more clearly in Bummeiron no Gairyaku. This treatise reduces government to the state of a necessary evil that serves to maintain law and order only until the ultimate level of civilization is reached. Even more significant is the intention to judge existing governments by their contribution to human progress. Consequently, Fukuzawa suggests that when the quintessential level of civilization is reached, not only will artificial restrictions on human freedom be unnecessary, but government itself will become obsolete.

We can only say that a government contributing a great deal to civilized progress is a good one, and one contributing little to civilization, or even detrimental to it, is a bad one. Hence, in evaluating forms of government, our criterion must be the level of civilization to which a person has attained. There never has been a perfect civilization, and there has never been a perfect form of government. Should we ever attain a perfect civilization, government would become entirely superfluous.50

Kaika Mondo avoids the abstraction that government will one day become 'superfluous'. Instead, Ogawa rebuts arguments made in Gakumon no Susume, maintaining that the imperial regime has done much to insure the peace and happiness of the masses. For this reason, 'Dialogue on the Origins of Government' recounts the tyranny and corruption of the Tokugawa shogunate:

Essentially, since the government of a country joins together the authority of its people, the aim of the administration of political affairs through the government must be to provide for the peace and happiness of the people. The former government acted contrary to this intention in every way. The shogunate should have provided for the peace and happiness of the people, but instead caused their suf- 48 FZ III, p. 57; EL, p. 44. 49 FZ iII, pp. 58-59; EL, p. 45.

50 FZ IV, p. 52; Fukuzawa, Outline, pp. 44- 45.

396 Monumenta Nipponica, xxxViI, 3 fering. In substance, it regarded the people as its own possession. As a result, the conditions of society reflected this outlook of the government. The weak continually encountered the tyranny of the strong, and those with much power always abused those with less power. Relations among human beings were just like those among the birds and the beasts. If you consider this from the perspective of the present, it was in fact a frightening and foolish world.51

In parallel with the seventh issue of Gakumon no Susume, March 1874, titled 'The Duties of the Citizens of the Nation', Kaika Mondo includes a dialogue on 'Jimmin no Seifu ni taisuru Shokumu no Mondo' AkR t4)flt6*900314 ('Dialogue on the Duties of the People Toward the Government'). These are opposite sides of the same coin. Fukuzawa stresses the mutual obligations of the social pact, while Ogawa emphasizes the obligations of citizens to obey the government. Kaijir6 explains:

Now, above a person himself there are rights [kenri $kJ] and duties [gimu ,].... For example, in buying and selling goods, since a merchant has the right to collect his money, he has an obligation to hand over the merchandise. Since the buyer has a right to receive the merchandise, he has an obligation to pay the money. It is the same between a master and a servant. Since the master has a right to employ a servant, he has the obligation to pay him a salary. And since the servant has a right to receive his salary, he has the obligation to work for his master. These principles accompany all the types of jobs that people do in society and not for a moment can they be abrogated. If you now think carefully about these principles, you will soon come to understand the relationship between a government and its citizens.52

Kaika Mondo describes how the government administers the country through laws to protect the property of citizens from thieves and to guard against personal injury. Asks Kaijir6, 'If there were no government above to manage the people, what would conditions in the world be like?' Stronger people, such as thieves and murderers, would dominate. No property-clothing, money, land, 'or even con- cubines'-would be safe. In fact, one need only recall the chaos when the Tokugawa regime was overthrown to appreciate the new government. 'Kyuihei San, if you thought about these things, you would be convinced that the generosity of the government is indeed boundless. Furthermore, if everyone has the right to receive this generosity, then everyone has the obligation to repay it.' The specific duties of the people toward the government are summarized: 'First, to respect the country. Second, to uphold strictly government proclamations and announce- ments. Third, to pay taxes, contribute to the needs of the nation, and serve as soldiers to protect the country.' Kaijir6 elaborates:

First, respecting the country means to respect the administration, government, and officials of the country.... Originally, the government came into existence from out of the people. Since each person who wishes to create the government con- tributes the rights he possesses, the government is the government of the people. The

51 MBZ, p. 132. 52 MBZ, p. 137.

CUSUMANO: An Enlightenment Dialogue 397 authority of the government is the authority of the people. The adminstration of the government is the administration of the people. The officials managing government affairs are the representatives of the people. And these officials, moreover, are the same as any other people.... Whoever grasps these principles will realize that the power of the country is his own power, the weakness of the country is his own weakness, the nation's joy, sadness, and pain are his own as well. Then a feeling of love for the country will naturally spring forth, and this will also extend to respecting the government and its administrators, who all conform to moral principles."3

Kyuihei's criticism, however, is precisely that the MeUi government does not conform to principles of morality and justice and of human equality. In the same vein as Gakumon no Susume, January 1874, the peasant interlocutor cites the arrogance of public officials and the restrictions on freedom of expression:

In today's society, if someone openly slanders the government or is rude to an official, they become angry, arrest the fellow, and punish him.... You say, however, that the government and its officials are just like the servants of the people. But if you look at actual conditions and listen to these salaried government employees, not one prostrates himself.... Public servants treat the people like the dogs and cats they keep in their homes.... 4

As if to mock the idea expressed in Gakumon no Susume that citizens are the true rulers of the country, Ogawa also has Kyuahei complain that were public officials really servants of the people, then any citizen could disobey government directives, not pay his taxes, refuse to serve in the army, and at a single word, government employees would be obliged to bow down before their masters. Never- theless, Kyfihei's basic criticism remains consistent with Fukuzawa's arguments: 'Alas, by arresting and imprisoning the people, such a government and its officials take advantage of their power and brandish authority as if we were their private property.'55

KaUir6's refutation of Kyuihei-or of Fukuzawa-on this last point again par- allels Gakumon no Susume, July 1874, in which Fukuzawa refers by suggestion to this attitude of Meii administrators toward the public. Specifically, Fukuzawa objects to the Confucian concept of meibun -Y, or 'moral obligation', dictating the 'subordination of inferiors to superiors'. In Confucian ideology, this includes the extension of filial piety to define the ideal relationship between a sovereign and his subjects:

To take up, in the first place, the origin of this theory, its form certainly is reducible to the principle of might makes right. But it does not necessarily arise from evil intentions. It consists rather in regarding the people as ignorant beings who are easy to control, i.e. who should be succored and guided by their total subservience to the commands of their superiors.... The minds of superiors and inferiors are sup- posed to be in perfect unison on the national level, the village level, or in a shop or household. All human relations are to be treated after the parent-child relation."6 53 MBZ, pp. 137-38. MBZ, p. 136. MBZ, p. 136. 56 FZ III, p. 87; EL, p. 69.


Fukuzawa maintains that the parent-child relation results in subservience, not independence. Hence, he believes that its application is suitable only in familial situations and that this metaphor is totally inappropriate to idealize behavior between strangers, such as between a government and its people:

The parent-child relationship can only be one between real parents, whose wisdom is mature, and their own immature children .... the relation between government and people is not that of flesh and blood. It is in essence an association of strangers. Personal feelings cannot be the guiding principle in an association between strangers. It is necessarily based on the creation of a social contract.57

Although appealing to the social contract, Kaika Mondo rejects the idea that the sovereign authority and subjects are equal. In Kyuihei's monologue Ogawa boldly criticizes the depiction, found in Gakumon no Susume, of the citizen as a 'master'. Kaijiro then utilizes the parent-child analogy to justify the attitude of the Meiji regime toward the general public:

The government is a relationship above the people themselves, to insure that the rights of the people are not infringed upon.... To prevent the people from injuring one another, the government protects their rights equally. This is similar to the way a parent treats a child.... The true feeling of a parent is likewise the spirit of the government.58

Kyuihei is assured that, whatever the government may appear to be doing, it in fact acts only in his best interests:

Upon examination, the duties of the government boil down to this-merely to protect the rights of the people. Everything the present government does has this object in mind. Because it protects our rights in accordance with moral principles, Kyuihei San, even you and I, free of worry, can eat three times a day, stretch our limbs, and rest at ease. If you consider this, there is nothing in the world for which we should be so grateful as the government.59

Elsewhere, Ogawa strikes his most devastating blow. Kaijir6 dismisses all antigovernment statements as merely the excesses of an excitable dolt:

Well, Kyuihei San, if you think about all these things, your recent argumentative opinions were those of an excited person fallen into error.... For this reason, take care from now on to exercise restraint in your remarks so as not to make such errors again. From the bottom of your heart, submit to the present government and respect its generous aims.60

Conclusion: Mentalities of the Japanese Enlightenment Fukuzawa may have been the most widely published and celebrated advocate of Japan's Enlightenment movement, but he was not its only spokesman. Ogawa

FZ III, p. 89; EL, pp. 69-71. 58 MBZ, p. 144.

MBZ, p. 140. 60 MBZ, pp. 135-36.


never achieved similar renown, nor did he deserve to do so. Much, too much, of his treatise is derivative. It reacts to ideas rather than create or explore them. Yet, considering that Fukuzawa himself borrowed enormously from Western thought, it seems unfair to be overly critical of Kaika Mondo's author. Be that as it may, the Enlightenment that Ogawa described contrasts markedly with the ideals presented in Gakumon no Susume and Bummeiron no Gairyaku. Ogawa's version is not utopian, nor is it idealistic or even moral. It is eclectic, pragmatic, and authoritarian in the role he assigns to the government.

Nishi Amane offered a balanced view. He concedes in the Meirokusha journal that events leading to 1868 were not liberal in spirit and that Restoration leaders were originally opposed to contact with the West. Their efforts were directed toward the return to imperial absolutism, although the emperor himself remained little more than a symbolic figure. The ruling oligarchy made only perfunctory attempts to install democratic institutions until pressured from within and outside the country. Nonetheless, aided by intellectuals in public as well as private office, the new regime successfully promoted the re-education of the masses and the revamping of Japan's social, political, and economic institutions.

Rebuttals in the Meirokusha journal indicate that Fukuzawa's peers considered his outburst of January 1874 to be merely a problem of perception, or of abstraction. Government consists of people with more or less free will, who may or may not choose to promote certain goals, such as Enlightenment. But the contention in Gakumon no Susume, supported by Bummeiron no Gairyaku, was not that government and citizens, public and private spheres, were necessarily hostile. To a certain level benign government could encourage progress. The disagreement was over how much and what kind of progress. Superficial imitation of Western civilization, such as advocated by Kaika Mondo, was not enough for Fukuzawa. He maintained that despotism defeats Enlightenment. Authoritarian means perpetuate a sub- servient public, and he felt that this would never engender a spirit of independence allowing Japan to equal the heights of civilization reached in nations such as Britain and the United States.

Yet neither was Fukuzawa free of bias or compromise. During the 1880s he came to place more emphasis on the emperor as the ideological and moral focus of the nation, justifying this view through a concern for Japan's national security.6' He relaxed his pressure to reform despotic practices as the country seemed to make some progress toward parliamentary government. Thus Fukuzawa's disagreement with the Meirokusha or with Ogawa probably lessened by 1890, but this convergence in itself of Meiji intellectuals brings into question the degree to which proponents of reform and Enlightenment built a firm democratic tradition or provided the intellectual means for its defense when threatened in later decades. Fukuzawa's autobiography reveals that even his disdain for Meiji officials involved

61 Albert M. Craig, 'Fukuzawa Yukichi: The Philosophical Foundations of Meiji Nationalism', in Robert E. Ward, ed., Political

Development in Modern Japan, Princeton U.P., 1968, p. 132.

400 Monunenta Nipponica, xxxvii, 3

more than just adherence to democratic or moral principles. In 1898, recalling his determination not to enter the imperial government, he speaks as would a Tokugawa samurai:

When the old regime was lost, the retainers apparently felt that the basis of their stand was also gone. They turned around and offered their services to the government without the least show of embarrassment.... But it seems to me that when a man fails in a dispute, it is his part to take his defeat and retire from active society. But there was nothing like that with these men. They have sought high positions in the rival government and, having obtained them, are proud. After all, the loyalists are not to be trusted; the doctrine of loyalty is a fickle idea. I should be much hap- pier to remain an independent citizen than to associate with this kind of men.62

In light of these comments, it is problematic whether Fukuzawa's refusal to participate in the new government was a noble stand or plain intransigence. The Meirokusha were honorable men. Some members, such as Nishimura Shigeki, also criticized the imperial administration and praised aspects of the old regime. Most chose to work with or within the Meii bureaucracy rather than against or apart from it. This choice was laudable. Fukuzawa preferred to promote Enlight- enment from outside of the government. This too was laudable.

There are questions left unanswered about Ogawa Tameji. We do not know much about his background and career, whether he knew Fukuzawa personally, or why he defended the Meiji government so profusely. We do not know who read Kaika Mondo or if Fukuzawa even knew of its existence. It is clear, however, that the tract was part of a larger corpus demonstrating consistent pedagogical intentions and intellectual purpose. At least in 1874-1875 Ogawa was also an apologist for the imperial regime as well as a critic of Fukuzawa's antigovernment stance.

None of these essential points about Kaika Mondo and its author is mentioned in accounts of the tract by Japanese scholars, who interpret it as an important but ingenuous work popularizing the progressive ideals of the Japanese Enlightenment. A comparison of Ogawa, Meirokusha members, and Fukuzawa also shows the difficulty of judging mentalities of Enlightenment. The complexity of minds or motives among Meiji intellectuals is seen best in Fukuzawa himself, whose criticisms of the government gradually softened and whose personal prejudice influ- enced his refusal to join other scholars in government service after 1868. Doubtless there were many thoughts in Ogawa's mind when he compiled Kaika Mondo. The political import as well as chronological context of the tract must be explained if the work and its place in Japan's Enlightenment are to be understood more than superficially.

Analysis of Kaika Mondo reveals an author who was eclectic to the point of being cynical, perhaps unprincipled except in his devotion to the government, and devious in the manipulation of ideas. He also believed, apparently, that

62 Yukichi Fukuzawa, The Autobiography of Yukichi Fukuzawa, tr. Eiichi Kiyooka,

Columbia U.P., 1960, p. 313.


Enlightenment was not incompatible with authoritarianism in government. Yet the larger significance of the text lies not in whether the Meiji regime was more despotic than enlightened in its policies. Rather, it is the appearance of Kaika MondJ-the perception of a need to defend the government, lifting and mis- representing Fukuzawa material-that provides cause for reflection. Use of the social contract to defend official authority is creative and bold, although the argument of a sycophant. So is Ogawa's deliberate adduction of the parent-child analogy, loathed by Fukuzawa, to justify the administration's paternalistic attitude toward the general public. It is anachronistic to expect a democracy to have replaced the Tokugawa shogunate when in Europe monarchy was still the rule rather than the exception. Withal, Gakwnon no Suswne declared that the masses retained a 'spirit of subservience' and that the government promoted a despotism reminiscent of an authoritarian parent. To the extent his criticism is valid, both Fukuzawa and, unwittingly, Ogawa, provide an explanation why the decade of Enlightenment after 1868 had only a limited impact upon the following seventy years of Japanese history.

Article Contentsp. 375p. 376p. 377p. 378p. 379p. 380p. 381p. 382p. 383p. 384p. 385p. 386p. 387p. 388p. 389p. 390p. 391p. 392p. 393p. 394p. 395p. 396p. 397p. 398p. 399p. 400p. 401

Issue Table of ContentsMonumenta Nipponica, Vol. 37, No. 3 (Autumn, 1982), pp. 269-412Front Matter [pp. ]Ethnicity in the Meiji Restoration: An Interpretive Essay [pp. 269-287]The Kaneko Correspondence. Part Three [pp. 289-316]Mr Gi's Music Book: An Annotated Translation of Gi Shimei's Gi-shi Gakufu [pp. 317-332]Kaky: Zeami's Fundamental Principles of Acting[pp. 333-342]Kaky: A Mirror of the Flower. Part One[pp. 343-374]An Enlightenment Dialogue with Fukuzawa Yukichi: Ogawa Tameji's Kaika Mond, 1874-1875[pp. 375-401]Book ReviewsReview: untitled [pp. 403-405]Review: untitled [pp. 405-408]Review: untitled [pp. 408-410]Review: untitled [pp. 411-412]

an enlightenment dialogue with fukuzawa yukichi

Documents