secular functions that had previously taken place at St. Mary's Church. It is now one of the most important buildings in Oxford. For discomfort in seating accommodation it is probably unequalled by any building in Europe.

In the latter part of the seventeenth century the coach service between London and Oxford was so far improved that passengers were carried the whole distance in one day, the fare being 10s. for the journey. Coffee-houses, too, Coffee-houses, too, were opened in Oxford, and in 1677 Antony Wood asks: "Why doth solid and serious learning decline, and few or none follow it now in the University? Answer: Because of the coffee-houses, where they spend all their time."

In the early days of the eighteenth century Oxford was a stronghold of Jacobitism. Under George I. this party was so indiscreet that the King sent a body of dragoons to Oxford, at the same time giving a present of books to the University of Cambridge. This provoked Dr. Trapp, Professor of Poetry, to write the following witty lines:

Our royal master saw with heedful eyes
The wants of his two Universities:
Troops he to Oxford sent, as knowing why
That learned body wanted loyalty:
But books to Cambridge gave, as well dis-
cerning

How that right loyal body wanted learning.

In the eighteenth century a very large number of books was printed at the University Press, and many new lectureships were founded. The University received also some exceedingly generous gifts at the hands of various benefactors. Chief among these acquisitions was the bequest of Dr. Radcliffe, who left money for the foundation of an infirmary, an observatory, and a medical library. The latter-now known as

the Radcliffe Camera-was designed by Gibbs, and was opened with much ceremony in 1749. Its imposing dome is a landmark for miles around. Another noteworthy bequest was that of Sir Robert Taylor, the result being the present Taylor Institute.

From a scholastic point of view, matters were not so satisfactory as they ought to have been. About the year 1770 John Scott-afterward Lord Eldon-then an undergraduate of University College, was examined in Hebrew and history for his degree. Only two questions were asked him. The first was: "What is the Hebrew for a skull?" and to this Scott answered "Golgotha." The second question was: "Who founded University College? and he replied "King Alfred." He passed.

With the nineteenth century the University entered upon a new era of expansion. The story of this epoch is too well known to need description here. The revision of the Examination Statutes, the rise of theological trainingschools, the "Oxford Movement," the University Extension agitation, each has left its mark, for good or for evil, upon University education. With the future this article is not concerned; but the writer may perhaps be permitted to suggest that the Extension movement and the Local Examination system, together with other similar attempts to reduce Oxford to the level of a superior Board School, cannot fail to exert an influence prejudicial to the prestige of the University a prestige that ought to be cherished by all who love to look back on the glorious days they spent in that City of Dreams.Gentleman's Magazine.

THE revolution of 1868, which introduced a new order of things into the Empire of the Mikados, was a revolution with political idealism at its back.

It was essentially an awakening of the nation to self-consciousness and political power. Far ahead before the vision of its leaders stood the form of an en

franchised State, with Imperial Government and National Assembly, the whole country from one end of it to the other beating with the common pulse of a united nation, all feudal restrictions and artificial distinctions abolished forever. Such an ideal, indeed, was not perhaps expressed distinctly in so many words even by the most enlightened of the revolutionary leaders, but in a vague sort of way, some such ideal was before the minds of not a few, and such was, in fact, the only logical outcome, as the later events have amply proved, of this great movement.

The revolution is commonly spoken of as a restoration, the restoration of the Mikado to his supreme and rightful authority in the government of the country. In a formal sense, the statement is certainly true. The Emperors of Japan had been for some eight hundred years, except at a few and brief intervals, kept in political imprisonment by the successive governments of the Shoguns. The men who agitated for the restoration were men who made Mikadoism their religion. They felt the oppression of the Shogunate régime all the more keenly since it was not they, but the divine Mikado, who suffered most. The restoration movement was thus an indictment of the existing authority as usurper and oppressor before the bar of the national conscience. The divine name of the Mikado gave to the movement a legal as well as a religious sanction, and made its strength well-nigh irresistible. But, however, powerful this idea may have been, it was not the chief reason of this great movement.

The revolution is again spoken of as the work of a few powerful clans, who had been nourishing the spirit of revenge against the Tokugawa dynasty for some three centuries. The clansmen of Choshu and Satsuma doubtless felt in 1868 that then or never was their long-waited-for opportunity. Relying on their united military strength and on the sacred mandate of the Mikado, they boldly faced the authority of the Shogunate, put it under the ban of the Empire by one splendid coup, and then crushed it with one speedy blow. The

Shogunate was thus overthrown in one day, and the country unified under the legitimate government of the Mikado. The nation certainly owes these two clans and a few others a debt of gratitude for their work. Yet, the ambition and military strength of these clans were not, any more than Mikadoism, the only reason of the movement. The outcome of the revolution was far greater than either Mikadoism or Clanism had anticipated.

It is yet again said that the coming of Europeans, with the stories of their wonderful civilization, was a cause of the revolution. To a certain extent this was doubtless true. The troublesome question of foreign intercourse certainly hastened the overthrow of the Shogunate, and, but for the introduction of democratic ideas from the West, the revolution would in all probability have stopped with the establishment of an autocratic centralized administration. Besides, the presence of the Western Powers, whose aggressive policies stared menacingly in the face of the divided nation, was indirectly of no small help to the re-establishment of peace. The Imperialists were disposed to a more lenient policy, and the Shogunate parties felt it easier to submit, for both knew they were obeying the dictates of magnanimous patriotism. But those who persist in regarding the outside influences as the main cause of the great movement will find Japan's healthy growth in her new life of freedom a perpetual puzzle in their attempts at explanation.

Most probably the European scholars who have interested themselves in these phases of Japanese history would have searched deeper for their causes, if these events had taken place not in Asia, but somewhere else. Asia is to the majority of Europeans a strange land of dreams. In their view the principles underlying the growth of social life in the East are fundamentally different from those in the West. The political or historical canons formulated for Europe are not to be applied to politics or history in Asia. Japan being an Asiatic country any random reason seems to suffice in the minds of most ob

servers to explain one of the most momentous events in her history. The Japanese are gifted, it is said, with a supreme imitative genius, and their recent civilizing activity is a great achievement of this genius. That so much has already been accomplished by this Oriental people is worthy of all commendation; nevertheless, these critics go on to say that the new civilization in Japan remains an imitated article, and with all its splendid exterior is but "skin-deep." The adjectives "Asiatic" and "Oriental" have, in fact, peculiar associated notions which. largely shut out peoples under their category from fellowship with the peoples of the West. Now, no mistake could be greater than such a wholesale characterization. The Japanese are, for instance, an insular people, and as such have characteristics quite distinct from those of other peoples in Asia. But the chief thing which separates Japan from China or India is the fact that the civilization of Japan is young, being no older than that of England or France. In the middle of the sixth century, when the latter countries were coming under the sway of Roman civilization and Roman Christianity, Japan, on the other hand, was coming under the sway of Chinese civilization and Chinese Buddhism. The Japanese are in fact the only nation in the East who rightly belong to the company of the modern nations of the world.* If the

*It seems to be a perpetual puzzle with European writers that this "Eldest of the

peoples" should be yet so young in spirit. The bugbear of the Japanese chronology has done many an innocent mischief. I beg leave to quote from what I have elsewhere written. "The chronology of Japan, which was officially proclaimed for the first time in 1872, indeed, makes her history stretch back to very great antiquity. It places the first year of the reign of Jimmu Jenno, the founder of the imperial house, 660 B.C., making him thus the contemporary, broadly speaking, of Draco and Solon, of Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar. But this chronology, which was compiled from the oldest extant records of the country (the two historical books, certain parts of which, largely mythical and legendary-" Kojiki" and " Nihongi"-were compiled respectively in 712 and 720 A.D.), somewhat as Bishop Usher's Biblical chronology was compiled, seems to be al

history of Japan for the last six centuries be studied without prejudice, there will be noticed the working of the same social forces and the effects of the same historical causes as in the history of modern Europe.

Are there, then, some deeper reasons than the three before mentioned to account for the great movement we have been discussing? I repeat what I said. at the beginning, that it was a revolution with a political idealism, and that the chief cause of it was the uprising of democracy.

We read in the history of modern Europe that, while in England it was the aristocracy who, uniting with the people, wrested constitutional rights and privileges from the Crown, in the case of the Continental nations it was the Crown which, rallying round itself the people, overthrew the despotisms of the feudal nobility. In other words, in these latter countries the Crown became the mouthpiece of the nation, and in the name of the nation destroyed the powers of the nobles. The immediate result of this movement was the establishment of centralized autocracies. These, however, were in their nature a benevolent absolutism, and under it these countries became unified within themselves and grew rapidly in wealth and intelligence. The rise of absolute monarchies was, therefore, a great step in advance toward the later uprising of democracy. Now, in the case of Japan the historical process was almost identical with that in Continental Europe: with one difference, however-that in Japan centralization and democratic uprising took place almost simultaneously. For feudalism in the Mikado's Empire had lasted longer than it should have done. With no competition with outside nations and no stimulus of new ideas, as has been the case in Europe,. the old régime in Japan ran more than its full course. In the third quarter of the present century, when the West

together too long. The scholars who have studied the subject critically all seem to think that from five hundred to one thousand years must be struck off if we would reach the solid ground of history."-International Journal of Ethics, January, 1897.

ern Powers came and knocked for admittance at the door of hermit Japan, feudalism was as to its spirit dead and gone-its forms alone remained intact. The descendants of the great men who many centuries ago founded those illustrious houses of the Daimios had become emasculated through luxury and idleness. The chief families of retainers who had the monopoly of important offices produced but few great men. It was pitiful, indeed, to see, as the day of revolution arrived, the nominal leaders of the nation utterly powerless and dependent, like children, upon the guidance and support of their subordinates. Very few of the revolutionary leaders came from the higher classes, most of them were from the middle-class Samurais, and not a few from classes still lower.

The mercantile class, too, had attained by this time to a position of much importance. According to the popular classification of social orders, they stood, indeed, at the bottom of the list; first came the Samurais, standing next to the nobility, then came the farmers, then the mechanics, and last of all the merchants. But this current formula represented merely the ideas of bygone days. In real social estimation the merchant stood next and closest to the Samurai. At the time we are speaking of one great question with every Daimio was the question of finance. The progress of civilization and the increase of the habits of luxury had made the revenues of these Daimios sadly insufficient. Financial embarrassment became greater when Western merchants brought rifles, cannons, gunboats for sale, and the impending revolution made the necessity for armament absolutely imperative. The rich merchants of great cities, as creditors of the Daimios, grew rapidly in wealth, and at the same time also in social influence. When, therefore, the Restoration Government, in 1868, as their most pressing measure, issued paper money, they could only secure sufficient credit for these notes through the support of the rich merchants of Kyoto and Osaka. Moreover, this uprising was not confined to the mercantile class. Signs

of improvement were visible among other classes also. Education, which had formerly been monopolized by the Samurais, now became quite prevalent among the rest of the people. Novels and romances, dramas and theatricals, story-tellings and recitations had become powerful organs of popular education. No small percentage of mechanics or farmers could read and write. In fine, three centuries of profound peace had produced great improvement in the social condition of the masses. As a result, there had come to exist a class of what may be called a representative commonalty, composed of men mainly recruited from the Samurai class, but also with important additions from other classes. Only one touch of modern thought was needed to set this class of men, and through them the whole nation, like well-dried fuel, on fire with the new life of freedom.

The steady growth of popular influence under the new régime strictly bears out the statement I have made above. In the famous oath of the present Mikado, in which, at the very beginning of his reign, he stated for the guidance of the nation the principles of the new administration, occurs a phrase which significantly expresses the spirit of the new time then being ushered in. The phrase used is Koji-Yoron, which, rendered in English, reads "public opinion and general deliberation." Now, why should the Emperor refer to his most earnest intention of following public opinion then, as also afterward at critical epochs, as the ground of his claim to be obeyed by the nation at large, if not for the reason that even at that early stage the most potent factor in politics was a class of men who, as students of current politics, constituted, informally but really, a representative commonalty? These men gave expression to the intelligent public opinion of the time, or, rather, through their agitation, created it, so that nothing was dreaded by the authorities so much as their opposition. On the other hand, with their approval and support all things were possible. The Emperor's oath was thus but a frank recognition on his part of the existing state of

things. The new reign, therefore, began not as the autocratic imperial administration of the days of yore, depending solely upon the divine right of kingship, but also with a solemn pledge that it aimed at the inauguration of constitutional government. Indeed, a year after the restoration an Assembly was organized for the discussion of legislative and administrative measures. But the attempt was as yet premature, and the Assembly soon ceased to exist. The laborious stages of preparation had to be gone through before the country was fit for a parliamentary régime.

was

The first great task of the new Government was administrative centralization. Japan in the middle of the present century was in a condition very similar to that of France in the seventeenth. The country was divided up into some three hundred princedoms, large and small, most of them virtually independent States. Laws, customs, traditions, dialects were distinct in each of these. Frontiers were guarded with great strictness, and commerce hampered with a hundred artificial restrictions. With no uniform mode of taxation and no legal security for life and property, the rich were in constant dread of money requisitions, and the peasantry weighed down with the sole burden of taxation and frequent calls for corvée. The work of centralization accomplished in France by Sully, Richelicu, Mazarin, and Colbert in the course of a century had to be accomplished in Japan in the course of a generation. Thanks to the patriotism of the Mikado and of his great Ministers -men like Kido, Okubo, and Ito-as well as to the lessons of modern Europe, the work was accomplished, in some respects even more satisfactorily than in France, and a parliamentary régime finally ushered in without a bloody revolution.*

In this work of centralization the

* 1869.-Feudalism abolished and all authority resumed into the hands of the Emperor.

1872. The army organized on the basis of universal conscript duty. The Samurais lose their monopoly of military service.

1873. The Government undertakes the

Mikado's Government did not sail entirely in calm waters. There were troubles on the right and the left. The centralizing policy was distasteful both

to the Conservatives and the Radicals. The former did not like it because they were not yet weaned from their old feudal notions; the latter because they thought the Government did not march fast enough. Several rebellions occurred, culminating in the great Satsuma rebellion, which almost assumed the proportions of a civil war. When, however, it became clear that all these attempts failed to shake the authority of the central Government, the Radicals, led by Count Itagaki, inaugurated a series of political agitations, which, beginning with 1878, grew year after year in scope and volume. Pamphlets were issued, newspapers were started, lectures were given, immense mass meetings were held, memorials with long lists of signatures were presented to the Government, and political partiesRadical, Progressive, and Conservative -grew as spontaneously as mushrooms. The years 1881 and 1882 were very noisy ones, indeed. The foreign observers of the time might have noticed. in these occurrences a parallel to events in England when the "Chartist" movement and the Repeal agitation were going on under O'Connell. Only the Japanese agitations were finally successful in achieving the end. In October, 1882, the Emperor issued a rescript