ication that the mother is an unmarried woman--presumably a
concubine.

Recent statistics throw a rather lurid light on these provisions of
the Code. The Imperial Cabinet for some years past has published in
French and Japanese a resume of national statistics. Those bearing on
marriage and divorce, in the volume published in 1897, may well be
given at this point.

MARRIAGES DIVORCES LEGITIMATE BIRTHS ILLEGITIMATE
1890 325,141 109,088 1,079,121 66,253
1891 325,651 112,411 1,033,653 64,122
1892 349,489 133,498 1,134,665 72,369
1893 358,398 116,775 1,105,119 73,677
1894 361,319 114,436 1,132,897 76,407
1895 365,633 110,838 1,166,254 80,168
1897 395,207 124,075 1,335,125 89,996[BQ]

These authoritative statistics show how divorce is a regular part of
the Japanese family system, one out of three marriages proving
abortive.

Morally Japan's weak spot is the relation of the sexes, both before
and after marriage. Strict monogamy, with the equality of duties of
husband and wife, is the remedy for the disease.

This slight sketch of the provision of the new Code as it bears on the
purity of the home, and on the development of noble manhood and
womanhood, shows that the Code is very defective. It practically
recognizes and legalizes the present corrupt practices of society, and
makes no effort to establish higher ideals. Whether anything more
should be expected of a Code drawn up under the present circumstances
is, of course, an open question. But the Code reveals the
astonishingly low condition of the moral standards for the home, one
of the vital weaknesses of New Japan. The defectiveness of the new
Code in regard to the matters just considered must be argued, however,
not from the failure to embody Occidental moral standards, but rather
from the failure to recognize the actual nature of the social order of
New Japan. While the Code recognizes the principle of individualism
and individual rights and worth in all other matters, in regard to the
home, the most important social unit in the body politic, the Code
legalizes and perpetuates the old pre-Meiji standards. Individualism
in the general social order demands its consistent recognition in
every part.

We cannot conclude our discussion of Japanese ideas as to woman, and
the consequent results to morali