vereign
from whom they derived their authority; in practice they were very
largely a law unto themselves, and their subjects had little or no
practical chance of redress in the event of their suffering any
injustice. It is very difficult to ascertain whether there was in
reality a legal code of any kind in existence and under the ken of
these feudal lords. The legal system then in vogue appears to have
been based for the most part on custom and usage. A writer on the
subject has remarked that the few written laws were of a thoroughly
practical character. Unfortunately I have not had an opportunity of
acquainting myself with the nature of these laws. They were probably,
like everything else in the country, imported from China, and indeed
the Chinese legal system has been supreme in Japan until recently, and
even now I am not quite certain that much of its influence does not
remain. I have read that the fundamental principle underlying the
written laws referred to was that: "The people should obey the law,
but should not know the law." The code was accordingly a secret one. I
have not space, nor indeed have I any inclination, to deal with what
is, after all, an academical question as to the law prevalent in Japan
prior to the Revolution. It was probably for the most part, just as in
other countries when feudalism existed, a kind of rough-and-ready
justice, which perhaps served its purpose well at the time, and
depended more as regards the matter of justice upon the administrator
of it than upon the code itself. Though the Revolution took place in
1868, it was not until 1871 that the Daimios were deprived of all
their administrative authority. The whole of the country was then
divided into districts under the control of the central Government,
and all relics of feudalism and class privileges, which had been
numerous, were ruthlessly swept away. In due course a civil code,
commercial code, code of civil procedure, and code of criminal
procedure were issued. One or two of these codes were found not to
work well in practice, and they have been submitted to and revised by
committees specially appointed for that purpose.

As I stated in the chapter on the Constitution the independence of the
judges is recognised and provided for. The legal system of Japan at
the present time is eclectic. As I have said, the Chinese system of
legal procedure long obtained, and its influences may perhaps to some
extent still remain. Nevertheless