1

which operate in European countries. It is remarkable,
as showing Japanese ideas of sexual morality, that
prostitution for the purpose of supporting a parent is
esteemed an act of filial piety and deserving of all
praise.2 Notwithstanding what has been above said, it
must not be thought that licentiousness is absolutely
excused by the Japanese. Iyeyas affirms that "the
man is not upright who is much given to woman,'
and the number of concubines a man may have is strictly
regulated. Mr Dickson says, moreover, that it is a
mistake to think that the marriage tie is lightly re-
garded in Japan, or that most wives have, as asserted
by some writers, been courtesans in early life. The
falsity of the former notion is proved by the fact that all
marriages are believed to be arranged, or at least
brought about, by the kami, or spirits who superin-
tend Japanese affairs; and as to the latter, Mr Mitford
affirms that marriages with women of bad character are
much rarer in Japan than in England. That Japan-
ese and European ideas relative to sexual matters
greatly differ, however, is evident from the observa-
tions of Sir Rutherford Alcock with reference to
Japanese plays. He says, "the curtain drops a great
deal too late, if a Japanese audience were susceptible
of being outraged by anything gross or obscene." He
adds, "It is difficult to conceive how anything of
purity or sanctity can enter into the lives, of those
classes at least, where not only the sexes of all ages
frequent the same public baths promiscuously, but young
girls and respectable matrons find their recreation in
witnessing such plays." And yet the same writer,
while wondering whether the Japanese have any stan-
dard of morality, says that some such must exist,
1 Op. cit., vol i., p. 69. 2 Do., vol i., pp. 57, 67.
3 Op. cit., vol i., p. 61.

3

66 for a gentle, womanly, and modest expression and bearing generally marks the women, and the wellconditioned among the men have a certain refinement and delicacy in their manners; while there is much habitual courtesy even among the lower classes, with a consideration for the feelings and susceptibilities of others, and an unwillingness to give offence, which cannot well be sustained amidst universal grossness, and a coarse unbridled license.'

The estimate formed by Mr Doolittle of the moral character of the Chinese is that they do not regard sin "as a very unworthy and exceedingly wicked thing. . Sin or crime, or fault or error, is a very indefinite and comparatively an unimportant and trivial thing in the Chinese mind."2 This is not to be wondered at, when we consider that the moral code of Confucius lays little stress on ought but duties toward princes and parents. It is, of course, a great moral gain if a man becomes a good son, a loyal subject, and a faithful husband, and the Chinese are undoubtedly right in principle, when they seek a basis for morality in human nature, rather than in an indefinite idea of duty towards a supernatural being. It is, therefore, in favour of Chinese morality, rather than the reverse, that, as Mr Edkins says, "The notion of duty in the Confucian system being the moral bond that connects man with man, instead of that which connects man with God, it comes to resemble the feeling of honour.

1 "The Capital of the Tycoon," (1863), vol. ii. p. 116-17; see also Aimé Humbert, op. cit., vol ii., p. 224.

Doolittle, op. cit., p. 594. Another writer says:-"The Chinese is so completely absorbed in temporal interests, in the things that fall under his senses, that his whole life is only materialism put in action. Lucre is the sole object on which his eyes are constantly fixed." Huc, op. cit., vol. i., p. 161. This traveller describes the Chinese as being, what Napoleon used to call the English, a nation of shopkeepers, and as having all the accompanying characteristics fully developed (vol. ii., p. 149).

The good man is called kuin-tsze, the honourable man; while the bad man is termed seaou jin, the little man. Mean and dishonourable acts are said to be done by the latter, while all acts that imply self-respect and a sense of honour are attributed to the former." 1 If the moral conduct of the Chinese were always governed by this principle, it would suffer little by comparison with that of peoples in a more advanced state of civilisation. The reference of actions to the standard supplied by self-respect, although in practice they fall short of it, shows that the Chinese are not far from a true idea of the nature of virtue. They speak, indeed, of the “native purity and goodness of the heart," and teach that "it entirely depends on themselves whether their conduct and character throughout life shall be good and honourable, or bad and mean. Much the same testimony is borne by various writers as to the Japanese. Caron declared that they bore the character of being extremely honourable, and that only those who were lost to every sense of character would do anything to hurt another. He adds that they were most faithful to the trusts reposed in them, and that they would defend to the utmost any one placing himself under their protection.3 According to Thunberg, honesty prevailed throughout the whole country, and justice was universally held sacred.* One of the principal defects in the Japanese character noted by this traveller was pride, which he ascribed to their belief that they were descended from the gods." What Thunberg terms pride, should rather be called a feeling of self-respect. It is the same feeling as that which has in a previous chapter been shown to be dis

1

op. cit., p. 178.

6.

Meadows, The Chinese and their Rebellions," p. 391.

3 loc. cit., p. 636.

▲ op. cit., vol. iii., p. 260.

4 op. cit., vol. iii., p. 259.

tinctive of the existing predatory races of Asia, as it was of the early European peoples.1 Considered from this point of view, the Chinese and Japanese might have been classed with the peoples of Central Asia; but unlike these, they have ceased to be "predatory," and have indeed long formed settled and highly organised communities.

We have probably here the real explanation of the peculiar phenomena presented by the moral culture of the Chinese and Japanese. The formation of the sense of personal dignity was intimately connected with the recognition of man's true position as the head of the family, and it is evident that the instincts which express themselves in the family life, and the virtues springing from them, have, with those peoples, been inordinately cultivated at the expense of the passive virtues—those which are more immediately concerned with self-or rather before the idea of moral obligation associated with them was actually formulated. The teaching of the earliest ages was evidently as much political as moral, and it sought to support the authority of the State by reference to the constitution of the family. To the filial relation may be traced nearly all the developments of Chinese morality, and it is because the sympathetic side of their nature has been too exclusively cultivated, that such morality is so little elevated.

The defective nature of Chinese morality may, probably, have some connection with their intellectual culture. Before the idea of duty could be definitely formed, the process of moral development was checked by an extraordinary display of intellectual activity, resulting in the teachings of Chinese philosophy, according to which all action is to be tried by a rational rather than a moral standard. If the principles of true reason had

1 supra, vol. i., p. 402, seq.

been embodied in that philosophy, the influence which it thus exercised would have had the happiest results; but unfortunately it was not so. It is true that the influence of philosophy led to the establishment of certain political principles, such as that "the nation must be governed by moral agency in preference to physical force," and "the services of the wisest and ablest men in the nation are indispensable to its good government.”1 If it had not been for the recognition of these principles in political government, morality would most probably have been a mere name among the Chinese. As it is, the extraordinary system of competitive examination which has subsisted in China for thousands of years," has had the result of so completely developing the intellectual faculties at the expense of the moral nature, that it may be declared of the Chinese that, while their moral conduct is on the whole guided by what they accept as the principles of reason,3 they are almost devoid of what we understand by "conscience."

2

It was said above that the phenomena presented by Chinese morality can be explained only on the assumption that the family instincts, and the virtues springing from them, have been inordinately developed at the expense of the passive virtues which form the true basis of morals. This conclusion is confirmed by the peculiar hold which ancestor-worship has acquired over the Chinese mind, that superstition being a consequence of the reverent feeling with which the head of the family is regarded during life. The same feeling is entertained

1 Meadows, "The Chinese and their Rebellions," p. 401, seq. 2 This writer says upwards of 4000 years. See do., p. 402.

3 Mr Meadows refers to the Chinese readiness to yield to the force of reason, in proof of their high civilisation. (Desultory Notes on China, p. 203).

4 Huc states that the Chinese go to inform their ancestors of whatever good or evil befalls them, op. cit., vol ii., p. 222.