We have been familiarized in Europe with the struggles of the Press for freedom, against a despotic Government; bat we should hardly have expected, ten years ago, to see these conditions reproduced in the Far East. There can be no doubt, however, that such struggle is now going on in Japan, and is being conducted with a courage and perseverance on the part of the Press which bear the strongest testimony to the sincerity of the writers. If the changes that have been introduced in Japan were merely imitative, lacking the basis of conviction, we should not find men willing to undergo recurring sentences of fine and imprisonment, in their effort to attain to a better dispensation. It may be, as the Japan Mail contends, that a free Press is an anachronism in Japan; inasmuch as such freedom depends on the existence of safeguards which do not there exist. "On what foundations," it asks, "does a free Presa rest? First on the liberties of the people, won from their rulers. Is there trace of these liberties in this country? Next, on laws administered by judges who have nothing to fear from the displeasure of the Crown. Is there any trace of the existence of such a body of men? Next, on juries called on to pronounce whether any incriminated writing is or is not calculated to produce the effects attributed to it by the public prosecutor or officer proceeding against the accused writer. It is useless to ask whether there is any trace of such an institution in Japan." But the fact that existing institutions are inconsistent with the freedom of the Press, is rather an argument for modifying those institutions than for enforcing repressive laws to the extinction of a powerful engine of education and reform. The questions Irere again arise-—Whether representative institutions would not much out of place in a country which, ten years ago, bad not conceived the meaning of such institutions, as a free Press is out of place under an existing despotism Whether, in fact, Japan is not still going too fast, as has been affirmed ever since she entered on the path of change along which she has burried at breakneck speed? The question can only be answered by comprehending the thought of the people; and the utterances of the Press itself are the only test by which foreigners can arriveata judgment. These utterances do not, of course, express the thought of the masses, because the masses are probably incapable of conceiving the situation. But they must be held to represent the thought of a large number of the intelligent classes otherwise the papers would not be supported, nor would relays of men be found to incur political martyrdom, so to speak, in conducting them.
Has, then, the conduct of the Press during the past two years been such as to justify the reasonable expectation that concessions of liberty made to the people, whose organ the Press is, will be prudently and wisely used? We agree with the Japan Mail, which has observed the native papers far more closely than we have done, that the answer must be affirmative "On the whole—and this is how it must be judged—the attitude of the public writers has been highly oreditable to them asa body. It was not for them to act as moderators and judges, balancing point against point in the question whether more freedom should not be granted them. It was their duty to argue and strike for liberty, and they have done it through dangers and humiliations and fines and imprisonments, with fair arguments adduced from history, without violence or intemperance of language, with an intelligent perception of the course of human affairs and the constitution of human nature. They have made a stond worthy of brave men defending a good cause. They have fought the battle of the people's liberties, and have earned fa recognition of their cause and their efforts, which, if this Government is wise, it will make with as little delay possible. They have afforded that evidence, without which no prudent government should move, and which no prudent government should disregard, that the nation has grown rapidly in the power of political thought, and is ripe for a further extension of the popular Li ties." There are indications that the Government itself is beginning to appreciate the impracticability of the present sit ation, Thirty editors locked up in prison at one time, means a degree of repression involving danger to the Government which thus strains its authority to stifle the expression of thought; and a new notification has accordingly been issued, which provides for the suspension of a newspaper at the di cretion of the Censorate. It seems to be understood that this is practically intended to override the punishments provided in the Press laws, though those laws will still be looked to as a standard of what may and what may not be legally published. The change is perhaps in the direction of even greater despotism; but it shows that the Government is alive to the scandal of imprisoning men right and left, for giving utterance to their convictions; and it may be hoped that this appreciation will prove a forerunner of reform in the political system itself.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.