I08 JAPAN - MISCELLANEOUS 



The average prices of rice at the Exchange of Tokio during the years 

 1872-73-74, were respectively 3.88, 4.80 and 7.28 yen per koku (i). 



The average price for the three years was therefore 5.32 yen per koku. 

 The average for the three years of the tax in kind having been 

 11,373,630 koku, it follows that this tax in kind corresponded to a tax 

 in money amounting to 60,500,000 yen. At present the price of rice is 

 generally about 22 yen per koku, and the opposers of the reduction of the 

 land tax say that if paid in kind it might produce about 250,000,000 yen. 

 The tax at present only produces 75,000,000, not more than one third of 

 what it produced, in the first years of the Restoration. This reasoning, 

 if arithmetically correct, is yet somewhat defective, because it takes no 

 account of the other fiscal burdens on land in particular, and on the 

 country in general, nor yet of the necessity for stimulating agriculture to 

 the utmost, for in this way alone can the economic equilibrium of the 

 country be restored. 



In any case, the Parliamentary Commission to which the bill was sub- 

 mitted, while agreeing to the reduction of the tax, could not consent to 

 approve the bill in its entirety, as the moment seemed unfavourable for re- 

 ducing the income of the State by 8,500,000 yen. But the bill was 

 amended so as to diminish the actual fiscal burden on landed property by 

 0.2% for grain fields and rice fields for Japan proper, as well as for Hokkaido. 

 With this alteration, the bill was approved in the session of the 17th. February 

 so that the land tax is at present 4.5 % on the grain fields and rice fields of 

 Japan proper, the Ken of Okinawa and the Seven Islands of Izu and 3.2 % 

 in Hokkaido. 



The effect of this diminution on the revenue may be easily calculated. 

 For Japan proper, for Okinawa and the Seven Islands of Izu, the receipts 

 win amount to 4.5% on 1,214,000,000 yen, that is 54, 630,000, instead 

 of 57,oe 0,000, a diminution of about 2,370,000. 



For Hokkaido the receipts will be 3.2 % on 2,072,000 yen, that is 66,300 

 instead of 70,516, a diminution of about 4,200 yen. 



This refoim will cost the Japanese trea ury in all about 2,500,000 yen 

 (6,450,000 francs). 



Will this loss be compensated by the real advantage which the agricul- 

 tural population in Japan wiU derive from a reduction of the tax by 2 

 per 1,000 ? There is more than reason to doubt it. In any case it must be 

 observed that this reform, coldly received as it was by the very classes 

 who were to have derived benefit from it, was energetically opposed by 

 eminent economists. 



(i) Compare the data published by the Department of Agriculture aud Coijmerce at 

 Tokio in the pamphlet entitled Nihon no Kome (Japanese Rice) pages 39 e( seqq. 



