7IO 



REVIEW OF REVIEWS. 



September I, 1915. 



have now made burdensonif, he wonders iin- 

 comprehendingly how an honourable gentle- 

 man could desire to impose on him terms 

 which are now unjust. And the honourable 

 gentleman understands only that the Japan- 

 ese wants to sneak out of a honest bargain. 

 The two moral standards are incommensur- 

 able. The Japanese who may evade a busi- 

 ness obligation but who will sacrifice his life 

 to a punctilio of honour or patriotism — he 

 is a mystery. But the Chinese who will rob 

 his government, or perjure the member of a 

 rival tong to the gallows, but whose business 

 word is inviolable — he is easy to understand. 



California, says Mr. Rowell, does not 

 seem to appreciate that the present 

 actual problem is acute at all, and that 



to precipitate unnecessary action on the in- 

 significant fraction of the problem within its 

 immediate jurisdiction may jeopardise the 

 far larger permanent responsibility in which 

 California newls the co-operation of the 

 nation and the world. AVhether 10.000 acres 

 of Japanese farms shall bi^oome 20,000 is not 

 overwhelmingly important. That the two 

 chief races of mankind shall stay each on 

 its own side of the Pacific, there to conduct 

 in. peace and friendship the commerce of 

 goods and ideas, and of the things of the 

 spirit, but without general interpenetration 

 of populations, or commingling of blood 

 that is precisely the greatest thing in the 

 world. 



WHERE DID THE JAPANESE COME FROM? 



The legislation in California is aimed 

 against "Mongolians." Protests regard- 

 ing the Japanese as jjart of this race have 

 been frequent. Mr. W. E. Griffis, m the 

 Norih American Review, proves to his 

 own satisfaction that the Japanese, in 

 mind, body, si:)eech, thought, ways, in- 

 stitutions, mental initiative in the past 

 and present, and in tiieir methods of 

 life in foreign countries, are radically 

 un-Mongolian ; are, indeed, as " white " 

 as we ourselves. He says : — 



It is as unscientific to call the Japanese 

 "Mongolians" as to say that Englishmen 

 are Jutes or that Americans are Angles. 



Like all great peoples, the Japanese are 

 composite in origin. Their reputed Mon- 

 golian ism is but a possible incident of their 

 partial and far-off ancestry. Their history, 

 language, ethnology, physiology, religion, 

 culture, tastes, habits, and psychology show 

 that instead of being '• Mongolians," they 

 are the most un-Mongolian people in Asia. 

 There is very little Chinese blood in the 

 Japanese composite, and no connection be- 

 tween the languages. Physically the two 

 peoples are at many points astonishingly un- 

 like. In the texture and attitude of their 

 mind they are antip<xlal. The notion of a 

 voluntary Chinese and Japanese political 

 union, for exami)lc, an '' anti-Caucasian " 

 league, is unthinkable. 



As to the actual origin of the race, his 

 own opinion is that the Japanese are 

 made up of four races, Aryan, Semitic, 

 Malay, and Tartar. The original in- 

 habitants were the Ainus. who, by si:>eech 

 and facial appearance, are Aryans. 

 Reading from their own historical books, 

 we find that a new race invaded Japan 

 from " Ama " or " Heaven " (the central 

 Asian plateau), and fighting back the 

 Ainus, settled in the Yamato or Kyoto 

 district. At the same time are mentioned 

 long-bearded, mi.xed Indonesian tribes, 

 who came from the south, and settled 

 in .Southern Japan. In i i ';o A.D. the Ainu 

 and the Indonesians were brought under 

 the rule of the Kyoto bureaucracy. 



China, at the time of the Yamato in- 

 vasion, was the most civilised nation in 

 the world, and the Yamato imported and 

 fashioned their civilisation on her model. 

 And it is from this fact that the Japan- 

 ese have for long been considered Mon- 

 golian. But their point of view is quite 

 un-Mongolian. China invented what 

 we have. Her culture is indigenous. 

 Japan, like ourselves, borrowed her cul- 

 ture from China, and therein we have 

 one of the great differences between the 

 two nations. 



THE GIFT (?) BATTLESHIP FROM MALAY. 



WHAT IT MAY LEAD TO. 



Mr. MacCullum Scott pomts out m 

 the Contemporary that the offer and ac- 

 ceptance of the gift from the Federated 

 Malay States of a battleship marks a 

 return to the policy which cost the Em- 

 pire the American colonies. 



What, then, he writes, is the Constitu- 

 tional problem involved in the offer and 



acceptance of this Malay battleship ? It 

 is the question of whether the principles 

 upon which the Empire has been 

 founded permit us to ta.x these subordi- 

 nate States, Dependencies, Protector- 

 ates, or Crown Colonies for Imperial 

 purposes outside themselves. This trans- 

 action involve the abandonment of a 



