UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An investigation of the origins of tenant unrest in Japan of the 1920s Whalley, Thomas Randall 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 W49.pdf [ 5.39MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094072.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094072-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094072-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094072-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094072-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094072-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094072-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094072-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094072.ris

Full Text

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ORIGINS OF TENANT UNREST IN JAPAN OF THE 1920s. by THOMAS RANDALL WHALLEY B.A. Sophia University, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of History) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October,1977 © Thomas Randall Whalley, 1977 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or publication of th is thes is fo r f inanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of /llST<7£ ML The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ftfr 5 jn i i i ABSTRACT This thesis is an investigation of the origins of the tenant farmer movement prevalent in Japan in the 1920 and '30s. This movement was a social movement of considerable importance. Accordingly, much research, both Japanese and Western, has been done on the movement. The concern of this thesis is with the origins of the movement at the r i c e -shoot l e v e l . The question addressed i s ; Why did the move-ment develop at this time in Japan's history? Events on the v i l l a g e level are investigated ir^search for the answer to this query. I have concerned myself with the 1920s alone since the developments in the 1930s merely represent an extension of those of the previous decade. The sociologist James Scott has recently developed a theoretical framework for investigating the origins of tenant unrest as a universal h i s t o r i c a l phenomenon. This framework was f i r s t published in an a r t i c l e in the Journal  of Asian Studies e n t i t l e d "The Erosion of Patron-Client Bonds and Social Change in South East Asia" I have found this framework to provide a useful means of organizing the material re l a t i n g to the origins of tenant unrest in Japan. The basic premise of Scott's theory is that the v e r t i c a l ties of loyalty binding the c l i e n t to his patron are based on the receipt of basic goods and services from the patron. The.client's minimum demands are subsistence guarantee and i i a protection. This bond can lose i t s legitimacy i f the patron no longer supplies the goods and services expected by the c l i e n t . Under these conditions the potential for tenant unrest is created. This p o t e n t i a l , however, is not always realized. Whether the patron loses his legitimacy without a c l i e n t reaction or not depends on several factors. Three of the more important factors that are investigated herein are the state of the c l i e n t ' s economy, the means for the c l i e n t to mobilize,and influences beyond the v i l l a g e that either encourage or discourage the expression of his dis-content, I argue herein that the 1andlord-tenant relationship in Japan is a patron-client relationship and that changes in Japanese society generally and Japanese rural society speci-f i c;al ly led to the loss .of legitimacy of that relationship. Four s p e c i f i c changes contributed to that development. The increase in absentee landlordism, the increasing tendency for landlords to invest their money outside of the rural sector, the steady decline in the number of c u l t i v a t i n g landlords and the increasing p o l i t i c a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the landlord with the prefectural bureaucracy a l l combined to a l t e r the quality of 1 and 1ord-tenant relations and gradu-a l l y divided the vil l a g e along class l i n e s . It was this loss of legitimacy of the landlord-tenant relationship that created the potential for tenant unrest. The r e a l i z a t i o n of this potential in the form of -'organ i zed tenant farmer movement depended primarily on three factors. i i b F i r s t , the economic conditions prevailing in Japan in the 1920s were such that the tenant desperately needed the goods and services t r a d i t i o n a l l y provided by the landlord. In the absence of an alternate source of supply the tenant was forced to react against the loss of the services. Second, the existence of a v i l l a g e level tenant farmer union en-abled the tenants to successfully mobilize their resources and confront the landlords with their demands in.form of a co l l e c t i v e bargaining unit. F i n a l l y , in order for the move-ment to have developed i t was also necessary that the tenant farmer's t r a d i t i o n a l attitude toward his landlord change. This change was fostered in large part by the breakdown in the tr a d i t i o n a l 1 an dl or d-tenan t rel a t i ons h i p, but other p o l i t i c a l changes in Japanese society were not without e f f e c t . The labor movement and tenant par t i c i p a t i o n within i t was p a r t i c u l a r l y important in fostering changes in tenant farmer consciousness and the development of a class con-scious tenant farmer movement. These three conditions are the factors crucial to the r e a l i z a t i o n of the potential for tenant unrest that led to the development of the tenant farmer movement in the 1920s. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES iv Chapter I. OVERVIEW OF THE RURAL CRISIS 1 II. THE SOCIAL BACKGROUND TO TENANT UNREST 11 III. THE ECONOMIC BACKGROUND TO TENANT UNREST 49 IV. THE ROLE OF THE TENANT UNIONS IN THE EXPRESSION OF TENANT UNREST 79 V. CONCLUSION 112 FOOTNOTES 1 1 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 2 7 i v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Non-cultivating Landlords in Tohoku and Kinki 1 908 - 1919 28 2. Percentage of Village Land Owned by Non-residents 31 3. Percentage of Tenanted Land 1 872-1 934 52 4. Percentage of Cultivator Type 1883-1908 52 5. Inequality of Landholding in 1 920 53 6. Summary of FarmoHousehol d Economies 62 7. General Aggregate Farm Product Prices 67 8. Summary of Farm Household Economies -Tenant Farmers 69 9. Tenant Disputes and Aggregate Farm Product Prices 1 91 9-1930 72 10. Number of Disputes, Tenant Unions and Membership 84 V ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to express my thanks for the help and guidance received from Dr. E. Wickberg and Dr. W.D. Burton in the preparation of this thesis. The work began as a seminar paper under the direction of Dr. Wickberg and I am grateful for the i n i t i a l aid and direction received at that time. The work Iwas com-pleted as a thesis under the supervision of Dr. Burton. The many hours that I received from Dr. Burton on a l l facets of this thesis are greatly appreciated. CHAPTER I OVERVIEW OF THE RURAL CRISIS 1 The decade following World War I was a time of great s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l upheaval in rural Japan. The rural c r i s i s gripping the nation was so extensive and highly v i s i b l e that even the foreign observer was able to trace i t s contours accurately. In the mid 1920s, one such observer wrote, Agriculture in Japan is greatly disturbed. The daily press bears witness to the widespread dis-content. There is trouble between farmer and government, between landlord and tenant. Farmers refuse to pay taxes to local governments; they withdraw their chi1dren from public schools in protest against o f f i c i a l actions. They fight over the water and over the rents. There are r i o t s and demonstrations. There are many arrests. A tenant farmer movement has taken up the fight for the rights of the tenants. Landlords have associ-ated together to combat the movement. The basic industry of Japan is in considerable disorder.' The Japanese government, also aware of the disorder in rural 2 society, regarded the situation with an a i r of c r i s i s . Events that animated the small v i l l a g e of Kisaki, located on the Japan Sea in the prefecture of Niigata, r e f l e c t the nature of this rural c r i s i s . They are not un-typical of events a l l over Japan in the troubled 1920s., In Kisaki, early in the winter of 1922, a series of develop-ments destined to effect profoundly the character of the tenant farmers of the v i l l a g e began to unfold. On the 23rd o'f November the 120 tenants of Katsuyanagi and Yokoi buraku, two of the v i l l a g e ' s seven hamlets, formed a tenants' union, c o l l e c t i v e l y confronting six of their landlords and demanding a 25% reduction in their rent. Five of these six landlords 2 complied with the demands but the sixth, the largest land-holder, refused to do so. When the tenants, in turn, refused to pay rent, this sixth landlord took them to court. He obtained a court injunction to prevent his tenants from entering the f i e l d s . This injunction was quickly withdrawn under pressure from public opinion. The tenants, however, did not withdraw their demands and when the landlord again refused to grant a reduction in rent the tenants r e t a l i a t e d by withholding payment. A four year court battle ensued. F i n a l l y on April 14th, 1926, the court issued a decree in favour of the landlord, and the tenants' case was l o s t . The landlords immediately followed this favourable s e t t l e -ment by obtaining an injunction to prevent r e c a l c i t r a n t tenants from entering their f i e l d s . To prevent this in-junction from being implemented, 600 members of the tenants' union confronted the representative of the land-lords and the police on May 5th, 1926. The tenants' lawyer was soon ordered to withdraw with the tenants, and when the tenants refused to do so, 340 of them were arrested. Thus began the famed 'Kisaki incident". The events of May 5th, 1926, earned the v i l l a g e a permanent place in the history of rural Japan. Temporarily routed by the arrests and evictions, the tenants changed their t a c t i c s . In protest over their treatment, they withdrew their children from the local school and refused to pay either taxes or rent. Defied 3 by the local landlords on the school council, the tenants decided to build their own school. In this endeavor they met constant harrassment. Their f i r s t attempt was blocked by an injunction against the use of the chosen site for that purpose. When the site was changed and the school f i n a l l y bui11, the Department of Education declared the school unfit for the government's educational requirements. This declaration was followed by a police order that the teachers return to their place of registered domicile. Agitation by means of mass meetings, and demonstrations by the tenants of Kisaki and the neighbouring villages f i n a l l y resulted in permission from the authorities to operate the school as a supplement to public education. Mass meetings were frequent. Not only Kisaki v i l l a g e r s but also tenants from miles around attended. The police, too, were in attendance and frequently ordered the speeches stopped or the speaker changed. They often forced changes in the meeting-pi ace five or six times in the course of a single meeting. Despite this constant harrassment the tenants did not give up but continued to struggle with their landlords 3 throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s;. Admittedly, Kisaki is one of the more spectacular tenant disputes of the 1920's, but in rough outline i t is typical of the disputes of the decade. A number of universal characteristics in disputes are clearly recognizable in the Kisaki dispute. F i r s t , there is the i n i t i a l formation of a 4 tenants' union and the great break with t r a d i t i o n in the attempt to implement c o l l e c t i v e bargaining with landlords. The demand for rent reduction figures highly in almost a l l disputes. Further, the withholding of rent is a typical tenant t a c t i c in disputes. Likewise, the use of a court injunction to prevent tenants from entering the f i e l d s is a common landlord counter-strategy. In fact, what distinguishes Kisaki from other disputes is the scale and intensity of the dispute. There were few disputes so long in the courts and few where the v i l l a g e r s were so determined to set up their own schools and create a 'counter culture' in the v i l l a g e . Kisaki was just one of thousands of vill a g e s torn by s t r i f e between landlord and tenant. The Japanese authorities were deeply alarmed by the frequency and geographic extent of these tenant disputes. It was not merely the frequency of these events that disturbed the authorities. Something much more threatening to national s t a b i l i t y was also cause for alarm. The Japanese Government had long regarded the rural sector as a bastion of s t a b i l i t y and had taken great care from early Meiji times to ensure that the v i l l a g e was isolated from social and p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t . Now i t seemed the very thing to be feared - discontent in the vill a g e s -was growing. One writer expressed the import of the develop-ment of widespread dispute: Not only were tenancy disputes more frequent than industrial labour disputes, they revealed 5 the existence of discontent in that very part of Japanese society, the rural v i l l a g e , long regarded as the ultimate guarantee of social s t a b i l i t y . The Japanese government was distressed and an aura of hysteria is noticeable in even the most academic of government docu-ments on the matter. Indeed, the situation could not be ignored; i t was serious. A look at a few s t a t i s t i c s soon confirms t h i s . In 1917, only 85 tenancy disputes were recorded. By 1920, this had climbed to 408, and then lept dramatically to 1,680 disputes the following year. This is more than a four-fold increase. The trend for disputes to increase, though never again of such epic proportions, did not stop. The number of disputes on a yearly basis rose steadily year after year until i t reached the peak of 6,170 incidents in 1937. In 1941, the la s t year for which disputes are recorded, 5 3,308 disputes occurred. These figures are even more meaningful when the extent of the population and cultivated area involved in the disputes is known. It is soon apparent that these disputes were small-scale in neither population nor acreage. On the con-trary, during the 1920S" an average 1,823 disputes per annum involved 27,740 landlords with 114,441 tenants. This is an average of 1.5 landlords and 65 tenants per dispute. The area involved, on a yearly average, was 75,794 cho (one ch5 is nearly 2.5 acres, so this amounts to approximately 189,485 6 acres) or an average 44 cho (approx. 110 acres) per dispute. The men and women who were involved in these disputes were part or f u l l tenant farmers. The f u l l tenants rented a l l the land they cultivated while the part-tenant farmer rented land to cultivate along with that which he owned. In 1921 tenant farmers comprised 28.5% of a l l cultivators while the part-tenants comprised yet another 40.9%.7 These f u l l and part tenants and their families represented one third of Japan's population. The tenancy system was not only extensive demographi-c a l l y ; geographically i t covered 47% of a l l Japan's c u l t i -vated land. While the area of tenanted land was extensive, the individual tenant's plot was not. The average size of a farm was 2 1/2 acres, scattered here and there throughout g the v i l l a g e in a number of small plots. These millions of men and women, t o i l i n g on tiny farms within the framework of a tenancy system embodying many elements of feudal Japan, were the active participants in the formation of. tenants' unions and in the confrontation with landlords in rural Japan. Their eff o r t s in that direction were saluted by some as, "the most s i g n i f i c a n t social development in Japan at the g present time." The tenant farmer movement has long been recognized as an important part of the Japanese r e a l i t y in the 1920s and 1930s. Accordingly, much research, Western and Japanese, has been done on 7 the phenomenon. :Jh'is schol ar s h i p , however, is conspicuous in i t s concentration on matters somewhat removed from the rice-shoot l e v e l . Professor B. Waswo, p a r t i c u l a r l y active in this research f i e l d , has recently commented on the nature of the exis'itfng research to the eff e c t that, "a consider-able body of material exists on the development of the tenant movement in the 1920s; - on the creation of the na-tional unions, their connections with the proletarian parties and the urban labor movement, and the doctrinal and t a c t i c a l •j g disputes among national leaders." She points out that rather less attention has been given to the origins of tenant unrest and the important question of why the tenant, o r d i n a r i l y so indisposed to actively challenging v i l l a g e authority and landlords, was as militant as he was in the 1920Si. Waswo's own research has been very much directed to just this question. This paper, too, w i l l concentrate on developments on the rice-shoot level in a modest attempt to redress the imbalance in the f i e l d . Waswo'.-s research is not the only attempt by a western scholar to come to grips with the origins of tenant unrest in the 1 920s*-;. Professor G. Totten, author of several books and a r t i c l e s on Japanese p o l i t i c a l and labour history, has also turned his attention to the origins of tenant unrest. Research in the same vein is currently popular among Japanese scholars and, though the f i e l d is s t i l l underworked, new work frequently appears. I have drawn extensively on the 8 available English language sources but less on the Japanese sources. Since much of Japanese scholarship is descriptive rather than analytical i t has been d i f f i c u l t to use as much Japanese language material as I would have l i k e d . With those Japanese sources I have been able to use, I have brought new material into the discussion, especially in • the area of p o l i t i c a l changes in the landlord class on the prefectural p o l i t i c a l l e v e l . This paper also provides a somewhat wider discussion of the economic background than Professor Waswo's work, and the inclusion of the findings of Professor Totten's research into the influence of the labour movement on the tenant farmer permits me to bring into sharper focus an aspect largely ignored by Professor Waswo. Her work, being the only major study of the origins of tenant unrest, has provided me with a wealth of easy-to-u t i l i z e material. This paper attempts to make a new contribution by dealing with the topic at hand through using a recently developed social science theory on the origins of tenant protest as a universal h i s t o r i c a l phenomenon.. This theory, outlined in the Journal of Asian Studies under the t i t l e "The Erosion of Patron-Client Bonds and Social Change in South East Asia", is the work of James Scott. It is f u l l y outlined in the following chapter. I have used Scott's theoretical insights to focus on the Japanese experience and have drawn conclusions from my data in a way consistent with Scott's theory. I do not claim that his explanation, or 9 the conclusions I have reached,are the only ones possible. Scott's theory has allowed me to do what I think badly needed to be done, namely, focus in a systematic manner on the some-what piecemeal, scattered and largely descriptive material that exists on several aspects of the tenant farmers' experience in the 1 920s.. Further, I have found Scott's theory to be an invaluable tool for refining the insights provided by other current research. Scott's theory was helpful in determining which aspects of the tenant experience were f r u i t f u l areas to search for the origins of tenant unrest. Although this unrest is a phenomenon of both the 1920s" and 1930s,. I am primarily concerned with the e a r l i e r decade. The tenant movement and disputes of the 1 930s.- are largely a regional development of the e a r l i e r phenomenon, the outlines of which are made clear by the examination of the preceding decade. The paper f a l l s into three sections. The f i r s t con-siders the changes that occurred in the tra d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant relationship during the Me i j i and early Taisho periods and then explores the implications of these changes for the development of tenant unrest and protest. The second section considers the economic changes and changes in social r e l a t i o n -ships since the Meiji Restoration, emphasizing changes in this cemtury; the implications of these changes are l i k e -wise analyzed in relation to the development of tenant unrest. 10 The f i n a l section examines the o r i g i n s , nature and a c t i v i t y of the tenants' unions which were formed as instruments to translate tenant grievances into action; here the importance of the tenant farmers' experience with the labour movement is discussed. The paper w i l l conclude with an evaluation of Professor Waswo's work in the l i g h t of new information i n -cluded herein and the insights f a c i l i t a t e d by using Scott's patron-client theory as a theoretical framework for the investigation of the origins of tenant unrest in Japan. 16 a CHAPTER II THE SOCIAL BACKGROUND TO TENANT UNREST 11 The relationship with his landlord was the single most important s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l relationship in the tenant's l i f e . The hierarchical t i e with the landlord was much stronger than horizontal ties with fellow tenants.^ This relationship and the landlord domination i t entailed was at the center of the l i f e of v i l l a g e Japan. Fukutake Tadashi/, the noted rural s o c i o l o g i s t , contends that " i t is a f a i r l y safe assertion that there was hardly a single 1 2 hamlet in Japan from which landlord domination was absent". Given the enormous importance of the landlord-tenant relationship in the l i f e of the tenant and the rural com-munity generally, i t is not surprising that the changes i t underwent in the post-Restoration period have long been considered as an important source of tenant unrest. Indeed, Japanese Government reports of tenancy disputes compiled in the 1920's make pointed reference to the changes in the 1 andl ord-tenant relationship./ as a major cause of dis-1 3 pute. Contemporary research by Japanese scholars con-tinues to focus on changes in the 1 andlord-tenant r e l a -1 4 tionship while discussing causes of tenant unrest. In Barbara Waswo's work, "The Origins of Tenant Unrest", she too offers changes in the behaviour of landlords as the single most important source of tenancy disputes. She writes, It was not status inequality in i t s e l f which prompted disputes, but rather the f a i l u r e of 12 landlords to perform those time-honoured and useful functions in rural society that had , r j u s t i f i e d their superior status in the past. Not only does the role of the 1andlord-tenant r e l a t i o n -ship draw considerable attention as a source of tenant un-rest in Japanese h i s t o r i c a l studies, but current social science theory is also turning concentrated attention to this factor in the search for an understanding of the uni-versal h i s t o r i c a l phenomenon of tenant unrest. One of the more recent and sophisticated works of this nature is James Scott's lengthy a r t i c l e "The Erosion of Patron-Client Bonds and Rural Social Change in South East Asia". The explanatory framework developed in this a r t i c l e w i l l be used as an aid to sharpen our understanding of the role of the landlord-tenant bond in the rural unrest of Japan of the 1920's. Scott's a r t i c l e elaborates on the nature of the patron-c l i e n t bond. In p a r t i c u l a r , he is concerned with how that relationship gains i t s 1egitimacy and conversely, how i t may lose legitimacy. Further, he is concerned with the consequences for rural s t a b i l i t y that may ensue in the event that the relationship loses i t s legitimacy. In very simple terms, Scott views the legitimacy of the patron-c l i e n t bond as resting on an exchange of goods and services that is t a c i t l y agreed upon by parties in a recognizable bargain. This exchange is composed of both quantifiable and unquantifiable goods and services. If the patron f a i l s to provide the goods and services t r a d i t i o n a l l y expected by the c l i e n t , the relationship can lose i t s legitimacy. One possible consequence is that rural, s t a b i l i t y w i l l be jeopardized, since the c l i e n t , no longer regarding the relationship with the patron as 1 egitimate,wi11 have a 'moral basis' for action against the patron. The patron, seen by Scott as a constituent of the agrarian e l i t e in S.E Asian countries, was, in the Japanese case, the landlord. Scott summarizes an elaborate discussion of these ideas in the fol1owing way: 1. It is instructive to view the relations between peasants and agrarian e l i t e s as ve r t i c a l exchange relationships in which changes in the legitimacy of e l i t e s , both c o l l e c t i v e l y and i n d i v i d u a l l y , are di r -ectly related both to changes in the balance of a l l goods and services trans-ferred - the terms of trade - between them to the comprehensiveness of the exchange. While the balance of exchange is not pre-c i s e l y quantifiable inasmuch as i t includes non-equivalent goods and services and some i n d i v i s i b l e services such as defense, i t is generally possible to determine over a period of time in which direction the bal-ance of exchange is moving and to distinguish marginal from major s h i f t s . 2. The legitimacy of the patron is not simply a line a r function of the balance of exchange; there are certain thresholds or 'sticking points' in the balance. In pa r t i c u l a r , the irred u c i b l e minimum terms t r a d i t i o n a l l y demanded by the peasant c l i e n t are physical security and a subsistence l i v e l i h o o d . This expectation is at the root of the peasantry's 'paternalist moral' economy - the basis of just i c e and equity. A breach of these minimum requirements in the exchange relationship serves to undermine the legitimacy of the patron class and to provide the peasantry with -| a moral basis for action against agrarian e l i t e s . 14 In applying Scott's ideas to the Japanese landlord-tenant relationship we w i l l proceed thro ugh.three stages. F i r s t , we w i l l examine the 1 andlord-tenant relationship as i t existed in early Meiji and determine the balance of goods and services - the 'terms of trade' - contained in that relationship. Next, an examination of the changes in the relationship through Meiji into Taisho w i l l allow us to determine the scale and direction of changes in the balance of exchange found therein. F i n a l l y i t w i l l be possible to determine i f there are grounds to expect a change in the tenants' view of the legitimacy of the relationships:and whether changes in the tenants' behaviour r e f l e c t changes in the role played by landlords. The t r a d i t i o n a l Japanese landlord-tenant relationship was p a t e r n a l i s t i c . The most extreme manifestation of this paternalism is found in the nago or 'name-child' system of tenancy. This was a form of tenancy where a f i c t i v e or real kinship bound the landlord and tenant more t i g h t l y than the usual economic and social bonds found in tenancy contracts. This form of tenancy is centuries old and continued to exist in the more isolated rural areas of Japan as late as the World War II period. The relationship was an integral part of the t r a d i t i o n a l p a t r i l i n e a l extended family. This extended family, known as dozoku, was a loose grouping of related families tied h i e r a r c h i c a l l y to a recognized head family. Although this system, in the extent of i t s application, varied from region to region, i t is 15 none-the-1ess the archetype for the vast majority of landlord-tenant relationships found in early modern Japan. Fukutake points out that the nago system, " t y p i c a l l y found in dis-t r i c t s where there were old-style local magnates, with tenants who had only in recent centuries evolved from a more direct form of serfdom,, represented only a more exag-gerated form of the landlord-tenant relationship typical of the whole of Japan."^ 7 A closer look at the nago system of tenancy w i l l i l -l ustrate some of the goods and services that passed between the 1 and!ord-patron and the tenant-client. The s t a b i l i t y and depth of "th i s • relationship becomes clear when i t is understood that a real or f i c t i v e kinship relationship was involved. The terminology of the relationship highlights the kinship feature. The landlord was called j i -oya (1 and-parent), oyasaku ( c u l t i v a t o r parent), or simply oyakata (parent person). The tenant was called kosaku (small c u l t i v a t o r ) , kokata (child person) or nago (name-child). Two case studies of landlords in late Meiji provide a valuable source of details concerning the 1andlord-ten/ant relationship. The f i r s t of these is a case study of the tenancy relations of Saito Zensuke, representative of the t r a d i t i o n a l nago system in northern Honshu, done by the Japanese soc i o l o g i s t Ariga Kizaemon. The second is R.P. Dore 1s brief account of the tenancy relations of the Otaki 16 family presented in his book, Land Reform in Japan. The tenancy relationships of the Otaki family, l i v i n g in Yamaga vil l a g e in the broad coastal rice plain of the Shonai, do not contain an actual or r i t u a l kinship relationship but this is s t i l l simply a variation of the more r i t u a l i s t i c nago system. The major benefit that the tenant received from the patronage of the landlord was access to land. Patronage was important in this respect since the granting of land was as much a matter of custom as a matter of decision and independant action on the part of the landlord. Although i t is doubtful that the landlord often overturned custom and revoked the tenancy of a t r a d i t i o n a l tenant, t h e o r e t i c a l l y the power to do so was his. The strength of the landlord's patronage and sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was guarantee against this unlikely but possible course of events. The r e l a t i o n -ship between the degree of patronization and the quality of goods and services flowing from the patron to c l i e n t is evident in the Saito instance. Saito dealt with two kinds of tenants, nago and sa kugo. In the former a kinship relationship was involved but in the l a t t e r this was absent. The difference in the status of nago and sakugo determined the extent of the exchange between landlord and tenant. The relationship with the sakugo was largely contractual and exchanges were limited to the instrumental ones of land 1 g on the one hand and labor and crops on the other. The 17 majority of Saito's tenants, however, were nago, sixteen out of eighteen in fact. To these, land was provided as well as houses. In this relationship the role of the "father providing for his sons" was an important element of Saito's patronage. It seems anomolous, however, that sons should have vto pay ren t! Access to land can be considered the basic condition for subsistence - what Scott c a l l s one of the minimum terms demanded by the tenant. Other goods related to maintaining a subsistence l i v l i h o o d included tools, seed and f e r t i l i z e r frequently provided for in the tenancy contract. Access to vil l a g e common land, again provided through the patronage of the landlord (only those registered as landowners had legal rights to-use of common land), was also an important contribution to the maintenance of a subsistence l i v l i h o o d . Further, there was a standard provision for rent reduction in times of poor harvest or crop f a i l u r e . There are records of landlords lending rice or money, at below market prices, 20 to their tenants during hard times. The above-mentioned . 1 b e n e f i t s 1 are most easily quanti-f i a b l e . They represent, however, but a part of the total exchange from the landlord side. There are other goods and services, not so eas i l y quantifiable, that f a l l under the rubric of 'social and ceremonial exchanges'. Generally these exchanges were an important means of maintaining 18 s t a b i l i t y in the face of the basic economic r e a l i t y that the tenant was poorer, often very much poorer, than the landlord. Such exchanges, together with the sharing of common values that landlords took care to foster, "played a part in allaying h o s t i l i t y and in softening the blow, so 21 to speak, of economic hardship." The pains that both Saito and Otaki took to be part of the vi l l a g e and to avoid setting themselves apart in any obvious personal way is highly noticeable. Dore writes of the Otakis: They accepted peasant values and found the source of their pride not in dissociating themselves from the peasant, but in exhibi-ting the peasant values in their heightened and ideal form; they eschewed bribes and extravagances and devoted themselves to keeping in t a c t , and i f possible, increasing the property of their ancestors.22 The 'social and ceremonial' exchanges, together with the active concern of the landlords to exhibit a system of values that would not alienate the tenants, played an important role in maintaining rural s t a b i l i t y . The social and ceremonial exchanges were most in evidence at bir t h s , deaths and marriages. On those occasions the subsistence budget of the tenant was under unusual s t r a i n . Both Otaki and Saito played an important role as father figures assisting the tenants at these times. At births the tenant would seek the landlord's help in nam-ing the c h i l d . In this way the landlord's help was enlisted to defray some of the cost of the ceremonies attending the 19 birth of a c h i l d , and the landlord was enlisted as guarantor of the child's future. Gifts were exchanged between the landlord and tenant in the event of a birth in the home of either. The g i f t of the landlord to the tenant was, of course, the larger of the two. Although these g i f t s were a contribution to the tenant's economy they were more important as 'social cement' in the relationship between landlord and tenant. Marriage was another occasion when these exchanges were noticeable. The landlord was deeply involved in the marriages of his tenants. Frequently he would seek marriage partners for them and also provide the room in which the marriage ceremony took place. In the case of Saito, he himself paid for the cost of the trousseau for the woman servants, usually daughters of his nago. These marriage-related a c t i v i t i e s were an extension of Saito's role of riitual parent to these g i r l s . The landlord's wife, too, played a role in the wedding procedures; she took care of the many small details surrounding the ceremony and supplied the necessary appurtenances. At the wedding, as at births, there was an exchange of g i f t s between the landlord and 23 tenant. Death provided yet another instance for these social and ceremonial exchanges. The landlord Saito payed for the services of a priest and for the burial on the death of one 20 of his tenants. He also provided the bereaved family with a g i f t to tide them over the unhappy time. This, again, 24 was an expression of his role as.a r i t u a l parent. Other exchanges of a social and ceremonial nature were i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d in the ceremonial calendar of the v i l l a g e . The landlord paid for the ceremonies, entertainment and feasting accompanying the v i l l a g e f e s t i v a l s . In Saito's case, he covered the expenses of the monthly Hachiman-to f e s t i v a l of Ishigami v i l l a g e as well as the more special f e s t i v i t i e s of January and August. Perhaps the most out-standing i n s t i t u t i o n a l symbol of s o l i d a r i t y and the landlord's paternal role was provided during the New Year f e s t i v i t i e s . On New Year's Day, Saito's tenants would come to his home to feast and worship at the family shrine. This religious observance was most important in maintaining s t a b i l i t y in the 1andlord-tenant relationship. The f u l l import of this mutual religious bond has been pointed.out by Ariga. The fact that the unrelated nago worshipped the dozoku patron deity indicated the extent to which th e i r r i t u a l kin ties were recognized as symbolic evidence of their membership in the group, poverty or no poverty.^5 There were also important ceremonial observations at rent payment time that emphasized the kinship nature of the landlord-tenant relationship. Further, as important and wealthy men of the v i l l a g e , the landlords provided leader-ship and the funds for important v i l l a g e projects. They also used their influence to obtain jobs for the children of 21 their tenants when necessary. There is also a record of the landlord Otaki, securing the release of a tenant in trouble with the police on one occasion, and a record of his grand-father walking miles in inclement weather to secure a loan 2 6 for a tenant in financial trouble on another. These instances of using personal influence to aid the tenant, as well as the above-mentioned p o l i t i c a l , economic and social functions discharged by landlords, has led Prof. Waswo to conclude that the landlords were "the host plants of the land; tenants, l i k e ivy, c o i l around (them) and are protected 2 7 from the weather." There can be no doubt that the landlords did perform important personal, p o l i t i c a l , economic and social roles in the v i l l a g e . In retrospect we can ident i f y a number of important goods and services flowing from the landlord to the tenant. Using a categorization developed by Scott we can ident i f y these as follows: 1) Provision of the basic means of subsistence; here we can include the provision of land to c u l t i v a t e , tools, f e r t i l i z e r and, in some instances, a home. 2) Subsistence•crisis insurance: this includes rent reduction in times of poor crop or crop f a i l u r e , work to supplement farm income, loans in time of need and the r i t u a l g i f t s . 3) Protection:; because of the nature of Japanese society this is not an important landlord-tenant flow. Perhaps isolated instances of the landlord protecting the tenant from the police can be included here but not 22 much else. 4) Brokerage and influence: finding jobs and marriage partners, acting as guarantor of children's futures and related a c t i v i t i e s are representative of landlord-tenant flows here. 5) Patron services: these include provision for vil l a g e f e s t i v a l s , and help at births, deaths and marriages. Further, we can include the funding of public works and, in Mei j i and Taisho, the attraction of government 2 8 money to the vi l l a g e . ~ - • * in this category. The above goods and services that the landlord supplied to the tenant were his part in the bargain contained in the patron-client relationship. The tenant, too, had his part to play in the bargain and the cost to him of these goods and services was a dear one. In return for the patronage he received he was kept in a state of near-complete economic and personal dependence and subordination. The rent he paid the landlord represented, on an average, f u l l y 50% of his crop. This rent was paid in kind or labor and sometimes a mixture of both. The surplus with which he was l e f t was a bare minimum to meet his needs. He was d i r t poor and there were frequent occasions when even the best of patronage could not save him from famine, flood, high infant mortality, sickness and a premature death - the by-products of a l i f e of uncertainty and poverty. One re-port describes tenants of pre W.W.II Japan as having, "a spade, a hand plow, and a sickle for tools, with the most primitive f e r t i l i z e r s , with hardly a beast of burden 23 to ease their 1abour...Debt-ridden , tax-burdened, under-nourished, miserably housed, their wretchedness defies 29 compari son." Besides laboring on their own behalf, the tenants also had to supply labor for the landlords. Saito u t i l i z e d his tenants to work as laborers on his own farm and as assistants for the craftsmen in the wood and lacquer i n -dustries. Further, they gave a total of forty days a year hard labor for timber cutting and c o l l e c t i n g firewood. The women were used for labor in s e r i - c u l t u r e , general cleanup, maintenance of the farm and certain household and cattle-breeding a c t i v i t i e s . It has been noted that these obligations and others of a similar nature, along with the value system of the landlord-tenant relationship, tended to turn economic dependence into "intense personal subordination" and further that "many of these obligations on the tenants' part seem more s i g n i f i c a n t of personal 30 dependence than of economic payment." The tenant's contract, where such a thing existed, was one-sided and i l l u s t r a t e s the delicacy of his tenure. One typical contract included the following provisions; (1) The tenant must make at least 1 chq- of paddy every year. (2) Rent rice must be the best of the harvest, but the tenant may pay in money. (3) In the following cases the owners w i l l give orders to the tenant: (a) If tenants do not use e'nough manure, (b) If there is disease of 24 plants or insect pests. (c) If the tenant neglects to mend the road or other necessary work is neglected. (4) The owner wi l l dismiss a tenant: (a) If the tenant does not pay his rent without reason, (b) If the tenant is neglectful of his work or is i d l e . (c) If the tenant is not obedient to the owner and does not keep his contract f a i t h f u l l y . (d) If the tenant is punished by law. (5) When tenants leave without permission of absence more than twenty days the owner can treat as he w i l l crops or buildings. (6) In the following cases the tenant must pro-vide two labourers to the owner: mending roads, drainage canals, or bridges; mending water gate and i r r i g a t i o n canal; when neces-sary public works must be undertaken. ' This contract was in use during 1915, the year Robertson Scott, who recorded i t for posterity, was t r a v e l l i n g in the Japanese countryside. Tenancy contracts were rare; i t is estimated that a mere 30% of tenancy agreements involved 32 written contracts. The majority were oral agreements. In the provisions of the above tenancy contract the tenant's part of the bargain in the 1andlord-tenant relationship can be seen c l e a r l y . Rent, labor and obedience are most apparent. The landlord's power over the tenant's l i v l i h o o d and possessions is equally clear. Clause 4(c) is p a r t i c u l a r l y i l l u s t r a t i v e of the claim that many of the tenants' obligations seem more s i g n i f i c a n t of personal dependance than of economic payment. Clauses such as No.5 are more suggestive of conditions of slavery rather than rental. Further, i t seems that not a few of the conditions for which a tenant could be dismissed invited a highly sub-25 je c t i v e judgment and no doubt provided landlords with an unchallenged means of ridding themselves of a troublesome tenant. The tenant payed dearly in personal, social and economic coin for the services of his landlord. Despite the obvious inequalities in the flow of goods and services between landlord and tenant, the legitimacy of the relationship rested on this flow. We must realize that this r e f l e c t s the relative strength in Japan,as elsewhere, of the bargaining position of the respective parties. There was, however, a minimum set of demands beneath which the tenant neither could nor would descend. This was the guaran-tee of subsistence and security of l i v l i h o o d . James Scott makes this clear when he writes, For the c l i e n t , the basic purpose of the patron-client bond, and therefore the corner-stone of i t s legitimacy, is the provision of the basic social guarantees of subsistence and security.33 The legitimacy of the 1 andlord-tenant relationship is dependant on the continuation of these guarantees. If the content of the patron-client flow changes in certain c r i t i c a l ways, the relationship can lose i t s legitimacy. Scott hypothesizes that changes threatening the guarantee of the tenants' subsistence can lead to a loss of the legitimacy of the patron-client bond. If and when the terms of trade deteriorate s u f f i c i e n t l y to threaten these social rights (subsistence and s e c u r i t y ) , which were the original basis for attachment and deference, 26 one can anticipate that clients w i l l consider the relationship unjust and exploitive.3 It must not be assumed that the terms of trade w i l l always deteriorate to the detriment of the c l i e n t but, in Japan after mid-Meiji, the changes in the parton-client flow were almost always detrimental to the tenant. Our task now is to ident i f y the qualitative and quanti-tative changes that occurred in the flow of 'goods and ser-vices' from the Japanese landlord to his tenant during the period 1868 - 1919. Prof. Waswo suggests that three trends among Japanese landlords are cl e a r l y evident and relevant. She admits that the absence of source material is such that only 'fragmentary evidence' can be marshalled to document these changes. Nonetheless, evidence does suggest that the following three trends were apparent among Japanese in the period under study here. 1) There was a steady decline in the number of landlords who cultivated part of their holdings themselves. 2) There was.growing involvement of landlords in non-agricultural a f f a i r s , indicated by greater landlord investment in urban and rural industry. 3) There was a gradual increase in absentee owner-ship. 35 Research I have done in Japanese sources, notably Ta i sho  Demokurashi No Shakai Teki Keisel, suggests that a fourth trend among landlords has an important bearing on the changes in the t r a d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant relationship, This trend is the gradual increase in the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of landlords, both 27 consciously and i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y , with the Prefectural bureaucratic management structure. Turning to examine our f i r s t trend, then, we find that the number of c u l t i v a t i n g landlords declined throughout Meiji and Taisho. In the early Meiji period i t is reported that most landlords were c u l t i v a t i n g 1andlords ; that i s , they 3fi worked at least a small part of their land themselves. A number of changes in M e i j i , however, promoted a s h i f t to non-cultivation among landlords. One of the more important changes was a decrease in the number of farm laborers a v a i l -able and £n increase in the cost of hiring farm labor. Both these changes were, of course, closely related. In early Meiji, farm 1 aborers' wages were very low; in fact, only the work of maid and man-servant paid less. Thus, in the last decade of the 19th century the competition from new land in Hokkaido and increased opportunities for more highly paid employment in the industrial and service sectors created a shortage of farm laborers. Gradually, under pressure of this s i t u a t i o n , farm laborers' wages rose, and by 1912 they were two and even three times as high as they had been in the 189OS.. While these changes did not change the un-favorable; population-to-land r a t i o , they did keep the situation from s h i f t i n g d r a s t i c a l l y in favor of the land-lord. At the same time other changes made i t more p r o f i t -able to rent^'land rather than farm i t alone or with the help of farm laborers. F i r s t , farming had become more stable 28 as crop f a i l u r e s and other disasters grew less l i k e l y as a result of improved agricultural techniques. Thus the land-lord was more certain of rent rice than before. Further, the r i s i n g cost of f e r t i l i z e r and tools, together with the p o s s i b i l i t y of the tenant shouldering these costs, added to the p r o f i t a b i 1 i t y of putting land into tenantry rather 37 than c u l t i v a t i n g i t oneself. The following table i l l u s t r a t e s the increase in non-cu l t i v a t i n g landlords and captures the regional nature of this trend - a factor that w i l l be commented on l a t e r . Table I: Non-cultivating Landlords in Tohoku and Kinki 1908 - 1919. Year Toho ku Kinki # : % # % 1908 Owners 5 cho+ 20 ,914 100.0 7,951 100.0 Cultivators 5 cho+ 12,692 60. 7 1 ,000 12.6 Non-cult. landlords 8,222 39. 3 6,951 87.4 1915 Owners 5 cho+ 20 ,645 100.0 7,793 100.0 Cultivators 5 cho+ 9 ,844 47.7 369 4.7 Non-cult. 1andlords 10,801 52. 3 7,424 95.3 1919 Owners 5 cho+ 21 ,868 100.0 7,546 100.0 Cultivators 5 cho+ 9 ,295 '- .42.5 243 3. 1 Non-cult, landlords 12,572 57.5 7,30 3 96.9 Source : B.A. Waswo , Landlords and S o c i a 1 Change in Post-War-Japan, unpublished Ph.D . thesis, Stanford U . 1969 p. 89. 29 Unfortunately, no figures exist to show the pace of the increase in non-cultivating landlords up to 1908. We can only assume that in order to reach f u l l y 87.4% in Kinki and 39.3% in Tohoku, the yearly increases must have been quite dramatic. At any rate, by 1915 the non-cultivating landlord was c l e a r l y the norm in Tohoku and almost the rule in Kinki where apparently one would have had to search hard indeed to find a landlord with s o i l on his hands. The second trend, that of increased landlord investment outside the agricultural sector, was stimulated by the gradual decrease in the p r o f i t a b i l i t y of land as an invest-ment. As late as the 1890s land had been the most secure and profitable investment, but this soon changed with the increased economic s t a b i l i t y of the decade. The completion of legal codes governing business investments, as well as the increased f a m i l i a r i t y of landlords with national economic a f f a i r s that came with the granting of p o l i t i c a l rights in the 1880s and the opening of the Diet in 1890, a l l helped to overcome the landlords' reluctance to invest out-3 8 side the agricu l t u r a l sector. The extent of landlord investment in the non-agricult-ural sector is d i f f i c u l t to document extensively since there are few records available. Waswo reports that landlords were generally reluctant to make the extent of their in-vestment known. The following summary by Prof. Waswo of her 30 research provides some insight into the extent of this trend. F i n a l l y , although the evidence is inconclusive, the s h i f t away from investment in land was pro-bably greatest among landlords in the Kinki and Chugoku d i s t r i c t s and smallest among landlords in the Tohoku.. Over half the landlords owning 50 cho or more in the Kinki and Chugoku who were l i s t e d by name in the registers of large land-lords compiled in 1890 and '98 were not included in the register of 1924; less than one third of the landlords in the Tohoku were not included. Some of these landlords had been forced to s e l l a l l or part of their land to cover business losses; others had done so voluntarily to gener-ate the capital for industrial investment. 39 While many landlords sold their land in the switch to investment outside of agriculture,, others continued to expand their holdings even though their income from out-side investment continued to increase. The Fujita of Okayama is a case in point. In 1887, they held 88 cho of land, and of their total yearly income of 1,230 yen, 66% was from tenant rent. In 1926, they held s l i g h t l y more than 100 cho of land but received only 52% of their income from their tenants' rent. The balance came from non-agricultural sources, primarily dividends. Government bonds, income from f a c t o r i e s , and salaries from positions in the non-agricultural sector gradually replaced or supplemented income from land 40 in the budgets of other landlord families. The third trend Prof. Waswo documents - increasing absentee ownership - is not an e n t i r e l y new phenomenon 31 in rural Japan. It existed to a small degree in pre-Restoration Japan. However, in mid-Meiji absentee land-lordism began to increase. Comprehensive surveys of absentee landlordism are scarce. A survey conducted in nine villages / throughout the nation in early Taisho is one of the very few available. I t"*s results are tabled below. Table 2: Percentage of Village Land Owned by Non-residents Year Paddy Dry 1 890 14.8% 1 .7% 1 899 14.2% 3.4% 1908 15.8% 3. 2% 1911 16.6% 4.5% Source: B.A. Waswo,"Land!ords and Social Change in Pre War Japan", p.108. In these years there is an i d e n t i f i a b l e trend but i t i s , in i t s e l f , too s l i g h t to be of major importance. One must admit, however, that the absolute percentage of land owned in absentee in 1911 is s i g n i f i c a n t . By 1924, the trend to increased absentee ownership had sharpened. In that year the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry conducted a nation-wide survey that found 4% of landlords surveyed l i v i n g out-side the prefecture in which their land was located and another 26% l i v i n g in another county:, In Kinki the county figure was 52%, while in Tohoku i t was 17%. The survey found almost a l l large landlords had land in several v i l l a g e s and were therefore regarded as absentee landowners in at 32 least a few of the vil l a g e s in which they owned land. By 1924, then* the percentage of absentee landlords was as high as 52% in Kinki and, even in Tohoku, 17%. The figures for actual absentee landlords are s i g n i f i -cant in themselves but there is an additional increase to take into account - the increase in the number of 'function-a l l y absent' landlords. There are, for obvious reasons, no figures on these. But i t is generally agreed that many landlords, due to changes in tenant management practices, enjoyed less and less contact with their tenants until they 42 "had l i t t l e l e f t to do themselves but pocket their profits." This situation resulted from the practice of hiring pro-fessional managers to select tenants, draw up contracts, supervise farming, c o l l e c t rent and s e l l the rent r i c e . Other landlords attempted to rent land to tenants from other vill a g e s in order to escape personalized relationships. Local police and o f f i c i a l s , as well as government agencies, took over responsibi1ity for tr a d i t i o n a l landlord functions such as dispute settlement, crop insurance, and famine r e l i e f . Waswo succinctly summarizes the cumulative effect of both actual and functional absenteeism on the v i l l a g e when she writes, Only when both parties made a special e f f o r t to preserve the personal ties of the past, or in remote vil l a g e s r e l a t i v e l y untouched by change, did old ideas of harmony and cooperation between landlords and tenants remain in force. In most cases, however, the lines dividing them became 33 more sharply drawn, the d i f f e r e n t interests and a c t i v i t i e s of the two groups more cl e a r l y defined. It can be seen, then, that the trend to increased absentee landlordism, both actual and functional, was one with major implications for the v i l l a g e and t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant relationships. The last trend to be considered, the increasing i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n of the landlord with the prefectural bureaucracy and the central government, is evident from the mid 1880s. It was then that the p o l i t i c a l nature of the Japanese land-lord began to change. After the i n i t i a l opposition to the Meiji government through the Popular Rights Movement, most landlords became conservative upholders of the status quo. It is from this time too that the objective role of maintain-ing the semi feudal base of Japanese society was taken over by the landlord and feudal tax was replaced by high rents 45 for the c u l t i v a t o r . There seems to have been l i t t l e research done on the increasing organizations of landlords, as a class, and the delegation to them of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y in the management structure of rural society. The noted Japanese scholar, Kinbara Samon in his book Taisho Demokurashi No Skaki  Teki Keisel (The Social Formation of Taisho Democracy) offers a case study of these developments in Niigata pre-fecture. This study is one of the few i l l u s t r a t i o n s of this trend available and is worth looking at in d e t a i l . 34 Important p o l i t i c a l changes began to take place in Niigata prefecture, at the prefectural administrative 1evel, when the move to organize landlords in the service of the bureaucracy began early in the year 1902. The prefectural landlord association was formalized in late 1902 and i n -creased in size following the Russo-Japanese war in 1905. The need to organize the landlords to insure the security and s t a b i l i t y of a g r i c u l t u r a l production in order to meet the demands of the market was foremost but there was more to the rationale of the founders than economic motivation. Membership in the organization was compulsory; therefore, i t insured class s o l i d a r i t y and provided an e f f e c t i v e organization through which the bureaucracy could u t i l i z e the landlords and share . authori ty with, them in the management of the countryside. The organization of the Prefectural Landlord Association further assured the p o l i t i c a l prominence of the landlords. This association was the means through which the landlords gained the right to exercise leadership in a gricultural production and preserve order in rural society. It has been described as providing for "a transfer of power to lead and manage rural society from the bureau-:; 46 cracy to the landlords." In order to see the nature of this organization c l e a r l y and the terms of the transfer of power to the landlords, i t is helpful to trace the development of the Prefectural Landlords Association. The f i r s t move in Niigata was made 35 in February of 1902 when the prefectural head called the large landowners of the prefecture together and discussed the prospect of forming such an association. Consequently, in October 1902, the f i r s t general meeting of the associa-tion was convened. There, the principles of the association were layed out, and the o f f i c e r s elected. The fostering of the s p i r i t of friendship and harmony in rural society, the improvement of rice see'dlings, the regulation, adjustment and protection of cultivated land and sundry other concerns dealing with the improvement of agriculture were adopted as p r i n c i p l e s . The prefectural head addressed the assembled landlords and urged them to adopt a social consciousness that would enhance the well-being of their v i l l a g e s and pointed to the importance of their roles in leading agri-cul tures'ad van ce/ along with commerce and industry. The concern of the bureaucracy with this association is clear in i t s beginnings but i t is even clearer when the internal structure of the association is examined. The executive and membership was so constituted as to have one association head, 17 trustees and 1 000 councillors. The head was to have wide executive and l e g i s l a t i v e powers. At the f i r s t meeting the prefectural Governor himself was elected to this prime position and thus the link with the prefectural bureaucracy is scarcely deniable. The structure of the association has been described as "pyramidal, authoritarian and having a chain of leadership that was a 36 4 7 one-way street". Thus i t is clear that the landlord association would not function independent of the pre-fectural bureaucracy. This landlord association exercised i t s influence in the countryside through u t i l i z i n g a number of v i l l a g e organizations as well as those on the county, ci t y and pre-fectural l e v e l . In cooperation with these organizations, and professing agri c u l t u r a l reform as a central concern, the association t r i e d to foster a s p i r i t of 'class co-operation' and undertook a program of 'basic social educa-tion' to ensure s t a b i l i t y in the countryside. They t r i e d to establish a means of c o n c i l i a t i n g v i l l a g e disputes over such things as rents. They also took charge of the co-operative d i s t r i b u t i o n of f e r t i l i z e r , the establishment of savings programs, rural a g r i c u l t u r a l competitions and exhibits and the improvement of ag r i c u l t u r a l technology. Thus the landlords participated in and coordinated on a prefecture-wide scale and under the direction of the bureau-cracy a series of a c t i v i t i e s that were an important part of the management of the countryside. There were other ways in which the landlords, together with the bureaucracy, extended their influence throughout rural society. The graduates of the prefectural a g r i c u l t u r a l schools developed ties with the v i l l a g e a g r i c u l t u r a l societies These schools were administered by the prefectural bureaucracy 37 and therefore reflected bureaucratic views and p o l i c i e s to a great extent. Further, the v i l l a g e f r i endly societies had intimate connections with the Prefectural Landlord. Associa-tion and the v i l l a g e a g r i c u l t u r a l associations. In other instances the Prefectural Landlord Association used youth organizations of the v i l l a g e comprising the children of s e l f - c u l t i v a t o r s and tenants as an important force in carrying out projects of agricultural reform. It is clear that the management of rural society was carried out through interlocking structures with the Prefectural Landlord Association, with i t s close links with the bureaucracy, at the apex. The Niigata Association under discussion had a bureaucratic hue insofar as i t ' s executive o f f i c e r was the prefectural head. Further, i t was partly financed by prefectural taxes and many of i t s members were bureaucrats. The most fundamental ties, between the bureaucratic and landlord management systems, however, were made on the v i l l a g e l e v e l . The v i l l a g e administrative leaders took their orders d i r e c t l y from the d i s t r i c t government which in turn was subordinate to the prefectural authority. It was through links between landlords and v i l l a g e o f f i c i a l s (indeed v i l l a g e leaders and landlords were often the same men) that conditions for cooperation were created. Through personal ties with the v i l l a g e leaders the landlords, at the most basic level of rural society, had an internal t i e with the 38 bureaucratic management structure. Thus, "through such an intimate organic t i e the landlords strengthened their 48 a b i l i t y to regulate v i l l a g e society." In the i n i t i a t i v e taken by the prefectural bureaucracy to organize the landlords the "dawn of the r e a l i z a t i o n of a bureaucratic rural society and the transfer of authority to the landlords and the development of an i n s t i t u t i o n a l connection between the landlords and bureaucrats can be 49 seen." The landlords thus strengthened their own position through sharing this authority and increased their p o l i t i c a l power re l a t i v e to the bureaucracy. Their right to lead the rural sector, regulate v i l l a g e society, preserve the existing order and cultivate the v i l l a g e in the manner they chose was thus assured. This is not to suggest that the landlords developed as a new ruling class; they had long been one. As Thomas Smith points out, ...the Japanese landlords of modern times, taken as a whole, were not a new and pre-cariously dominant group thrown up by the impact of capitalism on the v i l l a g e but a class whose habit of power goes back to the formative period of Japanese capitalism.^" What the close ties between the landlords and the bureau-crats do suggest is that their authority was legitimized and focused. Further, while landlords had t r a d i t i o n a l l y dominated v i l l a g e p o l i t i c s , they were now able, given that their interests did not clash with the bureaucrats, to turn administrative structures above the v i l l a g e level to 39 th e i r own interests. This development among the landlords made the dis-tinctions between them and their tenants progressively clearer. They frequently abused the power given to them and u t i l i z e d v i l l a g e organizations, supposedly established on government i n i t i a t i v e for a l l the v i l l a g e r s , for their own purposes. Indeed, organizations formed with famine r e l i e f and a g r i c u l t u r a l reforms as central concerns proved to be "e s s e n t i a l l y means for the landlord to maintain ric e quality and guarantee payment in times of default with the funds 51 provided for famine r e l i e f and a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement." Moreover, tenants were coerced economically and s o c i a l l y to join v i l l a g e organizations such as agricultural improvement societies that worked primarily for landlord interests. The leaders of these associations acted as rent' collectors and mediated tenancy disputes; in short, they were managers of landlord a f f a i r s . The f u l l import of the development of a new management structure in the countryside l i e s in the way in which the once collaborative 1andlord-tenant relationship began to change. The landlords u t i l i z e d , as we have noted, the transfer of authority from the bureaucracy to their own benefit, advancing the interests of their own class. As a result the contradictions between the landlord and the ten^ ant could not help but surface. As ''Kiribara concludes, 40 Through the development of the new management structure in the v i l l a g e , the contradictions between the landlord l i v i n g on tenant rent and -tenant bearing the burden of agric u l t u r a l pro-duction and reform became quite p u b l i c . 5 2 Although i t may seem an apparent contradiction to speak of landlord withdrawal from the v i l l a g e on the one hand and greater participation in vi l l a g e management on the other, i t is not in fact so. In speaking of these problems we are talking of two different kinds of landlords, large and small, and two d i s t i n c t l y d ifferent kinds of participation in v i l l a g e l i f e , c u l t i v a t i o n and bureaucratic management. The actual physical withdrawal from the vi l l a g e concerned mainly large landlords, while small landlords withdrew not from the v i l l a g e but rather from their role as c u l t i v a t o r s ; in both cases the change caused considerable discontent among tenants. Although the smaller landlord remained in the v i l l a g e , his influence changed from that of a fellow c u l t i v a t o r to that of administrator who represented an extension of the bureaucratic presence from the prefectural l e v e l . ThMis both the withdrawal from c u l t i v a t i o n of the landlord and his assumption of the role of v i l l a g e administra-tor with interests s t i l l further removed fromA-the tenants were sources of tenant unrest. What then, was the f u l l impact of the four trends we have discussed on the tr a d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant r e l a t i o n -ship? F i r s t , withdrawing from c u l t i v a t i o n , the landlord 41 no doubt found i t incf"asing!y d i f f i c u l t to retain peasant values and preserve his previously high degree of integra-tion with the v i l l a g e . Secondly, the trend to increasing investment outside of agriculture reinforced the growing divergence in values and l o y a l t i e s . It is as d i f f i c u l t to assess the eff e c t of a growing divergence in values between landlord and tenant as i t is to measure this change or know how common i t was. But i t can be surmised that the cultivators did not look favorably on the new values of landlords. There is evidence that in at least one case the behaviour of non-cultivating landlords met with strong disapproval and i t is not unlikely that this attitude was common. Robertson Scott reports that one tenant, when asked how the men in the v i l l a g e who owned land but did not work i t spent their time, repl i e d , They are chattering of many things, very t r i v i a l things, and they disturb the v i l l a g e . They drink too much and.they have concubines or women elsewhere. 3 We may question whether i t was the possession of concubines and women or having them outside the v i l l a g e that irked this man, but we cannot f a i l to recognize the displeasure the behaviour of these non-cultivating landowners aroused in this particular instance. It is the trend to absenteeism, however, that did great-est violence to the tr a d i t i o n a l 1 and!ord-tenant relationship. Many of the patron services began to disappear with this development. F i r s t , absentee landlords could not be taxed 42 as residents of the v i l l a g e and thus no longer contributed f i n a n c i a l l y to v i l l a g e services. The remaining landlords, faced with higher taxes, could not afford to help their tenants as easily in.time of need. S Further, absentee landlordism removed much of the f a m i l i a r i t y from landlord-tenant relations and although they returned to the v i l l a g e on occasion, habitual ceremonies in which the landlord took part were devoid of past f a m i l i a r i t y . In fact, many land-lords "became increasingly impatient with the elaborate r i t u a l s of g i f t giving and the many demands on their time and wealth".*--' The end result was the absence of any conspicuous role, aside from rent c o l l e c t i o n , for the land-lord in v i l l a g e society. The role of the landlord was more and more frequently a purely economic one in the v i l l a g e . The social intimacy and the wide range of inter-action between tenant and landlord was consequently re-duced. The effect of the trends discussed herein was such that the nature of the landlord was transformed; now, writes Waswo, To their tenants, they became distant figures, with great power over their l i v e s but l i t t l e involvement in or understanding of local a f f a i r s . The 1andlord-tenant relationship was steadily eroded across the five decades from the Restoration to the 1920s. Year by year the d i s t i n c t i o n between landlord and tenant became more apparent. In prefectures such as Niigata, • ;- • 43 where the landlords and bureaucracy shared authority in the management of the countryside, the division in the v i l l a g e was obvious in the social superstructure. One by one the strands of a once diffuse relationship- were snapping. The landlord wa s mors of ten viewed as exploitive;,; i f he were to disappear the tenant would merely be free of his obligation to pay rent. This change can be gleaned from a comment on landlords made to Robertson Scott. He reports that an ex-Daimyo's son told him, Many landlords treat their tenants c r u e l l y . The rent is too high. In the place of the intimate relations of former days the relations are now that of cat and dog. The ignorance of the landlords is the cause of this,state of a f f a i r s . It is very important that the landlord's son should go to the a g r i c u l t u r a l school where there is plenty of practical work which w i l l bring the perspiration from him.^5 If this is the view of a man whose background suggests he would be both well off and conservative, one can only imagine that the attitude of the tenant farmer must have been even more damning. There is reason to believe that the Japanese tenant's view of the legitimacy of his relationship with the landlord changed. When the position of rural e l i t e s is no longer considered legitimate, the v e r t i c a l ties of loyalty binding the peasantry to them collapses:, This collapse has far-reaching implications for tenant behaviour. James Scott asserts that this breakdown creates a potential for peasant 44 protest and class-based action. The important question that arises now is whether there is concrete evidence to suggest that the breakdown in the 1 andlord-tenant r e l a t i o n -ship was in any way a source of the militancy of the Japanese tenant in the 1920s. There is much evidence to suggest that the answer to the above question is affirmative. In 1922, a report on tenancy disputes issued by the Agricultural Office of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, "The Survey Concern-ing Tenancy Disputes',' included a number of pointed references to the issue of the landlord-tenant relationship as a cause of dispute. In Hyogo prefecture, i t found that "the cor-ruptness of the landlord is cause for dispute"; in Ehime i t found that "the method of landlord land-management is cause for dispute." The report further notes that in Okayama prefecture, "the lack of any kind of intimate f e e l -ings on the part of the absentee for his tenants" caused disputes. In Shizuoka i t was the "higher rate of tenancy fee charged by absentee landlords and their lack of un-obtrusive charity" that caused disputes. In Oita prefecture the report found that the "oppression of the tenants by the 5 7 absentee landlords' managers" was a cause of dispute. A close look at the demands of the tenants in tenancy disputes reveals the extent to which they were directed at obtaining services that had previously been an expected part 45 of the patron-client relationship. The issue of rent reduction in times of poor crop or crop f a i l u r e is a case in point. The landlord had t r a d i t i o n a l l y granted this reduction, with some reluctance no doubt, but without f u l l -scale resistance and disputes with tenants. In 1923, f u l l y 65% of tenancy disputes were over the issue of rent reduction and in 1926 i t was as high as 78%. Throughout the 1920s this demand was found in no less than 50% of disputes. There were also demands for permanent reduction in rent - 30% of disputes in 1923 and fluctuating between 7% and 22% in other years of the 1920s. The demand for permanent reduction of rent suggests that the tenant was attempting to have the loss of t r a d i t i o n a l landlord 'goods and services' compensated for by a reduction in the rent expected. Absentee landlords, of course, were more frequently targets of tenancy disputes since i t was here that the most extensive erosion of the t r a d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant bond had taken place. Professor Waswo relates that, "Sugiyama Motojiro, founder and head of the Japan Farmers' Union, observed in 1926 that more disputes occurred on land owned by absentee landlords than on land owned by v i l l a g e res i dents."^ 8 F i n a l l y , the geographic d i s t r i b u t i o n of tenancy disputes suggests the importance of the erosion of patron-client bonds in creating conditions leading to tenancy disputes. 46 Tenant militancy in the 1920s was concentrated in the areas of Japan that were economically advanced. It is precisely these areas where the most extensive breakdown in t r a d i t i o n a l 1 and!ord-tenant relationship had occurred. Further, with the deepening agricultural c r i s i s in the 1930s the patron-c l i e n t bonds were eroded in the outlying areas and dis-putes consequently developed there as well. The developed areas of Japan - Kinki, Chubu and Kanto - show 68.3% of a l l recorded disputes in the years 1917 to 1931. For the years 1932 to 1941, 44.5% of a l l disputes occurred in these areas, while Tohoku, Kyushu, Chugoku, Shikoku and Hokkaido experienced 59 55.5% of a l l disputes. There is no doubt, then, that changes in the t r a d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant relationship played an important role in the origins of tenant unrest in Japan. There is yet another important question to be answered, however, and this relates to the matter of timing. Since most of the trends among landlords considered above as con-tri b u t i n g to the breakdown of the tradit i o n a l landlord-tenant relationship were well advanced at least a decade before 1920, disputes might be expected to have occurred before 1920, but this is not the case. Why? The answer to this puzzle l i e s in understanding what Scott's theory does not do. It is not a simple equation of the loss of l e g i t i -macy in the 1 and!ord-tenant relationship followed by tenant action against the landlord. Scott suggests that the erosion of social bonds between agrarian e l i t e s and peasants 47 merely creates a potential for such action. He writes, The collapse of v e r t i c a l ties of loyalty i s , at best, a precondition ^ a latent potential - for peasant protest and class based organization.60 He suggests that the r e a l i z a t i o n of this potential depends on several variables. Two of the more important of these wi l l be discussed in the following two chapters. The f i r s t important variable he suggests is the economic effect of the s h i f t in the balance of exchange on the tenant. There are, he submits, changes which are more painful than others. If the peasant's welfare is not adversely affected by the loss of certain patron-client services, the potential for peasant protest may not be realized. Scott expands on t h i s : When the peasant's welfare has not declined, when social l i n k s , say to p o l i t i c i a n s and bureaucrats, offer alternative mechanisms of security, when urbanization and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n provide real opportunities for those who can no longer be accommodated within the v i l l a g e , agrarian e l i t e s may lose legitimacy more or less peace-f u l l y . A buoyant economy, rural development pro-grams, and electoral party patronage thus repre-sent for the peasant opportunities and services which make the worsening terms of trade with agrarian e l i t e s less painful. I f , on the other hand, the peasant's welfare is declining, i f his subsistence is threatened, and i f few alternatives are open, the process may be vastly more explosive.61 It is possible to argue, in the Japanese case, that the s h i f t in the balance of exchange was not c r i t i c a l until after 1920, when the tenant's subsistence was threatened on a massive scale. Until this time, p a r t i c u l a r l y in the decade 48 preceding 1920, there was s u f f i c i e n t prosperity in rural Japan to enable the tenant to maintain his subsistence despite declining patron services. The conditions after 1920, however, threatened his subsistence and created a situation that was 'vastly more explosive 1 and under which agrarian e l i t e s in Japan became the object of widespread tenant protest. In the next chapter I w i l l examine the degree of rural prosperity that existed in the years before 1920, especially during the five war years, and the extent to which events after 1920 reduced this prosperity. 48 a CHAPTER III THE ECONOMIC BACKGROUND TO TENANT UNREST 49 In this chapter I w i l l ' argue that the decade preceding 1920, p a r t i c u l a r l y the years embracing the F i r s t World War, saw s u f f i c i e n t prosperity in the countryside to guarantee the tenants' subsistence. This prosperity, however, was a false prosperity insofar as i t was primarily based on an increase in productivity and on good agric u l t u r a l prices as well as the economic boost of W.W.I - conditions that could not be expected to continue i n d e f i n i t e l y . Further, at the same time a number of structural changes occurring in Japanese agriculture ultimately made the tenants' economic position insecure and, just as importantly, greatly weakened his bargaining position vis-a-vis the landlord, making i t more d i f f i c u l t to ensure receipt of patron services. The abrupt end of prosperity in 1920 revealed the weakness of his position vis-a-vis the landlord and brought a massive threat to his subsistence, exposing the economic insecurity created by the structural changes transforming the nature of his economic environment for the last f i f t y years. The terms of trade in the 1 andlord-tenant exchange of goods and services are not s t a t i c . They depend in large part on the r e l a t i v e strength of each party's bargaining position. Each party's bargaining position is affected by structural changes in the society. Scott writes, 50 In aggregate terms, the balance of re c i p r o c i t y seems to depend largely on the r e l a t i v e bargain-ing position of the two parties; how much more does the c l i e n t need the patron than the patron needs him. The r e l a t i v e bargaining position of each party is in turn greatly influenced by structural changes such as the scarcity of land, s h i f t to commercial agriculture, the expansion of state power and the growth of population.62 Throughout Meiji and early Taisho structural changes greatly weakened the tenants' bargaining position and at the same time made his subsistence less secure and his need of patron services more acute. Scott provides a useful schema for understanding the effect of certain structural changes on the balance of patron-client exchange. Using this i t is possible to show that despite the prosperity in the countryside, the tenants' position was growing less secure. It is useful to reproduce Scott's schema in f u l l below. The Commercialization of Agriculture and the Balance of Patron-Client Exchange Nature of Chanqe Effect on, Patron-Client _ Rel ati ons  1. Growing inequality :: ' Control of land becomes key in landholding. basis of patronage; landholder's position strengthened in dealing with clients who seek access to narrowly-he 1d land. 2. Population growth Landholder's position strengthen-ed in bargaining with a growing peasantry seeking access to land, 3. Fluctuations of producer Landholder's position strengthen-and consumer prices under ed as peasants increasingly need commercial agriculture. credit r e l i e f , marketing a s s i s t -ance etc. 51 Nature of Change E f f e c t o n Patron-Client 3 Relations 4. Loss of "Slack resources" Weakening of alternative security (uncleared land, common mechanisms weakens peasant-clients' pasturage, free fuel etc.) bargaining position with e l i t e s . 5. Deterioration of v i l l a g e Weakening of alternative v i l l a g e leveling mechanisms. security mechanism again weakens bargaining position with e l i t e s . 6. Colonial state protects Landowners less in need of loyal property rights of land- local c l i e n t e l e ; hence less in-owning e l i t e s . centive to maintain a balance of, exchange that engenders l e g i t i r i , ma cy. Source: James C. Scott, "The Erosion of Patron-Client Bonds and Social Change in Rural South East A s i a ^  Journal of Asian Studies , Vol . ' X X X11 , #1 Nov. 1 972 , 0. 39'. Change #6 is obviously not applicable to Japan as i t stands, but replacing colonial state with modern centralized state we have an analogous situation. The remaining changes, however, a l l occurred in Japan from early Meiji through Taisho. It is worth examining each of these structural changes in turn. Throughout Meiji the area of tenanted land steadily in-creased as 1 an downership was concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people. The most dramatic increases occurred in the 1880s and '90s. The following table i l l u s t r a t e s this trend. 52 Table 3 Percentage of Tenanted Land 1872 - 1934 1872 1 883 > 1887 189 2 1908 1934 31% 30.75% 39. 34% 39.39% 45% 46% Source: Adapted from R. Dore, Land Reform in Japan. Table #3 alone does not give a complete picture of the in-equality in landholding. Changes in the numerical strength of the three types of c u l t i v a t o r s , as tabled below, complete the pi cture. Table 4 Percentage of c u l t i v a t o r type, 1883 - 1908 Owner cu l t i v a t o r 1883 1892 1 608 39.6 3% 31 .12% 3 3.2 7% Part tenant 38.45% 45.14% 40.25% Tenant 21.92% 23.74% 27.58% Source: K. Wakakawa, "The Japanese Farm Tenancy System" in D.G. Haring ed., Japan's Prospects. Cambridge, Mass., 1946, pp.25-73. From the table i t can be seen that the number of tenants and part tenants increased across the 15 year period. Thus by 1908 f u l l y two-thirds of a 11 cultivators were involved 6 3 in one form of tenancy or another. By the 1920s the di s t r i b u t i o n of land was unequal in 53 the!extreme. The following table i l l u s t r a t e s this inequality: Table 5 Inequality in Landholding in 1920 Percentage of Percentage of 1andholders land held 6%. . 54% 33% 39% 38% 7% Source: Farley, "Japan's Unsolved Tenancy Problem", Far Eastern Survey, Vol . 6 #14, 1937 1.P.R. , New York, p.l58. There were s t i l l further inequalities which this table does not reveal. Within the group of 6% holding 54% of the land, a mere 8% held half of that 54%. In addition, an estimated million and a half peasants, or 23% of the agricultural 64 population, owned no land. Landholding in Japan was in-creasingly narrowed so that by Taisho some two-thirds of Japan's farm families were involved in some form of tenancy on 45% of the nation's farm land. Such conditions favored the landlord who held greater amounts of land as the ranks of those who were obliged to.rent land was swelling. The tenant's bargaining position was thus weakened. The steady increase in population growth further strengthened the landlord's hand in dealing with the peasantry. Each increase in the number of those who needed land secured his position of control over an increasingly scarce commodity. 54 Cultivated land did increase by roughly 3% across Meiji and Taisho but this hardly offset the population pressure on 65 the land. The pressure on land was considerable; between 1872 and 1920 the population grew from 34,806,000 to 55,473,000. While some of this population was absorbed by the urban sector, the majority was absorbed on the already-crowded land. It was not until W.W.I that the population engaged in agri-culture and forestry dropped both absolutely and rel a t i v e to other sectors. With the important exception of the areas adjacent to the industrial centers during the war years, 66 the tenant-to-1 and ratio was strongly in the landlord's favor. Yet another of Scott's structural changes working against the tenant was the loss of slack resources, notably common land. These resources, consisting of uncleared land and v i l -lage common lands, diminished under increasing population pressure and the legal r e s t r i c t i o n s on use i n i t i a t e d by the Meiji agricultural settlement. After the Restoration, the Meiji government claimed t i t l e to a l l land without proven ownership, regardless of customary usage. The tenant found that he lost easy access to lands he had used as a source of timber, f u e l , f e r t i l i z e r , fodder and grazing land. The loss of these important resources had a substantial effect on the tenant's economy; his economic s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y was undermined as he was forced to go to market to buy these items with cash. Thus the tenant was drawn further into 55 commercial relationships beyond the paddy. There were further changes at work to undermine the tenant's s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . The growing commercialization of agriculture, apparent even in late Tokugawa, was vastly accelerated as Japan moved into the Meiji era. Large-scale imports of foreign goods that followed the Restoration began to slowly undermine native cottage industries. The important spinning and weaving industry is a good example. The im-port of cotton yarn and. fabr i c became extensive. Between 1868 and 1887 the imports averaged 30% of the national con-sumption. The price of these imports averaged roughly two-go thirds of the Japanese counterpart. Sugarcane is another case in point. Imports of cheap sugarcane forced a 75% re-duction in land devoted to sugarcane c u l t i v a t i o n between 1877 and 1882. The import of cheap kerosene was instrumental in destroying cottage industries producing li g h t i n g fuels from animal, fats and charcoal. Further, the handmade paper industry suffered greatly as the new Western-style tabloids, newspapers, and magazines brought changes in the quality of paper r e q u i r e d . ^ The destruction of cottage industries made the tenant farmer more dependant on grain and food c u l t i v a t i o n alone for subsistence and forced him to buy goods on the market that he had t r a d i t i o n a l l y manufactured himself. The prices of goods he purchased on the market were l i k e l y to be fixed 56 while, paradoxically, his main source of cash - the ric e crop - was subject to great price fluctuations. While this could work in his f a v o r s i t often did not, since lacking either storage f a c i l i t i e s or a s u f f i c i e n t surplus to wait for favorable conditions to s e l l , he had to s e l l at harvest time when the price was lowest. The fluctuation in rice prices was marked. With the 1874 price as an index of 100, the price rose and f e l l between 100 and 221 through the years to 1894. 7 0 The Japanese landlord, who could afford to wait for the best market conditions to s e l l , continued to take a constant share of the tenant's produce as rent, while the tenant was l e f t to shoulder more and more of the risks of commercial agriculture. Thus the tenant came to have a ' s p l i t personality': part entrepreneur, part farm laborer. E.H. Norman describes the Japanese tenant farmer of Meiji and Taisho as manifesting the "double nature of the capitalist-farmer (who takes the risks of the entrepreneur) and the agricultural proletarian (inasmuch as the landlord, by nature of high rent, takes a large part of the p r o f i t s of the e n t e r p r i s e . ) " 7 ^ The nature of this schizophrenia was such that while the tenant was assuming more and more of the risks of agriculture he could enjoy neither i t s benefits nor protection from i t s dangers since his p r o f i t was s kimmed off; by an. increasingly disinterested landlord. 57 At a time when the tenant most needed the guarantees of subsistence provided by the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant re-lationship the landlord, as argued in chapter 2, was be-coming less disposed to grant them. This s h i f t in the risk of agriculture represents a serious breach in the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant pact. Scott submits that, In e f f e c t the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant exchange e n t i t l e d the landlord to a surplus only after he had made provisions for his tenants' subsistence requirements. This arrangement placed a f l o o r under the real income of peasants and shielded them from the more severe fluctua-tions in production of price/. With the com-mercialization of agriculture, an increased share of the risk is pushed on the tenant who is least able to absorb this f l u c t u a t i o n . ' 2 This statement reemphasizes the idea that the tenant's minimum demand is the guarantee of his subsistence. When this threshold is breached, the tenant w i l l consider the relation to have lost i t ' s legitimacy. The structural changes that had occurred throughout Meiji and Taisho and the commercialization of agriculture, pushing the risks of c u l t i v a t i o n e n t i r e l y onto the tenant, had created con-ditions wherein his subsistence was less and less secure. Add to this the withdrawal of many patron services as discussed in the preceding chapter and i t can be seen that there was a situation created wherein the tenants' sub-sistence was no 1 onger guaranteed, by the landlord. That no wide-spread tenant unrest occurred in the years before 1920 seems due to the existence of a level of prosperity in the countryside that guaranteed the tenants' 58 subsistence, thus providing an alternative to the guarantees provided in the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant relationship. This prosperity is a condition that Scott cites as one allowing rural e l i t e s to lose legitimacy without serious consequences. The relationship between the decline in rural prosperity and the rise of tenant unions and tenancy disputes, both beginning in 1920, strongly suggests that Scott's concept of e l i t e s losing legitimacy with more violent repercussions when alternate forms of subsistence guarantees are unavailable, is valid for understanding the occurrence of tenant unrest in Japan. 11.i s: therefore useful in testing the above assumption to examine the economic trends up to 1920 and those of the 1920s in relation to trends in the development of tenant protest. I do not propose to examine economic trends in detail but rather to sketch them in broad brush strokes and try to gauge their effects on the tenant farmers' economic position by examining some tenant farmer household budgets. The F i r s t World War was a powerful stimulus to a l l sectors of the Japanese economy. Munitions contracts from Europe flooded into Japan and the reduction of imports from Europe stimulated the growth of industries for home supply. Moreover, Japanese exports to Asia, the Americas and Africa expanded to f i l l the gap created by the decline in European exports. As a result the ind u s t r i a l sphere expanded and 59 for the f i r s t time industrial production outstripped a g r i c u l t u r a l . The increased demand for goods invited an increase in prices and this in turn spurred investment. Prices in general increased rapidly; in the 40 years pre-ceding the war prices had risen by 25.8% but during the five war years rose 125%. Profits were also remarkable; in 1914 a survey of 68 important large businesses showed an average p r o f i t of 15% and dividends of 10% but by 1919 this had 73 risen to p r o f i t s of 85% and dividends of 30%. The agricultural sphere shared in this prosperity in two ways; prices for agricultural goods rose and employ-ment opportunities for the surplus population increased as well. Prices for a l l farm products went up and at their peak in 1919 were more than three times as high as they 74 had been in 1915. The rise in the rice price was particu-l a r l y steep. In 1914 i t was 13 yen 17 sen per koku but rose to nearly 46 yen by 1919 - a three and half fold increase. Partly this increase in price was the result of increased demand and partly the result of a decline in the volume of imported rice due to the diversion of freight vessels to other purposes. Spurred on by these war-time conditions, the increase in productivity too was notable: 10% between 75 1914 and 1920. This too added a further measure of pros-perity to the rural sector. The expansion of the urban industrial sphere supplied 60 opportunities for migration from the countryside for the rural population surplus while the increase in rural l i g h t industry gave part-time work to those remaining in the v i l l a g e s . The sons and daughters of the farmers received employment in the new industries and l e f t the farm. In 1914 the industrial labor force had been 1,800,000 but this rose to 2 ,800 ,000 by 1919 . At least 1 ,000 ,000 76 of t h i s - i s estimated to have come from farm families. Their wages continued to be an important supplement to the income of their families l e f t behind in the v i l l a g e . This supplement was essential to farm families who could no longer subsist on farming alone. The prosperity of the villages in the war years was such that phrases like 1vi11 age boom1 and 'peasant nouveau riche' were coined. One economist has called those years a "Golden Age unknown in the memories of contemporary farmers." This metaphor is an exaggeration of r e a l i t y . While i t is true that there was prosperity and that many tenant farmers, at the bottom of the rural economic scale, shared in i t s benefits, those tenants producing nothing for sale beyond their rent and consumption needs did not enjoy the benefits of price increases in agri c u l t u r a l goods and further, were actually put under greater economic strain by the increased price of non-agri cul tura.l goods. There were also tenants who had to purchase rice on the market and the high price 61 of the very grain they produced became an economic burden. Samples of tenant farmer budgets, however, suggest that some were enjoying a small surplus, though i t was not much greater than in the years before 1916. A look at some tenant farmer household budgets before the c r i s i s of 1920 can give us an idea of the effect of the macro-economic trends dis-cussed above on the tenants' economy. Unfortunately, detailed budget surveys are rare for the years before 1920. The Japanese government did not begin to conduct such surveys until the early 1920s but fortunately we have the surveys that were carried out, in a private capacity, by an employee of the Ministry of Forestry and Agriculture. These surveys of more than 100 owner-farmers and tenants in different regions throughout Japan were taken at scattered intervals up to 1920. A comparison of budgets for 1912 and 1920 can y i e l d an insight into the real economic position of the tenant farmer across those years. It is unfortunate that a survey for 1919 does not ex i s t , since the budget for 1920 is l i k e l y to show the i n i t i a l effects of the economic decline beginning in that year. The obviously small surplus of that year, therefore, should be interpreted c a r e f u l l y . The budgets for 1912 and 1920 are tabled on the following page. 62 TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF FARM HOUSEHOLD ECONOMIES (IN YEN) Tenan ts 1912 1920 Scale of management (size of land under operation in tan) 14.0 13.0 Number of family members (heads) 6 6 INCOME: Rice 450 1 ,041 Other cereals 123 1 36 Cocoon and others 57 1 30 Forestry income - -Wages 35 61 Miscellaneous income 40 48 Total : 705 1 ,41 5 OPERATING EXPENSES Manure and f e r t i l i z e r s 56 163 Land rent 253 522 Wages - -Other operating expenses - 50 Interest payable for debts 7 20 Total : 316 755 GROSS INCOME 389 .0 660.0 HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES: Food and drink 256 427 CIoth i ng 24 54 Fuel and li g h t 1 7 28 Housing expenses 10 1 6 Educational expenses - -Sundry expenses and incidentals 43 108 Taxes and assessments 8 22 Total : 358 655 NET SURPLUS 31 5 Source: Ouchi Tsutomu, "Agricultural Depression and the Japanese Villages"-* in The Developing Economies, Vol. 5, number 1-4, Tokyo, 1967, p.600. 63 Ouchi Tsutomu, the Japanese economist who recorded these budget surveys, has drawn three simple but useful conclusions from them;.. He suggests that the following trends are apparent: 1) With the scale of farm management near constant, farm income increased two times for the tenant. 2) The increase in operating expenses was 2.4 times for the tenant. This well exceeds the rate of increase in income. 3) Gross income grew by 1.7 times for the tenants but their net surpluses suffered a remarkable decrease. 79 The increase in farm income is no doubt due to the increase in productivity and the ri s e in farm product prices. The increase in operating costs r e f l e c t s some of the changes discussed e a r l i e r in this section, s p e c i f i c a l l y , the in-creasing need to purchase f e r t i l i z e r , fodder and various household items once produced at home or available from alternate sources. The decrease in surplus is d i f f i c u l t to interpret. It could be due to the effects of the reces-sion beginning in 1920 or barring that, i t could be claimed that the tenant farmer used some of his greater income to enhance his standard of l i v i n g ; i t could also be a com-bination of both. Ouchi argues that there was such an en-hancement and points to the increase in household expenses as evidence. He claims that the 1.8 times increase in household expenses can be interpreted as representative of a nominal increase in individual consumption. Further, he submits that, 64 On balance we may conclude that there was a substantial improvement in the farmers' l i v l i 4 hood and that their standards of l i v i n g were raised, while on the other hand, we may con-clude that the fact that their improved l i v l i -hood was not necessarily supported by a cor-responding increase in their incomes helped make the farmers' lives less stable. Although i t must be q u a l i f i e d , the conclusion that the years 1912 to 1920 were prosperous ones for the tenant farmer, insofar as his income increased and his standard of l i v i n g improved, seems v a l i d . It seems equally true that this prosperity was based on temporary economic con-ditions incapable of being sustained, a fact reflected in the observation that his improved l i v l i h o o d was not supported by a corresponding increase in net income. Further, the structural changes mentioned at the beginning of the chapter had undermined his basic economic position making i t unlikely that a long-term stable increase in his standard of l i v i n g could be sustained by his own e f f o r t s . In fact, the end of the war saw the complete collapse of v i l l a g e prosperity. This c r i s i s was related to the business panic and recession that gripped the country as a whole. Prices quickly dropped off from the 1919 peak. Rice that had sold at 50 yen a koku from September 1919 to March 1920 dropped to 40 yen a koku by August and to 26 yen 30 sen by December a near 50% drop in one year. The price of s i l k cocoons, an.important rural industry, f e l l from the Spring 1919 price of 20 yen 93 sen per kanme (8 3/4 lb. measure) to a Fall price of 20 yen 12 sen. This was 65 the beginning of a serious decline. In the Spring of 1920, the price per kanme was down to 7 yen 59 sen and in the Summer and Fall of that year was down again to 5 yen 12 sen. This 81 represents a drop of nearly 75% in a l i t t l e more than a year. The prices of rice and s i l k cocoons as well as other agri-culture produce were thereafter subject to yearly fluctua-tions, 1925 being noteworthy as a recovery peak, but the overall trend was for agr i c u l t u r a l prices to decline; they did not return to the 1919 peak until after the Second World War. 8 2 The layoff of factory workers after the war was also a blow to the villages for they l o s t both an important source of revenue and were now burdened with more surplus population. Further, the gap between the f a l l i n g prices of a g r i c u l t u r a l goods and the less rapidly f a l l i n g prices of manufactured goods reduced the purchasing power of the agricul t u r a l yen. Taxes, interest and in some cases cash rents remained fixed, placing a further burden on the farmer. It was a dilemma from which, writes one Japanese scholar, 8 3 they desperately had to breakjout. Unfortunately, i t was a dilemma impossible to escape from. In the end, the collapse, of the industrial boom, the very source of e a r l i e r prosperity, l e f t the farmer, with his decreased income, faced with an inf l a t e d price structure that did not decrease when the boom collapsed. Returning to agricultural prices, we see them con-66 tinuing to drop throughout the 1920s and 1930s. As in Me i j i , an increase in foreign imports, at the end of the war, had a d e b i l i t a t i n g effect on the home rural economy. This time the imports struck largely at the very mainstay of the rural economy - rice production. Rice prices f e l l after the war, largely due to the tremendous increase in imports of cheap rice from Japan's co1 onies, Korea and Taiwan. In 1914 only 300,000 tons of Korean and Taiwanese rice was imported but by 1922 this figure had risen to 456,000 tons. This trend continued unabated and in the next three years rice imports nearly doubled again to reach 771,086 tons in 1925. The trend did not stop there; i t continued, and by 1934 rice imports were a staggering 7 times as great as 84 they had been in 1920. Domestic rice prices reeled under this onslaught and the tenants' rice income declined d r a s t i c a l l y in competition with foreign rice which was 20% 85 to 30% cheaper than the native product. Yet another contributing factor to the f a l l in agri-cultural prices was the s l i d e o f f from the mid-twenties of the prices of agricultural goods on the world market. For Japan, the s i l k trade was a lucrative export, and s e r i -culture was a major a c t i v i t y of a great percentage of Japanese farm families. It is d i f f i c u l t to overplay the importance of the collapse of s i l k prices on the tenant economy since "over 2,000' fami 1 ies or 30% of the total of 67 farm families engage in se r i c u l t u r e , and in some provinces such as Nagano and Gumma in central Japan, the farmers depend almost wholly on this for a l i v i n g . " The decrease in s i l k price was severe and jeopardized these families' subsistence. In the period 1925 to 1929 the price declined by 33% and in the interval t i l l 1930 by another th i r d . The decline in the general aggregate farm product price is graphed below. Table 7 General Aggregate Farm Product Prices 1919 '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '25 '27 '28 '29 '30 Source: Ouchi Tsutomu, "Agricultural Depression and the Japanese-Village", Developing Economies,Vol.5,#1-4 , Tokyo, 1967, p.609, Fig.4. 68 This sharp decline in prices in the aftermath of the war and again with the blow to sericulture is p a r t i c u l a r l y s t r i k i n g . The further plunge with the great depression in 1929 again catches our eye. The world-wide economic c r i s i s of 1929, by placing r e s t r i c t i o n s on Japanese exports, notably s i l k , proved the death blow to the Japanese rural economy. By 1930 the condition of Japanese argriculture was grave; "with rural output v i r t u a l l y constant, farm prices depressed, and v i l l a g e economies stagnant, Japanese agriculture was obviously 8 7 confronted with c r i s i s conditions by 1930." Again i t is not possible to document the effects of these trends on the tenant farmers' budget in detail since budget surveys do not exist for the years 1921, '22 or '23; however, they do exist for the years after that. A comparison of budget surveys for 1924 and 1930 can serve to reveal the effects of the economic trends of the 1920s on the tenant farmers' economy. For the years 1920 to 1924 we can speculate that the following tendencies could be expected. F i r s t , the f a l l off in farm product prices would reduce tenant income. Second, since the general commodity prices did not drop as fast as farm product prices, the rela t i v e purchasing power of the tenant's income would have declined. Related to t h i s , a third trend, namely, the fixed nature of charges such as tax, rent and interest would place an even greater strain on the tenant's 69 reduced income. Ouchi has written that the result of these factors was that "many farm households were reduced to economic distress and even upper class farmers' account o o books were marked with red ink." The budget surveys for 1924 and '30, tabled below, show an acceleration of these trends. Table 8 Summary of Farm Household Economies - Tenant farmers. 19 24 19 30 Scale of farm in tan 1.4.5 16.2 Number of family members 5.8 6.9 Agricultural Receipts and Disbursements Recei pts 1 ,928 1,285 Operating expenses Total 1 ,1 76 1 ,867 " Rent only 463 2 78 Farm Income 753 418 Non-agricultural income 246 195 To be deducted Taxes and assessments 35 29 Interest payable 8 1 3 Disposable Income 956 571 Household expenditure 867 654 Net surplus ' 149 ' A83 •JL. Source: Ouchi Tsutomff,Developing Economies,Vol.5,p.611 , F i g . 6 . A denotes d e f i c i t . . The following con cl us i ons of Ouchi, based on the budget surveys, are important to us here: 1) At the nadir of the depression (1930), the gross income suffered from extraordinary 70 decline but net farm income was affected with an even greater d e f i c i t . Gross farm income in 1930, when compared to that of 1924, stood in 67% for tenants, while a similar comparison at-net farm income turned out to be 55.5% 2) The decline in the non-agricultural income, or part-time income, was also responsible for declin-ing net farm income. Tenants were unable to cover their household costs, by farm income, even in the year 1924, when the situation was not yet devastating. 3) While farm income was dropping d r a s t i c a l l y , taxes and other public charges remained constant. Inter-est on debts and l i a b i l i t i e s continued to increase as the farmers' borrowings grew bigger and bigger. The disposable income of the farmers was thus shied away by one means or another. 4) The farmers' l i v l i h o o d expenditure was reduced considerably through the processes described in (2) and (3). While general commodity prices declined by nearly one half, this remained r e l a t i v e l y moderate and, as i t is usually hard to c u r t a i l one's expenses when income drops, the gg farm family budget as a whole turned to d e f i c i t . I have t r i e d to demonstrate that the tenant farmers' subsistence was threatened by economic developments of the twenties. We have seen how from 1924 on tenants could not cover their household expenses from farm income so that by 1930 many became destitute. At this point they were merely working for the landlord. This decline must have started from 1920. We know that in 1920 tenant budgets were already in the red. We have further supporting evidence for this assumption in the fluctuation in farm product prices. The fact that they were lower from 1920 to 1924 than they were in 1924 suggests an even greater str a i n on tenants' budgets in the four years preceding 1924. 71 We can conclude, then that the decade before 1920 was a period of prosperity, p a r t i c u l a r l y marked in the so-called 'Golden Age' of the War years, but ending rather abruptly in 1920. In that year, economic trends began to reduce tenants' income and standard of l i v i n g and to set the rural sector " a d r i f t on the.lowest economic tide that i t had known until i t was engulfed in the depression". These trends, exacerbated by the imports of foreign ri c e and the collapse of the s i l k industry, and f i n a l l y the world-wide economic c r i s i s of 1929, brought tenants to a state of destitution by 1930. The question now confronts us: Is there a r e l a t i o n -ship between these economic trends and the outbreak of tenancy disputes in rural Japan? A simple graph plotting trends in tenancy disputes against trends in the economy, measured by the aggregate farm product price index w-i.Ill be helpful in answereing this question. This graph is presented on the following page. The graph is revealing. The correlation between the two factors in unmistakable. It appears that at precisely the point of turn-around in the rural economy, with the sub-sequent threat to the tenants' standard of l i v i n g and l i v l i -hood, the phenomenon of tenant unrest becomes v i s i b l e . There is a continuing correlation between deepening economic c r i s i s and increasing tenant unrest across the whole decade. 72 Tab! 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 1 7 16 15 14 1 3 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 e 9 Tenant disputes and aggregate farm product prices 1919 - 1930. 1916 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 = tenancy disputes - aggregate farm product prices Source: £o:mp3 -1 ed- from Dore , Land Reform in Japan. Table 2, p.7 and Oucni Tsutomu, "Agricultural Depression and the Japanese V i l l a g e " Developing Economies, Vol.5,#1-4, Tokyo, 1967. p.609, Fig. 4.. 73 The geographic. d i s t r i b u t i o n of disputes also suggests that the sharp threat to tenant's' subsistence was most certainly a factor that activated the potential for peasant protest created by the breakdown in the v e r t i c a l ties of loyalty between the tenant and landlord. It was the areas closest to the industrial centers that were hardest hit by the economic developments of the 1920s. It is in these very areas that the commercialization of agriculture was most advanced. Here both the tenant's relationship with his landlord had been most eroded and his economic sel f - s u f -ficiency and security most strongly undermined by the struc-tural changes that had occurred in the countryside since the Restoration. The f i r s t recorded disputes, those of 1917, f i r s t i11uminate the geographic correlation between dispute and the economic and social character of the tenant's position in the areas adjacent to i n d u s t r i a l i z e d centers of Japan. The f i r s t disputes occurred "in Gifu and A i i c h i , where the price of agri c u l t u r a l produce was especially sensitive to money fluctuation, and then spread to the 90 - Shizuoka plain." In the 1920s this pattern continued to predominate. The Chubu, Kansai and Kanto areas showed the highest concentration of tenancy disputes. These areas included the major industrial centers of Osaka, Nagoya and Tokyo, in short, the economically advanced areas of 91 the nation. The areas of Kinki and Chubu alone account for 50% of a l l disputes, and with the inclusion of disputes 74 in Kanto, the i n d u s t r i a l i z e d , economically advanced regions Q? show f u l l y 68.3% of a l l disputes. The outlying areas, less sensitive to market forces, were somewhat isolated from the immediate threat to sub-sistence presented by the deteriorating economic si t u a t i o n . In the 1930s, when the l i v l i h o o d of tenants in those areas was threatened by the deepening rural economic c r i s i s , tenancy disputes spread out beyond the economically advanced regions to the less advanced hinterland. In general terms, the phenomenon of unrest occurring after a sharp decline in the standard of l i v i n g of a given group is not rare. The sharp reversal of a trend to in-creased prosperity provides not only objective economic reasons for protest but also an important psychological stimulus. The following observation on the phenomenon of revolution is an interesting argument in support of the above assertion. Revolutions are most l i k e l y to occur when a pro-longed period of objective and economic social improvement is followed by a period, of sharp reversal. The al1 - important ef f e c t on the minds of the people is to produce, during the former period, an expectation of continued a b i l i t y to s a t i s f y needs, which continue to r i s e , and during the l a t t e r , a mental state of anxiety and frustration when manifest r e a l i t y breaks away from anticipated r e a l i t y . The actual state of socio-economic development is less s i g n i f i c a n t than the idea that past progress can and must continue in the future.93 Although the objective economic conditions of the Japanese tenant alone were cause for a 'mental state of anxiety and 75 f r u s t r a t i o n 1 , there is reason to believe that his expectations of what his standard of l i v i n g should be had risen and the subsequent f a i l u r e to achieve this standard did reinforce his feelings of alienation. Waswo alludes to this when she observes that "the desire for improved tenancy con-ditions arose not from despair or desperation, but from prosperity, however s l i g h t and f l e e t i n g , which gave the tenants the economic a b i l i t y to engage in disputes and which raised not only their standard of l i v i n g but expectations of what that standard should be." The experience of some tenants with factory wage labor also led to an expectation of a higher standard of l i v i n g . During the wartime boom, many tenants and their families experienced work both easier and more highly paid than their farm labor. One o f f i c i a l , investigating tenancy disputes in the 1920s, wrote that "the basic cause of most disputes i^ s the aware-ness among tenants that agri c u l t u r a l labor is much more troublesome than other kinds of labor and that farming i t s e l f is much less profitable than other occupations." He continued, "Poor harvests merely provide tenants with 94 an immediate excuse for expressing their grievances." We can conclude then that i t is at<least p a r t i a l l y true that tenant militancy is rooted in frustrated expecta-tions for achieving a higher standard of l i v i n g . The danger in accepting this thesis f u l l y is that the basic threat to tenant subsistence is ignored. For many tenants, 76 especially as the decade wore on, the struggle was not for an improved standard of l i v l i h o o d but for any standard at a l l . The surplus of the war years did provide the fi n a n c i a l means to wage the struggle but i t must be realized that the financial commitment is indicative of deeper factors, not a natural reaction to a surplus. It must also be borne in mind that the s a t i s f a c t i o n of basic economic needs releases energy for other a c t i v i t i e s . The important re a l i z a t i o n is that the equation is much more complex than simply relating an economic surplus and i t ' s depletion with tenant unrest. Japanese scholarship generally views economic conditions as important background influences to tenant disputes rather than as direct causes of disputes; contributing factors rather than the raison d'etre of dispute. We must not forget the point that the increase in productive power and the constant surplus of farm family economies during the boom years (1916-1920) gave the tenant the financial strength to fight tenancy disputes and that this forms the background to the main growth of the tenant . 95 movement. In accordance with \ Scott's theory, I have treated the economic conditions discussed in this chapter as a trigger that ignited the potential for tenant protest which had been created by the breakdown in the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant relationship. This conclusion seems con-sistent with the evidence presented next-. Scott suggests 77 that a further factor relating to the r e a l i z a t i o n of this potential is the means of mobilization and action a v a i l -able to the tenant. He writes, Secondly, i t seems necessary to link the level of 'distress' which peasants experience with the means available for them to act. This seems to be the most important d i s t i n c t i o n between the rural p r o l e t a r i a t outside the v i l l a g e context and village-based tenants or labourers. The former are perhaps the most hard-pressed sector of the peasantry and thus highly v o l a t i l e - but they are usually disorganized and thus 'demobilized'. Vi11 age-based groups who, by contrast, may be materially somewhat better o f f , often have the vi l l a g e i t s e l f available to them as a pre-existing structure for cooperation and action. For such peasants, then, the" l i t t l e t r a d i t i o n and the v i l l a g e are the functional equivalents of the pubs, chapels, and f r i e n d l y societies which helped create and underwrite the gradual formation of class consciousness among the nine-teenth century English worker.96 In the next chapter I w i l l examine one of the means a v a i l -able to the Japanese tenant to act - the v i l l a g e i n s t i t u t i o n of tenant unions. I w i l l concern myself with this as an organization for mobi1izing the tenants in their struggles against the landlords. I w i l l also discuss the extent to which these unions became class conscious and the ways in which they in turn created and maintained class conscious-ness. Scott does not propose that the above 'mobilization' variable and the economic variable are the only factors involved in activating the potential for peasant protest and class-based action, But they are the main ones which 78 he discusses, though he admits that a large number of variables exist. The Japanese case suggests that r •-further important variables may be f i r s t , the existence of a labor movement with which the tenants more or less con-stantly interact, second, the existence of new patterns of thought which provide an alternative to the values and behaviour associated with the old order and f i n a l l y , help from outside organizers familiar with and dedicated to the tenant cause. The following exerpt from Japanese scholarship highlights the importance of these factors to the development of tenant protest in Japan. We know that the tenant movement received an important influence from the numerous situa-tions created by the recurring productive cycles of capitalism. But we cannot say that the movement was born of the business panic of 1920/21 and the recession. The economic basis for the birth of the movement was created between 1916 and 1920. Beyond this the farmers' change in mentality and the influence of the labour movement stimulated the fundamental growth of the tenant movement. At a time when this in-fluence was a bris k l y boiling ferment the peasants suddenly received the blow of the busi-ness panic and crop f a i l u r e s . Then, in the breast of the s t o l i d , unorganized, conservative peasant, the f i r e of class c o n f l i c t was l i t . 9 7 Some of the factors contributing to the farmers' change in mental outlook and the influence of the labor movement wi l l be treated in relation to the development and nature of the tenant unions in the following chapter. 78 a CHAPTER IV THE ROLE OF THE TENANT UNIONS IN THE EXPRESSION OF TENANT UNREST 79 Scott submits that the actualization of the potential for peasant protest created by the erosion of v e r t i c a l ties of loyalty between peasant and rural e l i t e i s , in part, dependant on the presence of a means to mobilize. In Japan, where ties between tenant and landlord had weakened over the preceding decades, the tenant unions provided this means in the 1920s. This chapter explores the origins of these unions, their professed aims, and their actual functions in the organized struggle against the landlord. Two further questions are of particular interest: The extent to which class consciousness developed among the tenants and/ the factors beyond the v i l l a g e which had an influence on the development of that class consciousness, and the organization of the tenant unions and their in-volvement in confrontation with the landlords. The plethora of mi l i t a n t , class-conscious tenant farmer unions in the 1920s representsan expansion and trans-formation of a v i l l a g e tenant farmer i n s t i t u t i o n that had existed for more than forty years. The numerical expansion and the transformed nature of these unions in the 1920s was a response to the declining patronage of the landlord and the weakened bargaining position of the tenant vis-a-vis the landlord. The new experience of the tenant farmer, created by the erosion of the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant 80 relationship, fostered the development of class conscious-ness which was in turn expressed by and reinforced in the tenant unions. A variety of forces outside the v i l l a g e , notably the labor movement, but also the wider democracy movement, the Rice Riots, the Russian Revolution, develop-ments in the League of Nations and the student movement, a l l had an influence on the development of a class consciousness among the tenants and the increasing tendency for them to organize and engage in a struggle against the landlord. Before discussing the expansion and trans-formation of the tenant unions in the 1920s a sketch of their development in the previous 45 years is helpful in understanding the changes in that decade. The f i r s t tenant union was organized in 1875 by a group of tenants from Kutsui v i l l a g e in Gifu prefecture. It is interesting to note that this union, unlike the majority of subsequently formed unions, was organized for the purpose of wresting a concession from the landlord. The Kutsui tenant union was formed when several of the tenants agreed to c o l l e c t i v e l y confront their landlords, by what means is not clear, to prevent a scheduled increase in the ok i tema i , the part of the rent that went towards the tenant's share of the tax paid by the landlord. The tenants involved signed a mutual agreement affirming they would support one another in this endeavor. The landlords refused the demand and the union, not strong enough to achieve i t ' s purpose, 98 di sbanded. 81 From 1875 on, a variety of tenant unions were formed. These unions were organized for various purposes, most unconcerned with landlord-tenant c o n f l i c t s . In fact, these early unions are conspicuous in their lack of militancy. In 1917, a survey of the existing tenant unions found that only 51 of 239 unions recorded had been 9 9 formed to oppose landlords and engage in disputes. In late 1918, the Home Ministry conducted another survey, finding that of 280 unions formed only 118 unions re-flected s t r i c t l y tenant interests as opposed to v i l l a g e interests. Most of these early unions were temporary organizations that met for the purpose of providing mutual aid or taking care of s p e c i f i c v i l l a g e concerns. They were based on the smaller units of v i l l a g e organiza-tion - the vi 11 age.r". counci 1 , hamlet council and religious a s s o c i a t i o n s . ^ ^ They bore names l i k e "tenant friendship society", "tenant mutual aid society", or "agricultural improvement society". Their purposes and platforms variously included: 1. The improvement of tenancy conditions. 2. The improvement and maintenance of tenancy conditions and the development of ag r i c u l t u r a l i mprovemen ts. 3. Prevention of competition for tenant land\ (presumably among tenants in times of poor tenant-to-land ratios). 4. The development of improvements in agriculture. 5. Cooperation between landlords and tenants and the development of ag r i c u l t u r a l improvement. u 1 82 The nature of the early tenant unions is c l e a r l y expressed in the above points. Although points 1 and 2 imply negotia-tion and perhaps even confrontation with the landlord most of the points deal with broader tenant and v i l l a g e con-cerns. The non-militant appearance of the tenant unions before 1920 should be interpreted c a r e f u l l y . Although this lack of militancy could be considered evidence of a lack of disparity of interests between landlord and tenant, i t more l i k e l y r e f l e c t s the fact that the tenant knew he had to appear submissive in face of the greater power of the land-102 lord. The early tenant unions were often covertly m i l i t a n t , that i s , they served to camouflage more militant concerns. The tenants used these unions to take c o l l e c t i v e action against the landlord i f he raised rent or revoked tenancy. At times, the tenants would c o l l e c t i v e l y refuse to cultivate the land or return the land, declining to take up tenancy again until their demands were met. The tenant union was a structure through which they could provide each other with aid and maintain the s o l i d a r i t y that was necessary to make their tactics e f f e c t i v e . There were severe penalties for those who, disobeying the decisions of the union membership., placed tenant s o l i d a r i t y in jeopardy Recalcitrant members could be fined or, in case of a severe breach with the union, punished by mura hachibu, the practice of denying a v i l l a g e member the mutual aid services that 1 0 3 were common. The contradiction between the non-militant 83 appearance and the actual militancy of some of the early unions was such that tenant unions were regarded by some as a kind of secret s o c i e t y . 1 0 4 In the period 1917 - 1920 certain changes in the overt nature of tenant unions augur the coming of a multitude of unions which openly professed militant goals. In May 1920, the Ministry of Agriculture again published a survey of tenant unions. This time there is an important addition to the l i s t of tenant union purposes. The survey records that some unions openly professed having the purpose of maintaining tenancy conditions by opposing or confronting landlords. The period before 1917 shows an almost com-plete absence of this kind of union but the period 1917 to 1 05 1920 l i s t s 13. The tread is slow between those years but suddenly in 1920 there is a dramatic increase in the number of tenant unions which continues steadily until i t peaks in 1927. The number of tenancy disputes also increase dramatically from 1920. The following table i l l u s t r a t e s the i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of disputes and the in*: crease in the number of tenant unions. 84 Table 10 Number of Disputes, Tenant Unions and Membership Year # of disputes # tenant unions Members 1917 85 - -18 256 - _ 19 326 - -20 408 352 -21 1 ,680 681 -22 1 ,578 .1,115 -23 1 ,917 1 ,530 164 24 1 ,532 2 ,337 232 25 2 ,206 3,496 307 26 2 ,751 3,936 347 27 2,053 4,452 365 28 1 ,866 4, 353 330 29 2 ,434 4,156 316 30 2 ,478 4,208 301 Source: R.P. Dore, Land Reform in Japan, Oxford University Press, 1 959 , Table 2 p.72. The unions of the e a r l i e r period provided the organiza-tional precedent for the unions of the 1 920s and 1 930s* Some of these e a r l i e r unions also supplied precedents for the tactics widely used in disputes during the l a t t e r period. The erosion of patronage and v e r t i c a l ties previously binding them to their landlord, together with the major threat to their subsistence in the 1920s, made i t neces-sary to confront the landlord and wrest from him rent re-ductions and a more secure tenure in order to guarantee that threatened subsistence. 85 The landlords were reluctant to meet their demands and i t was only logical that the weakened tenant bargaining position deriving from forty years of adverse structural change led to new forms of confrontation. The c o l l e c t i v e bargaining made possible by the tenant unions obviously strengthened their position vis-a-vis the landlord. Thus did the organization of tenant unions largely concerned with con-fronting the landlord become a widespread phenomenon. These new unions were di f f e r e n t in other important ways as well: they were organized on a more permanent basis and in units larger than the previous comparatively small-scale units of social organization. The oa za, the largest unit of a v i l l a g e , became the basic unit of organization, and in some prefectures such as Gumma and T o t t o r i , the gun (di s t r i c t ) became the unit for federations of unions. 1 0^ The relationship between the increases in tenant unions and the increase in the number of tenancy disputes was a two-way street. The tenant unions did engage in dispute after their formation, but most often the r e s i s t -ance of landlords to tenant demands, leading to a dispute, stimulated the development of unions. Most tenant unions were the direct products of disputes with the landlords; some were the work of outside organizers who prepared the ground for dispute.1° 7 Organizing by outsiders was prevalent as early as 1920 when there was a concerted e f f o r t to organize unions throughout 86 Japan under the slogan, "Peasants of the Country, Unite!". In 1922 the Japan Farmers' Union, a national p o l i t i c a l party representing the interests of the tenants, was founded. This party and other national organizations that professed to represent tenant interests avowed that their chief functions were to "assist tenants engaged in disputes, to encourage the formation of local tenant unions in d i s t r i c t s hitherto unorganized, and to direct and coordinate the 111 0 8 formulation of tenant demands. It remains true, however, that most tenant unions were organized where a dispute had developed and further that the tenants themselves were usually the organizers. These tenant unions were not a quickly passing phenomenon. They were organizationally stable, existing between disputes as well as during them. George Totten has written that early in periods of vigorous growth of s t r i f e , organizations such as tenant unions disappear on the settlement of'.dis-pute, but he continues to the effect that "a greater number of unions than disputes at any given time may be taken as « ] go a sign of greater organizational stability..* In Japan the tenant unions were more numerous than disputes from 1924 on. The tenant unions formed after 1920 were primarily organized to strengthen the tenants' position vis-a-vis the landlords and to serve as effective c o l l e c t i v e bargain-ing units. To ensure s o l i d a r i t y , members were required to 87 pledge adherence to rules that were t y p i c a l l y as follows: 1. Never to attempt to obtain tenancy rights of land already cultivated by another member by offering a higher rent. 2. Never to accept a landlord's demand to return land without consulting the union. 3. Never to relinquish tenancy rights without f i r s t informing the union and arranging for another member to take over the land. 4. Never to take over the tenancy of the land from another member without his agreement. 5. On purchasing land currently leased to another member, not to attempt to terminate the i tenancy for at least one year.110 These rules, essential to maintenance of s o l i d a r i t y , were enforced through a series of punishments including fines and actions such as the previously mentioned practice of mura hachibu. Using the union as a c o l l e c t i v e bargaining unit, the tenants would confront the landlords with their demands. Since most of these demands related to matters concerning rent, the tenants negotiated them between October and December when rents were due. There is no way of knowing how often these demands were met through negotiation, for only disputes are recorded. The demands leading most frequently to dispute are tabled on the,fol1 ow-ing page. 88 Table 11 Principal Demands of Tenants, 1923 - 1940 Year # Disputes Rent Reduction i Continuation of ' temporary , permanent , tenancy or compensation 1923 1 ,917 1 ,249 65. 0% 582 30. 3% 1.5 0.8% 24 1 ,532 1 ,044 67. 0% 358 2 2.2% 35 2.8% 25 2,206 1 ,444 64. 0% 475 21.0% 173 7.7% 26 2,751 2,011 78. 0% 272 9.8% 31 8 11.8% 27 2 ,052 1 ,206 59. 0% 253 12.4% 444 21.5% 28 1 ,886 1 ,014 50. 0% 1 77 9.5% 484 26.0% 29 2,434 1 ,339 55. 0% 151 6.2% 728 29.8% 30 2,478 1 ,042 42/. 0% 1 92 7.8% 1 ,030 41 .6%. Source: Adapted from B. Waswo., "The Origins of Tenant Dispute" in Japan in C r i s i s , ed. H.D. Harootunian, 1974, p.383, table 9. There was a notable change in the principal demands of tenants as the decade wore on. From 1927 on, the tenants appear to be on the defensive while the landlords more frequently used the t a c t i c of revoking tenancy to end disputes. The tenants' demands r e f l e c t this in their switch from matters concerning rent reduction, both permanent and temporary, to matters concerning continuation of tenancy or compensation when i t was revoked. The tact i c s used by the tenants in the struggle against the landlord demanded a high degree of s o l i d a r i t y for success. Tenants refused, in some cases, to harvest the crop and in others to cultivate the land until their demands were met. Another popular t a c t i c was to return the land en-masse to the landlord, re-fusing to take up cu l t i v a t i o n until the demands were met. 89 For success in a t a c t i c l i k e t h i s , where one tenant was apt to offer to cultivate land returned by another, s o l i d a r i t y in tenant ranks was especially essential. Tenants not only employed tactics designed to interrupt production but they also refused outright to pay rent and taxes, petitioned the government, or took their landlords to court i f circumstances p e r m i t t e d . 1 1 1 On occasion i t is reported that violent demonstrations and even looting were used as 11 2 means of protest to achieve demands. While the functions of providing a structure for c o l l e c t i v e l y confronting the landlord and maintaining s o l i d a r i t y in disputes were central to the tenant unions, i t would be incorrect to suppose that these were the sole functions. The tenant unions were more broadly conceived. One of the leaders of the tenant movement is reported to have commented that a tenant union, "must be sometimes a barracks of warriors who fight against other classes, some-times a school of v i l l a g e culture, a club for amusement, a 113 temple, a shrine." In practice, tenant unions did f i l l these and other functions. In some instances they engaged in the cooperative purchase of tools and f e r t i l i z e r s . They also enjoyed some success in establishing schools to teach 11 4 basic social science and agricultural techniques. There is no reason to believe that the provision of mutual aid and the concern with s p e c i f i c v i l l a g e issues like roads and 90 i r r i g a t i o n , so prevalent in the early unions, ceased to be functions of the more militant unions. A.s the expressed need for a tenant union to be "some-times a barracks of warriors to fight other classes" suggests, these unions were class conscious. The following excerpt from R.P. Dore's work indicates the extent to which class consciousness took root in the tenant's l i f e . The old folk songs of the Bon dances gave way to the internation a 1e ; red flags appeared at the head of peasant demonstrations with anti-c a p i t a l i s t slogans proclaiming death to the exploiters of the p r o l e t a r i a t . Divisions within the v i l l a g e tended to become more ideological and class conscious.. It is necessary to r e f l e c t on what 'class' and 'class consciousness' is to f u l l y understand how and why the develop-ments in Japan's rural history discussed in this paper spawned a class-conscious tenant movement. The B r i t i s h scholar E.P. Thompson expresses a concept of class and class consciousness that allows an insight into the dynamics of the creation of this phenomenon. He claims that class is neither a structure nor a category but rather a h i s t o r i c a l phenomenon, something which happens to men providing a unity to seemingly disparate and unconnected experiences. It is necessary to quote him at length to accurately develop this thought further. More than t h i s , the notion of class entails the notion of h i s t o r i c a l re 1 ationship....The r e l a t i o n -91 ship must always be embodied in real people and in a real context. Moreover we cannot have two d i s t i n c t classes, each with an independent being;, and then bring them into relationship with each other. We cannot have love without lovers, nor deference without squires and labourers.. And class happens when some men, as a result of common ex-perience (inherited or shared), feel and a r t i c u -late their identity as between themselves, and as against other men whose interests are different from (and usually opposed to) theirs. The class experience is largely determined by the productive relations into which men are born - or enter i n -volu n t a r i l y . Class-consciousness is the way in which these experiences are handled in cultural terms: embodied in t r a d i t i o n s , value systems, ideas, and i n s t i t u t i o n a l forms.^16 Class s o l i d a r i t y then, develops when a group of men inter-pret their experiences as common to themselves as against other men whose interests are di f f e r e n t from and possibly opposed to the i r s . In Japan, the withdrawal of the landlord from his tra d i t i o n a l place in the v i l l a g e and the increasing diver-gence of landlord and tenant interests created a situation where the tenant could see that this experience was not shared by the landlord and, further, that his interests were different from those of his .landlord. Thus class became a r e a l i t y among the tenants, i t is not something that can be measured but rather a relationship that developed between two groups of men whose experience, largely deter-mined by their productive r e l a t i o n s , and interests diverged. Class consciousness is the response to this 92 experience. It is the product of men actively coping with their experience, not something which automatically arises. Thompson says of t h i s : We can see a logic in the responses of similar occupational groups undergoing similar experiences, but we cannot predicate any law. Consciousness of class arises in diff e r e n t times and places, but never in just the same way.'1' In the songs of the tenant unions the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the tenant's experience and interests as something unique to him and opposed to those of the landlord can be most clear l y seen. The following song from Taguchi v i l l a g e in Osaka Fu is a case in point. With our Imperial succession continuing without equal Japan i s the jewel, of the world. If you ask of the source (of this nation) In Japan, their fame is high. It is us, the working farmers, 70% of this nation! We,without sin, suffer. The violent, tyrannical landlords bask in the sunshine, while even the trees and grass try not to f1 utter. Rise up, Japan's farmers! Rise up, Japan's farmers! It is interesting to note the national chauvinism expressed as well as the tenants' j u s t i f i a b l e pride in the important role they shouldered in Japan. It is clear from this song that their attitudes towards their landlords had changed and that they now i d e n t i f i e d themselves as a group apart. In the following two songs this i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of their experiences and interests as di f f e r e n t from and opposed to those of their landlords is even stronger. 93 Why are we destitute, we who labour? Those who produce, rice should eat r i c e . Please do not think we do.not eat because we hoard. We do not eat rice because we are destitute. What of our ruddy complexions! What of our gnarled hands! What of our hairless shins! When we swing we have strength. We who receive rice shoots of unbearable beauty, Are broken-hearted by the drought and pained by the wind. While gazing happily at the autumn f i e l d s , We do not understand that these are not our children. There is sadness. There is nostalgia. There is joy. There is -gratefulness. The golden waves are f u l l some but the harvest sees the last of i t . We give our crop to the landlord and weep. This idiocy, this stupidity, It is an i r r i t a t i n g job with no self-respect. They say, 'Poverty runs from the shadow of hard work' but We have been deceived! We build the storehouses, We appreciate the land. Our clothes are in t a t t e r s , Our houses lean. Our backs are bent and The rain comes through our roofs. Ah,Ah, this is tragic. We we re ~ wr un g by the'1 and1ords , But now we have awakened! Now:we .can see! We sustain the landlord, We are the parents who sustain the country. We, the tenants, are the benefactors We, the peasants, alone are the parents of l i f e ! * . * * The rice shoots burned. Our fortunes are bad. Every year i t is eaten completely. Where is the worth of rice burnt' brown to the top? 94 What bastards! It is unbearable, these conditions. Look at our arms; they have strength But in reaping we cannot get sustenance. Emperor, what have you done? The landlord fattens, Our- stomachs are empty. Bastards! The persimmons ripen, the chestnuts f a l l , This hungry ghost, This eternal throne, Do we have to support you? The landlords' warehouses are stuffed to bursting, Our stomachs are empty! 1 , 8 * * * These songs are certainly evidence that the tenant regarded himself as a class apart.from the landlord. The songs are an expression of class consciousness, a tangible r e f l e c t i o n of the division in the v i l l a g e . There is also a crude ideology expressed, one that is anti- 1 andlord and, to the extent that i t demands that wealth be distributed among producers, a n t i - c a p i t a 1 i s f , most remarkable, i t is also a n t i -Imperial, in at least one instance. The tenant unions were the i n s t i t u t i o n a l expression of this class consciousness. The extent of class consciousness among tenants cannot be measured by the numerical strength of the tenant lunions alone. The tenants were not e n t i r e l y free to organize as they chose. Often, through either coercion or court action, tenants were prevented from organizing unions involving only themselves and giving expression to their own needs. In this way class con-sciousness was suppressed or averted, though often only 95 temporarily. The manifesto adopted by the Japanese Land-owner" s' Association in 1926 cle a r l y reveals the landlords' alarm at the development of class struggle in the v i l l a g e and the measures to contain i t . The manifesto in part reads: Remembering the splendid t r a d i t i o n of our nation, with sovereign and subjects forming one •:: whole, and r e f l e c t i n g on the glorious history of our national development in the past, let us emphasize the harmonious relations between capital and labour, and especially cultivate peace between capital and labour, farmers and landlords, and thus contribute to the development of our agri c u l t u r a l v i l l a g e s . What sort of dev.u'ls are they who furiously strike f i r e bells when there is no f i r e and i n c i t e to class struggle, provoking animosity against landlords by exciting tenant farmers? If these malicious designs go unrestricted, what wi l l become of our national existence? The landlords,'1 plan to defeat the 'malicious designs' of tenant organizers and stem the growth of class con-sciousness and class struggle in the v i l l a g e involved organizing the tenants into v i l l a g e unions including both tenants and landlords as an alternative to the tenant unions. These unions were known as Kyocho kumiai, or c o n c i l i a t i o n unions. In a v i l l a g e i n s t i t u t i o n including both landlord and tenant, the landlord could work to ex-tinguish class consciousness and circumscribe tenant a c t i v i t i e s . These unions correspond to the '/yellow1 or 1 20 company unions of the labor movement. These c o n c i l i a t i o n unions, i n i t i a t e d by the landlords, were the forum for emphasizing the virtues of harmonious relations between 96 classes and peace in the v i l l a g e - virtues which are deeply rooted in feudal rural philosophies. Most of these unions were formed on settlement of a pa r t i c u l a r dispute, generally at the i n i t i a t i v e of landlords but frequently on the i n i t i a -121 tive of the police or v i l l a g e authorities. The govern-ment too, especially after 1924, played a s i g n i f i c a n t role in encouraging and establishing these unions. After that year, most tenancy disputes were settled under the provi-sions of the Tenancy Conciliation Law and as a condition of settlement the co n c i l i a t o r s frequently demanded that the tenants switch membership from local tenant unions to the c o n c i l i a t i o n union in their v i l l a g e . The decline of tenant unions from 1927 on is largely the result of increasing pressure on tenants to abandon their own unions for member-1 22 ship in the c o n c i l i a t i o n unions. The d i s t r i b u t i o n patterns of the c o n c i l i a t i o n unions is further evidence of the extent to which they were 'yellow' unions. Jumping ahead to 1934, we find these unions con-centrated in r e l a t i v e l y few prefectures. Gumma prefecture has 45,433 members in 825 unions, Saitama prefecture has 37,663 members in 81 unions, and Kagawa, Hyogo, A i i c h i , Chiba and Niigata prefectures combined have more than 15,000 members. In 7 of Japan's 42 prefectures we find concentra-ted 1,405 unions, f u l l y 61% of the national t o t a l . In terms of the national membership, these union's 149,164 members represent 54% of the t o t a l . It is no accident 97 that these very prefectures were also the areas of heaviest tenant union organizing and dispute in the 1920 %s. It is here that the ef f o r t s to avert or suppress class conscious-ness and class struggle were most intensive. One must conclude that the action taken to circumvent tenants' class-based organizations was vigorous and resulted in diverting considerable numbers of tenants from tenant unions to the 'yellow' c o n c i l i a t i o n unions. The combined figures for both tenant union membership and c o n c i l i a t i o n union membership and the number of units of each i n s t i t u t i o n give us an accurate picture of how wide-spread the change in tenant consciousness was. Taking the figures for 1927, the peak year for the number of tenant unions, the membership of tenant and c o n c i l i a t i o n unions comes to 539,306. The 365,000 members in the tenant unions represent roughly 27% of a l l tenants, while the 174,000 in the c o n c i l i a t i o n unions represent roughly 12%. Thus roughly 40% of a l l tenants were organized in some sort of i n s t i t u t i o n that either expressed class consciousness or was designed to suppress or avert such :consciousness. It is undeniable that this represents a change in tenant farmer consciousness of considerable importance and reveals the emergence of divisions in the Japanese vi l l a g e hitherto non-existent or muted. While i t is clear that the change in the consciousness 98 of the tenant farmer and the increasing division of the vi l l a g e along class and ideological lines was largely the product of changes within the v i l l a g e , p a r t i c u l a r l y the nature of the 1andlord-tenant relationship, influences outside the v i l l a g e reinforced these developments. The major influences commonly cited as fostering the change in tenant farmer consciousness and their increasing tendency to join in organized struggle with the landlord are the increase of labor strikes and union organization, the pro-clamation by the League of Nation's International Labour Organization that the tenant farmer had the right to organize in his own interests, the democratic and student movements, the Russian Revolution and the Rice Riots. It is d i f f i c u l t to document the manner in which these factors influenced the tenant or their extent and importance in shaping tenant consciousness and behaviour. Since very l i t t l e research has yet been done on these questions, the account of these influences that follows w i l l be b r i e f . The influence of the 'Democracy Movement' that flourished in Japan from shortly after the outbreak of the F i r s t World War contributed in a small way to breaking submissive pat-terns of thought among tenants and preparing the way for a change in consciousness. The a l l i e d nations r a l l i e d the world to their cause through describing their war efforts as the struggle of democracy against militarism, and-this had a p a r t i c u l a r l y wide appeal in Japan. P o l i t i c a l develop-99 ments within Japan at that time were reinforced by the pres-tige given to democracy overseas. Together with the rapid development of p o l i t i c a l parties in Taisho, the tendency to oppose the clannish m i l i t a r y and bureaucratic government of Japan had increased. The movement to safeguard constitu-tional government is representative of this trend. At the same time populist p o l i t i c i a n s were beginning to form links with the increasingly p o l i t i c a l l y conscious c i t i z e n r y in demanding universal suffrage. The net result of these trends was that between 1916 and 1920 democratic thought dominated Japan's i n t e l l e c t u a l world and a variety of popu-lar movements were born, the tenant union movement being 12 3 a notable example. The 'Democracy Movement' was centered in the universities and i t ' s most eloquent spokesmen were university professors using academic publications -as a forum. This a c t i v i t y did f i l t e r down to the common people who came to understand democracy as meaning social and economic equality. The economic problems of the country soon provided a situation where this understanding could be employed. The existence of democratic thought in the labor s t r i k e s , rice r i o t s of 1918, and farmers' disputes was a natural development. The influence of the 'Democratic Movement' on the tenant's"' movement can be seen in two developments. F i r s t , the con-viction of the jus t i c e of human and social equality took root strongly in the v i l l a g e s . Second, the student in-t e l l i g e n t s i a was deeply affected by the thought of the 100 academics who expounded the virtues of democracy. Many of these students were from the villages and were later found 1 24 in leadership positions in the tenant movement. The influence of the Russian Revolution of 1917 was not nearly as s t r i k i n g in Japanese society as i t was in Europe. The influence on a small number of s o c i a l i s t s , labor leaders and radical students was considerable and stimulated the growth of fledgling social movements. More importantly, the Russian Revolution stimulated the commitment of radical students to Marxism and these students later played an active leadership role in the labor and peasant movements. There are also records of Japanese soldiers sent to Siberia, returning home to the villages and leading tenant 1 25 unions in struggles against the vi l l a g e landlords. The excitement that the Russian Revolution s t i r r e d among Japan's l e f t i s t s is best i l l u s t r a t e d by the following story. On the f i r s t anniversary of the Revolution, a group of employees of the Kanto Federation and Economic Production Survey Bureau of the Japan Farmers' Union were asked by one of their number to write down on a piece of paper unseen by the others the number of years i t would take for a revolution to occur in 126 Japan; the average guess was three years. It is d i f -f i c u l t to determine just how much the Russian Revolution in-fluenced the tenants in the v i l l a g e s . While the most honest answer is that i t l i k e l y did not influence the v i l l a g e r s very much, the enthusiasm for social revolution inspired 101 among the leadership by the revolution in Russia must have infected the v i l l a g e r s to at least a small degree. The third annual meeting of the League of Nation"s' International Labour Organization influenced the tenants of Japan with the solution of a long-standing internal problem relating to the right of tenants to organize in their own interests. The Japanese government had long taken the position that the tenant was a kind of small entrepreneur and thus bore complete r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for ;his own economic condition. He could not expect the law to guarantee his working .conditions in the same way that the IL0 sought to guarantee conditions for laborers. The Government further claimed that the tenant had nothing to gain by being granted the right to organize in defense of his own interests. This problem was taken up by the Japanese dele-gates to the International Labour Organization in Geneva. At the third annual meeting the Organization ruled that the tenant was a laborer and did have the right to organize in his own interests. This decision was soon passed on to the villages through the mass media. The popular rural magazine Tochi to Jiyu (Land and Freedom) published an a r t i c l e e n t i t l e d "The Tenant is a Labourer" on January 27, 1922, explaining the decision taken in Geneva and urging 127 the tenants to organize tenant unions. Of much greater influence than the factors mentioned 102 above were the Rice,Riots of 1918. These r i o t s , engulfing hundreds of v i l l a g e s , were part of the tenant's direct experience, unlike the previously mentioned factors. The Rice Riots occurred when the need to equip and supply a Japanese mil i t a r y expedition to Siberia aggravated a rice shortage due to the poor harvest of that year and drove rice prices to treble the usual price. In August of that year, a group of housewives in Toyama prefecture t r i e d to prevent the export of rice from the v i l l a g e . News of their action spread and for the next 57 days throughout 32 of Japan's 41 prefectures, hundreds of thousands of laborers, farmers and citizens attacked rice merchants, wealthy people and the police while demanding that the price of rice be reduced by half. There were r i o t s among the vill a g e s in Osaka, Okayama, Yamagata, Yamaguchi, Shimane and Fukushima prefectures. 810,000 people participated in these r i o t s and over 8,000 were arrested. The r i o t s ended when the price of rice was reduced and the army brought in to restore peace. It is not known how many of the participants were tenants nor how many among those arrested came from tenant ranks, but i t must be assumed the numbers were not in-considerable. The legacy of the rice r i o t s was twofold; the provision of an example of the power of mass movements 12E and lingering tensions in the villages throughout the land. The influence of the Rice Riots was not immediately apparent in the phenomenon of tenant disputes, as i t was in labor 103 st r i k e s , but i t is often speculated that the undercurrent created by the r i o t s worked in the villages to provide the 1 29 groundwork for the organized struggle soon to come. It is the influence of the formation of labor unions and their a c t i v i t i e s that is easiest to link to tenant thought and behaviour. The findings of the 1925 Survey Concerning Tenancy Disputes afford a number of insights into the nature of the trade union influence on the tenants. The survey reads in part, Under the influence of the European War, pros-perity was experienced as the industrial world developed vigorously in the prefectures along the southern coast. From the many prefectures of the adjacent areas younger sons of a g r i c u l * tural labourers went out to work in the fa c t o r i e s . There they associated with the industrial labour-ers. They ate and roomed together. It was an education for them; ideas concerning freedom and equality were infectious. They carried these ; ideas and thoughts back to the v i l l a g e . There they preached these ideas and stimulated the s e l f awareness of tenants. Moreover, the in-fluence of the propaganda of newspapers and magazines as well as the decisive action of the July 1921 Kobe Kawasaki Dockyard strike in fostering the 1blindly-fo11ow-the-crowd mood 1of the tenant is c l e a r l y apparent. In the pre-fectures affected by this mood, tenancy disputes have a chronic quality. In the disputes we encountered, the tenants employ such rational measures as putting their budget books under the nose of the landlord. We can c a l l this j> proof of the influence of labour on the tenants' thought and 'self awareness 1 . becoming one cause of di spute.'30 It was not until the war years, then, that the Japanese labor movement became a major social force capable of i n -fluencing the tenants. The rapid expansion of the labor Wee 104 during the war years was not only a turning point for the labor movement i t s e l f but many of the new members added to the industrial work force were from the v i l l a g e s , and were in a position to take that experience back to them later . In the five years of the war, the labor force doubled and reached 2., 777 , 1 77 members. The increases in prices, work speedups, and the influence of the Russian Revolution 1 31 drove labor to greater union a c t i v i t y and s e l f awareness. The Rice Riots of 1918 added fuel to the f i r e , and labor disputes and union organizing increased rapidly. In 1918, 417 labor disputes were recorded; this rose to 497 by the following year and continued to rise annually across the next decade. Labor unions likewise increased, the 40 unions of 1911 nearly trebling to 107 in 1918, r i s i n g again to 187 the following year, and by 1920 there were 273 labor unions in Japan. In 1919 a milestone was marked when the Friendly Society (Yuai-kai), formerly a workers' mutual aid society,5was transformed into a trade union federation openly dedicated to the fight against capital in labor's 1 32 interest. The large numbers of workers from the vill a g e s were undoubtedly influenced by these developments, especially the growing confidence with which workers fought management to protect and advance their interests. The popular notions of class, freedom and equality also had an appeal among rural workers in labor's ranks. It is an interesting question whether the internal organization of trade unions was reflected in that of tenant unions but unfortunately 105 there is no data to answer th i s . The influence of the labor movement was c l e a r l y v i s i b l e in tenancy disputes of the time. A typical source records that budding s o c i a l i s t i c ideas of class, freedom and equality due to the increasing association with the laborers and the influence of the Kawasaki dockyard s t r i k e , a representative example of the explosive labor movement of the day, can be recognized in any number of patterns in the belt where disputes were 1 33 frequent. The influence of the labor movement is more easily accepted when one is aware of some of the a c t i v i t i e s that accompanied labor s t r i k e s . For instance, during the Kobe Kawasaki Dockyard strike of 1919, l e a f l e t s were distributed among tenants in the neighbouring rural areas arguing that tenants too should organize in their own interests since the landlord was to them what the c a p i t a l i s t was to the worker. This particular strike and the a c t i v i t i e s that accompanied i t had so great an impact on the tenant that i t 1 34 was dubbed "the matins for awakening sleepy farmers". There were other attempts to develop a sense of common cause between worker and tenant. George Totten writes of one way in which this was done: The tenant farmers were encouraged to believe that they had the support of the working class, while the worker's sympathy was appealed to by descriptions of the plight of their country cousinjs. In this manner, even those disputes in which the workers or tenant farmers lost could be u t i l i z e d to develop 'class conscious-ness-, transcending urban-rural boundaries.135 106 Not only were there conscious attempts to make the tenant aware of labor's struggle and the common cause they shared with each other, but the sheer explosive drama of some of the labor disputes must certainly have had some influence. A case in point is the second Kawasaki Dockyard strike where 30,000 workers marched and clashed with police before the army was brought i n. A further case in point was the''distur-bance of February 1921, when the 30,000 st r i k i n g workers of Yatsushiro heavy industry plant in Kobe rioted during a 1 36 st r i k e . Strikes on such a scale were not uncommon. Many strikes were of considerable duration and resulted in severe hardships for the workers. The Noda Soy Sauce Company strik e i l l u s t r a t e s these hardships well. It lasted for 208 days in 1 92 7-' 2 8 and resulted in the dismissal of 745 workers subsequently b l a c k l i s t e d f o r . t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . The l i s t of strikes could go on and on, but the important point is that which Totten makes, namely, " i t is inconceiv-able that people's l i v e s were not changed by, involvement 1 37 in such s t r i k e s . " It seems merely a natural development that the men involved in these strikes would.provide leader-ship and direction when they returned to the v i l l a g e s where conditions were ripe for class struggle. It is also in-conceivable that news of such s t r i k e s , spreading to a deeply troubled countryside, would not give tenants food for thought and lessons for their own struggles. 107 The role of men adapting their experience in the organ-ized labor movement to the tenant unions and tenant move-ment is not inconspicuous. Totten has uncovered a number of examples of men active in both the labor and tenant move-ments. For example Yukimasa Chogo, one of the ori g i n a l founders of the Japan Farmers'Union in 1922, had been a caster in an iron factory and in 1920 had led a dispute for which he was f i r e d . Another example was Kiyokawa Seikichi who had been a worker in the Tokyo arsenal and.a leader in the Koishikawa Labour Association until October 1919. In 1920 he became a leader of a tenant farmer dispute in Hokkaido. Likewise Asano Unokichi, who became a leader in the Osaka Federation of the Japan Farmers' Union, had been a worker in an arsenal. Again, Sasaki Ryutaro, who became well known for his leadership in farm disputes, as a union secretary in the Sanin Federation of the Japan Farmers' Union, had e a r l i e r been a worker in a Kyoto t e x t i l e mill and a leader in the Japan General Federation of Labour.'38 These examples can be multiplied many times over to i l l u s t r a t e the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of workers or former workers in the tenant 1 39 movement and tenancy disputes. Although much of the influence demonstrated above is on the leadership l e v e l , influence at other levels can also be observed. The Noda Soy Sauce Company strike can again serve as a good example. This strike took place in Chiba prefecture and most of the workers were drawn from the sur-rounding rural areas. Until 1 928,Chiba prefecture had been a r e l a t i v e l y quiet prefecture in terms of the incidence of tenancy disputes. Before that year, the 12 disputes of 1923 were the peak. After 1928, however, things are quite 108 d i f f e r e n t . The strike ended in that year with the many workers who had been f i r e d returning to their v i l l a g e s and agricultural pursuits. In that very year 38 disputes . occurred in the countryside around the factory in Chiba. In the following year 105 disputes occurred and even in 1930, two years after the s t r i k e , there were 57 disputes. The increase in disputes in Chiba after the strike provides a good example of what Totten c a l l s the 'diffusion of in-1 40 fluence below the leadership l e v e l ' . It has been mentioned e a r l i e r that tenancy disputes were f v i s t prevalent in the more economically advanced regions of Japan. It was suggested then that this reflected the fact that these areas were most sensitive to the v i c i s s i -tudes of the market and further, that in these areas the breakdown of the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant relationship was most advanced. It also seems l i k e l y that the regional d i s t r i b u t i o n of tenancy disputes r e f l e c t s the influence of the labor movement to some extent. It is more than $fc  J  coincidental that t h o s e . i a r e a s in which labor disputes were most numerous. Examining the interaction between tenancy disputes and labor disputes by location, Totten found a loose correlation between the degree of i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and the number of disputes. The areas where this correla-tion was e s p e c i a l l y noticeable were the commercial and in-dustrial centers of Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. In p a r t i c u l a r , 109 Osaka led the nation in both labor and tenant disputes during the period between 1925 and '30. Unfortunately, data is not available for the five year period before 1925, but since we know that disputes were concentrated in the areas adjacent to the in d u s t r i a l i z e d centers from the very outbreak of tenancy disputes, we can expect a similar correlation for the years 1919 to 1925. Totten's thesis that tenancy disputes were stimulated by nearby labor disputes and union a c t i v i t y is valid and supported by other observers. The 'Survey Concerning Tenancy Disputes' points to a similar con-clusion in explaining the heavy concentration of tenancy disputes in areas adjacent to high concentrations of labor disputes. The recognition of the influence of labor's ideology on the tenants can also be seen in the words of the Minister of Agriculture in 1920, lamenting the "particu-l a r l y deplorable tendency for various ideologies to spread 141 from the towns to infect the countryside". Certainly some of the influence of the labor movement was 'carried in the a i r ' but the bulk of that inf1uence was transmitted through tenants who had participated in the movement and saw the implications of that experience for a course of action to solve their own problems in the v i l l a g e . One popular history of the Japanese tenant movement sums up the tenant movement as follows: It was a natural development that the workers of rural o r i g i n , baptized in the labour movement and awakened to class consciousness, tempered by labour's n o severe struggles., should on returning to the v i l -lages and witnessing the devastation of the tenants there, dedicate themselves to organizing to preserve the l i v l i h o o d of the tenants. The early expansion of the tenant movement was carried by the energies of men who haehhad connections with labourers to no smal1 degree. 1 4 2 Although the influence of the labor movement can be observed, the tenant unions provided a discrete i n s t i t u t i o n a l means for mobilizing tenants thus activating the potential for protest created by the breakdown in the tr a d i t i o n a l land-lord-tenant relationship. The tenant unions themselves had a t r a d i t i o n of nearly forty years as non-militant v i l l a g e i n s t i t u t i o n s exhibiting l i t t l e expression of class con-sciousness> (They had been tied to and s o l i c i t o u s towards landlord i n t e r e s t s ) . Developments in rural Japan throughout Meiji and Taisho, however, slowly created greater divisions between landlord and tenant and, from 1920 on, the tenant unions became more militant and grew to become the in-s t i t u t i o n a l expression of class consciousness that was developing among the tenants. Events outside of the v i l -lage reinforced the growing division inside the v i l l a g e and stimulated the growth of tenant class consciousness, the organization of tenant unions, and the increasing in-cidence of tenancy disputes in the v i l l a g e . The most noted of these outside influences was that of the labor movement; the Rice Riots of 1918 were also of considerable import and the influence of the Russian Revolution, democratic move-ment and the International Labour Organization's declaration I l l of the tenant's right to organize cannot be discounted. There was in Japan, during the war years, a rapid growth of left-wing thought and sentiment, p a r t i c u l a r l y among the leadership in the social movements that developed at that time, some of which f i l t e r e d through to the vi l l a g e s or was carried there more d i r e c t l y by men who assumed leader-ship roles in tenant unions on the v i l l a g e level and in p o l i t i c a l parties dedicated to fight for tenant's interests on the national l e v e l . The existence of these influences from outside the v i l l a g e and the positive role they played in supporting tenant protest suggests that consideration of the factors necessary to activate tenant protest must include some mention of a sympathetic and supportive p o l i t i -cal climate beyond the v i l l a g e s , a climate which affects v i l l a g e r s and may inspire them to action. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION 112 I have argued that the potential for tenant unrest in the 1920s was created in the breakdown of the t r a d i t i o n a l 1andlord-tenant relationship over the preceding decades. It was not inevitable that this should lead to widespread tenant unrest; indeed, the r e l a t i v e absence of tenant dis-cord in rural Japan in the f i r s t two decades of this century suggests that landlords were withdrawing from the t r a d i -tional relationship with l i t t l e trouble from their tenants. This withdrawal, however, did not go unnoticed, and the divisions between tenant and landlord interests and experi-ence became increasingly obvious, and were not without eff e c t on the tenant. Tenants began to see themselves as a class apart from landlords. The s t i r r i n g s of class con-sciousness l a t e r blossomed forth in the widespread formation of tenant unions protecting and advancing tenant interests in opposition to landlords. It was the economic collapse of the 1920s that made changes among the landlords a source of unrest. The massive threat to tenant subsistence in that decade made i t imperative.that some alternative be found for that part of the t r a d i t i o n a l guarantees to tenant subsistence provided by the landlord which did not remain in force. In the economically depressed 1920s the t r a d i -tional functions of the landlords assumed a c r i t i c a l role in the tenant's l i f e unknown to the previous decade when a degree of rural prosperity, of i t s e l f , guaranteed the tenant's s ubs i sten ce. 113 Economic conditions thus made i t essential that the tenant require of the 1andlord.some kind of subsistence guarantee; the reluctance of the landlord to resume his t r a d i -tional role led tenants to strengthen their bargaining posi-tion by forming unions, allowing them to c o l l e c t i v e l y con-front the landlord and apply c o l l e c t i v e t a c t i c s to wrest concessions necessary to maintain their subsistence. It was at this point-'the v i l l a g e i n s t i t u t i o n of the tenant unions became important. These unions provided the tenants with an organization through which they could mobilize their resources and coordinate an organized struggle with the landlord. As the 1920s wore on tenants increasingly organized and. confronted their landlords in these unions. It was increasingly obvious that considerable changes in the tenant's mental outlook were occurring. In part this was the product of developments on the v i l l a g e level and in part the product of a certain kind of interaction with the world beyond the v i l l a g e . Certainly large scale social and p o l i t i c a l movements in the greater society had some effe c t but more importantly i t was tenant participation in the p o l i t i c a l and social l i f e of the community beyond the vi l l a g e that had the greater e f f e c t . The labor move-ment p a r t i c u l a r l y was a source of stimulus, practical ex-perience and moral support to the tenants organizing and struggling against the v i l l a g e landlords. My conclusions d i f f e r from Professor Waswo's conclusions 114 on the origins of tenant unrest in a number of important ways. F i r s t , my interpretation of the role of economic factors is quite d i f f e r e n t . Further my understanding of the nature and i n e v i t a b i l i t y of the breakdown in the tr a d i t i o n a l landlord-tenant relationship is also d i f f e r e n t . Unlike Waswo, I do not think that tenant unrest was inevitable. To c l a r i f y these differences i t is necessary to quote Waswo's position at length. Tenant unrest in Japan in the 1920s appears to have originated in two p r i n c i p a l sources, , economic growth and changes among landlords, both more pronounced in south western Japan than in the outlying areas. The desire for improved tenancy conditions arose not from despair or desperation but from prosperity, however s i i g h t and f l e e t i n g , which gave ten-ants the economic a b i l i t y to engage in disputes which raised not only their standard of l i v i n g but also their expectations of what that stand-' ard should be.. The disruption of tr a d i t i o n a l 1 andlord-tenant rel a t i o n s , caused in large part by the land-lords' positive response to modernization, was an additional source of unrest. It was not status inequality i t s e l f which prompted dis-putes, but the f a i l u r e of landlords to perform those time-honored and useful functions in rural society which had j u s t i f i e d their superior status in the past. I r o n i c a l l y , had landlords in southwestern Japan remained more t r a d i t i o n a l , had they conformed more closely to the stereo-type of landed e l i t e s in modernizing s o c i e t i e s , shunning commerce and r e s i s t i n g the temptations of urban styles of l i f e , they might have avoided, or at least postponed, the tenant challenge to their authority. "'^  While the f l e e t i n g prosperity before 1920 did raise tenant expectations and provide the surplus necessary to engage in the i n i t i a l dispute i t seems incorrect to conclude 115 that these were the primary economic rationales for dis-pute. Although i t is undeniable that the era of prosperity preceding the outbreak of wide-spread tenant dispute did have the effects Waswo claims, the import of the economic and p o l i t i c a l events following that period...of prosperity is far greater as a source of tenant unrest. The sharp decline in the tenant's standard of l i v i n g is more im-portant as a threat to his subsistence than a source of frustration of his expectations. The rent reduction that the tenants demanded was necessary to maintain tenant farming as a subsistence l i v l i h o o d . At least by 1924, conditions had deteriorated to the extent that given current levels of rent the tenant could not earn a l i v i n g without an outside source of income. There was nothing new in this demand for rent reduction. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , in times of economic distress i t had been granted. What was new were the tact i c s that the tenant was forced to use in order to win concession. Faced with the economic conditions of the twenties, the tenant c e r t a i n l y needed improved tenancy conditions to maintain the same standard of l i v i n g which he had seen in the years 1914-1919 but more importantly, he needed them to guarantee his subsistence. The economic decline after 1920 is important further in that i t created conditions where the peaceful withdrawal of landlords from their t r a d i t i o n a l role.could no longer continue. The lack of alternate sources of subsistence guarantee forced the tenant to demand that the landlord assume a role he was 1 less prepared to shoulder. In short, the tenant was demand ing that the landlord take his share of the risks in agr i -culture and provide subsistence insurance for the tenant. The f a i l u r e of the landlords to perform the t r a d i -tional functions in the v i l l a g e created the potential for tenant unrest. Waswo's suggestion that a continuation of the landlord's tr a d i t i o n a l role is a condition under which:, tenant unrest might have been avoided is less than true. It is important to understand that the change in the land-lord's t r a d i t i o n a l role does not lead inevitably to tenant unrest but is a necessary prerequisite to tenant unrest. There are conditions under which they can abandon their t r a d i t i o n a l role in rural society without an adverse ef f e c t on rural s t a b i l i t y . One of these conditions is,as Scott points out,the existence of a level of prosperity suf-f i c i e n t to maintain the tenants' standard of l i v i n g without the goods and services t r a d i t i o n a l l y provided by the land-lord; this condition existed in the decade before 1920 but not in the decade following i t . It is possible that i f the same degree of prosperity had been present in the 1920s the phenomenon of tenant protest would not have developed. Further, i t is important to relate the origi n of tenant unrest to the existence of a means available to the tenant to act. Waswo's f a i l u r e to consider the success of the tenant union in organizing the tenants and.^directing tenant unrest is a serious inadequacy for without the means 117 to mobilize, tenant unrest would never have become so v i s i b l e a h i s t o r i c a l phenomenon.. The f a i l u r e to relate the ex-perience of other groups in Japan involved in struggles not dissimilar to the tenants also detracts from Waswo's conclusions on the origins of tenant unrest. It is d i f -f i c u l t to document precisely the way in which the events in the villages r e f l e c t undercurrents at work at large in Japanese society but some attempt must be made i f the origins of tenant unrest are to be f u l l y understood. It is import-ant to emphasize that the collapse, of the ve r t i c a l ties of loyalty binding tenant and landlord is a prelude to the formation of horizontal ties between the tenants and i t is this l a t t e r development that is of c r i t i c a l importance in Japanese rural history in 1920. I have tri e d to bring into discussion outside i n -fluences that fostered the creation of horizontal ties among the tenants and led to action to preserve and advance t h e i r own class interests rather than those of another class. In doing so I hope I have made a small advance beyond exist-ing English language scholarship and afforded some insight into the p o l i t i c i z a t i o n of the Japanese v i l l a g e . 118 FOOTNOTES ^Dorothy Orchard, "Agrarian Problems of Modern Japan-Part I I " , The Journal of P o l i t i c a l Economy, Vol. 37, No. 2, June 1929, p.285. 2 Barbara Ann Waswo, "The Origin of Tenant Unrest", Japan in C r i s i s : Essays on Taisho Democracy. ed. Silberman and Harutoonian, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1974 , p.23. 3 Seidan Watanabe, Interview with Ishida.^. Yusen in Agriculture Farmer, (Nogyo Nornin),Vol. 8 , # 1 ,Jan.1976,pp.31-36 4 Waswo, Loc.c11. 5 R.P. Dore, Land.Reform in Japan, Oxford University Press, 1959, Table 2, p.72. These figures were calculated from tables VI - 3 and VI-4, pp.175 and 56. in Waswo, "Landlords and Social Change in Prewar Japan," unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a , 1969. Available from University Microfilms Inc., Ann Arbor,Michigan, #69-17.459. 7Miriam S. FanUey, "Japan's Unsolved Tenancy Problem", Far Eastern Survey, Vol. 6, #14, 1937, I.P.R., New York, p . 1 5 8. 8. Loc.cit. g Orchard, op.cit. , p.389. 1^Barbara.Waswo, "Origin of Tenant Unrest", op.cit. , p.320. ^Barbara Waswo, "Landlords and Social Change in Prewar Japan", op.cit. , p.32. Fukutake Tadashi/., Japanese Rural Society, Cornell University Press, 1972, p.12. 1 3 See the Department of Agriculture and Commerce's Agricultural Office's Survey concerning the causes of tenant disputes of 1922. 1 4 Nihon Nomin Undo Kenkyu Kai (.Peasant Movement Research Conferencefed'lNi hon Nomina Undo Shi (History of the Japanese Peasant Movemen t) Tokyo 1961, p. 131. 1 5 Waswo, "Origins of Tenant Unrest", op.cit. , p.397. •j c James Scott, "The Erosion of Patron-Client Bonds and Social Change in- South East Asia" in the Journal of  Asian Studies, Vol. XXXII, #1, Nov. 1972, pp.6-7. ^ 7Fukutake, Japanese Rural Society, Cornell University Press, 1972, p.22. 1 8 Bennett and Ishino, Paternalism and the Japanese  Economy, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1 963, p.210. 19 * T.C. Smith, "The Japanese Village in the 1 7th Century. in Imperial Japan 1 899-1945 ^  ed. Livingston, Moore and Old-father, New York, Random House, 1973, p.4. 20 Dore, Land Reform in Japan, Oxford University Press, 1959, p.34. 21 Bennett and Ishino, op.cit., p.216. 22 Dore, op.cit., p.30. 2 3 Bennett and Ishino, op.cit., p.218. 24 Loc.cit. 2 5 Bennett and Ishino, op.cit. , p.221 2 6 Dore, op.cit., p.33. 2 7 Waswo5/ "Origins of Tenant Unrest", op.cit. , p.389. 2 8 Scott, op.cit., p.9. 120 29 Wakakawa, S. "The Japanese Farm Tenancy System", in D.G. Haring ed..Japan's Prospects. Cambridge, Mass., 1946, p.123. 30 T.C. Smith, 1o c.c i t. 31 Robertson Scott, The Foundations of Japan , London, John Murray, 1.92-2 , .-Appendix-- LXV-y'p. 405. - " 32 Miriam S. Farely, "Japan's Unsolved Tenancy Problem" Far Eastern Survey, Vol. 6, No.14, July 1 937 , I.P.R;. New York , p.155. 33 Scott, o_p_. ci t. , p. 11 . 34 H I b i d . , p.12. 35 Waswo, "Landlords and Social Change in Prewar Japan" unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. 36 T, . , Ibid. p. 82. Ibid. p. 85. 3 8 I b i d . p.97 39 T k • , Ibid. p.99 40. Loc.cit. 41. Loc.cit. 42Waswo,. Ph. D Ibid. p. 116 Ibid, p. 1 1 7 45 R. P. Do re , of Asian Studies, No. 3, May 1 959 , University of Michigan, Ann Alrbour, Michigan, p.351. 121 46 Kinbara Samon , Taisho Demokurashi No Shakai  T e k i K e i s e i Aoki Shoten, Tokyo, Japan, 1974, p.76. 47,i.bid. p. 72 4 8 I b i d . p.89. 49 Lo c. ci t. 50 T.C. Smith, "The Japanese Village in the 17th Century" quoted in Imperial Japan 1800-1945, ed. Livingston, Moore and Oldfather, New York, Random House, 1973, p.48. 51 Kinbara, -o-p-v c 11, p. 89. 5 2 I b i d , p.90. 5 3 Robertson Scott, op.cit., p.322. 54 Waswo, Ph.D. Thesis, op.cit. , p.112 55 Robertson Scott, op.cit., p.38 56 James Scott, Ibid. , p.35. 5 7 Ninon Nomin Undo Kenkyu Kai, op.cit., pp.11-12 c O Waswo, "Origins of Tenant Unrest", p.393. 59 Waswo, Ph.D. Thesis. This information is condensed from table IV-1, p.119 and IV-4 p.131. ^ S c o t t , op.cit. , p. 35. 6 1 L o c . c i t . 6 2 S c o t t , Ibid, p.87. 6 3 . Wakakawa , op...ci t. , p. 11 9. 64 Farley, op.cit. , p.157. 65 Dore, Land Reform in Japan , Oxford,; Uni versi ty Press, 1962, p.62. 1 22 Do re , pp. 17-18..,.. . E.H. Norman, Japan's Emergence as a Modern State New York, 1940, p.165. 6 8 1 b i d. p.164. 6 9 1 b i d. p.144. 7 01 bid, p.144. 7 1 Ibid, p.156. 72 James Scott, p.20. 7 3 Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai (Farmers' Union Publishing Association) ed. Nomp'.n; Kumiai Undoshi (Farmers' Union Move-i ment History) Nichikan Agricultural Newspaper Company, 1961 , p.40. 74 Kozo Yamamura, "The Japanese Economy 1911-1930: Con-centration, C o n f l i c t s , C r i s i s " in Japan in C r i s i s : Essays  on Taisho Democracy, ed. Silberman and Harootunian Prince-ton, Princeton University Press, 1974, p.608. 75 Ouchi, Tsutomu, "Agricultural Depression and the Japanese Vil l a g e s " in Developing Economies. Vol.4, Dec.1967, p. 603. Nomin Kurniai Undoshi , o.p'-.-ci t. , p . 41 . 7 7 0 u c h i . op.cit. , p. 608. .; = : 7 8 Nomin Kumiai Undoshi, 1o c.c i t. 79 Ouchi, op.cit. p.603. 80. Loc.cit. 81 Nomin Kumiai Undoshi, 1o c.c i t. 82 Ouchi, op.cit. , 608. 8 3 Nomin Kumiai Undoshi, Ibid. p.42 123 84 Ouchi, op.cit. , p.610 ^L o c . ci t. 8 6 W.L. Holland. "The Plight of Japanese Agriculture", Far Eastern Review. I.P.R. New York, Jan. 1936, p.2. 8 7 Thomas Havens, Farm and Nation in Modern Japan, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1974, p.138. 88 Ouchi, op.cit., p.601. 89 Ouchi, op.cit. , p.603 90 Totten, op.cit. , p.195. 91 Loc. c i t . 92 Waswo, Ph.D. Thesis, p.132. 9 3 J. Davis, Group Performance, Reading, Mass., Addison Welsey Publishing Company ,. 1 969 , p.33. 94 Waswo, op.cit., p.180. 95 Ninon Nomin Undo Kenkyu Kai, op.cit. , p.5. 9 6 J . Scott, Ibid. , p.35. 9 7 Nihon.Nomin Undo Kenyu Kai, op.cit. , p.5. 9 8 Aoki K e i i c h i r o , Ni hon Nomi n Undoshi , (History of the Japanese Peasant Movement) Vol.3, Tokyo, 1959, p.56. 99 Loc.cit. ^^Aoki , op. c i t , p. 58. Ninon Nomin Undo Kenkyu Kai, op.cit. p.131. ^02. . . .. • _ Aoki, op.cit. , p.58. 124 1 0 3 L o c . c U . 104. Loc.cit. i Qj- v-v.. Aoki , op-.-c-i t. , p. 56. 1 0 6 A o k i , Ibid, p.59 ^ 7 D o r e , Land Reform in Japan, p.72. 1 0 8 A o k i , ojD.cvt. p.62. 109 George Totten, "Laibor and Agrarian Disputes in Japan Following W.W.I" Economic Development and Cultural  Change, Vol. 9, #1, part 2, at 61, p.202. ^ 1 0Dore, op.cit. p.73. ^^Orchard, D. "Agrarian Problems of Modern Japan, Part I I " , The Journal of P o l i t i c a l Economy, Vol.37, #2, June 1929, pp.387.389. 1 1 2Waswo, Ph.D. Thesis, P.118. 113 Orchard, op.cit. p.391 114, Loc.cit. 1 1 5Dore , 0p_. cvt. p. 76. 116 E.P. Thompson, The Making of the English Working  Class, Penguin Harmondsworth, Middlesex England, 1963, p.10. ^ "* 7Loc. ci t. 118 Nihon Shakai Undo Shiryo No Kikai (Japan's Social Movements H i s t o r i c a l Materials Organization) ed. Nihon Nomin Kumiai Kikanshi (The Japan Farmers' Union B u l l e t i n ) , Tokyo, 1974. 11 9 Orchard, op.ci t. p.205. 125 1 2Q Totten, Labour and A grari an Disputes, p.204. 1 21 Pore , op .'ci. t. p.73. 122 Ninon Nomin Undo Shi Kenkyu Kai, op.cit. , p.133. 1 23 Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai, op.cit. , p.43. 124. Lo c . ci t. 1 2 5 1 b i d . p.44 126. Loc.cit. 1 2 7 l b i d . p.54. 128 Nakamura Shinko ed. Ninon Seikatsu Fuzokushi, (A History of Japanese Customs) Vol. 3, Industrial Customs, pp.143-147. 129 Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai, op.cit. , p.49. 1 3 0 N i h o n Nomin Undo Shi Kenkyu Kai, Ibid, p.10. 1 31 George Totten. The Social Democratic Movement in  Post War Japan, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1966, p.37. 1 3 2 I b i d , p.101. 1 33 Ninon Nomin Undo Shi Kenkyu Kai, op.cit. , p.11. 1 34 Totten, "Labour and Agrarian Disputes....", p.187. 1 35 ' -301 b i d . p. 197. "I O g Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai, op.cit. , p.52. 137 Totten, op.cit. p.211. 1 3 8 T o t t e n , Ibid, p.204. 1 39 See the discussion in Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai, op.cit. , pp.51-52. 1 40 Totten, "Labour and Agrarian Disputes in Japan Following W.W.I", p.189. 1 4 1 L o c . c i t. 142 Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai, op.cit., p.53. 14 3 Waswo in Harootunian et a l , op.cit. , p. 397. 127 I. BOOKS AND MONOGRAPHS IN JAPANESE INCLUDING JAPANESE GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS Aoki Ke i i chi r o || — Nihon Nomin Undoshi Qfc^J&W,^^ History o f the Japanese Peasant M o v e m e n t , Vol. 3, Tokyo, 1959. Kinbara Samon Taisho Demokurashi No Shakai Teki Kei s e i , The Social Formation of Taisho Democracy AJE. f^Lf ?C/T> &\W',fi*~ Aoki Shoten, Tokyo, Japan, 1974. Nakamura Shin Nihon Seikatsu Fusokushi A History of Japanese Customs, Vol.3, Industrial .Customs Q% )% \% ^ t o y k o , 1 963. •' Ilihon Shakai Undo Shiryo No K i kai ec. Japan's Social Movements H i s t o r i c a l Materials Organization % W rt , ^ .The japan Farmers' Union E u H e t i n l .922-24 ^ Japan's Social Movement H i s t o r i c a l Materials Organization, Tokyo, 1975. Nihon Nomin Undoshi Kenkyu Kai ed. , Peasant, Movement Research Conference 0 £ jfLfev>|? % $L ToA^o ^ Nihon Nomin Undo Shi, History of the Japanese Peasant Movement, Tokyo, 1961. Nomin Kumiai Kanko Kai,ed. Farmers' Union Publishing Associ ation^.g'^-^ \f ftJtl ftfft'43 £ Nomin Kumi a Undoshi , Farmers' Un i on Mo vemen t Hi s to r y ^ . ^ 0 - ^ ^ |# ^ Nichikan Agricultural Newspaper Company, 1961. Norinsho, Nomukyoku^^^J|[Jr^/f7 Chiho Betsu Kosaku  Sogi Gaiyo, Regional Summary of Tenancy Disputes &%%\>V&%V^\lV%r Vols.II and III, To kyo , 1 9 34 ,' 36 Norinsho, Nomukyoku, yg^  Kosaku.Sogi Ni Kansuru Chosa, Survey of Tenancy Ushiyama K e i j i ^f" & Nomin Sobunkai No Kozo T h Q structure of the Analysis of the Peasant Class f & * * f t n ~ .. .... . . Q c h a N q M i z u S n o t e n The :128 II. ARTICLES IN JAPANESE Watanabe Sei dan , j E % "Ishida Yusen Wa Monogetaru " ( i B ^ ^ a | | . 3 ) Nogyo Nomin. (Jgl & ) (Agricultural Farmer), No. 8, Vol. 1. This part of a series of interviews with men and women involved in the tenant movement. One interview a month was conducted for the 12 months of 1975. III.BOOKS AND MONOGRAPHS IN ENGLISH Bennett and Ishino, Paternalism and The Japanese Economy, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1963. Dore, R.P. Land Reform in Japan, Oxford University Press, 1 9 59. Embree, John, Suye Mura, A Japanese V i l l a g e , Chicago, 1 946. Fukutake, Tadashi, Japanese Rural Society, Cornell University Press, 1972. Havens, Thomas, Farm and Nation in Modern Japan. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1974. Moore, Barrington. Social Origins of Dictatorship and  Democracy, Boston, 1966. Nakamura, James I. Agricultural Production and the Economic Development of Japan, 1973-1922, Princeton, 1966. Norman, E.H. Japan's Emergence as a Modern State, New York, 1945. Ogura, Takekazu. Agrarian Problems and Agricultural  Poli cy in Japan , Tokyo, 1 967. Oldfather, Livingston and Moore, ed. Imperial Japan  1800-1945, New York, 1973. Robert-Scott J.W. The Foundations of Japan, London, 1922. III.BOOKS AND MONOGRAPHS IN ENGLISH - Cont. 129 Smith, Thomas C. The Agrarian Origins of Modern Japan, Stanford, 1969. Thompson, E.P. The Making of the English.Working Class. Penquin, Hammondsworth, Middlesex, Engl and , 1963. Totten, George. The Social Democratic Movement in Post War Japan, New Haven and London, Yale Univer-s i t y Press , 1966,p.37. IV. ARTICLES AND PAPERS IN ENGLISH Dore,R.P. "Agricultural Improvement in Japan: 1870-1890", Economic Development and Cultural Change October 1960, , "Land Reform and Japan's Economic Development" The Developing Economies, III Dec. 1965. Dore, R.P., "The Meiji Landlord Good or Bad" Jo urna 1  of Asian Studies , Vol.XVIII, No.3 May 19 59 , University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan Farley, Miriam S. "Japan's Unsolved Tenancy Problem", Far Eastern S u r v e y . Vol.6, #14, 19 37, l.P.R. Holland, W.L;. "The Plight of Japanese Agriculture", Far Eastern Review, l.P.R., New York, Jan. 1936. Orchard, Dorothy. "Agrarian Problems of Modern Japan-Part I I " , The Journal of P o l i t i c a l Economy, Vol. 37, No.2 June 1929. Ouchi, Tsutomu, "Agricultural Depression and the Japanese Vill a g e s " in Developing Economies Vol. 4, Dec. 1967. Scott, James. "The Erosion of Patron-CIient Bonds and Social Change in South East Asia", in Journal  of Asian Studies, Vol. XXXII, #1, Nov. 1 972, i> . Smith, T.C. "The Japanese Village in the 17th Century" Imperial Japan 1800-1945 ed. Livingston, Moore and Oldfather, New York, Random House, 1973. 130 IV. ARTICLES AND PAPERS IN ENGL ISH-Cont. Totten, George. "Labour and Agrarian Disputes in Japan Following W.W.I", Economic Development . and Cultural Change, Vol. 9, #1, Part 2, Oct.1961. Wakakawa, S. "The Japanese Farm Tenancy System" in D.G. Haring, ed. Japan's Prospects. Cambridge, Mass. , 1946. Wa^ s'wo, B.A. "Landlords and Social Change in Pre-war Japan* unpublished Ph.D. Thesis , Stanford, 1 974. Waswo, B.A. "The Origins of Tenant Unrest", Japan in  C r i s i s : Essays on Taisho Democracy, ed. Silberman and Harootunian,.Princeton , Princeton University Press, 1974. Yamamura, Kozo. "The Japanese Economy 1911-39: Con-V. centration , Conf 1 i cts , C r i s i s " in Japan in Cri si s : Essays on Taisho Democracy. Silberman and Harootunian, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1974. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094072/manifest

Comment

Related Items