[Footnote AN:  Cf. chapter xvii.]

[Footnote AO:  Quotations from “A Japanese Philosopher” will be found in chapters xxiv. and xxvi.]

[Footnote AP:  “Things Japanese,” p. 133.]

[Footnote AQ:  P. 213.]

[Footnote AR:  P. 30.]

[Footnote AS:  Cf. chapter vii.]

[Footnote AT:  Cf. chapter xv. pp. 186, 187.]

[Footnote AU:  Cf. chapters xvi. and xvii.]

[Footnote AV:  Chapter xv.]

[Footnote AW:  Chapters xix. and xx.]

[Footnote AX:  P. 39.]

[Footnote AY:  P. 36.]

[Footnote AZ:  Pp. 42, 43.]

[Footnote BA:  P. 45.]

[Footnote BB:  P. 61.]

[Footnote BC:  P. 120.]

[Footnote BD:  P. 129.]

[Footnote BE:  P. 130.]

[Footnote BF:  Dickenson’s “Japan,” chapter vii.]

[Footnote BG:  Cf. chapter xxi.]

[Footnote BH:  P. 163.]

[Footnote BI:  P. 169.]

[Footnote BJ:  It is interesting to observe that the contempt of Old Japan for trade, and the feeling that interest and profit by commerce were in their nature immoral, are in close accord with the old Greek and Jewish ideas regarding property profits and interest.  Aristotle held, for instance, that only the gains of agriculture, of fishing, and of hunting are natural gains.  Plato, in the Laws, forbids the taking of interest.  Cato says that lending money on interest is dishonorable, is as bad as murder.  The Old Testament, likewise, forbids the taking of interest from a Jew.  The reason for this universal feeling of antiquity, both Oriental and Occidental, lies in the fact that trade and money were not yet essential parts of the social order.  Positive production, such as hunting and farming, seemed the natural method of making a living, while trade seemed unnatural—­living upon the labor of others.  That Japan ranked the farmer higher in the social scale than the merchant is, thus, natural.  In moral character, too, it is altogether probable that they were much higher.]

[Footnote BK:  Cf. chapter ix. p. 103.]

[Footnote BL:  Chapter vi.]

[Footnote BM:  Chapter xxix. p. 339.]

[Footnote BN:  An anonymous writer, in a pamphlet entitled “How the Social Evil is Regulated in Japan,” gives some valuable facts on this subject.  He describes the early history of the “Social Evil,” and the various classes of prostitutes.  He distinguishes between the “jigoku” (unlicensed prostitutes), the “shogi” (licensed prostitutes), and the “geisha” (singing and dancing girls).  He gives translations of the various documents in actual use at present, and finally attempts to estimate the number of women engaged in the business.  The method of reaching his conclusions does not commend itself to the present writer and his results seem absurdly wide of the mark, when compared with more carefully gathered figures.  They are