The trade union is not illegal in Japan, but its teeth have been drawn (1) by the enactment that “those who, with the object of causing a strike, seduce or incite others” shall be sentenced to imprisonment from one to six months with a fine of from 3 to 30 yen; (2) by the power given to the police (a) to detain suspected persons for a succession of twenty-four hour periods, and (b) summarily to close public meetings, and (3) by the franchise being so narrow that few trade unionists have votes.  During the six years of the War there were as many as 141,000 strikers, but a not uncommon method of these workers was merely to absent themselves from work, to refrain from working while in the factory, or to “ca’ canny.”  Nevertheless 633 of them were arrested.  When I attended in Tokyo a gathering of members of the leading labour organisation in Japan it was discreetly named Yu-ai-kai (Friend-Love-Society, i.e.  Friendly Society).  Now it is boldly called the Confederation of Japanese Labour.  A Socialist League[152] and several labour publications exist.  Workers assemble to see moving pictures of labour demonstrations, and a labour meeting has defied the police in attendance by singing the whole of the “Song of Revolution.”  But crippled as the unions are under the law against strikes and by the poverty of the workers, they find it difficult to attain the financial strength necessary for effective action.  Many workers are trade unionists when they are striking but their trade unionism lapses when the strike is over, for then the unions seem to have small reason for existing.  The head of the Federation of Labour lately announced that the number of trade unionists was only 100,000, or half what it was during the recent big strikes and it is doubtful whether, even including the 7,000 members of the Seamen’s Union, there are in Japan more than 50,000 contributing members of the different unions.  But this 50,000 may be regarded as staunch.

The poverty-stricken unions certainly afford no real protection to the girl workers, who form indeed a very small proportion of their members.  And the Factory Law does little for them.  A Japanese friend who knows the labour situation well writes to me: 

“According to the Factory Law, which came into force in the autumn of 1916, ’factory employers are not allowed to let women work more than twelve hours in a day.’ (Article III, section 1.) But if necessary, ’the competent Minister is entitled to extend this limitation to fourteen hours.’ (Section 2.) As to night work the law says that ’factory employers are not allowed to let women work from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m.’ (Article IV.) If, however, there are necessary reasons, ’the employers can be exempted from the obligation of the Article IV.’  (Article V.) Article IX says that ’the employers are forbidden to let women engage in dangerous work.’  But whether work is dangerous or not is determined by ‘the competent Minister’ (Article XI), who may or may not be well informed.  There is also Article XII, ’The competent Minister can limit or prohibit the work of women about to have children’ and within three weeks after confinement.  But anyone who enters factories may see women with pale faces because they work too soon after their confinement.