Nothing precisely similar to this Goodnow Memorandum has ever been seen before in the history of Asia:  it was the ultramodern spirit impressed into the service of mediaeval minds.  In any other capital of the world the publication of such a subversive document, following the Yang Tu pamphlet, would have led to riot and tumult.  In China, the home of pacifism, the politicians and people bowed their heads and bided their time.  Even foreign circles in China were somewhat nonplussed by the insouciance displayed by the peripatetic legal authority; and the Memorandum was for many days spoken of as an unnecessary indiscretion.[16] Fastening at once on the point to which Yang Tu had ascribed such importance—­the question of succession—­Dr. Goodnow in his arguments certainly shows a detachment from received principles which has an old-world flavour about it, and which has damned him for ever in the eyes of the rising generation in China.  The version which follows is the translation of the Chinese translation, the original English Memorandum having been either mislaid or destroyed; and it is best that this argument should be carefully digested before we add our comments.

    DR. GOODNOW’S MEMORANDUM

A country must have a certain form of government, and usually the particular form of government of a particular country is not the result of the choice of the people of that country.  There is not any possibility even for the most intellectual to exercise any mental influence over the question.  Whether it be a monarchy or republic, it cannot be the creation of human power except when it is suitable to the historical, habitual, social and financial conditions of that country.  If an unsuitable form of government is decided upon, it may remain for a short while, but eventually a system better suited will take its place.

In short, the form of government of a country is usually the natural and only result of its circumstances.  The reasons for such an outcome are many, but the principal one is Force.  If we study the monarchical countries we will find that usually a dynasty is created by a person who is capable of controlling the force of the entire country and overthrowing other persons opposed to him, working towards his goal with an undaunted spirit.  If this man is capable of ruling the nation and if he is a rare genius of the day, and the conditions of the country are suited for a monarchical government, he as a rule creates a new dynasty and his descendants inherit the same from generation to generation.

If this is so, then the solution of a difficult position of a country is to be found in a monarchy rather than a republic.  For on the death of a monarch no doubt exists as to who shall succeed him, and there is no need of an election or other procedure.  Englishmen say, “The King is dead, Long live the King.”  This expresses the point.  But in order to attain this point it is necessary that the law