Registration laws from 1886 to 1945

+ temporary residence and travel laws

Incorporation of the "family" and national expansion

By William Wetherall

First posted 1 April 2008
Last updated 13 May 2021

The Family Register Law as the fundamental law of land Territoriality of registers • 1872 Family Register Law
1886-1915 revisions 1886 revision • 1898 revision • 1914 revision (effective 1915)
1915-1945 revisions and territorial applications Naichi and gaichi registers • 1918 Common Law
1924 application of Naichi laws to Karafuto 1943 Karafuto becomes prefecture • 1945 suspension of territorial register interactions
Temporary residence 1914 Temporary Residence Law (1915) • 1914 Temporary Residence Procedures Order (1915)
Postwar resident registration laws  Resident registration and registries from 1945 to the present
Sources Hōrei Kenkyūkai's family register and temporary residence guide (1922)

The Family Register Law as the fundamental law of land

Japan in 1868, having established a monarchy, in the name of which it would build a unified state, set out to nationalize the inhabitants of its sovereign territory by implementing a common domicile or household registration system throughout the country. Japan promulgated its first Family Register Law (Kosekihō) in 1871. The first registers were completed when the law came into force the following year -- hence, in accordance with practice on this website of referring to a law by the year of its enforcement, I am dubbing the household registration measure promulgated in 1871 as the "1872 Family Register Law".

Household registration before 1872

Controlling a population through family registration already had a long history in Japan. Until the Meiji period, population registers had been used to keep track of lineage and relationships within a clan or family. Local population registers had become a tool for land and tax administration since no later than the 6th century.

See Reports from early records for accounts of how, for example, migrants into sovereign lands were enrolled in local population registers in the process of settling them in return for their allegience.

During the 17th century, a parish registration system was imposed on Buddhist temples, some of which had already been recording births, marriages, deaths, and other matters about local families. The parish registers were contrived to support temples, but also to ensure that families were not Christians or members of a proscribed Buddhist sect. Temples lost their legal status as registrars with the enforcement of the new law in 1872.

See Household registers before Meiji: Marking the boundaries of the sovereign's nation for particulars on pre-1872 population registration practices in Japan.

Household registration as nationalization

The importance of the 1872 Family Register Law is reflected in the fact that it came a decade before the makeshift 1882 Penal Code, nearly two decades before the 1890 Constitution, and practically three decades before the 1898 Civil Code and the 1899 Nationality Law. Both the Civil Code and the Nationality Law presume the existence of family registers, which both record and facilitate their effects.

After World War II, under the direction and authority of the Allied Powers, the Japanese Government replaced the 1890 Constitution (promulgated in 1889) with the current 1947 Constitution (promulgated in 1946) -- before revising the Civil Code, which codifies family law, and the Family Register Law, which facilitates administration of the family law provisions of the Civil Code, to reflect emphasis which the new constitution placed on the dignity of the individual and sexual equality. In principle, the Nationality Law should also have been revised at that time, but political difficulties in sorting out nationality status issues during the Occupation delayed its revision until 1950.

In any event, the Family Register Law is at the mercy of the Civil Code for rules regarding individual status as a matter of family law, and is at the mercy of the Nationality Law for rules regarding the acquisition or loss of Japanese nationality at birth later or later in life. At the same time, the Nationality Law has functioned under the assumption that family registers affiliated with municipalities in Japan's prefectures, and historically to other parts of Japan where the law was formally applied (Taiwan and Karafuto), constitute registers of persons who possess Japan's nationality and are therefore nationals of Japan (日本国民 Nihon kokumin) as the current 1950 law calls them, or Japanese (日本人 Nihonjin) as the 1899 law stated.

To be kept in mind -- when considering the character of Japan's customary and statute nationality laws -- is that the notion of "belonging to Japan" originates in, and continues to be essentially an artifact of, belonging to a household register in a locality within Japan's sovereign dominion. Race or ethnicity have never been criteria for qualification as a national of Japan.

Neither the older 1899 Nationality Law, nor the present 1950 Nationality Law, spells out the umbilical link between nationality and local (municipal) registration. Nor does either law contain any statement of "initial determination" or otherwise declare who is already Japanese for the purpose of applying the law.

The "territorial imperative" of Japanese nationality -- the notion that belonging to Japan's political nation is a matter of being linked to an address in a municipality within Japan's sovereign territory -- is no where written. Yet this simple principle operated in the enforcement of the 1872 Family Register Law.

No version of the Family Register Law has spelled out the territorial imperative of Japanese nationality. The original 1872 law merely stated as its objective that the registration of "jinmin" aka "kokumin" aka "shinmin". There is no definition of who, among those living in Japan at the time, qualified as "jinmin" or "kokumin" or "shinmin".

Being perceived by a local registrar as belonging to the locality was apparently sufficient. Most people lived with or near their family, in the vicinity of where they were born and worked and may have been registered in a family record at a local temple.

One might have been from another town or village, or even "another province" (gaikoku 外国) or "country" (kuni 国) in Japan. Or one might have been a member of an itinerant class or settled subcaste. But speaking a different dialect, exhibiting somewhat different mannerisms, or plying a stimatized trade, would not disqualify one from being enrolled in a household register.

Racially different or mixed people

Someone who looked, spoke, and behaved like a "different country person" (ikokujin 異国人) -- a person from a country other than Japan -- would have been an anomally, since foreigners were generally restricted to extraterritorial settlements and other designated places, and cohabitation with Japanese in the Interior (outside the foreign settlements) was not generally not allowed. Foreigners would have been regarded with curiosity, and their presence might be questioned, but they would not be registered.

Children and adults who looked as though one of their parents had been a "different [country] person" (ijin 異人) would have been registered as Japanese, if their father was Japanese, or if their mother was Japanese but not married the father. There were no provisions for alliances of marriage or adoption between Japanese and foreigners until 1873, the year after the start of family registers. The foreign-fathered children of Japanese women had generally been treated as Japanese, except for a few years during the early 1600s, and after the establishment, during the early Meiji period, of rules governing recognition (out of wedlock) or legitimation (recognition through marriage). When birth-right nationality rules came to be codified in the 1890s, nationality continued to be matrilineal for children born to a Japanese woman out of wedlock. Moreover, even when known, the nationality of the father, or his putative race, have never mattered in determining a child's nationality status.

Moreover, the 1873 marriage and adoption proclamation provided that the foreign wife of a Japanese man could become Japanese, and the foreign man could become Japanese as an "entering husband" or "adopted son-in-law" -- again, with no racial conditions whatever.

Ainu registers

"Natives" (dojin 土人), referring to Ainu in what became Hokkaidō, were originally enrolled in their own registers apart from those of other's deemed to be Japanese. Natives of Karafuto (southern Sakhalin) were similar enrolled in their own registers.

In the 1875 Treaty of St. Petersburg between Japan and Russia, Japan traded its interests in Karafuto (southern Sakhalin) for Russia's claims to the northern Chishima (Kuril) islands. Pursuant to the terms of the treaty, some Karafuto Ainu migrated to parts of the territory of Hokkaidō, while others remained in Karafuto and became Russians. Hokkaidō was then a territory under the Development Commission (Kaitakushi 開拓使) in Hakodate.

Under the 1905 Treaty of Portsmouth following the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), Russia ceded Karafuto to Japan. Russified Karafuto Ainu were eventually enrolled in Japanese registers and many were relocated to what since 1886 had become Hokkaidō prefecture under the Hokkaidō Agency in Tokyo.

Japan's 1st national census in 1920 enumerated Hokkaidō Ainu with other Interiorites but also showed them as a distinct component of the general Interior population. In 1924, the segregated Ainu registers were merged with the registers of the general population, and Ainu as a distinct category of Japanese ended.

It stands to reason that there were customary notions of who would and wouldn't qualify for registration as a subject or national of Japan, whether in the locality where they were born and raised, or in the locality where they had settled and were residing at the time of registration.

Customary notions of belonging operated when Japan annexed Korea as Chosen in 1910, and as Chōsen's register were now in Japan, Chosenese were assumed to be Japanese. It similarly operated in 1952, when Japan formally lost Taiwan and Chōsen, and the government of Japan assumed that, because these territories had been separated from Japan, Taiwanese and Chosenese had been separated from Japan's nationality.

The same unwritten principle -- the principle of nationality as an artifact of territorial belonging -- operated between 1945 and 1972, while Okinawa was under the control and jurisdiction of the United States, during which the Japanese nationality of people in Okinawa's municipal registers was suspended -- not lost, but put on hold, like Japan's sovereignty. Just as Japan retained residual sovereignty over the islands, Okinawans retained residual Japanese nationality. And on 15 May 1972, the day Okinawa was reverted to Japan's control and jurisdiction, Okinawans resumed being Japanese, and Japan's population statistics resumed including people enrolled in Okinawan municipal registers.

Top  

Territoriality of registers

In Japan, a single family register, recording the civil status of one individual, is essentially a part of Japan's sovereign demographic territory. The territoriality of such registers is clear in the manner in which they identify an individual in terms of his or her primary affiliation with a municipality in a territory that is part of Japan's sovereign dominion. Severance of the territory from Japan implies loss of affiliation with Japan, hence loss of nationality. This was the case with people in Taiwan and Chōsen family registers as a result of the separation of Taiwan and Chōsen from Japan under the 1945 terms of surrender, which were finalized by articles in the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty.

The Japanese nationality of People in Okinawa registers was suspended during the years that Okinawa was under US control and jurisdiction. The United States invaded and captured Okinawa in 1945, and continued to administer the islands under the terms of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, but Japan retained residual sovereignty. When the United States returned the islands to Japan in 1972, Okinawans resumed their status as Japanese nationals. Between 1945 and 1972, Okinawans who resettled in Japan became Japanese.

While acquisition of Japanese nationality at time of birth is primarily through jus sanguinis (right-of-blood), the blood ties are parental, not racial or ethnic. The parent's (or parents') nationality is essentially grounded in the fact that they belong to Japan through their affiliation with Japan's sovereign territory. The nation is linked by land, not racioethnic blood.

The jus sanguinis criterion for "birth right" nationality acquisition by a child born to parents (or a parent) who are (is) Japanese by virtue of their (his or her) civil status in Japan, is backed up by a secondary jus soli (right-of-soil, place-of-birth) criterion for a child born in Japan to parents both of whom are unknown or stateless. While the primacy of the right-of-blood provision means that children born to known non-stateless alien parents will not become Japanese at time of birth, it is nonetheless a criterion that links the child's territorial status to the territorial status of its parents.

The essential territoriality of nationality, from Japan's point of view, is reflected in the fact that, in the "honseki" (本籍) box on administrative forms in Japan, where Japanese nationals write their honseki address (本籍地), aliens will write their nationality. Stateless aliens -- precisely because they have no territorial (state) affiliation -- write that they are "mukokuseki" (無国籍 mukokuseki), which means they "have no nationality".

Being Japanese means to have a honseki somewhere in Japan. For most Japanese, the honseki address is an ancestral address -- typically where they, a parent, or some grandparents were born and raised. Usually an ancestor still lives there, but possibly the honseki is maintained at the address for nostaligic reasons.

Where one registers as a resident is another matter. One may reside at the honseki address, or change one's honseki address to one's residence address. Honseki (koseki) and resident registration records, in any event, are physically separate records and legally they have entirely different meanings. Honseki is the foundation of nationality. Residence registration is the basis for rights and duties of municipal, and by extension prefectural and national, citizenship.

Aliens residing in Japan are obliged to register their municipal residence -- in the past in a segregated alien regsiter, today in the general register formerly used only for Japanese. As registered municipal residents, aliens are citizens of the municiality of registration and by extension the prefecture in which the municipality is located. But because they lack a honseki in Japan, their rights and duties of citizenship do not include an absolute right of abode or rights of municipal, prefectural, or national suffrage.

The notion that aliens in Japan possess a "honseki" in their country of nationality -- or no "honseki" if they are stateless -- is a legal fiction. It does not mean that foreign countries have a notion of "honseki" like Japan. It merely deems that, whatever the criteria other states use to ascribe their nationality to those they claim belong to their nation, it is analogous to having a "honseki".

"Honseki" in Japan may also be "fictive" in the sense that, in principle, Japanese nationals may designate any address in Japan as their "honseki" address -- even if they have no ancestral ties with the address -- even if the address has no community -- and even if Japan claims sovereignty but does not actually exercise control and jurisdiction over the address.

Japan has territorial disputes with all of its closest geographical neighbors. It claims sovereignty over (1) the Southern Chishima Islands, which had been a part of Japan until invaded, captured, and occupied by the Soviet Union in the last days of the Pacific War. Russia regards them as part of its Kuril Islands, while Japan calls them its "Northern Territory" includes in Hokkaidō prefecture. Japan also claims (2) Takeshima, a group of islands the Republic of Korea occupies as Dokdo, but Japan includes in Shimane prefecture. And Japan claims (3) the Sentaku Islands, which Japan includes in Okinawa prefecture, and the United States recognizes as part of the territory of Japan it is committed to help defend under a mutual security treaty. Both the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) claim the islands, which both PRC's and Japan's navies patrol with the intent of preventing the other from physically occupying the islands. Meanwhile, PRC claims that ROC belongs to it, a position that both Japan and the United States oppose.

Because Japan associates all three territories with municipalities in respectively Hokkaidō, Shimane, and Okinawa prefectures, all have "honseki" addresses within the municipalities that in principle embrace them though without control or jurisdiction . And a number of Japanese, mostly for political reasons, have established their honseki at these addresses.

Such is the "territorial" character of "honseki" as a part of Japan's sovereign dominion, and the "territorial" character of nationality as an artifact of "honseki"

Top  

1872 Family Register Law

Family Register Law (戸籍法 Kosekihō)
Promulgated Meiji 4-4-4 (22 May 1871)
Great Council of State Proclamation No. 170
Enforced from Meiji 5-2-1 (9 March 1872)

The 1872 Family Registers Law established the authority for local authorities to enroll their local populations in household registers that, in principle, would be of the same design throughout the country. While they were local registers, established by municipal authorities within their local jurisdictions, they would collectively constitute national population registers.

While registrants were individuals, individuals were grouped according to the "household" or "ko" (戸) with which they were affiliated by virtue of their residence, usually as members of a biological family, but also adoptees, or employees or others considered affiliated with the household.. An individual's original household register is called a "principle register" or "honseki" (本籍), the address of which is taken to be the "locality of the domicile" (住所地 jŭshochi) associated with the register.

Local leaders were responsible for dividing their localities into areas and to register vital events -- births and deaths, marriages and divorces, and adoption alliances and other such "status actions" -- that defined or affected an individuals family affiliation, and to register new arrivals and note those who left. All registers naturally included blood kin and in-laws, but might also include persons who had been adopted into the family, or were being fostered or otherwise sheltered and cared for by the family as "attached persons".

Provisions were eventually made to accommodate changes in a person's actual residence, if different from that of the address on his or her honseki. This led to measures, very much in effect today, according to which an individual has -- in addition to a personal koseki (i.e., honseki) that may or may not be affiliated with the koseki of immediate family members -- the status of being a resident of the municipality in which the person actually lives, at an address that may differ from that of his or her family (i.e., permanent) register.

Family registers in principle record statuses such as sex, age (in the form of a date of birth), and biological, adoptive, marital, or in-law relationships, usually with someone in the register, but possibly with someone in another register. However, until peerage was abolished by the 1947 Constitution, registers also recorded titles of peerage. Such titles accorded their holder special legal privileges, and were inheritable and thus defined a caste.

Until postwar reforms, older registers also recorded the defunct title of shizoku, created in the early Meiji years for former samurai. By the end of the Meiji period, though, the title was abolished and was no longer inheritable. Though the title no longer accorded its holders special privileges, those who had held it continued to value its appearance on their family registers. Postwar reforms, however, included the expunging of all mentions of abolished statuses.

Even the status of "commoner" (平民 heimin), defined at the outset of the Meiji period, was discontinued later in the period, since anyone who didn't have a title of peerage was by default a commoner. Members of the imperial family have always been registered in an independent genealogy, but the family -- as a caste unto itself -- was significantly downsized following the Pacific War and has shrunk to just 10 members of the 3-generations of the primary family and 8 members in collateral families as of this writing (2021).

Although outcaste (subcaste) statuses were abolished in 1871, some early Meiji registers continued to identify former outcastes in ways that linked them with an abolished status. In time -- because of lingering discrimination on the part of a few people who might go to the trouble of tracing an individual's familial ties with yesteryear's outcastes -- archived copies of such registers have been legally sealed, and even social history researchers are likely to be denied access.

Top  

1886-1915 revisions

The Family Register Law was revised twice during the Meiji period, first in 1886 (Home Affairs Order Order No. 22) four years before the Constitution, and again in 1898 (Justice Ministry Order No. 5). And in 1914 (Justice Ministry Order No. 7), three years into the Taishō period, it was heavily overhauled to accommodate the "ie" or "corporate family" system of family law codified in revisions to the Civil Code that came into effect in 1915.

1886 revision

Family register handling and procedures, promulgated 16 October 1886 (Interior Ministry Ordinance No. 22).

Family register recording format, promulgated 16 October 1886 (Interior Ministry Ordinance No. 20)

Changed form of domicile address from building number (屋敷番 yashikiban) system to locality number (地番 chiban) system. Provisions were also introduced for striking or removing registers (除籍 joseki).

Provided for recording direct and collateral branches of families in same register with single head of household.

Older registers recreated to reflect newer format -- the first to be uniformly used nationally.

Some information that had been on the 1872 registers, though no longer required on the new registers, was transferred in summary fashion to the new registers. These summaries were abandoned from the 1898 registers.

A box was created for the previous head of household.

Recording of occupation (職業 shokugyō) was abolished, but such information was restored on status registers (身分登記簿 mibun tōkibo).

Birth dates were recorded in year-month-day format.

Recording of temple affiliation or clan-god was abolished (this practice actually ended the previous year).

Notations beside names and such for the purpose of clarification (ト書き togaki) -- "so-and-so's third daughter" and the like.

Attached registers, and previously recorded information like "mekake" (妾), remained until the register formats that came into use from 1898.

1898 revision

Promulgated 16 June 1898 (Law No. 12) and enforced from 16 July same year (Justice Ministry Ordinance No. 5 of 13 July 1898), the same day the 1898 Civil Code came into effective.

The content of family registers somewhat changed because of family law provisions in the Civil Code. The unit of registration became the "house" (家 ie, corporate family). A "status registry" (身分登記簿 mibun tōkibo) system was established, according to which one had to file notices reporting changes in status -- meaning birth, death, marriage, divorce, adoption alliances, among other events effecting register statuses.

A column was created to record the reason and date someone became head of household.

Registers entirely remade in order to accommodate new system.

Registers showed locality of principal register (本籍地 honsekichi), class [caste] designation (族称 zokushō), occupation (職業 shokugyō), movements of people into and out of the register, and status (身分 mibun) particulars.

Top  

1914 revision (effective 1915)

Law revising family registration law (戸籍法改正法律), promulgated 30 March 1914 (Law No. 26)

Family registration law enforcement detailed regulations (戸籍法施行細則), promulgated 3 October 1914 (Ministry of Justice Instruction No. 7), enforced from 1 January 1915

Column for date and reason someone became the head of household was abolished. This matter is entered in the matters of the head of household.

Status registry system is abolished. Content of entries more detailed. 1898 registers were not required to be remade. 1886 registers that had not yet been remade were remade according to 1915 system.

Top  

1915-1945 revisions and territorial extensions

From 1915 through the end World War II in 1945, the Family Register Law continued to be revised in relatively minor ways to keep pace with changing needs of the increasingly mobile imperial nation. The major revisions that came into effect in 1915, and the provisions of the Temporary Residence Law that came into effect at the same time, worked fairly well together as legal tools to empower and guide national and local bureaucracies in carrying out various duties related to following areas (among others):

1. Determining the extent of Japan's legally affiliated national population, and its composition in terms of sex, age, marital and other family statuses -- but not religion, ethnicity, or race, which were not deemed to be matters of Japanese law.
2. Administering matters of personal family law including birth, death, marriage, divorce, adoption, and inheritance of persons who are Japanese by virtue of their existence in Japan's national registers, or qualified to become Japanese through birth or later in life and be enrolled in a family register.
   1. The Nationality Law governs the acquisition of Japanese nationality by those who are not nationals but qualified to be nationals at time of birth or later in life, and the loss of Japanese nationality by those who are already nationals. Moreover, it governs only nationality, a purely civil status, not elements of citizenship, which vary according to nationality, sex, age, penal record, and compentency.
3. Levying and collecting taxes
4. Providing health and welfare services
5. Providing public school education (rolls of children qualified for enrollment)
6. Conducting elections (rolls of adults qualified for suffrage)
7. Carrying out military conscription (rolls qualified candidates)
8. Carrying out labor conscription (rolls of qualified candidates)
9. Policing (locating people for law-enforcement purposes)

The prewar registers were under the administration of the Interior Ministry, which also oversaw policing. The registers were therefore subject to abuse by law enforcement officers who wished to conduct surveillance on individuals for ideological reasons not specifically authorized by law -- which is not to say that authorized reasons were justified under even contemporary standards of human rights.

Postwar registers

The postwar register system is administered by local municipal offices for the Ministry of Justice, the competent ministry responsible for overseeing both the Family Register Law and the Residents Basic Registry Law. These postwar counterparts of the prewar family and residence registration laws continue to aid the bureaucracy in all of the above (pre-postwar) areas of population management except military and labor conscription, and policing.

The present register system could, of course, be legally placed at the disposal of the national government for conducting national conscription of any kind. Today, however, authorities other than local municipal civil servants directly responsible for family register administration cannot examine specific registers for law-enforcement purposes without a court-issued warrant. While most local registers are now computerized to facilitate providing services more efficiently and conveniently for both officials and residents, a number of measures and countermeasures protect the privacy of both individuals and families.

Territorial registers

The Empire of Japan at one point consisted of 6 distinct legal jurisdictions under different territorial governments, most importantly the 4 territories that defined the dominion of its sovereign empire -- the prefectures of Japan called the Interior, plus Taiwan, Karafuto, and Chōsen. Because the people affiliated with Taiwan, Karafuto, and Chōsen became Japanese when these territories became part of Japan's sovereign dominion, their population registers became objects of "Interiorization" -- i.e., attempts to make them compatible with, if not the same as, prefectural registers.

Kwantung Province in Manchuria (leased from China), and the South Sea Islands (former German territories administered under a League of Nations mandate), were part of Japan's larger legal empire but not part of the sovereign empire, hence their affiliated populations were not Japanese -- a status enabled by territorial integration into Japan's sovereign dominion. While Japan was not motivated to Interiorize the manner in which it managed their populations, it did need to make rules for determining which territory's laws applied in private matters between individuals from Kwantung Province or the South Sea Islands and individuals from another legal jurisdiction within the smaller sovereign or larger legal empire -- thus the 1918 Common Law.

Elements of the Family Register Law, an Interior law, were incorporated into the territorial household registration ordinances of Taiwan and Chōsen. The 1918 Common Law, which provided for private (including family) matters between registrants in different imperial jurisdictions, stipulated that Karafuto, though not then part of the prefectural Interior, would be treated as though part of the Interior for the purpose of the law. The Family Register Law was not formally extended to Karafuto, however, until 1924.

See 1918 Common Law and 1924 application of Naichi laws to Karafuto below for details.

Top  

Naichi and gaichi registers

Korean household registers

Japan nationalized all territories that became part of its sovereign dominion through household registration. By "all" I mean literally all -- the prefectures, then territories like Ezo (Hokkaido) and Ryukyu (Okinawa) which became prefectures, islands groups like Chishima and Ogasawara, which became affiliated with prefectures, treaty-ceded territories like Taiwan and Karafuto, and finally the treaty-annexed territory of Chosen.

Not only were the populations of non-prefectural territories nationalized through household registration, but as the territories became legally assimilated through decrees based on prefectural laws, the more their populations were subjected to prefectural-style family law -- including the Family Register Law and related articles of the Civil Code.

1909 People's Register Law

Japan was involved in the improvement of household registration in Korea before it annexed the country into its sovereign empire. It was mainly through Japanese urging and guidance that the Empire of Korea adopted the "People's Register Law" (民籍法 민적법 Minjŏkpŏp J. Minsekihō) in 1909 (see ROK's 1948 and 1998 nationality laws for further details on registration issues.

In 1909, a year before formal annexation, and based on fresh Japanese studies of Korean family customs and registration practices, the Resident-General of Korea directed the barely sovereign Korean government to enact the People's Register Law. This law, one of the last laws of the short-lived Korean Empire, was based on Korean customary law, and was intended to make family registration more efficient and controllable.

Resident-General of Korea   The People's Register Law was promulgated by the Emperor of the Empire of Korea (大韓帝國 대한제국 Tae-Han cheguk J. Dai-Kan teikoku), which was founded in 1894. In 1905, when Korea become a protectorate of Japan, Japan established the Residency-General of Korea or "Office of the Resident-General of Korea" ((韓国統監府 Kankoku tōkan fu) in Seoul. This became the Government-General of Chosen or "Office of the Governor-General of Chosen" (朝鮮総督府) in 1910, when Japan annexed the Empire of Korea and changed its name to Chosen.

Post-annex registration decrees

In 1912, after Korea had become Chosen, a part of Japan's sovereign empire, the governor-general proclaimed the Chosen Civil Matters Ordinance (朝鮮民事令 Chōsen minji rei, Meiji 45 Ordinance No. 7). This ordinance mainly was mostly effort to codify customary Korean civil laws.

The interior revised its Family Register Law in 1914, and the People's Register Law was partly revised in 1915 to incorporate some features of the new interior law. The Civil Matters Ordinance was heavily revised in 1922. The revisions, which came into effect the following year, included a section on family registration, and this occasioned a Family Register Decree (朝鮮戸籍令 Chōsen koseki rei) which made Chosen registers more like those in the interior.

Naichijin and other status distinctions

The new civil and family registration decrees differentiated "interior persons" (内地人 Naichijin) as those with Japanese nationality whose principal register (本籍 honseki) was in the interior (内地 naichi) -- in a prefecture. The revisions enabled changes in the registers of the four subnations because of marriage, adoption, or recognition.

Some sources (which I have not yet confirmed) state that the new registration rules also provided for recording two former outcaste statuses -- paekchŏng (白丁 백정 J. hakucho), who engaged in leatherwork or other occupation regarded as unclean -- and tohan (屠漢 도한 J. tokan), literally "men who slaughtered" or butchers. Both statuses had been abolished in 1894 toward the end of the Yi Dynasty. I would guess that the object of resurrecting them in registers was to help police suppress proletarian movements in Chosen like those of the Suiheisha (Levelers Association) and other "buraku liberation" organizations in Japan.

Accommodating inter-subnational marriages

The register regulations were revised to accommodate a 1921 policy that had made it possible for Chosen subjects to marry interior and other Japanese subjects. Status actions involving the registers of two subnations would be treated the same as status actions between two interior registers -- except that movements between the registers of two subnations would effect a change in subnationality -- just as international marriages and adoptions at the time usually involved a change in nationality.

In other words, a Chosen woman (a Japanese woman of Chosen subnationality) who married an interior man (a Japanese man of interior subnationality) -- or a Chosen subject adopted into the household of an interior subject -- would become an interior subject. Similarly, an interior woman who married a Chosen subject, or an interior subject adopted into a Chosen household, would become a Chosen subject.

Top  

1918 Common Law

The 1918 Common Law was one of the most essential laws of the Empire of Japan. It was contrived to deal with conflicts in private matters arising between laws and ordinances in the different legal jurisdiction of the empire. It conformed with the principles of international private law, deal with conflicts of laws between states as well as between different legal jurisdictions within states. All states with multiple legal jurisdictions have domestic in addition to international "laws of laws".

See 1918 Common Law on the Status and applicable law: Governing the civil affairs of territorialized people page of "The Empires of Japan" feature of this website for particulars.

Top  

1924 application of Naichi laws to Karafuto

The Interiorization of Karafuto was significantly facilitated in 1924 by a number of measures, including Imperial Ordinance No. 88, and Cabinet Office Ordinance Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8. The full texts of these and other measures concerning Karafuto are appended in Tashiro 1974, which see for particulars and review.

The extension of the Nationality Law and other laws pursuant to Imperial Ordinance No. 88 was sealed on 16 April, promulgated on 18 April, and enforced from 1 August 1924.

Cabinet ordinances 5 and 6 were dated 28 July 1924 and came into effect from 1 August 1924, together with Imperial Ordinance No. 88.

Cabinet ordinances 7 and 8 were dated 28 November 1924 and came into effect from 1 December 1924, together revisions to the Nationality Law that were made after the above three measures were promulgated and enforced.

Ordinance 7, which took into account the Nationality Law revisions enforced from 1 December 1924, revised an Interior Ministry ordinance concerning the enforcement of 1924 revisions to the Nationality Law, and abrogated Cabinet Ordinance No. 5, which it in effect replaced on account of the 1924 revisions to the Nationality Law.

Ordinance 8 deleted [unnumbered] item 2 in Ordinance 6 because the 1 December 1924 revisions in the Nationality Law rendered it no longer relevant.

Three authorities

The above measures involved three levels of legislative authority.

1. Imperial ordinances issued in the name of the Emperor, who formally sanctioned and promulgated measures which had "passed the approval of the Imperial Diet"
2. Interior Ministry ordinances issued under the authority of the Minister of Justice, and
3. Imperial Cabinet ordinances issued under the authority of the Prime Minister

The involvement of the Imperial Diet reflected the fact that the Imperial Diet was responsible for passing and approving laws, which were then sanctioned and promulgated by the Emperor. The Imperial Diet had the authority to determine the reach of national laws within the Empire.

The involvement of the Imperial Cabinet, presided over by the Prime Minister, reflected the fact that, from 1910 to 1912 and from 1917 to 1929, Karafuto governors reported directly to the Prime Minister, not the Minister of Interior. Most of the few ordinances issued by the Cabinet Office in 1924 involved Karafuto, hence the numerical continuity from the two 28 July ordinances (5 and 6) to the two 28 November ordinances (7 and 8).

The involvement of the Interior Ministry reflected it was the competent ministry regarding both the Family Register Law and the Nationality Law. Ordinarily, registration and nationality matters requiring the approval of the competent authority would be directed to the Minister of Interior. However, in the case of Karafuto, then under a governor accountable to the Prime Minister, applications for permission to, say, renounce Japan's nationality, or acquire it's nationality other than at time of birth, would be directed to the Prime Minister. Hence the Cabinet Office ordinances, including one made exceptions to an Interior Ministry ordinance concerning the Nationality Law.

The Cabinet Office ordinances were issued to qualify the operation of provisions in the Nationality Law for (1) adopting an alien child or alien husband, which would thereby become Japanese (2) renouncing Japan's nationality, and (3) naturalizing in Japan or recovering Japan's nationality. Qualifications were required because Karafuto was then neither a part of the prefectural Interior, nor accountable to the Interior Ministry -- hence applications for such permissions would be processed slightly differently than applications from Japanese with honseki in (i.e., affiliated with) a prefecture.

Imperial Ordinance No. 88 of 1924

Applied Nationality Law and 4 other laws to Karafuto

The Family Register Law was one of five laws applied to Karafuto by Imperial Ordinance (勅令 chokurei) No. 88 of 1924 (Tashiro 1974: 851).

Imperial Ordinance No. 88 of 1924 (大正十三年勅令第八十八号)
Matter of enforcing [putting into operation] the Nationality Law and four other matters [laws] in Karafuto
国籍法外四件ヲ樺太ニ施行スルノ件
Kokusekihō hoka yonken o Karafuto ni shikō suru no ken

Sealed by Emperor Yoshihito on 16 April 1924, a year and a half before he died, this ordinance sanctioned the promulgation of the Nationality Law and 4 other laws. The ordinance, as published in the 18 April 1924 issue of Kanpō, stated that the laws were to be enforced in Karafuto from 1 August 1924.

The ordinance listed 3 major laws by their name and 2 minor laws by their year of promulgation and number, as follows (Tashiro 1974: 851, see Note 1 below).

1. 国籍法 Kokusekihō "Nationality Law"
       Law No. 65 of 1899 as revised through 1916 (see below)
       Replaced by Law No. 147 of 1950 effective later that year
2. 戸籍法 Kosekiō "Household (Family) Register (Registration) Law"
       1872 law as revised at the time
       Replaced by Law No. 224 of 1947 effective from 1948
3. 寄留法 Kiryūhō "Temporary Residence [Registration] Law"
       Law No. 27 of 1914
       Revised by Law No. 224 of 1947, Family Register Law
       Abrogated and replaced by Law No. 106 of 1952,
       Resident Registration Law Enforcement Law (see Note 2)
4. 明治三十一年法律第二十一号 Law No. 21 of 1898
       Civil Code Enforcement Law
       Revised version of same law still in effect
5. 明治三十二年法律第九十四号 Law No. 94 of 1899
       Commercial Code
       Revised version of same law still in effect

Note 1   The version of the 1924 law reproduced in Tashiro 1974 (page 851) states that the law would be enforced in Karafuto from 1 August 1923 (大正十二年八月一日), the year before the ordinance was promulgated. The texts of related ordinances make it clear that this is a typographical error.

Note 2   The Temporary Residence Law, Law No. 27 of 1914, and the 1914 revisions to the Civil Code and the Family Register Law, were enforced from 1 January 1915. See 1915 Temporary Residence Law below for particulars.

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 5 of 1924

Application procedures for renunciation of Japan's nationality
Replaced and abrogated by Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 7 of 1924 (see below)

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 5 of 1924 (大正十三年閣令第五号)
樺太ニ本籍ヲ有スル者ノ国籍ヲ離脱ニ関スル
Karafuto ni honseki o yū suru mono no kokuseki o ridatsu ni kan suru
Concerning renunciation of nationality of those who possess a principle register in Karafuto

Dated 28 July 1924, this ordinance itemized procedural rules which were to be followed by Karafutoans -- people whose status as a subject/national derived from the possession of a honseki in Karafuto -- who wished to be permitted by Japan to renounce their Japanese status under the 2nd provision of Article 20 of the Nationality Law. An application such permission was to be made to submitted to the Prime Minister of the Cabinet by a Japanese ambassador, envoy, or consul in the [foreign] state where the applicant was born and domiciled. See text of ordinance in Tashiro 1974 (851-852).

Article 20-2 of the 1899 Nationality Law was introduced by Law 27 of 1916, promulgated on 16 March 1916 and effective from 1 August 1916. The law revised the 1899 Nationality Law to permit Japanese had had gained the nationality of another country, on account of having been born in the country, to renounce Japan's nationality if they possessed a domicile in the country.

The 1899 Nationality Law originally had no provisions for renunciation. The 1916 revision was made to accommodate demands by the United States that Japan do something to allay America's concerns about the increase in dual nationality among American-born children of Japanese immigrants. See 1916 revision of 1899 Nationality Law for particulars.

Note that, in provisions for renunciation of Japan's nationality, in the case of Japanese who possessed also the nationality of another state, the applicant was required to have a domicile address in the other state. The provision for renunciation was introduced in order to permit dual-national Japanese born and domiciled in right-of-blood states such as the United States, which was concerned about dual nationality among US citizens of Japanese and other Oriental descents. Since the intent of the law was to facilitate the singularization of nationality in favor of the right-of-soil state's nationality, renunciation of Japan's nationality while domiciled in Japan made no sense.

Article 23 of the 1947 Constitution gives nationals of Japan the right to renounce their nationality, but in practice they cannot renounce it unless they also possess the nationality of a state recognized by Japan. Today, a Japanese dual national whose other nationality was of a recognized state could, in principle, renounce Japanese nationality while residing in Japan. However, the renouncer would then become an alien, and as an alien would have to acquire a status of residence or leave Japan.

Most Japanese dual nationals live in Japan as Japanese, and use their Japanese passport when departing from and returning to Japan. However, a few Japanese dual nationals have chosen to enter Japan on their foreign passport, and reside in Japan as aliens. Neither act is illegal. Dual nationals are treated according to the passport they use when crossing a national border. Japanese dual nationals residing in Japan as aliens would have no difficulty renouncing their Japanese nationality, in Japan, so long as their alien status of residence is valid. If they were to overstay or otherwise violate the terms of their status of residence as an alien, they would become an illegal alien and, if caught, have a lot of explaining to do.

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 6 of 1924

Stipulated the minister responsible for considering applications for permission to adopt an alien child or take an alien husband into a Karafuto family register, or to naturalize or recover nationality
2nd item deleted by Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 8 of 1924 (see below)

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 6 of 1924 (大正十三年閣令第六号)
Matters of application procedures for those who possess a honseki and [domicile] address in Karafuto and who would make an alien an adopted child or incoming husband, and those who would seek to naturalize [in Japan] or recover [Japan's] nationality
樺太ニ本籍ヲ有シ又ハ住所ヲ有スル者ニシテ外国人ヲ養子又ハ入夫ト為サムトスル者及帰化ヲ為シ又ハ国籍ヲ回復セムトスル者出願方ノ件
Karafuto ni honseki o yū shi mata wa jūsho o yū suru mono ni shite gaikokujin o yōshi mata wa nyūfu to nasamu to suru mono oyobi kika o nashi mata wa kokuseki o kaifuku semu to suru mono shutsugan hō no ken

Dated 28 July 1924, this ordinance had two unnumbered items, as follows (my translation of text of ordinance in Tashiro 1974; 852).

Law No. 21 of 1898

Law No. 21 of 1898 was both a re-codification and a revision of Great Council of State Proclamation No. 103 of 1873, which facilitated adoption alliances and marriages of Japanese with aliens, and included provisions for acquisition or loss of the status of being Japanese through the alliance or marriage. See 1898 revision of adopted son-in-law and incoming husband provisions for particulars on the 1898 revision of the 1873 proclamatiion.

"honseki" and "address"

The distinction between a honseki (本籍 honseki) and an address (住所 jūsho) meaning a "domicile" or "domicile address" was as important then as it is today. Since possession of a honseki in Japan is tantamount to possession of Japan's nationality, only those legally qualified to be regarded as Japanese can possess a honseki in Japan -- which at the time included the Interior prefectures, Taiwan, Karafuto, and Chōsen.

When national family registers (koseki) were first established in 1872, registrants were domiciled at the address on their koseki, which became their honseki address. Japanese were de facto defined as those who possessed a honseki (koseki) in Japan, hence the 1899 Nationality Law presumed without stipulating so in an "initial determination" clause that people in family registers affiliated with Japan's sovereign dominion were Japanese. The law at was promulgated as one which applied to the prefectural Interior, but when applied to other territories, such as Taiwan (later in 1899) and Karafuto (in 1924), the same assumption was made that people in Taiwan and Karafuto family registers were Japanese -- and had been Japanese before the law was applied to the territories -- otherwise the law could not have been applied to them.

As the nation became increasingly mobile, more Japanese moved to a locality in Japan other than the one having jurisdiction over their honseki address, establishing their domicile there while their honseki remained where their koseki was originally created. Japanese who migrated to another state became domiciled in the foreign country, but they remained Japanese on account of still having a honseki (koseki) in Japan.

Aliens by definition have no honseki in Japan. Their "honseki" is taken to be their country of nationality, if they have one -- or none if stateless. But aliens (including stateless persons) making a living in Japan are regarded as being domiciled in the locality where they reside in Japan. Hence aliens residing in Karafuto were legally viewed as having a "domicile address" in the territory -- the first requisite for naturalization or for recovery of nationality.

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 7 of 1924

Stipulated the minister responsible for considering applications for permission to adopt an alien child or take an alien husband into a family register, or to naturalize or recover nationality
This ordinance both replaced and abrogated Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 5 of 1924 (see above)

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 7 of 1924 (大正十三年閣令第六号)
Concerning retention and renunciation of nationality of those who possess a principle register in Karafuto, and naturalization [in Japan] and recovery of [Japan's] nationality of those who possess a domicile in Karafuto
樺太ニ本籍ヲ有スル者ノ国籍留保及離脱並樺太ニ住所ヲ有スル者ノ帰化及国籍の回復ニ関スル
Karafuto ni honseki o yū suru mono no kokuseki ryūho oyobi ridatsu narabi Karafuto ni jūsho o yū suru mono no kika oyobi kokuseki no kaifuku ni kan suru)

Dated 28 November 1924, four months after ordinances 5 and 6, this ordinance revised Interior Ministry Ordinance No. 26 of 1924 concerning the enforcement of the Nationality Law. Supplementary provisions abrogated Cabinet Order No. 5 of 1924 (above), and revised Imperial Ordinance No. 262 of 1924.

Interior Ministry Ordinance No. 26 of 1924, promulgated on 17 November 1924 and effective from 1 December 1924, concerned enforcement regulations for administering the 1924 revisions to the Nationality Law made by Law No. 19 of 1924, which was promulgated on 22 July 1924 and came into effect from 1 December 1924.

Imperial Ordinance No. 262 of 1924, promulgated on 15 November 1924 and effective from 1 December 1924, specified that the retention provision of Article 20-2(1) in the 1924 revisions to the Nationality Law, effective from 1 December 1924, would applied to Japanese residing in the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, and Peru. Mexico was added to the list by Imperial Ordinance No. 16 of 1926.

See the text of Cabinet Ordinance No. 7 in Tashiro 1974 (852). See 1899 Nationality Law for particulars on Interior Ministry Ordinance No. 26 of 1924 and Imperial Ordinance No. 262 of 1924.

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 8 of 1924

Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 8 of 1924 (大正十三年閣令第八号)

Dated 28 November 1924, as was ordinance 7, four months after ordinances 5 and 6, this ordinance revised Cabinet Office Ordinance No. 6 of 1924 by deleting its 2nd item, which concerned naturalization and recovery of nationality (see above). See Tashiro 1974 (852-853) for the text of the ordinance.

Why was only Item 2 deleted?

I have yet to learn why Cabinet Office Ordinance 8 of 1924, effective from 1 December 1924, deleted the 2nd item of ordinance 5, effective from 1 August 1924.

The only people who would have been eligible for naturalization would have been aliens, such as nationals of the Soviet Union or the Republic of China, or a stray Western European or North American. Taiwanese or Chosenese domiciled in Karafuto rather than in Taiwan or Chōsen, their honseki affiliations, could not have naturalized because they were already Japanese, as were people in Karafuto registers. The retention of the 1st item meant that Karafutoans, as Japanese, could still apply for permission to adopt an alien child, or to adopt an alien husband as a so-called "incoming husband" (入夫 nyūfu).

Top  

1943 Karafuto become prefecture

Karafuto's populations in 1924, 1930, and 1940

Karafuto was heavily populated by Japanese who had migrated to the territory from the prefectural Interior. Prefectural migrants generally left their honseki in the prefectural localities from which they came. Karafuto, while still an exterior territory, was treated as part of the Interior under the 1918 Common Law, a domestic rules of law. By 1924, a number of prefectural laws, including the 1899 Nationality Law and the 1915 Family Register Law, had been extended to the territory. And in 1943, as part of an extensive restructuring of territorial administration, Karafuto was legally incorporated into the Interior as Japan's 48th prefecture.

Native peoples

The 1930 census showed 332 Orokko (オロッコ), 113 Nikubun (ニクブン), 23 Kiirin (キーリン), 10 Sandaa (サンダー), and 2 Yakuuto (ヤクート) -- as reported in Minji Geppō (民事月報), Volume 21, No. 33, by Nakano Magoichi (中野孫一), Hōmushō Minji Kyoku (法務省民事局), March 1966 (昭和41年3月).

The Nationality Law and Family Register Law, though extended to Karafuto in 1924, did not apply to the registers of native people (土人 dojin). "Karafuto Native People Household and Population [Census] Regulations" (樺太土人戸口届出規則 Karafuto Dojin kokō todokede kisoku), Karafuto Government ordinance No. 35 of 1921 (大正10年勅令第35号, stipulated that the Family Register Law did not apply to native peoples.

The native population of Karafuto -- which had remained in 1875 when Karafuto became part of Russia, including Ainu who had chosen not to resettle in Japan -- had become Russians, and they and their descendants were treated as Russians when Japan regained control of Karafuto in 1905. Later they would be regarded as nationals of the Soviet Union.

Karafuto Ainu linked with Hokkiadō and Chishima Ainu

In time, the Civil Code was applied to people among Karafuto's natives who were Ainu, and because the Family Register Law mediates relevant articles of the Civil Code, it too was applied to Ainu in Karafuto, on the grounds that, among Karafuto's native population, Karafuto Ainu were part of the larger Ainu population in Hokkaido and the Chishimas (Kuriles). Consequently, in 1932, the Family Register Law was applied to Karafuto Ainu as well by Imperial Ordinance No. 37 (昭和7年勅令第37号), and their Interior honseki were established (定籍 jōseki) by Justice Ministry Ordinance No. 47 (昭和7年司法省令47号), both of 1932.

Top  

15 October 1945 suspension of interactions

On 15 October 1945, a few weeks after Japanese authorities in Chosen surrendered the territory to American forces in the south and Soviet forces in the north, and about one week before Taiwan would be surrendered to ROC forces, the Ministry of Justice (司法省 Shihōshō) ordered the suspension of "Interactions [exchanges] of family registers of Interior / Exterior" -- according to Civil Affairs A No. 452, Civil Affairs Bureau, Director-General Reply (民事甲第４５２号民事局長回答 the following civil affairs reply.

This would appear to have ended the operation of laws which Japan had established to facilitate the uniform administration of civil affairs in the Interior, Taiwan, and Chosen -- to accommodate migration between territories, and marriages and adoptions between all Japanese subjects regardless of their territorial affiliation. However, the order suspended only register exchanges that were beyond Japan's jurisdiction -- meaning outside "Japan" as defined by GHQ/SCAP. Within "Japan" business continued as usual. Status acts involving interactions of Interior/Exterior registers would continue to be effected within "Japan" -- since local offices had copies of the family registers of locally registered Chosenese and Taiwanese, and Japan's laws continued to Japan's Civil Code and Family Register Law continued to their officials continued to be authorized to -- and who were , or either and

This suspension of inter-territorial register actions especially inconvenienced individuals affiliated with different territories who wanted to marry or effect an alliance of adoption -- either of which, under Japanese law, would require that someone migrate from one register to another.

However, municipal halls in prefectural localities had copies of the registers of resident Chosenese and Taiwanese. And it appears that status actions such as marriage, between Interior and Exterior subjects, continued to be duly recorded in accordance with the Civil Code and the Family Register Law.

The San Francisco Peace Treaty entered into force from 22:30 hours Japan Standard Time on 28 April 1952. Chosenese and Taiwanese lost their Japanese nationality, pursuant to the enforcement of the treaty, according to Civil Affairs A No. 438 of 19 April 1952, a notification issued by the Director-General, Civil Affairs Bureau of the Attorney General's Office.

Article 1(4) of the notification states that, after treaty effectuation, register migrations concomitant with status acts like an alliance or dissolution, or a marriage or divorce, will not be recognized.

Such migrations would effect the territorial status of those who migrated between territorial registers -- and would be tantamount to a change of nationality after the treaty came into effect. And from the moment the treaty came into effect, local officials had lost the authority to treat Chosenese and Taiwanese as Japanese -- hence could no longer move anyone from a local register to a Taiwan or Chosen register, or vice versa, as though all such registers were affiliated with Japan.

As stated in Article 1(5) of the Civil Affairs Bureau notification, Chosenese and Taiwanese, having become aliens, would have to naturalize according to Japan's Nationality Law if they wished to be Japanese. There was no need to state that Japanese who wished to become an ROK or ROC national were free to naturalize in those countries, under their laws -- and then renounce their Japanese nationality under Japan's laws.

Chosenese and Taiwanese could not have naturalized before 28 April 1952 because they were Japanese.

Top  

Temporary residence

The establishment population registers throughout the nationalized provinces was needed (1) to know who who the people were by age, sex, occupation, and family relationships, hence household registers, and (2) to know where people were actually living, hence residence registers. At the time, practically everyone cohabited with close family members and did not travel far, or for long, from their home villages, towns, or cities. So family registers sufficed as records of actual residence for most people. Those who had reason to travel or live somewhere for more than a few days were therefore required, under the Family Register Law enforced from 1872, to obtain travel permits if traveling and register their addresses if working and living somewhere temporarily.

Temporary residence provisions in the 1872 Family Register Law were revised in 1886. Then from 1 January 1915, a short standalone Temporary Residence Law, and a much longer Temporary Residence Procedures Order, were put into force along with a revised Civil Code and Family Register Law. The 1915 temporary residence measures, which operated together with Civil Code and Family Register Law, remained in force until replaced by the 1952 Resident Registration Law, the forerunner of present resident register laws (see below).

Top  

Temporary Residence Law Law No. 27 of 1914 As sanctioned and promulgated on 30 March 1914 by Emperor Yoshihito (Taishō) witnessed by Prime Minister Yamamoto Gonnohyōe and Minister of Justice Okuda Yoshito Images copped and cropped from National Archives of Japan Digital Archives 国立公文書館デジタルアーカイブ Click images to enlarge 1914 Temporary Residence Law (effective 1915) The Temporary Residence Law (寄留法 Kiryūhō), Law No. 27 of 1914, was enforced from 1 January 1915, together with the 1914 revisions to the Civil Code and the Family Register Law. The law was promulgated for the purpose of clearly differentiating a person's honseki (koseki) and residential addresses while maintaining a record of the relationship between the two. This was done out of need for municipalities to register people whose honseki (koseki) were in other municipalities, for purpose of overseeing rights and duties that derive from the place of one's legal residence as opposed to the place of one's legal honseki (koseki). This included, for example, payment of taxes as a duty and voting and running for elected offices as a right. Public school admissions for children, and labor and military conscription for older persons, were also determined by where one actually lived. Temporary residence under 1872 Family Register Law From the start of Japan's Family Register Law in 1872, one as obliged to register a temporary address with local authorities. Individuals were registered in household registers called "koseki", which established their "honseki" -- their principle domicile as "people" (jinmin) -- "subjects" (shinmin) and "nationals" (kokumin) -- of Japan. Koseki (honseki) were basically registers of people who cohabited as direct relatives, but also as collatoral relatives and relatives by marriage and adoption. Household registers might also include a legal mistress, or an apprentice who was attached to the family and shared its name. Most people had little need to travel or sojourn far or for long outside their home village, town, or city. But those who spent considerable amounts of time elsewhere were expected to carry a travel permit if "traveling" (ryokō), or to register their temporary address as a sojourner (kiryū). Early registers also recorded occupations. 1886 revision of 1886 Family Register Law The Family Register Law was revised in 1886. Articles concerning temporary residence stated that sojourners had to register their temporary address staying in a locality outside their honseki for 90-day-or-more days. The Japanese text, partly downloaded from a Japanese government website, and partly transcribed and entirly vetted by this writer against printed copies, is shown below, with my Korean and Japanese texts of both the law and regulations are shown below, with my structural translation and commentary.

Top  

Temporary Residence Procedures Order Imperial Order No. 226 of 1914 As promulgated on 28 October 1914 Images copped and cropped from National Diet Library Digital Collections 国立国会図書館デジタルコレクション See Hōrei Kankyūkai 1922 for particulars Click images to enlarge 1914 Temporary Residence Procedures Order (effective 1915) The Temporary Residence Procedures Order (寄留手続令 Kiryū tetsuzuki rei), Order No. 226 of 1914, was enforced from 1 January 1915, together with the new Temporary Residence Law, and the 1914 revisions to the Civil Code and the Family Register Law. The order was promulgated to provide guidlines regarding procedures for registering temporary residents. Temporary residence particulars I have transcribed the Japanese text for only Article 5, which itemizes the particulars that were to be recorded in temporary residence registers. The structural translation and commentary are mine. The transcription is based on a 1922 loose-leaf handbook on the Family Register Law and the Temporary Residence Law, and related laws. See Hōrei Kenkyūkai 1922 under "Sources" below for full particulars and a table of contents describing this interesting contemporary guide to primary registration (family registers) and secondary registration (residence registers).

Top  

Postwar resident registration laws

Resident registration and registries from 1945 to the present

After the Pacific War (1941-1945), during the Allied Occupation of Japan (1945-1952), under the direction of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, Japan replaced its 1890 Constitution with a new Constitution, which came into force from 3 May 1947. Japan then enacted and promulgated a revised Civil Code and a new Family Register Law, to reflect the individual rights stipulated in the new Constitution, and the revised and new laws came into effect from 1 January 1948.

On and after 28 April 1952, the day Japan regained its full sovereignty and diplomatic independence from the Allied Powers, some article of existing registration laws, and some new registration laws, came into effect. And over the decades, registration laws, including family register and resident registry practices, have undergone considerable change while preserving the essential purpose of population registration -- knowing who lives where, and how people are related.

For details on post-1945 resident registration laws, see Postwar resident registration laws in the 1948 Family Register Law article.

Top  

Sources

I have made extensive use of the following loose-leaf handbook downloaded from National Diet Library Digital Collections (国立国会図書館デジタルコレクション).

Hōrei Kenkyūkai 1922

法令研究會 編纂編輯
加除式 戸籍寄留及関係法規
東京：敬文社出版部
大正十一年十月二十日印刷
大正十一年十一月十二日發行
8頁 (目次)、121 (本文)

Hōrei Kenkyūkai henshū
[ Laws and ordinances research society (compiler) ]
Kajoshiki Koseki kiryū oyobi kankei hōki
[ Add-remove-style (Looseleaf) Family register,
  temporary residence, and related statutes ]
Tokyo: Keibunsha Shuppanbu
[ Tokyo: Keibunsha Publishing Department ]
20 October 1922 printed
12 November 1922 published
8 page (contents), 121 pages (main text)

Publication on heels of Common Law

This handbook, published in 1922, came out 4 years after the promulgation of the 1918 Common Law, and 1 year after Article 3 of the 1918 Common Law came into effect.

The 1918 Common Law, a domestic laws of laws, governed applicable law in private matters between Japanese affiliated with different territories, such as marriages between Chosenese and Interiorites.

Ariticle 3, which came into effect in 1921, government movement between family registers of different territories in matters such as marriage and adoption, which required register migrations.

The 1922 handbook includes the 1909 People's Register Law, which was promulgated in the Empire of Korea. This law remained in force in Chōsen after Japan annexed Korea as Chōsen in 1910. The Chōsen People's Register Law was revised in 1915, 1916, and 1921, after which Interior household registration standards and their underlying family laws began to be introduced in Chōsen.

Chosenese-Interiorite marriages

The handbook is especially timely because it includes ordinances related to Chosenese-Interiorite marriages. It begins, however, with the Nationality Law, followed by the Family Register Law

    1-5  Nationality Law
   6-75  Family Register Law and related regulations
 76-105  Temporary Residence Law and related regulations
110-115  People's Register Law and related regulations
    116  Chosenese and Interiorite marriages
           and people's register procedures
    117  Chosenese surname and personal name changes

Top  

Contents

The contents of the handbook sufficiently describe its scope and suggest how registrars and others with interests household registration, temporary residence, and related issues were able to navigate the variety of laws, orders, and directives that decided the statuses and affiliations of imperial subjects nationals, but also of aliens in Japan including the Interior, Taiwan, Karafuto, and Chōsen.

The structural translations of the names of the entries are mind. The issuing agencies, law, order, and directive numbers, and promulgation dates shown in [brackets] are taken from the handbook.

  1  國籍法
     Nationality Law
  4  國籍ノ離脱ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning renunciation of nationality
  5  國籍喪失者ノ權利ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning rights of nationality loosers
  5  外國人ヲ養子、入夫トナスノ件
     Matters of making a foreigner an adopted son (son-in-law)
       or an entering husband [of a female heads of household]
  5  外國人ヲ養子又ハ入夫ト爲サントスル者
       及歸化ヲ爲シ又ハ國籍ヲ回復セントスル者
       出願方ノ件
     Matters concerning petitions by a person who
       would make a foreigner an adopted son (son-in-law),
       and a person who would effect a naturalization
       or recover [Japanese] nationality

  6  戸籍法
     Family Register Law
 27  戸籍法施行細則
     Family Register Law Enforcement Detailed Regulations
 73  戸籍手數料規則
     Family Register handling fee regulations
 74  皇族ヨリ臣籍ニ入リタル者
       及婚嫁ニ因リ臣籍ヨリ出テ皇族ト爲リタル者
       ノ戸籍ニ關スル件
    Matters concerning the family register of
      a person who enters a subject register from the Imperial Family,
      and a person who because of marriage leaves a subject register
      and becomes [a member of] the Imperial Family
 75  戸主ニ非サル者爵ヲ授ケラレタル場合ニ關スル件

 76  寄留法
     Temporary Residence Law
 76  寄留手續令
     Temporary Residence Procedures Order
 76  寄留手續細則
     Temporary Residence Procedures Detailed Regulations
106  身分登記、戸籍及寄留ニ關スル書類保存規程
     Document preservation rules concerning
     status registrations, family registers, and temporary residence
107  身分登記簿ノ閲覧及登記ノ謄本抄本ノ請求竝手數料ノ件
     Matters of requests and handing fees for
       examination of status registration ledgers
       and [official] copies or extracts of registrations
107  市町村長ハ裁判所檢事局軍法會議
       又ハ他ノ市町村長ノ通知ニ依リ
       本籍人ノ犯罪人名簿整備等ノ件
107  處刑ニ因リ族籍ヲ失ヒタル者ニ付キ
      （戸籍吏）へ報告方
108  宿泊屆其ノ他ノ件ニ依リ警察官署ノ登録シタル事項ヲ
      （戸籍吏）ニ通知等ノ件
108  外國ニ於テ婚姻ヲナストキ證明書ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning certificates
       when effecting a marriage in another country
108  婚姻屆書ノ認證謄本交付ノ件
     Matters of issuance of (official) copies of
       attestations of marriage notifications

108  士族ノ稱
     Appellation of Shizoku
109  世襲ノ卒ハ士族ニ編入ス
     Hereditary Sotsu are to be enrolled as Shizoku
109  郷士家筋由緒アル者ハ士族ニ入籍
     A person with local samurai family-line lineage
       to be enrolled as Shizoku
109  士族戸主死亡後相續人定メ期限
109  華士族分家ノ者ハ平民籍ニ編入ス
109  華族ヨリ平民迄苗字名並屋號共改稱ヲ禁シ
       同苗同名ニテ差支アル者ハ願出シム
109  平民自今必苗字ヲ唱ヘシム
     Heimin must from now recite (have, go by) family names
110  國名並舊官名を通稱ニ用フルヲ停ム
     Suspend use of the province names
       and former officer names as social names
110  御歴代御譯竝ニ御名ノ文字熟字ノ外ハ
       人民名乘憚ルニ及ハス
     Other than (Except for) the scripts and compounds of
       the successive (historical) imperial names,
       do not hesitate to go by people's (commoner) names
110  海軍志願兵及其家族ニ異動アリタルトキ
       海軍經理部ニ報告ノ件

110  民籍法
     People's Register Law [Chōsen]
       [Empire of Korea Law 48 of Yunghŭi 3-3 (March 1909)]
       [Chosen CGG Order 17 of March 1915 revised]
       [Chosen CGG Order 56 of July 1916 revised]
       [Chosen CGG Order 98 of June 1921 revised]
       [Chosen CGG Order 150 of November 1921 revised] 
112  民籍法執行心得
     People's Register Law enforcement guide
       [Empire of Korea Interior Order 39 of Yunghŭi 3-3 (March 1909)]
       [Chosen CGG Directive 47 of August 1915 revised]
       [Chosen CGG Directive 61 of January 1921 revised]
113  民籍簿若ハ除籍簿ノ閲覧其他ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning perusal et cetera of
       people's register ledgers and deregistration ledgers
     [Chosen CGG Directive 148 of 6 December 1911]
114  民籍簿除籍簿ノ閲覧其ノ他ニ關スル取扱手續
     Handling procedures concerning perusal et cetera of
       people's register ledgers and deregistration ledgers
       [Chosen CGG Directive 34 of 1 June 1915]
114  民籍事務處理心得
     Guide to dispoition of people's register affairs (administration)
       [Chosen CGG Directive 21 of 1 April 1915]
116  朝鮮人ト内地人トノ婚姻ノ民籍手續ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning people's register procedures for
       the marriage of a Chosenese and an Interiorite
       [Chosen CGG Directive 99 of 7 June 1921]
117  工塲法ノ適用ヲ受クル工場ノ職工徒弟
       又ハ職工徒弟タラムトスル者ノ民籍證明方
     People's register certification of a worker apprentice
       or a person who would be a worker apprentice
       at a place subject to the application of
       the Factory Law [promulgated 1911, enforced from 1916,
       abrogated by the Labor Basic Standards Law of 1947]
       [Chosen CGG Directive 80 of 14 August 1918]
117  朝鮮人ノ姓名改稱ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning changes of surnames
       and personal names of Chosenese
       [Chosen CGG directive 124 of 26 October 1911]
118  統戸番號ノ新設又ハ變更ニ關スル件
     Matters concerning establishment or change of
       lineage (blood line) dwelling (lot, parcel) number
       [Chosen CGG Directive of 8 July 1915]
118  在外帝國公館ニ於テ受理シタル外國在留朝鮮人ノ身分ニ關スル屆書
       又ハ證書ノ謄本ノ送附ヲ受ケタルトキ取扱方
     How to handle when receiving an issuance of an official copy
       of a notification or certificate concerning the status of a
       Chosenese temporarily residing outside the country [who is]
       acknowledged at a legation of the Empire abroad
       [Chosen CGG Directive 32 of 5 June 1913]

118  戸口規則
     Population regulations
       [Taiwan TGG Order of 16 December 1905]

Top