{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02142857142857143, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006696428571428571, 'mean_word_length': 4.851174934725848, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Religions of Japan in Practice. By George Tanabe. pp. xvii, 563. Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1999.

was certainly another element which absolutely weakened the Japanese approach to the Mint question. In the autumn of 1871, the Iwakura Mission, which was composed of almost all the powerful leaders including Toshimichi Okubo, Koin Kido and Hirobumi Ito, left Japan embarking upon what was an unprecedented investigation of the West. Most of the party were away from Japan until the beginning of 1874. During almost the whole period when the Mint problem was being dealt with by other Japanese officials, the absence of authoritative leaders from the negotiating table was a decisive factor in reducing the Japanese bargaining ability. As Hanashiro notes, the Mint was an integrated part of the Ministry of Finance, but the Ministry is notable by its absence from his discussion. What was the Finance Ministry's attitude towards the Mint and Kinder in particular? The Japanese reader cannot help but feel that there is something odd here. If the arguments in the book had involved the Ministry, it would inevitably have led to Alexander Allan Shand, a Scotsman. Shand was one of the most remarkable of the British who contributed to the making of the Japanese financial system. In sharp contrast to Kinder, Shand was admired by every Japanese who worked with him and, as a result, he was to be called later "a real British banker". Some ignorance of the Japanese system leads to another problem. Except for Shigenobu Okuma, the names of Finance Ministers are scarcely mentioned. Many Japanese officials are called into Hanashiro's arena of investigation, but he does not specify their offices. Japanese personal names are presented in Japanese style, but they are often mentioned by surnames only. This is vexing and it is almost impossible to identify the officials. This type of shortcoming could have been easily eliminated with simple help by Japanese scholars. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that Hanashiro has contributed greatly to enlightening scholars of banking and fiscal history. Now that the Kinder myth has been exposed by Hanashiro, other fields have emerged which could be researched to good advantage.