r^"
L£.
JV^l^I^^
'dl
^
.' ^J.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
p'".. V .u - I r
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE ADMINISTKATION
OF THE INTEENAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER
INTERNAL SECURITY LAWS
OF THE
U.S« C.^ COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
'• " UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-SECOND CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
THE INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
PART 12
MARCH 28, 29, 31, AND APRIL 1, 1952
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
88348 WASHINGTON : 1952
PUBLIC
^Li£
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
PAT McCARRAN, Nevada, Chairman
HARLEY M. KILGORB, West Virginia ALEXANDER WILEY, Wisconsin
JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi WILLIAM LANGER, North Dakota
WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Washington HOMER FERGUSON, Michigan
HERBERT R. O'CONOR, Maryland WILLIAM E. JENNER, Indiana
ESTES KEPAUVER, Tennessee ARTHUR V. WATKINS, Utah
WILLIS SMITH, North Carolina ROBERT C. HENDRICKSON, New Jersey
J. G. SouRwiNE, Counsel
Inteknal. Security Subcommittee
PAT McCARRAN. Nevada, Chairman
JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi HOMER FERGUSON, Michigan
HERBERT R. O'CONOR, Maryland WILLIAM E. JENNER, Indiana
WILLIS SMITH, North Carolina ARTHUR V. WATKINS, Utah
Subcommittee Investigating the Institute of Pacific Relations
JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairman
PAT McCARRAN, Nevada HOMER FERGUSON, Michigan
Robert Morris, Special Counsel
Benjamin Mandel, Director of Research
II
CONTENTS
Testimony of — - Page
Bisson, Thomas Arthur 4159
Field, Frederick V 4033
Finley, Moses 41 52
Friedman, JuHan R 4289
Renwanz, Lt. Col. Rowland H 4072
III
4034 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
ence would indicate something as to the circumstances. As I recall,
the institute moved its office from East Fifty-second Street to its pres-
ent address on Fifty-fifth Street, or whatever it is, at about that time.
They moved into a smaller place. And I believe they asked a number
of people if they had room to store a lot of excess files that apparently
were not in current use, and it finally came around to me. I had noth-
ing to do Avitli this. I forget who asked me, somebody in the institute
who was active in the administration at that time. And I did have
a private house, and it has a substantial cellar in it. It was prac-
tically empty, and I agreed. Those are the circumstances in which
the files were placed there.
Mr. Morris. I believe that Mr. Holland testified that in 1947 the
bulk of them was taken away.
Mr. Field. I remember at that time, if that was 1947, that I believe
I wrote a letter to the then Secretary of the American Council of the
IPK, Mr. Lane.
Mr. Morris. Clayton Lane?
Mr. Field. Clayton Lane, yes — requesting him to remove the files,
because they at that time were cluttering up my place and I didn't
want them. And after some time I thought they had been taken away.
I believe I was away on the west coast or somewhere at the time they
came down to remove them. And I remember not checking whether
they were all removed or not, and then discovering very much later
that some of them had been left there. And I think from there on=
Mr. Morris. What happened when vou discovered there was some
left^
Mr. Field. I telephoned Mr. Holland.
Mr. Morris. You went to his office and told him ?
Mr. Field. Or went there and told him.
Mr. Morris. On a Satui'day morning?
Mr. Field. Well
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Holland come down to your home then and
go through the files?
Mr. Field. He came down and verified them that they were there,
and some days later, I forget when it was, he took them
Mr. Morris. How much time did he spend in your basement at that
time ?
Mr. Field. Mr. Holland?
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Field. I don't think longer than to verify that such and such
cases were IPK. files.
Mr. Morris. I see. He was there on two occasions, was he not?
Mr. Field. He came back to pick them up ; yes.
Mr. Morris. But you cannot recall how much time he actually spent
on the files?
Mr. Field. No; except it wasn't a long time. As I say, it was to
verify the fact that these were the IPR files. I had some private
stuff of my own down there.
Mr. Morris. And that was about a year ago ?
Mr. Field. I guess that was ; yes.
Mr. Morris. You sav you had some private things down in among
the IPR files?
Mr. Field. It is my house, and I have my own stuff down there,
and he naturally went to verify what he was taking out was not my
private property but tlie institute's.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4035
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, wlien did 5^011 first meet Mr. Barnes, Joseph
Barnes?
Mr. Field. In college, I snppose 19 — it was my freshman year,
whatever that was, 1923, 1 think it was.
Mr. Morris. And you knew him quite well during college?
Mr. FiFXD. Yes ; I knew him quite well.
Mr. Morris. Who worked for the Institute of Pacific Eelations
first ? You or he ?
Mr. Field. I did.
Mr. Morris. Were you instrumental in his coming into the organ-
ization ?
Mr. Field. I testified to this before, I believe, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. In executive session.
Mr. Field. I forget whether it was in executive session or not,
I think that I was instrumental in the sense that I knew him and I
suppose — I can't recall the exact circumstances. I suppose I intro-
duced him to Mr. Carter or to someone else. And I was not instru-
mental in the sense that I had no authority myself at that time to hire
anybody or make such decisions.
Mr. Morris. You were both in Moscow together in 1931, were you
not?
Mr. Field. No ; we were not.
Mr. Morris. "W-lien were you in Moscow ?
Mr. Field. I went through Moscow on my way to China in 1929.
Mr. Morris. And then the next time ?
Mr. Field. That is the only time I have ever been there.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Were you and Barnes together in Shanghai ?
Mr. Field. Can I go back to that other question ?
Mr. Morris. By all means.
Mr. Field. I have only'been in Moscow once. I don't think Barnes
was in Moscow in 1929. It is easily verified. We only would have
been there together if we both attended the IPK Conference of the
Far East, which I think was at Kyoto that year. I don't think Barnes
had joined yet, but I am not sure.
To go back to your last question, there was a subsequent IPR con-
ference probably 2 years later, in 1931, in Shanghai. I think it would
have had to be moved from some other city because of the Manchurian
incident which had broken out at that time. I believe Barnes was at
that conference, and if he was we were certainly together in Shanghai.
]Mr. Morris. Do you know if Barnes was ever an employee of the
Soviet Council of the IPR ?
Mr. Field. I certainly have no knowledge that he was. From my
personal knowledge I would say he never had been.
Mr. Morris. You were in a position to know at that time, you were
an official on the Institute of Pacific Relations at that time ?
Mr. Field. I worked in the institute. From that experience and
any other I have had my answer would be "No." I have no other way,
or I have no other source of knowledge. I have no other way of
knowing.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, we have found one paper generally in
connection with one item. There were quite a few questions put to
Mr. Field the last time he was here in connection with his application
for an Army commission.
4036 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator O'Conor. I recall that. That was dealt with quite exten-
sively, you may recall.
Mr. Field. Yes.
Mr. Morris. We have made an effort and the Army has made an
extensive effort to find the papers on that case, but apparently all the
papers have been destroyed in connection with an Army order to clear
all files. And the only thing we were able to obtain was a copy of
his medical comment. Now, however, just very recently we did find
a paper which throws some light on this general item, and I would
like to introduce that into the record at this time.
Senator O'Conor. The destruction of the papers was not, however,
peculiar to this case? That is to say, there is no significance in the
fact that they were destroyed ? As I understand it, no records of that
general kind are available.
Mr. Morris. Well, we just have no records. I would like to just
say that without comment.
Senator O'Conor. I see.
Mr. Morris. And Mr. Mandell is getting that now.
Did you know Mr. Lawrence Duggan ?
Mr. Field. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Was he in school with you, too ?
Mr. Field. He was in college with me.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever make an effort to start a Latin- American
Branch of the IPR?
Mr. Field. No, I never made such an effort. There are probably
documents on this. My offhand recollection is that it did come up
for discussion, and, as I recall, I personally opposed the idea of doing
it.
Mr. Morris. What was the reason for the opposition ?
Mr. Field. I can't recollect, and I wouldn't be too definite about this,
but I have sort of a vague recollection I thought it was a poor idea.
We had plenty to do otherwise, and I didn't see very much point.
The Latin- American countries had relatively little relation to the
Pacific at the time.
Mr. Morris. Lawrence Duggan was the person with whom you
carried on the negotiations at this time ?
Mr. Field. I carried on no negotiations.
Mr. Morris. You carried on correspondence or had conferences on
the subject with him, did you not?
Mr. Field. Perhaf)s I did, I don't recall it. It is possible I did, but
I don't recall it.
Mr. Morris. Was Corliss Lamont a class mate of yours ?
Mr. Field. No, he was not. He was, I forget, maybe 3 or 4 years —
he preceded me by 3 or 4 years.
Mr. Morris. Is he a close personal friend of yours ?
Mr. Field. Yes, he is a good friend of mine.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, have you contributed money to the China
Daily News or tlie New China Daily News ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds that
to do so might tend to incriminate me, and I invoke the fifth amend-
ment.
Mr. Morris. Did you contribute on the 26th of March, 1948, a check
for $500 which was endorsed by Chu Tong for the New China Daily
News?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4037
Mr. Morris. On August 10, 1948, did you contribute a sum of $360
to the New China Daily News ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. On December 17 of the same year did you contribute
$450 to the New China Daily News with a check that bore the endorse-
ment Hom Q Pan and Eugene JNIoy ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. On August 8, 1949, did you contribute $500 to the New
China Daily News with a check which bore the endorsement of Chu
Tong ? 0
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
INIr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, the New China Daily News has come
up several times in our hearings, and we are trying to determine the
political nature of the New China Daily News. We have sent a sub-
pena to Eugene Moy and Chu Tong in order to complete this part of
the examination, and we have been informed that Mr. Chu Tong is
now in Red China with the Voice of China. However, Eugene Moy
is believed to be in the country and he should be subpenaed here next
week.
Did you know Eugene Moy ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Chu Tong?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question.
Mr. Morris. Do you know if Chu Tong is now in Red China ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds,
Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Were you in Vladivostok in 1930?
Mr. Field. The trip to which I previously alluded took me across
the Soviet Union and we were book on that Trans-Siberian Railway
that normally takes you down to Manchuria. As I recall we got to
the border just after the tracks had been taken up, and I guess it was
the Chinese Eastern Railway dispute, and we had to be routed north
of the Amur to Vladivostok and get a boat down to Japan.
Mr. Morris. Who was with you at that time ?
Mr. Field. There were a number of Americans and Englishmen, all
of whom were going to this IPR conference.
Mr. Morris. Was Marcel Scherer in your party ?
Mr. Field. No; he was not.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Marcel Scherer ?
Mr. Field. Do you want me to answer the question about who was
there?
Mr. Morris. Yes. I am trying to refresh your recollection.
Mr. Field. I am trying to recall. I remember reasonably distinctly
that Prof. William Kilpatrick was there from Columbia ; there was a
Professor Webster from one of — from the British university called
Aberyswyst ; there was a woman professor from the London Univer-
sity whose name escapes me at the moment ; I think Professor Cham-
berlain, Joseph P. Chamberlain, was on the trip, and I think Prof.
James T. Shotwell, but I am not absolutely certain ; Jerome Green was
on the trip; there was a lawyer from Boston who had just worked on
whatever the current reparations plan for Germany was, whether it
was the Dawes plan or the Young plan, he is now dead and I forget
his name, but that can be easily identified from the membership of
that conference. The lady, the British woman professor, was Eileeii
Powers.
4038 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
That is without refreshing my memory from looking at a list. That
is probably as far as I can go now, and I am not perfectly certain
about one or two of those.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Marcel Scherer on that trip?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question. Let me consult with
my attorney.
Mr. Morris. By all means.
Senator O'Conor. You may,
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
I Mr. Field. I just don't remember.
Mr. Morris. Did you know personally Mr. Shippe who wrote under
the name of Asiaticus?
Mr. Field. Mr. who?
Mr. Morris. Mr. Shippe — S-h-i-p-p-e.
Mr. Field. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you know the man who used the pen name
Asiaticus ?
Mr. Field. I don't know.
Mr. Morris. Did you have correspondence with him ?
Mr. Field. I can't recollect any. Mr. Shippe?
Mr. Morris. S-h-i-p-p-e.
Mr. Field. Just offliand, I haven't heard the name before. I may
be quite incorrect.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Herbert Bieberman ?
Mr. Field. May I consult my counsel ?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes, indeed.
Mr. Field. At that time ?
Mr. Morris. At any time.
Mr. Field, I decline to answer, Mr. Morris, on the same grounds I
have given previously.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I have a series of questions here based
on correspondence from the files of the Institute of Pacific Relations
about Mr. Field's associations and dealings with the Soviet Embassy,
the Soviet consul here and tlie Amtorg Trading Corp.
I would like to ask Mr. Field a few preliminary questions, and if
he declines to answer I would like simply to put the documents in the
record.
Senator O'Conor. All right, you may proceed.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, what has your association with the Amtorg
Trading Corp, been?
Mr, Field, May I again consult my counsel ? Do you want to re-
fresh my memory ?
Mr, Morris, I will ask the question first, but I do want to say we
have some letters here, and we would like to know to what extent you
would be willing to testify about your dealings with the Amtorg Trad-
ing Corp,
I think the witness should answer the question first.
Senator O'Conor. Just a moment. Repeat the question.
(The question was read by the reporter.)
Senator O'Conor. I think the witness has a right to consult his
counsel.
Mr. Morris. I have given him a copy of the first letter. It is pos-
sible Mr. Field in some capacity could have had a formal association
that he might be willing to testify to.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4039
Mr. Field. No, I will decline to answer that question on the grounds
that I have previously given.
Mr. MoREis. Did you know Mr. V. F. Prosin?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on the
same grounds.
Mr. Morris. I would like to introduce into the record two letters
here. One is a copy of a letter from the files of the Institute of Pacific
Relations fi*om Mr. Field to Mr. V. F. Prosin of the Amtorg Trading
Corp., and another from a Mr. Prosin who is listed as Chief Econ-
omist of the Amtorg Trading Corp.
Mr. Mandel, will you identify those letters, please ?
Mr. Mandel. This is a carbon copy taken from the files of the
Institute of Pacific Relations dated November 6, 1935, addressed to
Mr. V. F. Prosin, Amtorg Trading Corp., with a typed signature of
Frederick V. Field. Attached thereto is an original letter on the
letterhead of V. F. Prosin, 261 Fifth Avenue, signed V. Prosin, chief
economist, Amtorg Trading Corp., addressed to Mr. Frederick V.
Field, director, Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. May they go into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes; they will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 618" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 618
November 6, 1935.
Mr. V. F. Peosin,
Amtorg Trading Corp.,
261 Fifth Avenue, Neio York, Neic York.
Dear Mr. Prosin : I am very glad to reply to your letter of October 31st, with
the following statement, which you are free to use in the Soviet newspaper
Za Industrializaciu in connection with tlie forthcoming anniversary of the
Soviet Republic :
Any observer of the U. S. S. R. is inevitably impressed by the tremendous
strides that the Soviet Union has made in its economic development. The
speed at which industrialization has been carried on, the rate at which
mastering of industrial technique is being achieved, the results of this
progress as evidenced in tlie recent abolition of food rationing, give confi-
dence in the internal strength of the U. S. S. R. We, of our Institute,
have watched especially closely the economic development of the eastern
sections of the Union as an indicator of the increasing unity and balance
of the internal economy of the country. The imix)rtance of this progress
is most obvious in international relations as it gives weight and substance
to the determined stand for peace which has been taken by the Soviet Union.
I regret that I have delayed several days in sending this to you but I trust
that by dispatching it by special messenger it will reach you in time.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
V. E. PROSIN
261 Fifth Avenue
NEW YORK
October 31, 1935.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
Director, Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East Fifty-second Street, Neto York City.
My Dear Mr. Field : In connection with the forthcoming anniversary of the
Soviet Republic, the Soviet newspaper Za Industrializacitj, organ of the Heavy
Industries of the U. S. S. R., has requested me to secure expressions of opinion
4040 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
from prominent leaders of science and education, for cable transmission to
Moscow, on the following subjects :
1. Achievements of the U. S. S. R. in economic development ;
2. The peace policy of the Soviet Union.
I hope that you will find your way clear of favoring us with a statement
on this matter, and thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation, I am
Sincerely yours,
[s] V. Prosin,
Chief Economist, Amtorg Trading Corporation.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify these documents?
Mr. Mandel. These are invitations to celebrate the adoption of the
new Soviet constitution issued by the Ambassador of the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics, and they are dated in the different years,
and they cover various celebrations at the Soviet Embassy. I can
give each one separately.
Mr. Morris. I do not think it is necessary. I would not like to take
that much time. There are nine invitations to various official Soviet
functions which purport to be invitations to the witness Mr. Field,
and I would like to institute a line of questions to the witness on that
particular subject if he would be willing to answer.
(Documents handed to Mr. Field.)
Senator O'Conor, All right, Mr. Morris, will you proceed?
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, are you prepared to explain to us the cir-
cumstances surrounding your receiving these invitations?
Mr. Field. I imagine that I have no control over the mail that I
receive. However those things came to me, I assume, through the
mail.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember receiving these ?
Mr. Field. No ; I don't remember it.
Mr. Morris. How many of these functions did you attend?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on the
grounds previously stated.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Michael Gromov ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Mr. Andrei Yumashev ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that the questioning along
the line of this particular subject be discontinued on the ground that
we are not going to get any information from this particular witness.
Will you take into the record nine such invitations ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes; they will be admitted into the record.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 619" and
are as follows:)
Exhibit No. 619
The Charge d'Affaires
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Oumansky
request the pleasure of your company
at a reception in honor of
Michael Gromov, Andrei Yumashev, and Sergei Danilin
on Tuesday evening the twenty-seventh of July
at nine o'clock
at the Embassy
Summer dress or black tie 1937
Please present this card at the door R. s. v. p.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4041
To Celebrate the Adoption of the New Soviet Constitution
The Consul General
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Arens
request the honor of the company of
Mr. Frederick V. Field (penned in)
at a reception
Tuesday evening, the fifteenth of December
at nine o'clock
at the Consulate
1936
^- s. V. p. Please present this card at the door
(Pencilled) Regret
To Celebrate the Adoption of the New Soviet Constitution
The Ambassador
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Troyanovsky
request the honor of the company of
Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Field (penned in)
at a reception
Thursday evening the tenth of December
at nine o'clock
at the Embassy
1936
^- s. V. p. Please present this card at the door
The Consul General
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
requests the honor of the company of
Mr. Frederick V. Field (penned in)
at (penned in) luncheon
on (penned in) Friday, June fifth
at (penned in) one o'clock
at the Consulate General
Seven East Sixty-first Street
R.s.v.p. 1945
(Pencilled) Accept
The Consul General
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Tolokonski
request the honor of the company of
Mr. and Mrs. Frederick V. Fields (penned in)
at a reception
on the occasion of the Anniversary of the October Revolution
on Wednesday, November Seventh
between 4 and 6 : 30 o'clock
at the Consulate General
7 East 61st Street
R.s.v.p. 1942
4042 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
(Penned in) Farewell to Mr. and Mrs. Neymann.
(Pencilled) Accepted
The Consul General
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Arens
request the pleasure of the company of
Mr. Frederick Field (penned in)
at (penned in) a tea
on Monday, September thirtieth (penned in)
at (penned in) five to seven o'clock
at the Consulate General
Seven East Sixty First Street
R.s.v.p. 1940
Messrs. Michael Gromov, Andrei Yumashev
and Sergei Danllin will give the first account
of their flight from Moscow to San Jacinto, California,
across the North Pole
To Celebrate the Twentieth Anniversary
of the Great October Socialist Revolution
The Acting Consul General
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and Mrs. Borovoy
request the honor of the company of
(Penned in) Mr. Frederick V. Field
at a reception
on Saturday, November the sixth
from five until seven o'clock
at the Consulate General
Seven East Sixty-first Street
R. s. V. p. Please present this card at the door
1948
(Penned in) Accept
The Consul General
of the U. S. S. R. and Mrs. Tt)lokonski
and Mr. Peter A. Bogdanov
Chairman of the Board, Amtorg Trading Corporation
request the honor of the company of
Mr. and Mrs. Frederick V. Field (penned in)
at a reception and showing of the film
Chelyuskin
on (penned in) Thursday, September twenty-seventh
at (penned in) eight-thirty o'clock p. m.
at the Consulate General
7 East 61st Street
R. S. V. P. 1945
Mr. Morris. Will you identify that letter, Mr. Mandel?
Mr. Mandel. This is a carbon copy of a letter taken from the files
of the Institute of Pacific Relations dated July 23, 193T, addressed to
i
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4043
the Honorable C. Oumansky, charge d'affaires of the U. S. S. R., Wash-
ington, D. C, witli the typed signature of Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, I otfer you this letter and ask you if you
can recall having sent that to Mr. Oumansky,
Senator O'Conor. That is, the original of which that is a carbon.
Mr. Field. I decline to answer, Mr. Morris, on the grounds previ-
ously stated.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, on the basis of the fact it is identified
by Mr. Mandel as a document taken from the files and purporting to
be signed by Frederick V. Field, will you accept it into the record?
Senator O'Conor. Yes; it is admitted under those circumstances.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 620" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 620
July 23, 1937.
The Honorable C. Oumansky,
Charge d' Affaires of the V. S. 8. R., Washington, D. C.
Deae Mr. Oumansky : I am exceedingly sorry that I shall not be able to attend
the reception you are giving in honor of the three Soviet fliers. It is imix)ssible
for me to get to Washington at that time. You can imagine how greatly pleased
my colleagues and I have been over the success of the two recent flights.
Sincerely yours,
Fkedekick v. F1EI.D.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify that letter please ?
Mr. Mandel. I have here an original memorandum dated March 22,
1939, from E. C. C. with penciled notes in the corner marked "E. C. C."
and "Fred."
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, can you recall having received that letter
from Mr. Carter ? [Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. I don't remember, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Will you read that for us, Mr. Field, please?
Mr. Field (reading) :
Exhibit No. 621
F. V. F. from E. C. C. March 22, 1939.
I assume that Mr. Oumansky sends regularly to you or Mrs. Barnes copies
of speeches such as those recently made by Stalin and Molotov and communiques
such as the text of the note from Litvinov to the German Ambassador. If, how-
ever, he is not doing so, I would be glad to include you in my circulation of
these.
( Penciled note : ) E. C. C. : Yes ; he usually does include us. Fred.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive that into the record?
Senator O'Conor. Yes; it will be admitted for the record. Of
course the witness does not himself identify it.
Mr. Morris. I understand.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 621" and was
read in full.)
Mr. Morris. Can you recall, Mr. Field, whether or not it was the
regular practice of Mr. Oumansky to send regularly to you or to Mrs.
Barnes copies of speeches made such as those recently made by Stalin
and Molotov ?
Mr. Field. Excuse me a moment.
Senator O'Conor. Yes, indeed.
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
Mr. Field. I have no recollection of that, Mr. Morris.
4044 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will yon identify that letter, please?
Mr. Mandel. This is an original letter on the letterhead of the
American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations, dated January 9,
1939, addressed to Mr. Edward C. Carter, New York office, and
signed "Frederick V. Field."
Mr. Morris. Can you recall having sent that letter, Mr. Field?
[Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. It seems to be my signature, Mr. Morris, but I do
not have a personal recollection of correspondence that far back.
Mr. Morris. Or the meeting mentioned in the correspondence ?
Mr. Field. I don't recall it.
Mr. Morris. Mir. Chairman, may that go into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes ; it will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 622" and is as
follows :)
Exhibit No. 622
Officers : Carl L. Alf3berg, Chairman ; Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ; Miss Ada
Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Philip C. Jessup, Vice Chairman ; Benjamin H. Kizer, Vice
Chairman ; Ray Lyman Wilbur, Vice Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Secretary ; Charles
J. Rhoads, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant Treasurer
ameeican council
Institute of Pacific Relations
1795 California Street, San Francisco; Telephone: Tuxedo 3114; 129 East 52nd Street,
New York City ; Telephone : PLaza 3-4700. Cable : Inparel
New Yojjk City, January 9, 1939.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
New York Office.
Dear Mr. Cakteb : This is to thank you for your note of January 7th and to say
that I shall be very glad to lunch with you at the Century Club on Wednesday at
one to meet Plopkin and Mr. Oumansky.
■Sincerely yours,
[s] Fred,
Fredebick v. Field.
f/g
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify that letter, please?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a letter from the files of the
Institute of Pacific Relations addressed to F. V. Field, Esq., with the
signature of E. C. Carter dated December 31, 1939.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, do you recognize that letter as a letter sent
to you by Mr, Carter? [Handing witness.]
Mr. Field. I don't remember that letter, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, would you receive that into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. It will be admitted as a part of the records of
the IPR. That is a part of the records of the IPR?
Mr. Morris. Yes.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 623" and is as
follows :)
Exhibit No. 623
129 East Fifty-Second Street,
Nexo York, December 31, 1939.
F. V. Field, Esq.
Dear Fred : Last night at a workers meeting I described the need of the
American Council. Ten gifts of one dollar each were immediately made. They
were made on condition that they be anonymous. Here are the ten gifts. Will
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4045
you at your convenience request the Treasurer to make out ten receipts each
bearing the designation anonymous.
Sincerely yours,
E. C. Cartek.
12/30/39. (Not clear) B. M. #3994 to #4003.
I will pass on the receipts to their destinations.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, in this letter Mr. Carter sent to you :
Deae Fred : Last night at a workers meeting I described the need of the
American council. Ten gifts of $1 each were immediately made.
Do you know what the reference there is to the workers' meeting
the night before?
Mr. Field. No ; I don't know, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. You could not give us any information ?
Mr. Field. I am afraid not.
Mr. Morris. That is December 31, 1939.
Mr. Field. It doesn't recall anything specific to my mind.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I have here from the files of the Insti-
tute of Pacific Relations what purports to be a memorandum prepared
by Mr. Field concerning his application for a commission with the
United States Army. I would like Mr. Mandel to identify that as a
letter taken from the files of the institute.
Mr. Mandel. This is a memorandum taken from the files of the
Institute of Pacific Relations headed "Frederick V. Field: Events
Leading Up to Disapproval of My Application for United States
Army Commission and for United States Civil-Service Appointment."
It is undated and unsigned.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, I wonder if you would look at that and tell
us if you can recall having written that.
Mr. Field. May I have time to read this, please, sir?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, certainly.
(Mr. Field consults document.)
Senator O'Conor. The witness has inspected the paper, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Will you read that for us, please, Mr. Field ?
Mr. Field. Do you want me to read it aloud?
Mr. Morris. Would you, please ?
Mr. Field (reading) :
Exhibit No. 624
Frederick V. Field : Events Leading Up to Disapproval of My Application
FOB United States Army Commission and for United States Civil Service
Appointment
1. During December 1941 I made numerous inquiries regarding places where
a far eastern specialist could be useful in the war effort. Early in January I
had a long interview with Colonel Sharp of the Army Intelligence office in New
York City. During this interview (as in all subsequent interviews) I brought
me the question of my having been associated with the American Peace Mobiliza-
tion and the consequent unfavorable report which the FBI would unquestionably
give on me. Colonel Sharp assured me that appointments for specialist jobs were
made on a basis of "common sense," not political prejudice.
Colonel Sharp informed me that he did not at that time have a staff appoint-
ment to offer me, but that if I were willing to work for a few weeks on a volun-
teer basis he would later recommend me for an official position provided the
arrangement had by then turned out to be mutually satisfactory. I accepted
this offer, and Colonel Sharp sent my credentials on to Washington for approval
as a volunteer.
2. It appears that these credentials came to the attention of another branch
of the Army, for a few days later Capt. Malcolm W. Moss, of the Army Air Corps
88348— 52— pt. 12 2
4046 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Intelligence, asked me if I would be interested in a position as Far East specialist
in Air Intelligence. The job descril^ed was one of extraordinary interest to me,
and I told Captain Moss of my eagerness for an ofBcial appointment. He asked
me to go to Washington for further interviews.
My first interview with Captain Moss took place on January 5 or 6.
I could insert for the record here, on the basis of my recollection,
this would have been January of 1942.
On January 8 I had interviews in Washington with other officers of the Air
Intelligence: Maj. William Ball, chief of the particular section in which I was
to work; Captain Barr, administrative officer of that section, and a number of
officers and civilians engaged in research on other geographical divisions.
I was accepted by the officers of that section, Major Ball himself taking me
around to the personnel division to start the process of securing a commission
as a captain. Captain Moss took me to the division in charge of handling
civilian appointments. In their opinion a civilian appointment could be put
tlirough much quicker than the commission, which would take a month or two,
and as they were in a hurry for me to start work they wished me to apply for
a temporary civilian appointment pending the commission.
3. During the next few days I filled out all the questionnaires, application
forms, etc., for both the commission and civilian appointment (the latter being
described as "economic analyst, P-4, $3,800 per annum"). On January 10 I
took my Army physical examination at 90 Church Street, New York City.
4. On Tuesday, February 10, Captain Moss telephoned me from Washington
to say that he regretted to inform me that the applications for both civilian and
military appointments had been disapproved in "higher quarters." He siiggested
that I try to locate the cause and place of the disapproval and see if I could do
anything to reverse it. In that telephone call, as well as in conversation in
Washington 3 days later, he informed me that he was not authorized to tell me
the reasons for the disapproval ; that, as a matter of fact, liis section knew very
little about it. I have been unable to get any further information myself.
5. Finally, a brief word as to the job itself. It is concerned with developing
a theory for bombing Far Eastern objectives. My part of the job would be
largely economic-industrial research designed to determine key objectives in
the Japanese economy.
Frederick V. Field. 16 West Twelfth Street, New York City
(Gramercy 7-8265)
Born : April 14, 190-3, New York City
Education :
Hotchkiss, 1922
Harvard A. B., 1927
London School of Economics and Political Science, 1927-28
Activities :
Staff of Institute of Pacific Relations, 1928-40
Secretary-treasurer, American Cooperating Committee for Chinese Mass
Education Movement, 1928 to date
Served as secretary to Chinese Mass Education Movement, director. Dr.
Y. C. James Yen, during his tour of United States, 1928-29
Assistant to Edward C. Carter, 1928-35
Member, Economic Mission to Far East (Hon. Cameron Forbes, chairman)
1935
Secretary, American Council Institute of Pacific Relations, 1935-40; trustee
and member, executive committee, 1935 to date.
Chairman, editorial board, Amerasia (monthly journal on Far East)- 1987
to date
Executive secretary, American Peace Mobilization, September 1940 to July
1941
Attended international conferences of Institute of Pacific Relations as
follows: Kyoto. 1929; Shanghai, 1931; BanfC, 1933; Yosemite, 1936, Vir-
ginia Beach, 1939
Travel in Far East :
Trans-Siberian Railway to Vladivostok, 1929
Japan, September through November, 1929
Travel through Luzon, P. I., December through February 1929-30
Hongkong, Canton, Pakhoi, Tongking, Yunnan, March-April 1930
Institute of pacific relations 4047
Shanghai, Nanking, Hangchow, June 1930
Tientsin, Peiping, Paotingfu, July-Septemer 1930
Returned to Far East (Japan, Manchuria, Peiping, Shanghai) for 4 months
in 1931
Worlied in Honolulu, winter 1932-83
Five months in London, ^YOrliing at Royal Institute of International Affairs,
winter 1933-34
Returned to Japan and China as member American Economic Mission in
1935
Author :
American Participation in the China Consortiums (University of Chicago
Press, 1932)
Economic Handbook of the Pacific Area (Doubleday-Doran, 1935)
General editor, Economic Survey of the Pacific Area, 1939-^2
Numerous articles in Far Eastern Survey, Asia, Amerasia, Pacific Affairs,
Current History, etc.
Miscellaneous :
Married, three children
Member, Century Association, Harvard Club, Council on Foreign Relations,
Public Affairs Committee
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Field, I think we have covered
the substance. May it go into the record?
Senator O'Conor. Yes ; it may be admitted into the record in toto.
Mr. Morris. That is right.
Senator O'Conor. Unless, of course, the witness feels there is any-
thing important that in fairness to himself ought to be mentioned.
Mr. Field. I think almost all of it has been testified to previously,
sir.
Senator O'Conor. All right.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 624" and was
read in full.)
Mr. Morris. All the circumstances?
Mr. Field. I say most of it. In general, I think exactly the same
picture was presented in the last session.
Mr. Morris. We have an executive session here with Colonel
Church. In connection with this, Colonel Church of the Army had
sent a man over here and we were going to have him read this into
the record, but he seems to have gone. Suppose we have another
session on that.
Senator O'Conor. Very well.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, did you know Vladimir Romm?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds that
to do so might tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Morris. He was the representative of the Soviet Council at
an IPR Council in the United States ; was he not ?
Mr, Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Senator O'Conor. Just before you take up a new subject, have
you concluded the line of questioning on the commission?
Mr. Morris. Yes, unless there is something else.
Senator O'Conor. INlr. Field, in the period which has intervened
since you were asked about the application for the commission and
the endorsement of others in your behalf, is there anything that you
can add to what you previously testified to ?
Mr. Field. No, sir; I think not. I reread the record of my testi-
mony in open session the other day, and I don't think I have any
amendments to it.
Senator O'Conor. At that time I think you said that
4048 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. There are names in liere which I couldn't then recall
and I am glad to testify to as far as I can recollect as to the accuracy
of those names. I think those are the people that I saw.
Senator O'Conor. It occurred to me that possibly, in the exchange
of correspondence or communications or in the questioning of per-
sons mentioned, you might have thought of something else that would
bear upon the subject-matter.
Mr. Field. I have had no opportunity to read the proceedings of
your committee since I last appeared except my own.
Senator O'Conor. In that testimony there was mentioned the name
of Lauchlin Currie, you recall.
Mr. Field. Yes.
Senator O'Conor. And also the name of Owen Lattimore.
Mr. Field. Yes ; I do.
Senator O'Conor. In connection with either of those parties, is there
anything further that has occurred to you, or anything that might be
added by way of additional information as to their interest or their
activities in regard to the proposed application ?
Mr. Field. Mr. Chairman, as I recall the gist of my testimony at
that time, this is what I would repeat again : It was that with respect
to Mr. Lattimore my recollection was that I probably did go to him
to act for me. It was likely that I did under the circumstances. With
respect to Mr. Currie, I was then, and I am now, almost certain that I
did not go to him, but I conceded the possibility that some other friend
of mine might have involved him indirectly.
That is as concrete as I could possibly be on this question.
Senator O'Conor. I see. There is no other bit of information that
you could give that might help us ?
Mr. Field. No ; I have no other information on that.
Senator O'Conor. Just one question further before you leave this.
Have you concluded the questions with regard to the contributions
made in the name of Mr. Field for the time being?
Mr. Morris. They may come up again.
Senator O'Conor. There was one question about it. You previously
have declined to respond to questions, and what I am about to ask is
of course not for the purpose of asking you to reopen that except on
another angle of it. Apart from the question of fact of whether you
did make such contributions, I would like to ask you whether you
made any request of the Internal Revenue for exemption for any con-
tributions made to any of the organizations or parties referred to in
the previous questions?
Mr. Field. I would answer you, sir, if I may, in a veiy limited
fashion, that in previous sessions my contributions to the Institute of
Pacific Relations have been raised, and I acknowledged such contribu-
tions, and I did claim and was granted the usual exemption on those
contributions.
With respect to the others I would have to decline as I did pre-
viously.
Senator O'Conor. I would like to ask the question with respect to
the organizations mentioned by Mr. Morris in the previous questions.
Mr. Field. At today's session ?
Senator O'Conor. At today's session, as to whether or not you made
a request of the Treasury of the United States, or the Bureau of In-
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4049
ternal Revenue for exemption of any contributions made to any of
those organizations or parties.
Mr. Field. May I consult my counsel ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, indeed.
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
Mr. Field. Sir, without acknowledging such contributions or ad-
mitting them, I might state that I did not make such application.
Senator O'Conor. That is all I wanted to know. I was not attack-
ing the fact of a contribution, but only as to anything on your part
in connection with the Treasury Department.
Mr. Morris. You said a while ago that you had not seen the tran-
script of our open hearings ?
Mr. Field. Except for my own testimony. That is the only one I
have read.
Mr. Morris. The committee has been sending you, as it sends all
witnesses, Mr. Field, one or I think maybe two copies of all transcripts
that are published. You have not been getting those?
Mr. Field. I have not been receiving my mail regularly because I
have been in prison until recently.
Mr. Morris. You had access to them, though?
Mr. Field. I had access to nothing whatsoever. I haven't caught
up. I don't know if these things are in my mail. I haven't run into
them since I have been back.
Mr. Morris. They would be sent to you at the address you gave the
reporter.
Mr. Field. I suppose so. I haven't run into them. I do have this
one which contains my own testimony, but I have only read my own
testimony.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, it is the practice of the committee to
send to all witnesses, I believe, two copies of all public testimony, so
]\Ir. Field should have that. At least it has been sent to him at his
home address.
Will you identify that last letter, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. I have here a handwritten note from the files of the
Institute of Pacific Relations on the stationery of the Cunard-Wliite
Star liner Queen Mary dated November 5, 1936. In the upper right-
hand corner is written "Foreign Department, Yzvestia Moscow." It
is addressed to "Dear Mr. Field" and signed "V. Romm."
Mr. Morris. Can you recall having received that letter? [Handing
to witness.]
Mr. Field. I have no recollection of it, sir.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you read that letter ?
Mr. Mandel (reading) :
Exhibit No. 625
Dear Me. Field : I am very sorry I missed you when I left, but I hope we will
meet again somewhere. It has been very pleasant to know you and to cooperate
with you on some problems.
My plans are not very certain as my paper wants me to go to London. I will
see clearer when I am in Moscow, as I feel a little worn-out for the moment and
need a rest.
Very truly yours,
V. Romm.
Mr. Field. May I ask whether there is a date on that letter?
Mr. Mandel. November 5, 1936.
4050 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris, Did Mr. Komm get the rest- he mentioned there, Mr.
Field?
Mr. Field. I am afraid I can't help you out on that.
Mr. Morris. What do you mean by that, Mr. Field? Is it that you
do not know or you refuse to ?
Mr. Field. I don't know.
Mr. Morris. Do you know what happened to Mr. Romm?
Mr. Field. I have no idea.
Mr. Morris. He was purged, was he not ?
Mr. Field. I don't know.
Mr. Morris, You don't know first-hand?
Mr. Field. I don't really know second-hand.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember reading anything about Mr. Romm ?
Mr. Field. I don't remember anything specific. I have a general
impression that he was one of the people who got into trouble there,
and what happened to him I haven't the slightest idea or never heard.
Mr. Morris. Would you receive that into the record?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes; it will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked ''Exhibit No. 625" and was
read in full.)
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, the witness has declined to answer in
connection with the name of Herbert Biberman. I have here a tele-
gram and an exchange of correspondence, or, rather, it is not an ex-
change of correspondence, but one is a telegram from Herbert Biber-
man to Edward C. Carter and the other is a telegram from the witness,
Frederick Field, to Edward C. Carter, and they seem to be related
each with the other.
Mr. Mandel, will you identify those letters, please?
Mr. Mandel. I have here two telegrams from the files of the Insti-
tute of Pacific Relations. One is addressed to Edward C. Carter,
dated "September 3, 1940," signed "Herbert Biberman," and the other
is addressed to Edward C. Carter, dated "September 3, 1940," signed
"Fred."
Senator O'Conor. Mr. Morris, what is the source of those?
Mr. Mandel. They both come from the files of the Institute of
Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. The one telegram from Herbert Biberman, addressed
to Edward C. Carter on September 3, 1910, says :
Exhibit No. 626
Beg you to make it easy for Fred Field to accept new position with American
Peace Mobilization. Warmest personal regards.
It is signed "Herbert Biberman."
The other telegram, signed "Fred," reads :
Have accepted job but sincerely trust no publicity. Going Washington today
address Washington Hotel. Hope see you New York, Thursday.
Mr. Field, will you look at those two telegrams and answer whether
the second telegram was in fact sent by you ? [Handing to witness.]
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
Mr. Field. Mr. Morris. I decline to answer that question on the
grounds previously stated.
Mr. Morris. As to whether or not this telegram was sent by you ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4051
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, the first telegram is the telegram from
Biberman to Carter but it relates to the second telegram. 1 was won-
dering if you will, under the circumstances, accept both of those into
the record.
Senator O'Conor. Well, as to the probative force of it, I do not
think it is quite clear. Certainly there is nothing as yet bearing on
the witness, but as coming from the records of the Institute of Pacific
Relations it will be admitted to that extent.
Mr. Morris. Yes.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 626'' and
was read in full.)
Mr. Morris. I would like, ordinarily, Mr. Chairman, since there is
an indication here that Mr. Biberman was influential or instrumental
in having Mr. Field accept the position with the American Peace
Mobilization, to institute a series of questions on that, but if Mr. Field
declines to answer anything about Mr. Biberman, I think we have to
discontinue that.
Senator O'Conor. All right, you may proceed.
Mr. Morris. Is that correct, that you will not answer any questions
in connection with Mr. Biberman ?
Mr. Field. I have already claimed the privilege with respect to
Mr. Biberman.
Senator O'Conor. You are entitled to know what the questions are,
if 3'ou so desire.
Mr. Field. I don't like to make a blanket statement, but I have so
far used the privilege.
Mr. Morris. Was Mr. Biberman instrumental in causing you to take
a position with the American Peace Mobilization?
Mr. Field. I do decline to answer that question, Mr, Morris, on the
same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Will you give us the circumstances surrounding what-
ever effort Mr. Biberman did make to have you go to the American
Peace Mobilization ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on
the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, will you tell us your recollection of what
the people in the Institute of Pacific Relations did when it became
known to them that you were going to accept a position with the
American Peace Mobilization ? I mean, presenting to the world and
to the council the news of your being a member of the American Peace
Mobilization Dresented a Droblem to them, did it not ?
Mr. Field. May I have a moment, Mr. Chairman?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, indeed.
(Mr. Field confers with his comisel.)
Mr. Field. Mr. Morris, what I am looking for is the record which
is appended to the proceedings of my previous appearance here which
contains certain statements relating to the question you have just
asked.
Mr. Morris. Yes. And, Mr. Field, in that connection here is a
letter apparently from Mr. Jessup to Mr. Carter which discusses a
statement you may have made at that time. That may aid you in
your recollection. [Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. ]Mr. Morris, I feel that the records with respect to this
matter have already been made public, and I have read them, and it
seems to me that they do describe the circumstances
4052 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. This one is not in the record yet, Mr. Field, the one
I handed you. This is a letter from Philip Jessup to Edward C.
Carter and it says :
I don't really think we can use Fred's statement as it is, much as I would
be glad to help him with his cause. How about a combination of the two,
something like this.
Apparently that indicates that you did make a statement for the
institute, that you suggested that they release, and apparently Mr.
Jessup didn't like that one and wanted to make a compromise on that.
1 was wondering whether you could give us any testimony along
those lines ?
Mr. Field. I cannot give you any testimony as to what Mr. Jessup
did or what he wrote Mr. Carter, no, Mr. Morris.
I do agree that the circumstances, insofar as I know them with
respect to this question, are indicated in these documents that have
been made public already and are appended to my own appearance
here at page 122 and I guess 123, too.
Mr. Morris. So you can give no testimony bearing on this letter?
Mr. Field. No, I cannot.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, we have here the difficulty of whether
or not we should accept this into the record at this time or whether we
should have Mr. Jessup or Mr. Carter acknowledge the authenticity
of it.
Senator O'Conor. Of course I do not think the groundwork has
been laid sufficiently for its introduction at this time.
Mr. Morris. If the witness had recalled that he had ever seen it,
it might be. So Mr. Chairman, may this be submitted to the at-
torney for Mr. Carter who has appeared before this committee and
has indicated that he would acknowledge the authenticity of things
addressed to Mr. Carter or written by Mr. Carter together with Mr.
Holland and other witnesses?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, that would be in order, but its introduction
at this time is not.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, in that connection, I offer you this next
letter and ask you if that recalls any particular episode to you?
[Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. Mr. Morris, I have claimed the privilege with respect
to questions related to the American Peace Mobilization, and I must
continue to do so. I have, however, just a moment ago endeavored
to go as far as I felt I could in discussing surrounding circumstances.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify this letter, please?
Mr. Mandel. This is an original letter on the letterhead of the
American Peace Mobilization, lllG Vermont Avenue NW., Wash-
ington, D. C, dated December 19, 1940, addressed to Edward C.
Carter, Institute of Pacific Eelations, and signed "Fred" with the
typed signature of Frederick V. Field. The document is taken from
the files of the Institute of Pacific Eelations.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember having written that article?
Mr. Field. No, I have no recollection.
Senator O'Conor. That letter ?
Mr. Field. I haven't heard the letter, I don't know.
Mr. Morris. I showed it to you a minute ago. [Handing to wit-
ness.]
Mr. Field. I have already claimed the privilege on this.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4053
Mr. INIoRRis. Mr. Chairman, under the circumstances, will you re-
ceive that into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, it will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 627" and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 627
Rev. John B. Thompson, Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Executive Secretary ; Marion
Briggs, Administrative Secretary
American Peace Mobilization
1116 Vermont Avenue NW. Washington, D. C. Republic 7965
December 19, 1940.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, Neio York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Carter : Thank you for seuding me the copy of your December 14th
letter to Phil Jessup in which you suggest that ways should be found for using
his ten-point program presented at the end of our Princeton discussion. Without
at the moment making any suggestions as to how the document can be used, I
should like to make two comments regarding my own degree of support of the
program outlined.
One of the points calls for an immediate armistice between China and Japan.
I gathered from the few remarks that were made a number of those present at
Princeton interpreted this as meaning that a status quo arrangement would be
made, with the Japanese armies and otlier officials remaining in their present
positions in occupied China pending the negotiations of a permanent arrange-
ment. I would not agree to this. The program at this point would have my
support only if it specifically called for an armistice based on a complete with-
drawal of Japane>^e troops and other pressure groups from China, including
IManchuria. Or, if you prefer, I would base the terms of the armistice with respect
to the degree of Japanese withdrawal on whatever arrangement was acceptable
to the Chinese government.
The second point has to do with the part of Jessup's program calling for imme-
diate steps in the direction of liberating the colonial possessions in Eastern Asia.
To have my support this point would have to be made more specific so as to
include certain conditions regarding time, rate of liberation, circumstance under
which the liberation would take place, etc. I should also like it to be perfectly
clear whether the phrase "colonies" used in Jessup's recommendations includes
Korea and Formosa, and particularly whether it included Singapore, Hongkong,
Guam, Samoa, and other military outposts.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Fred,
Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Hilda Austern ?
Mr. Field. Yes; I do know her.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Nat Bretholtz ?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I do.
Mr. Morris. Did you, in the summer of 1938, turn over your apart-
ment to the use of Mr. and JNIrs. Nat Bretholtz — that is, in 1938 ?
Mr. Field. Yes. What was the address of my apartment ? Do you
remember ?
( Document handed to M. Field. )
M. Field. I apparently did ; yes.
Mr. Morris. Is that Hilda Austern ?
Mr. Field. That is correct.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember writing this letter to Mr. Gibbs?
Mr. Field. I haven't read it, but I am perfectly willing to acknowl-
edge the likelihood. That apparently is my letter.
Mr. Morris. Will you read that letter, Mr. Field?
Mr. Field (reading) :
4054 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 628
(Attention Mr. Gibbs.)
24 West 55th Street,
lieio York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Gibbs : I have invited friends — •
This is written from San Francisco, June 20, 1938 —
to occupy my apartment No. 11-F during the summer, as I shall unfortunately
have to remain in San Francisco. I have already given them a key to the apart-
ment, and I am sending them a copy of this letter.
Sincerely yours,
Mr. Morris. Mrs. Nat Bretholtz is Hilda Austern ?
Mr. Field. She was.
Mr. Morris. She was an official of the IPR, was she not?
Mr. Field. She was on the staff.
Mr. Morris. She was treasurer or assistant treasurer?
Mr. Field. Assistant treasurer. She was the bookkeeper.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify that letter?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a carbon copy from the files of
the Institute of Pacific Relations, dated June 20, 1948, air mail,
addressed "Attention Mr. Gibbs," 24 West Fifty- fifth Street, New
York, N. Y., with the typed signature of Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Will you receive that into the record?
Senator O'Conor. It will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 628" and was
read in full.)
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify that letter, please?
Mr. Mandel. This is an original of a memorandum from the files
of the Institute of Pacific Relations dated December 3, 1936, headed
"FVF fi-om ECC."
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, can you tell us what your dealings have been
with the following people : Colonel Stimson, Fred Osborn, Russell
Leffingwell, Frank McCoy? You will testify about those people, will
you not ?
Mr. Field. I believe ; yes ; I think — I would like to see the list again.
Colonel Stimson is obviously the former Secretary of State.
Mr. Morris. I wonder if you would read that whole letter for us.
Mr. Field (reading) :
Exhibit No. 629
FVF from ECC.
This is addressed to me, apparent l}- a memorandum, not a letter.
Mr. Morris. That is right.
Mr. Field. It is dated December 3, 1936 [reading] :
Herewith I return Chamberlain's letter. IMy recommendations are as follows :
1. That yon refrain from pressing Chamberlain.
2. That we drop the idea at this time of roping in Colonel Stimson, but that
at the right time, if he has not already contributed, you make a financial appeal
to him.
3. That in the last fortnight of December, either at your instance or mine, I
have a long talk with Fred Osb(n'n to follow up your initial approach. Please
let me know which of us should take the initiative.
4. That if we get Osborn moving along a little further we reconsider the
possibility of a Leffingwell, McCoy, Osborn meeting with or without Stimson.
It might be better to have Baker present instead of Stimson.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4055
Mr. Chairman, tliis obviously is a memorandum referring to per-
sistent efforts at that time to raise funds for the organization and
refers to one of these plots that are concocted in an office to get certain
people together and get contributions from them.
Mr. Morris. Does it not indicate to you that you were trying to
influence their political thinking?
Mr. Field. It most certainly does not. This is most obviously a
letter to endeavor to rope Colonel Stimson in, to make a financial ap-
peal to him.
Mr, Morris. Will you read the next sentence, please ?
Mr. Field (reading) :
That in the last fortnight of December, either at your instance or mine, I have
a long talk with Fred Osborn to follow up your initial approach.
Mr. Morris. Continue, please.
Mr. Field (reading) :
Please let me know which of us should take the initiative.
Mr. Morris. Continue, please.
Mr. Field (reading) :
That if we get 0.sl)orn moving along a little further we reconsider the possibil-
ity of a Leffingwell, McCoy, Osborn meeting with or without Stimson. It might
be better to have Baker present instead of Stimson.
Mr. Morris. Is it your testimony that that is in connection with the
fund-raising and not with the
Mr. Field. Very clearly and obviously, and I would like to make
that clearer to your original question, what my relations to those men
were. Mr. Leffingwell is or was a partner in J. P. Morgan. I believe
at the time he was chairman.
Mr. Morris. He is chairman of the board now.
Mr. Field. I think he is now chairman of the board. And McCoy
is General McCoy, obviously. Fred Osborn was formerly a member,
American member, of the U. N. Atomic Commission. I had known
Mr. Osborn because he is related to me, and I approached him to try
and get his interest in the institute. General McCoy, I had known
for a long time because of his own responsibilities in the Far East and
his membership in the League of Nations mission that went to Man-
churia, the 'name of which escapes me at the moment. He was the
American member of that.
I don't believe I knew Mr. Leffingwell myself, and I don't believe I
ever met Mr. Stimson except, perhaps, at some public gathering.
Mr. JNIoRRis. Mr. Chairman, will that memorandum be received into
the record?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes ; that will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 629" and was
read in full.)
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, was it a practice of yours when you were
Secretary of the Institute of Pacific Relations to send IPR materiaj
to people high in Government ?
Mr. Field. Yes ; it was.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us the purpose of that practice?
Mr. Field. It was inherent in the purpose of the organization it-
self, as a research and educational body which tried to spread its find-
ings as widely among the American people as it could, and did so as
4056 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
far as it was able in all groups, all kinds of levels of the American
population.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify these three letters.
Mr. Makdfx. These are photostats of documents from the files of
the Institute of Pacific Relations. First we have a photostat of a,
carbon cojiy of a letter dated October 27, 1938, addressed to Mr. Henry
Morgenthau, Secretary of the Treasury Department, Washington,
D. C, with the typed signature of Frederick V. Field.
Next we have a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter dated October
27, 1938, addressed to Hon. J. C. Grew, with the typed signature of
Frederick V. Field.
Then we have a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter dated October
27, 1938, addressed to Hon. Nelson T. Johnson, with the typed signa-
ture of Frederick V. Field. In each case the title of secretary is below
the name of Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, can you remember sending those three let-
ters? [Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. Mr. Morris, I don't recall. I don't have a real recol-
lection of any correspondence dating that far back. It seems to me
clear that these are letters, and I certainly would acknowledge that
they are the kind of letters that I most likely sent out, and these prob-
ably were or are copies of such letters.
Mr. Morris. And it was in line with the practice of sending, in
this case, reports to high officials in the United States Government.
Mr. Field. And all others. It is quite clear a selection here has
been made to pick out certain Government officials. You will find
similar letters in the files to non-Government officials.
Mr. Morris. Does this represent a selection, or were these three
letters found together, Mr. Mandel ? Do you recall ?
Mr. Mandel. These were found together. You will notice they
are all of the same date. It is evidently a circular letter that was sent
to the three individuals, and perhaps others.
Mr. Morris. But that was not a selection on 3^our part from the
group ?
Mr. Mandel. No ; it was not a selection on our part.
Mr. Morris. Ma}^ these go into the record?
Senator O'Conor. They will be received.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No, 630" and
are as follows:)
( Pencilled : ) Farley-Amco. Far Eastern Policy
New York, N. Y., October 27, 1938.
Mr. Henry Morgenthau,
Secret aril of the Treasury Department,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Morgenthau : We are sending: you a copy of "American Far Eastern
Policy and the Sino-Japanese War," a report of the seven discussion conferences
held under the auspices of the American Council in the spring of 1938. A
similar series of meetings is to be held during the winter on "The United States
and the Post-War Situation in the Pacific."
We should appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have regarding
this report.
Very sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field, Secretary.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4057
(Pencilled:) Farley- Amoo. Far Eastern Policy
New York, N. Y., October 27, 1938.
Hon. Nelson T. Johnson,
The Embassy of the United States,
Peiping, China.
My Dear Ambassador: We are sending you a copy of "American Far Eastern
Policy and the Sino-Japanese War," a report of the seven discussion conferences
held under the auspices of the American Council in the spring of 1938. A similar
series of meetings is to be held during the winter on "The United States and
the Post-War Situation in the Pacific."
We should appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have regarding
this report.
Very sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field, Secretary.
New York, N. Y., October 27, 1938.
Hon. J. C. Grew,
American Embassy, Tokyo, Japan.
My Dear Ambassador : We are sending you a copy of "American Far Eastern
Policy and the Sino-Japanese War," a report of the seven discussion conferences
held under the auspices of the American Council in the spring of 1938. A similar
series of meetings is to be held during the winter on "The United States and the
Post-War Situation in the Pacific."
We should appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have regarding
this report.
Very sincerely yours,
Fredehick V. FXEI.D, Secretary.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Chen Han-seng. Mr. Field ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on the
grounds previously employed.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Chen Han-seng when he was at the
Institute of Pacific Kelations?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that on the same grounds.
Mr. jSIorris. Mr. IMandel, will you identify this letter, please ?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a letter from the files of the
Institute of Pacific Relations. It is addressed from 57 Post Street,
October 19, 1937, addressed to Mr. Chen Han-seng, Institute of
Pacific Relations, and is signed with the typed signature of Frederick
V. Field, this being a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter from the
files of the Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. Mr- Field, I offer you this letter and ask you if you
can recall having written that to Mr. Chen Han-seng? [Handing to
witness.]
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on the
grounds previously stated.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive this into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, as a part of the records of the Institute of
Pacific Relations.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 631,-' and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 631
(Written in) (CHEN)
57 Post Street, October 19, 1937.
Mr. Chen Han-seng,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East Fifty-second Street, New York City.
Dear Han-seng : Your analysis of the Japanese super-Cabinet is very excellent
indeed and a great help to me who did not know the background of all the people
4058 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
inA-olved. You are, of course, quite right as to trends in that country. I cannot
make up my mind whether Japan is a great deal stronger than we like to believe
or not. It seems to me that historically people have always been inclined to
underestimate the toughness of countries in that situation. This was certainly
true of Germany in 1914. My guess is that unless we blockade Japan's trade, we
shall not find any crack-up of her social or economic structure taking place for a
very long time.
I wonder what your thouglits are on the conduct of the Chinese defense? I am
still greatly disturbed by the absence of any drastic shakeup in the Nanking
Government. I am afraid that if this war lasts a long time, we are in for a
great deal of internal difficulty in China. This is always what happens when
you have at the head people who do not have the guts or conviction to clean out
their opponents in a crisis. I am also worried about the enormous effort the
Chinese are putting into positional warfare in Shanghai. In view of the fact
that the trade of Shanghai and therefore the customs receipts have presumably
stopped anyway, it does not seem to me that it is very much to fight for. While
it is quite true that had Japan taken Shanghai easily and then marched up the
Yangtze River to Nanking in the first few weeks of the war Chinese morale might
have collapsed all over the country. The first defense of the Shanghai positions
was, therefore, an essential political move on the part of the Chinese Government.
I wonder, though, if this defense has not gone much too far and whether it is not
now merely a waste of men and war materials, the latter being so difficult to
replace. Personally, I should like to see much more efficient Chinese troop
movement in the North to support the 8th Route Army in its guerrilla tactics.
I am not at all certain about my views on Shanghai, though, and if you have a
spare moment or two sometime I wish you would straighten me out.
I have sent Bill Lockwood by the same mail a long letter regarding our research
program and I should be grateful if you would, take a look at it. It may, I think,
be possible for us to organize a fairly large study into the whole war situation.
We could, I think, make a sufficiently penetrating analysis of the internal scenes
in both China and Japan to provide a large part of the explanation as to why
this war has occurred. Tlie disturbing thing is that once we make that sort
of an analysis — it has, after all, been made repeatedly although not exhaustively
with respect to both countries — nobody acts upon it. I should say, for instance,
that it was perfectly clear what has been happening in Germany or Italy, as well
as in Japan, but this seems to me to have very little effect on the policies of
foreign countries.
Thank you, also, for a copy of the original draft of the review of Harry Cannes'
book. I am sorry that Jaffe refused to use it in AMERASIA. If I had been
there, I should have been inclined to argue the point, although I think I under-
stand why he felt it would not be good policy. My point of argument would
have been that if our friends write liad books, we should expose them. Nothing
can hurt the things in which we are interested so much as sloppy work.
Sincerely yours,
FREajERiCK V. Field.
FVF rb
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, just so that you will know what some
of these are about I would like to say this. I know it must be an
awfully dull hearing under the circumstances, but I assure you it is
very difficult to conduct an examination under these circumstances.
This reads :
Your analysis of the Japanese supercabinet is verj^ excellent indeed and a great
help to me who did not know the background of all the people involved. You
are, of course, quite right as to the trends in that country. I cannot make up
my mind whether Japan is a great deal stronger than we like to believe or not.
It seems to me that historically the people have always been inclined to under-
estimate the toughness of countries in that situation.
The purpose of introducing this into the record would be to ask Mr.
Field to testify as to the source of the information and the practice in
which he engaged at the time of exchanging information with Chen
Han-seng, but apparently we can get nowhere on that line of question-
ing, Mr. Chairman.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4059
Senator O'Conor. It is obvious that the witness will not testify in
regard to this, and I do not see any purpose in pursuing that line of
inquiry any further.
Mr. JNIoRRis. In the exchange of correspondence between Mr. Field
and Mr. Chen Han-seng a letter from Chen Han-seng reads :
Dear Fred : Herev/ith I enclose a copy of an interesting document, which please
share with Owen. I don't think it is advisable to show it to anyone else.
The document was mailed to me in Chinese from Hankow. It was originally
presented to Chiang Kai-shek confidentially, and as I understand it, Chiang has
accepted many major points for decisive reform in the light of this presentation.
Even in abstract form it is interesting because it shows both China's strength,
which is potential, and China's weakness which we have reason to believe is
transitory.
Then the related document is marked "Private and confidential,"
dated the I7th of June 1938.
I will ask the witness if he can recall having seen the letter from
Chen Han-seng to him or the accompanying report. [Handing to
witness.]
]Mr. Field. Mr. Morris, I decline to answer on the grounds previ-
ously stated.
Senator O'Conor. AYould you identify, or are you disposed to make
any reference at all to the word "Owen" in here or as to the inclusion
of that reference ?
Mr. Field. I am willing to do so in the abstract, but not with
reference to that letter.
Senator O'Conor. In the abstract.
Mr. Field. In the abstract, if I emjDloyed the word "Owen" it was
most likely to relate to Owen Lattimore.
Senator O'Conor. I meant to refer to it without reference to its
being embodied in that communication.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify that last document, please, Mr,
Mandel?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of an original letter from the files
of the Institute of Pacific Kelations on a letterhead marked 129 East
Fifty-second Street. It is dated July 20, 1938, addressed to Mr.
Frederick V. Field and signed Chen' Han-seng. Attached thereto
is a memorandum marked "Private and confidential," dated June 17,
1938. Chen Han-seng's name is in the upper right-hand corner. It
is headed "Abstract from a joint-report of the Chinese journalists
on the Tientsin-Pukow war front, regarding the points of weakness of
the Chinese Army at present."
IVIr. Morris. Will you receive that into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. 'Yes, it will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 632" and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 632
129 East 52nd Street,
'New York, 20th July, ]933.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
1793 California Street, San Francisco.
Dear Fred : Herewith I enclose a copy of an interesting document, which please
share with Owen. I don't think that it is advisable to show it to anyone else.
The document was mailed to me in Chinese from Hankow. It was originally
presented to Chiang Kai-shek confidentially, and as I understand it, Chiang has
accepted many major points for decisive reform in the light of this presentation.
Even in abstract form it is interesting because it shows both China's strength.
4060 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
which is potential, and China's weakness, which we have reason to believe is
transitory.
The people in China are laboring under a tremendous amount of corruption
and inefficiency, similar to that of the Czaristic regime. But considering their
poor heritage they are really doing well both politically and militarily. Chiang
Kai-shek is now very friendly to both the Chinese people and the Soviet Govern-
ment.
If you see Owen, you may tell him that his friend Freda Utley has excited
immense interest among my Chinese friends in Hong Kong and Hankow where
she arrived by plane on July 9th. She will return to England two months from
now.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Han-seng
Chen Han-sbng.
[Private and confidential]
(Written in:) CHEN, Han-seng
17th June 11)38.
Abstract From a Joint Eepokt of the Chinese Joxjbnalists on the Tientsin-
PuKow War Front, Regarding the Points of Weakness of the Chinese ^^jimy
AT Present
1. RELATING TO THE MILITARY PROBLEM IN GENEBAL
1. Relating to strategic matters
(a) Overrespect for public opinion. Some commanding officers try to win the
support of public opinion to the extent that they often neglect what is really
advantageous from military viewpoints. To this end, the desire for popularity
exceeds the realisation of the necessity for general cooperation and often leads
to unnecessary sacrifices.
(b) The inadequate application of the scorched-earth policy. Some troops try
to hold an obviously untenable position ; and, when they finally have to withdi-aw,
they have no time to destroy what may be utilised by the enemy. The Tsa-chuang
coal mine in Shantung and the railray tracks near Hsuchow are two cases in
point.
2. Relating to the troops themselves
(a) The bogging of commanding officers in administrative affairs. In the
majority of cases the organisation of staff people is incomplete, hence the com-
manding officer is bogged down by miscellaneous administrative affairs. Military
mistakes are often due to lack of preparation and thought.
(b) The commanding officers do not have the spirit of learning from ex-
perience. The high commanding officers are still indifferent to learning lessons
from the most precious and costly experience of their subordinate officers on the
battlefield.
(c) Lack of encouragement to the soldiers and lower officers. Rewards and
promotions are far from being sufficient for this purpose.
(d) The commanding officers do not adequately realise their responsibilities.
There i.« a, strong tendency on the part of some commanding officers to fight to
the finish at critical moments, instead of obeying their superior's orders to carry
out other instructions. There is a general idea of glory in fighting to the death,
which is not a true realisation of carrying out their responsibilities.
(e) Poor intelligence service. The intelligence work itself is incomplete,
partly because of material insufficiency but also partly because of the poor
personnel. The crucial point is that the troops have not sufficiently utilized
the people in general for intelligence service— a point which the Japanese can-
not take advantage and of which the Chinese have not fully done.
(f) Poor political training among the troops. Generally speaking, the po-
litical workers in the troops (the 8th Route Army excepted) are still puppets
of the commanding officers. Among the troops there are heaps of dry-cut military
orders, but educational measures are still very rare. In some troops there has
not been a single lecture given since the beginning of the fighting.
3. Relating to recruiting
(a) In numerous cases able-bodied peasants have been illegally bound with
ropes and thus forced into military service. There is still, therefore, a lot of
resentment among the new soldiers.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4061
(b) The organizations for training new soldiers need to be completely re-
formed ; otherwise the training of new soldiers will always I'emain poor.
(c) The treatment of the new soldiers is of the most miserable kind. The
Szechwan soldiers fighting in the Hsuchow area still wear padded cotton uni-
forms, and their monthly allowance is several months in arrears. The con-
stant change of commanding officers and the squeeze system from one layer
to another still operates to crush the spirit of the new soldiers.
Ji. Relating to the problem of blockhouses
(a) During the years of the anti-Communist campaigns, many provincial
authorities have built up numerous blockhouses originally designed by General
Von Seckt. It was useful to the Nanking troops whose weapons were superior
to the Red Army to set-up such blockhouses, but now these same blockhouses are
useful only to the Japanese whose weapons are superior. Once the Japanese
get hold of them, it is advantageous to the Japanese, both in offensive and on the
defensive. The Chinese troops could have reached Tsinan after their victory
in Taiehrchuang had it not been for the blockhouses in the southern part of
Shantung, which had been occupied by the Japanese. It is obvious, therefore,
that the blockhouses must be destroyed before the enemy captures them.
II. RELATING TO THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL MOBILISATION
1. Relating to civil administration in the war area
There is a lack of unity of administration in the war area ai'ound Hsuchow.
While General Li Tsung-jen was the commanding officer of the fifth war area —
Hsuchow is its center — his orders to the civilians never took effect. The old
system of local "pao chia" simply cannot cope with wartime political functions.
2. Relating to mass mobilisation
(a) Mass mobilisation committees (the territory covered by the 8th Route
army excepted) so far only exist in name. Party prejudices have worked against
the actual functioning. Those appointed by- the authorities simply have no idea
whatsoever of mass mobilisation.
(b) The real masses still remain untouched as far as mobilisation goes. For
instance, there are 30,000 to 40,000 railway workers on the Tsienpu and Kiaotsi
lines, 40,000 to 50,000 coal miners in Shantung, and numerous peasants in the
war zone eager to participate, but so far without any direction.
III. RELATING TO THE PROBLEMS IN THE REAR
1. War refugees
Until now the war refugees have not been taken care of, and their free and
unregulated movements cannot but affect the people both on the war front and
behind the lines, and furthermore create an additional burden for the govern-
ment. Any relief of a passive and negative nature cannot cope with this prob-
lem and must ultimately disappoint the refugees. If this problem is not properly
handled, therefore, it will objectively be giving the enemy a good chance to utilize
the situation. From now on a positive policy must be adopted which must de-
mand as its maxim that the refugees should return to their home places. Before
they are sent back, however, they must be given an adequate training, both
political and technical, so that vv-hen they return they will be organised to take
up activities against the enemy. The present relief funds can be used' f dr sending
them back.
2. Wounded soldiers
The miserable treatment of the wounded soldiers at present is partly due to
inadequate supply of medicine and medical workers but is also partly due to the
inefficiency and corruption among governmental officials whose duties are for
public health administration.
IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Based upon common and accurate observations described above, the following
four items are deemed to be of immediate necessity :
1. Intensification of the spirit of national resistance. Everybody should be
told and have explained that there is no possibility of halfway measures in the
matter of war and that before the final victory it is impossible to hope for one's
88348— 52— pt. 12 3
4062 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
individual future. Only in this way can opportunism, indifference, and factional
strife be eliminated.
2. Thorough mobilisation of the masses. The power of the masses is un-
limited, but they must be organised. Mere decrees and posters will not do. With-
out real strength for organisation, there will be no result.
3. Further and better organisation of political and military administrations,
(a) The relations between political parties must be legalised and systematised
to avoid unnecessary frictions, (b) the existing "pao chia" system for local
defense must be improved by increasing its finance and by improvements in
staff work. This can easily be achieved by reducing the number of higher
officials and also by appointing new and efficient workers, (c) More emphasis
should be laid on the organisation of general staff work in the troops.
4. More emphasis on political work. As political work is the basic soul of all
organisation, both civil and military activities, especially under emergency,
require discipline and I'esoluteness. This can only be achieved by intensifying
and widening political work everywhere. Without such political work it is
difficult to eradicate the present corruption in officialdom.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, did you make any effort to amalgamate your
activities in the Institute of Pacific Relations with those of the movie
industry in any way ?
Mr. Field. I guess the word "amalgamate" is a little confusing.
Mr. Morris. Integrate.
Mr, Field. I have no doubt that I made every effort to try and
raise some funds in Hollywood in any connection that we may have
had.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Manclel, will you identify this document, please?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter from
the files of the Institute of Pacific Relations dated September 25,
1939, addressed to Miss Margaret R. Taylor, care of Miss Eloise
Requa, Library of International Relations, 8G East Randolph Street,
Chicago, 111., and it has a typed signature of Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, can you recall having written that letter?
Here is an extra copy that I think will be easier to read. [Handing
to witness.]
Mr. Field. I do not recall the letter, Mr. Morris, but generally it
does refresh my memory as to the kind of thing we were trying to do.
Mr. Morris. "Will you tell us about that ?
Mr. Field. From the evidence itself, or tlie letter, I managed to
reach Mr. Frederick March on the long-distance telephone, and he
seems to have made a very favorable impression on me, at the same
time not making it possible for me to visit him. And I convey to
Miss Taylor certain suggestions he made of people who should be
seen on the west coast.
Mr. Morris. Who is Marion Sister?
Mr. Field. Her name means nothing to me. She is here described
as of the Hollywood Anti-Nazi League.
Mr. Morris. Are you acquainted with the Hollywood Anti-Nazi
League ?
Mr. Field. No ; I wasn't. I have heard about it, but I knew noth-
ing personally about it.
Mr. Morris. You will notice down in the next paragraph — go ahead,
Mr. Field.
Mr. Field. I would like to continue. In this letter I probably con-
veyed to Miss Taylor that Mr. ^Nlarch had suggested trying to get in
touch with Mr. Melvyn Douglas, who Avas the active secretary or
director of something that sounded over the j^hone like the Motion
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4063
Picture Democratic Committee, about which I know nothing at all.
He suggested the Motion Picture Artists Committee, in connection
with which I seemed to haA^e written down two names, John Stewart
and Charles Page. At the moment, ]Mr. Morris, neither of those names
means anything to me at all. All through the conversation he kept
mentioning the name of Biberman, but in what connection I cannot
recall.
Mr. ^loKHis. Is that the Biberman we have been talking about?
jNIr. Field. I don't know, but from the evidence here I didn't know
his name, and I say here, which is very familiar, but in what connection
I cannot recall.
Mr. Morris. Do you know any man by that name?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds previ-
ously stated. Apparently I didn't at that time know any such person,
as it would seem to be clear.
Mr. Morris. Will you read the next sentence ?
Mr. Field (reading) :
According to March, Biberman is mixed up in every organization in Hollywood,
so that it is quite likely that he is Joe Stalin's personal representative.
Mr. Morris. Is that the same ^Ir. Biberman that you refused to
testify about ?
Mr. Field. I haven't the slightest idea, and obviously that is not
a sentence which is of careful political formulation.
Had I been talking face to face with March, I would have told him that it was
unwise for organizations like ours to work exclusively through these left-wing
Hollywood groups.
Mr. Morris. What did you mean by "left-wing Hollywood groups" ?
Mr. Field. Do you want me to read that sentence, Mr. Morris?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes. I think it is only fair.
Mr. Field (reading) :
Had I been talking face to face with March, I would have told him that it
was unwise for organizations like ours to work exclusively through the left-
wing Hollywood groups. It is quite possible that he would have replied that you
have to work through them or not work at all, because they represent the only
socially active people out there. You will have to find out about this on the
spot. It has just occuri-ed to me that my cousin Shirley Burden. Bill Burden's
brother, is married to Douglas Fairbanks' niece — a marriage, I may say, on
which the Fairbanks family frowned but which was greeted from my end in the
hopes that it would revitalize the palpably growing decadence. In any case, this
may be a way by which to get in touch with the Fairbanks family. Burden him-
self has a show of his own, doing educational pictures. I am told that he is a
really first-rate cameraman (incidentally, he did his apprenticeship under
Marion Cooper, to whom you have a letter). I have never met his wife, but I
am told that she is a right nice gal. I doubt if you can get money from Shirley,
but you might try. I imagine that his business runs at a big deficit.
And I give the address. Do you want me to go on?
Mr. ]\Iorris. I would like to ask a few questions.
Mr. Field. All right.
Mr. ^loRRis. What did you mean when you said that it would be
unwise for organizations like yours, the Institute of Pacific Relations,
to work exclusively through the left-wing Holh^wood groups?
Mr. Field. I didn't say that. The letter states
Mr. Morris. It is vour letter, is it not?
4064 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. I told you earlier, I have no recollection of it, but I
cei'tainly don't deny that it might have been and probably was.
The letter states :
Had I been talking face to face with March, I would have told him that it was
unwise for organizations like ours to work exclusively through these left-wing
Hollywood groups.
I engaged in a hypothetical conversation which never took place be-
tween March and myself.
Mr. Morris. You did refer, however, to these left-wing Hollywood
groups clearly in reference to the groups that you have been talking
about ?
Mr. Field. In the context it would seem that way.
Mr. Morris. Is there anything else you can tell us about that let-
ter, Mr. Field?
Mr. Field. No; there isn't. One thing is that, as I recall, we
got practically nothing out of these eif orts.
Senator O'Conor. ISIr. Field, there is mentioned parenthetically
there the name of Marion Cooper.
Mr. Field. Yes.
Senator O'Conor. I recall that that name was mentioned in con-
nection with your application for a commission in the Army, and I
wondered whether it was the same person.
Mr. Field, I remember reading that. Wasn't it his brother who
had interviewed me? His brother was in some academic connection.
I believe it was in that connection.
Senator O'Conor. There is a letter signed "Fred" and addressed
to E. C. Connor of February 18, 1942, stating, "Someone suggested
the other day that Marion Cooper, our friend Jolm Cooper's brother,
was fairly high up in the Army Intelligence."
Mr. Field. It is the other way around ; yes. I don't think that is
the same
Senator O'Conor. I was wondering whether there was a connection
between the two.
Mr. Morris. It is a different name.
Mr. Field. It is a different one. This Marion Cooper was a movie
director who was a brother of a John Cooper who was associated
with the institute who is a businessman; he was president of a com-
pany.
Senator O'Conor. I wondered whether there was any relation,
either family or otherwise.
Mr. Field. I must say I don't know, but I don't think it is the same
person.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, did you know E. Herbert Norman?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I did.
Mr. Morris. What were your associations with E. Herbert Norman ?
Mr. Field. I knew him — he was a member or perhaps at some time
a staff member of the corresponding body in Canada, which I believe
was called the Canadian Institute of International Affairs, and I knew
him in that capacity, and in this way I would have known him in the
Royalist School of International Affairs in England or other corre-
sponding bodies.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet him in connection with your associa-
tion with the American Friends of the Chinese People?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4065
Mr. Field. I decline to answer on the premise previously stated.
Mr, Morris. Do you know whether he was a member of the Amer-
ican Friends of the Chinese People?
Mr. Fields. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify this letter, please, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. This is an original letter from the files of the Insti-
tute of Pacific Relations on the letterhead of the American council,
Institute of Pacific Relations, dated April 19, 1938, addressed to Mr.
Edward C. Carter and signed "Fred" with the typed signature of
Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, I offer you that letter and ask you if you
can recall having seen that ? [Ilanding to witness.]
Mr. Field. I am sorry. What was your question? Whether this
was my letter ?
Mr.'lSIoRRis, Yes.
Mr. Field. As in the case of these other letters, Mr. Morris, I don't
recall it, but it seems to be my signature.
Mr. Morris. Will you read the letter, Mr. Field?
Mr. Field. It is a letter tliat I might well have written [reading] :
Exhibit No. 633
San Francisco, April 19, 1938.
Dear Mr. Carter : I am clelightecl to learn that the RoekefeUer Foundation has
given E. H. Norman a third year on his fellow-ship and that they have assigned
him to your secretariat inquiry. He is an exceUent man. You will perhaps
have noticed from the very first issue of Amerasia up to the next to the last
issue that Jafte, Chi, and I have been making all possible use of him. You could
not have made a better clioice.
Sincerely yours,
Fred.
Mr. INIorris. Were you instrumental at all in securing the Rocke-
feller Foundation grant ?
Mr. Field, I don't know, I might have been. This was a period
when I was secretary on the American council. No, come to think
of it, I wouldn't have been, because he didn't come under our juris-
diction, being a Canadian, and I imagine that they handled it them-
selves.
Mr. Morris. In connection with the Association of American
Friends of the Chinese People, did it have an affiliate, the Canadian
Friends of the Chinese People ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viousl}' stated.
Mr. ]\ioRRis. Now, how active was Mr. Norman in the publication
Amerasia ?
Mr. Field. I would acknowledge any article you have listed in the
files. From this it seems that he wrote some articles. To answer
your question more precisely, if he did write some articles, and I as-
sume he did, that would be the limit of his association. I don't be-
lieve he was at any time a member of the board, but again I would
stand by the masthead.
Mr. Morris. You say "He is an excellent man. You will perhaps
have noticed from the very first issue of Amerasia up to the next to
the last issue that Jaffe, Chi, and I have been making all possible use
of him."
4066 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. That is tlie reason I say tliat I assume he had been
writing articles.
Mr. iNIoRRis. Do you know whether he used a pseudonym at all?
Mr. Field. I do not. I can't testify for Mr. Norman.
Mr. Morris. Do a'ou know as a matter of fact whether or not he
did?
Mr. Field. No.
Mr. Morris. You were the editor of the publication, were you not?
Mr. Field. I don't know, I assume he didn't. You probably have
the files. Let's look it up.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will the Margaret R. Taylor letter go
into the record?
Senator O'Conor. Yes; the original.
Mr. Morris. Yes; the original.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. G33 and
634." No. 633 was read in full; and 634 is as follows :)
Exhibit No. 634
[Air mail]
New York City, St'ijicnibi-r 25, liJS9.
Miss Margaret R. Taylor,
% Miss Eloise ReQtia,
Library of International Relations,
86 East Randolph Street, Cliicago, III.
Dear Margaret: For your information you will lind enclosed a brief report iu
which I have tried to note the progress or lack of it made in various lines we have
been trying to promote during the last few weeks.
I am sorry to say that the best I was able to do with Frederic March was a
very lengthy long-distance telephone conversation. He could not have been
more cordial but I naturally regret that I did not have a chance to sit down and
tell him in a great deal more detail than I could over the telephone what we were
driving at. It turned out that he was leaving with his wife on a motor trip lo
the South yesterday and, incidentally that I could not have seen him at the the-
ater if I had stayed over on Friday evening. Over the telephone he suggested
that we get in touch with Miss Marian Sister of the Hollywood Anti-Nazi League.
As my end of the conversation was held from my famous New Hartford party
line, I had a hell of a time getting names straight in spite of the fact that he
spelled each of them out. When you are in Hollywood, therefore, you will have
to garble names like Sister and see if you can get a precise reaction from any
informant you can find. March told me to use his name in api>roaching this lady,
that she was a close personal friend of his wife and himself, and that she knew
all the progressive people in the movie industry. He gave the impression that
we could count very heavily on her. I suggest, therefore, that you call on her
and find out what she has to suggest.
March also suggested that we get iu touch with Melvin Douglas who, he tells
me, is the active secretary or director of something that sounded over the phone
like the Motion Picture Democratic Committee. He also suggested tile Motion
Picture Artists Committee in connection with which I seem to have written down
two names, John Stewart and Charles Page. All through the conversation he
kept mentioning the name of Biberman — which is very familiar but in what con-
nection, I cannot recall. According to March, Biberman is mixed up in every
organization in Hollywood, so that it is quite likely that he is Joe Stalin's per-
sonal representative. Had I been talking face to face with March I would have
told .him that it was unwise for organizations like ours to work exclusively
through these left-wing Hollywood groups. It is quite iwssible that he would
have replied that you have to work through them or not work at all, because they
represent the oidy socially active people out there. You will have to find out
about this on the spot. It has just occurred to me that my cousin Shirley Burden,
P.ill Burden's brother, is married to r>ouglas Fairbanks' niece — a marriage, I may
say, on which the Fairbanks family frowned but which was greeted from my
end in the hopes that it would revitalize the jialpably growing decadence. In
any case, this may be a way by which to get in touch with the Fairbanks family.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS • 406Z
Burden himself has a show of his own, doing educational pictures. I am told
that he is a really first-rate cameraman (incidentally, he did his apprenticeship
under Marion Cooper to whom you have a letter). I have never met his wife but
I am told that she is a right nice gal. I doubt if you can gfet money from Shirley
hut you might try. I imagine that his business runs at a big deficit. Their
address is 930 vSeward Avenue, Hollywood. Use my name freely in trying to get
after him. I haven't seen him in 10 years but my brother Osgood sees him quite
frequently. You will find him a very nice, unintellectual guy and beautiful to
look at.
I am sending a copy of this letter on to Scott in the hope that he may run across
a few of these names and addresses for you before you reach Los Angeles and
thus help you get started a little faster.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
• Copy to Mr. Scott.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Chao Ting Clii ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds previ-
ously stated.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify this?
Mr. Field. Could I have just a moment on that last question ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, indeed.
Mr. Field. Which name did you ask me there?
Mr. Momis. Dr. Chi, Dr. Chao Ting Chi.
Mr. Field. What I want to do is, I think you asked me the same
question on my last appearance here.
Mr. MoRRis.*^ Yes.
Mr. Field. And I believe I acknowledged knowing him. If I did
then, I would certainly do so again at this time, but 1 would like to
verify whether I did. Do you remember from your personal know-
ledge whether I did ?
Mr. Morris. Yes, you discussed him at length.
Mr. Field. All right, so I knew him.
Mr. Morris. From some recent contact you had with him.
Mr. Field. So I knew him then. I won't use the privilege.
Mr. Maxdel. I have here a photostat of two documents from the
files of the Institute of Pacific Relations. One is a photostat of a
carbon copy of a letter dated April 20, 1938, air mail, addressed to Mr.
Edward C. Carter with the typed signature of Frederick V. Field.
The other is a Western Union telegram, a photostat of an original,
addressed to Frederick V. Field, signed Edward C. Carter, dated
April 19, 1938.
Mr. Morris. Are these taken from the files of the Institute of Pacific
Relations?
Mr. Maxdel. They are.
Mr. Morris. Tlie telegram signed by Mr. Edwai-d C. Carter was
directed to Mr. Frederick Y. Field and it reads :
Exhibit No. 635
Confidential if we should decide to send Chi to China for 5 mouths for inquiry
air mail me what topics in China outline you feel he could most usefully tackle.
Do you remember jNIr. Carter sending you this telegram ?
Mr. Field. No, I don't have any recollection of it.
Mr. Morris. Did you make use of Mr. Chi in your work in the work
of the Institute of Pacific Relations?
Mr. Field. He was never on the staff of the American council. On
that the answer to that is "No, I did not."
,4068 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. What is the reference to that Mr. Carter makes there ?
Mr. Field. He asked for 1113^ advice, apparently, on tlie nse to whicli
he in his capacity in the international organization presumably would
put Mr. Chi.
Mr. Morris. Now, this other letter is from you to Mr. Carter dated
April 20, 1938. I wonder if you will read the first few paragraphs
of that, Mr. Field?
Mr, Field. It is from San Francisco, April 20, 1938 [reading! :
Dear Mr. Carter: I am very glad indeed to learn from your nice letter re-
ceived tbis morning that you are considering sending Chi to China for 5 months
on behalf of the secretariat's inquiry.
That would be the International Secretariat —
I shall keep this matter confidential until you have made a decision, with the
exception, however, that I shall reveal it to Lattimore who has recently asked
me what Chi's plans were for the summer.
It happens that I can give you fairly definite suggestions as to the topics which
Chi could most usefully tackle because in another connection he has very re-
cently outlined three subjects which he is particularly interested to investigate
and with regard to which he feels qualified.
One of these subjects is a study of the economic and political process of
development of the southwestern provinces (Szechuan, Kweichow, and Yunnan)
from a regional entity into a part of a united China. As Chi describes it "this
will involve an investigation of the historical developments of this region, the
part it plays in the present war. and the inevitable transformation of the econ-
omy and politics of that region that is bound to occur as a result of the war."
You would, I imagine, want to cut down the historical aspect of this subject
and ask him to concentrate on very recent and current developments.
The second subject is a study of the socio-economic, political, and cultural
conditions in the Northwest with special reference to the prosecution and the
aftermath of the war.
The third subject involves a study of the changes in Chinese foreign trade
resulting from tlie war and a discussion of foreign trade policy from the point
of view of the interest of foreign traders as well as that of China's future
economic development.
All three of these subjects, it seems to me, fall within the scope of our staff
memorandum entitled "Outline for a Proposed Study of Chinese Political Uni-
fication and Economic Reconstruction, 1931-38." If I had not had these specific
interests of Chi's before me I would have replied to your telegram simply that
Chi should be asked to document the project on nearly all the subjects con-
tained in the outline. That is, indeed, what his own three suggestions amount
to, stated, however, in a more concrete form than I would have been able to do.
I hope most sincerely that this plan goes through and that, if it does, you
can arrange to have Chi stop over in San Francisco for at least a week on his
way out. I could then arrange to have him pick up information and documents
for the Economic Handbook project which we may have considerable difficulty
in securing in this country. I would, of course, undertake not to put such a load
on him that it would interfere with whatever instructions you give him.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Does that refresh your recollection on your dealings
with INIr. Chi ?
Mr. Field. On my dealings with Mr. Chi ?
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Field. No.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Chi help you in your Economic Handbook?
Mr. Field. No; I don't believe he did. I don't believe anything
ever came of that. I had another Chinese associate on the Handbook.
Mr. Morris. Who was that ?
Mr. Field. Mr. Liu Yu-wen.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4069
Mr. Morris. I offer you this extract from the New Masses, this re-
view in the New Masses, and ask you if you can recall that particular
review ?
Mr. Field. I don't recall the review itself, Mr. INIorris. I had a file
of all the reviews of this book, because I edited the book and naturally
kept all of the files with reviews I could find myself, but I don't
remember this particular one.
Mr. Morris. Who was that review by ?
Mr. Field. I don't know. It says John Phillips. I don't know.
Mr. Morris. You don't know who John Phillips is ?
Mr. Field. No ; I don't.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive this letter of Mv. Field's
to Mr. Chen Han-seng, the telegram, and the one to E. C. Carter into
the record ?
Senator O'Conor. Yes ; they will be admitted.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 635", read
in full above, "and 636," as follows:)
Exhibit No. 636
1795 Calitoknia Street,
San Francisco, March 28, 1938.
Mr. Chen Han-seng,
129 East Fifty-second Street. New York, N. Y.
Dear Han-seng : It was very good of you indeed, in reply to my wire of Marcli
12th, to prepare an article for Amerasia on the present military situation in
China. I had great pleasure in reading it and was particularly interested to
see your supplementary comments on the Information you received from
Hongkong.
Thank you for sending me the translation of the Eighth Eoute Army's oath
of loyalty. I agree with you that the developments which are taking place in
China are hastening a London-Tokyo rapprochement. As we all know, when a
united front of liberal elements in any country (whether it be Spain, France,*
or China) is organized, the tendency is for this united front to move to the left.
This is an inevitable development in that in each case the united front has been
led by the Communist Party which has, also in each case, furnished the most
able leadership. The result, naturally, is to crystallize the opposition. British
policy, if it has tried to do anything in the last several years, has been directed,
first, against the successful defense of Spain by the Government, second, in an
effort to break up the popular front in France and, third and most recently,
it is becoming alarmed at the success of the very processes which a year ago
it was advocating in China.
I have no inside dope on the London-Tokyo rapprochement, unless some ele-
mentary knowledge of the course of modern history can be regarded as inside
dope. Judging from the extraordinary ignorance of most of our statesmen
regarding the almost inevitable developments in the world, I am beginning to
think that this elementary knowledge is privileged information. In any case,
it is quite clear from all the evidence that the British Government wants to
make a deal with Japan for the mutual exploitation of Cliina and for mutual pro-
tection against a left-wing government being successful in emerging after the
far eastern war. I learned only today (although this has very likely been in the
New York papers) that the British Counselor of Embassy in China has spent the
last two weeks in Tokyo. I doubt if he is on vacation.
Just as Great Britain has been absolutely powerless to curb Japan, I rather
imagine that it will not be very effective in now supporting her. Though I think
that a London-Tokyo rapprochement emphasizes the danger to China I doubt
very much if it will materially weaken the present efforts of the Chinese Govern-
ment or strengthen tliose of the Japanese.
A more alarming international development which, I fear, may possibly have
eventual implications in the United States policy towards fascism and aggres-
sion is the recent development in Mexico. The expropriation of American oil
interests puts the question squarely up to the State Department whether or not
4070 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
it is actually going to siiinx)rt free and independent developments in Latin-Ameri-
can republics or whether it is to return to the more obvious phases of Monroe
r»octrine imperialism. Judging from the Government's first reaction, namely
the Treasury Department's move on silver, I am afraid that we are going to inter-
fere very seriously with what should be a purely domestic question in Mexico.
As I understand it, the Mexican Government has been entirely legal in expro-
priating its own oil lands, that is so long as they compensate the foreign inter-
ests. Our Government may criticize the methods employed, they may regard
it as too drastic, but it should be left at that, merely at the point of disagree-
ment. It should not be allowed to pass on to active intervention in the form
adopted by the Treasury Department. The reason that I fear this Mexican
development may have repercussions in other regions is that up to this time the
United States has been able to oppose fascism because it was taking place in
regions fairly remote from our borders. When the question is brought directly
to our back door we may, in what is supposed to be self-interest, take an opposite
course and oppose a fairly left-wing people's government with the result that
we shall gradually have to extend this attitude in your relations to other regions.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Mr. Morris. Will you receive this into the record, Mr. Chairnian?
Senator O'Conor. Wliich is this?
Mr. Morris. This is a review in the New Masses.
Senator O'Conor. Yes, this will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 637" and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 637
[New Ma.sses, August 14, 1934 : Review of Economic Handbook of the Pacific]
Dead Figures on the Pacific
(Economic Handbook of the Pacific Area, edited for IPR l)y Frederick V. Field,
Doubleday, Doran and Company. $5)
, Here is a book of 650 pages closely printed with innumerable tables, figures,
and data on the economic factors underlying the structure of the many countries
touching the Pacific Ocean totalling half the population of the world. In addi-
tion to the so-called Far East with its nations, colonies and territories, there are
also included such countries as the United States, the U. S. S. R., Australia,
Canada, etc. There is no question that the vast quantity of information
gathered in this handbook is very valuable to students of the Far East. Many
subjects are dealt with : Population, Land Utilization, Food, Transportation,
Finance, Capital Movements, Trade, Minerals, xVgriculture, and Textiles. The
bibliography itself is very useful.
But what is the purpose of this compilation? Fl-ederick V. Field who edited
ic for the Institute of Pacific Relations writes in the preface that "the volume
may now be defined as concerned entirely with the material aspects of the
vastly complicated and increasingly important economic problems of the peoples
of the Pacific area." So far so good. But, then the next sentence reads :
"Among these problems the elemental factors of population and the use people
make of the land on which they live are of first importance." They are of first
importance only in liberated peoples. Facts of real first importance are un-
fortunately omitted from the book. Does not Mr. Field know that the "use
people make of land" is entirely dependent upon their power and freedom to
use it. Especially is this an important point in the Far Eastern colonies where
imperialists are rampant. What have the Chinese or the Philippine masses of
their own accord to do with using land?
Newton D. Baker in a foreword gives us the answer. He says : "They (the
statistics in this book) are addressed to no existing controversy and are not
aimed to support or combat any thesis. They are just facts witliout emotion."
Yes, facts do not need emotion, but facts need a lot of explanation and analysis
before they can take on any meaning. Otherwise, facts become dead, as indeed
the facts and statistics in this handbook are dead and meaningless. This re-
view is not an attemi^t to belittle the importance of the book, but it is precisely
those facts and explanations which are omitted which would bring this book
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4071
to life and stir people to action against a small yroup of imperialists and
linaneiers who are impoverishing a world of plenty.
A few illustrations will help to clarify the point. In the chapter on "Land
Utilization" there appears the following statement : "The utilization of land
depends upon such factors as temperature, rainfall, topography, the quality
of soils, etc." True enough, but what about the land that was destroyed by
Japanese bombs around the area of the Great Wall of China which made twenty
million Chinese homeless last year. What about the 108,813,115 famine victims
in ( 'hina from "natural and human calamities" reported last year by the In-
vestigation of International Kelief Commission? If the money spent for civil
warfare against the Chinese masses were used instead for defense against
floods and drought, there would be no "natural calamities." What about the
vast acres of the most arable land in China which are converted to opium
growing so that the militarists and imperialist lackeys can draw large funds
for the support of their armies. What about Soviet China (one-fourth of
China proper) and the remarkable progress it has been making toward build-
ing up a plentiful food supply? Where are these figures? Why are they
omitted? The answer is easy. These omitted facts and figures would prove a
"thesis" that would endanger the power of the imperialists and bankers.
In the same chapter there is a table giving the remarkable increase in pro-
ductivity on the collective farms of the U. S. S. K. Doesn't it seem important
to the editor to explain the reasons and the economic philosophy behind this
amazing growth? And when the Roosevelt A. A. A. program of taking acreage
out of production is discussed, isn't it a vital statistic to show that while wheat
and cotton are plowed under, millions are starving and nearly naked?
In the chapter on "Transportation," the editor apparently is not aware that
only :-50 percent of the railways Japan is building in Manchuria is warranted
on economic grounds. That 70 percent is planned for military reasons, for the
preparations of an attack against the U. S. S. R. Certainly such clarification
belongs to an economic handbook.
In the chapter on "Pul)lic Finance" there appears the figure of over 300 million
dollars (.")() percent of total expenditure) in the Chinese figures for military
expenditures. Does not Mr. Field know that every cent of it is spent to fight the
Chinese people in the Soviet territory? Who covers the Nanking government's
deficit? Who supplies the Nanking government with military aeroplanes, pilots,
and instructors? Where are these facts and figures?
Such omissions are so numerous that they become conspicuous by their ab-
sence. Their inclusion would light up the figures into a "thesis" that Newton
Baker and his colleagues fear so much.
John Phillips.
Mr. FiKLD. May I point out that this book was reviewed by every
newspaper and journal in all the academic publications. It received
quite favorable reviews, even if I say so myself. And simply because
one of a very many reviews happens to come from the New Masses is
no reflection whatsoever on the book itself or the work of the institute.
Mr. Morris. May we have a short recess ? I have some urgent busi-
ness that calls me outside.
Senator O'Conor. Yes.
Mr. jMorris. I think 10 minutes will do.
Senator O'Conor. We will recess for 10 minutes.
Mr. Field. Could I ask roughly how much longer it is going to take ?
Mr. Morris. I think another half hour.
(Whereupon, a short recess was taken.)
Senator O'Coxor. The hearing will please be in order.
Mr. ]\Iorris, will you proceed i
Mr. ]\Iorris. Mr. Chairman, we have a representative of the War
Department here. I wish he would identify himself. Colonel, will
you identify yourself, please ?
Senator O'Conor, Will you come around, please ?
4072 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
STATEMENT OF LT. COL. ROWLAND H. RENWANZ, PERSONNEL
SECURITY BRANCH OF THE SECURITY DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE
ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF, G-2 (INTELLIGENCE), DEPART-
MENT OF THE ARMY
Colonel Renwanz. I am Colonel Renwanz.
Senator O'Conor. And your first name?
Colonel Renwaxz. Rowland — R-o-w-l-a-n-d.
Mr. Morris. Colonel, have I shown you a copy of the executive ses-
sion testimony of Colonel Church of Friday, January 11, 1952, pre-
sided over by Senator Ferguson ?
Colonel Renwanz. You have.
Mr. IMoRRis. Have w^e the permission of the War Department to
introduce that into our public record ^
Colonel Renw^JiNz. Yes, sir ; you have.
Mr, Morris. This is an examination of Colonel Church in connection
with terminating the questions about the efforts made on the part of
the Army to find the papers connected with Mr. Field's application
for a commission. We have a statement from an Army representative.
If there is no objection on the part of the Army to introducing this
into the record, may it therefore be introduced into the public record?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, sir ; it will be received.
Mr. Morris. Thank you very nnich.
(The record referred to was marked "Exhibit No. G38" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 638
[Executive session — confidential]
INTERNAL SECURITY
f
United States Senate, Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the
Internal Security Act and Otlier Internal Security Laws of the Committee on
the Judiciary, Washington, D. C, Friday, January 11, 1952
The subcommittee met at 10:45 a. m., pursuant to call in room 139 Senate
Office Building, Senator Homer Ferguson presiding.
Present : Senator Ferguson.
Also present : Subcommittee Counsel Robert Morris.
Senator Ferguson. You have been sworn, Colonel?
Colonel Church. Yes, I think that was the first of August.
Testimony of Gerald L. Church, Colonel, Army General's Staff, Room 2E-519,
The Pentagon, Washington, D. C.
Senator Feirguson. You have been sworn. Colonel, but for the record please
state your full name.
Colonel Church. Gerald L. Church.
Senator Ferguson. And you came in this morning to give us a memorandum.
Would you explain what it is and where you obtained it.
Colonel Church. This is a record that was discovered as a result of a search,
a further search, of The Adjutant General's files that I agreed to you that we
would make at the time I testified on August 1, 1951. A great number of files
have been searched, and this was discovered in The Adjutant General's files at
Alexandria, Va. ; and came to me on the 5th of December. At that time, of
course, Congress was not in session, and this is the first opportunity that I
have had to bring it over. Do you wish me to read this for the record?
Senator Ferguson. I don't think he ought to read it, but I think the stenog-
rapher ought to keep a copy of it. We will receive the whole thing in evidence
and he can make a copy for our record.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4073
Colonel Church. Very well. I would like to draw attention to the fact that
llie document is classified confidential.
(The memorandum referred to follows: )
War Department,
Office of the Chief of the Army Air Forces,
Washington, Februai-y I4, 1942.
Memorandum to : The Assistant Secretary of War for Air.
Subject: Mr. Frederick V. Field.
1. On or about January 5, 1942, the attention of this office, Operations Unit,
A-2, was directed to the above individual by the New York office of G-2 (Col.
Frederick D. Sharp), as being qualified for employment in the Operations Unit,
on either a civilian or commissioned status. Mr. Field was at that time inter-
viewed in New York by an officer of the Operations Unit who was there at the
time on other business. The results of the interview indicated that he was a
candidate of sufficient promise to justify further interviews by the chief and
other officers of the Operations Unit.
2. Mr. Field, accordingly, was interviewed in Washington by several officers
of the Operations Unit on or about January 8, 1942. It was suggested that he
make application for civil-service appointment in order that his services might
become available at as early a date as possible, and also apply for a commis-
sion, in wliich capacity his services would be of greater value later on.
3. About January 25, Colonel Sharp of the G-2 New York office informed one
of the officers of the Operations Unit by telephone that he liad received an
adverse report on Mr. Field from an ONI investigator (Mr. Peterkin). Mr.
Peterkin was put on the phone and stated that Mr. Field's connections were
unfavorable ; that his contacts with the Japanese in New York, with Mr.
Joseph Lash, and with the Communist Party were sucli as to render his em-
ployment in intelligence activities undesirable. The Civilian Personnel Divi-
sion was, accordingly, requested to withdraw Mr. Field's application.
4. Mr. Field inquired l)y telephone on about February 10, 1942, as to the sta-
tus of his application and was informed that it had been disapproved by higher
authority. He appeared in person at the Operations Unit on February 13, 1942,
and was informed that this office was not in a position to give out any informa-
tion ; that if he wished further information is would be necessary for him to
investigate the matter himself. He stated that he would make an effort to see
Mr. Lovett and Mr. Curry and try to get the matter straightened out.
For the Chief of the Army Air Forces :
[s] E. P. Curtis,
Lieutenant Colonel, Air Corps,
Secretary of the Air Staff.
Senator Ferguson. There is a name mentioned there, the name of Currie.
From your knowledge of all of the facts, who would you say that was?
Colonel Church. It appears to me from a perusal of all of the files pertaining
to Field that the Currie mentioned here is Laughlin Currie.
Senator Ferguson. And he was attached to the White House.
Colonel Church. Attached to the White House.
Mr. Morris. Colonel Church, will you make an effort to have that declassified?
The reason I say that is that the confidential aspect of that report has now been
outworn, I think you will grant that, in view of all of the publicity. Will you try
to get a declassification?
Colonel Church. I will request authority. I do not have the authority myself.
Mr. Morris. I understand that. And, Colonel, is it your opinion that the Army
or the Air Force would like more time to continue the search for these papers
that are missing, particularly the application of Field, the application itself of
Field, from this committee?
Colonel Church. We are continuing to moke inquiry and are making every
effort to discover anything more pertaining to the subject.
Mr. Morris. So your answer, then, Colonel, would be that you do want more
time to continue the search?
Colonel Church. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And it indicates now clearly from this memorandum that
he had made an application.
Colonel Church. This so states, in effect.
Senator Ferguson. And apparently when he was turned down he said tliat he
was going to Lovett, that is, Bob Lovett, who was then Under Secretary of Air.
4074 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Colonel Church. Then Under Secretary of War for Air.
Senator Ferguson. He is now Secretary of Defense.
Colonel Church. That is right.
Senator FergusOx-^. And Laughlin Currie at the White House. That is what it
indicates.
Colonel Church. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. P.nt yet, as far as the files are concerned, the only thing
that you had prior to this was a medical examination?
Colonel Church. That is the only thing that we could find. Now, I want to
tell you this ; it is possible that we will not be able to find any more, for the reason
that tlie files of the Army, particularly The Adjutant General's files, are period-
ically reviewed and papers which have no apparent present or future value are
destroyed. That may have been done to any further papers in this. That, I
don't know. I couldn't say. There wouldn't be any record in that case.
Senator Ferguson. I am wondering why they would destroy the application
and not the medical examination.
Colonel Church. If it was a question of destruction, it might be that they were
in two separate files, and one was destroyed and one wasn't. It would be a ques-
tion, again, of misfiling. During the war, of course, they had many incompetent
file clerks.
Senator Ferguson. Will you look through the Currie file, let Mr. Morris see the
Currie file, the 201 or any other file you have on it?
Colonel Church. Intelligence files?
Senator Ferguson. Any file you have on Laugliliu Currie.
Colonel Church. We woiildn't normally have a 201 file.
Senator Ferguson. No; l)ecause he wasn't in the military service. But how
about the intelligence file? You may find this whole Field thing in the Currie file.
Colonel Church. We will search that file.
Mr. Morris. One other thing, and I have spoken to some of the Senators on
this. Will you give us a report on your search in about 30 days? Don't let it go
much longer than that. We will have to come to some sort of a conclusion, and
you have been given as much time as possible. But maybe 30 days more would
be helpful.
Colonel Church. All right. Say by the 10th of February.
Mr. Morris. That would be fine.
Senator Ferguson. Thank you very much.
(Whereupon, at 10: 55 a. m.. the subcommittee recessed subject to call.)
Mr. Morris. ]\Ir. Mandel, I ask you if you will identify this letter
for us, please.
Mr. Mandel. This is a carbon copy of a letter which was taken
from the files of the Institute of Pacific Relations dated August 1,
1040, addressed to Frederick V. Field, Esq., with the typed signature
of Edward C. Carter.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, can you recall having received that letter?
Here are extra copies [handling to witness]. Will you read it aloud,
Mr. Field ?
TESTIMONY OF FREDERICK V. FIELD. ACCOMPANIED BY HIS
COUNSEL, HAROLD CAMMER— Resumed
Mr. Field (reading) :
Exhibit No. 639
Sunset Farm,
Lee, Mass., October 1, 19J,0.
Dear Fred : I have been wondering how your resignation and your new job
can be announced both constructively to the board and membership of the Ameri-
can Council and most constructively for the purposes of you yourself and your
new enterprise.
There is much in your new program that should appeal to the vast majority
of the meml)er.s of the American Council. I wonder whether it isn't better for
Jessup or me to consider an announcement which will put your new work in its
appropriate setting instead of having the American Council members one by one
get garbled, prejudiced, and hostile accounts.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4075
You have doubtless seen the very stimulating proposal that Robert S. Lynd
has made to the Earle Committee for a study of the potentialities of democratic
process in a period of mobilization. You yourself, either in your former or
your new capacity, might have drafted a very similar outline. You are probably
familiar with a somewhat similar but less ambitious proposal being worked on
by Raymond Gram Swing, Arthur Upham Pope, and others, proposing that for
the stupid morale work carried on in the American Army during the last war,
a totally different program be adopted in the Army for maintaining and deepening
democratic process.
Would you care to draft something for an announcement, or would you prefer
to send me samples of all the mimeographed and printed material that APM has
issued and have us prepare something? Naturally, I would prefer that you
make the first draft if you approve of the idea at all.
If we do something along this line it might refer to you alone, or your change
might be included ina circular to the board describing a number of staff changes.
This could include a description of Lockwood's work, of Lasker's, of far eastern
journeys of Mr. and Mrs. Barnett, the coming of Miss Jorgenson and Miss
Howie^in fact, a record of all staff changes. Which do you think would be
the best procedure?
Sincerely yours,
• Edward C. Carter.
Mv. IMoRRis. Do you recall receiving that letter?
Mv. Field. No, I doivt, Mr. ]Morris.
Mr. Morris. "Will that be received into the record?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 639*' and
was read in full.)
Mr. Morris. Did j^ou, as a matter of fact, in connection with the
fourth paragraph there reading :
Would you care to draft something for an announcement, or would you prefer
to .send me samples of all the mimeographed and printed material that APM
has issued and have us prepare something?
Send samples of all APM material into Mr. Carter in connection with
that suggestion ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously stated.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will j^ou identify that, please?
Mr. ]Mandel. This is an original of a memorandum from the files
of the Institute of Pacific Relations dated December 2, 1940, headed
"C. P. from E. C. C." and it is signed "C. P. and the initial "F."
Mr. Morris. Mr. Field, is that your initial on that letter ^ [Handing
to witness.]
Mr. Field. It is just the penciled initial "F."' I haven't the slightest
idea.
Mr. Morris. Does the memorandum look familiar to you?
Mr. Field. No, there is nothing familiar in it whatsoever. It
doesn't look like it. Actually I make an "F" the other way around.
I don't know what this is. I don't think it is my initial.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I suggest we not accept that into the
i-ecord under the circumstances.
Senator O'Conor. No.
Mr. Morris. I have a batch of letters here
Mr. Field. I would like to assert for the record that C. P. refers
doubtless to the initials of the staff member in the Institute of Pacific
lielations.
Mr. Morris. I was making reference to the P. S. That was Cather-
ine Porter, was it not?
Mr, Field. It must be.
4076 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. But we are making reference here to the P. S. on the
letter with the initial "F."
Mr. Chairman, we have about 40 letters which all relate to the partic-
ular witness before us today. They are letters either sent by him or
sent to him. In order to save time, I would like to have counsel and
the witness look over that stack of letters, and if he will acknowledge
either that lie was the author, or in reverse, that they were sent to him,
1 would like them to go into the record, Mr. Chairman.
I think that if the witness and his attorney w ould look at them we
will be able to save some time and not go through each individual
letter.
Senator O'Conor. May I suggest that in looking over them, if this
will expedite matters, that they put in different piles, as to those which
may be readily identified, and just judging from what has transpired,
it may be that they will not be rememlDered by you, or otherwise they
may.
Mr. Morris. There is one in particular' I would like to ask you
about.
Mr. Chairman, I would like this inserted into the record.
Mr. Mandel, will you identify that letter?
Mr. Mandel. This is a telegram taken from the files of the Institute
of Pacific Relations, addressed to Frederick V. Field and signed
"Hilda." It is dated October 20, 1937.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember receiving that telegram, Mr. Field?
[Handing to witness.]
Mr. Field. I don't recall it specifically, no, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, it reads:
ExHiBic No. 640
Carter asks reprint his October Amerasia article, distribution editors, Con-
gressmen, Cabinet ministers, institute countries. Suggest reprinting pamphlet
form survey as is. Out today preparedness China-Japan rather than Amerasia.
Not replacing pamphlet series. Please wire opinion and how finance 3,000 copies
costing .$170. Thanks. Wired agenda also. China manuscript excellent.
Si.gned "Hilda."
Mr. Field, was it the practice of sending certain manuscripts and
certain articles that appeared in Amerasia to various Congressmen
and Cabinet ministers? Was it the practice of the IPR as far as
you knew ?
Mr. Field. Just speaking generally cm the question, the practice
as far as I was concerned, what I could testify to, would have to do
only with this country.
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Field. And I just Avould refer to the testimony I gave on that
subject a little while ago — tliat we did on occasion circularize members
of the Government and Members of the Congress, as well as persons
in all other walks of life in this country whom we could reach.
Senatoj" O'Conor. It will be inserted into the record.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 640'' and was read
in full above.)
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. David Drucker?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously employed.
Mr. Morris. Did you know his wife, Esther Drucker?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4077
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Do 3^ou know whether or not he has been an attorney
for the Amtorg Corp. ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Was he an attorney for the corporation in which you
had an interest?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Adam Von Trott ?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I did.
Mr. Morris. Were you a host of Adam. Von Trott in this country?
]Mr. Field. A host in what sense ?
Mr. Morris. I mean, did you have him at your home for dinner?
Did vou take him to lunch ? What were your dealings with Adam Von
Trott?
Mr. Field. He attended one of the institute conferences, and I be-
lieve the one that was held at Virginia Beach, in whatever year that
was. It was during the early part of the war, wasn't it? You've got
the year ; I forget.
Mr. Morris. At Virginia Beach was the early part of the war.
Mr. Field. It was before this country was in the war. It must have
been late 1939.
Mr. Morris. How often did you see him ?
Mr. Field. I saw him primarily at that conference, and I imagine I
saw him a few times in New York.
Mr. Morris. Were you his host at luncheon or dinner ?
Mr. Field. I might have been. I couldn't possibly remember.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Ludwig Rajchmann?
Mr. Field. Before I answer that, could I identify him? Had he
been a League of Nations adviser in China ?
Mr. Morris. That is the one.
Mr. Field. Yes, I did know him.
Mr. Morris. "V^Hiat were your dealings with Ludwig Rajchmann ?
Mr. Field. He was simply a man that I met on one of my trips to
China. I had no dealings with him in any sense that I can remember.
I remember sitting in a conversation, I have heard him talk, but I
never had any personal dealings.
Mr. Morris. What were the occasions of your sitting in conversa-
tions with him and talking?
Mr. Field. I have no clear recollection. At Shanghai, at the time I
was there, a great deal of talk went on in the middle of the night at
night clubs. I think he was working with Soong, T. V. Soong. I re-
member it was the custom of JNIr. Soong and other Chinese officials
to have late meetings in night clubs. I think it is possible at one of
those sessions I was on. I don't have a clear recollection.
Mr. Morris. When did you last see him ?
Mr. Field. Mr. Rajchmann? I don't think I ever saw him except
in China, which would have been in the early thirties.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Anthony Jenkinson ?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I did. He stayed at my place.
Mr. Morris. For what period of time ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 4
4078 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. I don't reiueniber how long a period of time. In the
question of the housing shortage there was a period when he couldn't
find an apartment of his own. He stayed at my place.
Mr. Morris. For what duration?
Mr. Field. I don't remember how long.
Mr. Morris. Approximately?
Mr. Field. Well, it was a good many weeks, I know that, and I don't
remember exactly how long.
Mr. Morris. Was he associated Avitli the Allied Labor News ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question, Mr. Morris, on the
same grounds previously used.
Mr. JMoRRis. Now, did the Gellhorns, Walter and Kitty Gellhorn,
stay at yoHr place at all?
Mr. Field. It is possible that they used it, did use the house on oc-
casion. I couldn't identify when. I knew them well.
Mr. Morris. Did they register from your place at all? Do you
know that?
Mr. Field. No, I couldn't speak for myself on that. I couldn't tell
you accurately there. There was a period when — I was trying to think
why I wasn't using the house myself. I think they did. I just haven't
got a clear recollection of that.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever collaborate with Archibald MacLeish in
writing an article?
Mr. Field. No.
Mr. Morris. Do you know George C. Eltenton, the husband of Dolly
Eltenton ? Do you know Dolly Eltenton ?
Mr. Field. Well, that name strikes some recollection, but I cannot
identify her at the moment. I don't remember.
Mr. ^ToRRis. She was a staff worker in the IPR office in San Fran-
cisco.
Mr. Field. Not at the time I was there.
Mr. Morris. Do you know George Eltenton ?
Mr. Field. I don't think so. I don't believe I met him.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Abraham Chapman?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously employed.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Colonel Faymonville ?
Mr. Field. I don't think I ever met him.
Mr. Morris. You never met Colonel Faymonville?
Mr. Field. I don't think so. If I did it would have been at such a
large public gathering that I would have no recollection of it.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Charlotte Honig?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously employed.
Mr. IVIoRRis. Now, did you ever meet Mv. Louis Budenz ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever met Vincente Lombard Tolidano?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever make an effort to create an interest on the
part of Mr. Tolidano in the Institute of Pacific Relations?
Mr. Field. May I consult with my attorney?
Senator O'Coxor. Yes, indeed.
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
f^
to
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4079
Mr. Field. I have no recollection, Mr. Morris. It is possible that I
did, but I have no recollection of anything.
Mr. Morris. Did yon ever meet Harry Gannes?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously employed.
Mr. Morris. Did 3'ou ever meet Mildred Price ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
iirounds.
Mr. JNIoRRis. Did you ever make a contribution to the China Aid
Council ?
Ml". Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you contribute $63,950 to the publication Soviet
Russia Today between October 3, 1946, and April 28, 1950?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. It is not that I am giving you a figure and taxing your
memory.
Mr. Field. No, I decline to answer on the grounds to do so might
tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Morris. Were you a stockholder of the Trade Union Service?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
irrounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever contribute to the Chinese Laimdrymen's
Association ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds,
Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Do you know whether the Chinese Laundrymen's Asso-
ciation was connected with the New China Daily New^s ?
Mr. Field. No ; I have no knowledge of that.
Mr. Morris. You have no knowledge of that. Are you acquainted
with the North American Trade Consultants, of 150 Broadway, which
shares office space with AVCO ? Are you acquainted with the xVVCO
International Corp.?
Mr. Field. What was the first name there? The North American
Trading
Mr. Morris. Let me put it this way : Were you vice president and
treasurer of the AVCO International, Inc.?
Mr. Field. May I consult ?
(Mr. Field confers with his counsel.)
Mr. Field. That first, that North American whatever it was, I don't
recall at all. With the second one I did have such an association.
Mr. Morris. You were vice president and treasurer?
Mr. Field. If those were the offices on record. I am sure I was an
officer of it.
Mr. Morris. What was the purpose of that company ? ■
Mr. Field. A trading company.
Mr. Morris. What did you trade in ?
Mr. Field. We did no business whatsoever, as I recall.
Mr. Morris. Who organized the company ?
Mr. Field. That I don't remember the details of.
Mr. Morris. Do you remember who the incoriDorators were, ]\Ir.
Field?
Mr. Field. The actual incorporators? No; I don't.
Mr. Morris. AVho were the stockholders ?
4080 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds that
to do so might tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Morris. Who were the directors of the corporation ?
]Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. You will testify you were the vice president and
treasurer of the company ?
Mr. Field. I was an officer of it ; yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Ernest Thornton in Australia ?
Mr. Field. May I identify him? His name came up here in the
testimony in the last week or so. I have read the name in the — —
Mr. Morris. I don't think so.
Mr. Field. Ernest Thornton ?
Mr. Morris. Ernest Thornton.
Mr. Field. This is somebody quite different, then. From
Australia ?
Mr. Morris. Australia.
Mr. Field. I will have to decline to answer that question.
Mr. Morris. Did you know a man named Carlos Contreros Labarca ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet with him on July 6, 1945, at 16 West
Twelfth Street?
Mr. Field. Who is this ? Carlos ■
Mr. Morris. Carlos Contreros Labarca.
Mr. Field. I decline to answer on the grounds that to do so might
tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Tung Pi Wu ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Chang Han Fu and Chen Chia
Kang, asistants to Tung Pi'Wu?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Y. Y. Hsu ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Hsu have dinner at the home of Mrs. Selali
Chamberlain on April 30, 1945 ?
Mr. Field. Mrs. who ?
Mr. Morris- Chamberlain ; the first name is S-e-1-a-l-i.
Mr. Field. It is S-e-1-l-a-h, Sellah.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Hsu have dinner at the home of Mrs. Chamber-
lain on April 30, 1945, in your company ?
Mr. Field. I don't recall that.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Max Yergan ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you, Dr. Yergan, Chen, and Kang, assistants to
Tung Pi Wu, have dinner together at the home of Charlotte Honig
in New York City, 320 West Eighty-third Street, in 1945 ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Were you associated with the organization, Committee
for Democratic Far Eastern Policy ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you and Eugene Dennis propose that Grace
Granich pinch-hit and run the Committee for Democratic Far Eastern
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4081
Policy until such time as they would get more respectable names to
run that organization ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you give checks in the amount totaling $610 to
Mr. Y. Y. Hsu on March 19, 11)16, and July 19, 1946 ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Do you know where Mr. Hsu is now?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Were you connected with the American Chinese Ex-
port Co., of 51 Pine Street?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Was Charlotte Honig vice president of that corpora-
tion?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Saul Mills ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Was Saul Mills associated with you in the American
Chinese Export Co. ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you give Saul Mills on March 22, 1950, $4,000 ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you give him $2,000 on May 15, 1950?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question also on the the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Was Martin Popper the secretary of the American
Chinese Export Co. ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Mr. Morris. Is Mr. Popper a member of the Sunnyside branch of
the Communist Party in Queens?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet a man by the name of J-u-a-n, the
next part of the name is M-a-r-i-v-e-i-1-I-i, and the next name is
V-i-d, and the last part of his name is A-u-r-i-e-a, who is president
of the Chuman Communist Party? I will read that again. The
first name is J-u-a-n, the next part of his name is M-a-r-i-v-e-i-1-l-i,
the next part of his name is V-i-d, and the next part A-u-r-i-e-a.
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet with him on April 10, 1946 ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the same grounds.
Mr. Chairman, may I just say a word, that I have endeavored, and
I wish to continue, to answer as fully as I can any questions pertain-
ing to the Institute of Pacific Relations, but I feel that in self-pro-
tection I must decline to answer questions that go far astray from
this particular matter.
Senator O'Conor. Mr. Field, let me ask you just a few questions
along that line that might be a little closer, and they pertain to the
library. I think that was located at 26 West Twenty-sixth Street,
was it ?
Mr. Field. Of the Institute of Pacific Relations ?
Senator O'Conor. No; of yours.
4082 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. My own library?
Senator O'Conor. Yes.
Mr. Field. Yes; that is right; 23 West Twenty-sixth Street.
Senator O'Conor. 23 West Twenty-sixth Street. Did you know
Israel Epstein ?
Mv. Field. May I confer?
Senator O'Conor. Yes, indeed.
(Mr. Field conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Field. I must decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Senator O'Conor. Did you know Edgar Snow ?
Mr. Field. I also decline to answer that question on the same
grounds.
Senator O'Conor. And you have previously testified concerning
Owen Lattimore?
Mr. Field. Yes; I knew him.
Senator O'Conor. Now, with regard to the publications of each of
those three individuals, I would like to just ask you a few questions.
One, the book entitled "Unfinished Eevolution in China" by Israel
EpsteiiL Do you know of such a book?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I did know of such a book.
Senator O'Conor. And do you know of Red Star Over China by
Edgar Snow?
Mr. Field. Yes.
Senator O'Conor. Third, Solution in Asia by Owen Lattimore?
Mr. Field. Yes ; I know of such a book.
Senator O'Conor. I would not expect you to know all tlie books in
the librai-y, but do you know whether those books were included in
the library? ^
Mr. Field. Well, in other woi-ds, whether I own those books? Is
that your question ?
Senator O'Conor. Well, if you desire.
Mr. Field. I should like to explain, sir, that the library at 23 West
Twenty-sixth Street is my personal library.
Senator CConor. Tliat is right.
Mr. Field. 1 own tlie books there. So your question is whether I
own these three books you have mentioned.
Senator O'Conor. Well, you may answer, if that is your desire, on
that question. Mine was not directed to that particularly, but I will
ask the question as long as you put it that way.
Mr. Field. I have, I do own Lattimore's l)ook. and I think I have
Snow's. I offhand don't think I happen to have the other one, Ep-
stein's book.
Senator O'Conor. The point to which I was directing the ({uestion
was as to whether or not a library as such was made available to any
particular groups or to the public generally, or was it restricted in
its use ?
Mr. Field. No; it is a library which adjoins my office in a large —
just adjoining my personal office, Avhich is a personal office. And I
simply had a policy of leaving the door open, and I don't think I have
ever tlu-own anybody out of the ]dace. I have never gone into any
special efforts to get anybody into it, but anyone who Avanted to consult
the books on the premises could do so. I have had a policy of not per-
mitting people to take books out.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4083
Senator O'Conor. I see. Was there any standing arrangements, to
your knowledge, Avhereby members of any particular groups would
have access to it and would be admitted and have the run of it 'i
Mr. Field. No; no groups as distinguished from any other groups.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, in connection with this line of ques-
tions, I grant you that some of these questions and the association with
some of these people with the Institute of Pacific Relations are at best
marginal, but under ideal conditions the purpose of this investigation
would be to find out whether or not these people were actually con-
nected with Mr. Field's work in the Institute of Pacific Relations.
I grant you in some cases that may not be the case, but we should
have answers from Mr. Field to find out whether in fact they are or not.
Certainly, Mr. Y. Y. Hsu, about whom we have been talking, was
connected with the Institute of Pacific Relations, and Mr. Adam Von
Trott was connected with the institute.
]\Ir. Field. I replied with respect to him.
Mr. ]MoRRis. I have a series of questions; the next five are connected
with Mr. Von Trott. I grant you that it may be unfair to the Institute
of Pacific Relations to continue this line of inquiry, but since we have
a witness here we would like to find out whether or not there is any
connection with these people. It may well be that the answer is ''No,'"
but we do not alwaj's get that answer from a witness.
Mr. Field. The problem, Mr. Chairman, for the witness, or a wit-
ness, at least, in my position, is that, while wanting to answer all
questions possible, to protect myself from opening up a particular line
and waiving the privilege, I have had that disastrous experience, and
I have suffered from it, and I don't want to repeat it, and therefore
I am somewhat zealous in attempting to protect myself. This is the
problem : If I was assured of the complete^ line of questioning on any
particular person or line that Mr. Morris 'wanted to open up, it cer-
tainly would be something to consider.
Senator O'Coxor. I does occur to me that it might be desirable for
you to indicate the scope of the inquiry ; and, if it is in a limited area
\n which the witness feels that he may go without jeopardizing any
rights, it may be that it would be productive of results if it is indi-
cated that it is just to be encompassed within a certain area.
Mr. Morris. In connection with the matter that we have gone over.
Senator, we have the episode of Tung Pi Wu's visit to the United
States, which is important to this inquiry, who met Tung Pi Wu
while he was in New York, and then whether or not any people asso-
ciated with you in the Institute of Pacific Relations, Mr. Field, were
in the Committee for Democratic Far Eastern Policy.
Mr. Field. In that case, that would be a case where I clearly would
feel it might tend to incriminate me, and I would have to invoke the
privilege.
Mr. Morris. How about any questions in connection with the Com-
mittee for Democratic Far Eastern Affairs?
Mr. Field. On that also I feel it would tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Morris. In connection with Charlotte Honig, was she associated
with you in the Institute of Pacific Relations (
Mr. Field. Let me consult with my counsel.
(Mr. Field conferred with his counsel.)
4084 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. Let me answer that this way, Mr. Morris : To the best
of my recollection, this person was in no way associated with me in
connection with the Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. There we have an answer, Mr. Chairman.
Now, did you have cocktails with Adam Von Trott on November
28, 1939.?
Mr. Field. I have no idea whatsoever. ,
Mr. Morris. Do you remember having cocktails with him?
Mr. Field. How could I possibly remember ? It is 13 years ago.
Mr. Morris. Can you remember his having cocktails with you ?
Mr. Field. I can't. I told you that it is very likely that I knew
him. I had seen him in New York. Whether we had cocktails or
steaks or what, I haven't the slightest idea.
Mr. Morris. Is it consistent with your recollection that you met
him five time in New York in 1939 ?
Mr. Field. I will grant vou that it is auite conceivable.
Mr. Morris. When did you last hear of Mr. Von Trott?
Mr. Field. When did I last hear of him ? The last I heard of him
was when he was executed in Germany.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Harrison George ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously stated.
Mr. Morris. I cite that as an example of the difficulty that we have.
Mr. Field. May I say on this point, I think perhaps I could antici-
pate. I can give the same rex^ly that I did with respect to the other
person.
Mr. Morris. Charlotte Honig?
Mr. Field. That is right, that I recall no association that I had with
this person in connection with the Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, we have had evidence that Harrison
George in 1931 did have a discussion with Mr. Browder in connection
with the Institute of Pacific Relations, and therefore it would be only
plausible if we know that Mr. Field clid know Mr. Harrison George
that we should ask him if he had any connection with the Institute of
Pacific Relations, and he has answered that he had not.
Mr. Field. And I repeat the answer in light of w4iat you have said.
Senator O'Conor. You want to repeat the question ?
Mr. Field. I repeat the answer after the additional remarks that
Mr. Morris has made.
. Mr. Morris. You appreciate the difficulty of conducting examina-
tion into an area w'here you do not know whether or not the people
are going to be connected with the institute, people whom you do as a
matter of fact know that he was associated w4th.
You understand that, Mr. Field, and you appreciate the difficulty.
We want to be fair here to the institute.
Mr. Field. On the question of Mr. Harrison ?
Mr. Morris. Harrison George.
Mr. Field. Harrison George. It seems to me I have been responsive
insofar as stating definitely, categorically, that I had no association
with him in connection with the Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. We appreciate that, and yet at the same time, Mr. Field,
you must know that if we have evidence before this committee that
there was a connection between Harrison George and the institute and
at the same time we have reason to believe that you knew Harrison
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4085
George, it is only a fair question and we should ask you if there is any
connection there.
Mr. Field. I don't deny your absolute right to any question. I am
not appraising that issue.
Mr. Morris. We have had a conflict, Mr. Field, in the evidence be-
fore this committee as to whether or not you used the name Frederick
Spencer or Lawrence Hearn in writing for China Today. Would you
clear up that conflict for us?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question on the grounds pre-
viously used.
Mr.*^MoRRis. Did you know Mr. T. A. Bisson ?
Mr. Field. Yes, I did.
Mr. Morris. Was he associated with the publication China Today ?
Mr. Field. I decline to answer that question — I will take that back
and reply to you differently. I think the publication itself will show
whether or not he wrote articles for the magazine. I think it is likely
that he did, but I couldn't possibly recall a specific article.
Mr. INIoRRis. You do not recall
Mr. Field. As a matter of fact, he may have been on the editorial
board at a certain period. Again the masthead will show it and I
will stand by it.
Mr. Morris. You do not know whether he used a pseudonym on that
publication ?
Mr, Field. I have no knowledge of that, that he ever did.
Mr. Morris. Do you know that he ever used the name Frederick
Spencer ?
Mr. Field. No, I cannot testify to anything Mr. Bisson did.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever hear that he did ?
Mr. Field. I have no reason — I have no knowledge of this.
Senator O'CoxoR. May I ask how much more you have ?
Mr. Morris. I am finished now.
Senator O'Coxor. There does remain the one matter of the identi-
fication of the letters in the interrogation. I was wondering whether
that will probably take some time.
Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Senator O'Cox^or. At this point the hearing will be recessed.
Mr. Morris. We will have a short session this afternoon.
Senator O'Coxor. We will recess this hearing until then.
(Whereupon, at 12: 30 p. m., the committee was recessed, to be re-
convened at 2 p. m. the same day.)
AFTERXOOX" SESSION
Senator O'Coxor. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Morris. Let the record show that this is an open hearing and
that Mr. Field has come back, having gone through all of the exhibits
that we presented to him at the termination of the last session which
closed at about 12 : 30.
Mr. Field, have you gone through the exhibits that I have presented
to you ?
Mr. Field. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Do they appear to you to be copies of letters that were
written to you and written by you in connection with your duties in
the Institute of Pacific Eelations?
4086 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Field. In your absence, Mr. Morris, I dictated, or, rather, I
will put it this way : I divided these documents into four groups, and
then dictated my evidence with respect to each of the four groups, and
1 would suggest that what I have already dictated be incorporated
now as my evidence wdth respect to them.
Mr. Morris. He has explained it on the record. Senator.
Senator O'Coxor. That is what I had originally intended after you
had seen the letters, to suggest such a course as that, because I felt they
might fall into several categories, and by segregating them according
to whether or not they were certain or doubtful or otherwise it might
simplify the handling of it.
Mr. Field. Could I just add that I did this in the presence of
your associate counsel?
Senator O'CoxoR. Good.
(The testimony dictated that was above referred to is as follows :)
I\Ir. Field. Mr. Morris, I have reviewed the batch of letters and memoranda
which yon gave to me and divided them into fonr gronps. The first gronp pnr-'
ports to be memoranda signed by me as follows : A carbon of a letter dated
October 11, 1938, from San Francisco, to Miss Nettie Duskis. A carbon of a
letter dated .Tuly 26, 19,37, to Miss Susan T. Smith, attached to which is a letter
from Susan T. Smith to me dated July 12. 19.37, and a list of books.
A letter dated June IG, 1937, to Mr. T. A. Bissou. A letter dated October 11,
1938, to Miss Margaret R. Taylor. A letter dated November 9, 1937. to Miss
Catherine Porter. A letter dated March 29, 1938, to Edward C. Carter. A
letter dated November 15, 1937, to Mr. Theodore Draper, attached to which is
data concerning Mr. Draper's application for a Guggenheim Fellowship, and a
letter of November 9, 1937, to Mr. Draper.
A letter dated March 10, 1938, to Mi-. Edward C. Carter. A memorandum
dated July 24, 1939, to "RS, MSF, KB. MRT. HA. WWL."
Letter dated March 23, 1942, to Mr. Edward C. Carter attached to which
is a letter dated March 3, 1942, from Edward C. Carter to Frederick "V. Field
and a letter dated March 12, 1942, from Edward C. Carter to Mr. John A. Pollard.
Letter dated May 4, 1933, to Mrs. Ruth Young. Telegram dated November 23 —
no year but bearing the notation "Estimated 1942" to Edward C. Carter.
Memorandum to "CP from FYF" dated February 23. 1937, and "FVF from
CP" being probably Catherine Porter.
Letter dated August 23, 1934 to Newton D. Baker. Letter dated April 20, 1933,
to Mr. Loomis, attached to wliicli is a memorandum dated May 2, 1933, to Mr.
Loomis from an unidentified person, apparently other than myself.
Memorandum dated January 22. 1940. to "BL."
Letter dated July 2G, 1937, to Nathaniel Peffer.
Letter dated September 4, 1935, to Mr. Owen Lattimore.
Letter dated April 22, 1940, to Mr. Owen Lattimore.
Letter dated March 17, 1938, to Mr. Edward C. Carter.
Letter dated March 17, 1938, to Mr. Carter.
Letter dated January 31, 1938, to Miss Catherine Poi-ter.
Letter dated December 17, 1934, to Mr. E. C. Carter.
Letter dated October 4, 1934, to Mr. Lawrence Dugcan.
Letter dated October 9, 1939, to Mr. Edward C. Carter.
Letter dated May 15. 1940. to Mr. Owen Lattimore.
Letter dated April 25, 1939, to Mr. Carter.
Letter dated May 31, 1940, to Mr. John II. Oakie.
Letter dated April 9, 1940, to Mr. Philo W. Parker.
Letter dated December 20, 1938, to the American League for Peace and
Democracy.
Memorandum dated April 11, 1939, to "AB." attached to which is a letter to the
State Department from Annette Blumenthal.
Letter dated November 10, 193G, to General Victor Yakhontoff, attached to
which is a letter dated November 3, 1936, from Robert T. Crane to Frederick V.
Field, attached to which is a letter to Dr. Robert T. Crane from Frederick V
Field dated November 2, 1936.
Almost all of the foregoing letters are carl)ons or photostats of carbons of
letters. I do not have any present recollection of having sent these letters,
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4087
although from their contents I would assume that they were sent as they
appear to have been to the persons whose names appear thereon, but I do not
presently remember them. Except where I have indicated otherwise each of
the letters and memoranda referi'ed to in the first group appear to have been
sent by me.
The second group of letters and memoranda appear or purport to be letters
or memoranda to me from other persons as follows :
Memorandum dated November 6, 1939, to FVF from ECC.
Letter dated September 7, 1937, from Edward ('. Carter to which is attached
a cable dated August 25, 1937, from Carter to INPAKEL, New York.
Letter dated March 4, 1936, from Edward C. Carter, to which is attached
a telegram from "Fred" to Edward C. Carter dated March 2, 1936.
Memorandum from Liu Yu-wan to F. V. Field, E. C. Carter, E. J. Tarr, P. C.
Jessup, dated November 21, 1939.
Letter dated January 4, 1935, from Edward C. Carter.
Memorandum dated October 27, 1944, from Raymond Dennett to Philip C.
Jessup, William C. Johnstone, Frederick V. Field, and Rose Yardumian.
Letter dated January 12, 1937, from Owen Lattimore.
Memorandum or letter dated March 9, 1943, from Edward C. Carter.
Letter dated May 2, 1940, from Charles F. Loomis.
Memorandum dated March 20, 1939, from "ECC."
Letter dated July 2, 1937, from Charles F. Loomis.
Letter dated December 4, 1934, from Everett Case.
Letter dated October 7, 1937, from William W. Lockwood, Jr.
Letter dated July 16, 1934, from Edward C. Carter.
Memorandum entitled "Excerpts From Letter to Frederick V. Field From
Newton D. Baker, Dated August 6, 1934 (Cleveland, Ohio)."
Letter dated April 29, 1939, from Edward C. Carter.
Letter dated March 20, 1939, from Earl H. Leaf, to which is attached by
clipping an onionskin report entitled "The Attached Report, Compiled and
Written by the Shanghai Branch of the British Army Intelligence Service, Is
Strictly Confidential."
Letter dated August 12, 1938, from Kathleen Barnes.
An onionskin copy of what appears to be a resolution unanimously adopted
by the American Council in appreciation of the work of Frederick V. Field,
undated.
Letter dated October 11, 1938. from Owen Lattimore.
Almost all of the foregoing are unsigned carbons or photostats of unsigned
carbons of letters purpoi'ting to have been sent 1)y the persons whose names
appear thereon to me except where indicated utherwise. and except that the
letter which the cimfidential report of the British Army Intelligence Service is
now attached by clip does not contain any reference to such confidential report.
Except for such confidential report I have no present recollection of ever having
received the letters referred to in this second group. However, I am entirely
willing to assume that they were sent by the persons indicated thereon and
received by me. As to the confidential reixtrt, I am quite sure that I have never
previously seen it, and am unwilling to make that assumption.
The third group of communications which I have examined — and I have ex-
amined all of them hastily and within limited time, as you know — purport to be
letters sent bv me as follows :
Letter dated March 4, 1943.
Letter dated July 3, 1940.
Letter dated August 27, 1938, to which attached a letter dated August 22,
1938.
A letter dated September 1, 1988, to which is attached a letter dated August
25, 1938.
A letter dated April 12, 1938.
A letter dated December 5, 1940.
A telegram dated March 11, 1938.
A memorandum dated January 12, 1938.
The foregoing letters which I have examined appear to be in substantially
the same form as the other letters, that is, photostats or carbons in the main.
As to these letters I must respectfully decline to answer in the exercise of my
privilege against self-incrimination.
The fourth group of letters puriport to be letters sent to me, or memoranda
sent to me by various persons bearing the following dates :
4088 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
March 9, 1937 ; March 16, 1936 ; March 23, 1935 ; July 1, 1940 ; March 30, 1937,
attached to which purports to be a letter from me dated March 9, 1937, and a
letter dated March 6, 1937 ; IMarch 30, 1938, to which it attached another letter
dated March 30, 1938 ; letter dated April 26, 1938, to which is attached a memo-
randum dated April 2G, 1938 ; a letter dated October 15, 1937 ; a letter dated
March 24, 1938; a letter dated September 22, 1937,' to which is attached a
memorandum of four pages undated ; a letter dated June 4, 1938.
As to the fourth group of letters and memoranda I respectfully decline to
answer in the exercise of my privilege against possible self-incrimination.
Senator O 'Conor. I might also say just for the record that all of
the proceedings, including, of course, this hearing as well as the
examination and segregation of the papers all happened in the pres-
ence of Mr. Field's counsel.
Mr. Morris. Yes ; and Mr. Haaser.
Do you have any objection to introducing any of these in the public
record ?
Mr. Field. There is a group of those I claim the privilege on.
Senator O'Conor. It would be understood that any in respect to
which you claim the privilege would, of course, not therefore be
chargeable to you.
Mr. Field. I have nothing to do with those.
Senator O'Conor. Of course, they will be received in evidence if
they are originally records from the Institute of Pacific Relations.
Mr. Morris. That is right. The question was directed more to:
Do you have any reason to believe that they are not authentic records ?
Mr. Field. I have claimed the privilege on those particular docu-
ments, and therefore I don't think I can make any comments.
Senator O'Conor. With regard to that particular class there would
be nothing imputed to Mr. Field in regard to that one group in con-
nection with which he does claim his privilege. The rest of them, I
understand, are authenticated.
Mr. Field. We divided them into four groups. Two groups were
divided as to whether they were addressed to me or whether I ad-
dressed them to others, in which I had no specific recollection of a
document but was willing to assume that they were documents so ad-
dressed to me or sent by me. And the tliird and fourth groups were
documents similarly divided to which I claim the privilege.
Senator O'Coxor. Very well.
Mr. Morris. Mv. Chairman, may all of these documents be received
into the record ?
Senator O'Conor. They will be, if, as I understand is the case, they
are all part of the records taken from the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions files or records.
Mr. Morris. That will be subject to Mr. jSIandel's identification.
Senator O'Coxor. That is right. I want to attach that condition
so as to be sure they are traceable to that source.
(For Mr. Mandel's identification see p. 4158.)
(The documents referred to are as follows and were marked with
exhibit numbers, as follows:)
Group I : Nos. 641, 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650. 651, 652, 653, 654, 655,
656, 657, 658, 659, 660, 662, 663, 664, 665, 660, 667, 668, 66!), 670, 671, 672.
Group II : Nos. 673, 674 675, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681, 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 687,
688, 689, 6L!0, 691, 692.
Group III : Nos. 693, 694, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699.
Group IV : Nos. 700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4089
Exhibit No. 641
(Handwritten:) Duskis
San Fbancisco, October 11, 1938.
Miss Nettie Duskis,
Science atid Society, 30 East 20th Street,
New York City.
Dear Miss Duskis : I liave just returned to my office and find your letter of
Septenil)er 16th. As my secretary wrote you, I liave already reviewed Bisson's
.Japan In China. I happen to think it is the most important single book which
has appeared on the war and very much hope that you will find a first-rate
reviewer and give it good space. The only suggestion which comes to me off-
hand is Nathaniel Peffer at Columbia. I happened to discuss the book with him
at luncheon last week when I was East and thought that his comments were very
interesting. Perhaps I suggest him because his impression of the book is very
much the same as mine.
Sincerely yours,
FREDEBICK V. FiBXLD.
f/g
Editors: Edwin Berry Burgiim (New York University), V. J. McGill (Hunter College),
Margaret Schlaueh (New Yorli University), Bernard J. Stern (Columbia University),
D. J. Struik (Massacliusetts Institute of Technology). Foreign Editors: J. D. Bernal
(Cambridge University), Maurice Dobb (The Marshall Library, Cambridge), Lancelot
Hogben, F. R. S. (University of Aberdeen), Paul Langevin (College de France, Paris),
H. Levy (Imperial College of Science, London), H. J. Muller (Institute of Genetics,
Moscow), Joseph Needhara, F. R. S. (Cambridge University). Contributing Editors:
J. W. Alexander, Francis Birch, Louis B. Boudin, Theodore B. Brameld, Dorothy Brew-
ster, Ralph J. Bunche, Kenneth Burke, Addison T. Cutler, E. Franklin Frazier, Louis
Harap, Granville Hicks, Eugene C. Holmes, Leo Huberman, Corliss Lamont, Oliver
Larkin. Robert Morss Lovett, H. F. Mins, Jr., Broadus Mitchell, Fulmer Mood, Brooks
Otis, Herbert J. Phillips, David Ramsey, Samuel Sillen, Harry C. Steiometz, D. J. Struik,
Paul M. Sweezy, Genevieve Taggard, Louis Weisner
Science & Society
A Marxian Quarterly
30 East 20th Street
new YORK, N. Y.
Gramercy 7-1021
September 16, 1938.
Mr. ITrederick Field,
1195 California Street, San Francisco, California.
Dear Mr. Field: We are very eager to have you review Bisson's book on
Japan in China. If by any chance you have reviewed it for another periodical
will you please recommend a person who will do an adequate job as we are
anxious to see it well reviewed.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Nettie Duskis,
Nettie Duskis, Secretary.
San Francisco, September 20, 1938.
Miss Nettie Duskis,
Science and Society, 30 East 20th Street, j.
New York City.
Dear Miss Duskis: This is to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of
September 16th to Mr. Field. Unfortunately, this has arrived during Mr. Field's
absence from San Francisco. Upon his return in about ten days it will be
brought to his attention promptly.
For your information I may add that Mr. Field's review of Japan In China
has appeared in the current nitmber of Pacific Affairs.
Sincerely yours,
Secretary to Mr. Field.
4090 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 642
July 26, 1937.
Mi.ss Susan T. Smith,
Berkeley Public Lihrary, Berkeley, Calif.
Dear Miss Smith : I have heard from Mrs. Barnes that she was able to dis-
cuss with you your book list ou Soviet Russia when she passed through the Bay
Region two weeks ago. I have therefore consulted Miss Harriet Moore, who had
already heard from Mrs. Barnes, regarding her own recommendations. I am
enclosing tiie memorandum which Miss Moore has sent me rather than trying to
paraphrase it. I hope that these comments will be of some help to you.
There is only one point which I do not find included in Miss 3Ioore's memo-
randum which I know she would like to have me pass on. We both feel, as do
some of the others w^hom I have consulted, that Harry Stekoll's Humanity Made
TO Order should l)e omitted from the list as it seems to so truly fall into the
category of straiglit propaganda. I do not by any means want to suggest that
we should not include in the book list critical references to what is going on in
the Soviet Union, but it seems to me that the list includes plenty along that line
without Stekoll's book, which seems to go a good deal further than merely
being critical.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick Y. Field.
Berkeley Public Lihrary,
Berkeley, Calif., July 12, W^l.
Mr. Frederick K. Field,
In.'ititutc of Pacific Rclation.s-. }-2!> Past '>.2(l Street,
Neio York City.
Dear Mr. Field : The Library Committee of the Pacific Coast Branch of the
Institute has been working for some time on a list on Russia for u.se in Libraries,
similar to the ones we compiled on China and Japan.
This has been much more difficult. We first planned to make a general list
including old and new Russia. Our purpose is to select material that is in
print, not too expensive, readily available for purchase and suited to the mind
of the average reader. We were unable to choose twenty-five titles to cover
the whole subject of Russia with any degree of comprehension.
We then decided to concentrate on Soviet Russia, eliminating, if possible,
books that were too markedly propagandist, for or against. The books we
finally selected from about fifty read, are on the enclosed list.
We are not satisfied with it and we didn't agree as a committee on some that
were included, and some omitted. The list to me lacks balance and continuity.
I talked ^^'ith Mrs. McLaughlin yesterday and she suggested I write to you and
ask you to submit the list to Mrs. Katherine Barnes and Miss Harriet Moore
for criticism and suggestions as to titles to be included.
Will you return it so the committee may have your comments before August
first.
Yours sincerely,
[s] Susan T. Smith, Librarian.
P. S. — I have just heard that Mrs. Barnes is here in California and will be
in my office Wednesday. I am sending the list just the same. (The P. S. is
handwritten.) S. T. S.
STS:M
Enc.
( Handwritten : ) MM to FVF
(Handwritten :) July 24, 1937
Comments on the Book List, Llbrary CoMMirrEE, Institute of Pacific
Relations
I agree with Mrs. Barnes suggestion that the following be included in the list
John Reed— Ten Days that Shook the World
General Grave.s — American Intervention in Siberia
Zostchenko — Russia Laughs
Duranty — Reports Russia
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4091
These are to be substituted for :
Skariatina — Little Era in Old Russia
The works of Alexander Tusbkiu
Feval — Tovarich
Duranty — I Write as I please
There are several aspects of Soviet life which are not covered in this list.
I would suggest that there be added : M. S. Callott — Russian Justice, or if you
want a more academic account, add : Zelitch — Soviet Administration of Criminal
Law.
There is also no book on Soviet medicine. The only comprehensive report on
this at present is : Newsholme and Kingsbury — Red Medicine. This account is,
perhaps, too uncritical to be included in your list. However, in the fall, a new
book is to be published by Dr. Henry Sigerist of Johns Hopkins. This might
be more suitable.
The list omits all reference to foreign affairs. There are several good books
on this subject :
Louis Fischer — Soviets in World Affairs
The Soviet Union in World Problems, edited by Samuel Harper
Yakhontoff— Russia and the Soviet Union in the Far East
Lobanov-Rostovsky — Russia and Asia
Also these books may be heavier than most of those on your list, nevertheless,
it seems essential to include something on foreign relations.
There are also one or two other books of a general nature which might be
interesting:
Louis Fischer — Soviet Journey, a well-written and interesting travel book
by a sympathetic observer
Sholokhov — Soil Upturned (Seeds of Tomorrow), sequel to "And Quiet Flows
the Don"
Anyone of a number of the Maurice Hindus books on Soviet agriculture would
be an addition, as your list is very weak in regard to agriculture, as well as
industry. Unfortunately there is no book on Soviet industry which would meet
your requirements, although there are several Soviet novels picturing industrial
development. These however, might seem to you to be too biased.
Telephone : Murray Hill 2-0313 Cable Address : Amruseult
The American Russian Institute
For Cultural Relations With the Soviet Union, Inc.,
Fifty-Six West Forty-Fifth Street, New York
Board of Directors : Harrv Elmer Barnes, Mrs. Kathleen Barnes, Aaron Bodansky, Harold
Clurman. Mrs. Ethel Clyde, George S. Counts, Mrs. Vera Mieheles Dean, John Dewey,
Wui. O. Field, Jr., Lewis Gannett. Mortimer Graves, Wm. S. Graves, Alcan Hirsch, John
A. Kingsbury, Marv van Kleeck, Wm. W. Lancaster, William. Lescaze, Robert Littell,
Harriet Moore, William Allen Neilson, Mrs. George F. Porter, Raymond Robins, Geroid
T. Robinson. John Rothschild, Whitney Seymour. Lee Simonson, Graham R. Taylor,
Frederick Tilney, S. A. Trone, Allen W^ardwell, Richard Watts, Jr., Maurice Wertheim.
Avrahm Yarmolinsky, Mrs. Efrem Zimbalist
Executive Secretary : Virginia Burdick
Editor : Harriot Moore
July 23, 1937.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52d Street, Neto York City.
Dear Fred : I just noticed that your Library Committee wants this list returned
for the first, so I am sending it to you post haste.
Kathleen has sent me in detail her corrections and additions with which I
agree. I will make a few other suggestions on this list.
I find it a little difficult to be civil about the list because it is so obviously
biased under the cloak of being unbiased, but under the circumstances I suppose
I should be glad that the books which the branded "propaganda" are included
in the list at all. Therefore I will make no comment on the list which you can
forward to Miss Smith. But if you have any way of influencing Miss Smith, I
would suggest that you get the StekoU book removed as it is by far the worst.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Harriet Moore
Harriet Moore.
HM : KB
4092 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 643
June 16, 1937.
Mr. T. A. BissoN,
g/o Islorth China, Language School, Peiping.
Dear Art : Many thanks indeed for your letter, which I have shared with Chi.
Wliat you have to say is of very great help and has strengthened Chi in his
decision to delay his acceptance of the job in China for a few months. He had
after all definitely agreed to assist in the editing of a large study of the economic
history of China and he could not very well go away without first obtaining a re-
lease from that .iob. This he cannot look into for another two or three months.
How are tilings going with you and your family? You don't know how much
I envy your being in the Far East. Your article, which as you doubtless have
already seen we pul)lished in the last issue of Amerasia, was a swell job, particu-
larly as it was written before the Diet elections. It is going to be difficult to get
as good analyses of the Konoye Cabinet because it does not lend itself to such
clear-cut interpretation as did the Hayashi group. Nevertheless we are looking
around for what we can find. I hope you will be sending us a piece on China
pretty soon. Through printing first-hand reports we can perform a pretty im-
portant job in keeping people accurately informed and their minds working
along fruitful channels.
With best regards,
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
280 Chin Yo Hutang— (Handwritten).
Exhibit No. 644
Officers : Carl L. Alsberg, Chairman ; Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ; Miss Ada L.
Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Philip C. Jessup, Vice Chairman : Benjamin H. Kizer. Vice
Chairman ; Ray Lyman Wilbur, Vice Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Secretary, Charles J.
Rhoads, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant Treasurer
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations
1795 California Street, San Francisco; Telephone: Tuxedo 3114 — 129 East 52d Street,
New York Cltv : Telephone : Plaza 3-4700
Cable : INPARBL
San Francisco, October 11, 1938.
( Handwritten : )
Miss Margaret R. Taylor,
129 East 52d Street, Neiv Yorl; City.
Dear Margaret: Here is a letter to INIarion Paschal, Doris Duke Cromwell's
secretary. The Cromwell entourage arrived in New York, as I recall, by plane
shortly before I left for the West and, restless as Doris is reputed to be, I should
think there was a fairly good chance that they were still there. Will you be
so good as to fill in Paschal's address which can be found in my files and mail the
letter along with the Farley pamphlet? There should also be in my files her
office telephone number w'hich cost me six or seven cocktails to obtain but which
is now somewhere in our records.
I really don't know what technique to suggest if you and Carter are able to get
an appointment. Paschal is terrific over cocktails but whether that is the way
to do business with her I don't know. It is apparently essential to get by her
before Doris herself can be approached because she acts not only as secretary
and financial advisor on gifts but also as companion and best friend. Both gals
are evidently restless and romantic and are under the impression that they delve
deep into American life by making occasional visits to boys' clubs, slums and
settlements. I have talked with Paschal a good deal about Doris' terrible
money problems, the problem being knowing what to do with her income and
giving enough of it away to exactly balance the income tax schedules. I know
that about two years ago they were seriously considering setting up a foundation
but I don't think anything has come of that. At that time their main adviser
was Edwin Embree, president of the Rosenwald Fund. Carter knows him and
his peculiarities better than I do. He too, I should say, was a somewhat romantic
figure but then so is the IPR so T don't see why we can't all get together.
Finally, my ov\n advice is to make a perfectly frank and direct approach on
this money question and to completely avoid maneuvering. I should also sug-
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4093
gest, if you get a hearing, liitting at a figure of about five thousand dollars for
the first year on some specific project. I am glad to give you full authority to
invent new projects as tlie occasion warrants.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Fred
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 645
Officers of San Francisco Bay Region Committee : Ray Lyman Wilbur, Chairman ; Mrs.
Alfred McLaughlin, Vice Chairman ; Robert Gordon Sproul, Vice Chairman ; William F.
Morrish, Treasurer ; John H. Oakes, Secretary
Officers : Carl L. Alsberg, Vice Chairman : Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ; Miss
Ada L. Comstocii, Vice Chairman ; Frederick \^. Field, Secretary ; Charles J. Rhoads,
Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant Treasurer ; Carl L. Alsberg, Research Chairman
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations
57 Post Street
SAN FRANCISCO
Telephone ExBrook 5089
Cable Address : INPAREL
(Handwritten:) Confidential.
November 9, 1937.
Miss Catherine Porter,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, New York City, New York.
Dear Catherine : I failed, I believe, to report to you a part of tlie conversation
which Carter and I had with Miss Wallier of the Rockefeller Foundation two
weeks ago. Miss Walker informed me that the Foundation was now prepai'ed
to appoint some of the recipients of its international fellowships through the
Foreign Policy Association, the Council on Foreign Relations, and ourselves.
She wishes each of these organizations to find and call to the attention of the
Foundation persons who they believe will be promising and in return tlie Founda-
tion will permit the holder of the fellowship to work on the staff. I gathered
that we could probably have two such persons.
Coming west on the train, I ran over what I considered to be the best possibili-
ties. These included Walter Radius of San Francisco, Norman Hauwell who is
now an instructor at the University of Minnesota, Theodore Draper who is now on
the staff of the New Alasscs, Ernest Hauser, and Lawrence K. Rosinger. In my
own mind I have eliminated Rosinger from immediate consideration because I
do not think he has developed sufficiently to work successfully with a staff and
because, in any case, he should be encouraged to continue his concentration in
languages (including an American pronunciation of English). Hanwell already
being provided for, and the importance of having young persons of his ability in
our universities, could also be temporarily eliminated. Perhaps we could consider
him in another year. The other three, however, seem to me to be good candidates.
I should add a few comments on Theodore Draper, wiiom none of the staff
knows. The fact that he is on the board of the New Masses indicates that he is
a Communist. Whether he is a member of the party or not I liaven't the least
idea and I don't care. However, whether because of this connection be would
not be well received by the Foundation is another matter. If you or Lockwood
or someone else will look over the last eight or ten issues of the New Masses
you will find a number of articles by Draper on the Far East. In several
instances he has naturally overgeneralized in order to make his argument suitable
for the magazine for wliich he was writing. Other articles, however, are more
carefully written and represent, to my mind, a pretty shrewd interpretation.
However, I don't think it is quite fair to judge a person from articles which he
lias to write for a popular magazine any more than I should like to have my
candidacy for the honorary degree from the University of Hawaii, which I am
still looking for, judged on the basis of my Amerasia pieces.
I know Draper fairly well and have had a number of long talks with him. He
is a little too aggressive and a little too dogmatic for many people's taste. On tbe
88348—52— pt. 12-
4094 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
other hand he strikes me as havinjr a first class mind and as being seriously
interested in leaving journalism and concentrating on a long term study of the
Far East, particularly as it ties up with the United States. He has recently
written me as follows :
"I have been in a quandary for some months now on my future course. For the
past three years I have worked at some form of journalism which, while very
productive and fruitful, became more and more irksome and undesirable. I am
not altogether cut out for journalism in the sense that I cannot resist going into
questions more deeply and extensively than a journalist can afford. The work
requires a dispersion of efforts rather than a concentration. * * * Right now,
I should like to spend a few years digging deeply."
I am writing to Draper suggesting that he get in touch with either you or
Lockwood so that you can meet each other. I am not telling him definitely about
the availability of these Rockefeller fellowships because fur one thing I am not
at all sure that he can qualify academically and for another I am not sure that
you and I.ockwood would support my interest in him. I am writing him merely
that I should like him to know some of my colleagues so that if some opportunity
arises, we can help him find the sort of opportunity he is looking for. He and
Lockwood will probably not agree on a single point with regard to the Far East,
but the main point I would like from you both is your general impression of him.
Radius seems to me in every re.spect a suitable candidate, in fact I have from
the beginning put him at the top of this list. I find that he is anxious to return to
more academic work after two years' experience with an investment firm and
his academic record being excellent and his personality unusually favorable,
thei'e is no question in my mind but that we can secure the fellowship for him.
I shall try, in his case, to obtain sufficient traveling expenses in the fellowship to
permit his remaining for part of the time in the New York office and the remainder
Jiere.
This leaves Hauser and here I find myself in a rather complicated position.
I need your advice badly. The job I put up to him and hired him for in Septem-
ber was definite and concrete. It was (a) to make an occupational analysis of
the American Council members; (b) to take charge of Carter's itinerary for
November and December ; (c) to bring American Council work to the attention of
persons whom we could later approach for money; (d) to continue preparing
our press releases, and (e) to cooperate in general staff work wherever possible.
The only job available in our budget was the financial one and it was therefore
necessary to make it clear that he had to justify his presence on the staff with
respect to that aspect of his work.
Although I didn't go into this fully in New York, it was quite apparent to me
that Hauser was not making himself useful with regard to (a), (b). and (c) of
the above list. The woi-k on Carter's itinerary had almost completely fallen on
Hilda's shoulders and very little that I could see had been done in the direction
of the other two items.
I am not blaming Hauser entirely for this because it was clear from the be-
ginning that he was not the most suitable person in the world to find for this sort
of work. I thought, however, that in order to insure his own place on the staff he
would break his neck in making good on these tasks.
In view of the terms of his job, which I quite clearly described to him in con-
versation, I would have no hesitancy in telling him that the arrangement had
not worked out satisfactorily and that therefore we would have to drop him
from the staff at the end of December. If you and the others agree with my
analysis of what he has done, I would be perfectly justified in doing this. If I
do so, I should, of course, give him plenty of time to look around for something
else. It is very hard for me in planning next year's budget to see how I can
possibly justify adding his salary to our research expenses. I am afraid that
his presence oii the staff has to be in large part justified by his ability to advance
our business connections. In that case, I would feel justified in putting him
under the in-ovisions of a finance secretary. I am fully aware of the fact that
we need all the good people we can have on the research side, but here, un-
fortunately, we are strictly limited by the possibilities of our budget and these
possibilities, I am afraid, we have already overreached. Please, therefore, take
this up with others on the staff and send me at your early convenience your joint
recommendations.
Sincerely yours,
[S] Fred.
FbEDEEICK v. FlBXD.
FVFrb
P. S.— Please include Kate Barnes in any meeting with Draper.— FVF.
I
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4095
ExHiiUT No. 646
San Fkancisco, March 29, 193S.
Mr. Edwakd C. Carter,
129 East 52nd Street,
New York, New York.
Dear Mr. CARn:R: My interest in Chi's career is so great that I feel somewhat
responsible for seeing to it that he gets some sort of employment, at least during
the summer months when the lecture season, off which he has managetl to live
this year, is at low ebb. I wonder therefore if you have considered the sug-
gestion I made to you in a letter some weeks ago that Chi be connected with your
International Secretariat inquiry. I have not heard of your plans but recall
that in the original application to the Rockefeller Foundation there was some
mention of an augmented staff. I write now simply in order to keep Chi's name
prominently before you in case you wish special work done on China. Chen
Han-seng would, I think, give him a very high recommendatitm.
Sincerely yours.
Frederick V. Field.
F/tr
Exhibit No. 647
November 15. 1987.
Mr. Theodore Draper,
The New Masses, 31 East 27th Street,
New York City, N. Y.
Dear Ted : Moe of the Guggenheim Foundation has referred your fellowship
application to me and I have just sent him a strong endorsement of your can-
didacy. I hope you have some luck in that direction.
Incidentally, the statement of your projected study, which you included with
your application, is excellent and I hope that in some way or another, you will
be permitted to carry it out.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
FVFrb
Recommendation in St^'pport of Application for Guggenheim Fellowship,
Written for Theodore Draper, November 17, 1937, by Frederick V. Field
I am very glad indeed to comment on the application of Mr. Theodore Draper
for a Guggenheim fellowship.
I have known Draper personally for about two years during which I have had
a number of long conversations with him regarding American Far Eastern policy.
He is a serious student with a good mind. Because of his job on the editorial
board of The New Masses, his energies have had to be scattered over a much
wider fiL4d than anyone could handle thoroughly. He has felt increasingly uncom-
fortable at this situation and has wanted an opportunity to be temporarily relieved
from these editorial duties in order to go more deeply into American relations
with the Far East, the subject in which he is particularly interested.
I think that I have read everything that Draper has written in The New Musses
on the Far East. Several of the articles have shown a rather deep insight into
what was going on in China. I recall particularly an article which he published
early during the current phase of the war on China's defense strategy. He
showed excellent judgment in analyzing the war situation in China and in pre-
dicting the probable strategy of the nation's defense and the chief weaknesses
which would appear as the fighting dragged on.
Draper seems to have a first rate training in Marxism which whether or not it
provides all the answers for studying the American scene is unquestionably use-
ful in analyzing the Far East. He has a flexible mind which avoids mechanical
and dogmatic interpretations. I should think that if he were given a year in
which to concentrate on American Far Eastern policy, he would develop to be
an important worker in this field.
Draper has, to my knowledge, absolutely no funds of his own so that his only
chance of becoming an expert in this kind of work early in his career is to secure
a fellowship which will give him at least a year's freedom from economic worry.
Before knowing that he had applied for a Guggenheim fellowship, I had occa-
4096 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
siou to make a list of four or five of the younger Americans wlio had made prom-
ising beginnings in the study of tlie Far East and who deserved supp<)rt in which
I included Draper. I am, consequently, very glad to know that he has filed his
application with you and am very happy to recommend strongly his candidacy.
57 Post Steeet, November 9, 1937.
Mr. Theodore Diiaper,
The Masses, SI East 27th Street,
New York City, N. Y.
Dear Ted: I am terribly sorry that it was absolutely impossible for me to
have a talk with you when I visited New York 10 days ago. I was in a terrible
hurry to return to San Francisco and internal affairs in the Institute had to
receive first consideration.
The proposition you put up to me is certainly a sound one. I have no im-
mediate answer for it except that I am strongly endorsing your candidacy for
a Guggenheim fellowship. What your chances there are I don't know, except
for the fact that the Guggenheim people seem to have been moving to the right
in recent years. Their infrequent excursions on the left seem to be concentrated
in the arts rather than in the social sciences.
There are one or two vague possibilities in the near future which are still
too uncertain to put down on pai>er, but which are worth exploring. I would
like very much to have you meet one or two of my colleagues on the American
Council stalf so that you can get to know each other and so that they have their
own impressions of your abilities. I have written them, specifically Miss Porter
who is in charge of the olfice in my absence, and Bill Lockwood, an economist
who does a fair amount of our research work. You have probably seen some
of his stulf in the Far Eastern Survey. You have probably disagreed with
his conclusions, for in most instances I have myself. You will, nevertheless,
find him ai\ unusually agreeable person and in the field known as orthodox
economics he is first rate. Either he or Miss Porter will expect you to get in
touch with them so that you can get together and see what each other looks
like, etc. I have also suggested that Mrs. Kathleen Barnes, who is our exjiert
on the Soviet Union, join the gathering.
I am not going to forget what you have said in your letter and I have hoi>es
that before long we can find some way of providing an opportunity for you to
concentrate on Far Eastern developments and the American connection with
them. The meeting with some of my associates which I have suggested above
is a necessary first step in anything that we can do.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
FVFrb
Exhibit No. &48
1795 California Street, March 10, 1938.
Mr. Edward C. Garter,
129 East 52))d Street, New York, New York.
Dear Mr. Carter: I do not know how your plans for carrying out the large
incpiiry are developing but I want to make certain that you have in mind the
possibility of using Cirao-ting Ghi and Tsuro, the young .Japanese at Harvard
about whom I think I spoke to you and who has met Chen Hanseng and Kate
Mitchell. With regard to Chi, his schedule of work is such that I know he
would be alile to come on your staff <m a part- or full-time basis should you want
to employ him in any capacity. I need not, I think, point out to you his qualifica-
tions which are already entirely familiar to you.
I should, however, add a word in confidence regarding the possibility of Chi's
being employed by Wittfogel to edit his Chinese materials for you would not
want to make any move which would interfere with that project. From talking
with both Chi and Wittfogel at some length during my recent visit I came to
the conclusion that they would probably not be working together. This arises
frcmi the fact that Wittfogel will demand and require a tempo of work which
Chi, with his other interests, will find it impossible to maintain. Chi has offered
to work for Wittfogel four days a week but, if the latter purposes to edit his
materials as rapidly as he now plans, this will not, I know, be adequate. Further-
more, Chi's primary interest lies in current econcmiic and political situations
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4097
rather than in historical analyses. While no one eonld support Wittfogel's work
more stron.sly than Chi, I feel that he would a little bit prefer being connected
with soniethinix more current.
Sincerely,
Frederick V. Field.
F/g
ExHiRiT No. 049
JtT-Y 24, 1939.
-HA
\V\VL
We have not reached a decii-ion on how to solve our problem of keeping our
lay members for whom the Far Eastern Survey is a little too specialized closely
in touch with and interested in our general program. Negotiations regarding
the taking over of Anierasia, which some of us have felt would at least in part
meet (his pioblem. have reached a plateau because of our Chairman's not being
ccjnvinced that we have found the correct formula. Jessup is not, I think, opposed
to our taking over Anierasia for any reason except that he doubts whether a
magazine of that or any other nature is what we really need to introduce into
our program. He lias a feeling that a magazine, no matter how popularly writ-
ten, remains a fairly substantial item to give peoi)le. He is skeptical that it will
meet the demand which he assumes exists among these lay members for a periodic,
(juick glance at the higli spots of Pacific area relations.
Wliile the Amerasia idea is by no means dead and while Jessup himself will
be very glad to look into that suggestion further. I think there is enough sub-
stance in what he says to warrant exploring a rather different scheme. I am
consetpiently attaching to this memorandum a copy of the latest one-page bulletin
from the Council on Foreign Relations. These bulletins are is.sued at irregular
intervals, perhaps twelve or fifteen times a year. They are never longer than
a page and tlie page is always divided as this one is. half illustration, half prose.
Do you think that something along this line could l)e done by this otBce on a
regular periodic basis without overtaxing our staff or budget?' I have not gone
into the cost of reproducing and mailing l,rA)0 of these but doubt whether it
comes to very much.
I should like very much to have your further ideas. Let me emphasize that
I am submitting the attached bulletin not as an exact example of what we might
do but in oi-(ler to start your minds working along that general direction.
FVF
Exhibit No. 6.50
16 West Twelfth Street, March 23, 1942.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
Inst it lite of Pacific Beta t ions.
129 East Fiftj/sccond Street, Neio York Citii.
Dear Mr. Carter: Thank for sending on Mr. Pollard's recent letter. I have
taken off a copy for my files and am herewith returning the original. I have also
to thank you for sending me a copy of the changes from the first draft of the
letter you sent him.
Progress, if any, is slow in my investigations. I am informed, however, that
the matter has been brought to the attention of Mr. Patterson, the Under Secre-
tary of War. We are now waiting a report from Mr. Patterson's office on which
will depend the next move.
Glad to read the news about RWll's spring offensive.
Sincerely,
[s] Fred
Frederick V. Field.
4098 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
129 East 52nd Street,
A^ew York City, March 3, 1942.
Mr. Fkederick V. Field,
16 West 12th Street, Neiv York City.
Dear Fred : I wonder whether you would be willing to draft a reply from me
to Pollard in answer to this letter which has just reached my desk.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Carter.
(Handwritten.) Not sent?
129 East r)2ND Street,
Neiv York City, March 12, 1942.
Mr. John A. Pollaud,
Special Reports Division, Coordinator of I)tforniution,
210 Madison Avenue, Neiv York City.
Dear Mk. Pollard : Thank you for your letter of the 2sth regarding ]\Ir. Field.
I have no hesitation in testifying to Mr. Field's political integrity and freedom
from activities which might place his loyalty in question.
I was associated with him intimately from 1929 until September 1940. During
this period his Americanism was of the most rugged and valuable character.
He was an indefatigable and exceptionally able student of domestic and foreign
policy and became one of our foremost authorities on the Far East. He saw
the menace of Japan, and I do not know of anyone who more unerringly envisaged
the inevitable movement of Japan into Indo-China, Thailand, Malaya, and the
Netherlands Indies. He again and again called attention to the costly appease-
ment policy of London and Washington, and as I remember, indicated that if
the United States was not willing to tight to prevent the Japanese occupation of
French ]ndo-China, all of Southeast Asia would fall to the Japanese.
In the autumn of 1940 Mr. Field broke with me in the sense that he resigned
from the staff of the Institute becau.se he recognized that it was impossible for
him to continue on the Institute staff and engage in political activities as planned
by the American Peace Mobilization. He felt that the war as defined by the
London and Paris (Tovernments in 19.'^9 was in danger of involving the United
States in Chamberlainism, in the underwriting of British ImperiaJism, and in
the ultimate appeasenient of Germany and Japan as advocated at various times
by the Cliveden set. He therefore resigned from the IPR, threw himself into
the APM, carried on a nation-wide educational campaign, and to gain publicity
for this campaign organized the picketing of the White House.
Though I had a great deal of sympathy for many of his ideas I liad tried to
dissuade him from joining the APM because I thought it might endanger both
his research and political usefulness, and also because I felt that the sooner the
United States got into the war the sooner it could be transformed from an
Imperialist war into a people's war against the new and terrible imperialisms
of Germany and Japan.
The Congress of the United States, many employees of our government and a
great many trusted officers of our armed forces were in 1940 in my view as inade-
quate in their political analysis as Mr. Field. A very high percentage of loyal
Americans were working, as Mr. Field was working, to keep us out of the war.
They did this for all kinds of motives and all kinds of reasons. Yet the vast
majority of these are accepted today as citizens of integrity, completely free from
activities which might i)lace their loyalty in question. I would trust Mr. Field s
integrity more than I would certain well known isolationists, because I think
he possesses m(u-e than most a keen awareness of the essence of our American
democracy.
There will, of course, be wide difference of opinion as to the wisdom of APM's
picketing the White House. Personally, I think it was an ill-advised move.
It was defended by its protagonists on the ground that APM felt obligated to
exi>ose the nature of what they regarded as the phony war which was being
waged at the beginning. The difference between APM and certain genuinely
subversive muvements was that APM was attempting to do everything in The
open, and its picketing of the White House was an attempt to bring out into the
open before the American peojile and the American government the important
issues which it believed nuist be faced by tlie American people.
That Mr. Field could be guilty of any disloyalty to the United States is in-
conceivable. The great advantage he has over many is that liis political analysis
of the Far Ea.st has been far in advance of most of our best informed citizens.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4099
His knowledge of the Far East is very extensive. His capacity for work is great.
His usefulness to the Government would, in my view, be beyond question.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Cautkr.
Exhibit Xo. (Jol
129 East 52nd Street,
liew York, Neio York, May 4, 193S.
Mrs. RvTH Young,
Food Research Institute, Stanford University, California.
Dear jNIrs. Young : Several of the officers of the Canadian Institute of Inter-
national Affairs were in New York wlien I arrived and I took up with them the
point you raised in regard to entering Canada for the purpose of taking up
employment there during the time of the Banff Conference. They confirmed your
suspicions that there might be some difficulty involved and urged us to attach
you to the secretariat before you entered Canada.
I am writing Loomis in regard to this point and assume that you will soon be
hearing from him.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field,
Acting Research Secretary.
Exhibit No. 652
Philip C. Jessup
conference members
* Philip Jessup, Professor of International Law, Columbia University, New York.
Source : Problems of the Pacific, 1933, Proceedings of the Fifth Conference
of the Institute of Pacific Relations, Banff, Alberta, Canada, August 14-26,
1933. Page 456
( * indicates chairman of round table)
international officers of the ipr
Philip C. Jessup, Chairman, Pacific Council. Professor of International Law,
Columbia University, New Y'ork.
Source: Problems of the Pacific, 1939, Proceedings of the Study Meeting
of the Institute of Pacific Relations, 7th Conference, Virginia Beach, Vir-
ginia, November 18 to December 2, 1939 (page 273)
AMERICAN council NATIONAL OFFICERS
Philip C. Jessxip, Vice Chairman
Board of Trustees
Philip C. Jessup
Source : Annual Report of the American Council of the IPR, 1938
(page 58)
Conference Members
Philip C. Jessup (1933, 1939), Chairman Pacific Council, I. P. R. Professor of
International Law, Columbia University. Assistant Solicitor, U. S. Department
of State. 1924-25. Legal Adviser to American Ambassador to Cuba, 1930.
Member Executive Committee, Harvard Research in International Law. Chair-
man United States delegation.
Source : War and Peace in the Pacific. A Preliminary Report of the Eighth
Conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations on Wartime and Postwar
Cooperation of the United Nations in the Pacific and the Far East. Mont
Tremblant, Quebec, December 4—14, 1942 (page 159)
Conference Members
Jessup, Philip C. (1933, 1939, 1942), Professor of International Law, Columbia
University. Former Chairman of the Pacific Council, I. P. R. Chief, Division
of Personnel and Training OFRRO ; Secretary pro-tem of Council of UNRRA,
4100 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
1948. Legal adviser to American Ambassador to Cuba, 1930. Author : "The
United States and the World Court," 1929; "International Security," 1935;
"The Life of Elihu Root," 1938. Chairman, United States delegation.
Source : Security in the Pacific, A Preliminary Report of the Ninth Con-
ference of the Institute of Pacific Relations, Hot Springs, Virginia, Janu-
ary 6-17, 1945 (page 157)
Western Union Telegram
WiNSTED, Conn., Nov. 23.
WUT23 7 XC— 1032A
Edw. C. Carter :
Approve nominations suggest Jessup for research chairman.
Feed.
Exhibit No. 653
February 23, 1937.
CP from FVF :
What is the story of Owen Lattimore's Mongolian sheep which Tony Jenkin-
son wants? Please return with any information.
FVF from CP : What Tony has in mind is probably Owen's long discourse on
Mongolia during the first general session on the U. S. S. R. The verbatim notes
of this are not in the office at the moment, but here is the part about the sheep
as finally edited by Owen and included in the forthcoming Problems of the
Pacific :
"The nomadic Mongols had a self-sufficient economy in which the sheep
was the economic luiit. The woo] of the sheep is fairly coarse, but it is
excellent for making felt tents. The skin makes a warm coat. The sheep
is an "all-i-ound" :inimal unlike the specialized western type. The meat is
of good quality and supplies food. It supplies milk in the summer rather
than meat. In the steppes which are treeless, sheep dung is used for fuel.
From this one animal the Mongols get food, clothing, housing, and fuel."
(Tony will doubtless remember that it was at that point that Owen added
that the sheep furnished practically everything but anmsement — which classic
thought was carefully edited out.)
If by any chance Tony wants the whole story about improving the wool, etc.,
it can be found on page 37 of the typescript of Chapter III of the Proceedings
wliich is in Kate Mitchell's hands.
Exhibit No. 654
August 23, 1934.
Mr. Newton D. Baker,
CJiairnian, Aiiicricfni Coinicil. rii-stitvtc of Pacific Relations,
Union Trust Building, Cleveland, Ohio.
Dear Mr. Baker: 1 am very happy to accept the position of Secretary of the
American Council and to assinne office on the first of September.
It is most encouraging to know that I have your support and that I may oc-
casionally confer with you In legard to the development of our activities.
I look forward to assuming this new responsibility with enthusiasm and hope
that I shall be able to cai'ry it out with the success that has attended the efforts
of my predecessors.-
Sincerely yours, •
(Signed) Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 655
April 20, 1933.
Mr. Loomis : Before leaving, I should like to summarize briefly a few jwints in
regard to the Central Secretariat.
One of the principles laid down early in the Institute's history was that the
work of the organization should be carried out through already existing bodies
insofar as possible, and the creation of an elaborate Institute organization, as
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4101
such, uiiuimized. This policy has been strictly adhered to in all branches of our
work and in every National Council, or at least in all those formed especially on
belialf of the Institute. The yrinciiile that the organization of the Institute
should limit its activities to the stimulation and coordination of the work carried
out by others, designed to fulfill the aims of the institute, has been closely
followed.
In order properly to perform these functions of initiation and coordination,
skillful administration is necessary and as the Institute's full program has got-
ten under way the burden of administration has naturally increased — not only
that, but the applicatictn of general policies and philosophies of the Institute has
become more and more complex and at times a matter for delicate handling.
And so while adhering strictly to the original principle of minimizing the organi-
zation set-up, considerations of etlieiency in administration and coordination and
the activities of others have pointed to the importance of maintaining a well-
etpiipped staff in each of the National Councils and particularly in the Central
Secretariat.
It was with these general ideas in mind that some of the Secretaries of the
Shanghai Conference presented a memorandum to the Pacific Council urging the
appointment to your staff of three or four Junior Secretaries from various im-
portant National Councils. On account of the financial situation and for other
reasons it has been possible to put this recommendation only in partial opera-
tion. I would suggest, nevertheless, that the experiment that we have been con-
ducting here for three months with a strengthened Central Secretariat has at
least indicated the possibilities of making the arrangement permanent and even
somewhat augmenting this temporary staff. It is quite impossible to apply to
specific situations and specific countries the general policies of the Institute
without the active and continuous cooperation of representatives from the larger
National Councils who are in close touch with the peculiar conditions in their
countries and with the offices of their respective National Councils. A common
line of action has to be carried out in one way in the United States and very
likely in tpiite another way in Japan. The successful application to tliese general
lines of action must be made by qualified representatives of each country who
by long association with the Institute have a thorough understanding of its
methods and philosophies.
In the light of the above points. I was very much pleased in the i-esolution ap-
proved by the Advisory Committee yesterday to the same effect. I hope very
much that the Pacific Council will .support the principle of maintaining a strong
central otfice, always on the understanding, of course, that the activities of such
a staff will be limited to administration and coordination.
I woiald have some hesitancy in making these remarks which apparently call
for explanation and iulditional financial burden during these impossible times
were it not for certain considerations. Among the.se are the fact that you have
s(jmehow managed this wii\ter to augment the staff on a greatly reduced budget,
the fact that b\ stimulating the interest of various National Councils greater
support from each may be anticipated, and the fact that the more for which you
have to raise money, the more you are likely to raise. I think that with the type
of organizati(;nal set-up I have in mind, we can do a good job. If this is true,
our chances of securing support are proportionately great.
Frederick V. Field,
Actin(j Research Sccretarij.
(Matsukata to Loomis)
May 2, 1933.
Memorandum
Mr. LooMis : Having read what Field wrote before be left here, I find myself
in complete agreement with his opinion on the necessity of strengthening the
Central Secretariat. The fact that I am in complete agreement with him seems
to show that we were working very closel.v in these months since February, and
were building up opinion in tlie course of and from the result of our cooperative
works. And this, perhaps, is one of the great advantages the Institute method
provides.
To have enforcement in the form of Associate Secretaries, or otherwise, from
the National Councils at the Central Secretariat is very advisable, as Field
writes, from the standpoint of efficiency and administration, but it is also very
desirable for more intensive cooperation of the various National Councils. To
make the National Councils feel at home with the work carried on in the Central
4102 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Secretariat and to make them feel that they are actually contributing to the
common cause of the Institute, the system we have had for the last three months
seems to be essential and necessary. In other words, to work our cooperative
scheme is very important to bring forth cooperative feeling, which is the basis
of all the activities of our Institute.
When I left Japan I had two definite aims. One was to serve the Central
Secretariat and the other was to serve the Home Council, 1. e., to help the
Japanese Council in their preparation for the Banff Conference and at the
same time to help them build up a stronger National Council. For the first point,
I am not in a position to judge as to my achievement, but for the second point I
am pretty certain that my presence here has helped a great deal in making the
people in Japan work in closer touch with the central office. At the same time
I felt I could help the Home Council to carry on organization of the council on
a more serious basis. It is essential, I think, for healthy development of the
Institute as a whole.
To have the assistance of Chinese and Japanese secretaries seems to me very
useful for bringing out a really well-balanced "Pacific Affairs." I am not at
all satisfied with what I did in this respect, namely, in heliiing the editor of the
magazine, but still I am confident that it is essential for the steady development
of our Institute organ. Moreover, having such cooperation of people who can
take care of current topics, first hand, regarding their respective countries, seems
to be exceedingly advisable for developing our library along the unique line of
being a "Pacific" library. But before we decide as to the future of the library
there seem to be many things to be agreed upon such as the nature of our future
research work, the strength of the Central Secretariat, etc. At any rate, from
the standpoint of the Central Secretariat having a well-organized library at its
headquarters will mean that it is not only the administrative center of the
Institute, but also the center of studies of the Pacific area. ( See "Memorandum
on Pacific Library.")
I have emphasized the points which were not referred to by Field but it does
not mean, as I wrote in the beginning of this memorandum, that I have anything
to criticize on the opinion which he expressed, biit I would repeat once more that
I am in complete agreement with what Field says.
Exhibit No. 656
(Pencilled : ) Lasker
January 22, 1940.
Memorandum to : BL
From : FVF
Here is a manuscript for a forthcoming Public Affairs Committee pamphlet on
"Propaganda and the War." I wonder if you would he interested in reading it
and giving me any comments you may have and which I could pass on to the
editor. Maxwell Stewart. I am also rather anxious to ask Dorothy Borg to
look it over, so I would appreciate it if you could arrange with her so that both
of you could give me comments before the early deadline of January 30th.
(Pencilled: Lasker's comment 1/23/40 sent to Max Stewart 1/23/40 except
following paragraph.
Paragraph attached (pencilled out) :
The Foreign Policy Association which has done so much to educate the Ameri-
can public to a tolerant reception of diverse views on, and interpretations of,
current international issues, should be first among the organizations that are
trying to promote a similar learning process in relation to printed literature,
instead of joining in the unintelligent hue and cry against "propaganda."
January 23, 1940.
Exhibit No. 657
July 26, 1937.
Mr. Nathaniel Peffrr,
c/o Consulate General of the United States,
Tokyo.
Dear Peffer: Many thanks indeed for your letter of June 24 from Peiping
and your later note of July 2nd. Regarding the first, your views are most in-
teresting though I still think that in the long run China has more to lose by
continuing its peasantry in a condition of extreme poverty and by becoming
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC REl.ATIONS 4103
increasingly subject to Japanese exploitation than by a strong fight. I see
frightful destruction either way, but Great Britain, France, ourselves, and other
foreign countries completely lacking in both intellect and guts. I see no third
way out of the Sino-Japanese situation.
I note your remarks regarding those people whom you believe greatly over-
estimate (a) the strength and importance of the Chinese Communists, and (b)
the fighting strength of China as a whole. I surely am one of those whom you
have in mind. These points require much thought and discussion which cannot
be undertaken in a letter. But at this point my one comment is that we are
putting an enormous amount of emphasis on the political content of an army
at war as a substitute for military training and material equipment. On
political content the Chinese will have it all over the Japanese and this dif-
ferential will increase as fighting becomes prolonged. In my opinion this will
more than compensate for China's material and military weaknesses. This is
one of the important points, it seems to me, which explained the Red Army's
ability to remain intact from 1928 to Sian. I think it will count similarly on
behalf of all Chinese troops versus the Japanese military machine.
For the last three weeks the one great question in our minds has been whether
or not Chiang Kai-shek was going to support the 29th Army. It is clear that
China has already lost temporarily at least the Peiping-Tientsin area. It could
have saved it only by bombarding the Japanese troops as they came into the
country. Once the Japanese army got into position nothing on earth, let alone
Chinese troops, could move it. China must therefore, or so we suppose from our
New York desks, make a stand if it intends to make a stand at all, at a line no
further north than Paoting. Still the question remains, is Chiang Kai-shek
really going to take a stand or is he merely going through enough motions to
rationalize what he is doing before his own people without liecoming involved in
any headlong collision with the Japanese? If it is the latter, and I suspect that
is the case, then in a few months' time all of Hopei will be lost and the road will
be cleared for the next provinces, which I suppose will be Shansi and Shantung.
Having engaged in the utter absurdity of writing to you who are in Peiping
what is going on in China, let me now reply to your second note regarding Miss
Agnes Roman. Some weeks ago I had a long letter from her as well as a note
speaking most highly of her from Bill Holland. It happens that Russell Shiman.
the Editor of our Far Eastern Survey, is leaving for the Far East via Europe
and a Rockefeller Fellowship at the end of this week. I have asked him to look
up Miss Roman when he is in Shanghai and to see if he cannot work out some-
thing with her in relation to the Survey. We are not now in a position to take
anyone on our staff because we have a tough enough time as it is paying those
who are already here. If something breaks for us, however, or if I suddenly
discover how to stomach money raising, I'll keep her prominently in mind.
Do I gather that you are not to be here until December? We had hoped to
see you much earlier. I know your sister will be disappointed. She, incidentally,
is a swell person and is doing practically a one-man job at putting Amerasia
through the press each month. We were lucky to have found her.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 658
September 4, 1935.
Mr. Owen Lattimore,
Peiping,
Dear Owen : Since I first learned that you had arranged for an article on
the Chinese Communist movement from Harold Isaacs I hoped that it would
be possible to find someone to write a reply. I was very pleased with the way
the Isaacs article turned out, but it is after all a very controversial interpreta-
tion of the Chinese situation. I would not like to see Pacific Affairs leave the
Chinese Soviet movement go with a Trotskyist exposition. Certainly an orthodox
Communist view is needed to counterbalance it.
I knew of no one in this country whom we would invite to reply to Isaacs.
It would be difficult for a foreigner who wanted to return to China in the near
future to present an orthodox Communist view, and it would be impossible for
a Chinese. For Pacific Affairs to accept an article on this sort of subject by
someone using a pseudonym would seem to me nonsense. Whether you could
find someone in China to write the article I questioned, for the same reason that
it seemed impossible to find someone in this country.
4104 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Happily what seems to me a solution is at hand. In the September issue of
China Today, which as you know is published in New York by a left-wing group
of Chinese, appears a reply to Isaacs' Pacific Affairs article by someone who
signs himself Hansu Chan. I think the article is well written and the points
he makes are certainly the correct orthodox Communist rebuttals to a Trotsky
position. I am enclosing that article and al.so an editorial appearing in the same
issue of the magazine on "The Spread of the Soviet ^Movement in China."
My suggestion is that you incorporate excerpts from Hansu Chan's rebuttal
in an extended editorial comment signed by yourself. You could word your own
comments in such a way as to disavow any responsibility for the rebuttal and
so as not to involve yourself personally in the controversy. I urge this simply
becau.'<e it seems to me that the subject of the Chinese Communist movement is
of paramount importance and that therefore I'acific Affairs must analyze it
from different angles. This view is shared by four or five of my colleagues on
the American Council staff.
Of course this whole scheme may strike you as much less important than it
does me. I am simply expressing my own views and that of a few others here
in the hope that the suggestion corresponds with your own thoughts on the
matter. Catherine Porter is away on vacation, otherwise she would be writing
this note rather than I.
Yours sincerely,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 059
( Handwritten : ) Lattimore
New York City, Aiiril 22, 1940.
Mr. Owen Lattimore,
300 GUman Hall, Johns Hopkhis University,
Haiti III ore. }frir!i}(iiiil.
Dear Owen : I wonder if you have replied to the rather strange memorandum
(attached — see also Yarnel's comment to ECC herewith) on the embargo qttestion
by Colonel Ottosen of the University of AVashington R. O. T. C. which Charles E.
Martin sent to you. While Ottosen makes two or three interesting points he by
no means covers the subject. The jjoinrs that he passes over without comment — •
as for instance the little item of jietroleum lieiug used for airplanes — are by all
odds the most important. It seems to me that it would be worth while getting ati
answer to this memorandum in his hands, perhaps via Martin. If you have
done nothing about it I thought I might send it over to Harry Price and get him to
work out a reply which he might then get Yarnell to endorse.
Speaking of the embargo reminds me that I am afraid I did not get enough con-
sideration of your point of view at the Council on Foreign Relations dinner the
other night. Those are somewhat peculiar gatherings and I don't think they
can be used to change people's points of view. For one thing, the sessions are too
short and the dinners too long. All I tried to do was to get general participation
in the discussion and this I did, you will recall, by the elementary procedure of
calling on people in order to wake them up from their cigars, and the result was,
of course, a very confused series of expressions.
I think it is very important that, by a little serious discussion supplemented
perhaps by occasional letters, we try to reanalyze our own views on the embargo.
I am giving very brief thought to the matter on busses and between phone calls
here. I have recalled that during the early stages of the wai' in the Far East
we were pressing hard for an American embargo on exports with the warning that
if we did not take action soon it would be too late. I am inclined to think that we
were right and that it is now important to remember that we always added that
proviso al>out action befoi'e it was too late. I am more and more inclined to
think that we must now recognize that the time for an emliargo has perhaps
passed, that is that it is already too late. I am now inclined to think that an
embargo would actually be a dangerous move because of the European war and
particularly because of the inability of the Allies to get the upper hand in the
tirst months of the war and the additional factor that an election year makes
American policy even more haywire than usual. The Far Eastern scene is one
in which .Tapan may very likely take further provocative steps. The danger of
their invading some area in southeastern Asia, not necessarily the Netherlands
Indies, seems to me a real one. They might quite possibly be provoked by our
establishing an embargo. If we concluded that this was the likely result and if
we hold to (mr original belief that the spreading of the Japanese war area to
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC REIATIONS 4105
soutlieastern Asia would be one of the most important steps involving iis directly
in the Far Eastern war, I think we should discontinue advocating the embargo
policy.
I still hold to the view that the only purpose of positive policy is to provide the
minimum risk of eventual involvement in war.
Whether these considerations pertain to restrictions of one sort or another on
Unitefl States imports from Japan, I am not sure. 1 am indined to think that
imi>ort restrictions should be advocated as thf most powerful and reasonably safe
course that is now open to us. It is hard fur me to see how Japan can retaliate
in a military way aiiainst United States tariffs on her goods. Certainly the
danger of such retaliation would not be great if the tariffs were imposed grad-
ually and in such a way that they were ba.sed on the well-established principles
of nondiscrimination in international trade. Again, however, if we do advocate
import restrictions, we must introduce the timing factor and point out that here
again the time when they can he imi)osed safely, if we so concluded, is limited.
Obviously the l()nger we continue narrowing the safe alternatives of policy the
more certain we are of not being able to take the constructive steps which seem
to nie essential if we are to avoid almost certain hostilities.
I wish you would write me your thoughts on these questions for while I know
that you are still peaking in favor of an embargo I imagine that these same
doubts have occurred to you. One further consideration I should add is that
whereas before the outbreak of war in Etirope the possibility of a clash between
the I'nited States and Japan was not something to terrify us if it had to take
place, it will now certainly link us immediately into the E'uropean war and that is
sometliing which is to my mind unthinkable.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 060
Officers of San Fraufisco Bay Reaion Group: Ray Lyman Wilbur, Chairman ; Mrs. Alfr«'(l
.McLauKlilin, Vice Cliairman : Robert Gordon Sproul. Vice Chairman : Jes.sp Steinhart,
Treasurer ; John H. Oakie, Secretary
National Officers : Carl L. Alsberg. Chairman : Wallace M. Ale.xanrter, Vice Chairman :
Mi.ss Ada L. ("omstocl^. Vice Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Secretary : Charles J. Rhoads,
Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern. Assistant Treasurer : Carl L. Alsberg, Research Chair-
man : Galen M. Fisher. Counselor on Research & Education
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations
san francisco
Telephone E.xBrook 1458 — Cable Address : INPAREL
1795 California Street
March 17. 19.38.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
129 East o2nd Street, New York, New York.
Dear Mr. Carter: I am very much interested to learn that you are to speak
at the Hippodrome on the Soviet Union and present world events in a meeting
being arranged by Corliss Lamont. I wish I could be there to hear you.
I cannot think of any special points which I would like to have you' make on
behalf of the American Council. I very much doubt whether either Mr. Morgan
or Mr. Rockefeller will be in your audience so that strictly financial problems
will probably not have to be considered. Your speech will doubtless be concerned
entirely with the subject you have been asked to handle. I cannot think of
anything I can suggest to add to your own close knowledge of the Soviet position
nor to your interpretation with which I find myself completely in agreement.
There are points which, it seems to me, have to be made over and over again to
American audiences. They include :
(a) The fact that to anyone who will take the trouble to read the detailed
])roceedings of the famous Moscow trials and even to people who will read
enough American newspapers to correct the obvious prejudices of any one of
them, this whole series of trials makes sense. The story of the internal revolt
against what is called the Stalin regime, but what is actually a large hierarchy
of committees of which Stalin is the chief secretary, is to my mind a clear one
4106 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
and a consistent one. Most Americans genuinely object, as I do, to ruthless
mettiods of suppression. I do not try to defend this in the Soviet Union and
I see no point in anyone's doing so. I object to the same thing in the suppres-
sion of labor activities in this country where evidences of brutality during the
last eighteen months, if brought together, would make a very ominous record.
Obviously, the important thing is to stress the fundamental background on which,
it seems to me, there should be general sympathy with what the Soviet Union
is trying to do, and to isolate the details which one can very legitimately criticize.
(b) The Soviet Union's foreign policy, particularly as it relates to the Far
East and here particularly as it affects China's inland frontier. The prevailing
view is the one represented by the so-called Peter Fleming mind, namely, that
Soviet imperialism is just the same thing as British or American or Japanese
imperialism. You will find in the current issue of Amerasia what is to my mind
an exceptionally clear article by Owen Lattimore which does pretty well in
distinguishing between the admittedly expanding Soviet influence in the Mon-
golian region and the military Imperialism of the Japanese.
(c) More and more people are including the Soviet Union among the fascist
dictatorships. The names of Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler are often grouped
with the implication that each stands for the same system. To my mind, as
you know, there is an extremely fundamental difference between the Soviet dic-
tatorship and those in Germany, Hitler and Japan. There is not, however, a
very great deal of difference in the superficial characteristics of these dictator-
ships. The methods employed by each are often similar; the important thing
is not only the situation in which the dictatorships operate but the purposes for
which dictatorial methods are employed.
I could go on through the alphabet but think I had better leave it at these
few points which happen to be in the front of my mind. I certainly don't think
it is our job to defend the Soviet Union. My interest is in defending the United
States by trying to bring some clarification in the public's mind as to what is
going on abroad in which we are vitally concerned.
Wishing you lots of luck.
Sincerely yours,
( Signed ) Fred
f/g Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 662
OfBcers of San Franeisco Ba.v Region Group : Ray Lyman Willnir, Chairman ; Mrs. Alfred
McLaughlin, Vice Chairman ; Robert Gordon Sproul, Vice Chairman ; Jesse Steinhart,
Treasurer ; John H. Oakie, Secretary
National Officers : Carl L. Alsberg, Chairman ; Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ;
Miss Ada L. Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Secretary ; Charles J. Rhoads,
Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austeru, Assistant Treasurer ; Carl L. Alsberg, Research Chair-
man ; Galen M. Fisher, Counselor on Research and Education
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations
57 Post Street, San Francisco
Telephone ExBrook 1458 — Cable Address : INPAREL
(Handwritten:) FVF— 1 : 00 (Fri. luncheon, 18th— 12$)), 'Wittfogel.
January 31, 1938.
Miss Catherine Porter,
American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East r>2nd street. New York, New York.
Dear Catherine: Will you call a meeting of the Executive Committee for
whatever day is generally convenient, the week following my arrival on the 17th?
If the meeting could be held the following Wednesday, Thursday, or Fi'iday it
would give me time after my arrival to prepare the agenda and send the necessary
reports to those attending.
As nearly as I can figure now, the agenda should include the following items :
(1) Approval of the budget for 1938.
(2) Plans for raising funds in 1938, including special arrangaments to
be made with Mr. Carter.
(3) A report on the development of our groups on the West Coast.
(4) The question of affiliation as a consultative member of the National
Peace Conference.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC REIATIONS 4107
(5) Plans for the New York discussion conference of the American Coun-
cil members.
(6) The location of the New York office.
This last point is not an urgent one, though I should like to have it given con-
sideration fairly soon. We now pay a large enough rent in New York so that
if we moved away from the center of the city we could probably get very much
more space with more protection against fire at the same price. What would
you think of our moving up near Columbia, for instance? And if so, could you
find out for purposes of discussion what sort of rent is charged for the sort of
house on 117th Street which the Carnegie Endowment, the International Insti-
tute of Social Research, and other such organizations occupy. Those houses are
rather dark but they provide a fair amount of office space and good rooms for
books and meetings. I cannot see that there is any very great advantage to being
located in the middle of the city except that heretofore the office was located
near my own apartment. In view of my moving downtown when I return to
New York, this significant point will be eliminated.
Totally unrelated to the above is the fact that the American Council will defi-
nitely move its offices in about three weeks to a residence at 1795 California
Street. You may, therefore, tell Hilda to go ahead with the printing of the new
letter paper, although we do not yet know what our new telephone number will
be.
Aside from the many things which I shall have to discuss with you and the
other members of the staff in New York, I shall want to have sessions of an hour
or so with Peffer, Wittfogel, and Christy. It might be a good idea to aiTange
for these appointments at Columbia, say the Monday or Tuesday after my arrival,
arranging for luncheon with Wittfogel and times before and after luncheon with
the other two. Is Mortimer Graves likely to be in New York during my visit?
If so, I shall also want to reserve a good deal of time for conferences with him.
I shall also want to spend several hours with my Amebasia colleagues and
would appreciate it if you would let them know my dates.
I think it would be a good idea if you would arrange a list of topics which I
should discuss with the members of the staff so that we can proceed in an orderly
fashion. I think you know the points to be raised as well or better than I so
I shall not attempt to make suggestions.
Your letter of January 25th brings up a few points to which I should reply.
In the first place, I shall be gald to see Mr. Walworth of Houghton, Mifllin
Company when I am in New York.
Secondly, I have not incliided John Fairbank of Harvard in the more recent list
of candidates for membership secretary because I am reasonably certain that
he would not want to concentrate as much on money raising as the job demands.
I have a very high regard for him and would some day like to see him associated
with us in some other capacity.
The list to whom Lockwood recommends that I write asking for further sug-
gestions regarding candidates for this job is in part a good one and I am today
dictating letters to Spykman, Stacy May. Donald Young, E. E. Barnett, Lobeii-
stine, and Water Van Kirk. I am asking them to send their replies to you in
New York. You will find enclosed a sample letter. In the meantime I trust you
are approaching the three or four people whom I recommended in a recent letter.
You might also add to your list Dr. Stephen Duggan in case I failed to mention
him before.
If an expert on China is badly needed for the Far Eastern Survey, as I am
sure that he is, why not speed up a decision on another Rockefeller Foundation
fellow and pick someone who would fill this gap in our present staff? In my
opinion we have already lost two or three months of such a person's time by our
inability to decide on a candidate.
I am delighted that Miss Cynthia Power has made such a favorable impression.
I shall look forward to seeing her in San Francisco and I hope that you will
especially recommend to her that she call on us in our new quarters as soon as
she arrives. We have fewer German hofbraus in San Francisco than you do in
New York but my researches on the last two Saturday nights indicate that there
are a number of substitutes. Incidentally, is Miss Power the daughter of Sir
John Power? I assume that she is.
Sincerely yours,
[s]-Fred
Frederick V. Field.
FVF/g
4108 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. G63
Telephone, Plaza 3-4700 Cable, INPAREL, New York-
Officers : Newton D. Baker, Chairman : Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman : Edward C.
Carter, Vice Chairman ; Miss Ada L. Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Mrs. F, Louis Slade,
Vice Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Secretary ; Charles J. Khoads, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda
Aiistern, Assistant Treasurer : Carl Ij. Alsherjr, Research Chairman
Staflf : Joseph Barber, Jr., Kathleen Barnes, Annette Blumenthal, Miriam S. Farley, Eliza-
beth B. Field, Nancy S. Hushes, Catherine Porter, Jeanette D. Randolph. Russell G.
Shiinan, Helen Wiss
AMERICAN COUNCIL
Institute of PACinc Rklatio.\s
129 East 52d Street, New York City
December 17, 1934.
Mr. E. C. Carter,
Chatham House.
Dear Mb. Carter: Thank .von for tlie coii.v of the hiblioiiraphy ou Economic
China iirepare<l for tlie I. P. R. by Leonard (i. Ting, c>f Nankal. Tliere does not
seem to be anything I can do about this with respect to Kantorovitch inasmuch
as our arrangement simply calls for my supplying English language books from
this office. I suggest that Chinese language material be exchanged directly be-
tween Liu's office and Moscow.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Fred
Frederick V. Field.
P. S. — May I add that if it proves embarrassing for a direct exchange to be set
".il» between Shanghai and Moscow, or Tokyo and Moscow, I shall be glad to have
documents routed through this office.
Exhibit No. 664
Address (')ffi('ial Conununications to The Secretary of State. Washington, D. C.
Department ok State,
Wasliinffton, October S, IdSJ/.
Dear Fred: I have made some incpiiries since my r«'turn about the possibility
of the holding of a Naval Conference in liK^o. There seems to be considerable
doubt as to whether it will be held, and this doubt should be cleared up by the
conversations to be held shortly in London. I suggest that you hold off making
any preparatory studies until these conversations are completed. The naval
situation appears to have readied a crisis and all signs indicate a showdown at
the forthcoming conversations.
I find that the gentleman who made the study of Japanese labor conditions
is Mr. Latourette of the International Labor Office. Feis says that he seemed
to have a clearer picture of conditons there backed by statistical data than
an.voue else he has talked to.
In connection witli the trade agreements, a Foreign Service officer has been
recalled from the Far East to give advice upon the Japanese situation. His name
is Sturgeon, and I would be very glad to intrcxluce yon to him when you come to
Washington.
I am looking forward to seeing y<iu and hope that yon will be able to have lunch
or dinner with me.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Larry
Lawrence Duggax.
October 4, 1934.
Mr. Lawrence Duggan,
Department of State, Washington. D. C.
Dear Larry : The information you give me in your letter of October 3rd is very
welcome. I was on the point of writing you to find out the name and author of
the study on Japanese labor conditions wliich you mentioned when you were in
this office a few weeks ago. I hope that when I come to Washington I shall be
able to see this monograph.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC REl ATIONS 4109
Thank you alt<o for offering to introduce nie to Sturgeon. When I come to your
city I shall certainly ask you to carry this out.
Your paragraph on the naval conference bears out what I had supposed was
happening. Even if the 1935 conference is called off, however, the type of study
which I have in mind will still be very useful. I am not so much interested in the
measuremen'ts of guns or bullets or the tonnage of ships or even the nineteenth
century diplomacy which surrounds these questions; but I am interested in the
social and economic setting of the whole navy question. Regardless of whether
or not they hold a conference next spring, the problem of navies in the Pacific is
bound to be prominent. With our fleet dashing around the Aleutian Islands and
Japanese and American admirals shooting oft their faces every other minute, the
subject can be counted on to remain on the first or second page of the papers. A
monograph, therefore, tying the question down to the day-by-day life of the aver-
age American citizen -seems to me altogether pertinent.
I have already talked to Walter Millis of the Herald Tribune, whom you prob-
ably know is the author of "The Martial Spirit," about this point. There is every
likelihood that he will undertake the thing for us. I have great confidence in his
intelligence and ability to interpret this type of question and I think that any-
thing he produces will be interesting. We will have quite a hand in whatever he
does in this office, which may or may not suggest to you further assurance of the
validity of the undertaking.
Just at the moment I am overwhelmed with selling the Institute and myself to
the people from whom we expect large donations. As soon as this unpleasant duty
is over I shall take the first train to Washington.
Sincerely yours,
Fredebick V. Field,
Exhibit No. 665
(Handwritten)
WLH
JS 3
KM
Philip C. Jessup, Chairman ; Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ; Miss Ada L. Comstock,
Vice Chairman : Benjamin H. Kizer, Vice Chairman ; Philo W. Parker, Vice Chairman ;
Robert Gordon Sproul, Vice Chairman ; Ray Lyman Wilbur, Vice Chairman ; Frederick V.
Field, Secretary ; Francis S. Harmon, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant
Treasurer
american councll
Institute of Pacific Relations, Incorporated
1795 California Street, San Francisco; Telephone: TUxedo 3114 — 129 East 52nd Street,
New York City ; Telephone : Plaza 3-4700
Cable : Inparel
New York Citv, October 9, 1939.
Mr. Edward G. Carter,
Upstairs Office.
Dear Mr. Carter : Owen has sent me a copy of his letter to you of October 5th
with regard to his editorial on collective security, as he calls it, which we all
damned. I should like to make a few comments in case you want to give further
consideration to the possibility of covering this difficult concept in a early issue
of the magazine.
My first feeling is to drop the expression "collective security" as it has in my
opinion been rendered virtually meaningless not only by the use to which it has
been put but also by the damage which has been done to the concept as it was
originally used. It seems to me that what we as an organization are interested
in is the question of future security in the Pacific area. This may be attained
by a collective system, or by re-establishing some sort of balance of power (which
is quite another thing from collective security), or by some sort of unilateral
domination of tlie area's most controversial regions, e. g., by Japan, by the Soviet
Union, by the United States. I cannot see any way for an organizational maga-
zine like Pacific Affairs to discuss the question other than by asking a number of
prominent persons to express their opinions in its pages. It is not something for
one officer of the Pacific Council, either Lattimore or you, to express unless you
are included in a group of others all writing on the same subject and unless you
very clearly write as an individual.
88348— 52— pt. 12 6
4110 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
I should be very must interested in having Owen explore this possibility of a
symposium. I should want him to make every effort to get divergent points of
view expressed, falling, however, somewhere short of either Father Coughlin
or Trotsky. I should detine the limits of legitimate opinion somewhere between
the two poles of Beard and Browder. I should also make certain that we did not
fall into the error of believing that this was one of those question wllich has two
sides. It obviously has as many as authors can be found.
Sincerely yours,
[S] Fred.
Frederick V. Field.
Copy to Mr. Lattimore.
Exhibit No. 666
( Handwritten : ) Lattimore
New York City, May 15, 19^0.
Mr. Owen Lattiaiore,
300 Oilman Hall, Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Maryland,
Dear Owen : I have read the manuscript by Maurice Shore entitled "Lenin,
Sun Yat-senism, and China." As to the jwssibilities of its publication, I feel
reasonably confident in my views but as to a good deal of the content I feel
much less certain.
On the question of publication, while the manuscript contains a lot of ma-
terial which it would be useful to have around in such handy form, it would
not in my opinion find much of a market in pamphlet form. I hope therefore
that you will be willing to struggle with a condensation. As a magazine article
it could probably retain most of its present thesis and still have the usefulness
for reference purposes that I have in mind.
I should like to have a first-rate Marxist read the manuscript because there
are a few points where I suspect the author has misinterpreted Lenin's teaching.
I suggest this most uncertainly, hov?ever, for I don't know Lenin's writings at
all well and I have never consistently gone through all the stuif he wrote on
China. As a matter of fact the bringing together of those writings in this article
seems to me its most interesting aspect. A. good deal is made in the article of
Lenin's earlier disagreement with Sun Yat-sen over the latter's belief that by
instituting quickly certain socialist measures the stage of capitalism could be
altogether avoided, and the later alleged reversal of this jxisition on Lenin's
part. This question touches the complicated controversy that you ran in Pacific
Affairs a year or so ago between Edgar Snow and Asiaticus. It also touches
a lot of the theoretical questions which have been disputed in all of Edgar
Snow's writings. Without really knowing what I am talking about my impres-
sion is that Lenin never maintained that the capitalist stage could be altogether
skipped in China. My imderstanding of the Chinese Communist Party's doc-
trine, moreover, is that it hopes to do no more than truncate the regular his-
torical process, that is shorten the period between feudalism and socialism. This
is an example of a theoretical point which I should like to have checked by
someone who is really well versed in Marxist literature.
Another illustration is the flat statement on the part of the author, on page 41,
that Lenin and Sun Yat-sen did agree on the "elimination of the doctrine of the
cla.ss struggle from the revolutionary program of China.''
I cannot believe that this is so as regards Lenin although of course it was true
as regards Sun Yat-sen. The class struggle is at the very base of Marxist
dialectics and I have never heard of any exception from it being made for a
particular situation, and certainly not for China.
At the opening of the article, the references to Maui-ice William's claim in-
terested me because some years ago when I knew William quite well I docu-
mented a rather elaborate memorandum for Shotwell on the relation between
Sun Yat-sen" Third Principle — The People's Livelihood — and Maurice William's
book. The Social Interpretation of History. I haven't looked up my memo-
randum for a good many years — and it is very likely that if I did I could not
find it. I remember, however, the central point in which we were then inter-
ested. Maurice William claimed in his second book, Sun Yat Sen versus Com-
munism, that Sun was converted from Comnmnism to a milder form of social
reform because of his reading of The Social Interpretation of History. I re-
member working out the chronology of the publication of William's book and
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4111
the history of the single copy which apparently ever got to China, together with
the chronology of Sun Yat-sen's lectures on the Three People's principles and
finding pretty conclusive evidence that Williams claim was wholly unjustified.
What apparently happened was that Sun Yat-sen, because of other influences
bearing on his life, had come around to about the position which Maurice Wil-
liam argued in his book and then had found the book and found in it a con-
venient expression of these views. Consequently, in one of his final lectures in
Canton when he first put forward the Three People's principles, it was fairly
natural that he should quote this otherwise extremely obscure book.
This point about Maurice William is of no vast importance in the manuscript
under discussion except that if my interpretation is correct it calls for a modi-
fication of two or three sentences.
Let me know if I can do anything more with regard to this job. I am return-
ing the manuscript herewith.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Telephone : UNiversity 0100, Ext. 43
Pacific Affairs
Published Quarterly by The Institute of Pacific Relations
Amsterdam — London — Manila — Moscow — New York — Paris — Shanghai — Sydney — Tokyo —
Toronto — Wellington
Please addi'ess reply to:
300 Oilman Hall,
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., May 9, lO.'fO.
Mr. F. V. Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East o2n(l Street, New York City.
Dear Fred : Herewith I am enclosing the manuscript of an article on "Lenin,
Sun-Yat-Senism, and China," which I think may interest you. There are 48
pages of it — much too long for Pacific Affairs undess very considerably cut.
Before doing anything else, I am therefore writing to find out whether you may
think the article is worth publishing separately as a pamphlet. If you do not
think .so, but think that the article could be condensed to a length suitable for
Pacific Affairs, I am willing to attempt the condensation.
Yours very sincerely,
/s/ OL
Owen Lattimore.
Exhibit No. 667
AMERICAN council
Institute of Pacific Relations, Incorporated
1795 California Street, San Francisco — 129 East 52nd Street, New York City
New York Citt, April 25, 1939.
Air mail.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
Olympic Hotel, Seattle, Wash.
Dear Mr. Carter: As you perhaps know, for some time a few members of the
American Council staff have been forming a unit of the Book and Magazine Guild
in my office. 1 am now informed that a bare majority of the members of the staff
have joined the union which therefore makes tlie unit eligible for the negotiation
of a contract. Before proceeding with this contract, however, I understand that
the group intends to sign up two or tliree additional members of the staff so that
they will represent a good deal more than a bare majority.
I am writing you at this time because, in view of the progress which the office
union is making, I rather expect to be offered a shop contract by them before you
have returned from your trip. As I shall want to secure the approval of the
Executive Committee and, in addition, of certain other Trustees, to any decision
which I shall be inclined to recommend, I am writing to ask if you would be so
4112 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
good as to send me by letter your preliminary thoughts on this subject. It is my
present intention, if the contract which the otttce union offers closely resembles
the contract which other units of tliat union have already entered upon with such
organizations as the Foreign Policy Association, to recommend its appi'oval. This
would mean the formal signing of a contract between the staff and myself as the
representative of the employers.
Unless the oftice union makes demands which I do not now anticipate, the
contract will call for practically no changes in the present wage-and-hour scale.
Nt)r will it call for any actual changes in our method of giving notice of termi-
nation of einpltiyment, or leave of absence due to illness, vacations, and the like.
It may involve our agreeing to what is known as a "preferential shop" whereby,
in the employment of new persons, we would iirst give the union a chance to
fill the vacancy from its own ranks, but where they are unable to supply a suit-
able candidate, we could look elsewhere. It may also oblige us to set aside a
moderate reserve which would be u.sed to guarantee salary payments for a certain
number of weeks should the organization unexpectedly and suddenly be liquidated.
Aside from the fact that I am personally sympathetic with the principle of
unionization, its occurrence in my office has a rather definite advantage. The
office union would set up a shop committee for the piirpose of presenting any
demands or grievances and for the purpose of settling among themselves, if
possible, problems in the office. This will mean that the salary scale and the
salaries paid to individuals in the oflace will uo longer rest on the arbitrary deci-
sions of the Secretary — a situation which I personally regard as highly unsatis-
factory. It will mean that there will be a group responsibility for any decisions
reached. The terms of the contracts which I have looked over, in i-elation to
other organizations, present a salary scale which is, in practically every instance,
considerably below what we now pay. This, to my mind, would not mean that
we would reduce salaries to the union miniiunm but it would indicate that we
had nothing to fear by way of group pressure for an increased salary scale.
In the light of these remarks, I should appreciate it very mucli if you would
send me an expression of your opinion on this whole subject. Without having
the details of the proiiosed contract before you, I should like to know whether,
in your opinion, it would be pi'oper and desirable for the American Council to
enter into negotiations with the union and to conclude a contract, provided that
tile details could be worked out to the satisfaction of both parties. Certain of
our Trustees will, I think, look to you, among others, for advice on this matter
when I bring it to their attention. It woidd therefore be very useful to me to
have a general expression of your views on hand when the appropriate time
comes.
Sincerely yoiirs,
(Signed) Fred
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 008
Pencilled (Oakie)
( Handwritten : ) See FVF to Yarnell, 6/1/40.
New York City, May 31, 19^0.
Mr. John H. Oakie.
Dear Jack : I have just read your latest INPAREL with considerable interest
for the subject of the Netherlands Indies is at the forefront of our minds as well
as of yours. We had a discussion with some thirty to thirty-five people on
Monday which was led by Admiral Yarnell and which I wish you could have
attended for his point of view differs from your report in INPAREL at most
points. Although there follow my summaries of some of his views, the meeting
was a private one and he should not be (pioted by name.
I am inclined to disagree with Yarnell in several places but it may interest
you to know with refei'ence to the six items which you list on your second page
that Yarnell's ideas run somewhat as follows :
(1) That while Patavia may be nearly as far from Nagasaki as from Pearl
Hai'bor, the prol)l»'m of fleet operations moving down from .lapan and west from
Pearl Harbor seems to be altogether different. Japan's navy would move via
its own possessions, the Mandated Islands, Formosa and Hainan, to say nothing
of the China coast, whereas our navy could probably not even move straight
across the general route now traveled by the clippers. It would probably be
forced to go south of Australia.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4113
(2) Yarnell believes that tlie Japanese navy is in first-rate sluipe and is ex-
ceedingly well eqiiipiied relative to any opposition it is likely to face. It is not
now being used in the China campaign with the exception of a few second-class
cruisers and such ships.
He says it possess not only the ships with which we are familiar but "a well-
rounded fleet of supplementary craft for supply purposes and for tending air-
jilanes, submarines, etc. He also reports with considerable ccmviction that it is
now known that Japan is building 4r>.()()0-ton battleships and very likely from
six to ten light cruisers which in speed and armaments surpass anything in the
American navy. He went so far as to say that if Japan actually did turn out
these cruisers she would have at the present moment command of the entire
Pacific Ocean. ' ^
(;-{) It follows that Yarnell does not think that Japan is short on ;-ihipping
from a naval point of view. From a supply point of view he indicates that the
Japanese were able to take care of the very heavy demands put on their shipping
in the first year of tlie China campaign, a demand which has now been very con-
siderably felaxed. and that not only these .ships could be diverte<l to a new south-
ward campaign btlt that a great deal of Japan's shipping which is now plying ihe
regular trade routes could likewise be diverted.
(4) Yarnell envisages a possible naval war between Japan and the United
States as involving primarily a series of raids on each other. To that extent
he would perhaps support your point that Japan's supply lines running soi;th
through Formosa and Hainan would be vulnerable to attack. The point as
y(m Inake it i8 open to question "attack by whom'r" If the United States actually
declares war the answer is "by the United States." But there seems to be a
grave question whether Japan's lines would be as vulnerable as our own.
(5) Yarnell does not think highly of the Netherlands Indies defenses. He
reported that while they had a few submarines and probably some good coastal
guns and absolutely first-rate airplanes — although probably not more than two
hundred of these — the local militia, made up largely of about 70,000 native troops,
was not reliable. The point seems to be a good deal who gets to the Indies
first. If it were possible for this goveriunent to send our ships there now,
basing them perhaps on Singapore, the opinion seems to be that Japan, although
provoked and angry, could not afford to launch a campaign. On the other hand,
not one of us at our discussion believed that there was any possibility of a
democracy such as ours taking such a drastic preventative step, I shoiild also
like to comment with regard to your remark about the prompt Dutch round-up
of fifth columnists in the Netherlands Indies, I am extremely skeptical on this
point just as I would be if Congress followed to a logical conclusion the absurd
definition of what constitutes a fifth column by tlirov.-ing in jail every alien in
this country. It is not those people nor the actual German Nazi spies in the
Nethei-lands Indies who constitute fifth columns but it is the reactionary, fascist-
minded leaders in your own country. It was not, it seems to me, aliens or spies
or undercover agents who sold out Poland and Norway but their own leading
generals and a good nuinyof their cabinet members. Ditto for Holland. With
a nuich more complicated situation and involving a good deal of historical
explanation, ditto for Belgium and apparently for at least some armies in France.
(Footnote: Please take a look at the Associated Farmers in California.)
(6) While it is agreed that the Dutch, with the full cooperation of American
and British interests, would destroy oil wells and cracking plants in the Indies,
it is also generally agreed that Japan has enough fuel stored for extensive naval
operations lasting from 12 to IS months. This comes from as authoritative
sources as one can possibly find. In other words, that represents about the
time required to put blown-u]) wells and machinery back into operation. It is
also pointed out, although I don't think the point has been sufficiently grasped,
that while we could put great pressure (m Japan through an economic embargo
in the event of their in\ading southward, once they had established even a
naval blockade around the Netherlands Indies and the adjacent regions they
could put on an equallv or perhaps more effective embargo against the United
States.
It would be very interesting to learn from you whether the general views
which you have put forward in INPAREL in this issue reflect military opinion
in your part of the country. It would not surprise me at all to learn that it did
for there seems to be no more agreement among those boys than among any
pther group.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
4114 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 669
( Handwritten ) Parker
Copy to EvZdJ
New York City, April 9, 1940.
Mr. Philo W. Parker,
26 Broadway, New York City.
Dear Mr. Parker: I wonder if I can ask your help in the preparation of an
article on aviation gasoline in the Far East which we are writing for the Far
Eastern Survey and would like to complete by next week. The occasion for the
article arises from a notice in a paper just received from Netherlands Indies
which announces that the Shell people have recently opened a high-octane gaso-
line plant at Pladjos and plan to build a second one, to be completed by the end
of the year. It was also announced that the Standard group is constructing a
plant at Palembang which is to produce an average of 560 barrels a day. We
should like very much to know whether these reports are accurate and, if so, to
obtain a little more detail with regard to them.
Available statistics do not help very much in straightening out tlie story of
aviation fuel in the Pacific area and as this is very important in connection
with U. S. -Japanese trade, it has seemed to us that the more accurate information
we could unearth, the better. Japan, for instance, is reported to have imported
a little over half a million barrels of aviation gasoline from the U. S. in 1939
against a consumption of over two million barrels.
Did Japan produce the remainder itself, or did it import aviation fuel from
other sources? If high octane is to be produced in Netherlands Indies, is most of
it likely to go to Japan? If so, will it affect the export of aviation fuel from
California to Japan or will it more likely compete with Japanese refineries?
There is then the question of whether gasoline of around 75 to 82 octane con-
tent is exported to Japan and there blended to produce higher octane fuel or
whether it is exported as 100-octane gasoline from the source. We have been
told that some of the newer planes themselves are equipped to do the blending —
a leading process, I believe, while in flight.
I would very greatly appreciate it if you would permit my colleague, Miss
van Zyll de Jong, and myself to have a talk with you or one of your associates
sometime this week. As usual, we do not want to publish an article which is
inaccurate.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 670
(Handwritten) Am. League for Peace & Democracy
New York City, Decemher 20, 1938.
American League for Peace and Democracy,
112 East 19th Street, New York City.
Dear Sirs : In reply to your request that the American Council of the Institute
of Pacific Relations be represented by an observer at your forthcoming American
Congress for Peace and Democracy, I am writing to say that I believe that several
of our members will be in attendance. As you know, the natui'e of your work
prevents our taking any ofticial part in activities of a political sort. Our mem-
bership, however, is so chosen as to represent a fairly good cross section of va-
rious types of occupations and activities in this country and in that way we are
well assured that we will be unofficially represented at this sort of meeting.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field-
f/g
Freh) : The American Congress for Peace and Democracy wants us to send an
observer to their meeting January 6-8, as we did last year. Will you take care
of this?
Kbeo.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4115
CALL TO ACTION
American Congress for Peace and Democracy
January 6, 7, 8, 1939, Washington, D. C. Fifth National Congress, American
League for Peace and Democracy
To THE American People
The world-wide offensive of fascism, which threatens the peace and democracy
of every country including our own, requires immediate and energetic action by
the American people. It requires American leadership and initiative to rally and
organize the forces of democracy and peace.
The forces of reaction within our own country are seeking by every open and
concealed means to destroy our basic and democratic rights. Suppression of
civil rights, attacks on the rights of labor, the promotion of the "red scare" and
anti-Semitism, the fomenting of religious and racial hatreds, show the forming
pattern of American Fascism.
On a world scale the threat of Fascism brings with it the threat of a new World
War. Renewed war preparations demonstrate that this menace has been in-
creased by the Munich agreement. In China and Spain the theat is already a
tragic reality. Millions have been slaughtered ; tens of millions are without
homes or hope or bread. The war-makers liave served notice that they will wage
the most ruthless warfare in history against the peoples of the world.
. The United States cannot isolate itself from these developments. We cannot
hope to remain aloof from a Fascist-instigated world war. Sooner or later we
would become involved as we were in the last war. Our only hope is to prevent
such a world war from developing; to use our international influence and eco-
nomic power to stop Fascist aggression. No Munich agreements for Spain and
China.
To that end the American League for Peace and Democracy calls you to an
extraordinary American Congress for Peace and Democracy. Let your repre-
sentatives in the seventy-sixth United States Congress know the strength of your
desire for peace. Come to Washington, D. C, on January 6th-8th. Make your
voice heard in the demand for a new peace policy for America at the expiration of
the present unneutral Neutrality Act. Help us work out a program for the de-
fense of our democracy and for peace.
We summon REPRESENTAxrvES of the organizations of the American people —
trade unions, farm bodies, peace societies, religious organizations, fraternal
orders, civic bodies, organizations of veterans, women and youth. At this Con-
gress the democratic peace forces of America will map out a program for the de-
fense of democracy and peace — a program based on the necessity to : Protect
AND EXTEND DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS FOR ALL SECTIONS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: KeEP
the United States out of war and help keep war out of the world.
CONGRESS endorsed BY —
(These endorsements are personal, not organizational)
Rabbi Michael Alper, Associate Editor, "Reconstructionist"
Sherwood Anderson, Writer
Reverend Edgar R. Artist, Historian, Eastern Baptist Association of New York
Roger Baldwin, Director, American Civil Liberties Union
Lewis Alan Berne, President, Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists &
Technicians
George Biddle, Artist
Crissie Birrell
Professor Franz Boas, Columbia University, New York City
John H. Bosch, President, National Farm Holiday Association
Mrs. W. Russell Bowie, President, New York State Consumers League
Hon. Usher L. Burdick, U. S. Representative, North Dakota
John D. Butkovich, President, Croatian Fraternal Union of America
Joseph Cadden, United States Chairman, World Youth Congress
William F. Cochran, Vice President, Church League for Industrial Democracy
Rabbi Samuel M. Cohen, Executive Director, United Synagogue of America
Hon. John M. Coffee, U. S. Representative, Washington
Howard Costigan, Executive Secretary, Washington Commonwealth Federation
4116 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Jerome Davis, President, American Federation of Teachers
John P. Davis, Secretary, National Negro Congress
Harrington Dunbar
Paul de Kruif, Writer
Melvyn Douglas, Actor
Theodore Dreiser, Writer
Professor Henry Pratt Fairchild, New York University
Dorothy Canfield Fisher, Writer
Abram Flaxer, President, State, County & Municipal Workers of Amei-ica
Miguel Garriga, Vice President, Hotel & Restaurant Employees International
Alliance
Albert Ghidoni, Secretary-Treasurer, District Council No. 9, Brotherhood of
Painters, Decorators & Paperhangers of America
Professor Willystine Goodsell, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York
City
Rudolph Harju, Secretary, Cooperative Unity Alliance
L. O. Hartman, Editor, "Zions Herald"
Clarence Hathaway, Editor "The Daily Worker"
Donald Henderson, President, United Cannery, Agricultural, Packing & Allied
Workers of America
Alexander Hoffman, Genei-al Manager, Cleaners, Dyers & Truck Drivers Union
Local 239, A. C. W., New York City
Reverend William Lloyd Imes, St. James Presbyterian Church, New York City
E. Stanley Jones, Missionary
Rockwell Kent, President, United American Artists
Joseph P. Lash. Executive Secretary, American Student Union
David Lasser, President, Workers Alliance of America
Max Lerner, Writer
Dr. Kirtley F. Mather, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.
Bishop Francis J. McConnell, New York Area, Methodist Episcopal Church
Rhoda E. McCuUoch, Editor, "The Womans Press"
Katherine ^Mclnerny. Executive Secretary, League of Women Shoppers
Lewis Merrill, President, United Office & Professional Workers of America
Morris Muster, President, United Furniture Workers of America
Professor Reinhold Neilmhr, Union Theological Seminary, New York City
Samuel Oruitz, Writer
Bishop Robert L. Paddock
Reverend P^lini A. I'almquist, Executive Secretary, Philadelphia Federation of
Churches
Hon. James P. Pope, U. S. Senator, Idaho
Mervyn Rathhorne, President, American Communications Association
Reid Robinson, President, International Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers
of America
Hon. Byron N. Scott, U. S. Representative, California
Reverend Guy Emery Shipler, Editor, "The Churchman"
Viola Brothers Shore, Writer
Reverend H. Norman Sibley, University Heights Presbyterian Church, New York
City
Roliert G. Spivack, Secretary for the U. S., International Student Service
Reverend William B. Spofford, Executive Secretary, Church League for Indus-
trial Democracy
Donald Ogden Stewart, President, League of American Writers
Edward E. Strong, Secretary, Southern Negro Youth Congress
Hon. Henry G. Teigan, U. S. Representative, Minnesota
Reverend Worth M. Tippy, General Secretary Emeritus, Social Service Dept.,
Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America
Rose Troiano
Frank Tuttle, Motion Picture Director
Professor David D. Vaughan, School of Theology. Boston University
Mrs. A. H. Vixman, Former National Executive Director, Young Judaea
Dr. Goodwin Watson, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City
A. F. Whitney, President, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen
Dr. Max Yergan, Director, International Committee on African Affairs
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4117
NATIONAL OFFICERS, AMEKICAN LEAGUE FOR PEACE AND DEMOCRACY
Hairy F. Ward, National Chairman
Mrs. Victor L. Berjier, Vice Chairman
Robert Morss I.ovett, Vice Chairman
Margaret Forsyth, Acting Treasurer
All organizations and groups that stand for democracy and peace are invited
to elect delegates to the Congress. Organizations with memberships np to 200
are entitled to. one delegate. Organizations with membership from 350 to 500
are entitled to two delegates. Organizations with membership over 500 are
entitled to three delegates.
A registration fee of one dollar for every delegate will be charged to help meet
the expenses of the Congress.
National organizations are entitled to three delegates at a special registration
fee of three dollars each.
Delegates Credential Forji No. 1
To be sent with registration fee to the National Office of the Ameri-
can League for Feace and Democracy
(Name of delegate)
"(Street address) (City) (State)
(Organization or group represented)
(Address of organization or group)
(Number of members) (Secretary or officer of organization)
Delegates Credential Form No. 2
To be retained by delegate as means of identification at Washington,
D. C.
(Name of delegate)
""("str'eetaTldress) (City) (State)
(Organization or group represented)
(Address of organization or group)
(Number of members) (Secretary or officer of organization)
Send credential form No. 1 and fee, and address all inquiries to —
AMERICAN league FOR PEACE AND DEMOCRACY
268 Fourth Avenue 398 New York, New York
Dr. Harrv F. Ward, National Chairman. Cltv Executive Committee : Eleanor Grannan.
Chairman ; Rev. David Licorich : Arthur J. McLaughlin ; Isidore Sorkiu. Vice Chairman :
Helen R. Brvan, Executive Secretary : Oscar Schneller. Acting Organization Secretary ;
Albert Hvman, Treasurer ; Israel Amter ; Mrs. J. X. Cohen ; Abraham Feingold ; Jacob
Mirsky ; Cvril Philip : Rev. Frederick Reustle : Katherine Terrill. Staff : William Males,
Legislative ; Ruth Doltrer, National Minorities and Race Relations ; Cyrus S. Porter,
Campaigns ; Brian Heald : Morris Engel. Education : Anna C. Schneiderman, W'omen ;
Clifford Welch. Publications ; Gordon Sloane, Youth ; Ray Aversa, Trade Union ; Herman
Stollev, Anti-Nazi Dept. ; Albert Prcntis, Cultural. Advisory Board : Prof. E. B. Burgum,
John Cham.berlain, Malcolm Cowlev, Martha Foley, David Freeman, Rev. William Lloyd
Imes, Milton Kaufman, Vito Marcantonio, Rev. A. Clayton Powell. Jr.. Rev. Herman F.
Reissig, Elmer Rice. Prof. Margaret Schlaugh, Lee Slmonson, Prof. Robert K. Speer,
Ashley P. Totten, Thomas Young
4118 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
American League fob Peace and Democracy
new york city division
112 East 19th Street, New York City
ALgonquin 4-9290
IPK
November 25, 1938.
Dear Friend : The American Congress for I'eace and Democracy which will
be held in Washington, D. C. on .lanuary 6-7-S, 1939, more than ever will focus
the attention of the entire country and its lawmakers on the consolidation and
strengthening of the forces for peace. To quote from Dr. Harry F. Ward's edi-
torial in the November issue of The Fight, called "After Munich":
"No ocean barriers, no tradition of isolation, no pacitist idealism, can pre-
vent the United States from feeling the effects of the impetus the Munich
agreement has given to Fascism as a world force. In due time the results
will be seen and felt in the increased strength of Fascist movements and
tendencies in Latin America and in Canada, and in the development of
Fascist potentialities in the United Statues."
Are we going to permit, through inertia, such potentialities to become realities
in our country? In a country founded on the sacred principles of freedom of
worship and of minorities, are we to remain passive in the face of the wrathful
racial and religious persecution now unleashed?
We believe it is absolutely necessary in these times to meet such challenges
with unity of number, strength and effectiveness. This, our Congress, by its
broad and widely inclusive character, will achieve with the cooperation of allied
groups and individuals.
We are contident you will bring this vital Congress to your organization, elect
delegates and return the enclosed credential blank as soon as iwssihle.
We are ready to send a speaker to your organization. Please use enclosed
postcard for this purpose.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Guy Emery Shipler
Rev. CxjY P^mery Shipler,
Editor, The Churchman.
UOPWA No IH.
Enc.
(Handwritten) 52-36
Exhibit No. 671
April 11, 1939.
Memorandum to : AB.
From : FVF.
Would you kindly inquire of the Department of State what is the safest
way of sending material (both letters and printed materials such as the Survey)
to State Department oflicials stationed in China? We have noted in letters from
such persons that they have taken great care to indicate mailing by United
States gunboats, etc., and they have also asked us to write by registered mail.
Is the best thing to address all communications to the Department of State, for
them to forward through their regular channels?
When you hear from the Department, will vou let me know?
f/g
New York, N. Y., April 12, 1939.
Department of State,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sirs : We are most anxious to learn of the safest way to send materials
(both letters and printed matter) to State Department officials stationed in
China, and we are wondering if it is best to address all communications to the
Department of State, Washington, D. C, to be forwarded through tlie official
mail pouch.
1 shall greatly appreciate it if you would inform me whether the above-men-
tioned is the best procedure, or if yon have another other suggestion to offer.
Sincerely yours,
Annette Blumenthal, Subscription Manager.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4119
Exhibit No. 672
November 10, 1936.
General Victor Yakhontoff,
522 Riverside Drive, New York, New York
Dear General Yakhontoff : My reply from the Social Science Research Coun-
cil with regard to your proposed volume on Outer Mongolia is extremely nega-
tive. Its Executive Director. Robert T. Crane, writes me that "there is no way
in which this Council can provide funds for the proposal of General Yakhon-
j.^j^- * * * The Council has come to limit itself to advice directly to sources
of funds when they ask for advice on a proposal made directly to them by the
proixinent." This information is somewhat contrary to the impression which
HoUanil and I had.
I am somewhat at a loss to know what further move I can make on your
behalf. The largest source of funds, of course, is 'the Rockefeller Foundation,
l)ut because of the grants which they have already made to us we cannot ap-
proach them on an individual project. What I could do, and would be more
than glad to do, however, is to recommend your project after you had initiated
the idea with them. That is, if you took the matter up directly with the Foun-
dation, then suggested that they refer to us, I would be glad to give them a
favorable impression. You, however, may have some other idea as to how we
may be more directly helpful, and if you do I hope you will not hesitate to
conuuunicate with me.
Sincei-ely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Social Science Research Council
j Staff : Robert T. Crane, Executive Director ; Donald Young ; John E. Pomfret ; Carolyn E.
I Allen, Controller
] . 280 PARK AVENUE, NEW YORK CITY
Cable Address : SOCSCIENCE, New York
1 Members — American Anthropological Association : Alfred M. Tozzer, Harvard University ;
I Robert Redflekl. University of Chicago ; Clark Wissler, American Museum of Natural
I History. American Economic Association : Alvin H. Hansen, University of Minnesota ;
Sumner H. Slichter, Harvard University ; Frank H. Knight, University of Chicago,
American Historical Association : Arthur M. Schlesinger, Harvard University ; Guy S.
Ford, University of Minnesota : Roy P. Nichols, University of Pennsylvania. American
Po'itical Science Association : William Anderson, University of Minnesota ; Charles E.
Merriam, University of Chicago ; Lindsay Rogers, Columbia University. American
Psychological Association : Gardner Murphy, Columbia University ; A. T. Pofifenberger,
Columbia University; Gordon W. Allport, Harvard University. 'American Sociological
Society ; Thorsten Selliii, University of Pennsylvania : Shelby M. Harrison, Russell Sage
Foundation ; William F. Ogburn, University of Chicago. American Statistical A.-so-
ciation : Sevmour L. Andrew, American Telephone & Telegraph Company ; Edwin B.
Wilson, Harvard University : William A. Berridge, Metropolitan Life Insurance Com-
jiianv. Members at Larse : Carl L. Alsherg, Stanford University: Isiah Bowman, Johns
(Hopkins University : John Dickinson, T'niyersity of Pennsylvania ; Charles H. Judd, Uni-
versity of Chicago ; Wesley C. Mitchell, Columbia University.
November 3, 1930.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
Secretary, American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52 Street, New York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Field: Without circumlocution, I might as well say at once that
there is no way in which this Council can provide funds for the proposal of
General Yakhontoff. The situation is simply that the Council has no funds at
its di-sposal for work of this kind, nor would it seem to me desirable for the
Council to examine the merits of this particular proposal with a view to seeking
funds, since experience has shown us that this is an ineffective procedure in
raising funds. The Council has come to limit itself to advice on a proposal made
directly to them by the proponent.
Sincerely yours,
Robert T. Gbane.
RTC/set
4120 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
November 2, 1936.
Dr. KoBERT T. Crane,
Social Science Research Council.
230 Park Avenue, New York, New York.
Dear Dr. Crane: General Victor Yakhoutoff has presented to us a research
pi'oject in which we are interested but toward which, unfortunately, it is impos-
sible for us to put up any funds, and I have wondered if his scheme would fall
into the interests of the Social Science liesearcii Council. Briefly, his projwsal
is this: that he prepare a hook on the Outer Mongolian People's Republic, con-
taining a historical account, general description of tlie country and its people, and
full information on current economic, social, and political developments. General
Yakhoutoff has secured the promise of documentary assistance in Moscow, an<l
knowing something of the niaterinl that exists in Russian and the cooperation
with Russian authorities which Yakhoutoff has secured on i)revious volumes, 1
interpret this as a very important and favorable factor. He believes that he
should spend around three months in Moscow and then proceed to Outer Mon-
golia for a period of several moi-e months, the whole project to take roughly a
year. His publishei's. Coward McCann, have agreed to take the book and have
also, I believe, agreed to advance at least a portion of the funds required.
General Yakhoutoff is the author of three volumes on the Far East : The
Chinese Soviets, Russia and the Soviet Union in the Far East, and Eyes on
Japan. All three contained iiseful summaries of existing material and a certain
amount of origiiuil research. The latter is particularly true of the volume i)n
Chinese Communism, and it will have to be nioi-e true of the one on Outer Mon-
golia because of the alisence of secondary source material.
General Yakhoutoff served luider the Czarist regime as a high military officiid
and liad considerable experience in tlie Russian Far East and as military attache
to the Russian embassy in Tokyo. He was one%f the first emigres to make his
peace with the Soviet authorities and as far back as 1!)2!) or 11)?>() was taken into
their conhdenc-e and given free access to the IMoscow archives pertinent to the
questions he was then investigating.
I have no idea whether this proposition will interest you. We should like to
see the hook written, but the financing of it does not quite fall within our terms
of reference. It is for this reason that I am taking the lil)erty of a.sking whether
you would be interested in going into it further.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 673
November 6, 1939.
FVF from ECC :
Parrar and Rinehart wcadd like your suggestions as to a kind of list to circulate
concerning "Humane Endeavour" by Haldore Hau.son.
Would Amerasia like a review copyV Can one of your staff easily supply me
with a good list of magazines which should receive review copies?
Exhibit No. 674
Hotel Richmond,
Geneva, Switzerland, 1th September, 1937.
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
129 East 52nd Street, New York Citii, N. Y.,
United States of America.
Dear Fred : Tliere were two reasons for my cabling you to send eoijies of
Amerasia from the beginning in separate mailings to Moscow. The first was
because Motylev had only recei\ed the first issue, the second was because he
understood you had sent him eight copies of the July issue, but the package had
never reached him. He was a little disturbed that you liad published his article
written for Pravda without consulting him. He realized that any journal had a
perfect right to use an ai-ticle appearing in a newspaper, but I think he felt that
the close relationship which he thinks exists between Amerasia and the IPR would
call for consultation in advance. He had not seen the July Amerasia and had
the feeling that the article which he had written for the specialized constituency
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4121
of Pravda was not suitable for the general Amerasia audience. I told him that
I had read the article in the home of a friend and that it seemed to me admirably
suited to Ai)ient.'^i(i''i audience.
To make doubly sure he gets a cop.v I am now sending- him one of my own
copies which has just arrived from China.
While I am on the subject of Amerasia, may I congratulate yon on the very
penetratini;' statement which you made in the July issue on page 194 under the
heading "Politics in Tokyo."
Etienne Dennery, one of the closest French students of Far Eastern alTairs told
me that he had never heard of the existence of Amerasia, and I suggest that your
circulation department send him one or two sample copies and a subscription
blank.
I have read with care and profit every issue of Amerasia. I see no reason
whatever for it to continue its existence separate from the American Council.
I think the arguments in favor of its becoming an American Council publication
are overwhelming.
Sincerely yours,
[t] Edward C. Oaeteb.
LoxDON, August 25, 1937.
NLT
INPAREL,
New York:
Send Motylev all Amerasias fn)m beginning separate mailings. Stop. Cable
your views my retpiesting all councils immediate report activities enabling their
publics understand nature Far Eastern crisis. Also their suggestions program
Pacitic Council InternationJil Secretariat in present situation.
Carter.
Exhibit No. 075
March 4th, 1936.
Frederick V. Fikld, Esq..
Rainier Club, Seattle.
Dear Fred : This is to acknowledge the telegram reading as follows :
"Bridges has taken first papers out but cannot become full citizen for
another year Stop Rowell has accepted."
Another letter is going forth to you today which explains my inquiry regard-
ing Bridges.
It is most .satisfactory that you have succeeded in getting Chester Rowell to
take charge of publicity at Yosemite. Doubtless you will be writing to tell me of
your arrival on March lOtli and the details of the arrangements you have made.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Carter.
Exhibit No. 676
[Telegram]
1936 Mak 1' AM 3 14
FV.') ISNM San Francisco, Calif. 1
Edward C. Carter.
129 East 52 8t., N. Y. C:
Bridges has taken first papers out Init cannot become full citizen for another
year Stop Rowell has accepted.
Fred.
Exhibit No. 677
Memorandum
November 21, 1939.
To : F. V. Field. E. C. Carter, E. J. Tarr, P. C. .Tessup.
From : Liu Yu-Wan.
In re : Chinese Denial of Recent Domei News Agency Reports.
In view of the fact that the Domei News Agency has been repeatedly spreading
the rumors regarding the estrangement of the relations between the Kuomintang
4122 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
and the Chinese Cominnnist Party, you may be interested in learning that Dr. Hu
Shih received a telegram from Chungking yesterday (dated November 19th)
concerning a statement published by Sin Hua Jib Po (the organ of the Chinese
Communist Party) on November 2nd, the gist of whicli follows :
"(1) Domei Ne\\s Agency reported that the Chinese Communist Party has
requested the Central Government that Cliina's Northwest be sovietized. This
is groundless. The Chinese Conuiiunist Party will cooperate to tlie bitter end
with the Kuomintang in upholding the National United Front and in endeavoring
to achieve victory for National Resistance and realize the Three People's
Principles.
"(2) Domei News Agency also alleged that the Eighth Route Army has been
withdrawing from Shansi to Shensi. This is ridiculous. The Eighth Route Army
has not only not withdrawn a single soldier to Northern Shensi but also has
recently, in cooperation with other national units, taken a toll of more than
10,0(X) enemy troops in the Southwest of Shansi.
"(3) Domei reported that General Chu Teh had flown to Moscow. This is also
false, in view of the fact that General Chu has never left the Front in North
China since the War."
The declaration also added that the Japanese Army in consequence of its fail-
ure both militarily and politically in China has chosen to make an endeavor
to estrange the relations between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Nationalist
Party with the view towards jeopardizing China's good relations with the foreign
powers.
(*See. for example, New York Times, Oct. 27, 1939.)
Exhibit No. 678
Mr. Holland — for your information
Chatham House,
St. James's Square. London, S. W. I., Iftli Januam, 1935.
Frederick V. Field. Esq.,
129 East 52nd Street, Ne^v York.
Dear Field : You will, I hope, like the review which "P. J." has given of the
"Economic Handbook" in the current "International Affairs," which is out
today.
You doubtless know that "P. J." is a highly confidential nom-de-plume for F.
Ashton-Gwatkin, C. M. G., who is a Foreign Oflice official and head of the Jap-
anese section. He is a member of the IPR committee and has a high standing
as an authority on the Far East.
You know, of course, that none of us are supposed to know this nom-de-plume,
and no reference should be made in any of our letters or publications which
would give anyone the clue as to who "P. J." is.
While I am on this subject, would you please tell Catherine Porter that I
have just been talking with Miss Cleeve about Miss Porter's enquiry as to who
John Keith is. This is the nom-de-plume for E. H. Carr, of the Russian section
of the Foreign Office. Catherine wanted to know how to describe him in the
Who's Who of "Pacific Affairs." Tell her that of course no reference should be
made to him by his correct name, neither should any reference be made to his
connection with the Foreign Office. She can describe him, however, as "An
English authority on Soviet Russia."
Sincerel.v yours,
[t] Edward C. Carter.
Exhibit No. 679
Memorandum on Preliminary Meeting of the American Delegation
October 27, 1944.
To : Philip C. Jessup.
William C. Johnstone.
Frederick V. Field.
Rose Yardumian.
From : Raymond Dennett.
It seems unlikely that, with the time at our disposal, we shall be able to get
to any really definitive statements of fundamental agreement among the American
delegation. We ought, however, to be able to do two things :
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4123
1. Asrree as to what line American public opinion would take as the result
of a given line of action by another power in the Far East. (What would
be the reaction of the American public on internal dissension within China,
on refusal of the British to relinquish some portion of their control of India,
too.)
2. Identify major differences of opinion on various points within the
American delegation which can be amplified by getting those who differ most
vehemently to state their position in brief notes which are to be circulated
to the entire delegation before January.
We have brought down three previously prepared statements which can be
circulated at the appropriate time :
1. A statement on a possible position on the internal problems of China.
2. A statement on American attitudes on colonial problems.
3. A brief statement on what might be a minimum program for the political
treatment of Japan.
The first two statements are couched in terms of what the American public is
likely to feel if certain things do or do not happen, the last is of a more technical
character, in which technical knowledge of tlie situation in Japan is assumed.
To start the meeting off in a lively fashion, I would suggest something along
the following line :
1. A general statement by PCJ of the nature of IPR conferences, and the
purpose of this meeting. Included in this would be a statement that we are
not seeking to establish a '"line" to be taken by the American delegation, but
to do two things :
(a) To acquaint members of the delegation with each other's points
of view so tliat when they speak in roundtable they can truthfully say
that their opinion agrees with, or is in disagreement with other American
opinion.
( ft ) To discover whether we can agree on a minimum American posi-
tion which we will maintain if pushed into any corners by other delega-
tions.
2. A brief statement by Fred Field drawn from past conferences illustrat-
ing other examples of the kind of problems faced at these affairs than those
mentioned by PCJ.
3. Supporting comment by WCJ on the basis of his attendance at Atlantic
City, with the suggestion that we may find it desirable at Hot Springs to
meet as a body from time to time to compare notes and to see whether we
individually are accurately reflecting the opinion of the group in some of
the problems presented.
4. To illustrate what we mean, to turn immediately to the question of th»;
internal situation in China, upon wliich they have "been given a suggested
position. PCJ, FVF, or Owen Lattimore might be asked to give a brief
statement of the internal situation, pointing out the line taken by the Chinese
at Atlantic City, and saying that we have to be prepared to deal with this.
In connection with the prepared comment, it is worth pointing out :
(«) It does not deal with the facts of the situation at all as each
delegate can obviously talk to that point in accordance with his own
knowledge of tlie facts.
(&) It does deal with what American public opinion is likely to be if
the Chinese take certain kinds of action.
Is the delegation agreed that American public opinion would react
as stated if the Chinese took any of thfe actions mentioned? If we agree,
then we can always fall back upon this line as a more or less minimum
position.
5. Turn to the prepared agenda as circulated and to start off talking about
ti-eatment of Japan using the preparetl statement to stir up opening comment.
6. The afternoon session can be started in the same way with the prepared
statement on dependencies.
In general the limited objectives of the meeting as stated above call for brief
discussion of a number of points to a place where definite differences of view-
points emerge, and exhaustive discussion of only those points on which there
appears to be a good chance of getting a pretty general agreement. I would
suggest, therefore, that the Cliairman periodically try to summarize what the
general opinion on a given point is or what the conflicting attitudes are. If he
gets away with his summarization, we shall have in the recorders' minutes a
statement of general agreement ; if he accurately states the differences, he can
4124 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
then try to persuade individuals to make brief notes and send them to me. I
would suggest that if WCJ, FVF, or RD pitch in to help the Chairman if, at
any point, they think they have identified aeneral agreement or areas of differ-
ences. If the Chairman is met with a blank silence upon the introduction of a
new topic (as may be likely as we approach the cocktail hour), Mrs. Stewart and
Miss Farley might be called upon to lead off in a provocative manner :
On some points it might be useful to try the technique \;sed successfully at the
Conference Committee meeting last month and ask one or two people to draft
brief statements of their positions during lunch or dinner for presentation at the
following session :
It may be desirable to get in a brief statement at some point on
(a) Transportation arrangements,
(ft) The fact that Virginia is dry and the obvious conclusions to draw.
Exhibit No. 680
Pacific Affairs
the institute of pacific relatioxs
Honolulu, Hawaii
11 Heathcroft. Hamostead Way, London, N. W. 11
Office of the Editor,
129 East 32nd Street, New York City, 12 January. 19^^
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
American Council. Institute of Pacific Relations.
129 East 52nd Street, New York City, U. S. A.
Dear Fr?:i>: Although I have been so long in commenting on the material you
have sent me about Amerasia I have felt shielded by the fact that I, myself, had
had no i-eply to my long letter to you of November second. I was getting ready
this morning to be the first to write when I received your letter of December
thirty-first, which puts you delinitely ahead of me.
First your general memorandum cm the new magazine. I think this is ex-
tremely good, and have no modifications to suggest, and only one question to ask —
are you going to ask for material from non-Americans who are not resident in
America such as Freda Utley and George Taylor? There is also Dr. Herbert
Rosinski whose address is : Christian Student Movement House, Russell Square,
London, W. C. I. Rosinski's positi(»n in (lermany has become untenable because
of one Jewish grandfather. He has no leftist afliliations or, so far as I know,
sympathies. He has for a long time been in Germany concerned witli questions
of policies regarding Japan and the Far p]ast. Owing to this he has an excep-
tional insight into the not always very closely fitting relationship between the
propaganda and the h'calijolitik aspects of such questions.
There is no particular comment to be made on the subject of Colegrove's letter
to you about the magazine, except that I have a dubious feeling about the name
Amerasia which is like his only more durable. I note in your letter received
today that you are planning to print the name superimposed on a map of the
North Pacific. If my memory of the map of this part nf the world is correct, the
result would be to have "Amer" jirinted on the map of Asia and "Asia"' printed
on the uiap of America, although of course you could get "Asia"' back into Asia
and "Amer" back into America by printing the word "Amerasia"' up side down.
This in itself might be acceptable as a comment on the tempter of our times
but perhaps slightly adolescent. I admit however that I have no better title to
suggest.
One particular question: Is the magazine an organ of the American Council?
Now for tlie suggestion of turning part of my letter into an article. This has
got me all fiustered and fiattered. From your long silence, I had begun to
develop a sinking feeling that I had committed just another blundering amateur
analysis worth only the silent horror of you and your friends. Naturally, on
the rebound, I am tickled to death at your willingness to print my opinions, even
though this too may indicate that you feel my amateurism has merely a
momentary usefulness.
I am enclosing a reworking of the material which I hope you will find
satisfactory.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4125
With reference to your mention of the fact that you are negotiating for an
article from Reishchauer, I am enclosing herewith an article which he sent me
for Pacific Affairs. You may wish to take this over from me. It is too late
for inclusion in the March number of Pacific Affairs and may be out-dated by
June. It has also a number of touches which might make it unsuitable for
Pacific Affairs without damaging it in the least for the kind of magazine
you are planning.
Don't think from anything I have said above that I am snorting and prancing
in a nasty way about what I think about what you think about what I think
and so on. As you know, I really am only groping my way toward an under-
standing of what I think about what I think. I hope you won't mind if I
c(mtinue to send you an occasional memorandum. If you will criticize any such
material in the closest possible way, it would do me the invaluable service of
giving me a firm point on which to steer — even if I don't evetually steer in that
direction.
With all the best,
Yours,
[s] OL
[t] Owen Lattimore.
P. S. (inked in) — l^ou said that in my original draft, which was hastily dic-
tated and unrevised, some phrases were open to question. Please use your dis-
cretion in editing the amplified version. Cut or add. The article will iiot make
me a roaring, popular favorite, and therefore all the more it ought to be
invulnerably worded.
Exhibit No. 681
139 East 52nd Street,
New York, N. Y., Mar eh 9, 1943.
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
Council for Pan-Amerioan Democracy,
112 East 19th Street, Neiv York, N. Y.
Dear Friend : I hope you enjoyed Major Eliot's scathing attack on Sokolsky in
today's Tribune as much as I did. Sokolsky certainly had it coming to him.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Carter.
Exhibit No. 682
Hawau Group — Ex<?cutive Committee : Rilev H. Allen. Chairman ; A. L. Dean, Vice Chair-
man ; Prank C. Atherton, Treasurer ; Charles F. Loomis, Secretary ; Robbing B. Ander-
son : Paul S. Bachman ; Peter H. Buck ; David L. Crawford : W. F. Dillingham ; Gerald
W. Fisher ; Peyton Harrison ; Shao-ehang Lee ; Frank B. Midkiff ; Iga Mori ; Philip S.
Piatt ; Oscar F. Shepard ; Yasutaro Soga ; Hugh C. Tennent ; Heaton L. Wrenn
american council
Institxtte of Pacific Relations
501 Dillingham Building
HONOLULU, HAWAII
:\rAY 2, 1940.
Mr. Fbedebick V. Field,
American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, Xew York, N. Y.
Dear Fred : This will introduce Lt. Colonel George E. Arneman, who for the
past three years has been one of the most useful and active members of the
Hawaii group, IPR.
He is the one who engineered the two Schofield conferences for us and has
been a meuilier of several of our study groups. He was the G-2 intelligence
pfRcer at Schofield Barracks and has had two different tours as military attache
in Baltic countries.
88348— 52— pt. 12 7
4126 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
I want him to see the library and jreneral workings of the Top Floor and hope
it will be possible for him to participate in one of your regional conferences.
His immediate assignment is to the state of Maine.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Chas.
[t] Charles F. Loomts, Secretary.
Exhibit No. 683
Mabch 20, 1939.
FVF from ECC :
Enclosed is a copy of an air mail letter just received from Captain Carlson
which is self-explanatory.
From one point of view I wish that Captain Carlson could have kept his
position in the Navy Department.
Have you any suggestions as to ways in which the public here and in the Far
East can profit by his new freedom?
Exhibit No. 684
Hawaii Group — Hxecutlve Committee : Peter H. Buck, Chairman ; Frank E. Midkiff, Vice
Chairman ; Frank C. Atherton, Treasurer ; Charles F. Loomls, Secretary ; Riley H. Allen ;
Robbins B. Anderson ; Paul S. Bachman ; Royal N. Chapman ; David L. Crawford ; A. L.
Dean ; W. F. Dillingham ; Shao-Chang Lee ; Iga Mori ; Philip S. Piatt ; Oscar F.
Shepard ; Yasutaro Soga ; Hugh C. Tennent ; Heaton L. Wrenn
American Council
institute of pacific relations
316 Dillingham Bldg., Hdnolulu, T. H.
July 2, 1937.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
129 East 52nd Street, New York City.
Del\b Fred : On receipt of your letter regarding bigger and better textbooks
for the social science teachers of America I immediately wired you :
"Expect no difficulty financing 1,500 dollars for 750 books. Will confirm
clipper Monday. Stop. Need books early fall."
As I was able to get the Atherton Estate to have a meeting during the day and
guarantee the $1,500 (that was the only thing I could do as the Superintendent
of Schools is in the Orient and Barnes, the principal of Kamehameha school, is
on the mainland and I could not get advance orders from them), I sent you
another wire so that you and Helen could get busy immediately getting the
manuscripts to press !
"Hereby confirm order — committee hopes price includes maps, pictures (we
think this is essential). Progressive and coast schools should easily absorb
balance — send copy for promotion circulars. (I thought that I might de-
cide to print some circulars for distribution to the delegates at the World
Education Conference and knew that your office has more advertising brains
than ours so thought you v">nld be willing to prepare the copy for a circular.)
Send clipper regarding Los Angeles set-up. ( Before acknowledging Sprout's
letter I wanted your reactions to my queries and suggestions regarding
our work in Los Angeles this fall — I especially refer to my clipper letters of
June 2, June 19, and June 22, which I trust you received.)"
I must apologize for bombarding you with radiograms regarding Carter's query
about my going to Manila. The reason I seemed impatient was because I had to
decide that week whether to keep my booking to the mainland in August as there
are long waiting lists on all the steamers this summer. I have not received an
answer from my cable to Carter of June 24 and as I received your radiogram
of June 29, "ukge you go Los Angeles as coast work must develop rapidly", I
decided to keep to my original schedule as given in my letter of June 2. I hope
that you can give a full week to Los Angeles and can arrive there as near Sep-
tember 4 as possible.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4127
I have written Mrs. Ward privately and unofficially, asking her if she coiild
spend September and October in Los Angeles assisting me with the financial
campaign in case I have a secretary and she can be spared from the San Fran-
cisco office. She replied that she would be very happy to do this if the matter (an
be arranged. Unless there is some Los Angeles person in milid as a permanent
secretary, I think that using ISIrs. Ward would be the liest plan. If you approve,
kindly make the necessary arrangements with the San Francisco office or
authorize me to.
This week we hung leis around the Leebrick and Blakeslee families and they
are guests at an I. P. R. dinner being held tonight at the Pacific Club. P>lakeslee
is going to speak on "American Foreign Policy in the Light of Coming Philippine
Independence." C. H. Lowe, the flood relief man who was at Yosemite, also will
be one of the guests.
The other day we had the jileasure of entertaining Takaki's friends, D)ctor
and INIrs. Kawai. He is assistant librarian at Toyko Imperial University. Mary
Pickford and Jeannette MacDonald arrived yesterday on their honeymoons but I
don't think I will interrupt their play to ask for subscriptions for Los Angeles.
There also is a young Vanderbilt here who seems to be having a good time. Is
he one of your relatives, and, if so, should we do anything for him?
The Navy Intelligence Department tells me that H. C. Fornwall, one of
DuPont's man in Japan who arrived yesterday, has the low-down on the miliiary
situation in Japan, so I have just asked him to have lunch with five or six of
the keymen in our recent Far Eastern study group, giving them a chance to
pump him.
With kindest personal regards.
Sincerely,
[s] Chas.
[t] Charles F. Loomis.
CFL : db
Via airmail.
Cc via clipper.
(Handwritten:)
P. S. — Be sure and give me your ideas regarding Los Angeles membership and
goals — and office program set up [s] L.
Exhibit No. 68.5
6 iNlEaJciER Circle,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, December .}, 19,1 'i.
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
Secretary, American Council Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East Fifty-second Street, New York, Neiv York.
Deab Fred: I was very glad indeed to learn that when Joe Barnes retired you
had consented to take his place. Because Jo and I would like to cooperate in every
way we can it is particularly hard to decline your first request. Unfortunately,
the job I have undertaken here is proving to be a much longer assignment than
I had bargained for and the state of our finances simply will not permit us the
luxury of responding. I can only promise that once this job is succeedtnl by
one which is somewhat more remunerative we will be quick to return to the roll
of your faithful contributors.
Sincerely yours,
EC :MMA
[s] Everett Case.
Exhibit No. 686
October 7, 1937.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
San Francisco.
Dear Fred : Thanks for your wire. I am somewhat apprehensive as to the
story which reached the newspapers concerning my Washington speech. The
situation was something like this : A week or ten days ago I talked to a meeting
of Quakers in Philadelphia. Thei-e were present at the meeting several repre-
sentatives of the National Council for the Prevention of War, and in response
to their request I gave them a copy of the manuscript. This Wednesday, that is.
4128 ■ INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
yesterday, I attended the annual conference of the National Council in Wash-
ington and opened the discussion on the topic, "What Should Be the Objec-
tives of American Policy?" After the meeting one of their people confessed that
slie had issued a release to the papers based not upon my remarks yesterday, but
upon the manuscript of the Philadelphia speech. I am still ready to stand by the
latter, but I am somewhat suspicious of the selection and arrangement of state-
ments which were made by the representative of a group which takes a rather
limited isolationist point of view.
As a matter of fact, at the meeting yesterday I said very little about neutrality
except to emphasize more strongly than I had in Philadelphia its obvious limi-
tations as a policy in this situation. Knowing the attitude of Libby and of this
group, I made the iiurden of my remarks an insistence on the tact that we are
heavily and irrevcx^ably involved in the Far East and that we must necessarily
work out a long-run constructive policy based on the principle of cooperative
action. Proliably it did not go over very well, but I am sorry that if there was to
be a new.spaper story it was not based on this line of thought rather than on the
questicm of applying the Neutrality Act. I still think that there is a valuable
safeguard in this neutrality position which makes it an instrument of policy not
to be lightly tossed overboard; but it increasingly apparent that it does not deal
with the major problems in this particular case.
In regard to the Survey article, too. it now appears in the use which has been
made of it that the qualifications, conditions, and restrictions upon which the
argument is based, although explicitly stated, are not given a prominent enough
position. I suppose that one always faces the difficulty that other people will
abstract the particular parts of an argument that support their case and so dis-
tort the conclusions of the author.
While in Wasliington I tried without nuicli success to find out the meaning of
the President's speech. There wasn't much more information available than the
speculations which the newspapers had carried. One political cynic suggested
an angle which is perhaps not to be overlooked. In his view the speech was an
adroit political move in the President's best manner and one taken quite without
regard to the international situation. FDK was on his way back to Washington
faced with the most difficult personal problem of his career — the Black case.
. He was definitely on the spot, with absolutely no one on whom he could shift the
responsibility this time. According to this view he took his dramatic way of
blotting out the Black issue at just the time when it was most embarrassing.
For three days now and for some time to come the newspapers are filled with the
imi)lications of the speech and its respon.se here and abroad. In this way the
President has resorted to the old trick of diverting attention to foreign affairs
in the face of a difficult domestic situation.
I cannot believe that this is the whole story, although it may account for
the timing of the speech and for its emphasis. It is difficult to believe that as
adroit a politician as FDR would make a move so effective in domestic politics
unconsciously. On the other hand, we have known for a long time that he has been
seeking an opportunity to make a dramatic move in world ix)litics. No occasion
could have been more favorable from an emotional point of view, whatever possi-
bility there may be that the proposal for some effective action can actually be
implemented. Someone who had read a good many newspaper connuents on the
speech said that he was impressed by the fact that those parts of the speech which
received the strongest approval were the sentences declaring the President's
determination to keep the country out of war.
At the same time there cannot be much doubt that the neutrality position
which was already crumbling as a result of moral indignation over Japan's
actions has rceived a tremendous l)low. Probalily this speech definitely removes
the possibility that the Neutrality Act can be strengthened in the next session of
Congress, and events before that time may even lead to its repeal. They would
have to go a good deal further, though, before there is much likelihood that
Britain and the United States could get together on sanctions, and the recent
despatches from London indicate tliat the British Government is fiatly opposed
to any such proposal. The administration, I should think, would have to go to
Congress to get authority for any effective progi-am, even applying impartial
neutrality restrictions effective enough to support sanctions undertaken by an-
other country. Senator Pittman argues that the President can do anything in
the way of economic intervention under the recent Supreme Court decision ; but
it sounds a little fantastic to say that the general discretionary power of the
President in matters of foreign policy give liim a blank check with reference to
trade and finance in time of peace as well as war. It is conceivable that the
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4129
President could lead opinion along to the point where he could make a successful
appeal to Congress, and it is just this possibility which has made the isolationist
senators so insistent on tying his hands so far as possible. The story goes that
they were infuriated and alarmed a year and a half ago when the President, in
discussing the matter of discretionary neutrality powers with a small gi'oup,
leaned across the table, banged his fist, and said with great emphasis, "Gentle-
men, I can get this country in a war in 10 days."
While in Washington I picked up a few bits of gossip, which may interest you.
It was indirectly reported to me that the Military Intelligence Division believes
Japan to have 2.000,000 men under arms — a half million in China, a half million
in Manchuria. Korea, and at ports of embarkation in Japan ; and the remainder in
preparation. The Germany military advisers are people in good standing at
home, who simply have orders not to be captured or found dead on a battlefield.
It is reported that there are two American majors, retired or reserve, directing
China's air operations, and, less reliably, that two hundred American pilots have
landed in Hongkong. Referring again to the Germans, a Chinese told me here
that Germans were under orders from home to remain as long as China did not
receive direct military aid from the Soviet Union.
I greatly appreciated your extensive and .iicnerous comments on the pamphlet
manuscript. I was myself dissatisfied with the manuscript in a number of the
points which you raised, and I think the present revision is some improvement. It
still has to be done over again and as yet I haven't sat down to that liusiness
with your letter in front of me. Aime Johnstone thinks there will be considerable
demand for something of this sort and quoted Fred Libby as saying that a 100
pamphlet has ten times the sale of a 25^ one. With the situation moving as it is,
it is clear that the discussion should be broadened with the neutrality section
greatly curtailed. I am glad now we did not rush through a pamphlet focusing
on neutrality two weeks ago.
I am very reluctant to agree with you that we must submit this kind of thing
to Hornbeck, and Lasker feels the same way. If we sent it to a high govern-
ment official we would be more or less foi-ced to adopt wh;itever suggestions he
cares to make. My own feeling is that while in this case it might make no great
difference, it is a bad precedent and just the kind of thing which we criticise
in other countries. I will follow out your request unless I hear from you. to the
contrary.
We have had a number of requests for the American Stake pamphlet which
we are unable to fulfill. Anne Johnstone thinks that a new edition, prepared in
the near future and revised in such a way as to summarize not only the economic
stake but also existing political commitments and diplomatic machinery, etc.,
would be useful. I wish we had someone around who could do a really first-class
graphic portrayal of this subject.
Sincerely yours,
[t] Wm. W. Lockwood, Jr.
Exhibit No. 687
The Institute of Pacific Relations
Honolulu, Hawaii
129 East 52nd Street,
New York, N. Y., July 16, 1934.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
New Hartford, Connecticut.
Dear Fred: You doubtless received from Rajchman a copy of his Report as
Technical Delegate of the League in China. That Report, you will remember, was
based on ten Annexes published by the National Economic Council in China. If
you do not have a copy of these Annexes, and desire to do so, I can send you a
volume containing all ten.
Sincerely,
fs] Edward C. Carter
[t] Edward C. Carter.
(Pencilled note:) No; I have never seen the repoi't — and even less I have not
even heard about it. I should greatly appreciate a copy.
[s] Feed.
ECC/NSH
4130 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 688
Excerpts From Letter to Frederick V. Field From Newton D. Baker, Dated
August G, 1934 (Cleveland, Ohio)
I have just had a two-day visit from Joe Barnes. It was really a very
delightful experience for me and I was flattered out of all description by the
candor and completeness with which Joe permitted me to see the inside of bis
mind, and, as I gathered, to some extent, the inside of your mind. I tried to
tell liim that although I am an old man, I am still in full possession of all the
ideals of my youth, which do not differ from those which you and be cherish,
and that the only difference between bim and me lies in the fact that I have
ceased to expect tbe same rate of progress which he thinks not only possible
but necessary.
All of this is important so far as this note is concerned only because I want
to urge you to consider the secretaryship of the American Council. Mr. Carter
has telegraphed me that Mr. Alsberg has definitely decided that be will not
undertake it. I was perfectly content to have bim invited, but my first sug-
gestion when Mr. Carter talked with me about it was that you should do tbe
job. I hope you will consider it favorably, and, as you see, I have not learned
from Joe all the things which you might think it important for me to know and
I still am very enthusiastic in urging the invitation on your attention.
Exhibit No. 689
Office op the Secretary-General
Institute of Pacific Relations
Amsterdam — Honolulu — London — Manila — Moscow — Paris — Shanghai — Sydney — Tokyo —
Toronto — Wellington
Enroute,
Seattle-Victoria, April 29, 1939.
Dear Fred : Yours of April 25 has only just arrived. It deserves a better
answer than is possible at this last minute.
Apparently you want my reaction to a specific situation rather than the
general assurance that for years I have advocated the development of tbe
American Labor Movement. I wish you had raised these questions when I was
in New York for then I could have understood the nature of tbe difficulties you
and your colleagues are facing.
I was quite surprised for example to learn from I.,ockwood the evening I left
New York that he anticipated difficulty with tbe Board.
Now your letter comes with tbe implication of wide difference of opinion
within the staff.
To express an opinion on objections from the Board or the staff' I ought to
know tbe nature of these objections.
Lockwood's remark was the first bint I bad bad that you had not been carrying
a majority of your colleagues on the Executive Committee with you concurrently
with the efforts of. your immediate colleagues on the staff' to get a majority
of the staff to join the Union. In a cooperative enterprize like the I. P. R. where
tbe Executive Committee and the Board are not "profit makers" but volunteer
cooperators, I should have thought this indispensable.
What are the objections of staff members? If I learned, for example, that so
conscientious a member as Shiman did not want to join the Union I would want
to know his reasons before casting a vote in tbe Executive Committee, which be
might regard as coercion. I do not mean that I would be unwilling to go against
"x" or "y" on tbe American Council staff. I would first want to know what the
staff objections are.
I should hope that if unionization in the American Council is effected tbe
parallel of the F. P. A. would not be featured because (a) Buell opposed tbe
union whereas you favor it (b) the F. P. A. bad a bad labor policy whereas you
have had a good one. Are there not better parallels, i. e., where unionization
represents tbe mature, intelligent coopei'ation of socially minded adults not tbe
"employer" "employee" squabble in the F. P. A.
If for any reason unionization is delayed I should think that as an interim
measure tlie Executive Committee and the staff ought to work out without delay
a formulation of the present safeguards and standards including the creation
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4131
of a joint committee which will relieve you of your present responsibility for
fixing salaries, etc.
If you yourself finally decide to urge the Executive Committee to authorize
you to sign a contract you may wish also to recommend that the Committee con-
sider whether the financial position of the Council is not siich that it can increase
slightly its salaries to one or two lowest bracket staff members, // the only obstacle
to their joining the union is the size of the dues.
An immediate general formulation is clearly indicated for otherwise if you
were run over by a bus and succeeded by a less socially minded person there
might be a worsening in the standards you have established.
If you think it will help please do not hesitate to share this letter with Jessup.
If you do please tell him in his Pacific Council capacity that I understand there
is no parallel proposal among the members of the International Secretariat to
ask the P. C. for a contract. I assume this must invoke joint and concurrent
examination of the question from the start by the P. C. and the members of the
Secretariat as the situation in the P. C. and the A. C. appear to be somewhat
different.
Sincerely but hastily yours,
Edward C. Caeteb.
I have discussed the union with no one on your staff save Lockwood on Monday
and Austern briefly about a month ago.
Exhibit No. 690
212 East 48th St.,
New York City, March 20, 19S9.
Dr. Fkedeeick V. Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52d St.. New York City.
Dear Mr. Fiexd : I am sure that you will be interested in meeting Lieut. Arthur
Read who has just arrived in this country from China and has a very interesting
story to tell.
Mr. Read, who is an Army Reserve Lieutenant, has been instructing Chinese
soldiers at Kwangtung and in Hankow for more than a year and will be in the
United States for the next few months on a lecture tour.
I have asked him to look you up when he returns from Washington the latter
part of this week.
Letters of introduction from China express a glowing appreciation for the
splendid work he has done for the Chinese forces.
Very sincerely yours,
[s] Earl H. Leaf.
EHL : vr
The attached report, compiled and written by the Shanghai branch of the
British Army Intelligence Service, is Strictly co^'FIDENTIAL.
It is well worth a careful study, however, as providing a means of estimating
the actual number of casualties when studying the official Japanese casualty
reports.
Earl H. Leaf.
Japanese Casualties
1. Although it is difficult to do more than a rough approximation, the follow-
ing attempt has been made to assess the Japanese casualties incurred from the
outbreak of the Lukouchiao incident on July 7th, 1937, to about the middle
of November 1938, a period of over 16 months of hostilities.
2. The official Japanese Army figures of killed in action are as under :
(a) Up to about mid-Nov. 19.37 — North China: Approxi. 6,500; Central
China : Approxi. 10.000.
(b) Up to 7th July 1938— nearly 37,000 on all fronts. Between mid-
November 1937 and July 1938, most of the heavy fighting had occurred in
the North China Front, in Shantung, especially Taierchwang, in Shansi,
and North Honan. It is suggested that this figure of 37,000 might be
subdivided into 19,000 North China : 18,000 Central China.
4132 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
(c) During Hankow advance from about the middle of August to the
middle of October : G.inS.
This would give, with an admitted South China casualty list of 77, a grand total
of 4;^>.()(M» killed. It would appear reasonable to add another 2,000 to represent
"official" casualties in North China subsequent to 7th July 1938, and "official"
casualties in Central China otlier than those incurred during the Hankow
advance as stated above.
It is suggested, therefore, that the official figures to date would be in the
neighborhood of 4r),000 killed, of wliich not h^ss than 25,000 will have been in-
curred in Central Cliina.
3. (a) These figures suffer from two defects. In the first place they are
"official" lists, and in the second place they do not, it is luiderstood, include
those died of disease. They may be considered to be a serious understatement
of the true state of alTairs.
(b) As regards the accurac.v of the "ofticial" lists, it is a fact that the "official"
casualties at the "Changkufeng Incident in July- August 1938, were given at 158
killed. Later lists of killed. l)y name, gave a total of '>'2'^ (see Sununary No. 42).
A greater proportion of casualties were probably suppressed on this occasion
than is usually the case (the true casualties being over 200% more than the
official ones), as there were particular reasons to emphasize how gallantly and
successfully the Japanese had resisted the Russians.
It is also of interest to record that continuous reports have been received of
the number of ashes evacuated through Tangku and that these reports give a
total, up to the end of October, of over 60,000. These ashes will certainly include
died of disease and probably also civilians, but even allowing for a 50% exag-
geration, the subsequent total of 40,000 is twice the "official" total of 20,000.
Figures for Shanghai and Tsingtao are not obtainable, but the impression gained
from the reports of ashes arriving in Japan fortifies the belief that the dead
are very considerably greater than is officially announced.
It is suggested that the numbers killed in action are about 60% above those
officially admitted, and that they are probably over 70,000.
(c) Figures of "dead from disease" are more difficult to estimate, but the fol-
lowing information is of assistance :
(i) The Japanese admitted to 300 deaths from cholera near Shanghai in
August and September, 1937, and to outbreaks of cholera up the Yangtze
this summer, especially at Kiukiang. Their admission of cholera deaths
near Shanghai is probably an understatement.
(ii) The South Manchurian Railway, who have been operating certain
railways in North China for some months, have announced the deaths of 28
Japanese employees from disease. The number of Japanese S. M. R. em-
ployees in North China is not known, it is suggested an average over the
period under discussion may be about 2,000. These figures, taken by them-
selves, nmst not be pressed too far, as many of the 28 deaths might have
occurred in one isolated outl)reak of disease in one isolated area, and the
total of 2,000 Japanese S. M. R. employees may be an understatement. On
the other hand, it might be remembered that these civil employees will
usually be working under conditions nuiking them both less liable to serious
disease, and, with better treatment more quickly available, more likely to
recover, if attacked.
(iii) Other factors to be borne in mind are Ihe reported 60,0(X) ashes from
Tangku, which will have included deaths from disease, the admitted prev-
alence of dysentery l)oth in North and Ontral China, the bitter cold faced
in the winter of 1937-38, whic-h undoubtedly caused frostbite, pneumonia,
and other serious winter ailments, and the almost tropical conditions of the
summer fighting in the Yangtze this summer.
(d) It is suggested that the deaths from disease in the Japanese Army in
China may be taken as something under 10,000, and that the total number of
deaths from all causes is some 80,000 men.
4. (a) The numbers of "seriously" wounded and sick must also, to a con-
siderable extent, be a matter of conjecture, and it is difficult to draw an exact
line between "serious" and "slight" cases. It is intended that "serious" cases
should cover not only men pernuinently incapacitated for military service but
also, generally speaking, all those whose absence from duty is about 3 months
or more and who, therefore, have a serious effect on the fighting strength of
the Army.
(b) It is understood that as a result of the experience of the Great Wai a
proportion of 4 wounded to 1 killed may be expected in action. Of these 4
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4133
wounded 1 will be able to walk iu a Walkiug Wounded C-ollecting Centre and the
other 8 will have to be helped or carried by stretcher. The 1 walking wounded
can probably be taken as a "slightly wounded," and a small percentage of the 3
nonwalking wounded may also be only "slightly" wounded, the nature of the
wound preventing walking.
It is possible that in the present war in China, with most Japanese casualties
being caused by comparative cleaner and less serious bullet wounds, that the
proportion of "slightly" wounded is higher than it was in France, and it is
suggested, therefore, that the number of "seriously" wounded will l)e about
140,000.
(e) The number of "seriously" sick will, of course, bear a higher proportion
to died of disease than wounded to killed.
Cholera, dysentery, beri-beri, pneumonia, frostbite, all causing a high degree
of "serious" wastage, have been prevalent at different times among the Japa-
nese forces. The immediate "serious" wastage from venereal disease have
lirobably not been high, though the ultimate loss is bound to be serious in view
of its widespread existence in the Japanese army and the little or no preventive
measures taken. Malaria has obviously caused a very high immediate wastage,
but it is possible that its "serious" wastage (i. e., over 3 months absence from
duty) is less than dysentery, which has probably been the chief scourge to the
Japanese troopis. There have also probably been a not-inconsiderable number
of "heat" diseases from the summer campaigning in the Yangtze Valley.
It is suggested that tlie number of "seriously" sick will be about 60,000.
(d) These two figures give a combined total of 200,000 "serious" casualties,
wounded and sick.
Owing to tbe Japanese using, quite legitimately, hospital transports as well
as hospital ships for the evacuation of wounded and sick, it has not been possible
to obtain data of movements of hospital vessels from China, as the hospital
transports are not recognizable as such. Two facts, however, have recently
become known from the journey of certain foreign newspapermen up the
Yangtze in October, tending to confirm tlie above estimate.
The first fact is connected with a visit paid to the Japanese Army Yangtzpoo
Clearing Hospital, Shanghai. This is not the only Japanese Army hospital in
Shanghai, but it is believed to be now the ])rincipal one in existence. During
the Shanghai fighting there were, of course, several others. Sick and wounded
from Shanghai area and from Hangchow are evacuated to these Shanghai hos-
pitals. Sick and wounded from upriver are evacuated to hospitals at Nanking
and KiUKiANG, etc., and thence moved direct to Japan. It will thus be seen that
this Yangtzepoo Hospital, though an important one, only deals with a propor-
tion of the Army casualties in ('entral China. On the occasion in question when
the foreign journalists were being conducted round, the O. C. Hospital admitted
that since the opening of the hospital in SeiTtember 1937, 60,000 patients had
been dealt witb. of whom 40,000 had been evacuated to Japan.
The second fact is connected with the visit of the foreign journalists to.
Kiukiang a few days later. There, the KiirKiANG Army Hospital was full, with
a total of between 2,000 and 3,000 patients. It was estimated that about 60%
were "sick" and 40% "wounded." The chief sicknesses were dysentery, malaria,
and beri-beri.
The final suggested figures of Japanese Army casualties in China are therefore
280,000 wounded or sick. These figures are considered reasonable, though it is
possible that the proportions between one class of casualty and another may need
alteration.
The Japanese Navy admitted to 1,000 killed on July 7th, 1938. On a compara-
ble basis, with loss of Naval aircraft and with Naval landing parties operating
up the Yangtze, the Naval casualties may be assessed at 2,000 dead and 5,000
seriously wounded or sick. It is suggested that, to cover possible overassess-
ment, the Naval casualties are con.sidered as included in the Army losses
suggested above.
In Summary No. 44, page 8, it was estimated that the "official" Japanese Army
total of killed in China between July 7th, 1937, to about the middle of November
1938 would be "in the neighborhood of 45,000." The official figures publkshed on
December 26th, 1938, for the period 7th July, 1937, to 30th November, 1938, are
given as 47,133 officers and men "killed in action or succuml)ed to wounds."
It is considered that this higher figure tends to confirm the totals suggested
in the article in question of 80,000 Array and Navy killed, died of wounds, died
of disease, and 200,000 seriously wounded or sick. There have also been various
4134 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
small additional incidents confirming ttie belief that the "official" casualties have
been greatly understated. Such incidents are :
(a) An account in the "Osaka Mainichi" of the wastage from disease among
the reporters of that newspaper with the forward troops. It was stated that
"more than (JO" reporters had to be withdrawn "to the rear" on account of ill
health. It is also of interest that Lt. General Tokuga-sva, C. O. C, Air Force in
China, was evacuated to Japan in December 193S, suffering from typhoid.
(b) A photograph in the Japan Advertises of 94 ex-members of the Metro-
politan Police Board, Tokio, killed or died of disease in China.
(c) The arrival of a very large number of ashes in Japan at the end of
December. On one occasion 1,821 ashes were received at Tokio and about a
similar total at Kobe or Osaka.
In this connection, reports from Tientsin state that during the two months
November and December, 1938, 4,350 ashes were embarked at Tangku, making the
estimated grand total of ashes despatched from that port about 65,000.
(d) The large number of people met in Japan who had lost relatives in China.
Exhibit No. 691
Officers : Carl I. Alsberg, Chairman ; Wallace M. Alexander, Vice Chairman ; Miss Ada L.
Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Philip C. Jessup, Vice Chairman ; Benjamin H. Kizer, Vice
Chairman : Ray Lyman Wilbur, Vice Chairman : Frederick V. Field, Secretary ; Charles
J. Rhoads, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant Treasurer
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations
1795 California Street, San Francisco ; Telephone TUxedo 3114 — 129 East 52nd Street,
New York City : Telephone : PLaza 3-4700
August 12, 1938.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
1795 California Street, San Francisco, Calif.
Dear Fred : Situation on the Soviet-Japanese front seems well in hand and
my bet is that hostilities will not again break out, unless the ominous European
situation erupts. There were a bad few days, however, when I was holding my
breath. It was very difficult to arive at any clear-cut explanation, and I spent
considerable energy collecting opinions.
In view of the armistice which would signify a Japanese desii'e to avoid
real trouble to the north, the most logical explanation as I see it is something
along the following lines. The incident was Japanese provoked, prompted by
some request or at least understanding with Germany. The latter has been so
insistent in expressions regarding its lack of desire for this incident and its
unwillingness to give Japan more than "sympathy" that this alone would arouse
suspicion. Also in the present jockeying re Czechoslovakia, it might well be to
the interest of Germany to have some illustration given to France that the
Soviets can only look with one eye toward Europe. Without some prompting
from Germany, or at least, assurance that if the worst eventually should come
from the incident, Germany would also engage the U. S. S. R.'s attention, it is
inconceivable that Japan should have started something of so grave a magnitude
or at least should have let it develop as it did. For home consumption, Japan
might also well have been motivated by a desire to give some concrete illustra-
tion of why it is not progressing faster in China and why it has to adopt such
extreme economic measures. It can now be pointed out that a great part of
.lapanese manpower and resources have to be kept earmarked for Manchukuo
and therefore the country can in no way be considered as exercising its full
strength in cleaning up the "China incident." Again, for Japan's attempts to
prevent increased stiffening of attitude by England and the United States against
Japan, the Soviet border trouble may also prove of value. It is a reminder that
if Japan is allowed to get too weak, it may prove unable to cope with the
Soviet "menace." It has always been my belief that the leading circles in these
countries have always hoped that Japan and the Soviet Union may counteract
each other. Japan may well try to point out that unless she is given assistance,
a different complexion will evolve in the East — see Peffer's article in last Sun-
day's Times. It is possible that the trouble began by autonomous action on the
part of the Kwantung army, but the composition of the Cabinet would indi-
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4135
cate that there is not much separation between the Army and the forces in con-
trol. I would say that the Cabinet eitlier planned it from the beginning or im-
mediately utilized a few pot shots.
Regarding Thompson's exiilanation, whicli bases Japanese action on knowledge
of present Soviet weakness, I liave of course no immediate or personal knowledge
regarding the condition of the Red Army. However, I would refer to a recent
article in the Saturday Evening Post by Demeree Bess on the undeclared war
between Japan and the Soviet Union, in which particular reference is made to
the fact that the Far Eastern army was untouched by the purge. Also Russell of
the Teleciram in a recent series of articles has drawn a pretty glowing picture of
the Soviet forces, apparently from personal observation in his recent trip over
the Trans-Sib. He mentions particularly the unstrained, confident bearing and
manner of the officers and men whom he observed. I would also think that the
events of the fighting and the armistice as well as the tone of Litvinov's con-
versations with Shigemitshu indicate Soviet strength rather than weakness.
My own belief is that the Soviet Union has never felt itself as strong as it does at
present.
I hope all this makes some sense. Regarding Europe, everyone seems to be
keeping their fingers crossed, particularly during this month.
Yours faithfully,
[s] Kate
[t] Kathleen Baknes.
Frederick V. Field
It was voted unanimously to record the American Council's appreciation of
the work of Frederick V. Field as follows :
It was with the deepest regret that the Board of Trustees learned that the
Executive Committee had found it necessary to accept the resignation at its
meeting of September 18 of Mr. Frederick "V. Field from the Secretaryship of the
American Council. As the minutes of that meeting showed, the Chairman of the
Committee, Mr. Parker, had asked the Chairman of the American Council
whether he felt that IMr. Field could not be persuaded to resume the Secretary-
ship. Dr. Jessup had replied that he thought Mr. Field's decision was final.
Mr. Field joined the staff of the American Council in 1929. During his 11
years of service he has demonstrated an unusually high quality of leadership.
The program of the American Council has expanded notably under his direction,
partly because of his own untiring efforts, and partly because of his imaginative
leadership in developing the cooperation of the entire staff. Mr. Field was one
of the Founders of the Far Easteirn Survey. He was the author of "American
Participation in the China Consortiums", published by the University of Chi-
cago Press, and presented as a research study at the Hangchow-Shanghai Con-
ference of the Institute of 1931. In 1932 and 1933 he acted as Editor-in-chief
of the "Economic Handbook of the Pacific Area," which was published by
Doubleday-Doran and Company in 1934 with a foreword by the late Mr. Newton
D. Baker. In this monumental work his own research abilities, together with his
rare capacity for stimulating research on the part of his colleagues, were
strikingly exhibited. It was largely through his initiative that the series of
regional conferences on American foreign policy were developed in various
parts of the United States in 1938, 1939, and 1940.
While he was executive secretary the membership of the American Council
more than doubled, but it is impossible to make a full record of his services to
the American Council, because in innumerable unknown and anonymous ways
he has contributed to the mairtteuance and expansion of the IPR program.
His capacity to surround himself with young and able scholars has served as a
compelling example in other National Councils. His services likewise to the
International Secretariat and the Pacific Council have been a major contri-
bution to the development of the Institute's international work.
Throughout his connection with the Institute he has been most scrupulous and
exacting in maintaining the highest objective standards for his own IPR writ-
ing and that of his colleagues. He has combined personal modesty with the
capacity to inspire high achievement on the part of others. He has been noted
for his practical wisdom in counsel and amazing energy in action.
The Board of Trustees desire that the officers assure Mr. Field that his job
on the American Council staff will be awaiting him when he completes his
present work.
4136 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 692
300 GiLMAN Hall,
The Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Md., October 11, 1938.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
1795 California Street,
Sa7i Francisco.
Dear Fred : Enclosed I am sending a copy of a recent letter from Snow : also a
copy of a recent letter I wrote to Harold Isaacs, who suddenly wrote to apprise
me that his history of the Chinese revolution is about to be published by Seeker
and AVarburg in London. He particularly requested me not to have it reviewed
by any of the "next of Stalinists" in our New York office !
If you are interested I should like very much to send you occasional samples
of correspondence like these. I hope it might help to keep us in touch both per-
sonally and perhaps for the occasional benefit of Pacific Affairs and Amerasia.
We got the first part of our settling down managed very handily, but have now
entered the tag-end phase, which may take an indefinite time.
How is Edith? We both send our love.
Tours,
[t] Owen Lattimore.
Exhibit No. 693
Chairman : Clifford T. McAvoy. Secretary-Treasurer : A. J. Isserman. Executive Com-
mittee : Mrs. Edmond Barach, Franz Boas, John Bright, Louis Colman, Joseph Curran,
David Efron, Frederick V. Field, Michael Garramone, Hugo Gellert, Ben Golden, Marina
Lopez, George Mar.shall, Herman P. Osborne, Samuel Putnam. Charles Recht. Arthur G.
Silverman, Ferdinand Smith, Tredwell Smith, Max Yergan. Staff — Executive Secretary :
Marion Bachrach ; Frederick V. Field; Romolo Lachatanere ; Joan Madison
Council for Pan American Democracy
112 East 19th Street
NEW YORK, N. Y.
GRamercy 3-2709
March 4, 1943.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, New York, N. Y.
Dear Mr. Carter : I have been very much surprised to learn of the extraordi-
narily hostile attitude which Manchester Boddy of the Los Angeles Daily News
has been taking toward the Soviet Union. The progressive newspapers on the
west coast carry a blast against him about every week, a sample of which I
enclose.
Their position seems to me to be well documented. Do you still know him, and
have a good contact with him? If so, wouldn't it be worth trying to influence
his point of view which, if it remains where it now is, will simply continue to
poison the mass of his readers.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Fred
Frederick V. Field.
FVF : AP
["Peoples World," 2/26/43]
Editor Boddy, This Is Forgery !
In his column of Wednesday, February 24, Manchester Boddy, editor-publisher
of the Los Angeles Daily News, prints a statement purportedly made by Soviet
Premier Joseph Stalin in 1939.
We charge that it is a forgery worthy of the pen of a Goebbels or a Valtin-
Krivitsky stooge.
Here it is :
"* * * If we accept the Reich's offer of collaboration, the latter wiU not
hesitate to crush Poland ; England and France will thereupon be drawn fatally
into war. There will result a thorough destruction of Western Europe, and
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4137
remaining outside the conflict we can advantageously await our hour. If Ger-
many wins, she will emerge from the war too exhausted to dream of an armed
conflict against us. We must accept the pact proposed by Germany and work
to prolong the war the maximum possible. * * *"
A telephone call to Mr. Boddy's secretary from a People's World reporter failed
to elicit the source from which Mr. Boddy quoted Stalin.
Mr. Boddy's secretary replied that the statement was contained on a typed
index card in the publisher's files.
For a person holding as responsible a position in influencing public opinion as
Mr. Boddy to give credence to as obvious forgery as the one typed on his index
card, which after all might have been filed under "Nazi propaganda," seems
incredible.
The only purpose which the printing of such a forgery could accomplish is to
drive a wedge between the United States and its allies in this war of survival, a
tactic which President Roosevelt warned against in his recent speech as being
inspired by Berlin.
Mr. Boddy should be made to answer publicly for his irresponsibility.
For the present, we challenge him to present proof that will authenticate the
scurrilous slander printed above as having come from Stalin.
Failing such proof (as fail to produce it Boddy must), we challenge liim to
meet the responsibilities imposed upon him as a public figure by publicly retract-
ing this attack upon our great Russian ally.
Exhibit Xo. 694
New York City, July 3, 1940.
^liss Joy Hume.
Dear Joy : Thanks for your note written just as you left for Wisconsin. If
the FBI has not put you and the other representatives of American youth in jail
I hope that you will take the initiative in getting in touch with me when you
return to the Pacific Council office. I am anxious to have a talk with you but as
I shall be spending most of my time out of the office I shall probably miss you
unless you take pains to see that I don't.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
Exhibit No. 695
Chinese Youth Delegation
Parkins
San Francisco, August 27, 1938.
Miss Helen Parkins,
The Chinese Youth Delegation,
12 West 32nd Street, Neic York City.
Dear Miss Parkins : I have your letter of August 22nd asking me to join the
sponsoring committee for the good-will tour of the Chinese Youth Delegation. I
am entirely sympathetic with the purpose of this tour and shall be glad to do
anything I can privately to aid it but I shall have to decline your invitation to
join the committee and have my name appear on the letter paper. The staff of
our organization, which is essentially a research one. at the outbreak of the
war a year ago agreed to join no committees on behalf of one belligerent or
another although we reserved the right to express our private opinions in writing
and speaking as freely as we wished. As you perhaps know, I have taken ad-
vantage of this opportunity in writing a good many articles on behalf of China
but I have felt that it was wiser all around to decline such an invitation as you
have given me.
Please, however, be assured that I shall be eager to do anything I can to
help the tour, particularly when it comes to the West Coast.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
f/g
4138 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
LAckawanna 4-5761
Committee for the Tour of the Chinese Youth Delegation
12 West 32nd Street
new YORK CITY
317
August 22, 1938.
Mr. Frederick C. Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
San Francisco, California.
Dear Mr. Field: A group of Chinese young people, delegates to the World
Youth Congress, are now in the United States. These young men and women,
representing various religious and youth organizations in China, plan to spend
three months in the United States, after the World Youth Congress is over,
touring through our principal cities, visiting our educational institutions and
civic centers. The reception whicli will be accorded them will be an expression
of the international fellowship between youtli of America and China. Their
tour will truly be one of good will.
Wherever the delegation stops, local community leaders are planning a wel-
come, climaxed in most instances by a mass meeting. The Chinese delegates will
tell their own stories, their experiences in the New Life Movement in China, and
what they have gone through in this past year of war. It is our hope that the
listeners, moved by these accounts, will aid the cause of civilian relief in China.
The tour is being sponsored by a ninnber of organizations, including the
American Y'outh Congress, the United Council for Civilian Relief, the Young
Men's Christian Association, the American Association of University Women,
the Young Women's Christian Association, the Chinese Benevolent Association,
the China Aid Council of the American League for Peace and Democracy, and
other groups engaged in China Aid work.
The planning committee is now engaged in securing a sponsoring committee
for the Good Will Tour, of those men and women prominent in public affairs who
will indicate how strongly America supports the cause of all wounded and
suffering peoples. Among those who have already accepted are Mrs. Samuel
McCrea Cavert, Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., and others.
We should like very much to have you join them as a member of the Sponsoring
Committee. In that capacity your name will appear on our permanent sta-
tionery, and we hope you will be able to greet the delegation when it reaches your
city. We are sure you realize the importance of your cooperation in this matter,
and look forward to receiving your acceptance.
Very sincerely yours,
[s] Helen Parkins
Helen Parkins, Chairman.
hp ; rk
uopwa ; 16
Lackawanna 4 — 5761
Committee for the Tour of the Chinese Youth Delegation
12 West 32nd Street, New York City, 317
August 25, 1938.
Mr. Frederick Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
1195 California Street, San Francisco, California.
Dear Mr. Field : It has been suggested to me that you might be able to help us
in the i>ersonnel problem that we have.
The Amei'ican Youth Congress and other cooperating organizations are to tour
four of the Chinese delegates to the World Youth Congress over the United States
this fall. There will be two tours with two Chinese each. We are at pre.sent
looking for two people to accompany the Chinese on these tours to act in the
capacity of advisors and business managers. They would also be expected to
speak on the ijlatform with the Chinese perhaps concerning their own experiences
in China, and they would probably be expected to make collection speeches in
many places.
ESrSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4139
I think you will understand that we need two people of very high caliber for
these two jobs and I wonder if you would be able to suggest to us some Americans
who have recently returned from China and who might be available.
Since our time is growing short, I would appreciate hearing from you as soon
as possible.
Very sincerely yours,
[s] Marie Reed, Director.
mr ; rk
uopwa ; 16
Chinese Youth Delegation
Reed
San Francisco, Septemher 1, 1938.
Miss Marie Reed,
The Chinese Youth Delegation,
12 West 32nd Street, Neic York City.
Dear Miss Reed : It is very hard for me to suggest Americans who might tour
the United States with the Chinese Youth Delegation for those persons are
much more likely to be found in the East than here. I should think that it would
be quite possible to find recent American graduates who had attended the Youth
Congress at Vassar who would be interested in furthering the aims of the Chinese
tour and who would have sufficient funds to stake themselves to the trip. I know
one such person whom we have already signed up for work with our own organ-
ization. This is very much the kind of thing I did the first year I was out of
college and I should think that there would be a good many people in the same
position and with the same interests available for this service now. The thing
to do would be to get in touch with persons connected with several Eastern
universities and colleges sympathetic with what you are trying to do. I feel
quite sure that they would have a number of nominations to make.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
f/g
Exhibit No. 696
San Francisco, April 12, 1938.
Mrs. Kitty Gellhorn,
440 Riverside Drive, Neio YorTc, Neiv York.
Dear Kitty: I bother you with this request only because I want to be certain
that I get an adequate reply and it is just possible that I would not get one by
writing impersonally to the League of Women Shoppers' headquarters.
The American Friends of the Chinese People have in the last six months
organized a fairly active branch in San Francisco and from time to time they
have asked me to help. At the moment they want to undertake a very aggressive
campaign on behalf of a Japanese boycott, and I have urged them to put forward
literature giving advice to San Francisco shoppers. They don't seem to be aware
of the excellent pamphlet which I have seen and which I believe originated with
the League of Woman Shoppers. The first question is, therefore, could you have
two or three copies of this pamphlet, if I am correct in its sponsorship, for-
warded to me?
I would also be very grateful if you would let me know what you, as an
average New York shopper not specializing in Far Eastern questions but inter-
ested in social and political problems in general, have run into with regard to
this .Japanese boycott question. What influence, whether in the form of a piece
of literature, an organizatiX)nal effort, or a lecture, has particularly guided your
own decisions? I ask this because, if I' am not mistaken, the last time I looked
at your legs they were clad in lisle, so I assume someone has influenced you.
I would be very grateful for any information you could send me and also for
a fairly early reply.
Sincerely yours,
Frederick V. Field.
4140 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 697
Rev. John B. Thompson, Chairman ; Frederick V. Field, Executive Secretary ;
Marion Brigg.s, Administrative Secretary
Amekican Peace Mobilization
1116 Vermont Avenue NW
WASHINGTON, D. C.
National 1274
December 5, 1940.
Mr. Edward C. Carter,
Institute of Pacific Relations, 129 East 52nd Street,
Neio York, City.
Dear Mr. Carter : I had at first intended to reply to your mimeographed, cir-
cular letter of November 20th before the Trustees meeting. On rereading it a
couple of times, however, I was unable to put my teeth into precisely what sort
of reply you were after. I thought the letter presented an interesting political
survey of the Pacific area situation, though one yiith which I disagreed at a
number of points, without making it clear how you wished all this to be con-
sidered vis-a-vis the IPR program. Except, of course, to give more of a go-ahead
signal than ever.
A good many of these questions were touched upon at the Trustees meeting.
I thought Carroll Binder's statement, and to a less extent Luce's, were good,
but I felt ashamed as an American that it was necessary to repeat such in-
credibly elementary stuff at the close of the year 1940. It was necessary, never-
theless, in the light of Wilbur's either vicious or childish (I suppose the latter)
renmrks. I wish they could be expunged from the record ; I trust tliey will be
disregarded.
[(Penned:) From here on possibly .share with other members of the Staff?
FVF.]
The new section in the Far Eastern Survey is going to be an exceedingly difii-
cult thing to handle because I cannot see how political subjects are going to be
written in a way that our fancy friends will regard as "objective." If your
November 20th letter is an example, I beg to submit that that is by no means
impartial. It states, for instance, that "it has become plain that the two wars
are inextricably linked." With this important assumption I totally disagree. I
believe the wars are not linked, which does not mean that they do not affect each
other. I believe it to be the policy of both Great Britain and the United States
to see that they become linked, and ditto for the policy of Germany. I disapprove
of that policy because I believe the two wars to lie wars of a completely different
nature. The one in Europe is like the preceding world war, one of rival imperial-
isms neither of which stands for any issues in which I'm interested. The one in
the Far East will, if won by China, lead to positive progress, not to the return
of an old system which breeds war (as will be the case whichever side wins in
Europe). So that assumption about the wars being inextricably linked, while
sounding objective enough, is in my mind, loaded.
And the same for other points in the November 20th letter, which I shall not
discuss because my object is not to criticise that letter but to point out the virtual
impossibility of "objective" political writing. If the IPR takes the line that
Great Britain and China are fighting the same kind of war, a war for democracy,
I shall be alienated ; if it adopts my political point of view Wilbur, Binder, Luce,
et al., will he alienated.
So, what the answer? I think it can lie only in the kind of scheme we had
under discussion for many months last year and earlier this year. The scheme
of setting up (either by taking over Am^i-asia or by promoting a new venture) a
journal of political debate and interchange and information, a jmirnal where all
side-s and arguments would have a chance, where I'd write my personal interpre-
tation, you yours, Wilbur his, etc. The IPR's role would then indeed be impartial
in that it would be simply offering an agency for the exchange of political interpre-
tation, it would be making none of its own as an organization. I'm scared of the
Far Eastern Survey idea for the very reason that .space and the nature of the pro-
posal will not permit of an interchange of views, and because as I have illus-
trated earlier in this letter I d(m't think there is any such thing as impartial
political writing.
I must hastily correct a possible misinterpretation from a remark in an abov'e
paragraph. The new scheme, even if I don't like it will not serve to alienate my
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4141
interest in the IPK. That reinaik was n<> piece of blackmail ; I made it simply
to illustrate a point.
Now, as to 1941 program — the answer is obvious. First, continue research as
the basis of the whole show; second, make that research as widely available as
possible through education; third, improve facilities for Oriental studies, and
stimulate new scholarship; fourtli, provide every possible facility and occasion
for the discussion of political views, of policy. The latter means not only dis-
cussion conferences, but also an Amerasia. Meanwhile make it continually and
conspicuously evident that the IPIl is not a political but a study-research-educa-
tion pressure ^iroup. Finally, while not losini;- sitiht of the importance of the
American Council being part of an international show, remember, that its primary
function is in the United States.
With best regards,
Fred
Frederick V. Field.
ExHiiuT No. 698
Western Union
March 11, 1938.
Mr. Chen Han-Seng,
I}istitute of Pacific Relations, 129 Eni^t 52n(J .street,
-Vc/r York Ciiii, New York:
May we use your brief account China war situation dated March eighth for
April Amerasia. Please confer with Chi.
(Signed) Fred.
krcg
Charge: Institute of Pacific Relations, 1795 California Street.
4 :45 p. m.
ExiiiRTT No. (j99
.January 12, 1938.
Memorandum to Chen Han-seng from Frederick V. Field.
This is to remind you that you were going to write letters of introduction for
Joris Ivens to persons in China whom you think may be useful to him in pre-
paring the moving picture of Chinese defense. In our discussion it was sug-
gested that you write letters which get liim to Generals I'ai and Ui and
to the editor of the Pacific Dincsi. Any others which you tliink might be useful
would be welcome.
As you will recall, Joris Ivens. in association with Ernest Hemingway, made
the picture Spanish Earth. He has just wired me that his trip has been post-
poned a few days so he will not be coming through today, as first planned.
Exhibit No. 7,00
Office of the President Yexching University.
Peiping, China, March 9, 1937.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, New York, N. Y.
My Dear Mr. Fields : I am writing to ask your good offices in ascertaining from
Mr. Chen Han-sheng whether or not he would care to consider an invitation from
Yenching I'niversity to join our Department of Economics. This would take
effect, if possible, with the coming academic year. If Mr. Chen would care to
consider this proposal, will you kindly communicate with Dr. B. A. Garside,
Yenching University, 150 Fifth Avenue, and ask that an interview be arranged
with him or someone else from that office, as to further details. Dr. Garside
could communicate with us by letter or cable, and we shall ourselves be glad to
answer any further questions if Mr. Chen is sufficiently interested.
Thanking you in advance for this assistance, and with greetings to Mr. Chen
himself, believe me.
Very sincerely yours,
[s] J. Leighton Stuart.
jls c
88348— 52— pt. 12 8
4142 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 701
Cliaii-man : Harry F. Ward. Vice Chairmen : Mrs. Victor L. Berger, Earl Browder, Max S.
Haj-es, Robert Morss Lovett. Jacob Mirsky. Treasurer : William. P. Mangold. National
Bureau : Roger Baldwin. LeRoy E. Bowman, Eleanor D. Brannan, Margaret Forsyth,
Clarence Hathaway, William P. Mangold, William B. Spofford, Harry F. Ward, James
Waterman Wise. Secretarial Staff : Executive — Paul M. Reid ; Administration — Clara
Bodian ; Publications — Josenh Pass ; Organization — Waldo McXutt ; Youth — James
Lerner ; Women — Dorothy McConnell ; Trade Union — John Masse ; Religious — Rev.
Herman F. Reisslg
American League Against War and Fascism
A movement to unit in common resistance to War and Fascism all organizations and
individuals who are opposed to those allied destroyers of mankind
112 E. 19th Street, Room 702
NEW YORK CITY
Telephone : Algonqsin 4-9784
9785
March 16, 1936.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
129 E. 52nd Street, New York, N. Y.
My Dear Mr. Field : I am very anxious to talk with you again about our
work which you have helped us to develop. I also want to show you factually
in the office some of the things that are being done. Is it at all possible for you
to drop around on Wesdnesday afternoon at 4 : 30 P. M.
I am sorry I cannot offer you more alternatives but this is the only .spare time
I have this week. You will appreciate how much I am rushed in trying to look
after the policy of the Tveague in addition to my other duties.
Hoping that it may be possible to see you, I am,
Faithfully yours,
[s] Harry F. Ward, National Chairman.
HFR : DM
BS&AU
12646
Exhibit No. 702
Harry F. Ward, Chairman ; Robert Morss Lovett, Vice Chairman ; Lincoln Steffens, Vice
Chairman ; Earl Browder, Vice Chairman ; William P. Mangold, Treasurer. National
Bureau : Roger Baldwin, LeRoy E. Bowman. Elmer Carter, Paul Crosbie. Margaret
Forsyth, Clarence Hathaway, Donald Henderson, William. P. Mangold, Samuel C.
Patterson, Harry F. Ward. Secretarial Staff : Executive — Paul M. Reid ; Administra-
tion— Clnra Bodian; Affiliations — Charles C. W<bber ; Organization — Waldo McNutt ;
Publications — Listen M. Oak : Women — Dorothy McConnell : Youth — James Lerner
American League Against War and Fascism
A movement to vinite in common resistance to War and Fascism all organizations and
individuals who are opposed to these allied destroyers of mankind
112 E. 19th Street, Room 605
NEW YORK CITY
Telephone : Algonquin 4-9784
9785
May 23, 1935.
P'eederick; V. Field,
129 E. 52nd St., New York City.
Deae Fred Field : I am sure you will be glad to learn of the progress that has
been made in the past three months. New Jersey and California (and the entire
Pacific Coast as well) are at least getting permanent Regional Organizers. A
grant from the Elmhirst Fund will help to maintain these men in the field. We
have the perspective of sending a third permanent organizer into the Mid-
Western States during the summer, and we have two men now touring the
country. Their reports are extremely encouraging, and once we can get organ-
izers into our six concentration points, we can expect the League to really come
into its stride.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4143
111 addition, a grant from the Garland Fund will enable us to put our publica-
tions business on a realistic basis. Once this is firmly established, we will be
in a position to further our educational program by spreading our literature
far and wide.
All this is in preparation for our next Congress, our Third. We are working
toward it through the medium of regional conferences called by our local com-
mittees, with the specitic aim of electing delegates to the Third Congress. In
order to do this however, we must get those 6 organizers into the field. We are
now starting a cauipaign to get sufficient funds to keep our salaries and over-
head up during the slack summer months so as not to incur a deficit, and to main-
tain these men in the field. You will see from this how important and how use-
ful the renewal of your contribution would be and I trust you will find it possible
to renew it for the month of June.
There are two other things I hope you can do for us. A Japanese labor leader,
Kanju Kato, about whom I wrote you before, will soon be in this country. We
had trouble in getting his visa but finally secured it by getting the sponsorship of
an officially respectable organization. We will have meetings lor him under
joint committee auspices in various cities. We would like one or two under
auspices quite apart from these. Therefore, I am quite anxious that you
should arrange a little meeting, luncheon, or otherwise, under the auspices of the
Institute of Pacific Relations. Can you let me know what you can do on this,
just as soon as possible.
Also we need your help on material for a speaker's outline concerning our
policy in relation to Japan. Could you prepare a few notes on this and indicate
some source of material? It would be very much appreciated.
"Very sincerely yours,
[s] Harry F. Ward, National Chairman.
HFW : DP
Exhibit No. 703
Officers : Philip C. Jessup, Chairman ; Miss Ada L. Comstock, Vice Chairman ; Benjamin
W. Kizer, Vice Chairman ; Philo W. Parlier, Vice Chairman ; Robert Gordon Sproul, Vice
Chairman ; Ray Lyman Wilbur, Vice Chairman ; Fredericlt V. Field, Secretary ; Frances
S. Harmon, Treasurer ; Miss Hilda Austern, Assistant Treasurer
american council
Institute of Pacific Relations, Incorporated
209 California St., San Francisco— 129 East 52nd St., New Yorlj City
July 1, 1940.
Dear Fred : It was too bad that in the rush of this past week I was unable to
talk with you. As I have been released from the staff this summer, I have
accepted an invitation to represent Local 18, UOPWA, at the Youth Congress
in Wisconsin, during the coming week. Beginning on July 9, I shall be work-
ing on maps for Chi's book, up in the Pacific Council offices, for about 10 days.
After that I shall probably return to Nature with my family during August.
I have just been arranging with Oliver Caldwell for the disposition of some
5,000 books from the Youth Congress, I hope to round up this project for the
summer, and to get in touch with you further. The Publishers' and microfilm
committees will need a shot in the arm by that time. There is little else that
needs immediate attention on the project.
Yours sincerely,
[s] Joy Hume.
4144 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 704
The American Russian Institutp: For Cultural Relations With the Soviet
Union, Inc.
Fifty-Six West Forty-Fiftli Street
new YORK
Maech 6, 1937.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
129 East Fifty-second Street,
New York City.
My Dear Mr. Fiei.d : At tliis point we are badly in need of some comments on
the tilings wliieli we have put out. Would you be good enough to let me know
what you thought of the Yakhontofl pamphlet?
If I can hear from you soon, I shall appreciate it.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Virginia Burdick
[t] Virginia Burdick.
VB : KB
March 9, 1937.
Miss Virginia Burdick,
The American Russian Institute,
New York, N. Y.
Dear Miss Burdick : In reply to your letter of March 6th asking for my com-
ments on the materials which you have been publishing. I have a great deal of
praise to offer and only one possible criticism.
To record the latter tirst, I have the feeling which may be the result of my
not being closely familiar with your many problems, that you are overcautious.
I believe that there are occasions when a group of importance and prestige such
as yours must act with some boldness to present facts and authoritative inter-
pretations on controversial issues. I have in mind, of course, occasions such as
the very confused and uniformed state of public opinion in this country during
and since the recent Moscow trial. One searches the regular newspapers, peri-
odicals and pamphlet material in vain for authoritative statements of fact and
interpretation. The country witli which you are supposed to be promoting
friendly relations is allowed to be scandalously misrepresented all over this
country without, as far as I have been aware, a single concerted effort on the
part of a reputable group of American citizens to correct the false impressions
made. I dare to suggest that you should have done something in the face of this
situation because I think you could have participated in the controversy with
dignity and without embarrassment. Tliere is much that the Americans could
liave been told in a purely objective way; the judicial procedure in the Soviet
Union, the liistory of the divergent policies of the two Russian groups, a more
detailed and unbiased analysis of the testimony given at the trial than appeared
in the newspapers, and perhaps even an analysis of the propaganda respecting
the trial originating in this country. I think you could have gone further safely,
and as an organization reassured the American public for whatever the names
of your Board of Directors are worth, and they are worth a good deal, that the
whole episode did not compromise the Soviet liovernment and in no way shattered
your Institute's confidence in the work which is being done in that country.
The prai.se is eas.v and need not take more than a few sentences. The monthly
bulletin seems to me excellent and comes about under the same category as that
admirable contemporary of yours, the Fak Eastern Survey. The Yakhontoff
pamphlet was so good that I was prompted to write the author immediately
after I read it praising him for saying so much in so few words, for the
bibliography, and for the chronology. With regard to the Pushkin pamphlet, I
can only say that it is the only thing I have ever read on that gentleman and
having read it I feel quite well informed.
I hope you will forgive me the liberty I have taken in the one criticism I have
made. I have taken you at your word that yon wanted my comments.
Sincerely yours,
[t] FREDE^iiCK V. Field.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4145
Tele. MUrray Hill 2-0313
Board of Directors : Harry Elmer Barnes, Mrs. Kathleen Barnes, Aaron Bodansky, Harold
Clurman, Mrs. Ethel Clyde, George S. Counts, Mrs. Vera Micheles Deans, John
Dewey, Wm. O. Field, Jr., Lewis Gannett, Mortimer Graves, Wm. S. Graves, Alcan Hirsch,
John A. Kingsbury, Mary van Kleeck. Win. W. Lancaster, William Lescaze, Robert
Littell, Harriet Moore, William Allan Neilson, Mrs. Frances Flynn Paine, Mrs. George F.
Porter, Raymond Robins, Geroid T. Robinson, John Rotlischild, Whitney Seymour, Lee
Simonson, Graham R. Taylor, Frederick Tilney, S. A. Trone, Allen Wardwell, Richard
Watts, Jr., Maurice Wertheim, Avrahm Yarmolinsky, Mrs. Efrem Zimbalist. Executive
Secretary, Virginia Burdick ; Editor, Harriet Moore
The American Russian Institute for Cultural Relations With the Soviet
Union, Inc.
Fifty-Six West Forty-Fifth Street
new YORK
March 30, 1937.
Mr. Frederick Field,
American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations,
129 East 52nd Street, Netv York City.
My Dear Mr. Field : Thank you for your letter of March 9th. I have taken
the liberty of delaying my reply in the hope that I would have something definite
to tell you before you returned from your trip. However, even now I can tell
you very little which is definite concerning the Institute's policy in regard to
the recent Moscow trial. Needless to say, I was very grateful for your opinion
in this connection.
At the present time, the matter has been taken up both by the Board of Direc-
tors and by various members of the Executive Committee. It has not, however,
been discussed by the Executive Committee at a meeting at which a quorum was
present. So far| there has been a definite division of opinion within the organ-
iaztion, and personally, I feel that there is something to be said on both sides of
the question. As you know, the December 1936 issue of the "Research Bulletin
on the Soviet Union" carried an article on Criminaf Lavp in the U. S. S. R. For
the March issue of the Bulletin, Mr. Carter has written a review of the verbatim
report of the "Case of the Anti-Soviet Trotskyite Center." Beyond this, we have
at present no plans for publications on this suliject.
I shall be delighted to let you know if we are going to do anything further.
I cannot tell you how valuable it is to have the opinion of persons like yourself
on a matter of this kind. With many thanks for the words of praise on the
publications,
Sincerely yours,
[s] Virginia Burdick
[t] Virginia Burdick.
VB:LB
Exhibit No. 705
129 East 52nd Street,
New York City, March SO, 19S8.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
1795 California Street, San Francisco, California.
Dear Fred : May I congratulate you and your colleagues on the current issue
of Photo History. I would be interested to know how widely you are using this
for cultivation purposes for members and potential contributors.
Sincerely yours, ^ ^
[t] Edward C. Carter.
129 East 52nd Street,
New York City, March, 30, 1938.
Mr. Charles F. Loomis,
216 Dillingham Building, Honolulu, T. H.
Dear Charles : As an illustration in the way in which the Institute of Pacific
Relations makes available its material through outside channels to a wide
audience, I take please in sending you a copy of the current issue of Photo
History.
4146 ESrSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
It is not until you reach page 66 that the editors come to acknowledgement of
sources and there you will find that every one of the hooks mentioned, with the
exception of those by Lyde and Smedley, are by I. P. R. authors. You will notice
also that the editors acknowledge their indebtedness to the Institute of Pacific
Relations Library and the Far Eastern Survey.
It is barely possible that Mr. Atherton, Mr. Anderson, Riley Allen and others
will be interested in this.
Sincerely yours,
[t] Edward C. Cakteb.
Exhibit No. 706
129 East 52nd Street,
New York, 26th April, 1938.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
J795 California Street, San Francisco, California.
Dear Fred : The other day three copies of the first volume of the famous Soviet
Atlas arrived at this ofiice, one for the Amco, one for Carter and one for Holland,
and we have all thumbed through it enthusiastically.
I wonder if you have already seen the Atlas itself; but if not, I think you may
like to see this note which I have drafted for possible use in I. P. R. Notes.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to pass this on to Owen.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Han-seng
[t] Chen Han-seng.
26th April, 1938.
Note on the Great Soviet World Atlas
Parallel to their other record-breaking achievements, the Russians have
now made a notable advance in a new field. The appearance of the first volume
of the Great Soviet Atlas last November, which is to be followed by a second
volume this year and a third volume early in 1939, marks the height of modern
cartography. Not only are there many innovations of presentation but the bulk
itself is extremely impressive. The size of the first volume alone is equal to any
major atlas that has so far appeared anywhere in the world.
In spite of the fact there are single page maps of 17^2 by 10 inches, double
page maps of 17% hy 21i/> inches and some folding pages, the Atlas is still easily
handled by means of a simple loose-leaf device. This metallic lever and the mul-
tiple coloured sheets — often 15 to 20 colours on one map — testify to the ad-
vance of Soviet industry, and the host of new ideas evidently behind the draft-
ing, particularly in the political and economic spheres, makes this Atlas almost
a revolution in cartography.
The total number of pages of the Soviet Atlas more than doubles that of
Stiller's Atlas in German or the Times Atlas in English, and this is also true of
the actual map space; yet in this case the time for production has been halved
by means of a huge staff of 175 editors and cartographers. Indeed a special
institute for the Atlas has been established in Moscow and this will work on
subsequent revisions. Professor V. E. Motylev, the Chairman of the U. S. S. R.
Council of the I. P. R. is the Director of this Institute, and concurrently one
of the five on the Editorial Committee of the Atlas.
Whereas the second volume of the Atlas will deal with the regions of the
Soviet Union and the third volume with other countries in detail, the first
volume is devoted to 83 world maps in the first part and 85 maps of the entire
Soviet Union in the second part. The maps of the Soviet Union in this volume
begin with the political and administrative aspects followed by the topographical
and the geological, the meteorological and the mineral, the vegetative and animal
distributions, the heavy and light industries, the chemical and electric indus-
tries ; forestry, agriculture and collective farming ; general economic and the
technical culture, communications and commerce, and finally, as an apparent
appendix, a map showing the Russian administrative regions as existed on
January 1st, 1914.
The first part of this volume, however, will probably claim the widest interest.
It can be divided into three groups. The first group is physicogeographical, in-
cluding astronomical, topographic, geological, seismological ; meteorological,
both aerial and oceanic in January and June; and maps showing the develop-
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4147
ment of cartography, geographical expeditions, the Arctic and the Antarctic,
magnetic aberrations, soil conditions, and vegetative and animal distributions.
The second group is that of socio-economic maps which show population and
migration, nationalities and religions, electric power, coal output, metal pro-
duction; mechanical, chemical and textile industries; timber and paper manu-
facture, agriculture, commerce, communications, and the export and import of
capital and financial dependence. The third group consists of political maps of
the world, one for 1783, one for 1784 to 1876, and one for 1877 to 1914, one for
the strategic military movements on the European theatre of the War of 1914-
1918, and a contemporary political map of the world. In addition, there follow
special maps showing the political and economic situation of the Pacific area at
present.
Exhibit No. 707
Office of the Secretary-General
Institute of Pacific Relations
Amsterdam — Honolulu — London — Manila — Moscow — New York — Shanghai — Sydney —
Tokyo — Toronto — Wellington
129 East 52nd Street
new yoek city
15th October, 1937.
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
San Francisco.
Deae Fred : As you may well imagine, some of us here have had some inter-
esting chats with Karl August since his arrival. His general view of the po-
litical developments in China are less optimistic even than mine — and you know
what that means. At any rate, while he would give only 5 percent on chance for
Chiang Kai-shek to become a second Kemel Pasha, I would certainly give at
least ten percent.
You will recall that my open letter to Amerasia refuting Roger Greene's ar-
ticle on China has caused some embarrassment; but I am glad to inform you
that since Hu Shih's arrival in New York there has been a "rapprochement."
The other day, Hu Shih insisted upon my meeting Roger, for according to Hu he
is pro-Chinese, while his brother, Jerome, is pro-Japanese. At any rate, we three
had a good chat in Hu's room and the good news is that Roger is going to offer
his lectures free in an attempt to rally medical aid for China. Incidentally, I
may say, it was due to Roger's effort that the American Red Cross did not give
a smaller sum than $100,000 ; but of course, Hu agrees with me that he does not
know how to write articles.
It is interesting that no sooner was this "rapprochement" established than I
ran into another controversy — this time with the columnist of the Daily Worker.
I have written a review of Harry Cannes' book on China, originally for Amerasia,
and that is why the first draft is so long. Later when the Managing Editor told
me that they were not going to use it, I cut it to half its length and offered it to
Pacific Affairs. Another piece, reviewing the same book, will appear in the
Living Age, under my name. I am enclosing the original draft which you may
care to read.
I wonder if you have noted an AP wire from Tokyo, dated October 13th, that
tells in effect the poor show in Japan as regards the subscription of the 200 mil-
lion yen war bonds. In Japanese history, such a subscription of bond issues has
always been led by the government to rally public enthusiasm, and the subscrip-
tion of government and semi-government institutions is usually prearranged
immediately beforehand. The fact that this subscription only amounted to 12
million yen on tlie first day certainly anticipates rather slow and inadequate
private enthusiasm.
Surely you must have been impressed by yesterday's news that in Tokyo, the
Emperor has appointed in the presence of the Privy Council Members a Cabinet
Advisory Council. I am inclined to think that this is the first and foremost sig-
nificant phenomena in the Japanese political world since the outbreak of the
present war. On the one hand it shows that even the well represented and
unified cabinet, such as the present one, indeed the strongest Cabinet since 1905,
proves inadequate to cope with the present situation. We can readily infer that
the Japanese textile interest together with other people in the light industry
4148 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
for export, (the textile being perliaps tlie best organized of all industries in
Japan) have been greatly irritated li.v the loss of market, curtailment of raw
material import, and the prospect of a long war.
On the other hand, however, this new super-Cabinet is the surest and most
definite indication of Fascistic development in Japan. Nominally, the ten mem-
bers of this council are "accorded the same treatment and rank as Cabinet
ministers." They are in reality more or less like premiers or a body of px-emiers
since only the premier and not the ministers, hitherto, has been appointed by the
Emperor directly. In other words, tlie newly appointed ten people will remain in
power regardless of sul)sequent Cabinet changes. Even if the next general
election in Japan should l)y chance set up a liberal parliament and therefore per-
haps a liberal cabinet, this super-Cabinet will I'emain in power. These ten people
can advise the Emperor and at the same time dictate to the Cabinet. The
consolidation of Japane.se Fa.scistic forces is clearly reflected in the actual stand-
ing of these new appointees.
Indeed what seems to me equally significant is that the Japanese militarists
are utilising the wartime urgency to successfully bring together military groups
which hitherto have not been reconcilable, and to a much les.ser extent this is also
true of the navy. General Araki (1), the famous leader of the younger military
elements is now appointed together with General Ugaki, (2) former governor
general of Korea and a militai\v figure who is capable of the most effective
political intrigues and coup d'etat. This well-known opportunist, with all his
prestige, has commanded a group of military people both young and old ; and now
sitting together with Ai-aki in the same Council, brings his followers into coopera-
tion with the group led by his colleague. Admiral Suetsugu (3), is perhaps the
parallel of Araki, in the navy and Admiral Baron Abo (4), is somewhat parallel
to Ugaki, but less opportunistic and more refined in personal manner. Suetsugu
is very outspoken and an ardent advocate of Japanese naval equality and of
denouncing the Nine Power Treaty. Abo is not so extreme a nationalist as
Suetsugu, being older in years and representing the traditional polished manner
of the high-born Japanese. By appointing both these admirals the loyalty of the
entire navy is ensured for whoever does not like the one is bound to like the
other.
Two party politicians have been appointed, but they are careerists who at any
moment are ready to betray their party. Chuji Machida (5), president of Min-
seito, now sits together with Yonezo Maeda (6), who is Secretary-General of
Seiyukai. (The President of this party, Seiyukai, is Sutsuki, but he has been in
bad health for a long time.) Both are important in representing certain financial
and business interests. The Minseito is known as the spokesman for Mitsubishi,
while the Seiyukai still represents the landlord interests. It is interesting to
note that Mitsubishi needs only to be indirectly represented in the new Council
through Machida, because, unlike Mitsui, no direct representation is really
necessary. Since Mitsubish, more than any other firm, has gone into the ammu-
nition industry, they feel sure that their interest is already represented by the
war itself. Mitsui is directly represented by Seihin Ikeda (7), who was not long
ago Minister of Finance and is now president of the Bank of Japan. This fa-
mous pro-fascist financier has been long regarded as the chief staff officer for
Mitsui. The interest of Sumitomo, which includes the interest in Korea, and that
of the Osaka financiers, may be said to be represented by Ugaki who also has a
persuading infiuence over certain light industry people. Then I see the appoint-
ment of Matsuoka (S) may mean more than merely representing the S. M. R. (of
which Mitsubishi holds a large interest) ; I suspect that this outspoken type of
fascist is now charged with the task of rallying the support of the independent
financiers and industrialists in Japan.
The appointment of another famous pro-fascist is found in the person of Baron
Goh (9), who you probably met in 1035 in your Far Eastern economic mission.
You may recall that he can speak both German and French, and he is certainly
a distinguished leader in what I may call the Japanese "Liberty Leagaie," which
was organized nearly ten years before the American one came into being. The
tenth appointee is a distinguished bureaucrat, Kiyoshi Akita (10), a former Sei-
yukai member who became "independent" two years ago. You may recall reading
his name as Vice Minister of Home Affairs and of Communications dui-ing the
famous Tanaka Cabinet.
Of the ten only two are 100 percent fascist both by personal conviction and by
reputation (Araki and Matsuokp), and only two are stout fascists (Goh and
Ikeda) because they have long supported financially, fascist organisations.
With this set-up and during war time, however, it is very easy for the extreme
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4149
nationalist, opportunistic politicians and bureaucrats to fall into the fascist net.
Perhaps you may ask me who on this new Council represents the controlling
interest in the rural districts? First, I would answer, that there is no need in
the super-Cabinet, of such a representation and then, the present Cabinet can
well take care of this issue. The present Minister of Agriculture, Count Arima.
is from Kyushu (the Nagaski region) and is capalile of influencing the peasant
unions in western Japan. But more important in this respect is the north of
Japan, especially the rice and silk region of Nigata, etc., and here we find the
majority of the 5,<X)0.000 followers of the ''Living Buddha," i. e.. Count Ohtani, the
uncle of Emperor Hiroshia and the real leader of the famous Nishi Honganji
Temple in Kyoto. Count Ohtani is now serving as Minister of Education in
Japan.
You must not think that I make any political analysis, but the news of this
new political council in Japan so impressed me that I have not been able to help
writing this rambling letter and :;t least I would like to recommend to you this
brilliant political strategy of our common enemy.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Han-seng,
[t] Chen Han-seng.
Exhibit No. 708
Office of the Secretary-General
Institute of Pacific Relations
Amsterdam — Honolulu — Shanghai — Manila — London — Moscow — New York — Paris —
Sydney — Tokyo — Toronto — Wellington
129 East 52nd Street,
new york city
24th March, 1938.
Mr. Frederick V. Field.
San Francisco, California.
Dear Fred : In response to your wire of March 12th, I began to write a sketch
showing the general military situation in China so as to continue the chronologi-
cal description in the March issue of Amerasia. In the process, however, I found
the original MS from Hong Kong, though to a certain extent already revised,
inadequate and unsubstantial. With some additional Information from other
sources, I decided to rewrite the whole thing. Enclosed is a copy of what I have
not sent to the Amerasta office here. As it is not intended in any way as an article
I have asked not to have my signature appear on it.
Have you by any chance seen the translation of the 8th Route Army oath of
loyalty? I enclose a copy with underlines. From the indications from several
directions, it is quite certain now that China is on the threshold of a new era,
and as this fact becomes more apparent it can not but hasten the attempts of a
London-Tokyo rapprochement. Have you any inside dope on this?
With greetings to Edith and yourself.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Han-seng.
[t] Chen Han-seng.
Loyalty Oath Taken by 8th Route Army
Japanese imperialism is the mortal enemy of the Chinese nation. The imperial-
ists strive to enslave our country and destroy our nation ; they kill our relatives
and friends, violate our mothers, wives and sisters, burn down homes, destroy
our farms, implements, and cattle. In the name of our nation, our country, our
fellow countrymen, in the name of our children and grandchildren, we swear to
resist the Japanese aggressors to the end.
For six years already we have been fighting to save our fatherland from the
Japanese aggressors. A united national front has already been established.
Onr army has been renamed ihe People's Revolutionary Army, and we are set-
ting off to the front lines to destroy the enemy.
We sincerely siipiwrt the National Government and Chiang Kai-shek, President
of the Military Council, icho are in charge of the defense of our country against
the Japanese aggressors. We undertake to subordinate ourselves to the single
4150 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
command of the Military Council, strictly to observe discipline and not to return
Jiome vntil the Japanese aggressors have teen driven out of our country, until all
national traitors are wiped off the face of our land.
We, sons of workers and peasants, sircar that ire shall not deprive the popula-
tion of a single thread ; ive swear always to serve the interests of the people,
to adopt a brotherly attitude to troops fighting shoulder to shoulder with us
against the common enemy; we swear to ie devoted to the revolution. We are
prepared to accept the citicism of comrades and to ansiver for it with all the
severity of revolutionary discipline should we violate the interests of the nation.
Exhibit No. 709
Office of the Secretary-General
Inbtititte of Pacific Relations
Amsterdam — Honolulu — London — Manila — New York — Paris — Shanghai — Sydney —
Tokyo — Toronto — Wellington
129 East 52nd Street
nhw yoek citt
22nd Septembek, 1937.
Frederick V. Field, Esq.,
San Francisco.
Dear Fred : Herewith I enclose a copy of the review of Shuhsi Hsii's book,
which I promised to send to you. This review has been sent to the Canadian
Historical Review because Owen sent one in written by himself for Pacific
Affairs. He criticised Hsii severely because of his unfairness to the Chinese
Communists and the Mongols, and I certainly prefer to have his review in our
quarterly because it contains more of political and educational value, mine
being technical and historical.
I hope the mild aid in California will materially assist Edith in her quick
recovery, and that you are daily unearthing things of interest in your own work.
With greetings to both of you,
Sincerely yours,
s] Chen Han-seng
[t] Chen Han-seng.
[Sent to the Canadian Historical Rci^iew']
The North China Problem
(By Shuhsi Hsii, Ph. D., Shanghai, Hong Kong, Singapore: Kellv & Walsh, Ltd.,
1937, pp. 112)
The large scale military resistance in China against further Japanese aggres-
sion in the summer of this year, must have come as a surprise to those who did
not fundamentally understand the Sino-Japanese relations. Even such a noted
political scientist as Shuhsi Hsu, did not anticipate this in the spring when he
wrote the chapter, "The Outlook." in the present volume. Chinese unity after
the Sian incident, the changing international situation, were taken by the author
as hopeful factors which might induce "the rulers of Japan to revise their i)olicy
concerning North China."
Apparently Dr. Hsii has attempted to present a brief review of Sino-Japanese
relations since 1933, chiefly covering the Hopei-Chahar phase, the Inner Mon-
golian problem and the eight conferences between the Chinese Foreign Minister
and the Japanese Ambassador from September 15th to December 3rd, 1936. The
main revelation of this volume, however, lies in a clear expose of the general
policy followed by the National Government throughout those past years. A
mere perusal of this report would unmistakably make the reader aware that
Nanking was not only pursuing a policy of nonresistance but at certain times
was even attempting to reach a conditional "readjustment" of its relations with
Japan. After the friendly visit of Dr. C. H. Wang to Tokyo in the spring of 1935,
and the special efforts of General Chiang Tso-pin in Tokyo during the autumn,
as narrated by this author, at the beginning of 1936, General Chang Chun, then
Minister of Foreign Affairs, "courageously invited the Japanese to open nego-
tiations." These negotiations were abruptly suspended owing to the Tokyo
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4151
military coup d'etat of February 26tli, but "tlie readiness of the Nationalist Gov-
ernment to carry on discussion with Tokyo in spite of the Hirota Principles
created a great deal of misgiving among the members of the Southwestern
Political Council."
After the suspension of the series of conferences between Chang Ohun and
Kawagoo, because of the Suiyuan invasion, and after the Sian incident, the
leaders of the National Government still found an opportunity to express their
willingness fur cooperation and readjustment. In the middle of March, 1937,
when a mission of Japanese industrial leaders arrived in Nanking, General
Chiang Kai-shek proceeded from Kuling to greet them with a speech in which he
"asked the distinguished visitors for their sympathy for China in this period of
national reconstruction, which he compared with the Restoration and early
Meiji Era in Japan." The Generalissimo concluded his pleading by offering to
the Mission a classical quotation which reads : "Benevolence and love are real
treasures," and their friendly tone was further stressed by the Minister of
Industry, Wu Ting-chang, who said that the way of cooperation between the two
countries must lie in "shaking hands" and not ".shaking fists."
Such speeches may mei'ely have been diplomatic gestures, but they are un-
doubtedly indicative of their anxiety for peaceful adjustment at that time.
Readers must remain indebted to Dr. Hsu for his elucidation of the Nanking
attitude without an understanding of which many important events in China
during the past few years cannot be made intelligible. For instance, in March,
19.33, "the troops before Shankaikwau were ordered to retreat to the Luan River
as a gesture of pacific intention towards the Japanese," and "by July 12, 1933,
Chahar was cleared of the Japanese. At this point the Central Government
stepped in. In order not to give the Japanese a pretext to start trouble again,
General Feng was advised to disband his troops and leave the province."
Throughout the book, however, there is no indication whatsoever as to the
reason why the Japanese on their side have never yielded to the Nanking argu-
ment. Thus the author has not touched the fundamental point of the subject
on which he was writing. After reading this book, one cannot help feeling
perplexed as to just why the Japanese launched a new attack this summer, nor
can one fully appreciate the reasons for the Generalissimo's last stand and
military resistance.
One cannot help entertaining doubts when one reads such a statement as that
"the Shanghai incident was settled on the whole in a satisfactory way." Is it
not tnie that the demilitarized zone established by the Shanghai Truce in 1932
was the first of a series of such zones as created later by the Tangku Truce, the
Ho-Umetsu Understanding and the Chin-Doihara Agreement? Is it generally
thought that such arrangements can be called "satisfactory"? Then it is in-
deed difficult for a layman to understand why "Japanese connivance at the nar-
cotic trade in North China, though iniquitous, can scarcely be taken as a policy
for the exploitation of what they consider to be their special position there,"
especially when one reads further that Dr. C. H. Wang, when seeing Hirota on
January 22nd, 1935, expressed the wish that Japan would not support the nar-
cotic trade. For the narcotic question, reference is made to the Information
Bulletin of the Council of International Affairs, Nanking, which is directed by
the author him.self. But this bulletin simply points out that "there can be no
end to this vast narcotic traffic until there is an end to extraterritoriality, al-
though there is a remote possibility that the Japanese authorities may see the
wisdom of taking measures against it."
Further, one is led to doubt whether the author really understands the internal
politics of Japan as related to foreign policy, when one finds that he believes that
the Japanese industrial leaders were no longer, to such an extent, the silent
partners of the militarists after the February coup d'etat of 1936. One is also
surprised by his incomplete information on the Japanese economic penetration in
North China. While he mentions the Japanese gain in the salt industry and
shipping and the Chinese loss in the Tientsin textile mills, he has not brought
out the advance made by the Japanese in cotton production and the electric
industry. Certainly, the chapter on the Diplomatic phase of the North China
problem is very inadequate. Such important and significant items as the Ger-
man-Japanese Alliance and the American Neutrality Act are not discussed at
all, and even if he did wish to confine himself to press comments, one wonders
why an opinion from a no less impoi'tant quarter than tho.se quoted, Moscow,
should be omitted. No attempt has been made even to clarify the Chinese
internal politics as related to the North China problem. One finds frequent ref-
erences to "the renegade Chinese irregulars," the "Manchukuo irregulars" and
4152 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
the "Jehol ii-regulars," without any enlightenment as to their origin and nature.
The author correctly reported that Prince Teh "repeatedly declared that it was
not his intention to cut Mongolia loose from China, but ratlier to place it under
the direct control of the Central Government," but there is not a single word of
elucidation on this point.
If these are the defects, Dr. Hsii's book can hardly be regarded as good history.
It is however an excellent document both as a record of Nanking's policy in
the past few years and as a pointer to what may be Chinese academic limitations.
C. H-s.
Exhibit No. 710
Federated Press,
Eastern Bitreau,
90 Irving Place, Neiv York City, June 4, 1938.
Mr. Frederick V. Field,
129 E. 52n(l street,
New York City.
Dear Mr. Field : We are inviting the friends of the Federated Press to a recep-
tion for Carl Haessler, of Chicago, FP managing editor. Mr. Haessler, who has
been publicity director for the large West Side Local of the United Automobile
Workers in Detroit for the past year, has been in the thick of the fight Michigan
workers are currently engaged in to maintain the wage scales won during the
great strikes of the winter of llt37.
The occasion will also serve to introduce Alexander L. Crosby, recently ap-
pointed news editor of the FP Eastern Bureau, and Henry Zen, Washington Bu-
reau manager.
Tlie three bureau chiefs will speak briefly of the various vitally important la-
bor developments and i.'^sues as they see them from the inside.
The reception is to be at the home of Ernest L. Meyer, New York Post column-
ist, 00 Gramercy Park, at 5 o'clock, Monday afternoon, June 13. We shall be
delighted to have you come.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Marc Stone
[t] Marc Stone, Biisines.s Manager.
Central Bureau : 160 N. La Salle Street, Chicago, 111.
Washington Bureau : 1410 H Street NW, Washington, D. C.
Senator O'Conor. Very well, I believe that is all. Thank you very
much.
(Whereupon, at 2 : 10 p. m., the committee was recessed subject to
the call of the Chair.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
Senator Watkins. The committee will resume the session.
TESTIMONY OF MOSES FINLEY, ENGLEWOOD, N. J. (ACCOMPANIED
BY HIS COUNSEL, JOSEPH A. FANELLI)
Mr. Morris. Mr. Finley, you have been sworn.
Mr. Finley. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will you <iive your name and address to the reporter?
Mr. Finley. ISIoses Finley, i21() Tryon Avenue, Englewood, N. J.
Senator Watkins. The record will show at this point that the wit-
ness was sworn in executive session, today.
Mr. Morris. What is your present occupation ?
Mr, Finley. I am a teacher.
Mr. Morris. Where are you teaching?
Mr. Finley. At Eutgers University.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4153
Mr. MoREis, Are yon operating under a grant from the Ford Foun-
dation ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. How long have you had that ?
Mr. FixLEY. Since July 1, 1951.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Finley, are you now a member of the Communist
Party?
Mr. FiNLEY. No.
Mr. JNIoRRis. Have you ever been a member of the Communist Party ?
Mr. Finley. I must respectfully decline to answer on the grounds
of the first and fifth amendments and whatever other constitutional
privileges are available to me.
Senator Watkixs. In other words, you claim if you gave an an-
swer to that question, it might incriminate you?
Mr. Finley. Yes.
Mr. ]MoijRis. "Was a Communist study group ever held at your
home ?
]\Ir. Finley. No; it was not. But I am aware of the fact that in
previous testimony by Dr. Wittfogel, such charge was made. Now
he said, for example, that he knew that one of these study groups was
under the chairmanship of Daniel Thorner, and that I said to him —
that is, "Wittfogel — that this was our history study group. Appar-
entl}- what he has confused there is the Graduate History Society of
Columbia University, which is one of the official organizations that
exists in every department of a university, of which Daniel Thorner
was president. Its main function was to have various faculty speak-
ers, and Thorner invited Wittfogel to address one of the regular meet-
ings of the Graduate Historj^ Society, but I am completely at a loss
to understand another reference that he made — —
Mr. Morris. Just one minute. Have you heard the testimony of
Mr. Thorner saying that there was a group that studied music that
met at your house ?
Mr. Finley. I haven't heard the testimony.
Mr. Morris. Is that testimony true ?
Mr. Finley. That it was a group studying music is putting it a
little formally.
Mr, Morris. Did a group meet at your house?
Mr. Finley. Yes. We had open house for friends of mine on
Sunday evenings.
Mr. Morris. Were you a Communist at that time?
Mr. Finley. I nuist decline to answer.
Mr. Morris. Do you know if Thorner was a Communist?
Mr. Finley. I have no reason to believe he was.
Mr. Morris. Yet when we asked Mr. Thorner if he was at that
time, he refused to answer.
Senator Watkins. When you say you have no reason, just what do
you mean, "no reason"' ?
Mr. Finley. I have none whatsoever, Senator.
I have studied just enough logic to know that for anyone but your-
self you can never answer flatly and absolutely you know of some-
thing.
Senator Watkins. Did you ever hear him discuss communism?
Mr. Finley. Not that I remember.
4154 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Watkins. Did you ever hear him declare he was or was
not a Communist ?
Mr. FiNLEY, I certainly have never heard him declare he was. I
don't remember whether I lieard him declare he was not.
Senator Watkins. Was there anytliing in his conduct that led you
to think that he was in any way a Communist?
Mr. FiNLET. No.
Senator Watkins. Did you ever discuss communism with him?
Mr. FiNLEY. In any formal sense; no.
Senator Watkins. You never heard it discussed by others or him
in your presence?
Mr. FiNLEY. I find it liard to answer that in the conditions of the
1930's. We talked about current events.
Senator Watkins. You would not say now that communism was
not discussed with him, would you ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Flatly, no: no, I wouldn't say.
Senator Watkins. In other words, you would say as a matter of
fact that you would not remember whether it was or was not ?
Mr. FiNLEY. That is correct.
Senator Watkins. It could have been?
Mr. FiNLEY. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you make a statement, Mr. Finley, that you would
not know conclusively whether any other person was a Commu-
nist except yourself?
Mr, Fanelli. No ; as to a person in oeneral, as to a name, that the
only person you could be sure about, that one was a Communist or
was not, was yourself.
Mr. INIoRRis. That is what I meant. So that by asking Mr. Finley
questions we could never know that anybody was a Communist.
Mr. Fanelli. What he is saying is as to membership in an organ-
ization, as to whether one was not at any time in an organization. You
can be sure of no party but yourself.
Mr. Morris. You are saying that you can never be sure that one
was not a Communist except with reference to yourself.
Mr. Fanelli. Unless you were a Communist with him. I am sure
he does not mean to deny that.
Senator Watkins. What does the witness understand by the mean-
ing of Communist ? What does it mean to you ?
Mr. Finley. Primarily membership in the Connnunist Party.
Senator Watkins. Your answers are based on that definition?
Mr. Finley. Yes.
Senator Watkins. Do you think a man could be an advocate of the
Communist cause without being a member of the Communist Party ?
Mr. Finley. I suppose so, yes.
Senator Watkins. You keep that definition in mind with respect
to future questions that are asked because I think maybe we will be
splitting hairs on the question of whether a man is a card-carrying
Connnunist or not.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever see Daniel Thorner pay Communist
Party dues?
Mr. Finley. No.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Herbert Norman ?
IMr. Finley. I never met him and I never heard his name until I
saw it in Wittfogel's testimony.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4155
Mr. Morris. Under that name or any other name?
Mr. FiNLEY. I can only presume that I never knew him under any
other name.
]\Ir. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Lawrence K. Rosinger ?
Mr, FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did INIr. Lawrence Rosinger ever attend meetings at
your home ?
Mr. FiNLEY. To the best of my recollection, no.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Andrew Roth ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Andrew Roth ever attend meetings at your
home ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I am sure not.
Mr. MoRius. Did you ever meet Mr. Cristanzi ?
Mr. FixLEY. No.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. John Hazard ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Hazard ever attend meetings at your home?
Mr. FiNLEY. No.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Wittfogel ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. "Wittfogel ever attend a meeting at your home ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think so. I have no recollection of his ever
attending a meeting at my home. He has been at my home.
Mr. Morris. In the company of more than one person ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Under circumstances that could conceivably be called
a meeting?
Mr. FiNLEY. All right.
Mr. Morris. I do not know. The difference may be whether some-
thing is formally a meeting or a collection of people discussing a com-
mon subject.
Mr. FiNLEY. He was there under circumstances of common discus-
sion; yes.
Senator Watkins. How many would be there at that meeting ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Presumably four or five people.
Senator Watkins. Why presumably? Do you not have a recollec-
tion of how many would be there ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Senator, all this is 1938 and 1939, and I don't have a
recollection of three or five people sitting in a living room, that precise.
That is my difficulty.
Senator Watkins. You say the meetings were all small ones?
Mr. MoRins. Did you ever meet Mr. William Mandel ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I have met him very casually, maybe twice.
Mr. Morris. Do you have any reason to know that Mr. William
Mandel is a Communist?
Mr. FiNLEY. I know nothing about Mr. William Mandel.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Theodore Guiger ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Guiger ever attend a meeting at your home?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Senator Watkins. Do you know any Communists?
Mr. FiNLEY. I must decline to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
4156 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Watkins. Even now, even under the present condition
where you say you are not a Communist? I am asking if you know-
any Communists ?
Air. FixLEY. I know no one now who I know to be a Communist.
Senator Watkins. How far back from now would you make the
same answer ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I must decline to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. Fanelli. I think Mr. Morris understands our position on that.
I went over it this morning.
Senator Watkins. Maybe he does. Probably I do not.
Mr. Faxelli. I want to make it clear.
Senator Watkix^s. At the present time I want to make it clear that
he is willing to say now he is not a Communist but he is not willing
to answer the question with respect to other times in the past.
Mr. Fanelli. Let me say this: He is entirely willing to answer a
question as to the date in the past if it is one question; and put it 5
years back, he is perfectly willing to answer that question. However,,
if counsel is going to go on or if the Committee is going to go on and
ask him 6 years, T years, there comes a point where his privilege
evaporates, and since I have no assurance that the committee will not
go on, I have advised him to answer now questions as to the past. If
this committee will assure me that it will ask him one question as of
a given date, I probably would advise the witness to answer.
Senator Watkins. We can give no assurance whatever. We are
making no agreements with any witness. We want the truth.
Mr. Fax^elli. That is the reason he is not answering questions of
the counsel, because I do not know how far back the committee is
going to go.
Senator Watkins. Do you agree with the statement of your counsel ?
Mr. Fanelli. Yes.
Mr. Fix-LEY. Yes, I am taking counsel's advice. I will take coun-
sel's advice on all these matters.
Senator Watkix'^s. That is your stand, as he has just stated?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Were you an instructor to the School for Democracy?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Senator Watkins. What school and about when ?
Mr. Morris. Was the School for Democracy a Communist school?
Mr. FiNLEY. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Morris. Were there Communists teaching at the school?
Mr. Fix-^LEY. I do not know.
Mr. INIoRRis. Were you a member of the Communist Party at that
time ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I must decline to answer on the grounds previously
stated.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Were there people who weie dismissed from the staff
of City College of New York for being Communist instructors at the
school, School for Democracy at the time you were instructor in the
School for Democracy?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. '
Mr. Morris. There were ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Wlio were some of those teachers ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4157
Mr. FiNLEY. Benjamin Paskoff, Louis Lernian.
Mr. Morris. I do not think it is necessary for the witness to continue
adding- names. The names I don't believe are people within the scope
of our inquiry. The question was more to determine to what extent
the witness would give testimony before this committee on that subject.
So, unless you think otherwise, I will ask him to discontinue.
Senator Watkins. I would like to have the question repeated.
Mr. McRRis. I asked the witness, Mr. Chairman, if he were teach-
ing at the School for Democracy at the same time as instructors who
had been at City College and who had been dismissed for Communist
activities at the same time.
The answer was "yes" and he did name several of the teachers. So
I am satisfied with the witness' answer on that score. I say he does
not have to continue to answer questions along that line as far as I
am concerned.
Senator Watkins. If you want to pass it, so shall I.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, it brings out the difficulty that a com-
mittee such as our committee w^ould have of determining who is a
Communist. Here the witness stated awhile ago that to his laiowl-
edge he does not know anybody today who is a Communist. It poses
quite a problem, Senator.
Senator Watkins. I wonder if he can answer a few more questions.
Have you ever studied communism ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Yes.
Senator Watkins. When ?
jNIr. FiNLEY. As a graduate student of history.
Senator Watkins. Graduate student of history, when ?
Mr. FiNLEY. In the middle thirties.
Senator Watkins. Do you think you would know a Communist if
you saw one and heard one talk ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Probably, yes.
Mr. Morris. If you knew a man was a Communist a month ago and
I addressed the question to you, "Do you know anybody who is a
Communist ?'' Would you still answer in the negative ? If you knew
a man 30 days ago to have been a Communist ?
Mr. FiNLEY. Would you repeat the question, ]Mr. Morris?
Mr. Morris. I grant you that it is a complicated question. But
suppose you knew that Mr. X yesterday was a member of the Com-
munist Party and I asked you the question today, "Do you know any-
body today who is a member of the Communist Party?''; how would
you answer that question ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I would probably say that I know somebody who I
knew was a member of the Communist Party but I don't know whether
he is one today or not.
Mr. ISIoRRis. So when you answered the question of Senator Wat-
kins, "Do you know anybody today who is a Communist?" and you
said, "no", were you making such a reservation ?
Mr. FiNLEY. I do not know anyone toda}^ whom I have ever known
to be a Communist.
INIr. Morris. Whom you have ever known to be a Communist ?
Mr. FiNLEY. That is correct.
Mr. Morris. I think, Senator, we have gone far beyond the purpose
for bringing the witness here today.
88348— 52— pt. 12 9
4158 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
It was in connection with that study ojroup in hiy home. But I
think that the witness' presence here today does raise a lot of problems
that I think point up the difhculties that this connnittee is confronted
with in determining the Communist Party members.
Senator Watkins. That difficulty has been with us all the time, not
only with us, but every other agency that is trying to uncover com-
munism in the United States or anyone else that is underground.
Are those all the questions that you have?
Mr. Morris. I have one more question.
Did you ever meet Max Granich ?
Mr. FiNLEY. No.
Mr. Morris. That is all I have, Senator.
Senator Watkins. Do you want anything more of the witness?
Mr. Morris. That is all.
Senator AVatkins. You may be excused.
Mr. Morris. We have subpenaed Mr. T. A. Bisson for tomorrow
morning and we plan to have an open hearing at 11 o'clock. But he
is coming from California and we have no assurance from him that he
actually is going to comply with the subpena. We presume he will.
Senator Watkins. You want to adjourn then until 10 o'clock to-
morrow morning?
Mr. Morris. We will set the hearing at 11 o'clock if he comes,
Senator.
Senator Watkins. What I am trying to find out is whether I can
make a definite statement.
Mr. Morris. Yes, 11 o'clock tomorrow morning.
Mr. Mandel. Mr. Chairman, at the close of this morning's session
an agreement w^as entered into between Mr. Frederick V. Field and
his attorney and Mr. Morris to place into the record certain docu-
ments from the files of the Institute of Pacific Relations, giving Mr.
Field and his attorney the opportunity to go over these records.
Now, they have gone over these records and I now ask that these
documents
Mr. Morris. Will you identify whether they are documents taken
from the Institute of Pacific Relations ?
Mr. Mandel. They are documents from the files of the Institute of
Pacific Relatins.
Senator Watkins. Have you marked them for the purpose of
identification?
Mr. Morris. They are properly marked and there is a full descrip-
tion in the record as to what they are and what the witness' answers
have been.
Senator Watkins. All right, they may be received and made a part
of the record.
(For the documents referred to see p. 4088.)
The committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 11
o'clock.
(Thereupon, at 5 p. m., a recess was taken to reconvene at 11 a. m.,
Saturday, March 29, 1952.)
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
r^ SATURDAY, MARCH 29, 1952
United States Senate,
Subcommittee To In\'estigate the ADMiNisTRATioif
OF THE In'TERNAL SECURITY ACT AND OtHER InTERNAL
Security Laws, of the Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington^ D. C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11 a. m., in room 424,
Senate Office Building, Hon. Homer Ferguson, presiding.
Present : Senator Ferguson.
Also present: J. G. Sourwine, committee counsel; Robert Morris,
subcommittee counsel, and Benjamin Mandel, research director.
Senator Ferguson. The committee will come to order.
Will you raise your right hand and be sworn?
You do solemnly swear in the matter now pending before this
committee, being a subconnnittee of the Judiciary Committee, of the
United States Senate, that you will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. BissoN. I do.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS ARTHUR BISSON, BERKELEY, CALIF.,
ACCOMPANIED BY JOSEPH A. FANELLI, ESQ.
Mr. Morris. Will you state your name 'I
Mr. BissoN. Thomas Arthur Bisson.
Mr. Morris. What is your address, Mr. Bisson ?
Mr. Bisson. 97 Kingston Road, Berkeley, Calif.
Mr. Morris. Is that your formal residence?
Mr. BissoN. That is my formal residence.
Mr. Morris. You no longer have the residence of 40 Richards Road,
I'ort Washington, N. Y. ?
Mr. Bisson. No.
Mr. Morris. What is your present occupation, Mr. liisson ?
Mr. Bisson. University teacher.
Mr. Morris. You are an associate professor?
Mr. Bisson. I am a lecturer in political science in the political
science department of the University of California.
Mr. Morris. For how long liave you held that position, Mr. Bisson ?
Mr. Bisson. Since September 1948.
Mr. Morris. September 1948.
Now, did you operate under a grant?
Mr. Bisson. No.
Mr. Morris. Did you have a graiit from any one of the foundations?
Mr. Bisson. In addition to my connection with the university, yes.
4159
4160 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Are yoii now the beneficiary of a grant of any kind,
Mr. Bisson?
Mr. Bisson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Will yon tell ns abont it?
Mr. Bisson. The Carnegie Corp. is snpporting a group of four proj-
ects, two members of the political science department of the Uni-
versity of California, one member of the history department, and, I
think, one member in the oriental languages department.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify those people, Mr. Bisson, who are
the beneficiaries of the Carnegie grants?
Mr. Bisson. The two in the political science department are myself
and Dr. Robert A. Scalapino; in the history department, Delmer M.
Brown; in the oriental languages department, t)onald Shively.
May I just say there I think Donald Shively is in the oriental lan-
guages department. It is possible he is in the history department.
Mr. Morris. You have been the beneficiary of what other grants, Mr.
Bisson ?
Mr. Bisson. In 1937 the Rockefeller Foundation advanced a grant
to me covering a field research trip in the Far East for the year 1937.
Mr. Morris. Have you had any other grants. You had a grant from
the Rockefeller Foundation through the Institute of Pacific Relations,
did you not?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Morris. When was that?
Mr. Bisson. That grant began in 1947, I think.
Mr. Morris. How mnch money w^as involved in that one?
Mr. BissoN, I think the amount Avas $3,000, as I remember it.
Mr. Morris. What is your present grant? What is the amount of
that?
Mr. Bisson. Where the four people are involved ?
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Bisson. That is a $20,000 grant.
Mr. Morris. Four people, however?
Mr. Bisson. That money, however, does not come to the four
people engaged in the project. It does not amount to a salary addi-
tion to any one of the four people, but is rather to provide research
assistance, travel assistance in this country, and also travel assistance
to the field.
Two or three of those men may be in Japan this summer, and next
year, under that grant.
Senator Ferguson. Will you go?
Mr. Bisson. I am not expecting to go.
Mr. SouEwiNE. Did Mr. Holland of the Institute of Pacific Rela-
tions have anything to do with getting your present grant for you ?
Mr. Bisson. The present grant
Senator Ferguson. The one at California ?
Mr. Bisson. The Carnegie grant?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. Bisson. I do not think so. To the best of my knowledge, that
was prepared by the Institute of East Asiatic Studies in the Uni-
versity of California through the University of California authori-
ties.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know a Prof essor Odegard ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4161
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did he have anything to do with getting yon this
or any other grants or fellowships you have had ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. He had something 1x) do with the other Rocke-
feller grant.
Mr. SouR^viNE. But not with the present one ?
Mr. BissoN, No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know that he and Mr. Holland were the
two who jointly recommended you in regard to the Rockefeller grant?
IVIr. BissoN. 1 think they were ; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Have you iDeen a staff member of the Institute of Pa-
cific Relations?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. What period of time ?
Mr. BissoN. 1943-1945.
Mr. Morris. Have you been listed as acting editor of the Pacific
Affairs?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. For what period of time ?
Mr. BissoN. It was during those 2 years. Exactly how long a
period in those 2 years, I am not certain. I mean if you ask me by
month.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Lattimore was the editor of Pacific Affairs until
1941 and he was succeeded by Mr. Carter and Mr. Michael Green-
berg ?
Mr. BissoN. I think so.
Mr. Morris. Did you succeed Mr. Greenberg?
Mr. BissoN. I am not certain as to whether there may not have
been another editor between Mr. Greenberg and my association. The
acting editorship I think
Mr. Morris. AVere you an employee of the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion ?
Mr. BissoN. I was.
Mr. ]\Iorris. What period of time ?
Mr. Bissox. 1929-1942.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us what Government positions you have
held. Mr. Bisson?
Mr. Bissox. I was a principal economic analyst with the Board
of Economic Warfare.
Mr. Morris. For how long ?
Mr. Bissox. For the period January 1942 to May or June 1943.
I was with the Strategic Bombing Survey in japan, Japan side,
from October 1945 to, I think, March or April 1946.
Mr. Morris. Wliat was the nature of your duties with the United
States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan?
Mr. Bissox. I was attached to the over-all economic effects division
of the bombing survey. Our task was to assess the general economic
effects of strategic bombing during the war on Japanese economy.
Mr. Morris. What was your job ? To interrogate various individ-
uals on the effects of the bombing?
Mr. Bissox. I participated in some interrogations. We collected
materials and data on the Japanese economy from research institu-
tions, educational institutions, and so on.
Mr. Morris. What other Government position did you have after
that ?
4162 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. May I ask, are you coming back to this?
Mr. Fanelli. He will jxive you a chance to <»:et in any documents.
He has some documents he wants to wet in.
Mr. Morris. What was your other Government employment ?
Mr. BissoN. I had a third post as special assistant to the chief of
Government section, General Headquarters, Supreme Command of the
Allied Powers, Tokyo.
Mr. Morris. Where was your office in connection with that em-
ployment ?
Mr. BissoN. My office was in what was called the Dai-ich Building,
the general headquarters in Tokyo.
Mr. Morris. What was your salary in that position?
Mr. BissoN. It was $10,000.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. And when did you return from that position?
]\Ir. BissoN. I returned from that position in the spring of 1947.
I think I left the field early in May and probably got back to this
country toward the end of May 1947.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, have you ever been a member of the Com-
munist Party?
Mr. BissoN. I have not.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever been a member of the Committee for
a Democratic Far Eastern Policy?
Mr. BissoN. I have.
Mr. Morris. Do you know that that is an organization that has
been cited by the Attorney General as a subversive organization?
Mr. Bissoisr. At the present time, I do.
Mr. Morris. Do you know that it is ?
Mr. Bisson. I do.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us, were you a member of the board of
directors of that organization?
Mr. BissoN. I was.
Mr. Morris. For what period of time were you a member of the
board of directors?
Mr. BissoN. The period would. T think, cover from 1947 to 1949.
I am not certain about that because I do not have the actual data
here.
Mr. Morris. Were you also a consultant for that organization ?
Mr. BissoN. I was.
Mr. Morris. Did you formally resign from that organization?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. On how many occasions?
Mr. Bisson. I resigned on one occasion, which had to be repeated,
in a sense. Under June 2'>, 1949, 1 addressed a letter to the Commit-
tee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy reading:
Dear Sirs : DiU"ing the past year I have been unable to keep in adequate touch
with the activities of tlie Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy. This
condition will exist even more strongly in the future, as I am planning to move
permanently to California within a short time.
I am therefoi'e submitting my resignation to the committee at this time. Will
you kindly see that this resignation takes effect immediately?
Yours truly,
T. A. Bisson.
Senator Ferguson. How long before you wrote that letter did ^ou
decide to resign, or was that your decision?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4163
Mr. BissoN. In the period preceding that letter I had been increas-
ingly dissatisfied with certain aspects of the policy and activities, and
at this time I decided to make my severance complete.
In the preceding year or so I had had virtually no connection in an
active sense.
Senator Ferguson. When did you first learn that the Attorney Gen-
eral had cited this organization as subversive?
Mr. Bissox. I have no recollection of the exact date when I may
have known that.
Senator Ferguson. Was it before you wrote the letter?
Mr. BissoN, I am not certain.
Senator Ferguson. Do you say that that entered into your judg-
ment as to withdrawing from this organization?
Mr. BissoN. That was not what was primarily in my mind at that
time.
Senator Ferguson. In other words, the fact that it was subversive
did not cause you to resign ?
Mr. BissoN. I was primarily interested in the fact that the organi-
zation was one that no longer acted along lines that I approved.
Senator Ferguson. But at least it was not the fact that it had been
cited by the Attorney General, because you do not state it in your
letter and you have not stated it here.
Mr. BissoN. That did not enter into it.
Senator Ferguson. That did not enter into your mind.
Now, in the May issue of 1949 you were listed as a consultant.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. That would be a fact, in the May issue, because it
was printed prior to May, or in May?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. And your resignation did not come until June?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did you get the pamphlets, the so-called Spot-
light pamphlet?
Mr. BissON. I assume that I did.
Senator Ferguson. You assume that you did. Did you know that
there was an article. The Committee Versus Tom Clark, by Maud
Russell, executive director, Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Policy?
I will read you the first part of it :
The Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy lias learned from the press
that it has been designated as "subversive" in a new list circulated by the Civil
Service Commission with a covering letter by Attorney General Tom Clark.
The committee was not notified of the accusation ; neither was it heard at any
inquiry nor given preliminary opportunity to answer the charge.
I assume you read that.
Mr. Fanelli. Did you?
Mr. BissoN. I am not certain that I read that ; no.
Senator Ferguson. Does not that refresh your memory that you
read it ?
Mr. BissoN. I may have ; yes.
Senator Ferguson. And would you not say that it was subversive ?
Is not that one of the reasons why you resigned, but did not put in
your letter? Or was it?
Mr. BissoN. That was not the reason that motivated my letter.
4164 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. In other words, the fact that this institution
was a subversive institution was not one of the reasons that caused you
to resign ?
ISIr. BissoN. I have been increasingly dissatisfied with the type of
materials and the activities of that organization.
Senator Ferguson. Why did you not put it in the letter that that
was true?
Mr. BissoN. I had worked with these people. I think it is only
normal that one would not necessarily write a letter that would antag-
onize them.
Senator Ferguson. What do you mean, "antagonize them''? Why
did you not tell them the truth ?
Mr, BissoN. I did tell them the truth.
Senator Ferguson. Speaking as of this moment in this witness
chair, have you an opinion as to whether or not this organization that
we are speaking of, the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Policy, w\as a subversive institution?
Mr. Btsson. I would not be prepared to say so ; no.
Senator Ferguson. You were on the board and you have been get-
'ting the pamphlets and all, and now you are not in a position to
say so?
Mr. BissoN. I would not — —
Senator Ferguson. Even as of this date?
Mr. BissoN. I w^ould not necessarily say so.
Senator Ferguson. I will put the whole article in the record so it
will not be taken out of context.
(The information referred to was marls ed "Exhibit No. 711'' and
is as follows:)
Exhibit No. 711
[Source: Far East Spotlight — vol. V, No. 5. May 1949]
The Committee Against Tom Clark
(By Maud Russell, executive director, Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Policy )
The Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy has learned from the press
that it has been designated as subversive in a new list cii'culated by the Civil
Service Commission with a covering letter by Attorney General Tom Clark. The
committee was not notified of the accusation ; neither was it heard at any inquiry
nor given preliminary opportunity to answer the charge.
Despite the fact that this statement is not likely to get even a small fraction
of the publicity given to Mr. Clark's announcement, the committee now feels
Impelled to restate its record and aims for the American press and public.
REWARD FOR TRUTH
Since its founding in 1945, tlie Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy
has steadfastly advocated an American foreign policy in Asia that would be in
accord with the Atlantic Charter, the Charter of the United Nations, and inter-
national undertakings entered into by the United States Government. For 4
years it has continually warned of the dangers of a failure-doomed policy of
military support of a moribund and corrupt minority government in China ; a
policy bound to destroy both Chinese friendship for the United States and the
prestige and honor of America among the peoples of Asia.
Now that events have confirmed the bankruptcy of this policy and demonstrated ,
the public service we performed in warning the American people, the committee
is listed as subversive.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4165
A COWARDLY ATTACK
Such a listing, in the opinion of the committee, is intended to wreclj the good
name that the organization has acquired, on the merits of its record, for reliable,
factual reiiorting. It is intended to intimidate members of the organization and
brand its workers in the eyes of tlieir friends. It can only be regarded as flagrant
and cowardly attack on any who disagree with current policies and exercise the
American right of free speech to voice their opinions.
WE SHALL CONTINUE
The committee protests against the listing. Whether it stands on the Civil
Service Commission books or is revoked, we shall continue to work unceasingly
and with all vigor and strength to publish the true facts on the situation in Asia
and the effect of United States policies there. We shall continue to perform our
four-year patriotic service of exposing and calling for changes in United States
policies that earn hatred for Americans by obstructing the inevitably victorious
struggle of Asia's people to free themselves from foreign exploitation, social
oppression, and the resulting indescribable poverty in which no man on this earth
should be forced to, or will much longer consent to, exist.
Mr. BissoN. May I indicate further here that I learned hiter that,
in spite of my request, they had not completely disassociated my name
from their formal material.
Mr. Morris. For instance, I notice in February 1950 there is a
favorable re^aew of your book by Mr. Philip O. Keeney. It appears
on page 13 of the February 1950 Far East Spotlight.
Mr. SouRWiNE. When did you learn, Mr. Bisson, that they had not
disassociated your name?
Mr. Bisson. I had not seen any of their materials for a long time,
and sometime during the spring of 1951 I either saw it in the library
or someone called it to my attention, and for that reason I wrote this
letter.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What letter?
Mr. BissoN. A second letter, that I am about to read.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Tell us about it.
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
Dear Sirs : Some 2 years ago, when I resigned from your committee, I assumed
that my name would be taken off all of your publications. Recently I noted that
my name is still carried on your regular letterhead. I would appreciate it if you
remove my name from your letterhead immediately.
Yours truly,
T. A. BissoN.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What is the date of that letter ?
Mr. BissoN. June 4, 1951.
Mr. SouRwiNE. And you signed it and mailed it on that date?
Mr. BissoN. That's right.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive into the record this
I'eview by Philip O. Keeney of Mr. Bisson's Prospects for Democracy
in Japan? It appears on page 13 of the February 1950 issue of Far
East Spotlight.
Senator Ferguson. The record also shows on this May issue that
^Ir. Keeney was treasurer.
Mr. Morris. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. The official record of the committee shows that
ho refused to answer questions as to whether or not he was a
Communist.
Mr. Morris. That is right, on the grounds that his answers would
tend to incriminate him.
4166 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. It will be received.
(The docuinent referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 712" and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 712
[Source : Far East Spotlight, February, 1950, vol. V, No. 11]
Far East Reading
(Philip O. Keeney)
Prospects for Democracy in ,Tai>an, By T. A. Bisson, The MacMillan Co., New
York, 1049, 143 pp. $2.75.
Mr. Bisson was an adviser un the staff of SCAP's Government Section which
.snpervised Japanese legislation.
After analyzing the political forces that were in power when MacArthur began
the occupation, he concludes by saying: "This .Japanese oligarchy, confronted
with tlie necessity of military surrender, marshaled its forces for a postwar
struggle to preserve the political and economic bases of its power. * ♦ * rjij^^
society that had produced them (armed forces) once would produce them again
as soon as opportunity arose. If such an outcome was to be avoided, the society
itself must be so changed as to eliminate * * * the forces that had originally
impelled it to embark upon a course of military aggression."
The lirst directives designed to change the framework of the prewar Japanese
Government were greeted by a popular response "of such proportions that it took
the occupation authorities by surprise." The two old guard parties who were in
control of the government machinery found themselves faced with a vital problem,
viz., to keep in check the newly rising popular forces. The simpest way to solve
this problem was an election before new leadership arose to guide the common
people of Japan. The situation became so bad that in 1946 a general strike was
ordered. MacArthur prevented it. In order to save face with the Japanese people
he scheduled a second election for April 1947.
The reactionary forces were returned to power again though neither of the
two old line parties gained a majority in the lower house of the Diet. For this
reason a social democrat was chosen to fcn'm a coalition cabinet. The widely
different points of view in this Cabinet produced long drawn out debates. Despite
such delays certain reforms were instituted and investigations set in motion. One
investigation became a ma.ior scandal when it was discovered that the army before
the occupation had turned over to the Zaibatsu vast quantities of food and
materials.
Mr. Bisson sums up his analysis by saying that "this country failed to achieve
the announced aims of its initial postsurrender policy toward Japan, primarily
because those aims could not be achieved through the instrumentality of Japan's
old guard."
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, were yon ev^er a member of an organization
called the American Friends of the Chinese People?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Do yon know that that was an organization that has
been cited by the Attorney General as a subversive organization?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Have you read the testimony before this committee
that that organization was controlled by a Communist faction which
regularly met within the organization?
Mr. Bisson. I have not.
Mr. Morris. Did you write for the publication of that organization,
called China Today?
Mr. Bisson. I did.
Mr. Morris. Did yon write under a pseudonym ?
Mr. Bisson. I did.
Mr. Morris. Did you write under your own name in addition?
Mr. Bisson. I did.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4167
Mr. Morris. Would you tell us what pseudonym you used in writing
for that publication of the American Friends of the Chinese People,
which has been cited as a subversive organization?
Mr. BissON. Frederick Spencer.
Mr. Morris. Why did you use the name of Frederick Spencer ?
Mr. Bissox. I was working at that time with the Foreign Policy
Association, a nonpartisan research and educational organization.
I wrote under an assumed name for reasons that I would presume
motivated Mr. X when he wrote his article in Foreign Affairs. I
wanted to be able to express my views with full force without any
feeling that I was bound by limitations existing in terms of the writ-
ings that I did for the Foreign Policy Association.
Senator Ferguson. But Mr. X was a public official and was writing
about a foreign country and a foreign government. You were not
such, were you ?
Mr. BissoN. I was not such, but I assume that I have the same right.
I was in a position that was relatively similar, even if not the same.
Mr. Fanelli. The only question was, "You were not such"' and
the answer was "No."
Answer the Senator's questions.
Senator Ferguson. I will ask you now whether or not you knew or
ever heard that Frederick Spencer was the name that Frederick Van-
derbilt Field used on the records as a Communist? That was his
Communist name ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not know that.
Senator Ferguson. You did not know that ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. But if that is a fact and our records show that,
this official record of the committee shows that, that would lead the
people to believe, who were Communists, that you were a Communist,
would it not? Or, at least, the man writing the letter was a Com-
munist ?
Mr. BissoN. No ; I do not see that.
Senator Ferguson. You do not think that is true? Here is an offi-
cial name on the record, Frederick Vanderbilt Field. Frederick
Vanderbilt Field is on the official Communist records as Frederick
Spencer.
Now, you knew Field, and you were writing under the name of
Frederick Spencer. Would not that lead people who were Commu-
nists reading the article to believe that it was written by Field the
Communist ?
Mr. BissoN. Let me get this clear. I think when you say it is on
the official record, what you are saying is that one of the witnesses
before this connnittee has Identified Frederick Vanderbilt Field
Senator Ferguson. And it has not been denied by Mr. Field.
Mr. BissoN. As Frederick Spencer.
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I am now saying that that particular attribution by
Mr. Budenz was mistaken.
Senator Ferguson. Wliy ? Why do you contradict Mr. Budenz on
that, unless you know something about it ?
Mr. Bisson. I do know something about it.
Senator Ferguson. Tell us about it.
4168 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. I know that I was writing under the name Frederick
Spencer. I know also that Frederick Field, to the best of my knowl-
edge, at the same time, was writing in the same magazine mider the
name of Lawrence Hearn. I, therefore, think that Mr. Budenz was
mistaken when he says that Mr. Field was writing under the name
of Frederick Silencer.
Senator Ferguson. I was not saying he was writing under the name
of Frederick Spencer. His official nam.e on the Communist records
was Frederick Spencer.
Mr. Bissox. I have no knowledge of what his official name on the
Communists' records are.
Senator Ferguson. That is what our records show now — that Fred-
erick Vanderbilt Field's Communist name was Frederick Spencer.
Mr. BissoN. I am saying what I know from my knowledge of China
Today. I do not know
Senator Ferguson. Wliy do you contradict Mr. Budenz when he
says that the official Communist name of Frederick Vanderbilt Field
was Frederick Spencer ? Why do you contradict that ?
Mr. BissoN. I am not contradicting that. I am saying that in terms
of the writers on China Today I do not think that Frederick Vander-
bilt Field was Frederick Spencer.
Senator Ferguson. Coming back to my other question, which you
apparently misunderstood, if he was carried on the official Communist
records as Frederick Spencer, and then you wrote articles under that
name, would not that lead the Communists to believe that that was
Fred Field, the Communist, writing ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; but what I want to say here is that I have no
knowledge that Frederick Spencer appeared as Frederick Vanderbilt
Field on the Communist records.
Senator Ferguson. But Frederick Vanderbilt Field knew that you
were using the pen name of Frederick Spencer ?
Mr. Morris. He was associated with China Today ; was he not?
Mr. BissoN. He was.
Mr. Morris. And he knew that you were using the name Frederick
Spencer ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. I would like to offer you, Mr. Bisson, a copy of Cliina
Today, February 1935, which contains a statement to the American
people, and you will note that this statement is signed, among others,
by Mr. T. A. Bisson and by Mr. Frederick Spencer.
Now, you did not sign that twice, did you t
I mean, obviously, there are two people, are there not?
Mr. Bisson. I assume so.
Mr. Morris. So would it not indicate to you that certainly in this
instance some other person was using the pseudonym Frederick
Spencer ?
Mr. Bisson. It would seem to so indicate.
Mr. Morris. And you notice that Mr. Field's name does not appear
in this list of people to whom this statement was addressed.
I will let you examine it.
Mr. Sourwine. Mr. Morris, may I suggest that that statement and
the list of names appended as signators be offered for the record at
this time?
Senator Ferguson. The whole list will be received in evidence.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4169
(Tlie document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 713" and is
as follows:)
Exhibit No. 713
[Source: China Today, vol. 1, October 1934-September 1935. February 1935, p. 90]
To THE American People
Today 450 million Chinese people are .strugglins for national liberation^for
the simple right to be a free people, masters of their own destiny. The greatest
obstacle to the success of this heroic struggle is the active interference of the
foreign imperialist powers. The United States is one of those powers, the very
country that was itself engaged in a great struggle to free itself from British
colonial oppression a little more than a hundred and fifty years ago.
It is in China that we are at this moment specifically interested because there
we are witnessing a drama of tremendous power and significance — the breath-
taking struggle of a great people to free itself from oppression and to establish
its independence.
And what has been the role of the United States in this struggle? Is it giving
to an oppressed nation the same moral and material support that it received
in its own revolutionary war? On the contrary, the United States, under the
deceptive guise of the "open door policy," is playing a ruthless part in suppress-
ing the Chinese masses and fomenting civil wars among them. It was American
gunboats in March 1927 that took the lead in shelling Nanking and set the stage
for Chiang Kai-shek's treacherous turn against the Chinese revolution. Today
America is still staking its fortunes in China on Chiang Kai-shek and his
Nanking terroristic government. Only recently the United States Senate in-
vestigation into the munitions industry revealed the fact that at least ten million
dollars of the wheat and cotton loan from the U. S. to the Nanking govern-
ment was used to buy munitions for war against the 90 million Chinese people
who are living under the flag of the Chinese Soviets. Not only has the Ameri-
can government provided the funds for munitions to be used in this civil war,
but it has also permitted the sale of hundreds of aeroplanes to the Nanking
government by American aviation companies — a transaction that could not
have been completed without specific permission from the State Department.
From these aeroplanes have fallen thousands of death dealing bombs on inno-
cent non-combatants — bombs spreading terror, destruction, and devastation over
thousands of villages and millions of inhabitants. It has also supplied the funds
for the building of aeroplane factories at Hangchow, Sliaokwan, and other places.
And furthermore, the American government goes even so far as fb supply army
and navy aviators who are released from active service in order to be sent to
China as demonstrators, advisors, and pilots actually participating in bombing.
We find among these instructors such outstanding names as Captain Frank
Hawks. Major Doolittle, and the late Lieut. Dorsey who recently lost his life
in this service. Thus, as someone has so aptly stated, we are permitting our
own American soldiers to become the Hessian troops of the Chinese Revolution.
Without this support, according to many competent observers, the reactionary
Nanking government could not retain its power for any length of time.
This direct interference by America in the internal affairs of China has but
one purpose — the furthering of its imperialist designs at the expense of the
Chinese people. The profit-mad munition makers, aeroplane manufacturers, in-
dustrialists, and bankers, seeking new fields of exploitation for their surplus
capital, are turning greedy eyes towards war-torn China. They look to American
troops to protect their newly won fields. Major General Smedley D. Butler in
his recent Armistice Day address summed up briefly but completely this condi-
tion when he said : "For thirty-three years and four months I was an active agent
in the greatest debt-collecting agency in the world, the U. S. Marine Corps."
General Butler ought to know — he was for many years Commander of the
U. S. Marines in China.
Thousands upon thousands of American people deeply resent this interference
by the United States in the internal affairs of China. In the name of these
thousands, we demand :
1. That the American government stop the sale of aeroplanes to China ;
2. That the American government stop the release of army and navy pilots
for military use by the reactionary militarists in China ;
3. That America withdraw all gunboats, marines, and other armed forces in
China ;
4170 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
4. That America stop the shipment of munitions and financial assistance to
Chinese militarists.
Signed : Roger Baldwin, T. A. Bisson, Earl Browder, Winifred Chap-
pel, George S. Counts, Malcolm Cowley, Edward Dahlberg, Ethel
L. Dewey, Theodore Dreiser, Waldo Frank, Joseph Freeman, Beals
E. L. French, Myrtle M. French, Mike Gold, Katherine Graham,
Mary H. Gleason. R. M. Gyles, Granville Hicks, Josephine Jack,
Orrick Johns, Corliss Lamont, Robert Morss, Lovett, Thora Lund,
Edith de Nancrede, J. W. Phillips, Isidor Schneider, Frederick
Spencer, Maxwell S. Stewart, Katharine Terrell, Harry F. Ward,
Victor A. Yakhontoft.
Senator Ferguson. Tlie question is : Do yon find Frederick Field's
name on there?
Mr. BissoN. May I ask this ?
Mr. Fanelli. I have no objection.
Senator Ferguson. Frederick Fields' name is not on there, is it ?
Mr. BissoN. No, it is not.
Senator Ferguson. Is Earl Browder's ?
Mr. BissoN- Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Earl Browder's is?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Was Earl Browder a Communist at that time?
Mr. BissoN. I assume that he was ; yes.
Senator Ferguson. You know he was, do you not ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Why did you sign with Earl Browder ?
"To the American people," it is headed.
Mr. Fanelli. May I examine this. Senator ?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. Bisson. I see no reason why I could not on occasion have been
associated in that way with Mr. Earl Browder.
Senator Ferguson. That was your privilege and I want to know
why you di^l it.
Mr. SouRAViNE. Mr. Bisson, the Senator asked you why. Why did
3^ou sign with Browder ? He did not challenge your right to do so ?
He simply asked you why.
Senator Ferguson. Why ?
Mr. Bisson. I presumably agreed with the positions being taken
in that case by Mr. Browder.
Senator Ferguson. You must have read this thing before you
signed it.
Mr. Bisson. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Did you sign under both names, or did Fred
Field sign under Spencer's name, signing his Communist name ?
Mr. Bisson. I would not know.
Senator Ferguson. You did not sign both ways, did you?
Mr. Bisson. No.
Senator Ferguson. What?
Mr. Bisson. I do not think so.
Senator Ferguson. Will you tell us under oath that you did or did
not sign under the name of Bisson and the name of Spencer?
Mr. Bisson. I did not.
Senator Ferguson. Did you know another Fred Spencer?
Mr. Bisson. I did not.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4171
Senator Ferguson. This was a group of people. Will you tell us
how many you were acquainted with ?
Mr. Morris. Let the witness see the list.
Senator Ferguson. Yes; the list of names. Tell us how many.
Tell us first how many are on it, and then how many you were
acquainted with or knew.
Mr. BissoN. Koger Baldwin ; yes.
My own name.
Mr. Browder, yes.
Winifred Chappel, no.
George S. Counts, yes
Mr. SouRWiNE. By yes, you mean you knew the person and by no
you mean you did not ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Malcolm Cowley, yes.
Edward Dahlberg, no.
Ethel Dewey — I am not sure whether this is the wife of Dr. Dewey.
After all, this is a list of names I have not seen for many years.
Mr. Morris. Yes, we understand that, Mr. Bisson.
Mr. BissoN. If this is the wife of Dr. Dewey, I would know her;
otherwise not.
Senator Ferguson. Speak a little louder.
Mr. BissoN. Theodore Dreiser, no.
Waldo Frank, no.
Joseph Freeman, no.
Beals E. L. French, no.
Myrtle M. French, no.
Mike Gold, no.
Kathering Graham, no.
Mary H. Gleason, no.
R. M. Gyles, no.
Granville Hicks, no.
Josephine Jack, no.
Orrick Johns, no.
Corliss Lamont, yes.
Robert Morss Lovett, yes.
Thora Lund, no.
Edith de Nancrede, no.
J. W. Phillips, yes.
Mr. IMoRRis. Was J. W. Phillips known to you by another name ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Who was J. W. Phillips ?
Mr. BissoN. Philip Jaffe.
Mr. Morris. He was associated with you in this publication China
Today ?
Mr. Bisson. He was.
Isidor Schneider, no.
Frederick Spencer — I knew no other by the name of Frederick
Spencer.
Senator Ferguson. Except your own?
Mr. BissoN. I thought that this was my own assumed name.
Katherine Terrell, no.
Harry F. Ward, yes.
Victor A. Yakhontoif, ves.
4172 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE, Mr. Bisson, do you know, or do you have any reason
to believe that any of those persons whose names you have just read
were under Communist discipline or had voluntarily and knowingly
.cooperated or collaborated with Communist Party members in fur-
therance of Communist Party objectives?
Mr. BissoN. J assume that Earl Browder was in that category.
Mr. SouRWiNE You stated earlier that you knew Earl Browder
was a communist; is that correct?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Anyone else?
Mr. BissoN. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You are stating that there is no one else on this
list that you just read whom you either knew or had reason to believe
was either under Commuuist discipline or had voluntarily and know-
ingly cooperated or collaborated with Communist Party members in
furtherance of Conununist Party objectives; is that your statement,
sir?
Mr. Bisson. I would have to divide that question. I would not
know any of these persons as Communist Partj^ members.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I did not ask you that. All right, I will divide the
question.
Do you know, or have you any reason to believe, that any of these
persons was at any time under Communist Party discipline or Com-
munist discipline?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Other than Mr. Browder?
Mr. BissoN. I do not.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know, or have you any reason to believe
that any of these persons at any time voluntarily and knowingly co-
operated or collaborated with Communist Party members in further-
ance of Communist Party objectives?
Mr. BissoN. I assume that Mr. Phillips may have done so.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You mean Mr. Jaffe?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Jaffe, yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You say you assume. On what basis do you as-
sume ?
Mr. BissON. I assume that because on later occasions it was indi-
cated that he was connected Avith Earl Browder, or associated with
Earl Browder.
Mr. SouRAviNE. As a matter of fact, you do not assume that about
anybody under a question like that. Do you know, or do you have
reason to believe? You either do or do not. You do not assume that
anybody is a Communist, do you ?
Mr. BissoN. The distinction that I am trying to make here, how-
ever, is a time distinction. Some of these people at the present time
under later conditions have clearly become known under that category
as associating with Communist activities.
Mr. SouRWiNE. What we want you to do, Mr. Bisson, is to name
those persons on this list whom you either know or have reason to
believe voluntarily and knowingly cooperated or collaborated with
Communist Party members in furtherance of Communist Party ob-
jectives, and then tell us what you know about them and then tell
us what you know that gives you reason to believe that.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4173
Mr. BissoN. And I am saying that a time distinction is necessary
in that question because if I simply say "Yes"
Mr. Fanelli. Go ahead and make your time distinction and answer
his question.
Mr. BissoN. The time distinction is that in hiter years it has become
obvious that Mr. Phillips was associated with Earl Browder.
Senator Ferguson. You mean Philip Jaffe ?
Mr. Morris. Was associated with Earl Browder, did you say ?
Senator Ferguson. Philip Jaffe.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. IMoRRis. Was the end of your statement that he was associated
with Earl Browder? Was that the end of j^our statement just now?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. This man Phillips is Jaffe?
Mr. BissoN. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Do you not think also that Spencer in this par-
ticular list is Field, because they were both using fictitious or alias
names ?
Mr. BissoN. The questioning thus far has led me to believe
Senator Ferguson. If you will just not try to find out what we are
trying to put in this record by the questions. We are ti*ying to get
out of your mind by questions what you know.
Mr. Fanelli. For the record, I do not believe there has been any
indication tliat he has been trying to do that.
Senator Ferguson. He indicates by this last thing that he does
Mr. Fanelli. He does not have any knowledge on this subject, and
you are asking for an opinion.
Mr. SouRwiNE. The counsel is testifying as to what the witness has
knowledge of and I hope the Chair will
Mr. Fanelli. He has already testified that he does not know about
that.
Senator Ferguson. We have not cross-examined at all on this;
whether or not he knows. We might be able to refresh his memory by
a few questions.
I know that Mr. Sourwine wants to ask him some questions be-
cause this thing does bring out in one's mind a lot of questions.
Do you know Maxwell Stewart ?
Mr. BissoN. I do.
Senator Ferguson. Did you read his name on there?
Mr, BissoN. I don't think I did.
Senator Ferguson. It is on there, is it not?
Mr. Fanelli. I don't believe it is, Senator.
Mr. BissoN. I may have skipped that as I was reading.
Senator Ferguson. Yes, his name is on there, is it not?
Did you read Mike Gold ?
Mr. BissoN. I did read that name.
Senator Ferguson. You knew he was a Communist writer, did you
not, for the Daily Worker?
Mr. BissON. I did not.
Senator Ferguson. You did not know that? You did not know
that?
Mr. BissON. I did not.
Mr. Morris. Did you know his brother, Max Granich?
Mr. BissoN. I did later.
88348— 52— pt. 12 10
4174 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
]Mr. Morris. Granich was the editor of that paper, was he not,
China Today ?
Mr. BissoN. I think he was in a hiter ])eriod.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mr. Chairman, would it be permitted to go through
this list of names now and make the question very clear so there will
be no possibility of the witness misunderstanding?
]Mr. BissoN. I assure you that if I missed any name on that list it
was done inadvertently.
Mr, Fanelli. Let them go ahead and ask the question.
Mr. SouRwiNE. The question, Mr. Bisson, is this; First, did you
know the person ?
Mr, BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. I want you to say whether you did or did not know
when I name the name.
Then, I want you to state whether you knew, or had any reason to
believe, that this person had at any time been under Communist
discipline.
And, third, I want you to state whether you knew or had any reason
to believe that this person had at any time voluntarily and knowingly
cooperated or collaborated with members of the Communist Party in
furtherance of Communist Party objectives.
Now, if your answers are "no," we need go no further on a person
whom you identify as one with respect to whom you had no such
knowledge.
If you have such knowledge or belief, then we will ask additional
questions.
The first name here is Roger Baldwin.
Mr. BissoN, Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You knew him ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Ferguson. Is that Bene Baldwin ? That is not ; is it 'i
Mr. BissoN, I would not know Bene Baldwin.
Mr. Sourwine. Have you any reason to believe he was either under
Communist discipline or had voluntarily and knowingly cooperated or
collaborated with Communist Party members in furtherance of Com-
munist Party objectives?
Mr, BissoN, I did not.
Mr. Sourwine. The next name is your own, T. A. Bisson, Were
you ever under Communist discipline?
Mr. BissoN. I was not.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever voluntarily and knowingly cooperate
or collaborate with Communist Party members in furtherance of Com-
munist Party objectives?
Mr. BissoN, I did not.
Senator Ferguson. Just on that, do you know what this article is?
Was this not a Connnunist objective sponsored by the Communist
Party under Browder? Is it not clear that that is what that was?
Mr. INIoRRis. Mr. Chairman, I suggest you read some of that.
Senatoi- Ferguson. I want the witness to answer that. You just
answered the question by Mr. Sourwine. Now, what was this article
about in reference to the question Mr. Sourwine just asked you?
Mr. Bisson. I do not think it was necessarily a document that was
under Communist authorization.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4175
Senator Ferguson. Not necessarily, but was it not under the domi-
nation of tlie Communists because Earl Browder is on it? You do
not think Earl Browder was advocating something that was not a
party line in 1935, do you i
You Avere an educated man at that time, an intelligent man. You
do not think that he was advocating something that was not the party
line at that time, do you ?
Mr. BissoN. Presumably not.
Senator Ferguson. It is correct that it is presumably not. Then
you were voluntarily and willingly on that particular article advo-
cating the party line, were you not ?
Mr. BissoN. On that particular article my views coincided with
the views
Senator Ferguson. But you were advocating it. You say now that
the reason was that your views coincided?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. However, you were actually advocating the
party line there and knowingly doing it with a Communist, Earl
Browder ; is that not a fact ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Your answer was yes on the record.
Mr. Sourwine. I think it will speed this up a little if we may have
an understanding with the witness that a single no will mean that
he does not know the person and that the answer to the other two
questions is no if he does not know the person, as to the other two
questions.
If he did know the person, but the answer is "No," on the other two
questions, he will simply say "I i^new him, but the answer is 'No.' "
Is that agreeable, Mr. Bisson ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. Earl Browder?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. You knew him?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. You knew him to be a person under Communist
discipline ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. And you knew him to be a person who had know-
ingly and voluntarily cooperated and collaborated with other Com-
munists necessarily ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRW^iNE. Winifred Chappell ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. Sourwine. George S. Counts?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwaNE. Malcolm Cowley?
Mr. BissoN. No. Now, wait. The first question here is do I
know them?
Mr. Sourwine. That is right.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. You know Mr. Malcolm Cowley ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
4176 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRWiNE. Is that your answer to the other two questions,
"No"?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Edward Dahlberg ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Ethel L. Dewey ?
Mr.BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Theodore Dreiser?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Waldo Frank ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Joseph Freeman ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Beals E. L. French ?
Mr.BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Myrtle M. French ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Mike Gold ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You did not know Mike Gold ?
Mr.BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You do not know him now ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Katharine Graham ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mary H. Gleason ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. K. M. Gyles ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Granville Hicks ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SoTJRWiNE. Josephine Jack ?
Mr.BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Orrick Johns ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Corliss Lamont ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That is, you knew him ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr, SouRwiNE. And your answer to the other two questions ?
Mr. BissoN. Are "No."
Mr. SouRWiNE. Robert Morss Lovett ?
Mr.BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. And your aiiswer to the other two questions ?
Mr. BissoN. Are "No."
Mr. SouRWiNE. Thora Lund ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Edith de Nancrede ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. J. W. Phillips?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You knew him as Philip M. Jaffe?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
* INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4177
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know him to be under Communist disci-
pline ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr, SouRwiNE. Did you have any reason to believe him as such ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you know, or have any reason to believe that
he had voluntarily and knowingly cooperated or collaborated with
Communist Party members in furtherance of Communist Party
objectives?
Mr. BissoN. Not at this time. Later I did.
Mr. Sour\\t:ne. How did you come to know that later?
Mr. BissoN. Later there were evidences of association with Earl
Browder, of activities involved in the Amerasia case.
Mr. Sotjrwine. Are those two separate things, or are they one
thing in your mind?
Mr. BissoN. They are separate things.
Mr. SouRwiNE. How did it come to your attention that he was as-
sociating with Earl Browder?
Mr, BissoN. To my knowledge, I just learned it from conversation,
or
Mr. SouR"wiNE. Conversation with whom, with Jaffe?
Mr. BissoN. Could have been.
Mr. SouRwiNE. With Browder ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr, SouRwiNE. It could have been with Jaffe?
Mr, BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Who else could it have been with?
Mr, BissoN. No one that I know of,
Mr. SouRwiNE. Then was it with Jaffe ?
Mr. BissoN. It may have been ; yes.
Mr. Sour\\t:ne. If it could have been with Jaffe, it could not have
been with anyone else? It was with Jaffe, was it not?
Mr. BissoN. At a later period, yes.
Mr, Sourwine. You learned of Browder's association with Jaffe,
from Jaffe?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. _, ^
Mr, Sotjrwine. Isidore Schneider?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRAViNE. Frederick Spencer?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouR\viNE. Do you know that Frederick Spencer who signed
this?
Mr. BissoN. That's in terms — I say "Yes,"
Mr, SouRwiNE. You know the name Frederick Spencer ?
Mr, BissoN. I know the name Frederick Spencer.
Mr. Sourwine. But you do not know the man who signed the same
Frederick Spencer on here; is that right?
Mr, BissoN. I do not.
Mr, Sourwine, Maxwell S. Stewart?
Mr, BissoN. I know him, and the other answer is "No."
Mr. Sourwine. You have no reason to believe, or any knowledge
that he was ever under Communist discipline or ever had voluntarily
and knowingly cooperated or collaborated with Communist Party
members in furtherance of Communist Party objectives ?
4178 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRAViNE. Katharine Terrell?
Mr. Btsson. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Harry F. Ward?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. And the other two answers to the two questions?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. Sourwine. Victor A. YakhontofF^
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. And the answers to the other two questions?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. Sourwine. How was this article prejiared ? Did you prepare it ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember that I had any connection with it.
Mr. Sourwine. Was it presented to you for signature ?
Mr. BissoN. I assume so.
Mr. Sourwine. Was it in a long sheet of paper with a place at the
bottom for the names to be signed ?
Mr. BissoN. I cannot recall.
Mr. Sourwine. You did not sign your name on a piece of paper
that did not have this writing at the top : did you ?
Mr. BissoN. I assume not.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you, in fact, sign your name to this article?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. How many names were on it when you signed it ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not recall.
Mr. Sourwine. Were the names signed one below the other?
Mr. BissoN. I do not recall.
Mr. Sourwine. All right, Mr. Chairman. This has been admitted —
has it not — for the record ?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. May I state that this is what year ?
Senator Ferguson. 1935.
Mr. BissoN. This is, after all, 17 years ago, and I think I should
perhaps be pardoned for not knowing every detail.
Mr. Sourwine. The committee has not criticized you for not re-
membering. We are only trying to find out what you do remember.
Mr. Fanelli. You do not have to apologize.
Mr. Sourwine. You are not being asked to testify to anything
here that you do not remember. We want your best recollection and
belief ; what you know.
Mr. BissoN. I was trying to answer an assumption.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, njay I call attention to this one para-
graph in this article ?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. Morris (reading) :
This direct interference by America in the internal affairs of China has but
one purpose: the furthering of its imperialist designs at the expense of the
Chinese people. The proflt-niad munition makers, aeroplane manufacturers,
industrialists, and bankers, seeking new fields of exploitation for their surplus
capital, are turning greedy eyes toward war-torn China.
Mr. Bisson, did you ever speak on a platform with known mem'
bers of the Communist Party ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us the circumstances ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4179
Mr. BissoN. I spoke at a meeting in connection with the organiza-
tion, American Friends of the Chinese People.
Mr. Morris. When was that ? Can you recall ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not; presumably sometime in the midthirties.
Mr. Morris. I offer you this issue, November 1934, of China To-
day, Mr. Bisson, and ask you if you can recall whether or not that
advertisement of a meeting is the correct one ?
Mr. BissoN. I assume that that is correct.
Mr. Morris. They mentioned that the following speakers would
speak: Mr. T. A. Bisson, Mr. Earl Browder, Mr. Malcolm Cowley,
General Yakhontoff, Frederick V. Field, and Hansu Chan.
Did you speak on that occasion ?
Mr. BissoN. I assume that I did.
Mr. Morris. You notice that the tickets were sold in two places
there, at the New Masses and at the Workers' Bookshop, the Workers'
Bookshop being the official bookshop of the Communist Party.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you at the time know that any of those persons
were members of the Communist Party ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. What is that?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. What was the objective of the meeting that you
were speaking at?
Mr. BissoN. I think it was to raise funds for the magazine China
Today.
Mr. Sourwine. Is that a Communist publication ?
Mr. BissoN. I would not call that a Communist publication.
Mr. Sourwine. AVas it Communist-controlled at all?
Mr. BissoN. Not to my knowledge.
Senator Ferguson. Was it a front ?
Mr. Bisson. I am not sure of the distinction between Communist-
controlled and front.
Senator Ferguson. Do you know what a Communist- front paper
is?
Mr. BissoN. I am not certain in terms of your question at this
point.
Senator Ferguson. You cannot answer my question if you do not
know what it means, if you do not know what a front means.
Mr. BissoN. I presume you mean an organization which Commu-
nists control.
Senator Ferguson. Yes, and are using.
Mr. BissoN. I am not clear on the distinction between front and
the organization that he spoke of.
Mr. Sourwine. Was China Today a publication that was in any
measure controlled or used by the Communist Party ?
Mr. BissoN. It could have been ; yes.
Mr. Sourwine. Was it?
Mr. BissON. I am not sure.
Mr. Sourwine. You were associated with the magazine?
Mr. BissoN. I was as.sociated with it.
Mr. Sourwine. Yes. Was it?
Mr. BissoN. I am not prepared to say that it was fully controlled
by the Communists.
4180 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. I asked you if it was controlled or used in any way
by the Communist Party?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. It was not?
Senator Ferguson. What do you think Earl Browder was doing
in there if he was not using it ? Do you think Earl Browder was advo-
cating a capitalist front, speaking to the capitalist movement at this
meeting and raising the funds? Is that your opinion now?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Then it was a front; was it not?
Mr. Morris. The tickets were sold by the New Masses and the
Daily Worker.
Mr. Fanelli. Let him answer one question.
Either he knows, or he doesn't know.
Senator Ferguson. It was a front; was it not?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
I might say that under these circumstances one could consider it a
front organization.
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. SouR^VINE. Would you say that these Communists were there
to help this meeting for the raising of funds for China Today because
they wanted to see funds raised for China Today ?
Mr. Fanelli. I object to that. The only evidence I have heard so
far was that there was one Communist at that meeting, Earl Browder.
Mr. Morris. Who was Hansu Chan?
Mr. BissoN. He was one of the editors of China Today.
Mr. Morris. Is that a pseudonym ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Wliat is the real name of Hansu Chan ?
Mr. BissoN. Chi.
Mr. Morris. Dr. Chi?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. He is an official of Communist China today; is he not?
Mr. BissoN. I am not certain whether he is an official today. He
has been reported as such in the last 2 or 3 years.
Mr. Morris. Would you say that he is a Communist?
Mr. BissoN. He is a Communist ; yes, today.
Mr. Morris. So, there we do know that ]Mr. Browder and Mr. Hansu
Chan are Communists.
How about Frederick V. Field? Would you consider that he is a
Connnunist today ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; he would be.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mr. Chairman, just so the record could speak freely,
counsel objected, and I do not know to what extent the Chair is going
to permit objections by counsel
Mr. Fanelli. Mr. Sourwine
' Mr. Sourwine. If you please. I should like to point out that this
question has been asked before, the question in the plural, if he spoke
with Communists, and he said "Yes"; and this witness was asked if
he knew at that time that they were Connnunists, plural, and he said
"Yes," which seems to me to be adequate foundation for the question
which I asked.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4181
Senator Ferguson, I will take the objection merely as a suggestion
to the Chair to see whether or not in the opinion of the Chair it is
objectionable.
Will you repeat or read the question ?
Mr. Fanelli. Senator, I withdraw my comment.
Senator Ferguson. I am afraid that the witness does not remember.
Do you know what the question is?
Mr. BissoN. I am afraid not.
Senator Ferguson. Then, we had better have it read.
Mr. SouRwiNE. In order to lay the necessary foundation -■ ■
Mr. Fanelli. I withdraw my comment.
Senator P^erguson. Let us go right ahead.
Repeat the question.
Mr. Souravine. Mr. Bisson, is it your understanding that any Com
numists who were on the platform with you at that meeting were there
because they wanted to see funds raised for China Today ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. And that was why you were there?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. Doesn't that mean you were cooperating or col-
laborating with them?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. And that you were cooperating or collaborating
with them in furtherance of their objective?
Mr. BissoN. Objectives which I associated myself with at that time.
Mr. Sourwine. Yes. And at that time was that not a Communist
Party objective: to raise funds for China Today? They would not
have been there if that had not been ; would they?
Mv. BissoN. I assume it was ; yes.
Senator Ferguson. Mr. Bisson, do you know what was at 50 East
Thirteenth Street, New York ?
Mr. BissoN. 50 East Thirteenth Street?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Fergltson. That was the Communist headquarters at that
time; was it?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know.
Senator Ferguson. Do you know whether the Workers Bookshop
was a Communist shop ?
Mr. BissoN. I assume that it was. I do not know that shop.
Senator Ferguson. Did you know what the New Masses was?
Was that a Communist front ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. So, the tickets for sale were sold at a Comminiist
front, the New IMasses, ?>! East Twenty-seventh Street, and the other
place was at the Workers Bookshop, 50 East Thirteenth Street ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. At least one of the places was a Communist-
front place?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. We will put the whole ad in the record.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 714'' and is
as follows:)
4182 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 714
[ Advortisenicnt in China Today, November 1934. p. SO |
BANQUET AND DANCE
Celebrate the appearance of
China Today
and hear the following speakers
T. A. BissoN Gen. Yakhontoff
Earl Browder Frederick V. Field
Malcolm Cowley Hansu Chan
and enjoy
Native Chinese Food (Served Chinese Style)
Dance to the music of the well-known
Clui! Valhalla Orchestra
Saturday, November 10th — Irving Plaza, 15th Street & Irving IMace, New York
$1.25 for Banquet and Dance Reservations in advance only. Service at 6 : 30
sharp.
50^ Dance ticket entitles you to hear speakers at 8 : 80 — 65^^ at the door.
Tickets for sale at New Masses, 81 East 27th Street ; Worker Bookshop, 50
E. 13 Street, or at our Headquarters
Auspices
Friends of the Chinese People
168 West 23rd St. Chelsea 2-9096
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, when you were working in General Mac-
Arthnr's headquarters, and when you were working for the United
kStates strategic bomb survey, did you make disclosure to your author-
ities that you had these Communist associations in the past?
Mr. SouRWiNE. By "authorities," you mean superiors, Mr. Morris?
Mr. Morris. That is right. Your superiors and the people with
whom you made application for employment?
Mr. Fanelli. The answer is "yes'' or "no"' to them. Tell them you
did or didn't.
Mr. BissoN. I did not.
Mr. Morris. Did you mention that you had written for this Com-
munist publication, China Today, under a pseudonym '.
Mr. BissoN. I did not.
Mr. Morris. Did you mention that you had spoken on the same
platform with Frederick V. Field, Hansu Chan, and Earl Browder?
Mr. BissoN. I did not.
Mr. Morris. Did you think that they w'ould have reposed confidence
in you if you had?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know\
Mr. Morris. While you were in Tokyo, Mr. Bisson, did you ever
meet with Mr. Philip Keeney?
Mr. Faneei.i. In connection with the last question just asked, he
has some documents he would like to introduce. Do you want them
now?
Senator Fp:rguson. Answer the question. Then we will get to the
documents.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4183
Mr. Morris. How often did you meet with Mr. Keeney in Tokyo?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Keeney was a member of occupation lieadquarters.
He was livin*:; in the same hotel with me. I saw him a lunnber of
times a week.
Mr. Morris. Woukl 30U say that you were on very close terms with
Philip O. Keeney^
Mr. Bissox. I would not.
Mr. Morris. You did, however, meet him two or three times a week?
Mr, BissoN. We were working!: in different sections. He was in the
educational work.
Mr. Morris. But even though you were working in different kinds
of work, you did meet him two or three times a week, did you not?
Mr. BissoN. We were living in the same hotel and dining in the
same hotel. Therefore, I met him several times a week. I would not
know whether they were twice a week or six times a week.
Mr. Morris. He was a friend of yours, was he not, Mr. Bisson?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. Morris. And you had known him before he Avent out to Japan,
had you not?
Mr. BissoN. No. I met him first in Japan.
Mr. Morris. You were then subsequently associated with him in the
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy; were you not?
Mr. Bissox. I was.
Mr. Morris. Did you know that he was disqualified from service in
the Far East command?
Mr. Bissox. I did.
Mr. Morris. Did you know the reason for his disqualification ?
Mr. Bissox. To the best of my knowledge he could not find out
when he was there.
Mr. SouRWiXE. The question was : Did you know ?
Mr. Morris. Did you know why he was disqualified ?
Mr. Bissox. I did not.
Mr. Morris. And that did not interfere with your decision of be-
coming associated with him — he was treasurer, was he not, of the
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy — and that did not
interfere with your becoming associated with him in the Committee
for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy when you returned to the United
States?
Mr. Bissox. It did not.
Mr. SouRwiXE. Did you ever know or have reason to believe that
he was under Communist discipline or had voluntarily and knowingly
cooperated or collaborated with Communist Party members in fur-
therance of Communist Party objectives?
Mr. Bissox. I did not.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Susumo Okano ? Did you ever
meet Mr. Susumo Okano in Japan ?
Mr. Bissox. Yes ; I think I did.
Mr. Morris. He was an ofticial of the Japanese Communist Party,
was he not ?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. Morris. In fact, he was the leader of the Japanese CommunLst
Party?
Mr, Bissox. He is.
4184 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Did you clioose to describe him as a Japanese liberal
Avho should be included in the Japanese Government?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember of describing him as a liberal. I
may well have described him as one wlio could enter the Japanese
Government.
Mr. Morris. I have now your article, which appears in Pacific Af-
fairs of 1944, September 1944, in which you say, among other things,
here :
There are many such liberals, including Takao Saito, expelled from the House
of Representatives for denouncing the war against China ; Kan.iu Kato, jailed
for his aggressive and uncompromising trade-union leadership ; Daikichiro
Togawa, member imprisoned for susi3ected opposition to the war in China ;
Wataru Kaji, who has for years aided the Chinese armies in propaganda work ;
Tatsukichi Minobe, eminent constitutional lawyer driven from the House of
Peers for his liberal views on the Emperor ; Susumo Okano, Communist leader of
the Japanese Peoples' Liberation Alliance, organized February 1944 in Yenan,
China ; Baroness Ishimoto —
and so forth.
Did 3^ou advocate that Susumo Okano listed among those other
peo])le as liberal by you be included in the Japanese Government?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Many I make a comment on that ?
Mr. Morris. Yes. You wanted to introduce something into the
record at this time ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. We have been discussing my Government con-
nections in Japan and I should like to speak both to
Senator Fi:rgusox. Before you go into that, I would just like to
inquire from Mr. Morris how long he thinks this hearing will take.
Mr. BissoN. I think I can finish this in 2 or 3 minutes.
Senator Ferguson. It appears that we cannot finish today and we
can finish in about an hour and a half, so we have a full meeting on
Monday at 10 : 30, and, tlierefore, we will start this hearing sharply
at 9 o'clock Monday morning.
We will recess now until 9 o'clock Monday morning.
If you do not finish at 10 : 30 when the committee comes in as a
whole, you have another meeting at 2, do you not? We have another
meeting at 2?
Mr. Morris. We have another meeting and anotlier witness sub-
penaed.
Senator Ferguson. If there is any question we could start this one at
1 o'clock to finish it, so we Avould have 2i/2 hours.
Mr. Sour WINE. Do you want to get this material in he is offering?
Mr. Fanelli, It won't take a minute, Senator.
Senator Ferguson. All right.
Mr. BissoN. I want to note that Major General Willoughby, former
liead of G-2 in occupation lieadquarters at Tokyo, has charged before
the committee that I was among certain people "unloaded" on head-
quarters from the States in the spring of 1946.
The fact is that the Deputy Chief of Government Section, Col.
Charles L. Kades, invited me to join that section in the fall of 1945,
when I was in Japan with the strategic bombing survey.
My commitments with tlie survey did not permit me to accept the
offer at that time. By the spring of 1946 I had fulfilled tliese com-
mitments, including the writing of one of the cliapters in the official
survey volume prepared by the Over-all Fconomic Effects Division,
to which I was attached.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4185
From the War Department I received later an official scroll of
commendation for my contribution to the work of the strategic bomb-
ing survey.
Having completed my work with the survey, I took up the offer
previously made by Government Section in Tokyo, stipulating that
I stay only 4 months, and that my status be raised from the grade
of P-T to P-8, the highest professional category.
These matters are all subject of record and can be easily verified
by investigation. It was under these conditions, which do not take
on the character of being "unloaded" on occupation headquarters,
that I assumed my duties with Government Section in April 1946.
With regard to my period of official service with occupation head-
quarters in 19-1:6— tT,' the appropriate source to consult is my immedi-
ate superior, Brig. Gen. (later Maj. Gen.) Courtney Whitney, Chief
of Government Section. He gave me a letter of commendation when
I left the field.
Under the urgings of my official superiors in Government Section,
I extended the stipulated term of 4 months to 13 months.
The letter he gave me reads as follows
Senator Ferguson. Just offer it and we will put it in the record.
Mr. Fanelli. That is right.
Mr. Morris. Did you disclose to any of these people that you men-
i ioned, Mr. Bisson, your past Communist associations ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not.
Senator Ferguson. I will receive that commendation letter in the
record.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit 715'' and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 715
General Headquarters,
Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers,
Tokyo, Japan, May 8, 19Iil'.
Mr. T. A. Bisson,
Tokyo, Japan
Dear Mr. Bisson : It is with a sense of sincere regret tliat I note your departure
from your post here for the United States. I have, however, realized for some
time that your personal affairs reciuired your presence at home, and that you
were staying during the national and local elections at my request only at con-
siderable personal sacrifice.
As special assistant to the Chief, Government Section, since early in 1946,
you have devoted yourself indefatigably to the democratization of Japan. The
advice and untiring assistance which you gave in the preparation of legislative
programs during the several sessions of the National Diet contributed materially
to the successful formulation and adoption of laws of a progressive and en-
lightened character fvilly in keeping with the liberal spirit of the new Constitution
of Japan.
Nor can I commend too highly the vision and judgment which you exhibited
in the development of plans for the deconcentration of political and economic
power in Japan and the establishment of a social pattern in which a system of
private enterprise may function free from monopolistic influences and totali-
tarian controls. In fact, the zeal, patience, and initiative with which you per-
formed your manifold day-to-day duties have won the deep respect and admiration
of all your colleagues in this headquarters, as well as my own gratitude and
appreciation. We will all miss you.
With best wishes for your continued success, I am,
Very sincerely,
(Signed) Courtney Whitney,
Brigadier General, United States Army,
Chief, Oovernment Section.
4186 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. We will recess now, until 9 o'clock on Monday
morning.
(Thereupon, at 12 : 15 p. m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene
at D a. m. Monday, March ;31, 1952.)
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
MONDAY, MARCH 31, 1952
United States Senate,
Sl'BC'oMMlTTEE To INVESTIGATE THE ADMINISTRATION
OF THE Internal Security Act and Other Internal
Security Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, D. C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 9 a. m., in room 424,
Senate Office Building:, Hon. Homer Ferguson, presiding.
Present : Senators McCarran, Eastland, and Ferguson.
Also present: J. G. Sourwine, committee counsel; Robert Morris,
subcommittee counsel; and Benjamin Mandel, director or research.
Senator Ferguson. Come to order.
You may proceed, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you put into the record the citation
of the American Friends of the Chinese People?
Mr. Mandel. This is a correction of the previous statement.
The American Friends of the Chinese People, which was the organi-
zation that sponso>"^d China Today, was cited as a Communist front
by the Special Committee on Un-American Activities of the House of
Representatives in its report of March 29, 1944, pages 40 and 147. It
was not in existence at the time the Attorney General's list was promul-
gated. That is why it is not on his list.
Senator Ferguson. You mean it had passed out of existence?
Mr. Mandel. It had ceased existing at the time the Attorney Gen-
eral's list was put out.
Mr. Sourwine. You don't actually know why it wasn't on the At-
torney General's list; do you?
Mr. Mandel. I know only that the organization did not exist at
the time the first Attorney General's list was put out.
Mr. Fanelli. I think it ought to be noted the Attorney General's
list has many organizations that are out of existence such as the
American League for Peace and Democracy. That is just for vour
information, Senator.
Senator Ferguson. You may proceed.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS ARTHUR BISSON, BERKELEY, CALIF.
ACCOMPANIED BY JOSEPH A. FANELLI, ESQ.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, have you written in justification of the
Soviet-German Pact ?
Mr. BissoN. I have not, so far as I know.
Mr. P'anelli. He has one correction in his testimony of Saturday
at any point where it is convenient.
4187
4188 - INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson, Do it now,
Mr. BissoN. My position of mascot of Pacific Affairs was associate
editor, not acting editor. Tlie same is true for Michael Greenberg.
In these years, Mr, Holland or Mr. Carter ^vas the editor, "What I
wanted to indicate here is that I did not have editorial responsibility
at the time, as this mastiiead shows.
Mr. SouRwiNE. How did the masthead read, "associate editor?"
Mr, BissoN. Associate editor ; yes,
Mr, SouRwixE. Did yon perform the duties that an editor would
normally perform?
Mr. BissoN. I performed on occasion routine editorial administra-
tion, I did not have editorial responsibility,
Mr. SouRWiNE. Who decided what was going into the magazine?
Mr, BissoN, Mr, Carter when he was editor or Mr. Holland,
Mr. SouRwiNE, Mr. Carter, himself, personally submitted manu-
scripts and decided what to reject and accept?
Mr. BissoN. Sometimes we had editorial sessions in which the whole
group of editors would meet. There would be discussions there. The
final decision in those discussions always lay with Mr, Carter,
Mr, SouRWiNE, Did you make recommendations to him ?
Mr. BissoN, We all made recommendations, depending on what we
felt about all of this,
Mr, SouRw^iNE. Were you the top man on the publication except for
Mr, Carter?
Mr. BissoN. May I see the masthead of the Pacific Affairs?
Mr, SouRwiXE. From your memory, not from the masthead,
Mr. BissoN, Mr. Belshaw was there,
Mr, SouRW^iNE. AVas there someone over you except Mr, Carter?
Mr, BissoN. I would like to see the masthead,
Mr, SouRwiNE. What do you remember ?
Mr, BissoN. My memory is "No,"
Mr. Morris, I want to refresh the witness' recollection by referring
to our exhibit Xo. 71, which appears on page 307 of the public tran-
script. This is a letter from Wilma Fairbank to you dated October 19,
1943. Wilma Fairbanks writes :
Dear Akt : Harriet writes me that Chien Tuan-Sheiig's article on local govern-
ment is going to be published in the December issue of Pacific Affairs. I under-
stand that you are now acting editor.
Mr. BissoN. "I understand" — she wasn't certain, I think that is
quite clear and what she is saying is that she thinks I am the editor
and w^ould like me to take this into consideration. She wasn't certain.
That would be my interpretation of it,
I assure you the point here is whether an article should go in or not
and that was up to Mr, Carter,
Mr, Faneeli. You have answered the question,
Mr, Morris, Mr, Chairman, in connection with the question put to
the witness, "Did you support the Hitler-Stalin Pact?" I w^ould like
to introduce into the record an article that appeared in Amerasia of
September 1938, signed "TAB," which is entitled "Japan Picks Up the
Pieces,"
Senator Ferguson, Is that your article?
Mr, BissoN. That is my article.
Mr, Fanelli. Let me see it, please,
Mr, Morris, I will show you this next article in order to save time.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4189
Senator Ferguson. What do you say about that article?
Mr. Bissox. I have not had a chance to complete reading it yet.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Why haven't you had a chance to complete read-
ing iti'
Mr. Bissox. I would like to have my counsel read this.
Mr. SouRAviNE. Does Mr. Fanelli know whether you wrote this?
Mr. Faxelli. I would like to know what he has been asked and is
being asked.
Senator Ferguson. We are trying to find his knowledge.
Mr. BissoN. I have said I wrote it.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That is the answer we are waiting for.
Mr. Morris. I now offer you this article from Soviet Russia Today.
Mr. Fanelli. Senator, I have no objection to its being in the record,
but it doesn't show any support of the Russian-China Pact.
Senator Ferguson. It will speak for itself.
Mr. Morris. I offer you the May 1941 issue of China Today and on
l>age 5 is an article entitled "The Soviet-Japanese Pact in Historical
Perspective," by T. A. Bisson. I ask you if you wrote that.
Mr. BissoN. I wrote that article.
May I look at it in more detail ?
Mr. Morris. Yes.
Mr. Fanelli. Would you mind waiting a minute while I read it,
if you are going to ask him about this?
Mr. Morris. Counsel has asked permission to read the article, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. SouRwiNE. How long is the article ?
Mr. Fanelli. Two pages. It will take me 2 minutes. I have not
previously seen this article. I take it he is going to ask about its
contents.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you plan to ask Mr. Fanelli any questions ?
Mr. Morris. No.
Senator Ferguson. Why should counsel read it ?
Mr. Morris. I have no reason.
Senator Ferguson. It is what the witness knows about it, not
counsel, unless there is some constitutional question in it, or legal
questions that you do not want to answer on the ground that it would
tend to incriminate you.
Mr. BissoN. May I consult with counsel? If so, I think it would
be necessary for him to read it.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you identify it as an article you have written ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. How long have you known counsel ?
Mr. BissoN. About a week.
Senator Ferguson. Who introduced you to your counsel ?
Mr. BissoN. Mr, Maxwell Stewart.
Senator Ferguson. How long have you been in Washington now ?
Mr. BissoN. Since Friday night ?
Senator Ferguson. Last Friday night?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. When did you first meet your counsel? You
said about a week.
Mr. BissoN. Half a week.
Senator Ferguson. A half a week ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 11
4190 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr, BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. When did you meet your counsel ?
Mr. Bissox. I first met my counsel Friday night.
Senator Ferguson. Who took you to meet your counsel ?
Mr. BissoN. I went by myself.
Senator Ferguson. Nobody with you ?
Mr. BissoN. Nobody was with me.
Senator Ferguson. AVas he in his office or in his home ?
Mr. BissoN. He Avas at his office.
Senator Ferguson. You said that Maxwell Stewart introduced you
to your counsel.
Mr. BissoN. By introduced, I took to mean, got me in touch with
him.
Senator Ferguson. When did you contact Mr. Maxwell Stewart
about counsel?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Stewart telephoned me in Berkeley, Calif.
Senator Ferguson. He telej)honed you, or did you telephone him ?
Mr. BissoN. He telephoned to me.
Senator Ferguson. Had you been in contact with Maxwell Stewart
before ?
Mr. BissoN. I had not.
Senator Ferguson. Who is Maxwell Stewart ?
Mr. BissoN. You mean in terms of his business position?
Senator Ferguson. What is his business?
Mr. BissoN. I think he is head of a public affairs committee, puts
out some pamphlets.
Senator Ferguson. He is the head of a public affairs committee
tliat puts out pamphlets. What kind of pamphlets?
Mr. BissoN. I am not sufficiently aware of the type of ])amphlets.
Senator Ferguson. How long have you known Maxwell Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. I have known Maxwell Stewart 15 — 20 years, a long
time.
Senator Ferguson. Was he ever on the Institute of Pacific Relations
with you ?
Mr. BissoN. He was not, not that I know of.
Senator Ferguson. Did he ever work in (Tovernment?
Mr. BissoN. I do not think so.
Senator Ferguson. When did Maxwell Stewart get in touch with
you?
Mr. BissoN. You mean tlie telephone call to which I referred?
Senator Ferguson. Yes. When was that?
Mr. BissoN. To the best of my knowledge it was Wednesday.
Senator Ferguson. Last Wednesday, Maxwell Stewart called you
in California?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Fer(;us()n. Wlien were you subpenaed?
Mr. BrssoN. Tlie telegram arrived on Tuesday, I think.
Senator Ferguson. The telegram arrived on Tuesday of last week
saying that j'ou were to come here ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. And Maxwell Stewart called you on Wednes-
day ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4191
Senator E'erguson. What was your cjonversation with Maxwell
Stew^art ?
Mr. Bissox. Maxwell Stewart said that he understood I was to tes-
tify here in Washington.
Senator Ferguson. He understood you were going to testify here m
Washington, and what else?
Mr. BissoN. And suggested if I needed a lawyer he could recom-
mend one.
Senator Ferguson. What else?
Mr. BissoN. Then he gave me his telephone number.
Senator Ferguson. Maxwell Stewart's telephone number?
Mr. BissoN. No ; Mr. Fanelli's telephone number.
Senator Ferguson. Did you tell him you wanted a lawyer?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Ferguson. You realize that many witnesses have appeared
without lawyers ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not so realize.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ever know a witness in a court case to
have a lawyer? Have you ever appeared as a witness in a court case?
Mr. BissoN. I have not. I am rather inexperienced in legal matters.
Senator Ferguson. Have you ever attended a court trial?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know as I actually have.
Senator Ferguson. You don't think you have?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Have you ever known a witness to have a lawyer
before ?
Mr. BissoN. I just wouldn't know the answer to that question.
Senator Ferguson. Is that the only conversation you had with Max-
well Stewart? You are under oath, you understand.
Mr. BissoN. No ; that is not the only conversation.
Senator Ferguson. Tell us what the conversation was that you had
with Maxwell Stewart. I have been trying to get it.
Mr. BissoN. I also had a conversation with Maxwell Stewart in
New York.
Senator Ferguson. When?
Mr. BissoN. Friday.
Senator Ferguson. Did you go to New York and meet Maxwell
Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Ferguson. Where did you meet him in New York?
Mr. BissoN. I met him at his offices.
Senator Ferguson. He has an office in New York?
Mr. BissoN. He has.
Senator Ferguson. Did he telephone you from Washington or tele-
phone you from New York ?
Mr. BissoN. He did not telephone me.
Senator Ferguson. What ?
Mr. BissoN. Oh, you mean on the day that w^e are now speaking of,
or earlier ?
Senator Ferguson. Now you told me that he telephoned you last
Wednesday.
Mr. BissoN. But we are now speaking about Friday, and I am ask-
ing you whether you are speaking of Friday or Wednesday.
4192 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. I am talkiiif^ about your first telephone call
from Maxwell Stewart.
Mr. BissoN. That is exactly what I was not clear about. Now I
am clear about it.
Senator Ferguson. When did you have your first call from Max-
well Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. On Wednesday afternoon.
Senator Ferguson. From where?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know as he exactly stated. I presume he was
in New York City.
Senator Ferguson. You presume he was. You were where?
Mr. BissoN. In Berkeley.
Senator Ferguson. How lonjr did the telephone call take?
Mr. BissoN. I suppose 3 or 4 minutes.
Senator Ferguson. What did you say to him? What did he say
to you ?
Mr. BissoN. I have told you what we said.
Senator Ferguson. Is tluit tlie only conversation? He said: "You
are ^oing to be subpenaed ?"
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. "You are going to be subpenaed?"
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Fergi^son. "Do you want a lawyer?"
Mr. BissoN. He asked me whether I needed a lawyer.
Senator Ferguson. What did you say?
Mr. BissoN. I said I did not have one and I would like to have
one.
Senator Ferguson. Did he name the lawyer?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did he tell you who would pay for the lawyer?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ask him ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Was there anything said about paying the
lawyer ?
Mr. BissoN. There was not.
Senator Ferguson. Have you a contract now to ])ay your lawyer?
Mr. BissoN. I have.
Senator Ferguson. How much ?
Mr. BissoN. $250.
Senator Ferguson. For what, for a day ?
Mr. BissoN. For a day.
Senator Ferguson. A day?
Mr. Bisson. No, $250.
Senator Ferguson. For the whole ap])earance?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. This was originally understood to be only a
day's appearance.
Senator Ferguson. It was to be $250. Were you to pay it per-
sonally?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did you pay any down?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did you make an appointment with Stev^art?
Mr. BissoN. No.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4193
Senator Ferguson. How did you get to New York to see him if
3'ou did not make an appointment ?
Mr. BissON. I went down to New York City to see liim.
Senator Ferguson. You told us tlie conversation on Wednesday
and there is nothing in it about you going to New York.
Mr. BissoN. There is nothing to prevent me from going to New
York when I got here in Washington, is there?
Senator Ferguson. Not a thing.
Mr. BissoN. That is exactly what I did.
Senator Ferguson. You came to Washington when?
Mr. BissoN. I came to Washington on Friday morning.
Senator Ferguson. Did you go to see your counsel?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Where did you go in Washington ?
Mr. BissON. I did not go anywhere in Washington.
Senator Ferguson. Did you get off the train or plane?
Mr. BissoN. I was on a plane.
Senator Ferguson. Did you get off the plane?
Mr. BissoN. I got off the plane, asked whether I could purchase
an extension to New York, and returned to the plane.
Senator Ferguson. Did you do that ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did you contact anybody while you were here
in Washington?
Mr. BissoN. I did not. I merely had time to make the shift.
Senator Ferguson. Why did you change your mind about going on
to New York?
Mr. BissoN. I didn't change my mind. The Government TR called
for a San Francisco to Washington trip. I could not change that.
What I could do was to extend it on my own funds.
Senator Ferguson. Did you have another conversation on the tele-
phone with Maxwell Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. No; I did not.
Senator Ferguson. Where were you to meet Maxwell Stewart ?
Mr. BissoN. I was not. We made no arrangements to meet.
Senator Ferguson. Then you went on to New York?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did you know where Maxwell Stewart's office
was in New York ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not know the exact address.
Senator Ferguson. Did you go on to New York ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Ferguson. Did you see Maxwell Stewart?
Mr. BissON. I did.
Senator Ferguson. Who else did you see in New York?
Mr. BissoN. I saw Mr. Holland. '
Senator Ferguson. You saw Mr. Holland ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did you see anybody else?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Is Maxwell Stewart a lawyer f
Mr. BissoN. No; not as far as I know.
Senator Ferguson. He is a public-relations man?
Mr. BissoN. I would not call him a public-relations man.
4194 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. What is on his office door?
Mr. BissoN. Public Affairs Committee.
Senator Fekgusox. Connnittee for what?
Mr. BissoN. The committee publislies pamphlets. It does not nec-
essarily mean — I do not think he operates for any person as a public
relations expert in terms of his business.
Senator Ferguson. What kind of pamphlets does he publish?
Wliat are the pamphlets?
Mr. BissoN. I have not seen them for many years. They are small
pamphlets, something of this size, a little largei', various subjects,
most of which I think are domestic.
Senator Ferguson. Did you go to see Stewart before you went to
see Holland?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Ferguson. You went to see Stewart first?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. You didn't have an appointment with him?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. You are sure about that ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right. He is my friend.
Senator Ferguson. What was vour conversation with Stewart
{ibout?
Mr. BissoN. It resolved generally around the procedures in a com-
mittee hearing of this kind with hints to help me out in conducting
myself.
Senator Ferguson. How to conduct yourself?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. What did he tell you about that?
Mr. BissoN. Well, there are a number of points we discussed. I
suppose I can remember some of them.
One was to try to keep cool. Another was to make sure you knew
the question before you attempted to answer it. Another Avas to look
at a document that was read to you.
Senator Ferguson. Look at it wlien it was read to you ?
Mr. BissoN. If I am not familiar with its contents.
Senator Ferguson. To have your counsel read the document also ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did he tell you that?
Mr. BissoN. No, he did not say that. Just to make sure that I had
the content of a document on which I was being questioned if my
memory was not complete about it.
I do not remember any other details. He thought we should — it
was almost lunch time then — go out for lunch.
Senator Ferguson. How long did you talk with Maxwell Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. I suppose it was 15 or 20 minutes. We then telephoned
Mr. Holland and made a luncheon appointment with him.
Senator Ferguson. You and Stewart went to Holland?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. And had luncheon with Holland?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Fergus'on. What did you talk about there?
Mr. BissoN. In general, the same problems.
Senator Ferguson. How to conduct yourself before a connnittee ?
Mr. Bisson. That is right.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4195
Senator Ferguson. Did you talk about Owen Lattimore's testi-
mony ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Was his name mentioned?
Mr. Bissox. I don't believe it was.
Senator Ferguson. Think a mimite.
Mr. BissoN. To the best of my knowledo;e, his name was not even
mentioned.
Senator Ferguson. Did Mr. Stewart say that he had talked to
counsel, that the counsel would take your case?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. I think he said that he had talked to Mr. Fanelli.
Senator Ferguson. And Mr. P'anelli would take your case?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Did he tell you that Mr. Fanelli had any ex-
perience in this particular case?
Mr. BissoN. That is, my case?
Senator Ferguson. No, in the IPR case.
Mr. BissoN. No; I don't think so, except that he told me he had
l)een Ids lawyer here when he was here.
Senator Ferguson. And Mr. Fanelli had represented Mr. Maxwell
Stewart as a witness before the committee ?
Mr. BissoN. That is rifrht.
Senator Ferguson. Then you knew ]\Iaxwell Stewart had been a
witness here?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Fercjuson. Did he tell you as to whether Mr. Fanelli had
represented anybody else before the committee?
Mr. BissoN. He did not.
Senator Ferguson. That he had gotten other people to go to Mr.
Fanelli to have Mr. Fanelli as a lawyer before this committee?
Mr. BissoN. He did not. We did not discuss any of that.
Senator Ferguson. Did you discuss Mr. Budenz ?
Mr. BissoN. We did not.
Senator Ferguson. Was he mentioned?
Mr. BissON. Not that I remember.
Senator Ferguson, Did he tell you that Mr. Fanelli was the man
who had given certain evidence to the attorney for Mr. Lattimore?
Mr. BissoN. He did not.
Senator Ferguson. Didn't he tell you that?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did he tell you that Mr. Fanelli had given evi-
dence to ^Ir. Fortas, Abe Fortas?
Mr. Bissox. He did not.
Senator P'erguson. Was the name of Abe Fortas mentioned?
Mr. BissoN. It was not.
Senator Ferguson. Did you talk about any deportation cases?
Mr. BissoN. AVe did not.
Senator Ferguson. Have we got about your conversation with Hol-
land?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Were any of these documents mentioned?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. How long was your conversation with Holland?
4196 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr, BissoN. There was no separate conversation with Holland. It,
was a general conversation in the office and then we had lunch. As a
matter of fact, as I remember, hnally only ]Mr. Stewart and I went
to lunch.
Senator Ferguson. Holland did not go with you?
Mr. BissoN. Holland finally did not go to lunch.
Senator Ferguson. Then you and Stewart went over to Holland's
office ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. How long a time did you spend there?
Mr. BissoN. I would estimate a half or three-quarters of an hour.
Senator Ferguson. You were about three-quarters of an hour at
Holland's office?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Who suggested getting Holland?
Mr. BissoN, I expect I said that, since Mr. Holland is acting as head
of the IPE, it would probably ])e well if I saw him.
Senator Ferguson. Who called Holland?
Mr.. BissoN. Maxwell Stewart did.
Senator Ferguson. Then you went to lunch with Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. Could you give us the conversation?
Mr. BissoN. I am afraid I don't recall any of the details. We
passed on to general subjects then. We were discussing family mat-
ters, my son's position, and so on.
Senator Ferguson. What is that ?
Mr. BissoN. We had certain matters to deal with with reference
to my son, and I asked him about his family. We were discussing
mainl}^ family matters over lunch.
Senator Ferguson. Did you call the lawyer — he was not your lawyer
then, because you had not talked to him
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did Stewart call him?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Did anybody call him?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. Hoav did you know you were goiug to meet him
Friday?
Mr. BissoN. I did not know I was going to meet him Friday.
Senator Ferguson. When did you leave New York?
Mr. BissoN. I left New York right after lunch.
Senator Ferguson. What time?
Mr. BissoN. On the 1 : 30 train.
Senator Ferguson. You arrived here at what time?
Mr. BissoN. I think it was around 5 o'clock.
Senator Ferguson. Where did you go then?
Mr. BissoN. I went to my hotel.
Senator Ferguson. Where ?
Mr. BissoN. Hotel Stratford.
Senator Ferguson. Then where ?
Mr. BissoN. I then telephoned Mr. Haaser.
Senator Ferguson. Who is Mr. Haaser?
Mr. BissoN. I was directed to telephone him when I arrived.
Senator Ferguson. By whom ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4197
Mr. BissoN. Who directed me to do that?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. The telegram here.
Senator Ferguson. Did you get him on the phone?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Then what?
Mr. BissoN. I reported I had arrived. He said the hearing was
scheduled for
Senator Ferguson. About what time was that ?
Mr. BissoN. I suppose that must have been about 5 : 30, a quarter
of 6.
Senator Ferguson. Then you had not contacted the lawyer yet?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Ferguson. When did you contact him ?
Mr. BissoN. I made a telephone call to him after that.
Senator Ferguson. You had his number because Maxwell Stewart
gave it to you ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. Was he at his office?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; he was at his office.
Senator Ferguson. You went to the office ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Ferguson. Then you appeared Saturday morning?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Ferguson. Did you have some questions, Mr. Sourwine.
Mr. Sourwine. Just one or two.
What time did your plane get into W^ashington Friday morning?
Mr. BissoN. I think it was about 9 o'clock. I am not exactly certain.
Mr. Sourwine. What time did you take off for New York?
Mr. BissoN. I think it was about a half an hour.
Mr. Sourwine. That would be about 9 : 30 that the plane took off
for New York ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. Sourwine. What time did you get to New York ?
Mr. BissoN. As I remember, the flight took about an hour or a little
over.
Mr. Sourwine. You got into LaGuardia Field?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. Sourwine. That would be about 10 : 30 or a little later ?
Mr. BissoN. 10 : 30 or a quarter to 11.
Mr. Sourwine. What time did you get into ISIanhattan?
Mr. BissoN. I had to wait for' the bags. I went in the limousine.
I suppose it was 11 o'clock or 11 : 15.
Mr. Sourwine. Where did you get off? Where did the limousine
leave you?
Mr. BissoN. As I remember, I got off at the uptown stop.
Mr. Sourwine. Where was that ?
Mr. BissoN. I wouldn't remember the exact street. It was around
Fifty-seventh Street, something like that.
Mr. Sourwine. Fifty-seventh and what?
Mr. BissoN. Lexington.
Mr. Sourwine. Then what did you do?
Mr. BissoN. My problem was I did not know where to get off the
limousine because I did not know the address of Mr. Stewart's office.
4198 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRWiNE. This is around a quarter to 12 ?
Mr. BissoN. No ; this is a quarter after 11.
So I went into a drug store or something, and looked at a telephone
book, and found his address and got a taxicab and went to his office.
Mr. SouRWiNE. How is he listed in the telephone book?
Mr. BissoN. I think I looked up Public Affairs Committee.
Mr. SouRWiNE. In the Manhattan telephone directory ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Where is the office ?
Mr, BissoN. The office — I am not exactly certain. It is down
Mr. SouRWiNE. Where did you go ?
Mr. BissoN. It was about 20 blocks downtown, I think, a little
below Forty-second Street, around Fortieth Street.
Mr. Sour WINE. Fortieth and what?
Mr. BissoN. That is what I was trying to remember. I think it
is on the east side of Fifth Avenue a couple of blocks.
Mr. SouRWiNE. That is all you can remember about it ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRW^NE. You don't know the name of the building?
Mr. BissoN. I don't.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Does it have a name ?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You went there in a cab ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You got there when? About 11 : 30?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You just walked in on him unannounced?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRWiNE. And he was there?
Mr. BissoN, That is right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You talked with him for a while?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr SouRWiNE. Then one of you suggested calling Mr. Holland ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You think it was you ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Then Mr. Stewart did call Mr. Holland?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. He found him in?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know whether Mr. Stewart had talked to
Mr. Holland before about your coming?
Mr. BissoN. I do not think so.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You don't know?
Mr. Bissox. I don't know.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Had you made any contact with Mr. Holland by
mail or otherwise to let him know yf)u were coming?
Mr, BissoN. I had not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. So you went over to Mr. Holland's, you and Mr.
Stewart?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr, SouRWiNE. In a cab?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4199
Mr. SouRWiNE. What time did you leave to go to Mr. Holland's
office?
Mr. BissoN. I think we must have got to Mr. Holland's office about
12 o'clock. It may have been a little before or after.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you get right in to see him ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; I think so.
Mr. SouRwixE. You talked with him for about how long ?
Mr. Bissox. Well, our talk was interrupted. Mr. Shannon McCune
came in. Maybe we talked for 10 or 15 minutes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Mr. who?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Shannon McCune.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Do you know him?
Mr. BissoN". I know him to some extent.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Is he with IPR?
Mr. Bissox. No.
Mr. SouRwixE. What does he do ?
Mr. Bissox. I think he is a university teacher up in New York
State somewhere, Syracuse, or something.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What was he doing there ? Do you know ?
Mr. BissoN. He just happened to come into the office at that time.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You talked with him for about 15 minutes in the
group ?
Mr. BissoN. No; he came in, he talked to Mr. Holland. Maxwell
Stewart and I were on the side.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That was an interruption ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right. .
Mr. SoTJRWiNE. Then you talked with Mr. Holland altogether about
15 minutes?
Mr. Bissox. I would say about that.
Mr. SouRWiXE. Then you went to lunch ?
Mr. Bissox. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiXE. Did you ask Mr. Holland to go to lunch with you ?
Mr. Bissox. I think lie said he had another engagement.
Mr. SouRwixE. Did you ask him to go with you ?
Mr. Bissox. No. We were going out to lunch, but he had another
engagement.
Mr. SouRwixE. So it was then about 12: 15; is that right?
Mr. Bissox. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiXE. You went out to lunch ?
Mr. Bissox. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiXE. Did you eat near the office building there?
Mr. Bissox. No. We decided we didn't have too much time and
we went down to the Pennsylvania Station eating house, I think one
of the Savarin's there.
Mr. SouRwiXE. Did you take a cab down there?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. SouRwixE. You were taking your bags with you ?
IVIr. Bissox. We went down in the subway.
Mr. SouRwixE. You were taking your bags with you from place
to place?
IVIr. Bissox. Yes. The reason we did that was that it was quicker
and very convenient from 1 East Fifty-fourth Street. You get on
the subway there.
4200 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SoTJKWiNE. Were you at 1 East Fifty-fourth Street?
Mr. Fanelij. I didn't hear the question.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Nobody asked you what you heard.
Mr. Fanelu. I am. entitled to know the questions. I just didn't
hear that. He had his hand over his mouth.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Mr. Fanelli has repeatedly interrupted here. This
time he has interrupted at a very important point in the examination.
Were you at 1 East Fifty-fourth Street?
Mr. Bissoisr. We w^ere at Mr. Holland's office. That is the address.
Mr. Fanelli. I wull object to "repeated interruptions." I have
not made repeated interruptions.
Senator Ferguson, The record will speak for itself.
Mr. Faneli.i. I know. He need not describe it that w^ay. It is
not true.
Senator Ferguson. You may proceed.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You took the subway down to the Pennsylvania
Station ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You ate at the Savarin ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Just the two of you ?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Then you got on the 1 o'clock train for Washington ?
Mr. BissoN. 1 : 30.
Mr. SouRwiNE. All right, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Fanelli. May I read this document? I am awaiting your rul-
ing on it. I understood there was an objection to my reading it.
Senator Ferguson. No ; there is no objection to you reading it, but
we do not want to delay the examination.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Neither of those two items identified previously by
the witness has been offered for the record. The purpose for waiting
has been to give you an opportunity to read it.
]Mr. Fanelli. I have been listening to your questions. I cannot do
two things at once.
Mr. Sourwine. Is it your thought that you have the right or privi-
lege to object to the offer of any of these for the record ?
Mr. Fanelli. I have not objected to the offer. I understand this
committee does not permit me to object.
I may make a suggestion. I have not objected to the offer. I would
merely like to understand what is going on. I may have to confer
with my witness about it.
Senator Ferguson. Those two documents will be filed for the record.
You may proceed now with the questioning.
(The documents referred to were marked Exhibits No. 716 and No.
717 and are as follows :)
Exhibit No. 716
[Source: Amerasia, vol. Ill, September-February 1939-40]
Topics In Brief
japan picks up the pieces
Somewhere in Europe, possibly in Switzerland, a Japanese mission is cooling its
heels. Responding to Mr. Hitler's personal invitation, it had left Tokyo late in
July to attend the Nazi Congress at Nuremberg. The Party consisted of General
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4201
Terauchi, Admiral Osumi, and two distinguished Japanese businessmen. Its
announced purpose was tlie strengthening of Japan's ties with Berlin and Rome
under the '-anti-Comintern" pact. Some reports indicated that the long-deferred
military alliance with the Axis powers was about to be concluded, and that the
Japanese mission was to touch up the final details. The group landed in Europe
at the moment when the Soviet-German nonaggression pact was announced.
Since then the Nuremberg Congress has been called off, thus completing the dis-
comfiture of Japan's envoys.
The plight of this mission reflects in miniature the larger predicament into
which Japan has been plunged by the Soviet-German pact. Throughout the first
week, Japan's militarists and politicians fumbled for an answer to the acute
dilemma. At Berlin they presented a feeble protest against violation of the
"spirit" of the "anti-Comintern" pact, while privately they seethed at the lack of
"advance information" on a move which affected their international position so
profoundly. In China some of the acts of the Japanese military exhibited a child-
ish exasperation; the slappings administered to German nationals obviously
provided no answer to their problem.
Japan's dithculties were serious enough before conclusion of the nonaggression
pact, which has greatly strengthened the possibility of effective intervention on
behalf of China by the Soviet Union. For several months the Japanese leaders,
counting on the European crisis to immobilize all opponents, had been pursuing a
recklessly provocative policy in the Far East. Hostilities on the Manchurian-
Mongolian frontier were permitted to reach serious proportions, apparently in the
belief that they might discourage the formation of an Anglo-French-Soviet al-
liance. At the same time, the Japanese were carrying on a bitter campaign
against foreign rights and interests in China. The effort to single out Britain
for special attack at Tientsin was too transparent to go down ; it was obvious that
American and French interests stood or fell with tliose of Britain. From the
beginning of Japan's campaign in the spring, in fact, there had been definite
collaboration by London, Paris, and Washington in defense of their position in
China. Secretary Hull's denunciation of the Japanese-American commercial
treaty must have made this point clear in Tokyo, if it had not been realized earlier.
But by this time Japan had gone too far to retreat. It was carrying the fight
directly to Great Britain and the Soviet Union, and indirectly to the United States
and France. For international support, it was relying on its "anti-Comintern"
partners — Germany and Italy.
On the eve of the current European crisis, Japan's campaign had been tempo-
rarily checkmated. The essential issue revolved around the scope of the con-
cessions which Japan could milk from the Craigie-Arita '•formula" of July 24.
In the beginning, the prospects appeared hopeful to Tokyo. The Japanese leaders
were gambling for big stakes. Beyond the immediate policing issues affecting the
British Concession at Tientsin, they looked for Britain's cooperation in consoli-
dating their economic domination of "occupied" China, particularly in currency
matters. And still further, they aimed to secure Britain's aid in coercing China
into a ''peace" maker, Japan hoped to gain a victory in China which it had
proved unable to win by force of arms.
In the beginning of the Craigie-Arita negotiations, all went well. Secretary
Hull's denunciation of the trade treaty, however, had considerably strengthened
Britain's hand at Tokyo. After making the expected compromise on the policing
of the Tientsin Concession, the British negotiators balked. Japan's demands on
currency and other economic issues in North China were given lengthy con-
sideration, involving consultation with Washington and Paris officials. On
August ISth Britain essentially rejected these demands by stating that they
could only be dealt with in multilateral conversations involving all interested
powers. The stage was set for another turn of the Japanese screw. Ominous
signs of renewed army pressure on British centers in China were evident as
the European crisis entered its rising curve. At Shanghai a shooting affray, in
which a British sergeant killed two China policemen of the local puppet regime
in self-defense, was taken as the point of departure. Japanese military and
naval officials met and conferred, demands were made by the local Japanese-
dominated authorities, and a force of 6,000 Japanese troops was landed near
Shanghai. At Hongkong, meanwhile, Japanese military forces had occupied the
mainland areas along the Crown Colony's border, and extensive military -naval
precautions were taken by the Hongkong authorities.
Announcement of the Soviet-German non-aggression pact occurred as Japan's
preparations for renewed pressure on Britain were reaching a climax. The blow
struck Tokyo with crushing force. Only a month before it had suffered the shock
4202 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
of an action which registered the disapproval of the United States. Now it
suddenly found itself deserted by Germany. It had nothing but its own strengtli—
or lack of strength — to midergird the reckless moves which it engaged upon. An
unfinished war with China, hostilities with Russia on Outer Mongolia's border,
a serious conflict with Britain, latent tension with France, and the undisguised
hostility of the United States — all these to carry on its own shoulders, plus the
unpredictable effects on the sudden access of strength to the Soviet Union in the
Far East. It was high time to reconsider and take stock of the new situation.
The first reactions were evident in China. A sudden damper was put on the
anti-British campaign. No more was heard of the demands on the Shanghai
Municipal Council, or of the 6,000 Japanese troops landed in the neighboring area.
At Hongkong the Japanese troops were withdrawn from the borders of the
Colony, and local Japanese officials discounted any talk of aggressive moves.
A more significant reaction appeared in Tokyo on August 28th, when the
Hiranuma Cabinet resigned en bloc. The military-fascist extremists in Japan,
who had been clamorously demanding an outright alliance with the Berlin-Rome
axis, appear to have suffered their most decisive political set back of the past
three years. Preliminary reports with regard to the composition of the new
Cabinet indicate a decided falling off in the influence of army extremists. Gen-
eral Nobuyki Abe, the new Japanese premier, is not a member of the extremist
clique ; his past associations and record tend to place him among the more
moderate of the army elements. Even the new War Minister, General Shunroku
Hata, comes from a wing of the army that cannot be classified as extremist.
Most significant of all is the consideration being given to the appointment of
Mamoru Shigemitsu, now Ambassador to London, as Foreign Minister. Prior
to his service in London, Shigemitsu held the post of Ambassador at Moscow for
a period of several years. An old career diplomat of the civilian school, Shige-
mitsu will undoubtedly be called upon to play a conciliatory role in relation t-:
the Western powers. Another sign of discomfiture of Japan's military-fascist
exponents may be seen in the projected recall from Rome and Berlin of Toshio
Shiratori and Lieutenant-General Hiroshi Oshima. These two Ambassadors par-
ticipated in the original formation of the "anti-Comintern" pact in November
1930, and during recent months had actively campaigned to convert the pact
into an outright military alliance.
After the events of recent months in China, the new Japanese leadership may
expect to find some difficulty in convincing the Western powers that it comes
honestly bearing an olive branch. The real test is whether Japan is willing to
give up its brutal attempt to subjugate the Chinese people. Of this there is as
yet no sign. The Abe Cabinet reaffirms its intention of establishing the "new
order in East Asia" — an "order" which involves not only the conquest of China
but the eventual elimination of all Western interests in the Far East. The
scenes at Tientsin are of too recent memory to be erased by a sudden shift of
tactics dictated by temporary necessity. If cleverly applied, conciliatory tactics
hold out more danger to China's efforts to maintain its independence than the
recklessly arrogant policy of the Japanese extremists. To Britain, in particu-
lar, they would appeal with especial force at the present time. A bribe may
often be more effective than a blow. In order to conclude a "deal" that would
sacrifice China, Britain would have to receive a quid pro quo. Is the present
Japanese Cabinet alile to make such an offer? And would it be garnished with
the plea that Japan must be conserved as a makeweight against the increased
strength and influence which the Soviet Union can exert in the Far East? It is
to be hoped that any such offers, if tendered, will be recognized for what they
are worth.
In the ultimate disposition of Far Eastern affaii'S, moreover, reckoning must
be had with another power — the United States. Editorial reaction to Secretary
Hull's denunciation of the Japanese-American trade treaty, as shown in a repre-
sentative selection of newspapers from coast to coast, is indicative of what the
American people have come to believe on the current issues of Far Eastern policy.
Approval of Secretary Hull's move is virtually unanimous, while a surprisingly
large majority favors implementation of this act by severance of America's trade
in war materials with Japan. The result of a nationwide Gallup poll, announced
on August 30th, shows that 81 pei-cent of Americans approve the abrogation of the
American-Japanese trade treaty, while 82 percent believe that the United States
.should refuse to sell war materials at the end of six months when the treaty
expires. There can be little doubt tliat, short of a complete reversal of its
attempt to dominate China, Japan can expect no aid or support from the United
States. This country, as a result of our misnamed Neutrality Act, has already
rendered — and is still rendering — far too much assistance to Japan's undeclared
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4203
war on the Chinese people. Today popular opinion overwhelmingly approves the
adoption of measures which will bring to an end America's partnership with
Japan's war makers. It would be unfortunate if small but powerful groups
representing the vested interests of minorities should bring to bear sufficient
influence to thwart this expressed will of the American people.
T. A. B.
Exhibit No. 717
[Source: China Today, May 1941]
The Soviet- Japanese Pact in Historical Perspective
(By T. A. Bisson)
Interpretations of the Soviet-Japanese pact have about equally the number
of its interpreters. All sorts of motivations have been ascribed to it, some of
which obviously cancel each other out. Hitlerian diplomacy may be very clever,
but even the Nazis cannot square the circle. Germany cannot be at once the
father of the pact and the object against which it is directed.
The plain fact .seems to be that the pact was greeted with considerable reserve
in Berlin and Rome. For this, the reasons are fairly obvious. Germany had
hoped to induct the U. S. S. K. into the Axis-Japan alliance via a Soviet-Japanese
agreement. It did not achieve this aim. The neutrality pact signed at Moscow
on April 13 was clearly an indei>endent transaction, which cuts two ways. If it
bars Soviet aid to the United States and Britain in a war against Japan, it also
bars Japanese aid to Germany in the event of a Soviet-German collision.
In concluding this agreement with Japan, as in its earlier pact with Germany,
the Soviet Union joins neither of the opposing coalitions into which the world
has been divided. Rather is the independence of its position strikingly demon-
strated. To recognize this fact, it is only necessary to look at the course of Axis
diplomacy during the war.
Last September Tokyo adhered to the Axis by signing the military alliance
drafted by Hitler in Berlin. But the full scope of the Hitlerian project was still
unrealized. It required the Soviet Union as a full-fledged member in order
to be completed. Adherence of the U. S. S. R. would have rounded out the
Axis- Japan alliance on a grand scale — Eurasian, two-continental. But the
Soviet Union has not entered this projected military combination, any more
than it entered the original Berlin-Rome Axis in August 1939. It has, instead,
signed a separate nonaggression pact with Germany and a separate neutrality
pact with Japan, thus fending off both these powers and retaining the maximum
degree of diplomatic independence for itself. There is nothing to prevent the
Soviet Union from concluding neutrality or nonaggression pacts with Britain
and the United States tomorrow, if these powers seriously desired such agree-
ments. The major restriction on the Soviet Union's freedom of action comes
in this respect — that it will not join the Anglo-American front in war against
either Germany or Japan. This result, of course, is not especially welcome
to those British or American circles which would like to see the U. S. S. R.
come into the war on their side. They have merely the negative satisfaction
that the Soviet Union is also pledged not to join the Axis-Japan alliance in
war against the Anglo-American coalition.
What have been the historical factors which have led to the evolution of
Soviet policy along these lines? For to those who are willing to look facts in
the face, there is nothing mysterious or enigmatic about the development of
Soviet policy during recent years. The Soviet-German pact of August 1939
was a logical result of the course taken by British diplomacy in Europe during
the immediately preceding years. Similarly, the Soviet-Japanese pact of April
1941 is the logical outcome of British and American policy in the Far East
since 1937.
At this time it is instructive to look back for a moment upon the Anglo-
French diplomacy of appeasement in 1933-1939, to which the United States —
by its embargo on the Spanish Loyalists and its failure to embargo the Japanese
militarists — was also a party. In all three countries — Britain, France, and
the United States — a large body of opinion condemned appeasement as suicidal
for the democracies, argued that it served to strengthen Germany, Japan, and
Italy and encourage the spread of their aggressions, and advocated a policy
of collective restraint of the Fascist aggressors. At Geneva, through Maxim
4204 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Litvinov, the Soviet Union championed this policy of collective security and
fought for its application by a united front of all powers opposed to Fascist
aggression. The ruling groups in London, Paris, and Washington thought
otherwise, and translated their belief into a series of actions which demon-
strated their essential unity of outlooli with the Fascist powers. Britain, France,
and the United States stubbornly persisted in "building up" the aggressors by
one surrender after another — the Anglo-German naval agreement, the Ethiopian
fiasco, the rearmament of Germany, the Rhineland remilitarization, "noninter-
vention" in Spain, the Austrian occupation, and, finally, the Munich pact by
which Czechoslovakia was sacrificed.
In the Far East, Britain, France, and the United States failed to extend
effective help to China, Init continued to arm Japan liberally. Official Washing-
ton, it must be reemphasized, did not oppose the diplomacy of appeasement but
pursued a policy of "parallel action" which supported Chamberlain to the hilt.
We twisted our neutrality laws in such a way as to ban the shipment of American
arms to the Loyalists in Spain, even while we permitted an enormou:s flow of
war supplies to Japan. American statutes were twisted and distorted, but there
was no contradiction in the intent and effects of the policy which these distor-
tions allowed us to pursue. It enabled the Fascist troops of Mussolini and
Hitler to win in Spain, and it helped the Japanese armies to overrun China.
The betrayal of democracy by the democracies during the appeasement era
is the factor mainly responsible for the difliculties in which we find ourselves
today. It defeated the program of collective resistance to Fascist aggression,
which could alone have maintained peace, and crushed the League of Nations.
It started the train of "little nation" casualties — numbering Manchuria, Ethiopia,
Austria, Czechoslovakia and Spain before the European war broke out in
September 1930. It built up Germany's strength to the point at which Hitler
could openly launch his drive for conquest and hegemony.
It also accomplished one further result. It drove the Soviet Union out of
the concert of the democracies. The Munich Pact enforced a temporary inter-
national isolation of the U. S. S. R. Although Soviet interests were vitally
affected by the decisions reached at Munich, Chamberlain and Daladier did
not see fit to include the Soviet Union in the negotiations which decided
Czechoslovakia's fate. The Munich Pact reduced to a travesty the mutual
assistance treaties which the U. S. S. R. had concluded with Czechoslovakia and
France. By breaking Czechoslovakia, moreover, Britain and France opened
up a path for Hitler toward the Soviet LTkraine. Did they hope that Munich
wtmld usher in a German-Soviet war? Only nine months later these powers
were seeking a military alliance with the U. S. S. R. at Moscow. The latter
chose to reject this alliance, to sign a non-aggression pact v.ith Germany, and
to remain neutral in the ensuing war — a war, be it noted, caused not by the
Soviet-German pact but by the Anglo-French-American policy of appeasement in
the 1933-193!> era. In order to ensure peace, Britain, France and the LTnited
States would have been obliged to oppose Fascist aggression rather earlier, by
some five years at least, than 1939. The Soviet Union chose to stay out of
what it considered an imperialist war, which the Anglo-French-American rejec-
tion of a collective security program, designed to restrain the aggressors and
lieep the peace, had made possible.
When we turn to the Far East, we are struck by an amazing coincidence.
The same broad pattern of events as occurred in Europe has been repeated
there. The Anglo-American failure to restrain Japan's occupation of Man-
churia in 1931-1933, indeed, marked the opening phase of the appeasement era,
encouraging Hitler and Mussolini to follow Japan's example. After the Jap-
anese wholesale assault on China began in 1937, the diplomatic parallel between
European and Far Eastern appeasement becomes even more striking. Washing-
ton officials issued a continuous series of statements condenming Japan's activ-
ities, but the United States consistently supplied more than half of Japan's
imports of war materials ; if the British and Dutch empires are added in, the
democracies have supplied more than three-quarters of such imports. In 1940,
despite sharp declines in November and December, we still shipped Japan goods
valued at $227 million, only $5 million less than the 1939 total. Nor have we
ever given adequate aid to China — in munitions, which China needed K.5st,
support by either the United States or Britain has been negligible.
Our continued refusal to embargo Japan (even at the current rate we are
still supplying more than $100,0()0,(KM) worth of goods annually to Japan, includ-
ing the bulk of its petroleum imports) and to give adequate aid to China
(plane shipments are just beginning on a very limited scale) has had the same
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4205
results in the Far East as the policy of appeasing Hitler and Mussolini had in
Europe. It has kept Japan's military machine in good running gear, spread
Japanese aggression from Manchuria to Indo-China, and raised the spectre of
a Japanese onslaught against Singapore, the Dutch East Indies and the Philip-
pines. And once again the Soviet Union, this time by a neutrality pact with
Japan, has sharply dissociated itself from the logical outcome of Anglo-American
policy in the Far East. The pact signifies quite clearly that the U. S. S. R. will
take no part in a Japanese-American conflict, if such a conflict occurs. It means
that the United States cannot expect Soviet assistance in a war against Japan,
any more than Britain has received Soviet assistance it its war with Germany.
The Soviet Union obviously feels that such conflicts have been made possible
as much by British and American support of the German and Japanese aggres-
sors, as by the aggressiveness of the Nazis and the Japanese militarists them-
selves. So far as lies in its power, it is evidently determined not to engage in
them.
For Americans, therefore, the Soviet-Japanese pact constitutes a sharp chal-
lenge— a challenge to think through the implications of our Far Eastern policy.
Some have been quick to say that the pact has freed Japan's hands for an attack
in the south Pacific, and that it thus encourages a Japanese-American conflict.
But if Japan's hands are really free for such an attack, which may be the subject
of some doubt, what has actually freed them? What has spread Japan's aggres-
sion from Manchuria to Indo-China? It is not the neutrality pact signed at
Moscow. It is rather the consistent unwillingness of the United States and
Britain to oppose the spread of that aggression, either by effective embargoes
against Japan or effective aid to China. If Britain and the United States must
now prepare to fight Japan in the Far East, it is because of their own failure to
oppose Japanese aggression in the past — first in 1931, but more especially since
1937.
This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that the U. S. S. R. has been the
single power that has consistently supported China's struggle against the Japa-
nese invasion since 1937, not only by diplomatic notes but in actual deeds. Its
loans to China, considerably larger than ours, have been translated into finished
mimitions for the Chinese armies ; we have been satisfied to send trucks and
petroleum. While our war trade with Japan boomed, the Soviet-Japanese trade
turn-over rapidly dwindled from over 50 million yen in 1936 to a few hundred
thousand yen in 1939-1940. Throughout the period since 1937, the Soviet Union
was making it less possible for Japanese aggression to spread by offering real
and consistent opposition to it. This opposition was not wholly without risk —
it involved severe military confiicts with Japan on the borders of Manchoukuo
in 1938 and 1939. Had we joined hands firmly with the Soviet Union after 1937
in opposing Japanese aggression, we could have long since brought it to a halt.
We have not assumed the lesser risks of firm and unequivocal opposition to
Japanese aggression, but we have accepted the greater risk of permitting it to
spread and offering it aid and comfort in the process. We were loath to see the
threat when Japan merely devastated China ; today we see the threat of our tin
and rubber supplies in southeast Asia quite clearly. The threat exists because
of our policy — American, British and French policy — and not because of a
Soviet-Japanese neutrality pact.
Nor has the Soviet Union, in signing this pact, agreed to give up its policy of
extending aid and support to China. It has notified Chungking that it will con-
tinue to send military supplies to the Chinese armies. This aspect of the neu-
trality pact has, in fact, been sharply attacked by some of the more aggressive
Japanese circles. The recognize the sharp distinction which Moscow has drawn —
a distinction between maintenance of peaceful relations with Japan and its
people, and continued opposition to Japanese aggression in China.
It is this distinction which many supporters of China's struggle in this country
would like to see drawn by the American Government. The American people
have no quarrel with the .Japanese people. But they are distinctly opposed to
Japanese aggression in China, and are anxious to see that adequate American
aid is given to the Chinese people's struggle for freedom. They are not satisfied
that Washington is applying this program with sufficient vigor. Concrete meas-
ures of support for China continue to lag. Complete and unequivocal denial of
American aid to Japanese aggression has yet to be effected. Such a policy is still
the best insurance against a Japanese-American war in the Pacific. Signs of
hesitation on Washington's part, or any remnants of the old feeling that a "deal"
might be arranged with Tokyo at China's expense, would be the surest invitation
to catastrophe.
88348— 52— pt. 12 12
4206 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Chairman, may I consult with my counsel on
this question?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I would like to consult with him as soon as he reads
the article.
Senator Ferguson. You want to consult with him about that
article ?
Mr. BissoN. I want to consult with him about the ]:>roblem that has
arisen at this point in the hearing.
Senator Ferguson. What is the problem?
Mr. BissoN. The material that has just been submitted and the
questions that are presumably to be asked.
Senator Ferguson. If you want to confer with your counsel you
may.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mr. Chairman, I have a few questions to ask after
that point. They are on a different matter. Perhaps we can save time
and get them in while counsel is reading that. The witness can inter-
rupt counsel if he feels at any point he needs to consult him. These
are other matters entirely.
What does the phrase "Corbett group" mean to you ?
Mr. BissoN. How would you spell that?
Mr. SouRwiNE. C-o-r-b-e-t-t — Corbett group.
Mr. BissoN. I have never heard of it.
Oh ! Corbett group.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. That is what I said.
Mr. BissoN. Is that in terms of a Mv. Corbett who wrote a study of
the Institute of Pacific Kelations?
Mr. SouRwiNE. I asked you what the phrase meant to you.
Mr. BissoN. It means nothing to me.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Were vou in Peking, China, in the winter of 1937-
38?
Mr. BissoN. Up to nearly or about the beginning of December,
Maybe I was there the first week in December.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was Mv. John K. Fairbank there at the time you
M-ere there ? The winter of 1937 ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not think so.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you see him there in Peking at that time ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was Mrs. Fairbank there, Wilma Fairbank?
Mr. BissoN. I don't remember.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was Mr. Owen Lattimore there?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Was Mrs. Lattimore there?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you see him ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Frequently?
Mr. BissoN. I would not say frequently ; occasionally.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Socially?
Mr. BissoN. Socially.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was Mr. Eeischauer there at that time?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; he was.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you see him?
Mr. BissoN. I think T saw him once or twice.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4207
Mr. SoTJRWiNE. Socially?
Mr. BissON. Yes.
]\Ir. SouRwiNE. Did you ever attend a meeting of the World Affairs
Council of Northern California?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you attend such a meeting in December of
1949?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. At that meeting, did you do anything indicating
that you favored reorganizing Communist China ?
Mr. BissoN. I would suppose that in a discussion group in the course
of the conference I may have so indicated ; yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you have any memory as to whether you did?
Mr. BissoN. I think I probably did.
Senator Ferguson. Were you in favor of it at that time?
Mr. BissoN. I was. May I extend my answer to that question,
please ?
Mr. SouR^viNE, Surely.
Senator Ferguson. Could I ask one question? What part of No-
vember was it-?
Mr. SouRWiNE. It was December.
Mr. BissoN. December.
Senator Ferguson. Then we were at war.
Mr. BissoN. No; that is exactly the point. We were not at war
with Korea at that time, and at that time there was considerable senti-
ment in favor of a recognition of the Peking government. It was by
no means a limited group that so felt that way about the situation
at that time.
Mr. SouRWiNE. The entire World Affairs Council, or the majority
of it at this meeting was in favor of recognizing Communist China ;
wasn't it ?
Mr. BissoN. I have here a statement of the world trade depart-
ment of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. This appeared, I
suppose, about 2 months before the conference, October 18, 1949.
Under a heading, "Realistic policy in China recommended by cham-
ber," there are these statements :
Adoption of a realistic and positive policy by the United States toward the
Far East, particularly China, in place of the present watchful waiting by the
S'tate Department has been strongly urged by the chamber's board of directors.
Recommendations of the board include first, continued American private busi-
ness and trade with the Chinese as far as possible without dangerously increas-
ing that country's war potential.
(2) Give all possible aid to and continue financial support of American pri-
vately endowed enterprises, educational, medical, and missionary.
(3) Keep open our Embassy and consular offices in China, stafling them with
the ablest personnel available so that we may meet with our best capacities the
serious problems still ahead.
(4) Accept the fact that we may soon have to recognize in such areas as they
control the Communist Government as the de facto government, whether we like
it or not.
This established policy is crystallized in our new recommendations into a
strong, clear position now necessary in the face of indecision of crises.
Recognition of the Chinese Government as the de facto government is essen-
tial. It is thoroughly realistic and necessary. Nothing could be gained by de-
claring an embargo against the Communists.
I merely want to indicate I was not adopting a unique position at
that time.
4208 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
As you have indicated, most of the conference which is now under
reference seemed to favor that policy. The San Francisco Chamber
of Commerce also did.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You recall the question I asked you a few minutes
ago about Corbett?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. I direct you attention to page 253 of our printed
hearings, part 1, where appears the text of a letter dated May 29 from
Edward C. Carter to W. L. Holland, the last paragraph of which
reads :
Last week we had a special meeting on Soviet policy in the Pacific made up of
some members of Corbett's group, but it was an ad hoc meeting. Those present
were: Kathleen Barnes, Lockwood, Grajdanzev, Corbett, Muhle, Bisson, Moore,
Field, James Allen, Bill Carter, E. C. Carter, and Owen Lattimore, and Leaning.
Mr. Bisson. I had completely forgotten that particular meeting.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Does this refresh your memory?
Mr. BissoN. It does.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Tell us about that meeting.
Mr. BissoN. I remember nothing at all about it. If I had remem-
bered anything about it, I think I would have recalled when you first
mentioned it.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know what is meant by "Corbett's group"?
Mr. BissoN. It is still very vague to me.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What can you remember about it ?
Mr. BissoN. Apparently I can only recall what you just stated, that
this seems to be a group that is studying Soviet policy problems.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you remember any of the members whose names
I read there ?
Mr. BissoN. I do know — remember as attending that meeting?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know Kathleen Barnes? '
Mr. Bisson. You are asking do I know these members ?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Do you know a Lockwood ? Would that have been
William Lockwood?
Mr. BissoN. Probably; yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know a Grajdanzev?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Would that have been Andrew Grajdanvev?
Mr. BissoN. Probably.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know Corbett ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. That is why I originally asked you whether this
was Charles Corbett.
Mr. Morris. Was it Percy Corbett ?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know both a Charles and a Percy Corbett?
Mr. BissoN. Not to my knowledge ; no.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know a (Jorbett connected with the TPR?
Mr. BissoN. Yes, it must have been Percy Corbett.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What was his connection with the IPR?
Mr. BissoN. I remember him as doing a study on international peace
problems. Is there any indication he published a book on interna-
tional paths to peace, or something of that kind ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4209
Mr. SouRWiNE. There is no indication right here as to what he may
have published, Mr. Bisson.
Do you know a Mr. Muhle?
Mr. Bisson. I do not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you ever know anyone with that name?
Mr. Bisson. I don't think so.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You appeared to have attended a meeting with him
for the purpose of studying Soviet policy.
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember that person.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know Mr. Moore?
Mr. BissoN. I would have to know his first name. There are lots
of Moores.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Could it have been a Miss or Mrs. Moore ?
Mr. Bisson. It could have been.
Mr. SoTJRwiNE. Could it have been Harriet Moore?
Mr. Bisson. It might have been.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you have any memory as to whether it was ?
Mr. Bisson. I have no memory as to whether it was at that partic-
ular meeting.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know a Mr. Field ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Would that be Frederick Vanderbilt Field?
Mr. Bisson. I would not know.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You have no memory of a meeting ?
Mr. Bisson. Not of this meeting.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know a James Allen ?
Mr. Bisson. Would you spell that?
Mr. SouRwiNE. A-1-l-e-n.
Mr. Bisson. No.
Mr. Sour WINE. You do not know a James Allen?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Apparently you attended a meeting with him.
Mr. Bisson. That meeting has completely passed from my memory.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know a Bill Carter ? ^
Mr. BissoN. I do ; yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Wlio is he ?
Mr. Bisson. I think he is the son of E. C. Carter.
Mr. SouiiwiNE. Do you know Mr. E, C. Carter?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You know Mr. Owen Lattimore ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You know a Mr. Leaning ?
Mr. Bisson. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. To the best of your knowledge, sir, do you know,
or did you ever have any reason to believe, that any of these persons
who have been named as attending this meeting were under Commu-
nist discipline or had voluntarily, knowingly cooperated or collabo-
rated with Community Party members in the furtherance of Commu-
nist Party objectives?
Mr. Bisson. Would you read the list?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Kathleen Barnes.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Lockwood.
Mr. Bisson. No.
4210 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. Grajdanzev.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Corbett.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Miihle.
Mr. BissoN. I don't think I know him.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Moore.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Field.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Bill Carter.
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. E. C. Carter?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Owen Lattimore?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Leaning?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know how many times you met with Mr.
Corbett's group for the study of Soviet policy ?
Mr. BissoN. Would you give me the date of this again?
Mr. SouRwiNE. No ; my question is : Do you know how many times
3^ou met ?
Mr. BissoN. This will help me to answer that question.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you remember whether you met as many as 10
times ?
Mr. BissoN. Could you give me the date of the meeting ?
Mr. SouRwiNE. This was in May 1940.
Mr. BissoN. May 1940?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. To the best of my knowledge, I never attended that
meeting again, that group. If I was at that particular group at that
time, I have no remembrance of being at any other meeting of that
group.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you think you might have attended a meeting
of that group at some other time ?
Mr. BissoN. I doubt it very much.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you attend other meetings for the purpose of
studying Soviet policy ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not. You are speaking of this group ?
Mr. SouRwiNE. No.
Mr. BissoN. No; I did not.
Mr. SouRWiNE. I am trying to find out what could have confused
you in your mind if you did not do it elsewhere and did not do it
here except once, so there should not be any problem for you.
Mr. BissoN. The problem here is vevy simply this : You have given
me an indication that I attended one meeting of this group. When
you gave me that indication, the group meant nothing to me and
it still does not as far as my memory is concerned, and I have no
memory ever meeting with that group again. At that time I was not
in the IPR. I may have been invited on that particular occasion and
may not have been invited to that group again.
I am inclined to thinlj that is the situation, because my memory
is so defective.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4211
Mr. SouRwiNE. I have nothing further on that point.
Mr. Fanelli. Could we take a 2-minute recess at this point?
Senator Eastland (presiding). We will take a 2-minute recess.
(Short recess.)
Senator Eastland. Proceed, Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, have you read this article: The Soviet-
Japanse Pact in Historical Perspective ?
Mr. Bissox. I have looked it over.
Mr. Morris. Are you the author of that article ?
Mr. Bisson. I am.
Mr. Morris. May I read this one sentence here ?
For to those who are willing to look facts in the face, there is nothing mys-
terious or enigmatic about the development of Soviet policy during recent years.
The Soviet-German pact of August 11)39 was a logical resuH of the course taken
by British diplomacy in Europe during the immediately preceding years. Sim-
ilarly, the Soviet-Japanese pact of April 1941 is the logical outcome of British and
American policy in the Far East since 1937.
I introduce that and the whole article, and suggest that the whole
article be placed in the record bearing on the questions addressed to
the witness that he did not support the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939.
Senator Eastland. How long were you with the IPR?
Mr. Bisson. I was with the IPR for 2 years, a little over 2 years?
Senator Eastland. Were you associated with Mr. Field?
Mr. Bisson. May 1 make a correction to a statement he just sum-
marized there?
Mr. Fanelli. Answer the question first.
Mr. Bisson. I think in the summary of his concluding sentence to
which my mind was paying- attention, he said that I said that I had
not supported this pact. I think my original statement was to the
best of my knowledge, which you did not add.
Mr. Fanelli. Answer the Senator's question.
Senator Eastland. Were you associated with Mr. Field ?
Mr. Bisson. I was.
Senator Eastland. Did you know the officials of the institute?
Mr. Bisson. I did.
Senator Eastland. I want you to be perfectly frank. You con-
sidered the institute — and I want you to think before you answer the
question — you considered and so said that the institute was a Com-
munist-dominated organization, did you not ?
Mr. Bisson. I never said anything of that kind.
Senator Eastland. You deny that ?
Mr. Bisson. The Institute of Pacific Relations?
Senator Eastland. Yes. I want you to think now. Think before
you answer. Before you place yourself in the position that you never
made a statement, think.
Mr. Bisson. Have you completed your statement?
Senator Eastland. I want you to answer my question.
Mr. Bisson. To the best of my knowledge in the slightly over 2 years
that I was connected with the Institute of Pacific Relations, I saw no
evidence that it was an organization that was controlled by Commu-
nist influence.
Senator Eastland. You say, "to the best of my knowledge," you saw
no evidence. Is that what you said?
Mr. Bisson. I am prepared to say I saw no evidence.
4212 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Eastland. You also state flatly that you never made the
statement that it was Communist-controlled ?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you go to Yenan in 1937 ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. Were there any prearangements made on that trip,
prearrangements with Communist authorities?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. What arrangements were made ?
Mr. BissoN. May I begin at the beginning ?
Senator Eastland. No, sir; I want you to answer that question.
Mr. Morris. Just tell us about the prearrangements.
Mr. BissoN. Lattimore and I decided we wanted to go to Yenan.
Mr. Snow, who had been in the area and had come out, was in Peking.
We therefore naturally contacted him to see whether there was any
possibility of making contacts that would enable us to get into the
area.
Mr. Morris. Wlien you say "we," you mean you and Mr. Lattimore ?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Lattimore and me.
Mr. Morris. Did Mr. Snow arrange for you to get permission to go
into Yenan ?
Mr. BissoN. I know nothing about the details of what Mr. Snow
did. All I know is that he apparently, through persons that he knew,
received assurances that we could enter the area and so notified us
some 3 or 4 weeks later.
Mr. Morris. He notified you arrangements had already been made
and you did have permission to go into the area ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. He notified you and Mr. Lattimore of that fact ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. How did he notify you ?
Mr. BissoN. He just told us.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, did you meet Mao Tse-tung in your trip
to Yenan ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. Did you have an interview with him ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. Did you write up that interview in Amerasia of Oc-
tober 1937?
Mr. SouRWiNE. What Mr. Morris wants to know is whether this
article in the named issue is one written by you.
Mr. Bisson. Yes ; that is what I am trying to decide at this moment.
Yes, apparently I wrote this interview. But apparently, as it indi-
cates in the foreword there was an interview given to all of us.
Mr. Morris. Did anyone help you in writing this article ?
Mr. BissoN. No; not to my knowledge.
Mr. Morris. Are the facts stated here true, to the best of your recol-
lection?
Mr. Bisson. They are. ^
Mr. Morris. May that be introduced ? "
Mr. Eastland. It will be entered in the record.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 719," and is as
follows : )
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4213
Exhibit No. 719
[Source : Amerasia, vol. 1, September-February 1937-38, pp. 360-365]
Mao Tse-Tung Analyzes Nanking in Interview
(By T. A. Bisson)
Editors' Note. — During the latter part of June, three members of the editorial
board of Amerasia, T. A. Bisson, PhiMp J. Jaffe, and Owen Lattimore made a
trip tosether into tlie Chinese Soviet area in Shensi Province. During a stay
of several days In the capital, Yenanfu (Fushin), they interviewed extensively
most of the inipoTtant political and military leaders. Much of the material
gathered is not yet in sufficiently organized fashion for publication, but the
following interview with Mao Tse-Tung, at the time Chairman of the Revolu-
tionary Military Council, is here presented in the hope that our readers will be
tlie better able to follow the future developments in the now accomplished
united front between the Comnuinist and Kuomintang Parties. The following
interview was written liy T. A. Bisson, though all three of the editors were
present during the interview. Since this interview was given 2 months before
the completion of the united front, its significance becomes more apparent in
the light of such consummation. A discussion of tlie Communist-Kuomintang
rapprochnient is given in another article in this issue. The Far East at the
Crossroads, by P. J. Jaffe.
Question: What has been the evolution of Nanking's policy toward Japnn
since 1931? Is it possible to- distinguish several phases in this development?
Answer : Two periods may be distinguished. The first period began with
September IS, 19.31, and ended with the Kuomintang Second Plenary Session in
July 193G. In this period the Kuomintang continued the policy which it had
really initiated in 1927 ; it depended on imperialisim, made concessions to im-
perialism, and suppressed the people.
After September 18 it gave up M;inchuria unconditionally. Due to the Shang-
hai War the Chinese bourgeoisie were afraid of Japanese imperialism. They
had prepared no defense works at all in the coastal provinces and were ready to
give up these provinces to Japan. During the Shanghai War they prepared
to move to Loyang as the provisional capital, and then to Sian if necessary. Only
after Nanking saw that Japan began the Shanghai War as a means to legalize
the seizure of Manchuria, and that the Japanese troops had no intention of
occupying the coastal provinces, and that Great P>ritain and the United States
made some efforts against Japan — only then did Nanking decide not to move
the capital. So they returned to Nanking, but they were still afraid of Japan
and continued so until after the North Cliina developments in November-Decem-
ber 1935.
In 1935 Japan wanted to occupy North China at once and so frightened Nan-
king that it signed the Ho-Umetsu compromise agreement. This attitude pre-
vailed until the Fifth Congress, in November-December 1935. At tliat time
Nanking continued to say that if peace was still possible it didn't want to fight,
i. e., it was prepared to surrender further.
Only in July 1936, at the Second Plenary Session, did Nanking begin to change
its tone toward Japan. At this session it declared that if Japan would not further
violate Chinese sovereignty, would not take more territory, it would not fight.
Thus it explained the limit of sacrifice it was prepared to make, defining this
as the maintenance of the status quo. The actual steps to represent this change
of line were the negotiations between Chang Ch'un and Kawagoe, when Nanking
rejected the Japanese demands. From 1931 to 1936 this was the first time that
Nanking showed any evidence of a change in its capitulation policy.
Question : Are these periods related to an inner political struggle at Nanking?
If so, what are the main groups involved in this struggle? What social-economic
forces do these groups represent?
Answer : Now we shall consider the reasons for Nanking's change of policy.
Three main factors were responsible for the change :
(1) The anti-Japanese struggle waged by the Chinese people, the patriotic
troops, the Communist Party, and the Red Army. This includes the Manchurian
volunteers, the Nineteenth Route Ai'iuy, Chi Hung-chang's army which fought the
Japanese in Chahar in 1933, the actions of the Red Army, the student movement,
and the National Salvation movement of wide masses of the people.
The Kuomintang thought that Japanese aggression could not be resisted. We
know that the Manchurian volunteers have resisted and are still resisting. The
4214 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Kuoniintang thought that the anti-Japanese movements of the people would give
Japan a pretext to carry its aggressions further. Actually, these actions gave
such serious blows to Japanese inii>erialism that they dared not easily occupy
more territory ; they discouraged and disheartened the Japanese. The Kuomin-
tang thought of the Communists as the eternal, irreconcilable enemy, but did not
look upon Japan as the enemy. So the Kuomintang sought to exterminate the
Communists, but the Communist united-front policy acquired such a great influ-
ence in the country that it forced the Kuomintang to take stock of the success
of this policy. This was the first cause leading to a change in Nanking's policy
toward Japan. From this point the Kuomintang began to realize that in the
people lay the real and whole national strength. Thus it began to feel a little
more bold and courageous, and its fear of Japan was lessened by this movement.
(2) Tlie second factor was the international situation. The sympathy of the
Soviet Union with Cliina in its struggle against Japanese aggression may be taken
for granted. Also the capitalist world is divided into two rival sectors : the one
in favor of peace and the status quo ; the other the Fascist aggressors and pro-
vokers of a new world war. The relative change in British policy in the Far
East also had much influence on Nanking. From these two factors came the
third factor conducive to Nanking's change.
(3) The differentiation in the ruling class and party at Nanking. There are
several groups and cliques, but fundamentally there are two blocs — the pro-
Japanese and the anti-Japanese. This ditTerentiation had already begun in
September 1931. But only with the North China autonomy movement of 1935
did a kind of public opinion form within Kuomintang areas that China must
and could resist Japanese aggression. Formerly this opinion was shared by
only a few persons : now it became more general. At this tinre this opinion
became so widespread that it exerted an Influence on Nanking politics and policy,
having a real effect for the first time.
These three factors, taken together, made the Kuomintang reconsider its
former policy, and obliged Nanking to change from compromise and concession
to resistance.
Question : What groups or individuals at Nanking favor or oppose the united
front? What evidence is there of progress toward the democratization of the
Nanking government? Do you expect further progress along this line in the
near future?
Answer: We come now to the next phase, that of the present and the future.
The change in Nanking's policy, which began during the Chang Ch'un-Kawagoe
negotiations, continued and was clearly expressed in the Third Plenary Session
in February. In this session Kuomintang policy really began to change in
various fields. After this sessicm the Kuomintang's attitude to Japan became
stronger, and a policy of internal peace was formally adopted by Nanking, i. e.,
no civil war. This development was closely related to the policy of the Com-
munist Party, which had long propagated the necessity of centralizing all
Chinese forces to fight Japan.
The most needed thing, however, is a change of Kuomintang policy in relation
to democracy. On this question, Nanking did not resolutely give \w its military
policy, its dictatorship; this change has not been made by the Kuomintang.
This is now the most important task — the realization of democratic reform.
In order to consolidate internal peace and unite the country, democracy is
the most important requisite. Without it the task of resisting Japanese aggres-
sion cannot be achieved. So in this period the mass slogans of the movement
are these: (1) Internal peace; (2) Democracy; (3) Anti-Japanese war — all
under the general slogan of the national united front and a democratic country.
In this second period, the three factors noted above as influencing the Kuomin-
tang's policy will have an increasing influence on the Chinese people. With
the help of these three factors, we can realize the three slogans. As to the
groups opposing the united front, these may be considered under three heads :
(1) On the international side, chiefly Japanese imperialism. But Japan does
not stand alone. Germany is in this Fascist bloc, and also Italy. They want
to induce the Chinese ruling class to join their front. They want China not
only as a colony but also as a force to fight against the peace front. This is
the first menacing factor.
(2) The pro-Japanese clique within the Chinese ruling class, and Trotskyism
in the social sphere. They fought and are fighting against the united front
policy and the three main slogans. This is the second factor of danger.
(3) The danger of irresolute, wavering elements. These exist in the ruling
class and in society ; they agree with the principle of fighting Japan, but not
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4215
with giving democratic rights to the people. Their diflficulty is that they have
a foot on two different boats ; in the end they will either he drowned or else
will stand with both feet on the Japanese lioat. This is the element which
provoked the students to fight at Shih Ta in Peiping on May 4, and which keeps
the National Salvation leaders in prison. Yanc Ta-K'noi of Shih Ta (Peiping
Normal University) is one of these elements.
These three groups occupy virtually the same standpoint. They are opposed
to the united front policy of the Chinese people. Whether the tasks or slogans
can be realized depends on whether the anti-Japanese elements, the democrats
and liberals, all those who are for consolidation can overcome these three kinds
of opponents. If so the slogans can be realized, if not. * * * The outcome
will be decided by the struggle between these two forces.
As to how the struggle between these two is proceeding, it should be observed
that the anti-Japanese front has taken the first steps toward success. The main
feature is that China was prevented from entering the Fascist front, and turned
to the anti-F'ascist front. On this point Japan has been defeated. The Com-
munist Party has done all in its power to prevent China from entering the
Fascist front. This was expressed in the long period of its work before the
Sian coup, in its efforts for the concentration and centralization of all Chinese
forces in the united front. It was also expressed in the peaceful solution of the
Sian incident, instead of exploiting it on the lower plane of trying to create an
advantage for ourselves in the civil war. It was further expressed in the
actions taken by the Communist Party after Sian, directed toward the uniting
of all Chinese forces to fight Japan.
Question : What political advantages w^ere gained by foregoing the possi-
bility of forming a united Northw'estern Army during the Sian incident and
after?
Answee: In the first place, China did not enter the Fascist front. Secondly,
tlie work of unification of all patriotic forces in China to fight Japan achieved
the first step toward success. Only by such a policy can China be saved.
Question : Does not acceptance of Nanking as leader of the national forces
tend to confuse the students and other mass organizations? AVhat lines of action
can be laid down to avoid this difficulty?
Answer : We are convinced that the students and masses will see clearly the
whole situation and will have no doubt of the success of the Communist policy.
The masses will have no doubt about the question of leadership. The leader
depends not on the weight of forces, but by the program and the efforts which
will be made by this leader. The Communist Party does not have its own
partial interest to serve. It only has the interests of the majority of the people,
of the nation, the toiling masses. If the fight will succeed, if Japan is turned
back, if events move in this direction it means that the movement is under the
leader.ship of the Communist Party. The way pointed out by the Communist
Party cannot be obstructed by any kind of force. If the whole nation goes the
way of the Communist Party program, then the iron wall of the enemy front
will be broken. Whether it be Japanese influence, the pro-Japanese groups, or
the wavering elements — one and all will be destroyed by the struggle of the
people led by the Communist Party. The life of these elements will not be long.
We, not they, will have the long life. Our American friends will see the result.
Qi'ESTioN : In the student elections at Yenching after the Sian incident, the
left forces seemed in doubt as to what course to pursue. They did not strongly
contest the election and as a result the reactionary students obtained control of
the higher offices in the union. More recently, a meeting of Yenching student
union delegates, called by the new leadership, voted to withdraw from the
Peiping Student Union.
Answer : Such conditions were the result of one side of the Sian incident.
In the beginning this was an anti-Cliiang-Kai-shek uprising— a feature that
changed only after the efforts made by us. Later it was converted into general
union, under the acknowledged authority of Chiang Kai-shek ; and it was the
Red Army which thus converted mutiny into consolidation. By this move the
Communists did not capitulate, but on the contrary Communist influence and
strength have greatly enlarged over the bigger part of China. At first sight, it
may .seem that Red influence at Yenching has diminished ; but this is not really
true. In point of fact, Red influence and authority are not decreasing but are
increasing in many other cities, places, and universities throughout the country.
Question : May not Britain be strengthening China as against Japan to
prevent war and protect her interests, and by balancing one against the other
utilize them both against the Soviet Union? Could not this also envisage a
4216 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Fascist military dictatorship at Nanlcing that miglit later attempt to crush the
Chinese Communists?
Answer : The strengthening of British influence in China is a contradictory
phenomenon of today. In the fight against Japan, because of China's colonial
position, it is possible for a third Power to strengthen its position in China. Can
it then be said that this is pushing the tiger out the front door and letting
the wolf in the back door? No; that would not be correct. This question must
be treated differently.
Japan cannot be considered as the same imperialist Power as Britain. One is
tied up with the aggressive front, the other is not. To treat them equally would
not be right. If we treated them as equal imperialist Powers, we would in the
end have to light them both, or have to fight all imperialism at once. This would
be wrong and dangerous. It is a conclusion drawn only by Trotskyists, that we
must fight against all imperialists. On its face it seems very revolutionary, but
it really drives Britain to the side of Japan ; it is making a net to catch yourself
with.
The policy of the Communist Party is just the opposite. We must get help
to fight Japan from any country which opposes it. We know from experience
that if China is subjugated by the Fascist Powers, as in the case of Manchuria,
there is little value to be gained from Trotsky's beautiful phrases. As to the
help extended by other imperialist Powers to China, this must be different from
that of the Japanese. The policy of such Powers must be different from that of
Japan. Principally it must differ on this point, that China's sovereignty must be
preserved.
Formerly Great Britain was the leader in the crusade against the Soviet
Union, the holy task of the British.Empire was to fight against Bolshevism. Now
Germany and Japan are taking over this task, and Britain is changing its attitude
toward the Soviet Union. England now adopts a conservative policy of main-
taining its own position. Although Britain does not like the Soviet Union, yet
this situation means Britain cannot like Germany and Japan very much. Of
course, the Anglo-Saxon people have always prided themselves on their freedom
of thought. They can have any kin<l of thought they like, but in the end tliey
must come to the conclusion that it it better to preserve their privileges with
the help of the Soviet Union. Thinking is not always the same as acting.
It is impossible for Britain to establish the kind of Far Eastern balance of
power which you have outlined. It is true that Britain long ago adopted the
balance of power policy and has traditionally followed it. But if two sides of
the balance are unequal, it is necessary to add here and subtract there in order
to achieve a balance. Under contemporary world conditions, any such balance
can only be temporary. In Europe, Britain also wants to establish a balance,
but tlie Fascist I'owers may be depended upon to destroy any balance that is set
up. To help itself, Britain is obliged to help the democratic forces. In some
cases, because of the rapid advance of the Fascist Powers, Britain must utilize
anti-Fascist forces. So it cannot obstruct the growth of the revolutionary anti-
Fascist forces. The policy of compromise, of balance of power, allows the revo-
lutionary forces to grow. The example of France and Spain well illustrates this
process. In these two countries there exist certain pro-Fascist forces, but it is
too dangerous for Britain to permit these elements to get power. Although
England does not like the united-front governments, it must somehow cooperate
with them. There are many contradictions in British policy. Its compromise
procedure also helps the Fascists rise, but the flood of Fascism carries the revo-
lutionary wave up with it and thereby the Soviet boat floats higher.
The same reasoning holds true in the case of China. Britain may wish to
set up a balance in the Far East, but Japan wants to dismember China. To es-
tablish a balance, Britain must adopt the policy of uniting China. If it helps to
unite China, that is good. With the realization of the united front, the uniting
of the country, the cessation of civil war, there is a great opportunity for China's
free development. How can .aou prevent the growth of the Chinese revolutionary
movement under these circumstances?
The situation has some analogy to the position of France in Spain. The
Huangp'u clique faces two enemies — the Conununist Party and Japan. If it
forms an alliance with Japan to fight the Communists, then it plays the part of
Franco. As in SL)ain, there would be a civil war of the revolutionary forces
against the Huangp'u clique, i. e.. Franco. If the Huangp'u clique wants to
fight Japan determinedly, then it must use the unified strength of the Chinese
nation. Then it must unite with the Communist Party. So it cannot obstruct
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4217
the growth of the Communist Party. Either way, the influence of the Communist
Party will increase.
As to a Kuomintang military dictatorship, it is very clear that from September
IS, 1931, to now Nanking has always been a military dictatorship. In the first
period, there was dictatorship plus a pro-Japanese policy. Now that it has
changed its foreign policy, it must also change its internal policy. It is im-
possible for the Kuomintang at one and the same time to suppress the people
and fight against Japan. It may he true that Nanking is not deeply and per-
manently committed to an anti-Japanese policy. There is not yet the anti-
Japanese war, not yet democracy. This can only be a temporary situation. The
present period bears a transitional character : it is passing from one situation
to another. We are now in the midst of this transitional period.
The same holds true in the world at large. So it is possible to ob.serve many
unhealthy phenomena. In China we see the arrest and trial of the National
Salvation leaders, the suppression of the mass movement, the remnants of the
old policy not yet fully given up. On the other side is the struggle of the healthy
trend against" the evil remnants. It is not necessary to be over-anxious be-
cause we can see the other side. Look at the struggle that is going on objectively ;
this struggle is the specific character of this period. If some Kuomintang mem-
bers maintain the old policy and don't want to change, they are free to adopt
this attitude. But the new anti-Japanese, democratic forces are growing up,
and will call a halt to the activities of these people.
Mr. BissoN. May I extend my remarks on this question of the trip
to Yenan ?
Senator Eastlaxd. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. The trip to Yenan was part of a general study of far-
eastern political conditions, I was making that year.
Senator Eastland. Are you reading that?
Mr. BissoN. I am referring to a paper that I have in front of me.
Senator EAS^rLAND. AAlio wrote that?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
It was part of a general field of study of far-eastern political con-
ditions that I was making that year. I was making it under the
auspices of a Rockfeller Research grant given to me as a member of
the research staff of the Foreign Policy Association.
The importance of Yenan in the international and the political
picture of the Far East at that time was very great. The major politi-
cal issue at that time concerned relations between the Nationalists
and the Chinese Communists.
In Japan where I went first, the Japanese were very interested in
this relationship. I was in Japan for 2 or 3 months until the first
part of the year studying political conditions there. I then went on
into Korea for a week or so, then into ISIanchuria for another week
or two and came into north China at sometime toward the end of
March 1937.
I visited the Nationalist capital of Nanking in March to April
1937, and then wanted also to visit the Chinese Communist capital
to complete my study of political conditions in the Far East.
By undertaking this trip to Yenan I was carr^dng through the pur-
pose for which the Rockefeller Foundation made the research grant.
This was one of the vital areas of the far-eastern political develop-
ments at that time and it was necessary for me to visit it if my re-
search trip was to be complete. As a matter of fact, at these inter-
views we were told by the Chinese Communist leaders that negotia-
tions were going on for the conclusion of a truce between the two
sides in fear of a Japanese attack. So that when we came out of
Yenan we were able to confirm reports that up to that time had only
4218 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
been reports and rumors. In other words, I was more sure of my
data on one of tlie more crucial issues in the Far East at this time.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Does that complete your statement ?
Mr. BissoN. Except to say that as a result of this year's field study
I published a book, Japan in China, This is a whole volume. I sug-
gest that the connnittee should indicate that there was not just a trip
to Yenan. This was a general study of the Far East resulting in a
book published 6 or 8 months later.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Will you leave a copy of that book with the com-
mittee for study ?
Mr. BissoN. It is my only copy. It is an out-of-print book now.
Mr. SouRwiNE. We will return it. I know it is out of print.
Mr. BissoN. Yes; certainly.
May I say the war in China broke out during the middle of this year.
It interrupted my trip to South China which I was intending to make
that year. The Japanese occupied North China.
Most of this book was written in manuscript while the Japanese were
occupying Peking. I had to smuggle the manuscript out of Peking
under the eyes of the Japanese and through Japan in order to bring it
home.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I have a few questions, Mr. Chainnan.
While you were in Yenan, did you address a mass meeting?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Who else spoke at that mass meeting?
Mr. BissoN. My remembrance is that Mr. Jaffe and Mr. Lattimore
also spoke.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Philip Jaffe and Owen Lattimore?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Senator Eastland. What was the object of the mass meeting?
Mr. BissoN. The object of the mass meeting was to meet the western
guests and to let the Chinese Army see us and become aware of the
fact that we were among them.
Senator Eastland. You mean the Communist army see you ?
Mr. BissoN. The troops in command is what I am saying.
Senator Eastland. It was a Communist army, was it not?
Mr. BissoN. The Chinese Communist troops ; yes.
Senator Eastland. Say that then. Go ahead.
Mr. SouRwiNE, Was Chu Teh one of the speakers ?
Mr. BissoN. He was.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you recall anyone else who spoke there?
Mr. BissoN. I do not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you speak in Chinese ?
Mr. BissoN. I did not.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you speak in English?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Who translated it for you ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember. It was one of our local inter-
preters.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you see any of the other Caucasians out of Ihe
four who composed your party while you were in Yenan?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; there were two other persons there, Mrs. Edgar
Snow — and one reason why Mr. Snow wanted us to go in was because
he wanted us to bring his wife up. She was there. That was one
reason why we cooperated in making the contacts, _
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4219
The other person there was Agnes Smedley.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Were there many foreigners, foreign to Yenan, non-
Comniiinists?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember any others.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Wasn't the ph^ce full of tourists?
Mr. BissoN. The place was not full of tourists.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you see any missionaries while you were there?
Mr. Bissox. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know Mr. Lattimore had testified before
this committee under oath that there were a lot of tourists around
when you were there ?
Mr. BissoN. A lot of tourists ?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. There were a lot of tourists in
Mr. SouRwixE. Did you know he so testified?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I just wondered if you had known it. You did not
see any missionaries while you were there ?
Mr. .BissoN. I did not.
Mr. SouRwixE. When yx)u left, did anyone give you or any mem-
bers of your party messages to be taken to other persons in other
places ?
Mr. Bissox. I think probably there were messages we took back to
people in Peking.
Mr. SouRWixE. As a matter of fact, communications were very bad
and they crowded around you to try to get you to take messages, did
they not?
Don't accept my word for that. Tell me what happened.
Mr. Bissox. I am not certain of that. I don't remember any crowd-
ing around us. I am willing to say we probably took some messages.
Senator Eastlaxd. Regardless of whether they crowded around
you or not, did a number of people attempt to ask you to carry mes-
sages out for them ?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. SouRwixE. That is all.
Senator Eastlaxd. About how many ?
Mr. Bissox. I suppose two.
Senator Eastlaxd. Then other people contacted other members of
the party, did they not?
Mr. Bissox. Other people ? I am not sure who you mean.
Senator Eastlaxd. Other Chinese contacted other members of your
party to take messages out?
Mr. Bissox. I do not remember the Chinese
Senator Eastlaxd. What did you say at that mass meeting ?
Mr. Bissox. As I remember, I said the same thing I had said in a
meeting at
Senator Eastlaxd. I did not ask you what you said at a meeting
before. Just tell me what you said at that mass meeting.
]\Ir. Bissox. I indicated that the lull in Japanese-Chinese relations
at that time wa?, in my opinion, false : that the Japanese were very
likely preparing an active invasion of China. Therefore, I advocated
that this group and other groups in China should attempt to settle
their differences in order to present a firm and effective defense against
possible Japanese attack.
4220 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
May I extend my remarks? May I amplify what I said?
Senator Eastland. Wait just a minute. I will let you extend your
remarks.
That was the line that the Communists were using then, was it not,
for the Nationalists ?
Mr. BissoN. That was the line most Chinese were using.
Senator Eastland. Answer my question. That was the Commu-
nist line?
Mr. BissoN. That was the line that almost all Chinese were using.
Senator Eastland. Was it the Communist line? Answer the ques-
tion "Yes" or "No."
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Fanelli. Answer the question.
Senator Eastland. Now, you desire to extend your remarks. Do so.
Mr. BissoN. I want to extend my remarks on two points here.
The political issue that was paramount at that period was the issue
"Could China defend herself against Japanese attack if it came?"
Therefore, in my talks in China, wherever it was, that was the cru-
cial problem that I was dealing with. I remember a talk that I gave
in Peking maybe a month or 2 before, before this Peking group. I
think you can verify this to some extent, at least through recollection
in regard to Col. David Barrett, who was the American military at-
tache there, who I remember attended that meeting. He was an old
friend of mine, and we had been in school together.
At that meeting I said, "There is a lull at present. I think it is
deceptive. I think the necessities are that all groups in China get
together."
On that occasion I emphasized particularly the southwestern groups
because there were a couple of groups involved here.
I have one other point ; that is, that while it is true that the Com-
munists were trying to get China united at that time, it is also true
that sentiment all over China was in favor of unity at that time. It
was growling very strong in Nanking. Official policy there was veer-
ing toward
Senator Eastland. I want you to be fair with the committee. Ar-
rangements for you to go into Communist areas were made by Com-
munists. You were one of the few people who got to go into Yenan,
were you not ?
Mr. BissoN. There were
Senator Eastland. You were one of the few Caucasians that got to
go there, were you not ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; although I would not say they were few. There
was a considerable group that went.
Senator Eastland. You testified you only saw two there.
Mr. BissoN. Others went later.
Senator Eastland. Agnes Smedley is one of them. She is buried
in Communist China, is she not?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know.
Senator Easti^nd. You know she is a Communist. You saw a
Communist there. You met the chief or the head of the Conununist
Party in China who is now the dictator of China. They entertained
you and they gave a mass meeting, had a big mass meeting for you to
speak to. To be perfectly frank, you were considered a pro-Commu-
nist, were you not, by the Chinese?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4221
Mr. BissoN. By no means. We were considered as people who had
come in and were visiting that area. They had not seen western people
for many years.
Senator Eastland. They could not get in. "Wliy was it you could
get in ?
Mr. BissoN. Other people could get it if they wanted to get in.
It was not an impossible feat.
Senator Eastl.\nd. It was practically an impossible feat, as you
well know, and if you wanted to be entirely frank, sir, you would
admit it, because you know that is true. It was an impossible feat
except for fellow travelers, those who were considered sympathetic
to communism, whether they were Communists or not.
I am not accusing you of being a member of the Communist Party.
I do not know whether you were or not, but isn't a fact now, that they
considered you sympathetic to their olDJectives in China and let you
in, entertained you and gave a mass meeting for j^ou to speak to?
Mr. BissoN. I am not prepared to say that
Senator EASTLiVNO. Why ?
Mr. BissoN. That they considered us sympathizers.
Senator Eastland. Do you think they would have called a mass
meeting for somebody to make a speech to take issue with the policies
of their government ?
Mr. BissoN. I stand by my original statement.
Senator Eastland. I want you to answer that question, though.
Mr. BissoN. What is the question ?
Senator Eastland. In dictatorships, do they call mass meetings at
which people speak and take issue with the government ?
Mr. BissoN. No. The answer is "No."
Senator Eastland. Of course they do not. Then, if you were not
considered pro-Communist, why did they call a mass meeting for you
to address it?
Mr. BissoN. We were considered guests, western guests who had
arrived.
Senator Eastland. They do not call mass meetings for guests to
take issue with their policies. If they called that for you, it was their
impression that you were sympathetic with those objectives; is that
right?
Mr. BissoN. I see no reason to accept that statement. I was there
as a political observer and so were the others which were entertained as
one might expect outsiders would be entertained.
Senator Eastland. But you certainly do not ask me to believe that
they called mass meetings for foreigners .to address »and by so doing
vouch for those f oreignei*s unless they think those foreigners are sym-
pathetic with their objectives. In fact, that was the object of the mass
meeting, was it not, to help solidify sentiment behind the policies of
the Communist government ?
Mr. Bisson. I do not see that that was the object. The object was
just as much to show the western guests that were in the city at that
time.
Senator Eastland. You have just testified that no dictatorship,
Communist dictatorship would call a mass meeting to be addressed
by a foreigner who would take issue with their government. How do
88348 — 52— pt. 12 13
4222 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
you square that statement that you made a minute ago with your
statements now?
Mr. BissoN. I see no real contradiction. We were not there — I did
not intend to take issue with their policy.
Senator Eastland. Of course you did not intend to take issue with
their policy.
Mr. BissoN. I was willino; to be a friendly guest. I was interested
in observing what I could see. I was not interested in disputing their
policies. What I was anxious to do was to talk to them, to have
them ■
Senator Eastland. You made a speech at the mass meeting and you
are 100 percent right when you say you were not there to take issue
with their policies.
Mr. BissON. I was there to find facts.
Senator Eastland. Wait a minute. Is it not true that mass meet-
ing was called because you were sympathetic with those policies?
Mr. BissoN. No ; I would not accept that.
Senator Eastland. You may proceed.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, did you ever make any protests when
China was attacked by the Connnunists in the period of 1946 and
following?
Mr. BissoN. When China was attacked?
Mr. Morris. When the Cliinese Government was attacked by the
Chinese armies from the north, did you protest on behalf of China
on that occasion ?
Mr. BissoN. I don't understand the idea of the Nationalists
Mr. Fanelli. If you understand the question, answer it.
Mr. Morris. The Nationalist Government was attacked by the Chi-
nese Communists, was it not?
Mr. BissoN. The Communists were perhaps attacked by the Na-
tionalists.
Mr. Morris. You defended your action, your previous association
with Communists, on the grounds that you were interested in the
integrity and the defense of the Chinese Government.
Hasn't that been your defense to your Connnunist associations all
along?
Mr. BissoN. I don't understand that question. I am very sorry
about this.
Ml'. Morris. You do know, however, there was a w^ar between the
Chinese Government and the Communist armies?
Mr. BissoN. There w^as a civil war going on.
Mr. Morris. Did you express any support for the Chinese Nation-
alist Government for the period of 1946 to 1950?
Mr. Bisson. I do not think so.
Mr. Morris. You expi-essed no concern whatever for the Chinese
Government under those circumstances?
Mr. BissoN. I do not think so.
Senator Eastland. Why ?
Mr. BissoN. For nnich of this period, I was in Government service
and could not express an opinion.
Senator Eastl^vnd. When you were in Government service, what
about that?
Mr. BissoN. I do not understand.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4223
Senator Eastland. Yoii say "for miicli of the period I was in Gov-
ernment service and could not express an opinion."
Now, the time you were not in Government service
Mr. BissoN. I was in Government service in 1946 and 1947.
Senator Eastland. The time yon were not in Government service
now.
Mr. BissoN. I was engaged in writing a book in 1947-48 and w^rote
no articles at all at that time, either on Japan or China.
Senator Eastland. Yon were never hesitant to express an opinion
at any other time, were yon?
Mr. BissoN. Senator, what I am trying to say is that on some of
these other occasions, I was regnlarly writing for periodicals when
I was with the Institute of Pacific Relations and when I was with
the Foreign Policy Association.
In these later years I was not in that position. I wrote virtually no
articles. I was either in Government service or writing a book.
Senator Eastland. When is it that a Government official cannot
express an opinion? I thought we had a bunch of pro-Communist
statements coming out of the State Department during that time, pro-
Chinese Communists.
Mr. BissoN. I assure you I could not write articles on the Chinese
political situation from the Government section in occupation head-
quarters. I was not permitted so to write.
The Chairman. From where? You say you were not permitted,
from where ?
Mr. BissoN. I was on duty as an official in General MacArthur's
headquarters in Tokyo in the first part of the period referred to.
The Chairman. You were not permitted to write ?
Mr. BissoN. I was doing official duty, and as a Government official
I was not engaged in writing articles. If I wanted to write an
article
The Chairman. Your answer, which I caught, was you were not
permitted to write. Is that true ? What is the fact ?
Mr. BissoN. Well, put it this way : That a Government official •
The Chairman. You are under oath ; are you not ?
Mr. BissON. Yes. A Government official in that capacity would
not normally b'e writing articles for periodicals. If you say "could he
never write an article ?'' the answer would be that, if he went through
channels and they got special permission and his article was read
properly, that article might be published.
I did not go through any such effort to get an article published at
that time. I was bus_v with my official duties.
The Chairman. You departed from your first answer. You said
in your first answer : "I was not permitted to write."
Mr. BissoN. I do not consider that a departure.
The Chairman. You have left that entirely and you have smudged
that over with another statement.
Mr. BissoN. I do not consider that a departure.
The Chairman. I do consider it a de])arture. Not being permitted
to write is one thing and not writing is another.
Mr. BissoN. A Government official
The Chairman. I am not asking for any answer except to clarify
your first answer.
4224 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Do you want to stand on your first answer, or on the rest that you
have stated ?
Mr. BissoN. Let me state it this way : A Government official did
not normally engage in articles for periodicals. On special occa-
sions he might receive permission. That is the testimony I should like
to make to that question.
The Chairman. Then you want to recede from your first answer
you were "not permitted to write" ?
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Will you tell the committee what your job was at
Tokyo in the period terminating in 1947 ?
Mr. BissON. I was acting as Special Assistant to the Chief of Gov-
ernment Section.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson,*did you negotiate with Mr. Holland in
connection with the possibility of your taking up IPR. work when you
terminated your Government contract at Tokyo ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not so remember. I may have.
Mr. Morris. JNIr. Mandel, will you identify this letter?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a document from the files of the
IPR dated August 21, 1946, addressed to Mr. T. A. Bisson, with the
typed signature of William L. Holland, secretary general. It is a
photostat of a carbon copy of a letter.
Mr. Morris. Do you recall having received that letter ? Will you
read the first paragraph, please ?
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
This is just a note to say hello and to ask whether you have now had enough
of Mac-Arthur and are in a mood to thinlj of IPR work airain. I have been won-
dering whether you have made any detinite plans yet about returning and about
working on any particular project for the IPR. Though there's no great rush
I would be interested to hear your ideas regarding this, so that I can make pre-
liminary arrangements about finances. As you know, I am ready to request
a grant that will enable you to work for 6 months on a project coming within
the general scope of our international research program.
Mr. Morris. Does reading this rather refresh your recollection as
to whether Mr. Holland did write this?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will that be received, Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Eastland. Yes,
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 720" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 720
August 21, 1946.
Mr. T. A. BissoN,
c/o Mrs. T. A. Bisson, 40 Richards Rd.,
Port Washington, L. I., New York.
Dear Art: This is just a note to say hello and to ask whether you have now
had enough of MacArthur and are in a mood to thinli of IPR work again. I
have been wondering whether you have made any definite plans yet about
returning and about working on any particular project for the IPR. Though
there's no great rush, I would be interested to hear your ideas regarding this,
so thai I can make preliminary arrangements about finances. As you know,
I am ready to request a grant that will enable you to work for six months on
a project coming within the general scope of our International Research Pro-
gram. I assume you will want to write on some aspect of .Japanese politics or
economics, but it would be a good idea if you could submit a brief outline of
two alternative studies which I could present to Sansom and the research advis-
ers. I would hope to have the project done under the nominal auspices of the
American Council even though it is financed by the International Research
Fund.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4225
If you preferred to work part-time on some other job, I don't believe there
would be any objections, although we would still hope that you could finish your
report within nine months, and could also make some part of it available in the
form of a Conference paper by April 30, 1947.
Will you let me have your reactions on this?
I wrote Harold Quigley recently suggesting that he with Miriam Farley,
Herbert Norman and yourself might organize an informal study group in Tokyo
to meet occasionally with some of the Japanese who might take the lead in a new
Japanese Council of the IPR. I know you don't have much time for these extra-
curricular activities but I do hope you can lend a hand.
We greatly miss not having more news from you and I wish j'ou could take
the time to write a general newsletter which you could share with your family
and the IPR staff. How about it?
With best wishes.
Sincerely yours,
William L. Holland, Seoretary-General.
P. S. — Under separate cover I am sending you a copy of the announcement.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Mr. H. H. Fisher, of the Hoover Research
Library ?
Mr. BissoN, Yes.
Mr. Morris. Have you had any negotiations with him for employ-
ment ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify this?
Mr. Mandel. It is a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter, the
carbon being taken from the files of the IPR. It is dated May 20,
1947, addressed to Mr. T. A. Bisson, with the typed signature of
William L. Holland, secretary general.
Mr. Morris. I offer you this letter and ask you if you will read the
first paragraph and answer whether or not you can recall having
received this letter. Read that aloud, please.
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
Welcome back to the land of the loyalty tests ! We are all looking forward
to seeing you, and I hope that you can spare us a day or two at the office
before you go on your vacation. I hope you will also take a couple of days to
visit some of the university people at P>erkeley and Stanford. I have written
H. H. Fisher, director of the Hoover Library at Stanford, asking him to see
you and tell you something of his Far East research program. It is possible
that you may see some suitable opening for work there next year. At Stanford,
you might also try to see Claude Buss if he is still around.
Mr. Morris. Can you recall if Mr. Holland wrote that letter ?
Mr. BissoN. I never said I do not recall.
Senator EastLx\nd. Do you recall?
Mr. BissoN. I do.
Mr. Morris. Will that be received?
Senator Eastland. It will be admitted.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 721," and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 721
May 20, 1947.
Mr. T. A. Bissox,
% San Francisco Institute of Pacific Relations,
Jfll Market Street, San Francisco, California.
Dear Art : Welcome back to the land of the loyalty tests ! We are all looking
forward to seeing you and I hope that you can spare us a day or two at the office
before you go on your vacation. I hope you will also take a couple of days to
visit some of the university people at Berkeley and Stanford. I have written
H. H. Fisher, Director of the Hoover Library at Stanford, asking him to see you
and tell you something of his Far Eastern research program. It is possible that
4226 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
you may see some suitable opening for work there next year. At Stanford, you
might also try to see Claufle Buss, if he is still around. At Berkeley, I hope you
will see Woodhridge Bingham and George McCune in the History Department.
George is writing a conference paper for us on political developments in Korea.
If you get time, you might also see Conliffe and Kerner.
Staley may want you to talk to the IPR group in San Francisco and I hope you
can do so. You may not have heard that the IPU in San Francisco is being
amalgamated into a San Francisco World Affairs Council and, as a result, there
is a good deal of bad feeling between the San Francisco and New York offices.
Carter and I will be interested to know what you hear about all this. Tlie main
point of disagreement at present is tlie recent n)ove by the San Francisco people
pressing for a national merger of the American IPK and the FPA plus, possibly,
some other organizations. As you can imagine, there is a good deal of resistance
to the idea from many quarters.
All the best,
Y'ours,
William L. Holland, Secretary-General.
Mr. Morris. You worked for the Board of Economic Warfare; did
you not ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. For what period of time?
Mr. Bissox. For the period from January 1942 to May 1943.
Mr. Morris. What was your assignment there ?
Mr. BissoN. My assignment there was to analyze the economic
weakness and vuhierability of Japan in order to enable advantage
to be taken of such weaknesses as we could detect in conducting the
war against Jaj)an.
Mr. Morris. ^AHiile you worked in the Board of Economic Warfare,
did you supply material to the IPR which you have obtained in your
work for that Board?
Mr. BissoN. While I was working at the Board
Mr. M(jrris. Did you supply the IPR with information and ma-
terial from the Board of Economic Warfare?
Mr. Bissox. I might liave; yes.
Mr. Morris. AVould you tell'us about it?
Mr. BissON. I do not remember any specific details.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, will you identify this letter?
j\Ir. Mandel. This is a photostat of a memorandum from the files
of tlie IPR dated September 14, 1942, headed "MF, WWL from RB,
and AVLH."
Mr. BissoN. May I see that?
]Mr. JNIoRRis. You may see the letter.
Mr. BissoN. This is the photostat that you have just mentioned?
Mr. Morris. I have the photostat. Will you read the first para-
graph ?
Mr. BissoN. (reading) :
Bisson has returned Miriam's interesting draft on recent developments in
Japanese-occupied southeast Asia. Obviously reflecting the line taken in his own
BEW job, he thinks current studies are less valuable than fundamental anlysis
of the prototypes of recent Japanese activity — Manchuria, Inner Mongolia,
north and central China. Such studies, he maintains, would imply current prac-
tices. He and Peake predicted a month ago the Greater F'ast Asia Ministry.
Mr. Morris. Do you know who MF is ?
Mr. Bisson. I should think that would be Miriam Farley.
Mr. Morris. And WWL?
Mr. Bisson. William Lockwood.
Mr. Morris. WLH?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4227
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Holland.
Mr. MoRBis. And RB?
Mr. BissoN. Robert Barnett, I should suspect.
Mr. ]MoRRis. It was the common practice that you know of the IPR
stall" to use initials in exchanging memoranda?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
May I make a comment on this, Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. As I read that first paragraph, and so far as my mem-
ory goes, this was not a case of my sending Government material to
Miss Farley. This was a case of Miss Farley writing a draft about
Japanese developments in southeast Asia.
Mr. Morris. You do recall this particular incident i'
Mr. BissoN. Let me continue.
Mr. IMoRRis. I am not going to direct a line of questions to that, and
it is not related to the previous question.
I do want you to recall the fact that Miss Farley did send a draft to
you.
Mr. BissoN. You have her private memoranda ?
Mr. Morris. That is right.
Mr. BissoN. May I say
Mr. Morris. It has nothing to do with Government, and there is
no indication it has anything to do with BEW material.
Mr. BissoN. I see.
Senator Eastland. Did you send BEW material to Miss Farley?
Mr. BissoN. I did not. That is what startled me.
Mr. Morris. Will you read the last two paragraphs?
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
They have supplied no new information, which is a disappointment, but not
one wiiich should surprise us.
Who is "they"?
Mr. Morris. The first two preceding paragraphs deal with "Peake
and Bisson."
Then the other one says : "On page 14, Peake and Bisson suggest."
The next one reads: ''On page 16, the terms 'rigid' and later 'whole-
sale' seem too extreme to Peake and Bisson."
The last or next to the last paragraph reads :
They have supplied no new information which is a disappointment — but not
one which should surprise us.
Read the last paragraph, please.
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
Bisson says that Jessup has fousht through red tape and succeeded in getting
a whole file of BEW Pattern of Occupation Reports for use at Columbia. Bisson
sees no reason wliy the IPR should not have the stuff, too. The approach should
be made through Jessup who now knows the ropes.
Mr. Morris. I am asking you if that refreshes your recollection, or
whether or not you did supply IPR with BEW material.
Mr. Bisson. 1 did. but I would like to make a comment.
The Chairman. Let's straighten that out, Senator Eastland.
This does refresh your recollection ? That is the question.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
The Chairman. You did furnish the material ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
4228 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Do you have any comment to make ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. The comment is that this was not material that
referred to policy matters. This happened to be a study that I was
making myself. It was merely a collection of Japanese techniques
in regard to occupation documents of all kinds.
When the Japanese were in Manchuria, what kind of documents
came out in terms of their methods of occupying and controlling that
area. The same for other parts of China, for southeast Asia, a tech-
nical series of documents with no comment, no policy recommenda-
tions, no policy treatment here at all.
So, under those circumstances, it would be quite possible for a Gov-
ernment arrangement to be made with a private organization that the
documents go to.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will this document be received in the
record as the document that refreshed the witness' recollection on
that series of questions ?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 722" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 722
(Handwritten:) Barnett
W. Holland
700 Jackson Place NW.,
Washington, D. C, September 14, 19Jf2.
MF
WWL from RB
WLH
Bisson has returned from Miriam's interesting draft on recent developments in
Japanese-occupied Southeast Asia. Obviously reflecting the line taken in his
own BEW job, he thinks current studies are less valuable than fundamental
analyses of the prototypes of recent Japanese activity — Manchuria, Inner Mon-
golia, North and Central China. Such studies, he maintains, would imply cur-
rent practices. He and Peake predicted a month ago the Greater East Asia
Ministry.
From our point of view, his suggestion helps little. We've done most of the
descriptive job. Comprehensive reanalysis calls for staff which even BEW with
its bulging expense accounts cannot snag.
Peake and Bisson made several comments on points of fact. On page 2, they
suggest that the Japanese are less intransigent than they sound and really hope
for a negotiated peace. This is a Gripsholm opinion of considerable generality.
The Japs treated Sassoon tough, Init held out sweet hopes to other businessmen.
On page 14, Peake and Bisson suggest that properties are not confiscated out-
right but expropiated legally and held in trust in accordance with The Hague
rules of war. This is a question of fact upon which they are informed and we are
not. However, as other cases of similar Japanese practices, they cite Japanese
dealings with Chinese owners in China. I cannot agree in the inaportance
which they attach to pro forma practices of the Japanesi\ The test of their
importance would appear when the Japs began to retire for good. Where this
has happened in China, property has been ruthlessly destroyed.
On page 16, the terms "rigid" and later "wholesale" seem too extreme to Peake
and Bisson.
They have supplied no new information which is a disappointment — but not one
which should surprise us.
Bisson says that JcsHup has fought through red tape succeeded in geH:ing a
whole file of BEW Pattern of Occupation Reports for use at Columbia. Bisson
sees no reason why the IPR should not have the stuff, too. The approach should
be made through Jessup who now knows the ropes.
Mr. Bisson. May I be excused for a few minutes ?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
(Short recess.)
Institute of pacific relations 4229
Mr, Morris. Mr. Bisson, while you were in Tokyo, did you meet with
other members of the IPE. in furtlierance of the w^ork of the institute?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. How often did you do that ?
Mr, Bisson. Well, I would say maybe three or four times.
Mr, Morris, Who were the people you met with ?
Mr, BissoN. When Mr, Holland came through, I would meet with
him, I think he came through once or twice — probably twice while
I was there,
Mr, Morris, Who else?
Mr. BissoN. There were also efforts being made to reorganize the
old Japanese Council that had been dissolved by the Japanese mili-
tarists when the war broke out. I remember, it seems to me, attending
one or two meetings where they were trying to get a group together
that would not be an official Japanese Council because they could not,
under the existing circumstances, but they might become an embryo
for development of a new Japanese Council.
Mr. Morris, Did you meet with Miriam Farley for that purpose?
Mr, BissoN, Miriam Farley was also in occupation headquarters.
We probably met.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet with Herbert Norman for that purpose?
Mr. BissoN. We might have, yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. How about Harold Quigley ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes, I should think so,
Mr, Morris, Will you read the fourth paragraph in the letter of
August 21, 1946, that has already been introduced in the record?
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
I wrote Harold Quigley recently suggesting that he with Miriam Farley,
Herbert Norman, and yourself might organize an informal study group in
Tokyo to meet occasionally with some of the Japanese who might take the
lead in a new Japanese Council of the IPR. I know you don't have much
time for these extracurricular activities but I do hope you can lend a hand.
Mr. IMoRRis. Did you meet with members of the Japanese Council ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes,
Mr, Morris. Will you tell us about that ?
Mr. BissoN. The only thing I remember about it is that this group
and some Japanese scholars w^hose names I am sure you will ask and
I do not think I can recall
Mr. Morris. Did you meet with Yanaibara ?
Mr. BissoN. I might have been there.
Mr. Morris, How about Yokota ?
Mr, BissoN, Possibly, yes.
Mr, Morris. Matsukata?
Mr. BissoN. Yes,
Mr, Morris. You knew him well ?
Mr. Bisson, He was one of the members of the old Japanese Coun-
cil of the IPR.
Mr. Morris. You knew Matsukata?
Mr, BissoN, Matsukata,
Mr. Morris, And Saionji?
Mr. BissoN. No, I do not remember him,
Mr. Morris. Did you ever remember meeting him ?
4230 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. I don't remember meeting him in Tokyo. I think he
was at the 1936 Yosemite conference.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify this letter, Mr. Mandel?
Mr. Mandel. Tliis is a photostat of a carbon copy of a letter from
the files of the IPR dated October 8, 1946, addressed to Mr. T. A.
Bisson, Government Section, SCAP, APO 500, care of Postmaster,
San Francisco, Calif., with the typed signature of William L. Holland,
secretary general.
Mr. Morris. I offer you this letter and ask you if you will read
aloud the first paragraph of this letter ?
Mr. BissoN. I was trying to take a look at the letter.
Mr. Morris. If you read it aloud, it may refresh your recollection
and we will not lose time.
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
I am most gi-ateful to you for your letter of September 22 containing the very
intei'esting report on recent developments in the .lapanese IPR. On the whole
the group strikes me as a very able and progressive one and I hope very much
that you can unofficially convey my warmest good wishes to them (particularly
to Yanaibara, Yokota, Matsukata, and Saionji) . Will you also please tell Matsuo
that I hope he can write me more frequently and let me know if there is any way
we can assist the new group ; e. g., by supplying more IPR publications.
Mr. Morris. Does that letter refresh your recollection as to the fact
you did meet with these Japanese in the formation of a Japanese Coun-
cil of the IPR?
Mr. BissoN. I think I indicated in every case, except Mr. Saionji,
whom I did iiot remember, that I had met with them. Obviously
I did.
Mr. Morris. You did that work regularly for the IPR ?
Mr. BissoN. Regularly.
Mr. Morris. Tell us how frequently you did it.
Mr. BissoN. This was one operation to get this group restarted.
We may have had one or two meetings about it. It was not a regular
thing. That is why I objected to the term "regular."
Mr. SouRWiNE. There was not anything irregular about it?
Mr. BissoN. It was irregular rather than regular. So far as the
meetings were concerned on this project, that is.
Mr. Morris. Was the purpose of the committee to determine the
extent to which you did need these people because very often the files
do not show?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will this be received ?
Senator Eastland. It will be received.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No, 723" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 723
October 8, 1946.
Mr. T. A. BissoN,
Oovcrninent t^iection, S. C. A. P.,
APO 500, c/o Postmaster, Smi Francisco, Calif.
Dear Art : I am most grateful to you for your letter of September 22 con-
taining the very interesting report on recent developments in the Japanese IPR.
On the whole the group strikes me as a very able and progressive one and I hope
very much that you can unofficially convey my warmest good wishes to them
(particularly to Yanaibara, Yokota, Matsukata, and Saionji). Will you also
please tell Matsuo that I hope he can write me more frequently and let me know
if there is any way we can assist the new group, e. g., by supply more IPR
publications.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4231
I am interested to hear of the symposium on current problems and hope you
can arrange to supply me with two or three copies of the various chapters as
they are completed. Are they to be in Japanese or in English, and if the latter,
will any arrangements be made to publish them in Japan?
I would like you to convey to the new group my earnest hope that they will
make an early start on one or two projects of fundamental scholarly research,
preferably not too closely relafed to immediate political issues. You might point
out that the chances of readmittance to the IPR will be greatly improved if they
can demonstrate that they are conducting a scholarly research program by well-
qualified people. Though I can make no promises at this moment, it is con-
ceivable that we might be able to give some financial assistance next year for
an important piece of research subject, of course, to the necessary approval of
SCAP. You will know better than I what subjects are feasible after discussing
the matter witli the group — but you and Herb Norman and Andrew might keep
in mind the standing economic history of Japan (or, alternatively, of Japan since
1868). There may be other noteworthy studies in Japanese sociology, economics,
or give some consideration to the possibility of completing, perhaps in modified
form, one or two of the older Japanese Council projects in the International
Research Program. For instance, Nasu's studies on Japanese agriculture and
on rural standards of living were never really completed to a point where he
felt justified in printing it in English, though we did put out a mimeographed
edition. I fully realize that Nasu may not be the right man now to continue the
study, but it should be possible to make some arrangement to bring it more up
to date by including a few chapters on the principal agriculture developments
during the war years, and also by revising the existing study (parts of which
were censored by the authorities in 1941). This is something which you might
discuss with Andrew so that there would be a minimum of overlapping with his
own study of Japan's agriculture. Another possibility that strikes me as prom-
ising would be a book of writings on Japanese agrarian problems during the
past decade, somewhat along the lines of Agrarian China, prepared by Chen
Han-seng some years ago.
Another unfinished project which could be considered was one on the Japanese
family system ; in view of the fact that we have recently published Olga Lang's
book on the Chinese family, it would be interesting to have a corresponding study
from Japan based either on the original project or on some other outstanding
Japanese book in this field.
Quigley may also have some suggestions for work in the field of political science
and diplomatic history, but this may get too much into the field of political
controversy.
Sincerely yovirs,
William L. Holland,
Secretary General.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Bisson, did you ever meet with Tung Pi-wu?
Mr. Bisson. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will voii tell us the circumstances? Who was Tung
Pi-wu?
Mr. Bisson. He was one of the older members of the Chinese Com-
munist group at Yenan. He was there when we were in Yenan.
Mr. Morris. Did he come to the United States later on ?
Mr. Bisson. He did.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet him at that time ?
Mr. Bisson, I probably met him in New York ; yes.
Mr. Morris. What was he doing in New York?
Mr. Bisson. He was attending the founding conference of the
United Nations as the Chinese Communist delegate officially
recognized.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us the circumstances of your meeting with
Tung Pi-wu in New York ?
Mr. Bisson. As well as I remember, he came along with a couple
of other Chinese who were with him, his aides or something, to the
IPR, and we had a chat with them. We may even have had lunch with
the group, I am not sure as to whether we went to lunch.
4232 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Did you discuss the interest of China with him ?
Mr. BissoN. I have no recollection as to what was actually discussed
at that time. It probably concerned his operations at the United Na-
tions Conference and what he thought of the founding conference.
Mr. Morris. What did he think of it ?
Mr. BissoN. His aspects of his trip to the United States, and so on.
Mr. Morris. What did he think of it?
Mr. BissoN. I say it probably concerned that. I wouldn't remember
the details.
Mr. Morris. Are they the only times you met Tung Pi-wu in New
York?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever give an expression of support to Ernst
Thaelmann ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us the circumstances ?
Senator Eastland. Repeat that, please.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever give an expression of support to Ernst
Thaelmann ? Who was he ?
Mr. BissoN. He was an imprisoned German Communist leader.
Senator Eastland. He was the head of the Communist Party in
Germany, was he not ?
Mr. BissoN. He was imprisoned.
Senator Eastland. But before he was imprisoned he was the head
of the Communist Party in Germany ?
Mr. Bisson. Before he was imprisoned he was.
Senator Eastland. He had been a candidate for president of the
Communist Party in Germany, had he not ?
Mr. BissoN. He had.
Senator Eastland. Proceed to answer the question.
Mr. Morris. Did you join in an expression of support to him?
Mr. BissoN. I would not answer "Yes" to the question as so
expressed.
Senator Eastland. What did you do?
Mr. BissoN. On that occasion, as I remember the details, the daugh-
ter of the Socialist Prime Minister of Norway was coming to this
country to ^conduct a general campaign to gain popular support for
freeing a political prisoner held by Hitler. I went as a member of
a group to receive her when she came to this country.
Senator Eastland. Who was the political prisoner ?
Mr. BissoN. The political prisoner was Mr. Thaelmann. He was
one of the victims of Hitler's tyranny.
Senator Eastland. He locked up a Communist agitator who was
attempting, by revolution, to overthrow his government and set up
a Communist dictatorship that was subservient to the Soviet Union.
Mr. Fanelli. There is no quesion there.
Senator Eastland. Yes, there is.
And you expressed your support of him ; is that right ?
Mr. BissoN. Not quite in that way.
Senator Eastland. You know you expressed your support of him,
regardless of "not quite that way"?
Mr. BissoN. I expressed my support of a campaign to get him out
pf jail under the Hitler regime.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4233
Senator Eastland. So he could set up a Communist government m
Germany ?
Mr. BissoN. That is your interpretation, Mr. Senator.
Senator Eastland. Is it not yours? Was that not what you
wanted ?
Mr. BissoN. I was primarily concerned that this was a symbol of
political oppression by the Nazis in Germany.
Senator Eastland. Who else did you intercede for? Hitler had
thousands of political and racial persecutees in jail in Germany. Did
you intercede for any of the others ?
Mr. BissoN. I was generally opposed, yes, to all of them.
Senator Eastland. Answer my question. Did you intercede for
any of the others ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. Who ?
Mr. BissoN. So far as I remember I was
Senator Eastland. Who was it you interceded for ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know a specific name.
Senator Eastland. He had Catholic leaders in prison. Did you
intercede for any of them ?
Mr. BissoN. Not that I know of.
Senator Eastland. He had leaders of the extreme right in prison.
Did you intercede for any of them ?
Mr. BissoN. Not that I know of, not by name.
Senator Eastland. Of course you did not. He had racial persecu-
tees in prison. Did you specifically intercede for any of them?
Mr. BissON. Not for a specific individual.
Senator Eastland. You did intercede specifically for the head of
the Communist Party in Germany ; did you not ?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Senator Eastland. Of course you were not a Communist sympa-
thizer and were not pro-Communist. You deny all that?
Mr. BissoN. I do.
May I say in extension of my remarks here that so far as I remember
1 engaged on occasion in general acts against the Hitler tyranny.
Senator Eastland. Of course you did. All Communists did.
Mr. BissoN. This happened to be one instance.
Senator Eastland. All Communists did that, but no Communist
would intercede for the release of the Catholic leadership which was
anti-Communist. No Communist would intercede for the release of
the leaders of the extreme right like Count von Plettenberg who were
in prison. All the Communists all over the world interceded for the
release of Ernst Thaelmann so he could get up a government.
I may say you were following the regular Communist line as laid
down by Moscow. You say you are not a Communist. Maybe you
are not.
Mr. BissoN. May I comment that this campaign was after all headed
by a Social Democrat personage, the daughter of the Socialist Prime
Minister of Norway.
Senator Eastland. That is the Communist strategy all over the
world, to put some Social Democrat out in front. All the front or-
ganizations in the country had some big name that did not know
what was happening behind the scenes. But I cannot understand
that when the chips were down that you always turned ujp on the Red
4234 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Side of tilings. I cannot understand if you were not a Communist how
you were used.
Mr. BissoN. The point I am making here is people of all political
persuasions were against this political imprisonment. They operated
for all of them.
Senator Eastland. Yes; but it is very strange that you just picked
out of all of them that Communist leader to specifically help.
Mr. Morris. Do we have any document that reports the fact that
Mr. Bisson did in fact support Ernst Thaelmann, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. I have here a publication called International Press
Correspondence which has previously been identified as the official
organ of the Communist Internationale. It is volume 15, No. 50, dated
October 5, 1935, and on page 1263 is an article entitled "The World-
Wide Campaign for Thaelmann," which publicizes the activities of
the international release committee which is working for the release
of Thaelmann there appears as a member of the committee the name
of Bisson and Field.
I offer this page for the record.
Mr. Bisson. Was that committee lieaded by Soiiya Branting?
Mr. Mandel. All the names are given.
Mr. Bisson. She was the daughter of the Socialist Prime Minister.
Senator Eastland. That is the alibi to hide behind if it is charged
it was a Communist set-up. It will be ])laced in the record.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 724" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 724
The World-Wide Campaign for Thaelmann
We have received the following statement from the International Release
Committee :
In all parts of the globe, even the most remote, the struggle for tlie release o£
Thaelmann is on the increase. New gronps of trade-unionists, intellectuals, new
great organisations and factories take the fate of the menaced German fighters
for peace into their protecting hands.
The two great Congresses of French trade-unionists, that of the C. G. T. and
of the C. G. T. U., adopted resolutions of protest against the imprisonment of
Thaelmann, Mierendorff, Ossietzky, Brandes, and Maddalena. Jouhaux, the
well-known French trade-union leader, declared at the opening of the C. G. T.
congress that Caballero and Thaelmann are to be elected as honorary chairmen
of this great congress. Many hundred union and branch secretaries of the two
congresses, representing the French trade-union movement, which is now march-
ing in a united front, signed a protest and demanded the release of Thaelmann,
Mierendorff, Claus, Kayser, and of the thousands of imprisoned ti'ade-unionists
captured in the illegal struggle for the trade-unions in Germany.
In the United States of America the well-known Swedish lawyer, Sonia Brant-
ing, daughter of the former Swedish Prime Minister, Hjalmar Branting, is tour-
ing the country on behalf of the International Thaelmann Release Committee.
Prominent American intellectuals have formed a Branting reception committee
and are organising a campaign of meetings, lectures, and conferences all over
the country. The committee includes ,Tudge Anna Cross : Bisson, Secretary of
the Committee on Foreign Relations; Field, director of the Institute; the lawyers
Hays, Ernst, and Lucile B. INIilner. The leader of the Socialist Party of the
United States, Norman Thomas, a leading figure in American public life, has
quite recently agreed to sit on the committee. The American press featured the
first lectures of Sonia Branting in extensive articles.
The "New York American" pointed out that Sonia Branting was well-acquainted
with conditions in Germany as she had been a delegate to the recent penal reform
congress lield in Berlin and had received a lasting impression of the level to
which the administration of .iustice had sunk in Germany. The "New York
Post" reported a lecture of Sonia Branting at length. She had especially stressed
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4235
the barbarism of the methods of sterilisation, a procedure even applied as a
punitive measure to political opponents. Sonia Branting drew a tn7e picture of
the German machinery of justice which olieys the commands from above and
which will judse Thaelmann at just such commands from above. The "New
York Times," in reporting a lecture of Miss Branting, quotes the attitude of the
speaker to the coming Olympic Games, which are to be held in Germany. The
paper points out that nonparticipation in the Olympic Games is an act of protest
against the persecution of opponents in the Third Reich and would be an act of
sympathy on the part of the civilised world for the men and women humiliated
and toriuented in Germany. The "New York Tribune" writes that Miss Branting
received a telegram from leading French writers and journalists, asking her to
form a release committee in the United States for the liberation of Thaelmann
and all other imprisoned anti-fascists.
On October 5 a great Thaelmann meeting will be held in Yorkville. Sonia
Branting and a number of other prominent speakers will speak. On October 17
a great iianquet will be held with the participation of men and women prominent
in the intellectual life of New York. Sonia Branting will speak. The great mass
meeting on October 25 will to a certain extent be a culminating point. It is to
be held in New York for the release of Thaelmann and of all German anti-Nazi
prisoners. The mass movement against the Nazi terror in the United States
has already provoked the New York Nazis to outbursts of impotent rage and
provocative tlireats. They have announced that they would organise counter-
demonstrations. But the rising anti-Nazi feeling in the United States will nip
in the bud the provocative plans of the Hitlerites, especially after the tremendous
success of the Bremen affaii'.
Even in the distant i.slands of New Zealand a wide mass movement is in
progress on behalf of Thaelmann, Mierendorff, Ossietzky, etc. A great confer-
ence of trade-unions, peace societies, and student clubs adopted a resolution
demanding the release of Thaelmann, held in custody unlawfully for nearly
three years, the release of all other anti-Nazi prisoners, and the cessation of
the persecution by the Hitler regime of political and religious opponents.
A delegation of' three handed the German consul, Herr Penseler, a copy of this
resolution on behalf of the working population of New Zealand. The consul
declared that his government had informed him that Thaelmann was being
"decently treated." He promised to forward the resolution to the Hitler govern-
ment.
The New Zealand committee of the Movement Against War and Fascism has
addres.sed a mass appeal to the workers, trade-unionists, and farmers of New
Zealand.
In Spain the popular movement for the release of Thaelmann has been con-
siderably Intensified during recent weeks. A committee composed of intellec-
tuals and representatives of various parties appointed September 14 as Spanish
Thaelmann Day. A public meeting was held in one of the largest halls of Madrid
which holds 5,000 persons. Over 15,000 people came to buy tickets. Representa-
tives of the Radical Party, of the Repulil leans, of the Socialists, and a number
of non-party intellectuals spoke. A unanimously adopted resolution demanded
the release of Thaelmann and of the Imprisoned German anti-fascists.
On the same day a mighty mass demonstration took place in Valencia, in which
a number of representatives sent by other Spanish cities were present, and here
as well as in Madrid the speakers included representatives of all progressive
parties.
In five cities of the Balearic Islands mass demonstrations were held on the
same day demanding the release of Thaelmann.
In almost every Spanish prison the political prisoners celebrated Thaelmann
Day in their own particular way. About fifty letters came out of the prisons,
fifty letters representing the result of discussions between thousands of captive
workers. In these letters tlie prisoners, themselves victims of the terror, express
their indignation at the barbarians now ruling Germany and demand the release
of Thaelmann.
A campaign has been undertaken in Spain to get five million signatures for a
petition to release Thaelmann. In Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Seville, etc.,
one sees posters and stickybacks everywhere demanding the release of Thaelmann.
The Spanish Legal Commission of Inquiry into the Thaelmann Trial, whose
chairman is Victoria Kent, the well-known lawyer, recently adopted a resolution
protesting again.st the further imprisonment of Thaelmann. The resolution was
signed by the following jurists, all practising at the Madrid bar : Viktoria Kent,
Luis Zubillaga, Enrique Porua, Francisco Lopez, de Goispechea, Benito Pavon,
4236 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
E. Ortesa y Gasset. A delegation presented this petition of protest to the German
consul in Madrid. A great number of Spanish newspapers printed the text of
this petition and declared their sympathy with the demand for the release of
Thaelniann.
In the Scandinavian countries the campaign against the Hitler terror is making
good progress. In Norway a release committee for the liberation of German
anti-fascists is in the course of formation. Prominent scientists and writers,
teachers' organisations, Socialist student clubs, and intellectuals have expressed
their willingness to cooperate with the committee. In September the Oslo
"Dagbladet" published a lengthy article on the scandalous sentence passed on
Glaus and Kayser. Various individuals prominent in public life have addressed
an open letter of protest to Hitler, demanding the rescinding of the death sentence
passed on Glaus and Kayser. The whole action and the names of the leading
personalities participating in it was described in a detailed communique issued by
the official Norwegian news agency.
A world-wide movement is now on foot to free the German fighters for liberty,
who are now threatened by death ! The liberation of Dimitrov and the release
under duress of Berthold Jakob have shown that only the mighty pressure of inter-
national public opinion can save our courageous and tormented brothers. The
trial of the 25 anti-fascists of Neu-Koelln, now in press in Berlin and revealing
the barbarous methods employed by German justice, has warned the workers of
the whole world that our menaced comrades are in deadly danger. Thus in this
Berlin trial, which is ultimately intended to bring Thaelmann's head under the
axe, a number of perjuries, the falsification of sworn statements and false testi-
mony by bribed Nazi witnesses have already been proven beyond a doubt.
Although the world is already in motion against the horrors of the Hitler
regime, those harbingers of the horrors of the coming war — this movement is as
yet only a start. Only if it is tremendously increased can Ernst Thaelmann and
the other hostages of the Nazi war polic.v be wrested from the clutches of the
fascist incendiaries and warmongers and restored to liberty.
(English Edition, Internationl Press Correspondence, vol. 15, No. 50, 5th Octo-
ber, 1935, p. 1263. )
Senator Eastland. Who approached yovi to become a member oi
that committee ?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know anyone approached me.
Senator Eastland. You jvist vohmtered?
Mr. BissoN. I may have discussed it with Mr. Field.
Senator Eastland. In fact now, to be frank, Mr. Field got you to
become a member of that committee, did lie not ?
Mr. BissoN. I may have <jotten Mr. Field to become a member of
the committee. We were seeing each other in terms of our far-eastern
work at that time.
Senator Eastland. You and Freddie Field, of course.
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Field was then in the IPR.
Senator Eastland. I understand he was.
Mr. BissoN. I was in the Far Eastern Policy Association. We
were both interested in far-eastern matters both officially and other-
wise.
Senator Eastland. I understand Mr. Field was in other things, too.
How did you get your job with the Board of Economic Welfare?
Mr. BissoN. To the best of my knowledge
Senator Eastland. Wait a minute. Why say "To the best of my
knowledge" ? You know very well who recommended you for a place
on the Board of Economic Warfare.
Mr. BissoN. I don't know. I don't remember specifically.
Senator Eastland. What is the best of your knowledge?
Mr. BissoN. I would probably have had support from the head of
the Foreign Policy Association, Maj. Gen. Frank R. McCoy.
Senator Eastland. But you don't know you did?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4237
Mr. BissoN. He was my official superior in the organization that I
was working with.
Senator Eastland. Did yon know him ?
Mr. BissoN. How could I help but know him. He was my superior.
He was the president of the Foreign Policy Association. I was a
member of the research staff there. I feel sure that I have a recom-
mendation from him for that position.
Senator Eastland. Did you have a recommendation from Mr. Field ?
Mr. BissoN. I might have.
Senator Eastland. What about Mr. Earl Browder?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Eastland. Do you know Mr. Browder ?
Mr. BissoN. I have met him.
Senator Eastland. Where did you meet Earl Browder ?
Mr. BissoN. We spoke on the same lecture platform.
Senator Eastland. Where ?
Mr. BissoN. In New York.
Senator Eastland. Whgit lecture platform was that?
Mr. BissoN. I think it was a meeting that was concerned with the
magazine China Today.
Senator Eastland. What about Jack Stachel? Did you know
him ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember knowing him.
Senator Eastland. You don't remember knowing him?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Eastland. Have you been in Browder's office?
Mr. BissoN. Have I ?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I have not.
Senator Eastland. Where did you speak ; in Union Square ?
]Mr. BissoN. I do not remember. I expect it was in some restaurant
or dining place.
Senator Eastland. In some restaurant ?
Mr. BissoN. It was an evening, as I remember, an evening engage-
ment. We probably had dinner first and then we had speeches.
Senator Eastland. Yon and Browder had dinner and had speeches.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Is that the occasion that there has been testimony
about here already ?
Mr. BissoN. I am a little confused as to exactly which meeting
that has reference to.
Mr. SouEwiNE. How many meetings did you ever speak at with Mr.
Browder ?
Mr. BissoN. It is this China Today meeting.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Answer the question.
Mr. BissoN. One.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Only one ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That is the one we have had testimony about?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You think that was in a restaurant?
Mr. BissoN. That was my recollection.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you have a memory of speaking with Browder
at some time with him in a restaurant ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 14
4238 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. No ; I do not have any specific memory.
Senator Eastland. The tickets for that banquet were sold by New
Masses and the Worker Book Shop, which was a Communist head-
quarters, were they not ?
Mr. BissoN. A Communist headquarters?
Senator Eastland. Yes; 50 East Thirteenth Street. Is that not
Communist headquarters?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know. Not to my knowledge.
Senator Eastland. You do know New Masses was a Communist
Party publication ?
Mr. BissoN. I do.
Senator Eastland. I will tell you now that the tickets for this lec-
ture that you made with Mr. Browder were sold at the Communist
Party headquarters and New Masses. Was Mr, Hansu Chen present ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; I think he was.
Senator Eastland. He was a Communist?
Mr, BissoN. I have no reason to know he was.
Senator Eastland. He was one of the speakers who appeared with
you and Browder ; was he not ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. As a matter of fact, to be perfectly fair, Chen
is a Communist?
Mr, BissoN, I know him as such today.
Senator Eastland. You know him as such today. Frederick Field
was a speaker also ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. There was Bisson, Browder, Field, and Chen
who were the speakers?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. They were all Communists but you ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not say that.
Senator Eastland. You just said you knew Chen was a Communist.
You know Earl Browder is a Communist?
Mr. BissoN. It was not clear at that time what is clear today.
Senator Eastland. Do you mean to say it was not clear to you that
Earl Browder was a Communist ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; but I am speaking of the other two individuals,
Mr. Field and Mr. Hansu Chen.
Senator Eastland. It was not clear to you Freddie Field was a
Communist ?
Mr. BissoN. Not at that time ; no.
Mr. ^loRRis. When you worked for tlie Board of Economic Welfare
did you testify before tlie House Un-American Activities Committee?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. To what extent did you testify before the House
committee ?
Mr. Blsson. I am not sure what you mean "to what extent."
Mr. Morris. How frequently did you testify?
Mr. BissoN. I was called before them once. -
Mr. Morris. Did you have a second appearance ?
Mr. Bisson. I do not think so.
Mr. IMorris. Was there a planned second appearance ?
Mr. BissoN. Not that I know of.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4239
Mr. Morris. Did you discuss with IPR confreres of yours the pos-
sibility of having a second appearance before the Dies committee?
Mr.BissoN. I may have. I clon't remember.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us what eft'orts you made in order to clear
yourself before the Dies committee? Did you ask the IPR to help
you ?
Mr. BissoN. I may have. As I remember, there was a counsel of
the BEW at that time and I can't remember his name, but it seems
to me he gave us some help and came along to the session with me.
Mr. Morris. The counsel to the Board of Economic Warfare went
to the hearings?
Mr. BissoN. This particular person.
Mr. Morris. What is his name?
Mr. BissoN. I cannot recall his name.
Mr. Morris. To what extent did you ask the IPR to help you in
your appearance before that committee and before the
Mr. BissoN. To my knowledge very little. My chief efforts were
getting help from the agency with which I was connected.
Mr. Morris. You did, however, have the IPR to help you?
Mr. BissoN. I may have. I do not recall.
Mr. Morris. Will you identif v this letter, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. This is a letter on the letterhead of "353 Willard
Avenue, Chevy Chase, Md." It is a handwritten letter addressed to
"Dear Mr. Carter" and signed "T. A. Bisson." Date, April 26, 1943.
Mr. Morris. Was that letter taken from the files of the Institute
of Pacific Relations ?
Mr. JNIandel. It was.
Mr. Morris. Will you read that letter, please ?
Mr. Bisson (reading) :
Dear Mr. Carter: I appreciate very mucli your generous assistance on the
moving: expenses, whicli will ease things up for us on the transfer very materi-
ally. If our dates work out, I should be ready to take up my new duties on
June 2 or 3.
Thanks very much for sending me the copy of Buell's characteristic letter. I
find the BEW appropriation bill has just gone in, so I may still liave to run the
gauntlet here early in May before the Kerr committee.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, may that go into the record ?
Senator Eastland. Yes, sir.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 725" and was read
in full.) :.-
Senator Eastland. What was the Kerr committee ?
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, do you have any recollection of that
committee?
Mr. Mandel. The Kerr committee was a special committee of the
House of Representatives, a subcommittee of the House Appropria-
tions Committee which at that time dealt with loyalty cases.
Senator Eastland. Did you write this letter ?
Mr. Bisson. I did.
Senator Eastland. What do you mean "so I may still have to run
the gauntlet of the Kerr committee"?
Mr. Bisson. It means I would have to appear before the Kerr
committee.
Senator Eastland. Does it not mean more than that? Does it not
mean there was a probability in your mind your loyalty to your coun-
try might be questioned ?
4240 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. It was a security test ; yes.
Senator Eastland. That was in April 1943, April 26, while this
country was at war with Germany and Japan. Did you not mean
here "So I may still have to run the gauntlet here early in May before
the Kerr committee" that you thought your loyalty to your country
might be questioned ?
Mr. BissoN. It might be questioned; yes. It still remained to be
proved.
Senator Eastland. I understand that, but you thought conditions
were such that your loyalty might be questioned. Why did you think
your loyalty might be questioned? You were bound to have known
the reasons that would cause them to question your loyalty to your
country.
Mr. BissoN. There was a group of 12 or 15 BEW individuals who
were undergoing this scrutiny. Several of them appeared before
the Dies committee.
Senator Eastland. How did you know you would be called?
Mr. BissoN. Some of them had been called and therefore I as-
sumed I would be called, too.
Senator Eastland. Why did you assume you would be called?
Mr. BissoN. I was among the group that was being investigated
and they were dealing with us in a more or less similar way.
Senator Eastland. What had you done?
Mr. BissoN. Nothing.
Senator Eastland. What was the accusation against you? Why
were they investigating your loyalty?
Mr. BissON. I would not know.
Senator Eastland. You are bound to know. On what basis were
the others being questioned as to their loyalty?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know the details.
Senator Eastland. You do not know the details? You say that
you knew they were investigating others, Mr. Bisson. Is that true?
Mr. BissoN. That is true.
Senator Eastland. How did you know they were investigating
them? From talking to them?
Mr. BissoN. The names were generally known.
Senator Eastland. You had talked to them about their appear-
ances, had you not?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; although I remember no specific individuals
that I talked to.
Senator Eastland. Of course if you talked to them about their ap-
pearance before the committee, you certainly knew that the basis was
that their loyalty was being questioned ?
Mr. BissoN. When I talked with them we were primarily concerned
as to what the situation would be before the committee.
Senator Eastt.and. You know very well that if you asked a man
about his appearance, you asked him on what grounds they were ques-
tioning him. Didn't you do that?
Mr. Fanelli. The answer is yes or no. You either did or did not.
Mr. BissoN. I was not sure what ground I would be questioned on.
Senator Eastland. You did not ask what grounds you would be
questioned ? When you asked the other peojDle who had been called
before that committee about their appearance, you certainly asked
them the grounds on which their loj^alty was questioned, did you not?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4241
Mr. BissoN. No.
Senator Eastland. You did not?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember so asking.
Senator Eastland. How do you know it was a security check on
them if you did not do that?
Mr. BissoN. This w^as the general assumption.
Senator Eastland. You asked them? You say you knew it was a
security check. How did you know ?
Mr. BissoN. The Kerr committee was organized, as I remember
after the Dies committee.
Senator Eastland. Is your answer you just assumed?
Mr. Bisson. I had not finished my answer. Since tlie Kerr com-
mittee was organized hiter, we assumed that perhaps the same group
woukl go before that committee.
Senator Eastland. On what ground? The ground of loyalty?
]Mr. BissoN. It was a security test.
Senator Eastland. That is a loyalty test ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. Why was it you thought you would be called
before them and questioned about your loyalty ?
Mr. BissoN. I would not know. I don't recall.
Senator Eastland. Do you mean to tell me with your country at
war and you an official of the American Government who was called
before a committee of the American Congress to determine whether
you were loyal to j^our country or not, in other words, whether you
were a traitor or not, you would not know on what grounds your
loyalty was questioned? Or you would not know^ on what grounds
there was suspicion of treason against you? Do you mean to tell
me that?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. That is exactly what I said. I went before the
committee. I knew nothing of what I was being charged with.
May I add a statement here? I have just been called a traitor
before this committee.
Senator Eastand. No, you have not.
Mr. Fanelli. Let's get on.
Senator Eastland. Let's straighten the record out. You have not
b%en called a traitor. I said there was a question as to your loyalty by
the Kerr committee ; that that meant there was a question as to whether
you were guilty of treason or not, and with an accusation like that
you were certainly bound to know the facts on which it was based.
Whether it was true or not I do not know. I am making no charges
against you.
Mr. BissoN. May I be excused for a second?
Senator Eastland. No; I want to proceed with the hearing.
Mr. BissoN. I would like to go outside for a second.
Senator Eastland. All right.
(A short recess was taken.)
Mr. Morris. Will you identify this letter, please, Mr. Mandel?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a handwritten document from
the files of the IPK on the letterhead of the Board of Economic War-
fare, Washington, D. C, dated April 14, with no year given, addressed
to "Dear Mr. Carter," siimed T. A. Bisson, and the initials in the
corner are ECC, WLH, KP, and HA.
4242 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Will you read that letter, please ?
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
Exhibit No. 726
Dear Mr. Carter : I cannot begin to tell you how heartening the letters from
New York have been. There has been no second hearing yet, which is all to the
good. In fact, the weight of the letters may be alone sufficient to prevent one,
though I am not too sanguine on this point. The Kerr committee has to feel
strong enough to reject the transcript of my testimony before the Dies committee,
and the letters are therefore just what is needed.
Unless complications develop, I am expecting to be at the Princeton conference
this week end where I shall hope to have a chance to discuss things with you.
Please express my thanks and pass on this word to any who may inquire. I
appreciate your efforts more than I can say.
Sincerely,
T. A. BissoN.
Mr. Morris. Did you write that letter ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Does that refresh your recollection whether the IPS,
aided you in your difficulty in Washington at that time ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Can you testify further on that subject?
Mr. BissoN. One of the things that we were doing was securing
letters from persons that knew us in our previous careers that could
testify to our loyalty to the United States and also to our general
competency in the field that we were in. ]\f r. Carter, among others, was
attempting to help me out in getting letters of that kind. I remember,
for instance, that one letter came from Dr. Hu Shih who was, if not
then a little later or a little earlier, the Chinese Ambassador to the
United States.
Mr. Morris. Is it your testimony you can now recall this where you
could not recall it 5 minutes ago ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. You seem to have a clear memory now.
Mr. BissoN. I had forgotten who helped out on these letters. I knew
about the letters but I had not read that the IPR, through Mr. Carter,
was helping me get those letters. There is nothing unusual
Mr. Morris. There was no implication anything was unusual. We
are asking if you had used the instrumentality of the IPR to aid ycyi
in your difficulty in Washington.
Mr. BissoN. The answer is "No." I had asked my personal friend,
Mr. Carter, to help me, and he was helping to get those letters.
Mr. Morris. May that letter go in ?
Senator Eastland. It is submitted.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 726" and was read
in full.)
Mr. Mandel. I have here a handwritten letter from the files of the
IPR on the letterhead addressed "353 Willard Avenue, Chevy Chase,
Md.", dated April 30, 1943, addressed to "Dear Mr. Carter" and signed
T. A. Bisson.
Senator Eastland. Right here, to save time, all these letters and
documents will be admitted into the record unless challenged by the
witness and his attorney. Then I will pass on them.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4243
Mr. Mandel. Attached thereto is a carbon copy from the files of the
IPR dated April 30, 1943, addressed to "Dr. Joseph P. Chamberlain."
It is unsigned.
Mr, Morris. Will yon read that letter, please?
Mr. BissoN. You mean the ink letter?
Mr. Morris. Yes ; the one in your handwriting.
Mr. BissoN (reading) :
Exhibit No. 727
I enclose copy of a letter to Dr. Chamberlain for your information. My hunch
is that the case here will develop into a large and politically significant fight.
At the moment, however, it looks as though Watson and Dodd will provide the
test cases over which the battle in Congress will be waged, leaving the rest until
after that decision is reached.
Sincerely,
T. A. BissoN.
May I comment on that ?
Mr. SouRwiNE. May I see that letter while you are phrasing your
comment ?
Mr. Morris. I would like to know, too, if that second letter is a letter
written by you ?
Mr. BissoN. I will see.
The comment I wanted to make on this original one was that Watson
and Dodd had had their salaries stopped apparently that the decision
hinged on that because it was a question whether the salaries would be
stopped before a decision had been reached, in other words, before the
court test or the loyalty hearing, or whatever it was, that was con-
cluded and a decision was reached as to whether the person was
cleared or not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Is that other letter a copy of a letter you wrote?
What is the date of that?
Mr. BissoN. That is April 30, 1943.
Mr. SouRW^iNE. . To whom is it addressed?
Mr. BissoN. Dr. Joseph P. Chamberlain.
Mr. SouRA^aNE. Is that a letter you wrote ?
Mr. BissoN. May I look at it? It is a long letter.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Surely.
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; that is a letter I wrote to Dr. Chamberlain.
Mr. SouRwiNE. May they go in the record ?
Senator Eastland. I ordered them all in the recard unless they
are challenged.
(The letters referred to were marked "No. 727" (read in full), and
"No. 728" and is as follows:)
April 30, 1943.
Dr. .Joseph P. Chamberlain,
510 Kent Hall, ColuniMa University, New York, N. Y.
Dear Dr. Chamberlain : Some of the recent developments in the handling of
the congressional investigations here may be of interest to you. Three persons
have appeared so far before the Kerr committee. As you know, Schuman was
exonerated while Dodd and Watson were convicted. It seems possible that hear-
ings of tlie others involved will be delayed until Dodd and Watson are ousted
from office by congressional vote.
The ouster will apparently be attempted through attachment of riders to
appropriation hills indicating that no funds from any source shall be utilized to
i:ay the salary of the accused. Passage seems likely in the House, but a stiffer
4244 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
fight is in prospect in the Senate, doubtless with considerable attendant publicity.
The issues in debate will probably extend beyond the narrower problem involved
into such broader questions as to whether Dies, Fish, and the other isolationists
or the accused were correct in estimating the course of international develop-
ments in the past decade and as to whether political libei'alism can survive in
this country in the near future if this preliminary attack succeeds.
The normal arbitrary procedures of a congressional committee have, of course,
been applied in this case. The Dies committee permitted a legal representative
of each agency involved to attend the hearing as an observer, but not to partici-
pate in the hearing or act as legal counsel for the accused. The Kerr committee
has refused to permit a representative of the agency involved to attend the
hearings even as an observer. No list of charges is furnished to the accused in
advance of the hearing.
In one case certain members of the Kerr committee sought to pin the accused
down to "Yes" or "No" answers, thus seeking to prevent the introduction of evi-
dence into the hearing. This created a dispute within the committee which was
finally resolved in favor of the accused. On the next day the same members of
the committee again sought "Yes" or "No" answers and refused to be bound by
the previous committee decision. When the accused picked up his papers and
prepared to leave, however, the atmo.^iphere cleared and the accused was again
allowed to proceed with the introduction of evidence.
The Kerr committee's report on the Watson-Schuman-Dodd case (Congres-
sional Record, April 21 ) has applied an extraordinary definition of "subversive"
to certain organizations, defining them as such by reason of the judgment of the
"court of public opinion" in the United States. Association with organizations
so defined then involves the individuals concerned in "subversive activity.".
The Kerr committee is on firmer legal ground apparently when it connects an
individual with organizations listed as subversive in a statement by the Attorney
General (cited by Dies on the floor of Congress last January). There is some
question, however, as to whether this list was merely an interoffice memorandum
within the Justice Department to which the Attorney General's name became
attached by some unexplained means. This point would bear clearing up because
it affords by far the strongest ground that has ever been afforded Dies in his
campaign.
All of this information may be already known to you, but I have set it down
here on the chance that some of the details may be new to you and of interest.
I presume you have seen the 26-page statement issued by the Federal Commu-
nications Commission in defense of its employees.
Sincerely yours,
Mr. Morris. Do you have a question, Mr. Sourwine ?
Mr. Sourwine. No.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify these letters, please, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandeu. I have here a handwritten letter from the files of the
IPR on the letterhead "353 Willard Avenue, Chevy Chase, Md." dated
April 21, 1943, addressed to "Dear Mr. Carter," and signed "T. A.
Bisson." An attachment thereto is a carbon copy of a letter from the
files of the IPR addressed to "Hon. John H. Kerr, chairman. Special
Subcommittee of Committee on Appropriations, House of Representa-
tives," with the typed signature of Edward C. Carter.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, this is already introduced in the record
as Exhibit 260.
Mr. Bisson, will you read your letter, please?
Mr. Bisson (reading) :
Dear Mr. Carter : My formal letter of resignation here went in yesterday,
effective for June 1. Stone just called me and the decision was made final.
The replies by Kerr make it seem that the matter may not be carried any
further for the moment. Formal clearance, however, seems unlikely.
May I again express my deep appreciation for your help?
Sincerely,
T. A. Bisson.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4245
Mr. Morris. Mr. Mandel, -will you identify these letters, please?
Mr, Mandel. I have here several carbon copies of letters from the
files of the IPR. The first one is dated April 12, 1943, addressed to
"Dear Dr. Evans, The Rockefeller Foundation", with the typed signa-
ture of Edward C. Carter. The second one is a carbon copy of a
letter dated April 12, 1943, addressed to Miss Pearl Buck, with the
typed signature of Edward C. Carter.
The third is a carbon copy of a letter dated April 12, 1943, addressed
to Dr. Goodrich with the typed signature of Edward C. Carter.
The next is a carbon copy dated April 12, 1943, addressed to Dr.
Raymond Leslie Buell, with the typed signature of Edward C. Carter.
And finally, a carbon copy of a letter dated April 12, 1943, addressed
to Mr. Richard J. Walsh, with the typed signature of Edward C.
Carter.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, these all seem to be worded in the same
fashion. The first paragraph begins :
The Dies Committee is after T. A. Bisson who for the past year has been
working for the BEW. Bisson desires a few of his friends to write letters
testifying to his loyalty as an American citizen, adding anything that the
writer feels free to say.
That seems to be the form that Mr. Carter followed in all of these
letters, Mr. Chairman. The letters will speak for themselves. May
they go into the record ?
Senator Eastland. They are ordered in unless there is objection.
(The letters referred to were marked "Exliibit No. 729'' and ai-e as
follows:)
Exhibit 729
129 East 52nd Street,
tfew York City, April 12, 1943.
Dr. RoGEB F. Evans,
The Rockefeller Fotmdation,
49 East 49th Street, New York City.
Dear Dr. Evans : Here is a copy of my letter to Honorable John H. Kerr,
Chairman, Special Subcommittee on Committee on Appropriations, House of
Representatives, Washington, D. C, regarding Mr. T. A. Bisson.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Carter.
Copies of the following letter were sent to : Miss Pearl Buck, R. D. 3, Perkasie,
Pennsylvania ; Dr. L. Carrington Goodrich, Columbia University, New York City ;
Dr. Raymond Leslie Buell, Fortune Magazine. Time and Life Building, Rocke-
feller Plaza, New York; Mr. Richard J. Walsh, Asia Magazine, 40 East 49th
Street, New York City.
129 East 52nd Street,
Neic York City, April 12, 1943.
Dear ■ — : The Dies Committee is after T. A. Bisson who for the
past year has been working for the BEW. Bisson desires a few of his friends
to write letters testifying to his loyalty as an American citizen adding anytiiing
that the writer feels free to say.
Enclosed is a copy of what I have written. Would you feel free to write directly
to Honorable John H. Kerr, Chairman, Special Subcommittee on Committee on
Appropriations, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C, sending a copy
of your letter to T. A. Bisson at 353 Willard Avenue, Chevy Chase, Maryland.
Sincerely yours,
Edward C. Carter.
4246 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. This was not written by Mr. Bisson bnt it bears on
the point of to what extent the IPR was an instrnmentality in ob-
taining signatures or sending testimonial letters for Mr. Bisson.
Mr. Bisson. "To Avhat extent Mr. Carter was." He was not neces-
sarily acting as an IPK, official but as an individual.
Mr. Morris. These were from the files of the IPR, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Eastland. Proceed.
Mr. Bisson. Are you turning to a new subject?
Mr. Morris. Do you have some comment ?
Mr. Bisson. Yes. I think it is pertinent to this last half or three
quarters of an hour's testimony to note that I was under investigation
at this same time by the Civil Service Commission. As some of you
may probably remember from that period, people were hired in a
great hurry and went into the departments in large numbers and then
the Civil Service Commission proceeded to conduct its routine
investigation.
In the spring of 1943 the Civil Service Commission's formal clear-
ance for me w^as suitable and fit for Government employment and
that came through. They had conducted this investigation during the
whole period when the Dies committee and the Kerr committee were
operating. The decision of the Civil Service Commission was that
I was suitable and fit for Government employment as indicated by
that formal clearance.
I do not have a copy of that with me, but I presume this fact I am
now stating can be verified.
Mr. Soxjrwine. Mr. Chairman, at that point may I interrogate
very briefly ?
I have before me what purports to be a copy of the Form 3721
personal history statement which this witness executed in connection
with his Board of Economic Warfare employment. I do not ask this
go in the record because this is not the best evidence. The committee
is securing and will have in its possession later today a photostatic
copy of the original form. I ask that the photostatic copy go in.
Senator Eastland. Yes, proceed.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 730" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 730
United States Civil Service Commission,
Washitigton, D. C, March 31, 1952.
Honorable Pat McCarran,
Chairman, Senate Internal Security Subcommittee,
Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate.
Dear Senator IVIcCarran : As requestetl in telephone conversation between
my secretary and Miss Walker of your staff, I am enclosing a photostat copy
of Form 3721, filled out by Mr. Thomas Arthur Bisson, born November 8, liWO.
This is the only personal history statement for this person we were able to
locate in our flies.
Sincerely yours,
Robert Ramspeck, Chairmajx.
Inelosure 142384.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
4247
A^mi
UIIITED STATES CIVIL S£W«€Ca^l$$ir
:*....«,.,.. r%.:: APR 19 1942^
This f«ra isuist !>« ex«c;ate{) : in «>« aj5pj icatvt ■« iwn ,hat!*»,' it tns, ;« sfsk,.
)' acait ■<!!»! SjWce is ne«!»! t«r «ny itsre ir tr>i«. Far«, enlris:^
■ sriou5(! »e" cont-inaaii «« a SBparats shejst. each «Atry rxssfesre!} ts coffe-
' TS«3» »i*
^
If » ««!rj'S»« «I>««1>, JlUVJ-ttJl »tt*»X!K*ffXM!;W!im
iirirtti <SJ«8X«> fi«SJ
i «. »»*♦ »f %irt*:
»i jr »»Mt»»-»o««. «t»» in »»tw»i«» x»»»M*,tJo«;
fUMHik; <a«.i : ;!»•>;>;'
. <4> 3Pt»C» ♦f ««l»r»Jt »**•«>»:
»> iPii»is of i<lt»>!
<«> 0*t».4r. «»t«y*Sl«*tldft
f'. *f?i-»»X{ ■■;■■:■ ::'-;-v;:W^^^
(<;»»») , ,,;--t«»»*.> ' __. ■„ ;■ •
(t) )l»t»j»-i»i»t«9» <:«JrttTie»«» »»■' }<*> »»»♦ sa<t«f .■•M««
(*J ^*«« *r>4 (-»! «.* i<j««:ltiy t ,
, J>? E^ Jjwabftflfl, *i»5.« *ftft s^3»Ha« «f s-«r?i-4«*
(«> e.t» »f «ri»»l l» B, ».5 ._- ! (45 »i.pt «f «»«ryj
f-»> »■».*» »ir ■**«*•! «? <<t*«F .;»**»;#;.;;#iF-:;w«*iM«
(»! »J«» jf »jit«»«l«*tt«i
t ^«> »*«* »*' R«%«r«3;l»*tJ«
<fej C#»r» a*' *»t!»r*i(»«4tt>
{») !>«(HM^.»Ji»»tl«» «»»*tf(r«*« »u«a«n |qX
?.{«) «»> ,0* »»«)>«
f-^J^^li^y^MA^
[• Of »«th»»i ftttiHta^ife-g ««-ia*» «»:»«>
tXoMit}
i6.> »sl«r««»4
:' - ^''Av.iQ sv-5-;-44.4
. f£,tl4tt4^>i «*
■ » K>«E*iMO» -- »tY«! t!f StiStit* »»»»_* »M«t»!) »T*T««l«t «!P •»)!» jRlSSiTMlt, r«*i1!»t»a OiTSSi
sfeei..-.,..-- .,
4«a f»«» -^3WC«S«<;s!4r. , iW^ V t*
^.Mjt^„.
»?>: *««Ifcal«*t^:»«»**3: T»»» «)B J***-
;i^^ Ci'^tWAC 1 ^Um}^ I »»«»•«* J»V »»«*1«
*»»« : r*9 ■,**M»ii*«*SS^
[ *t*< «^ t»>iT»* j^<»p-««»a, »»« rf«j^^
&A...-,
4248
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
^i:mM\
■^ I fX^oe
".b>e*3^:..-j
5*>;* ♦«(* ^*.5« vr-Bjyrti -sif
nR^HnBaMiy* V s\.f.W!t^F^WrV^rt^T-\
::^:in ' P^^
•d.'tJ'V* <■>•>! 'k'VIhJ d#t*n*: j i*>i Pi«
>;?tJit:»i («<j&th; (Tt**?-
*»■*■ 7^y jr.^xiH4irf -iC ti*f«ttdtAS1, ?
BmMmgiWmMffiMJMlmiMg
':• '*^'^<^/
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
4249
» ».j 4i*i**i^*^^i
iiiimniiiBiuigngw
ij*«*iP«pt «* U*6* «*«Jj|«*«*t for
<>> if «*> (((*-«. d:itt.v«^ ««««.»fi^ i«-if«it** «r c***-r>i^;:
■■■"*.■ -_»*-*«*« ti* «^t****?- .■-:■-■■■■--■.■.--■-■:■.
If ♦a, SU* »*«3» fcff?**!, #i»t*« 4»«.». ««♦'«* ifc* „ .. ^ ji<f^. „ _ ^ -"'•
- ti**, ^ti5», «-9>st*t.> s»».*'8;«, ««4 4jt«po«l*l;«n; ifT«« S-f »o!! ''T ' " '■''. ■■■■' ■' ■"■ ■ '' " ""''' '" ""
nXttA, i>M4. y«iJ**'«J Cfc^U Sffr'TSo
"X^HfUJ^
UM0mm/
^2&imS ^ ' <£^<i'i^ ^M'U^m':
-^U\; 4::xd44f^:V''^
'^^^ WH,^ ^*^^
tti« air^tJthJ^*.* of .««*- V<in*t Jtut i**!*;! >. a'r« i>f <£>*»?TS#*nt ift -t>>* tint t»* St*i«s, or *i* yov h*«« »»«it»ts*t (p t-c.-sr-.
4250
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
.»«.. l,1-«S yoa* r»»t<i»»e*«. rfw.rl«jt t3i« i>»»t Tlr* jr««r«t tttclu^lng^ your ^fvs^ns.. i«««l t.J*^f*»»' Otr» «V»» tft« n*««« o<, »n6
oStS)" "(f.XrT ■" "" '<«loBtS>~ ftiis-r ~ - - '(fail,!,;- ' Trt»«
»),{»««!■> . itiMi) ;t»
^Ko.fc*!-') (*t«»«l>
)tJIO«SWM!l-.
- - - - - *• - - -^^iitS,-,)-
»•- ^■'S^'-P.'^^h-S^x'€^''i''-yJ'^i''^ yi-\?^ ■5^'M'¥-f^l'J'. u.
:»./.>:^-. .^FW
rWiswaseti. •/
Mt. 8:
;-?tC/ *'.«^S***<;
t«oB,i:,h> <1f«fi?J (itentfcj iy»**v (*«»fe«r) (»tr«»t?
ir^**Tt , (i(«-»6h) <?-«nfcf> [»a»ip
1 cijrt t *">• t tsst ti>"« f !
iffiowje^g* and fc>:i^ie?x
<aij**ttt»* «t *^»i J CUBITS
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4251
TcuJlcc ^
doJU&^.^ tU (^ff^j /LMiM^^ Pa^^jMXiy omJ-
4252 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you recall filing a personal history statement
while you were with BEW?
Mr. BissoN. Yqs.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You were asked for that ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That was some time after you had actually begun
work?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; I think so.
Mr. SouRWiNE. When you actually went to work did you file a Form
57, or an application form of any sort ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember. Presumably there was some form.
I do not recall at this time.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You do not recall how you made application for
work with the Board ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Who was head of the Board of Economic Warfare
when you went to work ?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Perkins, I think.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did he remain the head of that Board throughout
your entire tenure?
Mr. BissoN. No. I think he was replaced by the Vice President.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What Vice President?
Mr. BissoN. Mr. Wallace.
Mr. SouRwiNE. When was that ?
Mr. BissoN. I am not sure just when that occurred, presumably in
1942.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was Mr. Wallace still the head of the Board when
you left?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; I think so.
Mr. SouRwiNE. When you filed this personal history statement — it
is dated April 1, 1942 — does that strike any discord with your memory ?
Are you willing to accept that as the date it was filed ?
Mr. BissoN. I think that would be right.
Mr. SouRwiNE. The purpose of that statement was to inform the
Government as a basis for a civil-service check-up of where you had
worked and what you had done ; is that correct ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr, SouRwiNE. You had this statement typed up, did you not?
Mr. BissoN. I think so.
Mr. SouRwiNE. In the portions of the statement which you had
typed out did you give any information about your connection with
IPR?
Mr. BissoN. I had no connection with the IPE, before that time.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You had not ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Then the answer would be "No" ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you give any information about your connec-
tion with the Ajnerican Committee for Nonparticipation in Japanese
Aggression?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you give any information about your connec-
tion with American Friends of the Chinese People ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4253
Mr, SouRWiNE. Did you give any information about your connec-
tion you may have had with the American League for Peace and
Democracy ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you give any information about your connec-
tion with the International Release Committee that we have spoken
about here ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiXE. Did you give any information about your connec-
tion with Amerasia?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRwiNE. This is the information that you were furnishing
as the basis for the check-up that the Civil Service Commission was
going to make on you ?
Mr. BissoN. No ; this, as I remember, was a check sheet asked by our
employer in our section. It was not a sheet that was to be filed with
the Civil Service Commission. He wanted to know the jobs we had
held and what our background was in general.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You felt you were answering that question and
giving him the desired information even though you did not give any
of these items of information I have referred to ?
Mr. BissoN. Certainly. It did not necessarily mean one was to
give every possible organization that one had been connected with.
He was primarily interested in the career background.
Mr. SouRwiNE. After you had filed this, weren't you subsequently
told that you should have made mention of some of these organiza-
tions you belonged to?
Mr. BissoN. I may have been ; yes.
Senator Eastland. Were you? You remember if you had been
told that.
Mr. BissoN. I think I was.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Didn't you get the application form back, the Form
3721 back, and make additions to it in your own handwriting?
Mr. BissoN. I may have.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Didn't you make the additions under the heading
"Membership organizations,'' with tlie first the American Council of
thelPR?
Mr. Bissoisr. I may have.
Mr. SouinvixE. You just said you had no connection with the
IPR.
Mr. BissoN. I had no business connection with them. That merely
a membership. I assumed you were referring to a business connection.
Mr. SoTJRwiNE. Didn't you add, in your own handwriting, the
American Committee for Nonparticipation in Japanese Aggression?
Mr. BissoN. I may have; yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Didn't you add American Friends of the Chinese
People?
Mr. BissoN. I may have.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Didn't you add "Was probably on the mailing list
for American League for Peace and Democracy ; never a dues-paying
member" ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. Incidentally, may I make a comment on that
point ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 15
4254 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. Let me continue, please.
Your purpose for adding these was because you had been told there
should be some mention of the organizations you belonged to on this
sheet ; is that right ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You added them?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Why didn't you add your membership in the Inter-
national Release Committee ?
Mr. BissoN. In terms of my background, that was so unimportant
that it never even occurred to me. My only relation with that com-
mittee, so far as I know, was this one occasion on which this greeting
was made.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Why didn't you add your connection with Amer-
asia? Was that completely unimportant in regard to your back-
ground ?
Mr. BissON. Amerasia was a magazine. It was not really an
organization. I may have thought that a magazine was not called
for here.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You don't know why you didn't add it in ?
Mr. BissoN. I would say that would be the reason.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was it the reason ? You said it must have been.
Mr. BissoN. Yes. That was the reason. That is the only magazine
among that list so far as I know.
Mr, SoiTRWiNE. I have no more questions.
Mr. BissoN. I would like to make one point here ; that is, this takes
on the appearance here of a very formal business. My recollection
was that this was handled very informally. There was just a memo-
randum coming around saying "Get up some kind of sheet showing
what your background was." I got that sheet up. That was the
original one.
Mr. SouRwiNE. It is a printed form; isn't it? The original one is
a printed form ?
Mr. Bissoisr. No. The original one was not. It was merely a type-
written manuscript that I typed out myself. Later on the head of
our section said, "We want more information than has been given on
these. Let's make them more complete and adequate." This was not
a formal filing of applications for anything. It was merely an inter-
office procedure.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You were already employed by BEW ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You had been employed there January 22, 1942?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You worked there until July 10, 1943?
Mr. BissoN. That was my formal severance date.
Mr. SouRwiNE. This form 3721 is dated April 1, 1942. That is
more than 3 months after you began working there?
Mr. BissoN. Yes, but what I am saying is that the first operation
on that was just a memorandum saying "Set clown some of your back-
ground for us for the use of the person that is in charge of this de-
partment."
Then later on it may have become formalized. I had forgotten
there was a formal form. The thing was made more complete.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You mean your hiring by BEW was a very informal
thing?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4255
Mr. BissoN. This was not hiring.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I am asking about the time you were hired. It was
a very informal thing. You made no formal application. You were
not required to give a statement of your employment?
Mr. BissoN. On the contrary. I think I did give a formal state-
ment of employment. This was an infonnal thing within the depart-
ment afterward.
Senator Eastland. Proceed, Mr. Morris.
Mr. MoKRis. Do you know whether or not Dr. H. H. Fisher con-
sulted personnel of the IPE, in connection with his desire to increase
the teaching and library facilities in the Far East in connection with
liis Hoover War Library?
Mr. BissoN. In connection with what?
Mr. Morris. His Hoover War Library.
Mr. BissoN. Did he consult with IPR ?
Mr. Morris. With IPR personnel including yourself?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us what you know about it?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know the details on it.
Mr. Morris. Did he consult with you on it?
Mr. BissoN. What is the date of this?
Mr. Morris. In 1945.
Mr. BissoN. Yes. I do not remember the ch^tails.
Mv. Morris. Will you identify that letter, Mr. Mandel?
Mr. JNIandel. I have here a memorandum from the files of the IPR
dated January 24, 1945, headed ''RD from ECC."
Senator Easti^and. Who is RD ?
Mr. Morris. Who is RD?
Senator Eastland. Was it Raymond Dennett?
Mr. BiRsoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. How do you spell it?
Mr. BissoN. D-e-n-n-e-t-t, I think.
Mr. Morris (reading) :
Exhibit No 731
RD From ECC
Yesterday Dr. H. H. Fisher of the Hoover War Library came in in connection
with Stanford's desire to increase its teacliing and library facilities on the Far
East.
In addition to meeting Grajdanzev and Bisson, I arranged for him to have a
talk with Salisbnry. who will doubtless i-eport to you the substance of his
conversations.
Does that refresh j'our recollection on the fact that you had a con-
versation with Dr. H. H. Fisher in connection with the question that
was put to you ?
Mr. Fanelli. He said he did, as I recall.
Mr. BissoN. My original statement was that I probably did talk
with him; that I didn't remember the details.
Mr. Morris. Doesn't this indicate you did as a matter of fact talk
with him ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Can you recall the conversation ?
Mr. BissoN. I cannot. I said at the time I did not recall the de-
tails. I do not recall the details.
4256 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. May this go into the record to establish the fact there
was a conversation?
Senator Eastland. It will be admitted.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 731" and was read
in full.)
Mr. Morris. Did you ever write for the publication, Soviet Russia
Today?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. On how many occasions did you write for Soviet Russia
Today?
Mr. BissoN. At least once.
Mr. ]\loRRis. With whom did you negotiate in your writings for
Soviet Russia Today?
Mr. BissoN. Presumably it would be with the editor.
]\Ir. JSIoRRis. Did you negotiate with Jessica Smith?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; I probably did.
Senator Eastland. Did you negotiate with her?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Who is Jessica Smith?
Mr. BissoN. It has been indicated she is the editor of
Senator Eastland. Was she? Testify, please.
Mr. INIoRRis. Was she ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you know her personally ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not actually remember seeing her,
Mr. Morris. How did you carry on negotiations?
Mr. BissoN. I don't know. Presumably by letter.
Mr. Morris. Is that your only recollection on the subject?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
]Mr. Morris. Do you remember signing a letter entitled "To All
Active Supporters of Democracy and Peace,"' which is an open letter
calling for greater unity of anti-Fascist forces and strengthening the
forces against aggression, released on August 14 by 400 leading
Americans, which appeared in Soviet Russia Today in September
1939?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, may it be admitted into the record?
I just call attention to this first point which seems to be called for in
this open letter?
Senator Eastland. Yes; it may be admitted. When was it
published?
(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 732" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 782
[Source: Sdviot Russia Today, 193!>, September]
To All Active Si pporters of Democracy and Peace
The text of an Open Letter calling for greater unity of the anti
fascist forces and strengthening of the front against aggression
throu,ch closer cooperation with the Soviet Union, releasefl
on August 14 by 400 leading Americans.
One of the greatest problems confronting all those engaged in the struggle
for democracy and peace, whether they be liberals, progressives, trade-unionists,
or others, is how to unite their various forces so as to achieve victory for their
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4257
common goals. The Fascists and their allies are well aware that democracy
will win if its supporters are united. Accordingly, they are intent on destroy-
ing such unity at all costs.
On the international scene the Fascists and their friends have tried to pre-
vent a united antiaggression front by sowing suspicion between the Soviet
Union and other nations interested in maintaining peace.
On the domestic scene the reactionaries are attempting to split the demo-
cratic front by similar tactics. Realizing that here in America they cannot
get far with a "definitely profascist appeal, they strive to pervert American anti-
fascist sentiment to their own ends. With the aim of turning antifascist feeling
against the Soviet Union they have encouraged the fantastic falsehood that
the U. S. S. R. and the totalitarian states are basically alike. By this strategy
they hope to create dissension among the progressive forces whose united
strength is a first necessity for the defeat of fascism.
Some sincere American liberals have fallen into this trap and unwittingly
aided a cause to which they are essentially opposed. Thus, a number of them
have carelessly lent their signatures to the recent manifesto issued by the
so-called Committee for Cultural Freedom. This manifesto denounces in vague,
undefined terms all forms of "Dictatorship" and asserts that the Fascist states
and Soviet Russia equally menace American institutions and the democratic
way of life.
While we prefer to dwell on facts rather than personalities, we feel it is
necessary to point out that among the signers of this manifesto are individuals
who have for years had as their chief political objective the maligning of the
Soviet people and their government, and it is precisely these people who are the
initiators and controllers of the committee.
A number of other committees have been formed which give lip service to
democracy and peace while actually atacking the Soviet Union and aiding reac-
tion. Honest persons approached by such committees should scrutinize their
aims very carefully and support only those groups genuinely interested in
preserving culture and freedom and refusing to serve as instruments for attack-
ing the Soviet Union or aiding Fascism in any other way.
The undersigned do not represent any committee or organization, nor do they
propose to form one. Our object is to point out the real purpose behind all these
attempts to bracket the Soviet Union with the Fascist states, and to make it
clear that Soviet and Fascist policies are diametrically opposed. To this end we
should like to stress ten basic points in which Soviet socialism differs funda-
mentally from totalitarian fasci-sm.
1. The Soviet Union continues, as always, to be a consistent bulwark against
war and aggression, and works unceasingly for the goal of a peaceful interna-
tional order.
2. It has eliminated racial and national iir(\iudice within its borders, freed the
minority peoples enslaved under the Tsars, stimulated the development of the
culture and economic welfare of these peoples, and made the expression of anti-
Semitism or any racial animosity a criminal offense.
3. It has socialized the means of production and distribution through the
public owner.shlp of industry and the collectivization of agriculture.
4. It has established nationwide socialist planning, resulting in increasingly
higher living standards, and the abolition of unemployment and depression.
5. It has built the trade-unions, in which almost 24,0(X),000 workers are organ-
ized, into the very fabric of its society.
6. The Soviet Union has emancipated woman and the family, and lias devel-
oped an advanced system of child care.
7. Fi-om the viewpoint of cultural freedom, the difference between the Soviet
Union and the Fascist countries is most striking. The Soviet Union has effected
one of the most far-reaching cultural and educational advances In all liistory
and among a population which at the start was almost three-fourths illiterate.
Those writers and thinkers whose books have been burned by the Nazis are pub-
lished in the Soviet Union. The best literature from Homer to Thomas Mann,
the best thought from Aristotle to Lenin, is available to the masses of the Soviet
people, who themselves actively participate in the creation of culture.
8. It has replaced the myths and superstitions of old Russia with the truths
and techniques of experimental science, extending scientific procedures to every
field, from economics to public health. And it has made science and scientific
study available to the mass of the people.
9. The Soviet Union considers political dictatorship a transitional form and has
shown a steadily expanding democracy in every sphere. Its epoch-making new
4258 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Constitution guarantees Soviet citizens universal suffrage, civil liberties, the
right to employment, to leisure, to free education, to free medical care, to mate-
rial security in sickness and old age, to equality of the sexes in all fields of
activity, and to equality of all races and nationalities.
10. In relation to Russia's past, the country has been advancing rapidly along
the road of material and cultural progress in ways that the American people can
understand and appreciate.
The Soviet Union has an economic system different from our own. But Soviet
aims and achievements make it clear that there exists a sound and permanent
basis in mutual ideals for cooperation between the U. S. A. and the U. S. S. R. on
behalf of world peace and the security and freedom of all nations.
Accordingly, the signers of this letter urge Americans of whatever political
persuasion to stand firmly for close cooperation in this sphere between the
United States and Soviet Russia, and to be on guard against any and all attempts
to prevent such cooperation in this critical period in the affairs of mankind.
Among the 400 signers of the open letter are :
Dr. Thomas Addis, professor of medicine, Leland Stanford University
Helen Alfred, executive director. National Public Housing Conference
Prof. Newton Arvin, professor of English, Smith College
Dr. Charles S. Bacon, honorary president, American Russian Institute, Chicago,
111.
Frank C. Bancroft, editor, Social Work Today
Maurice Becker, artist
Louis P. Birk, editor, Modern Age Books, Inc.
T. A. Bisson, research associate, Foreign Policy Association
Alice Stone Blackwell, suffragist, writer
Marc Blitzstein, composer
Anita Block, Theater Guild playreader
Sterling Bowen, poet
Richard Boyer, staff writer, The New Yorker
Millen Brand, writer
Simon Breines, architect
Rol)ert Briffault, writer
Prof. Dorothy Brewster, assistant professor of English, Columbia University
Prof. Edwin Berry Burgum, associate professor of English, New York University
Fielding Burke, writer
Katherine Devereaux Blake, teacher
Meta Berger, writer, widow of the first Socialist Congressman
Prof. Robert A. Brady, professor of economics. University of California
J. E. Bromberg, actor
Bessie Beatty, writer
Vera Caspary, scenario writer
Maria Cristina Chambers, of the Authors' League
Prof. Robert Chambers, research professor of biology. New York University
Harold Clurman, producer
Robert M. Coates, writer
Lester Cohen, writer
Kyle Crichton, editorial staff of Collier's Weekly
Miriam Allen De Ford, writer
Paul De Kruif, writer
Pietro Di Donato, writer
William F. Dodd, Jr., chairman Anti-Nazi Literature Committee
Stanley D. Dodge, University of Michigan
Prof. Df»rothy Douglas, department of economics, Smith College
IMuriel Draper, writer
I'rof. L. C. Dunn, professor of Zoology, Columbia University
Prof. Haakon Chevalier, professor of French, University of California
Harriet G. Eddy, library specialist
Prof. George B. Cressey, chairman of the department of geology and geography,
Syracuse University
Prof. Henry Pratt Fairchild, professor of sociology, New York University-
Kenneth Fearing, poet
Prof. Mildred Fairchild, professor of economics, Bryn Mawr College
Alice Withrow Field, writer
Sara Bard Field, writer
William O. Field, Jr., chairman of the board, American Russian Institute
Irving Fineman, writer
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4259
Marjorie Fischer, writer
An.cel Flores, writer, critic
Waldo Franli, writer
Wanda Ga.ii, artist
Hugo Gellert, artist
Robert Gessner, department of English, New York University
Prof. Willystlne Goodsell, associate professor of education (retired), Columbia
University
3Iortinier Graves, of the American Council of Learned Societies
Dr. John H. Gray, economist, former president of the American Economics
Association
William Gropper, artist
IMaurice Haiperin, associate editor, Books Abroad
Earl P. Hanson, explorer, writer
Prof. Samuel N. Harper, profesosr of Russian language and institutions, Chicago
University
Rev. Thomas L. Harris, national executive secretary, American Leagxie for Peace
and Democracy
Dashiell Hammett, writer
Ernest Hemingway
Granville Hicks, writer
Prof. Norman E. Himes, department of sociology, Colgate University
Charles J. Hendley, president, Teachers' Union of the City of New York
Leo Huberman, writer
Langston Hughes, poet
Agatha Hies, writer
Rev. Otis G. Jackson, rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church, Flint, Mich.
Sam Jaffe, actor
Orrick Johns, poet
Matthew Josephson, writer
George Kauffman. playwright
Prof. Alexander Kaun, associate professor of Slavic languages. University of
California
Fred C. Kelly, writer
Rockwell Kent, artist
Dr. John A. Kingsbury, social worker, administrative consultant, WPA
Beatrice Kinkaid, writer
Lincoln E. Kirstein, ballet producer
Arthur Kober, playwright
Alfred Kreymborg, poet
Edward Lamb, lawyer
Dr. Corliss Lamont, writer, lecturer
Margaret I. Lamont, sociologist, writer
J. J. Lankes, artist
Jay Leyda, cinema critic
John Howard Lawson, playwright
Emit L^ngyel, writer, critic
Pi'of. Max Lerner, professor of government, Williams College
Meridel LeSueur, writer
Meyer Levin, writer
Prof. Charles W. Lightbody, department of government and history, St. Lawrence
University
Robert Morss Lovett, Governor of the "Virgin Islands, an editor of the New
Republic
Prof. Halford E. Luccock, Yale University Divinity School
Katherine Dul're Lumpkin, writer
Klaus Mann, lecturer, writer, son of Thomas Mann
Prof. F. O. Mathiessen, associate professor of history and literature, Harvard
University
Dr. Anita Marburg, department of English, Sarah Lawrence College
Dr. George Marshall, economist
Aline MacMahon, actress
Clifford T. McAvoy, instructor, department of romance languages, College of the
City of New York
Prof. V. J. McGill, professor of philosophy, Hunter College
Prof. Robert McGregor, Reed College
Ruth McKenney, writer
4260 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Darwin J. Meserole, lawyer
Prof. Herbert A. Miller, professor of economics, Bryn Mawr Ck)llege
Harvey O'Connor, writer
Clifford Odets, playwright
Shaenius O'Sheel, writer, critic
Mary White Ovington, social worker
S. J. Perelman, writer
Dr. Jolin P. Peters, department of internal medicine, Yale University Medical
School
Dr. Emily M. Pierson, physician
Walter N. Polakov, engineer
Prof. Alan Porter, professor of German, Vassar College
George D. Pratt, Jr., agriculturist
John Hyde Preston, writer
Samuel Putnam, writer
Prof. Paul Radin, professor of anthropology. University of California
Prof. Walter Rautenstrauch, professor of industrial engineering, Columbia
University
Bernard J. Reis, accountant
Bertha C. Reynolds, social worker
Lynn Riggs, playwright
Col. Raymond Robins, former head of American Red Cross in Russia
William Rollins, Jr., writer
Harold J. Rome, composer
Ralph Roeder, writer
Dr. Joseph A. Rosen, former head of Jewish Joint Distribution Board
Eugene Schoen, architect
Prof. Margaret Schlauch, associate professor of English, New York University
Prof. Frederick L. Scluuuan, professor of government, Williams College
Prof. Vida D. Scudder, professor emeritus of English, Wellesley College
George Seldes, writer
Vincent Sheean, writer
Viola Brothers Shore, scenario -writer
Herman Shumlin. producer
Prof. Ernest J. Simmons, assistant professor of English literature, Harvard
University
Irina Skariatina, writer
Dr. F. Tredwell Smith, educator
Dr. Stephenson Smith, president, Oregon Commonwealth Federation
Hester Sondergaard, actress
Isobel Walker Soule, writer, editor
Lionel Stander, actor
Christina Stead, writer
A. E. Steig, artist
Alfred K. Stern, housing specialist
Dr. Bernhard J. Stei*n, department of sociology, Columbia University
Donald Ogden Stewart, writer
Maxwell S. Stewart, associate editor, the Nation
Paul Strand, producer and photographer
I'rof. Dirk J. Struik, professor of mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of
Technologj'
Robert Tasker, scenario writer
C. Fayette Taylor, aeronautical engineer, head of automotive laboratories, Mass-
achusetts Institute of Technology
James Thurlier, artist, writer
Rebecca Janney Timbres, social worker, writer
Jean Starr Untermeyer, poet
Louis Untermeyer, poet
Mary Van Kleeck, economist, associate director. International Industrial Re-
lations Institute
Stuyvesant Van Veen, artist
J. Raymond Walsh, economist
Dr. William Henry Walsh, physician
Prof. Harry F. Ward, professor of Christian ethics, Union Tlieological Seminary
Lynd Ward, arti.st
Morris Watson, New York Newspaper Guild
Clara Weatherwax, writer
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4261
Max Weber, artist
Dr. Gerald Weiidt, director of science and education, New Yorli World's Fair.
Rev. Robert Whitaker, clergyman and lecturer
Albert Rhys Williams, writer
Dr. William Carlos Williams, writer
Ella Winter, writer
Ricliard Writiht, writer
Art Young, artist
Leane Zugsmith, writer
Mr. Morris. In Soviet Russia Today in September 1939.
Senator Eastland. Proceed.
Mr. Morris. The one point is :
The Soviet Union continues as always to be a consistent bulwark against Fas-
cist aggression and works unceasingly for the goal of a peaceful international
order.
Senator Eastland. Did this witness sign this ?
Mr. Morris. He has stated he is one of the signers of this letter.
Senator Eastland. That was on the eve of the attack on Finland ?
Mr. Morris. No, this is September 1939, subsequent to the announce-
ment of the Hitler-Stalin pact.
Senator Eastland. It was on the eve of the attack on Finland.
Mr. IVIoRRis. It was before, I think.
Mr. SouRw^NE. Is this offered for the record?
Mr. BissoN. I signed that.
Senator Eastland. Had Poland been attacked at that time?
Mr. BissoN. Not that I know of.
Senator Eastland. Not that you know of ?
Mr. BissoN. I don't think so. My field was primarily the Far
East, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Eastland. Do you mean to say because j'ou are a far east-
ern expert you would not know whether Germany attacked Poland
in September 1939 or not ?
Mr. Morris. Do you know Theodore Draper?
Mr. BissoN. I may have.
Mr. Morris. I wish you would recall whether or not you know him.
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember meeting him.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify this letter, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. This is a document from the files of the Institute of
Pacific Relations, a photostat of a letter, on the letterhead of New
Masses, 31 East Twenty-seventh Street, New York City, dated Sep-
temper 23, 1937, addressed to ''Dear Field" and signed "Theodore
Draper."
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read the first para-
graph here :
Dear Field : I have wanted to talk things over with you for some time but
circumstances always intervened to make it impossible or to cause me to post-
pone it. Your absence from New York made me decide to write you a rather
longish letter though perhaps I may see you again before long. Our friend,
Chi, suggested that I tell you frankly what is bothering me, though it is wholly
personal, for what advice or assistance you could suggest. With that as intro-
duction. * * *
Paragraph 4 reads:
For this reason, I am going to take a crack at the Guggenheim fellowships this
year. Incidentally, I am grateful for your permission to use your name in the
application. Professor Laski of Great Britain has also consented and I am now
looking for one or two more, besides yourself and Bisson.
4262 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Does that refresh your recollection at all ?
Mr. BissoN. This' would seem to indicate that he was looking for a
letter of recommendation from me. I do not remember whether I gave
him such a recommendation. I do not remember that I saw him,
which was my original statement.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I suggest we not under the circum-
stances introduce this into the record at this time.
Senator ExVStland. Has the FBI attempted to talk with you ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; it has.
Senator Eastland. Did they ask you a number of questions?
Mr. BissoN. You mean quite recently?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Senator Eastland. Did you give them whatever information they
asked ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes'. I answered their questions.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify these letters, please, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. JVIandel. These are documents from the files of the IPR, photo-
static copies of handwritten letters. The first one is dated September
2, 1946, addressed to "Dear Bill" and signed "Art."
The second is addressed "Dear Bill," dated September 22, 1946, and
signed "Art Bisson."
Mr. Morris. Will you identify those letters as having been written
by you ? There is going to be no question on them. They are going
to be put into the record. They are in your own handwriting. I
would like you to identify them as having been written by you.
Mr. BissoN. Yes. These are my letters.
Mr. Morris. May they be admitted?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
(The letters referred to were marked "Exhibits Nbs. 733, 734" and
are as follows:)
Exhibit No. 733
Dat-ichi Hotel,
Tokijo, Sept. 2, 1946.
Dear Bill: The impossibility of really describing the complicated nexus of
things here has operated as a bar to writing letters ever since I've arrived
except those to Faith. In literal terms my output has been none with the one
exception of a letter carried by Major Everett Sherbourne which I hope he has
delivered you by now. His book should be a first-class job and I trust that he
and the IPR may get together on it.
Your letter reached me here just as I put in for travel orders on October 1st.
There is some reluctance to let me go, however, and the work here is sufficiently
rewarding and significant that I aiu in a state of some indecision myself. The
most difficult problem, of course, is that of a continued separation from the
family. I should have some definite answer on the matter within a tew days
now, and will write fully then.
In my reading of your letter I am in some doubt as to whether you mean that
I can do the project you have in mind while a full member of the staff of the
American Council. I should nmch prefer that working basis, as it would give
me a greater feeling of stability and permanence in my job.
A reorganization of the former membership (along with new members) of the
old Council has occurred here, as you probably know if you have received letters
from Matsuo. So far as I have followed it a good job has been done in a rather
delicate situation, although some of the older members ai"e still left out and
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4263
there may be some heart-buiTiings there. I will, of course, join with Herb,
Quigley, and Miriam in keeping contact with the Japanese group.
Please give my best regards to all at 1E54. I trust that my exile over here
will not continue much longer.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Art.
Exhibit No. 734
PEL ECO
MH MAS
MK LES
(Penciled notes : ) HER — 10 copies of marked paras.
Tokyo, Sept. 22, 1946.
Dear Bill : If I'm going to be a fixture here, I've decided to do a little more
letter writing than before — I've been remiss almost completely thus far.
Andrew and I have spending considerable time the last week or so checking up
on the land reform bill now going through the Diet. It still has some defects
but on the whole Ladijinsky has done a good job, and I'm more hopeful about
a thoroughgoing landlord abolition than Zaibatsu dissolution.
Eleanor Hadley has been working closely with me on virtually all economic
phases of the occupation, but particularly the Zaibatsu problem and the economic
control agencies. She is an excellent economist and a grand person, and knows
Japan well (she was here in 19.38-40). You (or Bill Lockwood) probably know
of her work on the proto — SWNCO directive on the Zaibatsu when she was in
the State Department. She returns to Harvard this January to do her thesis on
the Zaibatsu — she has already passed her Radcliff generals for the doctorate.
I've asked her whether she couldn't do for the conference a study of what has
been done on the Zaibatsu under the occupation — not too long a piece, but a
sort of balance sheet of accomplishments and the job yet to be done. If this
suggestion is of any use to you please let me know and give some indication of
length desired. Eleanor would make a most excellent woman member for your
Amco delegation to London.
Friday afternoon I had a long talk with Matsuo on the recent developments
re the new .Japan Council. A preliminary organization meeting on September
IS crystallized the long job that has been done here during the past six months
to weed out the older conservative elements and merge those left from the past
with a new and more liberal group.
The chairman (or president) of the new Board of Directors will probably be
Dr. Takano (Twasabui'o), currently president of Radio Tokyo, formerly chief
of the Ohara Institute of Social Research. The research secretary will be
Professor Ouchi (Hyoe) of the Public Finance (senior professor) section of
Tokyo Imperial. Ouchi is a close friend of Tsuru, who hopes that he (Ouchi)
will be the nucleus around which the liberal-radical academic circle can be
drawn into the new Council's work. This group already has under way a sym-
posium on Japan's current problems (mainly the economic side) to which I
have been asked to contribute a foreword.
These two will be members of the Board of Directors ex-ofiicio. Other direc-
tors include :
Professor Yanaibara (Tadro), of Tokyo Imperial (specialist or International
economics.
Prof. Yokota (Kisaburo), of Tokyo Imperial, specialist on International Law.
Prof. Suekawa (Hiroshi), of Kyoto Imperial University, law faculty.
Matsukata, Saburo.
Hani (Motoko), prominent woman publicist, with articles in many journals.
She is associated with Jiyu Gakuin, a coed school in Tokyo.
Koike (Atsunosuke), businessman, head of Yamaishi Securities Company.
Saionji, Kinichi.
Present at the meeting was also Shibusawa, Keizo. He is willing to stay in
background (he was Finance Minister in the Shidehara Cabinet earlier this
year) and help to corral some much needed financial support. On the other
hand, he may come into the open as Treasurer and member of the Board of Di-
rectors. With the research secretaryship in Ouchi's hands, Shibusawa is not
likely to run away with the organization.
4264 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
It seems unlikely that Takaki (who has been most outspoken in support of a
Tenno system stronger than the Draft Constitution permits) or Takayarogi (ac-
tive in the war crimes defense) will join, although both of them maintain an
indirect and unofficial link with the new organization.
A Council (Shoin) of about 30 members is being organized of persons from
various fields. This body may formally choose the directors at the formal
organization meeting expected in mid-October. Name is Taiheiyo Mondai Cho-
sakai (Pacific Problems Research Institute) — same as old. AVhen asked, I
advised them to keep the literal translation for the present instead of calling
it the Japan Council of the Institute. Immediate problems are oflSce space and
money.
Miriam transferred to me your letter to Zhulsou, but unfortunately he had
just left when I sought to reach him. I presume you do not wish me to mail it
to him?
Many thanks for your advice and counsel to Faith when she called you. Give
my best regards to Mr. Carter and all my friends on both floors.
Art Bisson.
Mr. Morris. Will you identify this, Mr. Mandel ?
Mr. Mandel. This is a photostat of a carl^on copy of a letter from
the files of the IPR dated September 29, 1939, addressed to Mr. T. A.
Bisson, Foreign Policy Association, with the typed signature of Owen
Lattimore, and at the top the initials KM.
Mr. Morris. I ask you if you can recall having received that letter
from Mr. Lattimore ?
Mr. Bisson. Are you going to ask questions on this?
Mr. Morris. No.
Mr. Bisson. Yes; this letter was received by me.
Mr. Morris. May that be received ? ,
Senator Eastland. Yes.
(The letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 735" and is as
follows:)-
Exhibit No. 735
300 Oilman Hall,
Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Md., ^eptemher 29, 1939.
Mr. T. A. Bisson,
Foreign Policii Association,
8 West JfOth Street, New York City.
Dear Art : You may be out on a limb, but it looks to me like a strong and
springy limb. In fact, I think it is a splendid article. By this mail I am send-
ing a copy, as edited. I made a few minor changes, most of them intended to
make the article less "American," in view of the circulation of Pacific Affairs
abroad.
That, incidentally is one of our great problems, as people outside of the United
States are tremendously interested in the American angle of the Far East, and
in the way in which Aanerica reacts to each move and each stage out there,
but at the same time it is better not to write for them just as if they were
American.
Well, now what? Are the British and French going to fight? You tell me!
This morning the Baltimore paper reports an "appeasement" article in the
"New Statesman and Nation," which of course has always been against Cham-
berlain's api)easement.
I can see the futility of fighting to restore the kind of I'oland that Lloyd
George never liked anyway ; but what I can't imagine are the specific terms
on which the French and British could liack down in front of Hitler.
In the meantime the Russians have got everything they asked for in the
first place as the conditions for entering an alliance with the British and
French — security against German occupation of the whole of Poland, security
against German-engineered putsches in the Baltic States. They have got this
at the cost of terrific hostility in the press, and the jolting up of, I suppose,
all their more loosely attached adherents abroad. AJm I right in supposing
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4265
that they may begin to recover from this? In the first place, they are actually
extending revolutionary principles, at least in Poland. In the second place,
there are many who respect strength and power who are not penetrable by
intellectual arguments.
All this European side of things is a puzzle and a tangle to me ; all I can
see clearly is that the Chinese are certainly not weakened, and probably, or
at least potentially, strengthened.
Yours,
Owen Lattimoke.
OL:Y
Mr. Morris. Did you write an article in the Far Eastern Survey in
August 1944 in anticipation of a negotiated peace with Japan, or in
connection with peace with Japan?
Mr. BissoN. What is the title?
Mr. Morris. Japan Prepares for Peace Offensive.
I show you the Far Eastern Survey of that date and ask you if
that is your article?
Mr. BissoN. Are there going to be questions on this ?
Mr. ]\loRRis. Is this your article ?
Mr. BissoN, Yes ; it is.
Mr. Morris. May that be received into the record ?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 736" and is
as follows : )
Exhibit No. 736
[Source: Far Eastern Survey, American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations, August 9,
1944, vol. 13, No. 16]
Japan Prepares for Peace Offensive
(By T. A. Bisson)
The Tojo Cabinet's resignation en bloc on July IS is an impressive tribute
to the weight of the Pacific offensive, currently tearing the vitals out of Japan's
strongholds in the Marianas. This onslaught was seconded by the first massive
blows from the B-29's on Japan's home soil — a factor which also counts heavily
in Japanese home-front reactions. There is deep-seated apprehension among the
Japanese that no preparations which their rulers can make will be sufficient
to overcome their country's peculiar vulnerability to attack from the air, once
such attack becomes large-scale and continuous. Finally, even before the
attempt on Hitler's life, the Japanese were painfully noting the ominous col-
lapse of Germany's military power, spectacularly evident in the crumbling of
the eastern front before the Russian drives but also seen in the breaching of
Hitler's boasted Atlantic Wall and the steady Allied progress in Italy.
The series of drastic Japanese defeats in tlie Pacific, culminating in the loss
of Saipan, directly forced the resignation of the Japanese Cabinet. Between
July 10 and IS Tojo desperately maneuvered to save his cabinet by conces-
sions which separated the military and naval staff commands from the War
and Navy Ministries. Admiral Shigetaro Shimada first insisted that he should
be divested of one of his two concurrent posts — Chief of the Naval Staff and
Minister of the Navy. To this measure Tojo was forced to consent, and for
the purpose appointed Admiral Naokuni Nomura to the Navy Ministry on
July 17, leaving Admiral Shimada as Chief of the Naval Staff. Admiral Nonmra
must have set an unusual precedent, since — if the announced dates are cor-
rect— he retained his new post for exactly one day. But this concession was
not enough to appease the opposition to Tojo and on July IS it was announced
that General Yoshijiro I'mezu had become Chief of the Army Staff, succeeding
General Tojo, who had "been relieved of his concurrent post." These dates, it
should be noted, are announcements by the Cabinet Board of Information after
the changes had been made. The actual changes may have preceded the an-
nouncements by a day or two, since the entire cabinet finally resigned on July 18.
Thus Tojo's eleventh-hour attempt to save his cabinet completely failed.
4266 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
While the cabinet resignation may be attributed mainly to Japan's military-
naval defeats, for which To jo was made to accept responsibility, an additional
set of factors must be taken into account iu order to explain the composition
of the new cabinet. These factors are in part external, affecting the current
status of the war in its global aspects. Japanese leaders, military as well as
civilian, are not unaware of the effects which the coming defeat of Germany
will have on Japan's war prospects. The Japanese leadership has always been
acutely sensitive to the world setting within which it has plotted the successive
steps in the program of national aggrandizement. It now begins to recognize,
with full dread of the consequences, that the attack on Pearl Harbor consti-
tutes the greatest miscalculation of Japanese diplomacy in the 7G years since the
Restoration. And it is now taking the preliminary internal measures which,
it hopes, may offer a prospect of salvaging the essential portions of the Empire
from the wreckage of defeat. It is cleverly preparing the groundwork for that
offer of a negotiated peace against which the United Nations must gird them-
selves in the aftermath of Nazi Germany's collapse.
These external factors, however, are but a part of the total complex situation
in Japan which helps to explain the composition of the Koiso cabinet and gives
us some assurance in gaging the role which it is expected to perform. The
evolution of the Tojo cabinet, which has held office for the lengthy term of nearly
3 years, has logically concluded in the establishment of a government which
relegates the armed services to their purely military and naval functions and
assigns one man to do one job.
TOJO CABINET UNIQXJE
In these respects, the Tojo cabinet was an extraordinary anomaly in Japanese
constitutional history. For a Japanese minister to hold two concurrent posts
was a common practice. But never before did one man succeed in grasping so
many of the reins of government in his hands as did Tojo. At the outset, in
October ll»41, Tojo was Premier, War Minister, and Home Minister. He held
the latter post until the success of the initial attacks was complete, thus assuring
no untoward reactions on the home front. The first two posts he held until the
end. To these he had added the extremely important offices of Munitions
Minister, in control of war production, and Army Chief of Staff.
Two points may be made in this regard. No one man could be Premier, War
Minister, Chief of Staff, and Munitions Minister, all at the same time, without
detriment to administrative efficiency. In actual fact, much of the routine
and even policy-forming activities of these positions had to be carried out by
the Vice-Ministers or the Vice Chief of Staff. But — and this is the second point —
such a condition immediately tended to create friction or animosity and to lead
to charges of one-man dictatorship. So long as things went well, Tojo could
reply that his unimpeded control gave unity and cohesive direction to the war
effort. When defeats came in monotonous succession, this position could no
longer be maintained ; at the end it turned into a disadvantage for Tojo, cul-
minating in his downfall.
On the eve of the July IS overthrow, the earlier scope of Tojo's dictatorial
powers had in reality been whittled down to a considerable extent. Under his
effective control was left essentially the general direction of the cabinet and of
the Army, but other phases of domestic administration had largely slipped
from his grasp. This evolution, in accordance with normal Japanese constitu-
tional practice, had come about so gradually as to be almost unnoticed. Over a
period of nearly 3 years, many changes in cabinet portfolios would necessarily
occur iu Japan and it is by these changes that the political current is to be dis-
cerned. In the Tojo cabinet the ministerial shifts had been even more numer-
ous than usual. They bad occurred, as might be expected, largely in response
to the changing fortunes of the war hut also as a result of the pressure of those
groups in the ruling circle which felt that Tojo had invaded their legitimate
spheres.
The general drift is clearly indicated by several of the more important shifts.
On September 1, 1942, despite the Midway defeat, Tojo was still able to announce
establishment of the Greater East Asia Ministry, to accept the protest resigna-
tion of Foreign Minister Shigenori Togo, and to appoint Masayuk Tani, an Army
favorite, in place of Tojo. The snub to the Foreign Office crowd was pronounced.
With the loss of Guadalcanal, however, it Ijecame increasingly apparent that Tojo
was meeting opposition to which he was forced to make concessions. He over-
played his hand in seeking extraordinary dictatorial powers to cope with the
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4267
crisis of production, raet unexpectedly strong opposition on this score in the
Diet in Januarv-Februarv 11)43, and ultimately— on March 17, 1943— announced
that a ministerial-ranli; Council of seven financial and industrial magnates would
advise him on the application of his emergency powers.
Further cabinet shifts on April 20, 1943, brought Mamoru Shigemitsu, a For-
eign Ofliee stalwart, to the Foreign Ministry and introduced two of the old
party leaders into the cabinet. Within the Munitions Ministry, formed No-
vember 1, 1943, Tojo's undivided control was challenged by the business leaders,
especially in the person of Ginjiro Fujihara, who was made State Minister
^^•ithout Portfolio on November 17 and became increasingly active in the pro-
duction effort. The trend was unmistakable. It meant the return to the
Foreign Office, of the business magnates, and of the party leaders to their old
spheres of jurisdiction within the normal balance of group interests.
Under these internal conditions, added to the external factors of the military
defeat in Europe and Asia, the Emperor's advisers were confronted on July
18 with the Tojo cabinet's resignation. In this case, it is important to observe
that evervthing was done pro forma. Marquis Koichi Kido, Lord Keeper of the
Privy Seal, was received in audience by the Emperor to discuss the selection
of the next cabinet. The Elder Statesmen who used to perform the delicate
constitutional function of advising the Emperor on the choice of a new Premier
are no longer available, but since their passing a new constitutional practice
has been sedulously developed. With Marquis Kido came the seven living ex-
Premiers, the Presklent of the Privy Council. Yoshimichi Kara, and the out-
going Premier, General Tojo. A glance at the ex-Premiers is instructive, in
view of the crucial significance of their new constitutional role. The list com-
prises Baron Reijiro Wakatsuki, Admiral Keisuke Okada, Koki Hirota, Prince
Fumimore Konove, Baron Kiichiro Hiranuma, General Nobuyuki Abe, and Ad-
miral Mitsumasa Yonai. Everyone in this group has distinguished himself,
in one war or another, by working against the Army extremists. Hara and Kido
are naturallv of the snme stamp. By the addition of Tojo, the overwhelmingly
conservative" cast of this group of constitutional advisers is hardly altered.
This factor must be steadily kept in mind when future cabinet changes are
under consideration.
In the present instance, i. e., the formation of the Koiso cabinet, the group
of advisers worked in expert fashion to secure the results desired. The basic
essential, of course, was to reconstitute a strong fighting team which would
carry on the war with the utmost energy, efiiciency and unity, so far as the
fighting services were concerned. There can be little doubt that this objective
was achieved. Five senior military and naval men hold the major posts.
Koiso, as Premier, has the key position. As an old Kwantung Army man, he
will obviously work hand in hand with General Yoshijiro Umezu, new Chief of
the Army Staff, who comes directly from command of the Kv>antung Army in
Manchuria. Admiral Shigetaro Shimada. evidently a capable naval technician,
retains his post of Chief of the Navy Staff. Admiral Yonai, as Navy Minister,
and Field Marshal Gen Sugiyama, as War Minister, able leaders but by no
means extremist, bring to the cabinet posts a conservative weight that balances
the whole team. The princple of "one man to one post"' is rigidly adhered to in
these changes, and there can be no blinking the fact that a vigorous prosecution
of the war can be expected from this group of leaders.
The political constituents of the new cabinet, however, carry the evolution
which was proceeding within the Tojo cabinet to a new stage. General Koiso
holds the single post of Premier, and no other. Not only is his direct outreach
far less than that of Tojo, so far as cabinet portfolios are concerned, but in addi-
tion Navy Minister Yonai — a former Premier of moderate outlook — has been
made Deputy Prime Minister. There is no good reason to believe that the
creation of this post, rather unusual in Japanese constitutional practice, im-
plies that Koiso and Yonai may work at cross purposes.
Koiso is, like Tojo, and old Kwantung Army man of the most aggressive
type, and as such a good front man personifying determination to wage
the war to a successful conclusion. He was, however, a colleague of Yonai's
in the Hiranuma cabinet of 1939, as Overseas Minister, and held the same post
in the 1940 cabinet headed by Yonai. During this period Koiso showed himself
exceedingly active in furthering the Navy's program of expansion in Southeast
Asia, especially as affecting the Netherlands Indies. There is thus every war-
rant for believing that the yoking together of General Koiso, the "extremist"
Premier, and Admiral Yonai, the "moderate" Deputy Premier, will prove a
4268 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
smooth-working combination instead of the reverse. It will help to overcome
the friction that had clearly developed between the Army and Navy commands
at the close of Tojo's administration.
The marked curtailment of General Koiso's power in the new cabinet, as con-
ti-asted with Tojo's former position, is nevertheless a political factor of great
importance. This change goes much further, moreover, thnn in relegating Koiso
to the premiership alone and appointing a deputy to act with him. All the other
traditional Japanese group interests — the diplomats, the businessmen, and the
former party leaders — have resumed the regular administrative spheres and
powers held in normal times.
CONSERVATIVES STAGE COMEBACK
Take the position of Foreign Minister Shigemitsu as one outstanding example
of the shift back to normalcy. He, and not an Army man, holds the only ma.ior
concurrent post in the cabinet. The Greater East Asia Ministry, set up by the
military in order to keep administration of conquered territories in their own
hands, now passes back to control of the Foreign OlTice. The change is boldly
stated to be aimed at securing unified diplomacy. At one stroke the long
history of the Army's determined efforts to maintain administrative control of
territory conquered since 1931, exemplified in the political struggles attending
formation of the Manchurian Affairs Board, the China Affairs Board and GEA
Ministry itself, is nulified. The Foreign Ofiice returns to its own — and, be it
noted, thereby becomes responsible for the conduct of negotiations which could
affect the disposal of Japan's nexus of ruling groups — such agreement will be
forthcoming.
Hardly less significant of the changing political tide is the appointment of
Ginjiro Fujihara, outstanding Japanese industrialist, as head of the Munitions
Ministry. Tojo himself had held this portfolio in the old cabinet and the Vice-
Minister had been Shinsuke Kishi, a former Manchukuo bureaucrat. Fujihara,
carrying the ball for the business interests, had been critical of Tojo's production
efforts even before the Munitions Ministry was established. After its forma-
tion, as noted, he had played an increasingly significant role in spurring pro-
duction as State Minister. Now he takes over full control.
In addition no less than four of the old-time Koiso cabinet. Yonezo Maeda,
former Seiyukai leader, becomes Transportation and Communications Minister,
while Toshio Shimada is made Agriculture and Conunerce Minister. These
posts cover the administrative sphere which was normally occupied by the
party leaders in the heyday of their power. Botii Chuji Machida, former
Minseito presided now described as dean of political circles, and Count Hideo
Kodama, from the Kenkyukai group in the House of Peers, are accorded the
dignified posts of Ministers of State Affairs (without portfolio).
Appointments to other cabinet posts follow the same trend. The Home Min-
istry goes to Shigeo Odate, a cai'eer bureaucrat in the legal field with some
Manchukuo experience, instead of to an Army man. The Finance Ministry is
taken by Sotaro Ishiwata, a bureaucrat who held the same post in the Hiranuma
and Yonai cabinets. (Nine out of the 16 newly appointed ministers held office
in these two cabinets, in itself a very revealing fact.) Taketora Ogata, State
Minister and President of the Information Board, was vice-president of the
AsAHi, also representing a shift from the career bureaucrats that have previously
held this post. Hiromasa IMatsuzaka. New Justice Minister, had been the Pro-
curator General, while Hisatada Hirose, Welfare Minister, had also been a
member of the Yonai cabinet. Lt. Gen. Harushige Ninomiya, as Education Min-
ister, is the sole military leader holding a normally civilian post.
The far-reaching political realignment indicated by these changes does not
imply that there will be a slackening in Japan's war effort. More probably the
reverse is true. The caliber of the men chosen to lead the war and home fronts,
characterized by ability, experience, and seniority, may well infuse greater
efficiency and drive into the prosecution of the war. The Koiso cabinet's per-
sonnel, moreover, despite surface indications to the contrary, is essentially far
more unified than Tojo's cabinet had become. Most of its members have ^^ ^rked
closely together in the past, understand each other thoroughly, and have con-
fidence in each other's ability. For the immediate continuation of a stubborn
defensive fight, therefore, vigorous leadership may be expected from this cabinet.
Looking somewhat beyond the next few months, however, it is vitally necessary
to recognize the second line of defense which the Emperor's far-seeing advisers
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4269
have established in the making of this cabinet. Its political complexion proves
unmistakably that it is a way-station on the road to the offer of a compromise
peace. Only one additional change remains to be made in the cabinet as now
constituted 'in order to give the political authority to seek terms. This change
would be in the premiership. Yonai, already Deputy Prime Minister, could
succeed Koiso ; or General Nobuyuki Abe, who succeeded Koiso as Governor-
General of Korea, could be brought home for the task. Such a development is
virtually inevitable, as the blows in the Pacific strike closer to Japan. And the
scope of the political shift already made indicates that the final change will be
smoothly accomplished. If the elder statesmen's plans succeed, there will be
no civil disturbances, as in Germany, when the decision to make the peace offer
is eventually taken. The groundwork has been too carefully laid already in the
Koiso cabinet. Japan's Army-Navy leadership will in all probability support
the move toward a compromise settlement.
POSSIBLE TKRMS OF PEACE OFFER
This offer will be carefully timed. We can probably expect it in the wake of
Germany's final collapse, when Britain and the United States are in the trough of
the wave, wrestling with such problems as the transfer of armed forces and equii>
ment to the Pacific, and industrial reconvePBion. The terms will go far, possibly
even to the extent of relinquishing all Japan's southern conquests and all of
China Proper. IManchuria and Korea will not be offered, since they are both
necessary for Japan if it is to remain a great power.
Is there any danger that this offer will be favorably entertained by the United
States and Britain? If so, the time to reckon with the threat is now, for the
Koiso cabinet strongly indicates that the day of the offer is approaching. Some
voices will almost certainly be raised in favor of acceptance. It is to be hoped
that they will be a small minority. There can be no question as to what such
acceptance would mean. With the raw materials and industrial facilities of
Korea and Manchuria, both intensively developed in the past decade, Japan would
have all the necessary resources to heal the wounds of this war and lay careful
plans for a full success in the next one. Within Japan itself the domination of
the armed services, the monarchist bureaucracy and the business groups would be
confirmed, and the Japanese people would again be yoked to- the war chariot of
their oppressors. China, disillusioned in the Western democracies, might fall
an easy prey to the machinations of Japan's agents engaged in the work of
preparation for the new conflict. These are the essential factors which make it
necessary that the task now well begun be fully completed. The cost of stopping
halfway to victoi-y in the Pacific is too great to pay.
Mr. Morris. I offer you a partial list of writings by T, A. Bisson
which has been compiled by Mr. Mandel. I ask you if you will look
at that list and determine whether or not there are any inaccuracies.
Mr. Chairman, I suggest that may not have to be done today. If
the witness simply indicates he will so comply with this request, we can
do that by subsequent correspondence and save time.
Mr. BissoN. Yes; that is all right. This is supposed to be a com-
plete compilation ?
Mr. Morris. Read the heading there.
Mr. BissoN. Partial list.
Mr. Morris. If you want to add anything to that list by title, by
all means do it.
Look at the last page, please. The last page is writings of Frederick
Spencer. There are nine articles on that list, I believe. I guess there
are more than nine. There are 14 articles and reviews written for
China Today under the name of Frederick Spencer. At the same time
will you tell us whether or not all of those articles were written by you?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. You have testified that you used the pen name of
Frederick Spencer ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 16
4270 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. BissoN. You mean ^Yhen I send back a statement on this.
Mr. IMoRRis. On this, we will have to have sworn testimony and we
should do that here. Whether or not all of these 14 items, re\'iews
and articles were in fact written by you I mean. Can you determine
that now ?
Mr. BissoN. Do you have copies of those magazines here?
Mr. Morris. We have, Mr. Chairman. I wish you could determine
now in the interest of time.
Mr. BissoN. It was my testimony and it is my knowledge of the
articles in China Today under Frederick Spencer were by me, so
that should cover this.
Senator Eastland. That may be admitted.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 737" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 737
Partial List of Writings by T. A. Bisson
America's Par Eastern Policy, IPR Inquiry Series.
Aspects of Wartime Economic Control in Japan, Secretariat Paper No. 2, 9th
Conference IPR, Jan. 1945.
American Policy in the Far East, 1931-40, IPR Inquiry Series, 1939.
Japan's War Economy, Publication International Secretariat, IPR, Macmillan
Co., 1945.
America's Far Eastern Policy, IPR Inquiry Series, Macmillan Co., 1945.
Prospects for Democracy in Japan, Published Under Auspices International
Secretariat, IPR, 1949.
Japan in China, Macmillan Co., 1938.
AMERASIA
(Editorial) 1 Sept. 1935.
Behind Japan's Internal Crisis June 1937.
Mao Tse-tung Analyzes Nanking — An Interview Oct. 1937.
Aikawa Asks for Fifty Millions March 19.38.
Aikawa's "Open Door" (editorial) April 1938.
Lessons of Taierhchwang (editorial) May 1938
After Suchow, What? (editorial) June 1938.
Japan Beats a Retreat (editorial) Aug. 1938.
A Bold Proposal (editorial) Sept. 1938. -
Observations on Fascism in Japan Sept. 1938.
Japan and the Open Door (editorial) Oct. 1938.
No Collaboration With Chamberlain (editorial) Nov. 1938.
Reviews :
Imperial Japan : 1926-1938, by A. Morgan Nov. 1938.
Japan : The Hungry Guest, by G. C. Allen Nov. 1938.
Hemisphere Armaments and the Open Door Dec. 1938.
Mr. Bisson Replies to Mr. Nauano Jan. 1939.
How the Axis Became a Triangle Feb. 1939.
Japan's Next Move (editorial) March 1939
Can Britain "Deal" With Japan (editorial) July 1939.
Another Chance for Cbamberlain (editorial) Aug. 19.39.
Japan Picks Up the Pieces (editorial) Sept. 19.39.
What Kind of "Peace" in the Far East Nov. 1939.
No Progress in Puppet Land Puppetry (editorial) Dec. 1939.
Review : The Inner Asian Frontiers of China, by Owen May 1940.
Lattimore.
Review : India Today, by R. Palme Dutt Dec. 1940.
Japan's "New Structvire" Falters May 1941.
Toward Winning Far Eastern Security Oct. 1941.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4271
FAB EASTERN SURVEY
The Suzuki Cabinet May 9, 1945.
Nationalization by Request Aug. 1, 1945.
People's Army in Japan Aug. 15, 1945.
Japan Prepares for Peace Offensive Aug. 9, 1944.
China's Part in a Coalition War July 14, 1943.
Japan's New Industrial Conversion Program Sept. 8, 1943.
Reparations and Reform in Japan, Vol. XVI, 1947.
FOREIGN POLICY REPORTS
America's Dilemma in the Far East July 1, 1940.
Japan's "New Structure" April 15, 1941.
FOREIGN POLICY ASSOCIATION
Showdown in the Orient, World Affairs Pamphlets, No. 8 Apr. 1940.
Clash in the Pacitic, by T. A. Bisson and Kyllis Alexander
Goslin, Headline Books.
Shadow Over Asia — the Rise of Militant Japan, Headline
Books.
SOVIET RUSSIA TODAY
Far Eastern Front Against Aggression Nov. 1938.
To All Active Supporters of Democracy and Peace — Open Sept. 1939.
Letter signed by T. A. Bisson.
PACIFIC AFFAIRS
The United States and the Far East Jan. 1932.
Review : Sun Yat Sen vs. Communism, by Maurice Williams Sept. 1932.
The United States in the Pacific Dec. 1932.
Japan Without Germany Dec. 1939.
The Price of Peace for Japan Mar. 1944.
Review : Battle Hymn of China, by Agnes Smedley Mar. 1944.
Review : The Japanese New Order in Asia, by Paul Einzy June 1944.
Japan as a Political Organism Dec. 1944.
The Zaibatsu's Wartime Role Dec. 1945.
The United States and the Orient, American National Survey, IPR
1118, 1930, Vol. III.
Problems of War Production Control in Japan, 1943, Vol. XVI.
Increase of Zaibatsu Predominance in Wartime Japan, 1945, Vol.
XVIII.
CHINA TODAY
Under -pseudonym of Frederick Spencer
Nanking Clasps Hands With China Oct. 1934.
Japan Takes Over Shanghai Nov. 1934.
Review : Twilight in the Forbidden City, by Reginald F. Johnston, Do.
Chiang Kai-shek's Dictatorship Stumbles ^ Dec. 1934.
Review : China, by L. A. Lydall Do.
To the American People (Open Letter) (signed by T. A. Bisson Feb. 1935.
and Frederick Spencer).
Chiang Kai-shek Yields to Japan * Mai'. 1935.
Chiang Kai-shek "Rehabilitates" Kiangsi May 1935.
Review :
The Case for Manchoukuo, by Geo. Bronson Do.
Toward Understanding Japan, by Sidney L. Gulick Do.
Japan Calls the Tune July 1935.
The Missionaries Must Choose October 1935.
Chiang Kai-shek Licks Japan's Boots Nov. 1935.
The Same Old Wheeze Do.
Students Resist Nanking Betrayal Feb. 1936.
Case Studies in Japanese Imperialism Do.
Behind the Murders in Tokyo April 1936.
Viscount Ishii, Imperialist Diplomat — June 1936.
The Gangly Days of American Imperialism August 1936.
4272 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. Did you know Esther Carroll ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. Morris. How well ?
INIr. BissoN. I knew her from the American Friends of the Chinese
People.
Mr. Morris. Were you a member of that organization ?
Mr, BissoN. I was.
Mr, Morris, Did you ever speak under the auspices of the American
League for Peace and Democracy ?
Mr. BissoN, Yes ; I imagine so,
Mr, Morris. "VVliat year ?
Mr, BissoN. I don't recall the date.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Susumu Okano in Japan ?
Mr. BissoN, Yes, Mr, Okano, as I remember, was interviewed by
several members of the Government Section,
Mr. Morris. He was the head of the Japanese Communist Party ?
Mr, BissoN. Yes.
Mr, Morris. Did you meet him in connection with official duties?
Mr. BissoK. Yes,
ISIr. Morris, I have no more questions. We do have one more ex-
hibit. This is the Minutes of the Annual ]\Iembersliip Meeting of the
American Friends of the Chinese People, dated January 23, 1938.
Senator Eastland. It will be admitted.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 738," and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 738
Annual Membership Meeting of the American Friends op the Chinese People
January 23, 1938—2 : 00 P. M.
Meeting opened by Mr. Julius Loeb who introduced the chairman for the day —
Mr. Maxwell S. Stewart.
Mr. Stewart announces the Order of Business :
1. Discussion by Mr. T. A. Bisson.
2. Reports of work.
3. Discussion on reports.
4. Election of officers.
Mr. Bisson : Mr. Bisson pointed out the more optimistic perspective of the
Chinese situation. Whereas five years ago all China was rent with partisan
difference and political disunity, today the country is united. Despite Hirota's
three demands, the infiltration of Japanese control in East Hopei and the attempt
to invade Suiyuan, the Kuomintang was still waging war on the Communist
forces.
The demand for unity was, however, growing steadily until finally the Generalis-
simo was detained at Sian by the rebellious troops under Chang Hsueh-liang
who refused to fight their countrymen while the enemy kept advancing. In the
spring of 1937 the Kuomintang could no longer hesitate and this led up to the
present united-front situation. There are, however, some groups within the
Kuomintang opposed to the arming of the population.
China more and more takes her place among the anti-fascist nations of the
world. Her relations with the Soviet Union are more cordial than they have
been in the last ten years.
Mr. Bisson concluded his report with an analysis of tlie military situation.
He emphasizetl the necessity of organizing the peasantry for active defense and
the extension of guerrilla warfare.
A brief period of questions and discussion followed.
reports of work
Mr. Julius Loeb (on history of organization) : This organization was started
on January 4th, 1933. Our activities during the past were mainly educational.
Our Lecture Bureau, which includes Chinese, Japanese, and Korean speakers,
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4273
has sent lecturers to all sorts of groups, and who have spoken to thousands of
people monthly. We have a research staff and a School for Far Eastern Studies.
Our other activities consist of holding mass meetings, sending delegates to various
peace congresses and conferences, picketing, and holding demonstrations before
the Japanese Consulate's OfBce and at Brooklyn docks where Japanese ships are
being loaded with scrap iron. Several years ago we produced a documentai-y
film, "The Birth of New China."
We started to publish a "Monthly Bulletin" in July 1933. By January 1934
the mimeographed China Today was issued. The printed form was published
October 1934, and has been issued consecutively every month since. It is the
only magazine of its kind printed in the English language. Subscription price
is $1.00 yearly ; single copy, 10(^. We print ten thousand copies. The i..agazine
circulates throughout the United States and in foreign countries. Our publica-
tion is barred in Japan.
The educational activities have been intensified and the membership and sub-
scribers of our magazine have increased. A branch has been established in San
Francisco, Portland, Chicago, and a group is functioning in Los Angeles. In the
international field, Friends of the Chinese People have been established in Canada,
Mexico, France, and in the Philippine Islands. A smaller group which has been
operating in England recently merged with other larger groups which are helping
China.
Having anticipated the present events in China, we were not unprepared for
what we have to do now. We are holding larger meetings, have created a Boycott
Committee, have held several anti-silk parades, and increased our picketing work,
started to send organizers and lecturers out of town, and are increasing our efforts
for the collection of funds for China's aid. From now on our work will be more
national in scope than ever before. We must assist the Chinese people in all
possible ways. By so doing we will justify our name, the American Friends of
the Chinese People.
E. A. Schachner (editor, China Today) : "I don't know of any oi'ganization
anywhere, considering the size and the number of people working with it, who do
more good in the direction it wants to go than this organization. Perhaps the
most effective weapon in the country on China is the magazine China Today.
The problem that faces us is very clearly this : to continue to make China
Today an effective factor in disseminating accurate information on China. We
have got to be an expression in this country of all the various movements that
are helping China at this moment.
"Our main object is the problem of funds. We have now the best correspond-
ents on China as contributing editors. Our big difficulty is to get this magazine
in the hands of the tens of thousands of interested Americans. We hope to
improve the format considerably and increase the circulation in the very near
future. We may start this very month with a new cover. We have already
Increased the size of the magazine by four pages. We haven't a circulation
manager as yet, but hope to remedy the condition. I think if we get the coopera-
tion from the executive council and from the friends of the organization, we
can feel sure that the fine traditions of the organization will be continued and
that China Today will continue to be an important weapon in the country for
the help that all of us want to give to the liberation and independence of the
Chinese people."
Esther Carroll (Organization Secretary) : "In 1934-85 only small groups of
people were ready to listen to the message of China. All doubted Chinese will-
ingness and ability to fight for her territorial integrity and independence. Then
our speakers, our magazine China Today, our forums, brought to the American
public a better understanding of China's histoi-y, China's art, China's culture,
and China's love for freedom. * * *
"When aggression in Spain broke out we knew that aggression in the Far East
would follow. We knew that the aggressive fascist powers would want to ignite
the flames of war in Asia too. But this time when Japan struck at China, when
the heavy boot of the Japanese military swept through the ancient and beau-
tiful cities, when the bombs of the Japanese war planes brought death and ruin
to Shanghai, Nanking — a united and determined China came into being. The
rest of the world, stirred and indignant, called for all support to the Chinese
people and defeat of the Japanese aggressors. It was the voice calling for de-
fense of a free Spain. * * *
"Such peace-loving Japanese friends like Mr. Kubota, Miss INIatsui, Mr. Okano
and others made it possible for us to act properly, timely. It was this team-
work and wise counsel that made it possible for us to organize the first big
protest meeting on August 4th at the New School for Social Research to organize
4274 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
the successful and colorful mass meeting at Madison Square Garden together
with the American League for Peace and Democracy on October 1st, for the
airplanes and tugboats equipped with loudspeakers protesting the shipment of
scrap iron to Japan, for the organization of the antisilk parade in New York,
the participation of ten delegates equipped with speakers, posters, leaflets who
went to the Congress for Peace and Democracy held in Pittsburgh. The send-
ing of fraternal delegates to the American Federation of Labor and Committee
for Industrial Organization conventions. It was with the help of our Japanese
friends that we gave deserving 'receptions' and 'send-offs' to the Japanese war
envoys who came to this country. And the special introductions which we
gave* for the Japanese labor misleader Bunji Suzuki who came here to defend
his government. So much so that he never reached the east coast but went cry-
ing about the lack of appreciation on the part of American labor for the
humanitarian aims of his government.
"It was with the help and advice of our Chinese and Japanese friends that
we were able to have a series of demonstrations in front of many Japanese
consulates throughout the country the day following the bombing of the 'Panay'
and to distribute 120.000 leaflets in one week in the city of New York alone dur-
ing the showing of the film. Over half a million pieces of literature and hun-
dreds of thousands of buttons were sold and distributed.
"Branches of our organization were set up nationally and internationally.
Everywhere people are clamoring for help and guidance. We hope to imme-
diately after this meeting and with your help to raise the necessary funds for
the purpose of sending out the best people of our staff on a tour together with
Jack Chen and other Chinese friends who have kindly consented to participate
and help.
"Relief work is not going fast enough. But good beginnings were made every-
where. Funds shoiild be raised for medical aid, for doctors and nurses, and food
to go in a constant stream to China. The boycott movement — well on its way must
be rolled uphill faster. China Today, our magazine, must gain 2,000 new sub-
scribers and thousands of additional readers in the next few months. We must
intensify and increase throughout the country, pressure brought to bear on our
government for an active peace policy, aid to China, and an embargo against
Japan the aggressor. Let us help the people of our country to, in the spirit of
true American tradition, give every substantial, moral, and material help to
China in her fight for freedom, independence, progress, and world peace."
Conrad Komorowski (Educational Director) : Mr. Komorowski reported that
the work of the Educational Committee was not quite satisfactory as yet. He
pointed out that the feeling of sympathy for China is growing much faster than
our organizational work is. The movement is growing by such leaps and Iiounds
that we find ourselves lagging behind it. As an example of the good work the
Educational Committee has done he mentioned the fact that in the last six or
seven weeks the Lecture Bureau has sent out speakers who have reached ap-
proximately 10,000 people. He stressed that we must mal^^e new contact.s — church
groups, peace organizations, and trade-unions. We must utilize the radio. An-
other shortcoming is that we have no meetings for the speakers where they can
discuss their work and settle mutual problems. This must be done soon, and
also the issuance of a bulletin dealing specifically with the problems of the
speakers and outlining facts for them.
The Library must be enlarged and improved to the point where it will be an
actual help to the research workers. In this connection Mr. Rodgers was com-
mended for the splendid work he has been doing in the research field. A research
committee must be built around him to help carry on the work. The much-
discussed speakers' class will be started some time in February. The plan is to
get many new people from different organizations who can take our course and
then return to their organizations to carry on the work there. One of the func-
tions of the Educational Committee is to take care of the publicity that comes out
of the office. With a larger, more efficient committee this can be done.
Mr. Komorowski concluded his report by appealing for volunteers for the
Educational Committee. He urged all the members to bring to him the r>anies
of organizations, particularly church, peace, and trade-unions, which can be con-
tacted by the Committee. In this way we can expand the work of the Committee
and the organization.
Helen Holman (on Negro work) : Miss Holman spoke briefly on our work among
the Negro people in Harlem. She emphasized that with Negro nationalist
movements flourishing in Harlem, it is very important for our organization to
become entrenched among the Negro people there and dispel all incorrect im-
pressions that "Japan is a friend of the darker races," etc.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4275
Mrs. Julia Cliurcli Kolar (Boycott Committee) : "In reviewing and setting clown
the actual work done by this committee since the first date recorded, that of
September 10th, I came to this conclusion, that the results are amazing in com-
parison to effort put forth. On Oc-tober 2nd in the "Nation' we read the first call
for the boycott in the voice of Mr. Maxwell Stewart. On October 6th, fifteen
women picketed a Woolworth store and ours were the first feet to be marching
for the boycott as far as I know. * * *
"We visited the Woolworth management in the Woolworth Building; we also
called upon the executives in Macy's, Gimbels, Wanamakers', H. L. Green Co.
We suggested they remove Japanese goods from their counters and make a
statement to that effect. Leaflets were distributed. In December we had the
Christmas banners. On Oct. 19th we had a picket line at the Commodity Ex-
change followed by a street meeting which was very successful, drawing a large
crowd and which was written up in the papers. On Oct. 13th we visited the
Viscous Company to get information about rayon for hose, and on the 14th five
of us went as a delegation to the National Hosiery Manufacturers Association
meeting at the Waldorf-Astoria where we had an interview with Mr. Consadine,
the national director. * * *
"Oriental stores, stores selling only Japanese goods, wholesale houses, etc.,
were visited in order to get information and advise the trade what we were doing
on the boycott. Letters came into the office from colleges, from students ,and from
professors, from organizations in different parts of the country asking informa-
tion about the boycott. We distributed thousands of buttons, visiting, meeting
with them, and with leaflets. On November 10th two young women and myself
boarded the S. S. Nonnandic with 2,000 cards which we distributed to oncoming
possengers and handed in to staterooms. These announced that two fellow
travelers — Baron Okura and Admiral Godo were Japanese envoys who were here
on a so-called good will mission, and urged they be boycotted These cards were
received with splendid response. A picket line was on the outside of the pier
during this time. * * *
"Then began plans for the Women's Anti-Silk Parade which was held on
December 11th when more than 2,000 women paraded in the name of peace.
Among the women's organizations participating were : Theatre Arts Committee,
League of Women Shoppers, Women's Division American League for Peace and
Democracy, Women's Division, Medical Bureau for Spain, Free Synagogue Wom-
en, Progressive Women's Council. University Settlement Mothers Clubs, I. W. O.
Women, Harlem Peace League, Workers Alliance, Union of OflSce and Profes-
sional Workers, Retail Store Employees, Federal Writers Project, W. P. A.
Teachers Local, Teachers Union, Women's Advertising Guild, Social Workers,
American Artists Union, International Labor Defense, Students, Chinese women
and Spanish women, etc. Other prominent women who endorsed the parade
were: Miss Hester Sondergaard, actress; Miss Frances Farmer, actress; Miss
Claire Luce, actress ; Miss Phoebe Brant, actress ; Miss Edith Barret, actress ;
Mrs. Isobel Walker Soule, writer and editor; Mrs. Anna Rochester, writer; Miss
Genevieve Taggart, poetess ; Miss Grace Lumpkin, writer ; Miss Muriel Rukeyser,
poetess ; Miss Eda Lou Walton, poetess. * * *
"On December ISth our committee was well represented at the Boycott Con-
ference held at 99 Park Ave. I was placed on the resolutions committee. On
January 19th we visited the directors office of the National Lamp Shade Manu-
facturers Association during the showing of the products to the trade. He told
us how much the lamp shade business had changed, how no silk shades were
made to sell for mox'e than $1.5.00 where previously many had sold as high as
$50.00. The following day they snapped two of our committee outside the Hotel
New Yorker holding up signs urging buyers not to buy silk shades. We hope
this photograph will be in the trade journal. * * *
"In concluding, I may make a few observations as to the future program of
the boycott committee. So far we have not here in American been able to gain
niuclr support from church or religious groups. The Free Synagogue stands for
the boycott. On February Gth at the Community Church Forum, the program
is on the boycott with Dr. Sidney Goldstein and myself speaking in support of
the boycott and- the Women's Peace Union opposing the boycott.
Our Committee is now interested in getting out a film on the boycott. One
last fact that strikes me as so humorous is that now manufacturers and whole-
salers and employers generally are weeping over the hardship to the hosiery
workers. Surely we all regret if any hardship must be endured by them, but some
of these people I mentioned have not wept a single tear for the ten million now
unemployed or the 20 million who were idle a few years ago. Surely we are sorry
4276 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
for any workers who may be temporarily out of jobs— American or Japanese,
but our object is to save lives by smashing Japan's war machine and the boycott
must go on, and it will. , ^. .„
"A mass meeting is to be held in Brownsville, Brooklyn. A women s antisilk
parade in Brooklyn is scheduled for Lincoln's Birthday. Another women's anti-
silk parade should be held in Manhattan in the spring. Demonstrations on the
waterfront, plans have been discussed as to a delegation to visit Mr. John D.
Rockefeller, Jr., asking him, in the name of humanity, to refuse more oil to
Japan. We have made contact with the Federation of Women's Clubs and this
is an important objective. There is work to be done in the trade unions.
"These are some of the activities that will be carried out and more will develop
as events will determine and new ways to spread the boycott will be thought
of. We ask all of you w^ho are interested in this part of our work to join our
Boycott Committee."
Jean Stanley (Finance) : "You will all agree that money is one of the most
important organizational matters. In the past half year, with war in the Far
East, our organization has grown threefold and our great job is teaching the
American people how they can help the Chinese people. Similarly our expenses
have increased during this period, while our income, too, has been greater. In
the next six months we miist not only continue to carry out our work as we have
been doing, but that we must also increase both our work and our scope. With
this in mind, it is necessary to look into a budget for the next three months of our
activity.
"The great items in a budget for our organization are: Publication of our
organ in, China Today and wages for our people who devote their full time to
the organization and the magazine. There are four people on our payroll.
Their salaries, based on a minimum living wage amounts to only $294.00 a month.
We are considerably understaffed. China Today, which will in the future come
out in a color cannot be published for less than $275.00 a month. The circulation
of our magazine has increased 250%. With these great leaps ahead, we have
not yet been able to afford to add a circulation manager.
"Our income is derived from subscriptions to China Today, cash sales of the
magazine and newstand distribution both nationally and locally, and lecture
fees from our speaking engagements. Here we must give due recognition and
express our gratitude to Marcella Loring for donating and devoting her full
time to the lecture bureau of our organization.
"In the budget for the next three months there will be a monthly deficit of
$250.00 per month. This money will have to be realized from special affairs
run for China Today and the American Friends of the Chinese People as well
as finding new friends to contribute regular monthly sums of however large or
however small amounts each month. I hereby earnestly appeal to our member-
ship and friends. If you know of anyone who can give even a small sum, as
small as $1.00 a month, towards furthering the work of our organization, inform
him of our needs".
Jack Chen (visitor from China) : "If we stop Japan today the Rome-Berlin-
Tokio axis is weakened, the fascists discouraged. America will not be alone
in its efforts to stop Japan. $25,000 has already been sent from Soviet Russia
to China for medical aid and civilian relief. In England a China Campaign
Committee has been formed with three main aims : medical aid to China, the
education of the English people on the Chinese question, and the furtherance
of the boycott movement against Japan. Many churches, including the Unitarian
Church are supporting this committee. Mass meetings of thousands of ijeople
have been arranged. At the Queens Hall meeting the Dean of Canterbury and
various Members of Parliament were present as speakers.
"Demonstrations have been held at Trafalgar Square. Dockers of Southampton
have refused to unload and ship Japanese goods. The dockers of Liverpool have
pledged not to unload Japanese goods. Trade unions have gone on record for the
boycott and imposition of sanctions. On February 14th an International .Con-
ference for the Boycott of Japanese Goods is being held in England. Delegates
for all leading countries will attend. China must win, because China's struggle
is tlie struggle for peace and for the welfare of the people of the world- ^nd
this cannot lose."
The floor was taken by an anonymous gentleman who introduced himself by
saying that he had spent tweuty-flve years in Japan. He commended our work on
the boycott. He warned us that the merchant dealing in Japanese goods must not
be antagonized. We must approach them in a very nice way so that we will win
them over as allies, instead of forcing them to become enemies. He also men-
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4277
tioned the fact that many Japanese students are not in accord with their gov-
ernment's policy. They are very carefully watched and are called to account
by the Japanese Consul. We should seek these students out and encourage them
to take a determined stand.
Bertram Loeb (Youth Director) : "Youth in China have taken leadership in the
anti-Japanese fight. Youth here are also in the leadership in the movement for
peace. The American Youth Congress passed a motion at its last Congress of
solidarity with the Chinese youth. The American Student Union passed a Boy-
cott resolution. The Youth section of the American Friends held a banqiiet com-
memorating the Peiping students demonstration. A China project was arranged
for a group of office workers. Future work : Model Youth Legislature to have
a resolution on the boycott. World Youth Congress being held in Washington
this summer and should be attended by our representatives."
Mrs. Lsadora W. Kerr : "I represent the University Settlement, the oldest set-
tlement house in the city. We are affiliated to the American Friends of the
Chinese Peoi^le and some of us have individual membership in it. All of our
people wear lisle hose. We have looked into the question of buying from Japan.
We know that Macy's is sending their buyer to Denmark instead of Japan this
year."
Miko Kubota : "I would like to send greetings of Japanese people to the Ameri-
can Friends. Esther Carroll pointed out that the Japanese people in New York
have done something to help this organization. This is true and it is also ti'ue
that this organization has done more for the Japanese people in New York as well
as throughout this country. I appreciate this help. We Japanese will take care
of the military-fascists of our country but we need your help. At present the
greatest help which you can give us is your activities for aid to the Chinese
people. Direct help to the Chinese people directly affects the Japanese people."
J. H. Lin : "On behalf of the Chinese people I express my sincere appreciation
of the work you are doing. You have done your work very well considering the
means at your disposal. You do your work with great devotion and your work
not only affects the Chinese people in the United States but affects policy in China
itself. I see that your activities are reported in the Chinese press. I hope that
now we Chinese in the organization will be able to do more work than we have
been doing. I think there are many tasks which confront us besides the dis-
semination of information on China, for there are some well-meaning pacifists
who say 'what is the use of boycotting Japanese goods.' I>ut the war is just
beginning. The Chinese people will fight very well and will win this war. We
must further developments on the boycott. We must render medical and moral
aid to China. After all, the Chinese people are fighting a life and death struggle —
but not for China alone. They are fighting for the peace and democracy of the
entire world."
James Anderson : "I wish to speak briefly on our waterfront activities. We
have organized meetings and demonstrations in front of the NYK and OYK
lines in Brooklyn in the Red Hook district. I think in the near future we shall
have to do what Jack Chen mentioned in his speech as regards the dockers of
Southampton and Liverpool. On January 29th we intend to have another demon-
stration. We nuist begin on a real active period.
Other friends took the floor to criticize and further elaborate the reports given
by the various officers.
Mr. J. H. Lin. on behalf of the Nominating Committee, proposes the following
people as our national officers : Maxwell Stewart — National Chairman ; Julius
Loeb — National Vice Chairman ; Helen Mallery — National Treasurer ; Esther
Carroll — Organizational Secretary ; Manvil Rodgers — Recording Secretary. Mo-
tion made to accept these people as read. Seconded. Passed unanimously.
Mr. Julius Loel) in behalf of the Nominating Committee propo.ses enlarging
Executive Council to 25 seats, leaving ~i seats open for possiI)le additions. Pro-
poses the following for the Executive Council : James Anderson, Esther Carroll,
Helen Holman, INIrs. Julia Church Kolar, Mrs. Robert Kalvar, Mr. Conrad Komo-
rowski, Mr. Kuliota, ilr. J. H. Lin, Julius Loeb, Helen Mallery, Percy Quick,
Manvil Rodgers, Ruth Rubin, Eugene Schrachner, IMaxwell Stewart, Heng-chi
Tao. Mr. Rothman moves to accept. ^Motion seconded and passed.
Mr. Julius Loeb announces that the National Advisory Board is in process of
formation. The names being considered include : Miss Margaret Forsythe, Prof.
Lovett, Mrs. J. C. Guggenheimer, Prof. J. Nash, Prof. McCall, and others.
Mr. Stewart in Summation : The American Friends of the Chinese People works
under difficult conditions, but produces good results. New tasks lie ahead. While
many of the things which need to be done by our organization are not, we must
4278 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
realize that no one organization can meet the needs of China. He emphasized
that because we are tlie only organization in America today that is I'eally
initiating vigorous work for China, we have a stupendous task aliead of us. "We
have failed in the past because we haven't gone far enough. Our job calls for
the varioiis activities which have been mentioned today. Primarily we have
to do what Jack Chen indicated is being done in Great Britain today. Firstly
in aiding the people of China. Secondly raising money for relief. There are
also a few other agencies which have attempted to do this. Thirdly, develop
active resistance to the boycott. I really believe that the boycott alone can bring
Japan to her knees. We should work among American workers and work for a
government embargo. The primary challenge is to be a national oi-ganization —
to spread out in the country. Branch out in church groups, settlements, youth
groups, peace groups, etc. We must carry on the complete program which has
been outlined by the speakers today. The first thing is to challenge — the next
thing to do is to. take it.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did the IPK in 1938 ask you to write a book on
American policy in the Far East?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you write it?
Mr. BissoN. I did.
Mr. SouinviNE. Were you paid for it?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. How much were you paid ?
Mr. BissoN. My memory is it was $250. It was not very much.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What was the name of the book ?
INfr. BissoN. The book was United States Policy in the Far East,
or Toward the Far East, something of that kind. I am in doubt, be-
cause the title changed in the revised edition.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you have a grant of any sort while you were
writing that book?
Mr. BissoN. Well, the writing of that book coincided or overlapped,
I think, with the time of the grant that covered my research trip to
the Far East.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You say the title changed. Wliat did it change to?
Mr. BissoN. America's Far Eastern Policy.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Under that name by whom was it published ?
Mr. BissoN. The Institute of Pacific Relations and MacMillan.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do vou remember meeting Mr. Karl Wittfogel,
Chao ting Chi, and Mr." Jafl'e in late 1931?
Mr. BissoN. I do not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Can you say whether such a meeting took place?
Mr. BissoN. I do not know.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know there was testimony with regard to
such a meeting in these hearings ?
Mr. BissoN. I did. I saw that. I could not recall that meeting.
Mr. SouRwiNE. As a matter of fact, you have gone over all of the
testimony in the published volumes of these hearings that concerns
you, have you not ?
Mr. Bissox. I have gone over the testimony that concerns me. I
am not sure that I know it all.
Mr. SouRwiNE. But you have had it pointed out to you ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. What I am saying is I am not sure I would
remember everything that I have read about that.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you write an article in 1913 for Pacific Affairs
in which you discussed the democratic character of the Chinese Com-
munist Party and referred to Chiang Kai-shek's party as feudal ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4279
Mr. BissoN. You have your magazine wrong. You mean Far East-
ern Survey.
Mr, SoURWiNE. I v\'ill accept your correction.
Mr. BissoN. Is it July 1943?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwixE. You publislied it in the Far Eastern Survey?
Mr. Bissox. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Was that printed in the Far Eastern Survey of
July 14, 1043?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. But while you were preparing that article you were
employed by the Board of Economic Warfare ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRwixE. You were employed by the Board of Economic
Warfare until July 10, 1943 ?
• Mr. Bissoisr. No. May I say my salary continued to that date. I
think ni}' last official duties, actually performed duties with the Board,
were at the end of May. I tliink I had a vacation of about a month
or so before I joined the IPK.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Are you telling us you pj-epared this article during
the month of June 1943, after you had left BEW?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You did so in its entirety ?
Mr. Bissoisr. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. By what time did you have to have it in order to
have it published in the July 14 issue of Far Eastern Survey?
Mr. BissoN. I would not remember exactly. I think about a week
or maybe 10 daj's.
Mr. SuuRwixE. Then you did this whole article in a month or less?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
]\Ir. SouRwiNE. Do you remember the manuscript of Lawrence
Rosinger's book, Wartime Politics in China ?
Mr. BissoN. The manuscript of it ?
Mr. SouRWix^^E. Yes. Do you remember anything about the manu-
script of that book?
Mr. Bissox. Not particularly.
Mr. SouRWixE. Was that manuscript sent to Mr. John Carter
Vincent ?
Mr. Bissox^. I do not know.
Mr. SouRwixE. Did vou ask him to send it back?
Mr. Bissox-^. I do not recall.
Mr. SouRwiXE. Are you familiar with the excerpt in that regard
which is in the record of this committee?
Mr. Bissox. Apparently not ; no.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Are you aware that on page 487 of this committee's
record, exhibit No. 127, there is a letter dated November 12, 1943,
from the files of the Institute of Pacific Relations addressed to Mr.
John Carter Vincent purporting to have been signed by you, saying :
Dear Mr. Vixcent : Knowing- that you must be exceedingly busy at this time,
I am sorry to bother you with a minor detail. We believe that the original
copy of Mr. Lawrence Rosinger's manuscript on Wartime Politics in China was
sent to you for criticism, but with your new responsibilities there is no reason
to burden you with this task of reading and review. However, we are anxious
4280 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
to have the mauuscript copy itself returned here for the printer if it is con-
veniently possible to have it sent back. Hoping to see you in New York soon.
Sincerely yours,
T. A. BissoN.
Did you write that letter ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you now renieniber any of tlie circumstances?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. It seems to me that, as I recall now, that manu-
script had been sent to him sometime earlier and we had not heard
from him, and we wanted the manuscript back.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Where was it sent to him ?
Mr. BissoN. Presumably they wanted his comments and criticisms
for any changes that might be made.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you send other manuscripts to Mr. Vincent?
Mr. BissoN. Did I ?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I may have. I would not know whether I did actually.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know whose idea it was to send manuscripts
to Mr. Vincent ?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Was it standard procedure? Was he one of those
to whom manuscripts were sent ?
Mr. BissoN. I should think so. It was standard procedure with the
Foreign Policy Association in the earlier years.
Mr. SouRwiNE. This was the IPR, not the Foreign Policy Associa-
tion.
Mr. BissoN. It bears on this point, and I think I should state it.
When I wrote a manuscript for the Foreign Policy Association re-
ports, it was very often sent to Stanley K. Hornbeck. It would come
back from him.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Who would send it to him ?
Mr. BissoN. Either I would or the secretary of the Foreign Policy
Association, asking him for his comments.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you remember participating in a draft of a
statement which it was ho})ed or intended would be signed by Mr.
Thomas Lamont and sent to the New York Times ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you consult with Mr. Lattimore about that
matter; Owen Lattimore?
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember any consultation with him.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did Mr. Carter write to you about that matter?
Mr. BissoN. Yes; I think there was a memorandum he wrote to
me about it.
Mr. SouR\viNE. Can you remember anything about your participa-
tion in that?
Mr. BissoN. No.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you remember making a statement to the Daily
Worker giving an interview urging President Truman to avert the
danger of civil war in China by letting the Japanese surrender to the
Communist Party ?
Mr. BissoN. Is this a general letter with many signatures. I am not
clear which you refer to.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes. This is a statement specifically quoting you.
It contains 20 other signatures. The statement was in a telegram
signed by 20 other persons.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4281
Mr. BissoN. You are asking whether I signed that statement?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes, sir.
No, I am asking first whether you gave any interview to the Daily
Worker. I will ask you about the statement in regard to the President
in a moment.
Mr. BissoN. I do not recall any interview I gave to the Daily
Worker.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you sign the telegram to the President?
Mr. BissoN. Yes ; I think I did.
Senator Eastland. Were you ever interviewed by the Daily
Worker ?
Mr. BissoN, Not that I know of.
Senator Eastland. Did you ever write an article for the Daily
Worker ?
Mr. BissoN. No, sir.
Senator Eastland. New Masses ?
Mr. BissoN. No, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you see Andrew Grajdanzev's report on For-
mosa in 1942?
Mr. BissoN. Yes.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Was that in connection with your official duties?
Mr. BissoN. Yes. It was because I was head of a Manchuria-
Korea-Formosa unit in the Board of Economic Warfare.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Did you do anything to circulate that report ?
Mr. BissoN. Yes, probably. It was probably circulated among the
members of the Board.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you do anything to circulate it other than
among the members of the Board ?
Mr. BissoN. Outside the Board of Economic Warfare?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I may have.
Mr. SoTJRwiNE. What might you have clone to circulate it outside
the Board of Economic Warfare ?
Mr. BissoN. I do not recall specific individuals I may have sent it
to, but it is possible that there were other outside individuals that I
wanted to have read this.
Mr. SouRwiNE. As a matter of fact, you did send it to outside in-
dividuals, did you not ?
Mr. BissoN. I probably did. I do not recall any specific individuals.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you write an article for Spotlight on the Far
East in February 1948 ?
Mr. BissoN. I probably did.
Mr. SouRWiNE. I want to show you page 1018 of our hearings and
ask you if the article there is one which you wrote ? It has been iden-
tified as an article which you did write. Is that something you wrote?
Mr. BissoN. No ; I do not think I wrote this at all.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You deny having written that?
Mr. BissoN. This is a summary of what occurred at the conference
mentioned in here.
Mr. SoTjRwiNE. I don't think you are looking at the same thing.
Mr. BissoN. I am looking at the wrong one.
Mr. SouRwiNE. The one right at .the top of the page.
Mr. BissoN. This is again a similar situation, someone writing in
Spotlight reporting what I said at this conference.
4282 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. I did not say you wrote it. I am asking you if you
did write it?
Mr. BissoN. No.
INIr. SouRWiNE. Did you give an interview to Spotlight on the Far
East about that matter ?
Mr. BissoN, About the conference?
Mr, SouRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. BissoN. I do not remember.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you give them any memoranda about it?
Mr. BissoN. I may have given them a memorandum. I made some
remarks at the conference, and they may have wanted to know what
those remarl^s were.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That publication is published by the Committee for
a Democratic Far Eastern Policy?
Mr. BissoN. That is right.
Mr. SouRWiNE. That is all.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive into the record this
page 276 and up to page 284? It begins a new subject. It is from
Amerasia of 1943.
Senator Eastland. It will be filed as an exhibit.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 739'' and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 739
[Source: Amerasia, September 1943, pp. 276-278]
The Two Chinas
This all-important question of the present trend in Chinese policy was dis-
cussed at some length by T. A. Bisson in an article on "China's Part in a Coali-
tion War" publlslied in the Far Eastern Survey of July 14. Mr. Bisson is
extremely critical of the shortcomings of America and Britain in their dealings
with China, but he also believes that the present political situation in China
is cause for well-justified apprehension, since it affects "not only the current
prosecution of the war, but also the prospects for the postwar emergence of a
stable, united, and democratic China." Together with many other students of
Chinese affairs, Mr. Bisson considers that "the early promise held out by the
war for the broadening and deepening of Chinese unity through the achieve-
ment of liberal political and economic reforms has not been fulfilled." Instead,
the conservative elements in the Kuoraintang, alarmed l)y the growing influence
of the Communist-led armies in the guerrilla areas of North China, and by the
agrarian reforms and democratic electoral procedures introduced in these areas,
have imposed a military blockade against them. Thus two Chinas have emerged,
"each with its own government, irulitary forces, and territories, and each with
its own characteristic set of political and economic institutions."
These two areas are coumionly referred to as Kuomintang China and Com-
munist China, but Mr. Bisson maintains that the terms "feudal China" and
"democratic China" more accurately describe the ba.sic distinction between
the two regions. His use of the term "feudal," Mr. Bisson explains, is intended
to define a society "in which the landlord-peasant relationship is dominant and
autocracy in government centers around this relationship." Its application to
Kuomintang China is justified, in his opinion, by the fact that no serious effort
has been made to uproot the landlord-usurer system, and that the great land-
lords have become the economic mainstay of the Kuomintang regime, while
political power is exercised solely by the Kuomintang bureaucracy, with no
provision for popular representation or control.
In so-called "Conununist China," on the other hand, economic and political
reforms have combined to free the peasant from "the crushing burden of rent,
taxes, and usurious interest charges levied by a feudal economy," and to in-
troduce a system of local democratic government in which all classes of the
population, including the landlords and merchants as well as the peasants and
workers, participate. "The task of statesmanship," declares Mr. Bisson, "is
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONiS 4283
to merge these two Cliiuas into one. To be sound, sucli unification must come
on the high plane of social advance and democratic reform. Until unification
is achieved on this plane, China's full strength cannot be placed behind the
war effort."
Mr. Bisson's use of the term "feudal" to describe conditions in Kuomintang
China was sharply criticized by Dr. C. L. Hsia, Director of the Chinese News
Service in New York, as well as by Chinese officials in Chungking. In a letter to
the editors, published in the Far Eastern Survey of August 11, Dr. Hsia contends
that Chinese landlords do not exercise any control over the Chinese government,
and that the present land tax system and land reform policy pursued by Chung-
king have served to restrict the influence of the landlords and place greater finan-
cial burdens on them. Furthermore, Dr. Hsia argues that if one accepts Mr.
Bisson's definition of feudalism, "we may say that practically all countries in the
world, with the exception of the U. S. S. R., are feudal. Outside the U. S. S. R.,
we find peasants and landlords everywhere, whether the landlords are owners of
large farms, great estates, oil wells, or iron and coal mines."
Dr. Hsia also criticizes Mr. Bisson for failing to state the specific means by
which Chinese unity is to be attained, and contends that it is utterly impossible
for the Chinese Government to introduce far-reaching political and agrarian re-
forms in the midst of war, disregarding, apparently, Mr. Bisson's contention that
such reforms are being carried out today in the guerrilla regions. Dr. Hsia
appears to be chiefly incensed, however, by the assertion that the mobilization
of China's resources is being hampered by the feudal character of her political
and economic structure. But if Chinese feudalism "passed away some twenty-one
centuries ago," as Dr. Hsia maintains, how does he explain the statement made by
Chiang Kai-shek on December 10, 1928, that the two basic objectives of the Chinese
Revolution are international equality and the overthrow of feudalism? ^ It is also
difficult to reconcile his claim that the power of the landlords is decreasing with
the statement by Sun Fo, President of the Legislative Yuan, that "The landlords"
share of the taxes is still too small, while the small owners are shouldering an
increased burden. During recent years, the landlord class has been greatly
enriched. * * * The big landlords are employing their surplus funds to
increase their holdings. * * * Land ownership is more and more concen-
trated in the hands of the landlords." ( Ta Kung Pao, October 16, 1942. )
The persistence of feudal or semifeudal elements in a country's political and
economic structure is certainly not peculiar to China. In essence, similar condi-
tions exist in the southern states in this country, as well as in many parts of
Europe. It is significant, for example, that the new Italian Action Party, headed
by Count Sforza, has for one of the planks in its liberal, democratic platform:
"wide agrarian reform looking toward the elimination of feudalism." The point
to be stressed here is that the liberal and progressive forces that exist in Kuomin-
tang China are being seriously hampered in their efforts to secure an extension
of democracy in both the political and economic spheres as an essential factor
in strengthening China's war effort. In their view, a program of land reform
which would limit both the political and economic power of the great landlords
is not only possible but essential in time of war in order to give the Chinese people
a greater incentive to carry on the struggle. Furthermore, they maintain that
greater political democracy is essential to secure the close cooperation of all anti-
Japanese groups in China in tlie war against the invader. In this connection it is
worth noting that not only the Chinese Communists but also many of the smaller
political parties in China, some of them even more conservative than the Kuomin-
tang, have demanded that they be granted legal status as minority parties and
given the opportunity to be represented in the government by popularly elected
delegates.^
At the moment, however, there appears to be little prospect of any change in the
attitude of the Kuomintang leaders toward other political parties in China. On
the contrary, recent reports have stressed the rising political tension in Free
China, resulting from the Chungking Government's efforts to suppress the activi-
ties of all non-Kuomintang organizations. As applied to the Chinese Communist
Party and the armed forces under its control, this policy has been expressed in
the continued blockade of the guerrilla areas in the north by Central Government
1 The speech containing this statement appeared in a book entitled "Collected Speeches
of the Generalissimo" (In Chinese), published by the Cheng Chung Book Shop, Chungking,
xyoo, p, 5.
" For a detailed account of the organization of the "smaller parties" in China into the
Fedevation for Political Democracy, see Amerasia, Spring Quarterly, April 25, 1943,
pp. 97-120. > y B ^
4284 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
troops. No large-scale armed clashes have occurred between the Kuomintang
and Communist forces since the "New Fourth Army Incident" of January 1941,
but reports have reached this country in recent weeks that certain elements in
the Kuomintang favor immediate steps to force the dissolution of the Border
Kegiou Government and of the armies under Communist leadership.
[Source: Amerasia, September 1943, pp. 278-281]
Threat of Civil War in China : A Soviet Observer's View
The most outspoken of these reports was contained in a United Press dispatch
from Moscow on August 6, quoting excerpts from an article on China published in
the official Soviet trade union journal, War and the Working Class. Its author,
Vladimir Rogov, recently returned to the Soviet Union after serving for twelve
years in China as a representative of the Tass agency, and the prominence
given his report would seem to indicate that the SoTiet Government is seriously
disturbed by the current Chinese situation. For purposes of I'ecord, the full
text of Mr. Rogov's article is published herewith : '
"During six years of war, the Chinese command, at the cost of considerable
territorial losses, succeeded in saving its troops from defeat. Despite heavy
odds, the Chinese army preserved its capacity for resistance. The Japanese
militarists failed in their plan for a rapid conquest of China, and proved in-
capable of breaking the resistance of the Chinese people. The war in China
became prolonged, threatening Japan with ever-increasing complications.
"In defensive battles on an extremely long front, the Chinese army gained the
necessary time for reorganizing its troops and strengthening their fighting ca-
pacity. Soon after the fall of Wuhan (Hankow) in October 1938, Chiang Kai-
shek outlined a program for the reorganization of the country's armed forces,
the principal points of which were as follows : First, China's national policy must
become the policy of a long, defensive war. Second, the guerrilla movement
must be developed. Third, in order to conduct a general counter-offensive, a
new army must be cresited, many millions strong and trained in the use of the
most up-to-date war equipment.
"However, the plans of Chiang Kai-shek met with covert resistance from
the outset. The reforms in the army with the aim of training new units, reor-
ganizing control and strengthening discipline were not completed, and the task
of creating an economic base for war was not accomplished. The main reason
for this was the divisive work of the 'appeasers,' the defeatists, and capitulators.
"The war economy resources of National China (Free China) are large and
afford an adeqwate base for the rearmament and supply of the army. On its
territory National China has all the strategic raw materials necessary for the
conduct of a prolonged war. Nevertheless, large-scale construction has not
been undertaken because industrial and financial circles prefer to engage in
profiteering rather than invest their capital in the armaments industry.
"This situation has led to the weakening of the army's fighting capacity and
to greater dependence on the supply of arms from the United States and Great
Britain who, owing to their own war, find it extremely diflBcult to supply China.
Elements favoring capitulation have sabotaged the measures for the mobilization
of China's Internal r(\sources intended to establish the national economy on a
war ba.sis, as well as the measures for waging economic warfare against the
Japanese invaders.
"China has no lack of human reserves, hut the Chinese army receives no
regular reinforcements. There are insnfiicient trained reserves. There is no
organized military registration of the population, and law providing for universal
military service is not fully enforced. The army also receives a large percentage
of men unfit for service.
"The main defect of the Chinese army is the shortage of trained commanders.
All foreign military observers who have visited the Chinese army agree that the
Chinese soldier is tenacious and enduring in the field and is undemanding as far
as food and uiuforms are concerned ; whereas the commanding personnel is
extremely weak and backward in military and technical training. The army's
equipment is still at a low level, and the organization and control of the troops
1 Since Mr. Rogov's original article In Russian has not yet arrived in this country, this
text is l)a.sed on the English translations cabled from Moscow by the United Press and
Inter-Contlnent News.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4285
is far from perfect. One of the defects of the Chinese army is the lack of an
effective united command and of coordinated operations on tlie separate fronts.
The internal friction and suspicion among the generals cannot help but affect
the fighting capacity and discipline of their troops.
"In Chungking, of course, there are no open advocates of surrender, but this
does not mean that there is a lack of capitnlators and defeatists there, some of
whom occupy important positions in the Kuomintang. These defeatists ele-
ments have evolved a theory of an 'honorable' peace with Japan, and are weaken-
ing China by their political intrigues. There is no doubt that these elements
represent a serious menace.
"Since December 1941, the Japanese have concentrated their attention on the
war in the Pacific, while the war in China has receded into the background. This
lias led to the appearance among Chinese political and military leaders of a
certain complacency, and the Japanese are taking advantage of this attitude to
intensify their 'peace oft'ensives.' They are now making every effort to deepen
and sharpen internal conflicts in China to weaken Chinese resistance and
strengthen their own position. In this attempt they are aided by the maneuvers
of the Chinese 'appeasers' who are doing their utmost to undermine the military
collaboration between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party and to incite
the persecution of the Eighth Route and New Fourth Armies which, as units of
China's united national army, have in.scribed many heroic pages in the history
of the resistance of the Chinese people to the Japanese invaders.
"These armies consist of the most progressive, steadfast, and self-sacrificing
people of China. They ai*e led by the Chinese Communist Party which enjoys
merited prestige among the broad masses of the working people as the organizer
of their struggle for national freedom and independence. Today, by direct mili-
tary pressure, new attempts are being made to bring about the dissolution of the
Chinese Communist Party and the liquidation of the Eighth Route and New
Fourth Armies. The Chinese high conunand has transferred new divisions to
the districts where these armies are stationed, with large supplies of munitions
and food, obviously in preparation for an attack on the Eighth Route and New
Fourth. If these moves are crowned with any success, anti-democratic and
anti-popular forces will gain the upper hand in Chungking, and if fratricidal
war results, it will lead to fatal consequences for the Chinese war of liberation.
Such an improvoked attack by the Chungking generals against the Eighth Route
and New Fourth Armies would be tantamount to a knife in the back of the
Chinese people, and would be of incalculable aid to the Japanese imperialists.
"A number of outstanding Kuomintang leaders strongly oppose the treacherous
activities of the appeasers, capitnlators, and provocateurs, and demand closer
collaboration with all anti-Japanese groups. "The discontent with the Kuomin-
tang's policies in this respect is widespread throughout China. However, the
Chinese Government has shown no firmness in eliminating the capitulators who
are undermining national unity and weakening China's resistance against Jap-
anese aggression.
"In the last few years I have had occasion to visit more than fifteen provinces
of China. Both at the front and deep in the rear, in occupied Shanghai and
Manchuria, representatives of various groups in China watch with grave concern
the criminal activity of the traitors, turncoats, defeatists, and saboteurs. Nev-
ertheless they are unanimous in their confidence that all efforts to provoke civil
war are doomed to failure because the people of Free China, in hard fighting,
have accunuilated great strength and will not permit the cause of national lib-
eration to die.
"With large strategic raw material resources and tremendous manpower re-
serves at her disposal, China has every iwssibility for victory over the enemy.
The necessary conditions for this victory are the realization of radical measures
for reorganizing the entire economy on a war footing, subordinating all eco-
nomic life to the needs of the front, and strengthening the armed forces against
capitulation and defeatism, and, most imiwrtant of all, the genuine unity of all
national forces in the struggle for freedom and national independence.
"The extent to which Chiang Kai-shek and the Chungking authorities recog-
nize the importance of this principal condition and succeed in averting the dan-
ger of internal struggle, now being fostered by the enemies of the Chinese people,
will determine whether the exhausting war forced upon China by Japanese
imperialism will be brought to a successful conclusion in the interests of the
Chinese people as a whole."
88348— 52— pt. 12 IT
4286 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Many Americans presumably discounted Mr. Rogov's comments on the grounds
that he is naturally prejudiced in favor of the Communist-led armies of China
and therefore inclined to take an exaggeratedly hostile and alarmist view of
Kuomintang policies. But though one may question his contention that as of
today China possesses all the strategic raw materials necessary for the con-
duct of the war, and his implication that today she has the potential strength to
defeat Japan single-handed, his warning regarding the dangers of renewed
civil strife in China cannot be dismissed as merely pro-Communist propa-
ganda.
As we noted earlier in this article, many competent American students of China
have expressed concern in recent months over the suppression of liberal forces
in China and the growing influence of reactionary elements within the Kuo-
mintang. These include writers who have staunchly supported the Chinese Gov-
ernment for many years, and who can in no way be regarded as Communist sym-
pathizers. Their view is simply that the preservation of Chinese unity and the
strengthening of the liberal, democratic forces in China are essential not only for
the success of the United Nations war effort in Asia, but also for the emergence
of a strong and stable China in the post-war world. For this reason, they are
sincerely concerned over the fact that the trend toward greater political unity
arid democracy in China, which appeared so promising in the early years of the
Sino-.Tapanese war, has now been reversed in favor of a strengthened dicta-
torship by the Kuomintang and the suppression of groups seeking political and
economic reforms.
An excellent analysis of the basic cause of the political crisis in China was
provided by Mr. Raymond Gram Swing on August 11. Mr. Swing has earned a
well-merited reputation both in this country and abroad as an informative and
reliable news analyst, and it may be assumed that his appraisals of the Chinese
situation was based on the authoritativeness by millions of listeners throughout
the world, but in view of their importance, it seemed desirabb that they should
be made available to Amerasia readers in printed form. We are therefore in-
cluding in this record, with Mr. Swing's permission and approval, that portion of
his broadcast which dealt with China.
[Source : Amerasia, September 1943, pp. 281-284]
An Appraisal of Conditions in China by Raymond Gram Swing
An item crept into the news yesterday about China which calls for careful
appraisal. It came first from London. Chineses circles there autRoritatively
denied that the Chinese Government is taking military action against the so-called
Chinese Communists. And the same denial later reached this country from
Chungking direct, in a wireless to the New York Times. The denials were evoked
by an article appearing in a trade-union newspaper in Moscow, by a writer named
A^ladimir Kogov, who has spent tbe last twelve years in China, and stated the
appeasement and defeatist sections of the Chinese Government have been under-
mining the war effort by seeking to provoke internal trouble and urging dissolu-
tion of the Communist units of the Chinese forces. He said that the Chineses
Government is facing serious internal difficulties that could result in civil war
or Japanese victory. The Chinese authorities quoted in the New York Times
categorically denied these assertions and the Times correspondent adds an obser-
vation : "In view of month-old rumors of trouble with the Communists breaking
out again, this news is considered of the highest importance."
These rumors have reached this country, too, and caused great concern, for a
forcible attempt to liquidate the Eighth Route or Communist army, repeating
the attack on the Fourth Army, would do a most unwelcome injury to the United
Nations war against Japan. They were accompanied by reports that the Chinese
Government has yielded quite visibly to reactionary influences, and that the pros-
pects of early democratization, in our sense of the word, were fading away. Thus
the Chinese cooperatives, while not suppressed, were finding it hai'd to maintain
themselves. Accepting the news as true that no forceful measures are planned
against the Communists, the situation in China still remains critical and dis-
quieting. And it is a situation not aiDpreciated by the public in this country,
though it is well enough known by the China experts. The simplest statement
of the facts is enough to show that the problem is well-nigh unsoluble. The
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4287
Communists hold sections of Sbensi, Shansi, and Kansu Provinces, a fairly smaU
territory, with a population of approximately five or six million. Here they have
instituted their agrarian and social reforms. For these are not Marxian Prole-
tarians, these so-called Communists, they are agrarian radicals, trying to estab-
li-sh democratic practices and particularly to break up the great estates, so that
the farm worker can have individual status and now own property. A word is
in order about these agrarian radicals. They should not be called Communists,
whatever their origin may be. They have developed in another direction. At
the same time that the Kuomintang "has gone to the right, the Communists have
become versed in the democratic art of compromise. They have had to deal
with the landlord, too, to convince him they are not simply going to expropriate
his land. T. A. Bisson, writing for the American Council of the Institute of
Pacific Relations, objects to the labels, Kuomintang China and Communist China.
"These are only party labels," he says. "To be more descriptive the one might be
called feudal China, the other, democratic China." The Communists have their
own army, and though it is only a small percentage of the total of Chinese forces,
it has produced more than two-fifths of the casualties inflicted on the Japanese
in 1941 and 1942. The Communists were the ones who first insisted on resistance
to Japan. They precipitated the union of action against the Japanese. But they
settled down in tlie territory they occupied, established their own regime, main-
tained the independence of their array, which they now refuse to give up.
Obviously this is a contradiction of unity, and the Central Chinese Govern-
ment— the Kuomintang Government — feels it cannot permanently tolerate it.
Chiang Kai-shek, who had waged war against the Communists before the war
opened against Japan, now has blockaded the Communist territory, and is using
some half million troops to isolate it from the rest of China. Some of Chiang's
crack troops are kept there. They have not smelted gunpowder in any clash
witli the Japanese. They are on guard to hold the Communist movement in
check. I should add that Communist influence extends much farther than the
blockaded province. It seeps throughout the North, and the celebrated Chinese
guerrillas operating against the Japanese in the North function not as agents
of the Central Government but of the Communists. So the Communist move-
ment is far more pervading and significant than a regime established in prov-
inces of five to six millions.
When the Comintern was abolished, some leaders in the Central Government
argued that this meant the severance of Russian connection with the Chinese
Communists, and steps could safely be taken to liquidate them as an independent
movement. So the troops blockading the Communists were apparently strength-
ened, though that has been denied, and it is believed that the Communists were
presented with terms. They had to join Central China and put their army under
Chiang or disband it. They either had to become a minority party, or accept
membership in the Kuomintang. The Kuomintang is the single party which
rules China today and does it with the trappings of a secret police, a youtjh
movement, and the successful elimination of most civil rights. The Communists
are believed to have rejected the terms. If they turn their army over to the
Central Government they lose their identity. If they lose their identity' they
lose tlieir cause, and abandon hope of introducing their social and agrarian
reforms in all China. And they do not lielieve that as a minority party they
would be allowed to exist. From their point of view, they are just as logical
as the Central Government. And there is little that outsiders have been able
to suggest as a solution of the problem. If the Communists were to come into
Central China and serve as a minority and opposition party they would have to
have a guarantee that they were to be allowed to function. But the only con-
vincing guarantee that Chiang could give them would be to show some interest in
their reforms. He might introduce some of them. But that is out of the ques-
tion, because Chiang Kai-shek derives most of his power from the very landlord
class which the Communists are seeking to dethrone. His power is from these
great owners, and from militarists and bureaucrats in sympathy with them. So
whatever Chiang may feel about the reforms, he would be powerless to institute
them.
As to Chiang himself, it used to be thought that he was sympathetic with the
reforms, and that he looked forward to the introduction of triie democracy after
the war, which obviously would bring reforms in its train. Democracy is the
end goal of the Yat-sen policy to which Chiang is committed. - But doubts have
been raised as to Chiang's own views. He has recently published a book on
4288 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
foreign and domestic policy ^ which now becomes the official guide and textbook
for Kuoniintang, a kind of bible of Chinese policy.
It has not been translated into English, as Chiang decided not to i)ermit it
to be translated. In spirit it is an antiforeign book. It also is anti-imperialist,
and it lays down the principle that China itself will not pursue an imperialist
policy. But it does not much differentiate between American policy and im-
perialism, and it is not friendly to the tenets of Western liberalism.
On the subject of Democracy, Chiang writes that there can be other types of
it than the Western kind, and states that the destiny of China rests with the
Kuoniintang. In other words, while there can be other factions in theory, China
will keep the one-party system, continuing its youth movement, and presumably
its rigid controls. There is no mention in the book of land reforms. So there
is no basis in tliis doctrine on which to build hopes for what we should consider
a democratic movement in which the agrarian radicals would have some political
weight. The news that the Central Government is not going to use force against
the Communists is, as the Times correspondent pointed out, of the highest im-
portance. It means tliat China will not be engulfed in a civil war at once. But
it also is clear that this simply postpones a crisis for which no solution appears
available. While it is undeniable that this is an internal affair of the Chinese
it is not one tliat China's allies can ignore, while the war is in progress. Nor
will this country be able to ignore it after the war is over. The Chinese people
have all the sympathy of this country, and deserve it all. They will need Ameri-
can loans and equipment after the war. Their place as a power and their leader-
ship for stability and development must be assured. So long as the United
States has Pacific responsibilities what happens in China will affect us, and
hence interest us. And though it is important news tliat force is not going to
be used against the Eighth Route Army, one can only wish that the crisis might
have a consti'uctive solution, not merely a postponement.
Senator Eastland. You may be excused and the hearing is closed.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 25 p. m., the hearing was closed, subject to call.)
1 "China's Destiny," not to be confused with "Resistance and Reconstruction" recently
published in this country by Harpers. "China's Destiny" is published only in Chinese, and
is reported to have already sold over a million copies in China. It is virtually impossible
to obtain a copy in this country.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 1952
United States Senate,
Subcommittee To Investigate the Administration
OF the Internal Security Act and Other Internal
Security Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington^ D. G.
The siibcominittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 : 45 a. m., in room 424,
Senate Office Building, Hon. Homer Ferguson, presiding.
Present : Senators Eastland and Ferguson, and Watkins.
Also present: J. G. Sourwine, committee counsel; Robert Morris,
subcommittee counsel, and Benjamin Mandel, director of research.
Senator Ferguson. The committee will come to order.
You may proceed.
Mr. Morris. Will you give your name and address to the reporter ?
TESTIMONY OP JULIAN R. FRIEDMAN, BERKELEY, CALIF.
Mr. Friedman. Julian R. Friedman, 24G6 Hilgard Avenue, Berke-
ley, Calif.
Mr. Morris. AVhat is your present occupation, Mr. Friedman^
Mr. Friedman. At the present moment I am a lecturer in political
science in the department of political science. University of California.
Senator Ferguson. Is that a full time job?
Mr. Friedman. No ; it is a three-fourths time job at the present time,
Senator.
Senator Ferguson. AVhat is your salary ?
Mr. Friedman. I am receiving for this term — I have just started as
of January 1952— about $1,700, $1,680.
Mr. Morris. AVhat is your age, Mr. Friedman?
Mr. Friedman. I am 31 years old.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, I would like the record to show that the
witness has been sworn in executive session.
Senator Ferguson. You have been sworn. You understand that.
Mr. Friedman. Yesterday; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Friedman, were you ever an employee of the State
Department ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I was an employee of the State Department.
Mr. Morris. AVhat position or positions did you hold at that time?
Mr. Friedman. In September 1943, I was employed by the State
Department as a junior professional assistant in what was then the
Office of the Assistant Adviser on International Economic Affairs.
Subsequently that office became the Division of Labor Relations, and
I believe, while I was still there, the Division of International Labor,
Health, and Social Affairs,
4289
4290 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
I remained in the Division until, officially, November 20, 1944, when
I was appointed Divisional Assistant in the Division of Chinese
Affairs.
At the time I left the Division of Labor Relations, I was then the
assistant to tlie Chief, with the rating of P-2, transferred to tlie Divi-
sion of Chinese Affairs also with the rating of P-2. I was in the
Division of Chinese Affairs until my assignment, my appointment,
to the Foreign Service Auxiliary, which was officially made, I be-
lieve, on October 6, 1945.
In the period in which I was a member of the Division of Chinese
Affairs, I was officially assigned to the United Nations Conference
at San Francisco from, I believe, April 18, until July 1, 1945, and
served on the Internatonal Secretariat as the Assistant Secretary of
Committee 2, Commission 1.
Mr. Morris. That is, you were assigned by the State Department to
the International Secretariat for the United Nations Conference?
Mr. Friedman. I was made available to the Secretariat.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What is the difference between "made available"
and "assigned" ? You used the term "made available."
Mr. Friedman. The specific difference, I think, is that the Inter-
national Secretariat was not an American Secretariat but an inter-
national one, for which several governments made personnel avail-
able.
Mr. Sourwine. Were you required to go there ? Was that a part
of your duties ?
Mr. Friedman. When I was assigned and accepted, it was part of
my duties ; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. A part of your duties for the State Department ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. At the assignment to the International
Secretariat, my duties were entirely for the International Secretariat.
Mr. Sourwine. Did the State Department pay you during that
time ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe the State Department did. Yes; I believe
the arrangement was that each government would pay the personnel
which it made available to the International Secretariat. I am not
quite sure on that ]:)oint, but I think I am correct.
Mr. Sourwine. Is it your judgment that during that period of time
you owed no allegiance to the State Department which was paying
you, but you did owe allegiance to the International Secretariat?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I owed allegiance or loyalty for the dura-
tion of the conference to the International Secretariat, that I would
perform my duties as an international civil servant for that period.
Senator Ferguson. Was this before the Charter had been approved
by the Congress?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, Senator.
Senator Ferguson. How could you, as an employee of the United
States Government, the State Dei^artment, accept employment from
an international organization without a, transfer over to them?
Mr. Friedman. To the international organization? I am not sure
of the details under which the arrangement was made. I know I was
one of several persons from the State Department, which the State
Department made available to the conference. I am certainly not
familiar
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4291
Senator Ferguson. You were not, then, when you were on that con-
ference out at San Francisco, working for tlie United States Govern-
ment. You felt that your duty was to a foreign organization, an
international organization ?
Mr. Friedman. Excuse nie, sir. Not a foreign organization.
Senator Ferguson. Well, at least foreign to the United States, ue-
cause it was international.
Mr. Friedman. Well, it was international in the sense that the
United States was also a participant and a principal participant and
the host at San Francisco. I should make that clear, that the United
States Government was the host to the conference.
Senator Ferguson. Well, how many of our employees were assigned
to international organizations like tliat, out of San Francisco?
Mr. Friedman. I cannot say specifically the number of persons, sir,
but my impression was that the international conference probably
was staffed, oh, with 95 percent Americans made available from the
State Department and other agencies of the United States Govern-
ment.
Senator Ferguson. That was at least your understanding, that you
were working for the international group.
Mr. Friedman. For the International Secretariat, to which the
State Department provided part of the personnel ; yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. How long after you left college did you go into
Government ?
Mr. Fried^ian. Well, I graduated from the Fletcher School of Law
and Diplomacy at Medf ord, Mass., in, I believe, June 1943, and entered
the State Department in September 1943.
Senator Ferguson. Just afterward?
Mr. Friedman. A few months, yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Friedman, were you assigned by the State De-
partment to the Hot Springs Convention of the Institute of Pacific
Relations?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I was.
Mr. Morris. In other words, you were sent there on official duty for
the State Department?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Now, what were your duties at Hot Springs?
Mr. Friedman. My principal duty was to serve as a reporter of
committees of the conference, which was an international conference
of the Institute of Pacific Eelations. That was my principal duty;
in addition to which I arranged, at the conference, a party, a social
gathering, on behalf of some members of the American delegation,
particularly Mr. John Carter Vincent, who was an American delegate
to the conference ; and subsequently, subsequent to the conference, I
helped the Protocol Division of the State Department arrange a cock-
tail party or tea party for the delegates at Blair House.
Mr. SouRwiNE. May I inquire about that Blair House conference?
Because we have been interested in that.
You were the person who helped the Protocol Division arrange it?
Mr. Friedman. I believe that I helped make the arrangements ; yes,
sir.
Mr. SoURWiNE. What were your duties in connection with those
arrangements ?
4292 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Fkiediman. I don't recall specifically. I think principally to
inform the Protocol Department that it was desirable to have such
a reception.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Wait a minute. That is a little different from help-
ing them arrange it. That is bringing it about, isn't it?
Senator Eastland. Let him finish his answer.
Mr. Friedman. Thank you, Senator,
If I am not mistaken, the party was to be given on behalf of the
Under Secretary, who was ISIr. Joseph Grew at that time. Mr. Grew
was the host.
The Protocol Department consulted the Office of Far Eastern Af-
fairs, the Division of Chinese Affairs, as to the type of party that was
wanted — the number of persons who might be expected.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You spoke of your duties in convincing the Protocol
Department that such a party should be held.
Mr. Friedman. Not convincing the Protocol Department. It was
decided in the Department that the Under Secretary should offer a
party, since so many of the delegates to the conference were distin-
guished persons from many foreign countries.
Mr. SouRwiNE. How was that decided?
Mr. Friedman. That I don't know, sir.
Mr. Souravine. Who gave you your first instructions with regard
to it?
Mr. Friedman. To the party?
Mr. SoTiRwiNE. Yes.
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did anyone ask you to go to protocol and tell them
there should be such a party ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you make the first contact with protocol about
this party?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that either.
Mr. SouRwiNE. What was it that you had in mind a moment ago
when you started to say something about telling protocol, or inform-
ing protocol, of the need for having such a party?
]Mr. Friedman. That the Department had decided that such a party
should be held — a party given by the Under Secretary of State, Mr.
Grew.
Senator Ferguson. You mean the State Department?
Mr. Fried^ian. The State Department; yes, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you have anything to do with selecting the list
of guests for that party?
Mr. Friedman. Xo, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you know that that party had been suggested
initially by the Institute of Pacific Relations?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall whether the institute took the initia-
tive. I don't quite recall the details for arranging that affair. The
point was that there were so many distinguished guests in Washington
that it seemed to be one of the desirable duties of the Under Secretary
to entertain them following the institute's conference. I am not sure
whether the ai'rangements were made or proposed by the institute. I
am not sure whether they were pi'oposed before the conference was
over or subsequent to the conference.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4293
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know that the institute had anything to do
with it ?
Mr. Friedman. Since the party was for delegates to the interna-
tional conference, I presume that the institute itself was consulted.
Mr. SouRWiNE. I asked what you know, Mr. Friedman.
Mr. Friedmax. I don't know specifically.
Mr. SorRwiNE. You vouchsafed the information here that you had
assisted in preparing for that party.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRWixE. Now, will you tell us anything about what you did,
what your duties were, in connection with that?
Mr.' Friedman. Well, as I say, specifically my duties were at that
time in connection with the Protocol Department, informing them of
the number of guests, the type of party that was desired.
Mr. SouRW^iNE. Did you do that on behalf of Mr. John Carter
Vincent ? Was he your chief then '?
Mr. Friedman. He was my chief at that time; yes, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You spoke in his name when you made those ar
rangements ?
Mr. Friedman. I am not sure that I did, sir. I am not sure whether
I spoke directly in his name.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You got your authority by virtue of your position
in his Division, did you not ?
Mr. Friedman. My authority was my State Department contract.
I was a member of his Division. And this Division was interested in
this party at Blair House.
Senator Eastland. Did you ever tell anybody you were a Com-
munist ?
Mr. Friedjian. No, sir; I don't believe I have told anyone.
Senator Eastland. You don't believe you did. Do you not know ?
Mr. Friedman. I am quite certain I did not, sir.
Senator Eastland. Quite certain ?
]\Ir. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. Now, why is there a little question in your
mind, Mr. Friedman ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, since
Senator Eastland. Now, do not hesitate. You can answer the ques-
tion without hesitating. You have been making a good witness.
Mr. Friedman. I have just been on the cautious side, since in a
sense over the past years I have spoken to people, and as I say I am
almost certain that I have never told anyone that I was a member of
the Communist Party. I am almost prepared to say that I never
told anyone I was a member of the Communist Party.
Senator Eastland. Almost prepared ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. You know, his question did not say "a member
of the Communist Party."
Senator Eastland. No.
Mr. Fried3han. I am taking that to mean, sir, a member of the
Communist Party.
Senator Eastland. Why is there a question in your mind about
whether you told people you were a Communist or not ?
Mr. Friedman. Just on the cautious side, sir.
4294 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Eastland. Cautious, why ? Because you might have ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have, sir.
Senator Eastland. But you are cautious because you might have
told somebody you were a Communist. Then if you specifically denied
it, you would be guilty of perjury ; was that your reason ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I just want to be accurate and provide the
information that the committee is seeking.
Senator Eastland. Go ahead.
Mr. Morris. What was your last assignment with the State Depart-
ment, Mr. Friedman ? We left you at the United Nations Secretariat,
did we not?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Morris. After that what were your duties with the State
Department ?
Mr. Friedman. When I returned from San Francisco I remained
with the Department until my appointment to the Foreign Service
or Auxiliary, which I believe I said was October 1945.
I went to Shanghai as a junior economic officer assigned to the
American consulate general in Shanghai, to perform the duties of a
labor attache in China. And I remained in that post from October
1945, or perhaps it was November 1 by the time I got started, until
my return to the United States, which was when I departed from
Shanghai in November 1946.
Mr. Morris. I see. Now, what was your next employment
after that?
Mr. Friedman. From February 1947, when I landed, reached the
United States from China — I took a slow boat from China on the
way back — I remained in the New York area. I visited Harvard
University. I visited Johns Hopkins University, to lecture on China.
I visited Washington, D. C, to lecture at a local meeting of the
Institute of Pacific Relations. I was unemployed for
Senator Eastland. Had you been connected with the Institute of
Pacific Relations in any way ?
Mr. Friedman. I had been a member of the institute following the
conference in 1945, Senator.
I believe I took out my membership about January 1945 or Feb-
ruary 1945.
Senator Eastland. Why ?
Mr. Friedman. Why did I take it out ?
Senator Eastland. Yes. Why did you join the institute?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I must say that my experience at Hot Springs
impressed me with two things — its international nature, and secondly,
the high level of discussion and material which was identified with it.
Senator Eastland. And it was a fact that the institute was influen-
tial with the State Department. That was a factor ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; that did not come into it, as I recall. I
also wanted to get the publications of the institute, which I believe
required taking out some form of membership.
Senator Eastland. But while it did not influence you in joining,
you also knew that the institute was very influential with the State
Department?
Mr. Friedman. Influential in what sense. Senator ?
In respect of what ?
Senator Eastland. Policies and personnel.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATION'S 4295
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I did not know that the institute was influ-
ential with reference to policy and I certainly did not know that the
institute, as you suggest, was influential in respect of personnel.
Senator Eastland. Then, if they were not influential, why did the
Department assign you to Hot Springs ?
Mr. Friedman. Since the Institute of Pacific Relations has, over
the I believe past 20 or 25 years — I am not sure of the exact length
of time — held international conferences, the United States was the
host country in this case, and the institute wanted to have a repre-
sentative of the American delegation, and it wanted, I believe, to
provide the American delegation with an opportunity of sending
observers who were neither delegates
Senator Eastland. Yes. Now, what other private organizations
did the State Department assign personnel to, to cover their con-
ferences ?
Mr. Friedman. In this matter, sir ? That is, personnel to serve on
the Secretariat ?
Senator Eastland. Just like you were assigned to Hot Springs.
Mr. Friedman. I don't know, sir.
Senator Eastland. Well, as a matter of fact, no other organization.
Is that not right ?
Mr. Friedman. I am not familiar with whether the Department
had a policy in this respect. All I know is in a sense my own
emi^irical experience.
Senator Eastland. Do you not think that the institute was influ-
ential with the State Department, and, in fact, that it is demonstrated
that it is, when you, as an employee of the State Department were
assigned to that conference? Now, you want to be fair about this
thing.
Mr. Friedman. Well, let me put it this way : This was one of the
international meetings which I mentioned. These were international
meetings in which personnel of the first eminence attended.
Senator Eastland. Yes. I understand all that. Now, answer my
question, "Yes" or "No," and then you can explain.
Mr. Friedman. Could I have the question again, please ?
Senator Eastland. Do you not think that, by virtue of the fact that
you, an employee of the State Department, were assigned to that con-
ference at Hot Springs, Va., it showed that the institute was influ-
ential with the State Department?
Mr. Friedman. I would say that I just can't answer "Yes" or "No,"
Senator, to that.
Senator Eastland. You can answer "Yes" or "No" and then explain
your answer.
Mr. Friedman. I would say "No," sir ; it did not show that the insti-
tute was influential with the State Department.
Senator Eastland. Well, you answer is "No," then.
Mr. Friedman. May I explain my answer, sir?
Senator Eastland. After you answer it, I am going to let you
explain.
Now, what is your answer ? — "Yes," or "No" ?
Mr. Friedman. The answer is "No," Senator.
Senator Eastland. All right. Now explain.
Mr. Friedman. I do not believe that the institute was influential
with the State Department in respect of policy or personnel; that
4296 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
tlie Department considered the conference in Hot Springs in lOiS of
sufficient significance to make available personnel when the Institute
of Pacific Relations made it known that personnel would be welcomed.
Senator Eastland. All right ; now you say, in regard to policy and
personnel, that the institute was not influential with the State Depart-
ment. That is 3'our answer; is it not?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. All right ; and in what respect was the institute
influential with the State Department? You limited your ansAver
to two things : that they were not influential in policy and personnel.
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I took the two points that you had mentioned
before, Senator.
Senator Eastland. All right.
Mr. Friedman. I should say that the institute, to my knowledge,
was not influential in any other respect as far as the State Depart-
ment was concerned.
Senator Eastland. All right.
Mr. Morris. Now, when you lectured at John Hopkins University,
with whom did you negotiate to carry on that lecture?
Mr. Friedjian. With Mr. Owen Lattimore.
Mr. Morris. At that time, you were unemployed ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I was unemployed.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever get any compensation for that lecture?
Mr. Friedman. I believe not, sir; no, sir.
Mr. Morris. I see. What was your next employment, Mr. Fried-
man?
Mr. Friedman. My next employment was the London School of
Economics of the University of London.
Mr. Morris. How long were you there ?
Mr. Friedman, Which began in January 1948. If I may just fill
in the period
Mr. Morris. Go ahead.
Mr. Friedman. In September 1947, I went abroad to be a graduate
student at the London School of Economics. I arrived in London, in
September, registered for courses at the school, and in Januar}^ tliere
was a vacancy of an assistant lecturer in the field of colonial social
science. I was appointed to the lectureship after appearing before a
selection board of distinguished British scholars.
I was appointed to the assistant lectureship, and then subsequently,
I think in October 1950, after serving in the assistant lectureship, I
was appointed a lecturer in colonial administration at the London
School of Economics.
Mr. Morris. Now, when did joii become active in the Committee for
a Democratic Far Eastern Policy, Mr. Friedman?
Mr. Friedman. I have never been active in the Committee for a
Democratic Far Eastern Policy; although I have written a piece
for its publication and I have spoken on the public platform, where
I believe the sponsor of the meeting was the Committee for a Demo-
cratic Far Eastern Policy.
Mr. Morris. Did you know at the time that that was a Communist
organization?
Mr. Friedman. I did not know at the time that that was a Commu-
nist organization.
Mr. ^Iorris. Do you recognize it as such now ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATION'S 4297
Mr. Friedman. I have not had contact with that organization, if I
recall, for about 3 to 41/2 years, and I could not answer that question.
I just have no opinion on whether it is or it is not.
Mr. Morris. I see. Now, with whom did you speak when you spoke
under the auspices of the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern
Pdlicy?
Mr. Friedman. Well, now, if I may just refresh my memory: On
March 6, 1947, I spoke on the platform, or I should say under the
auspices of the committee, with a speaker named Mr. Chu Tong. C-h-u
T-o-n-g.
Mr. Morris. I am sorry. I didn't hear you, Mr. Friedman.
Mr. Friedman. Mr. Chu Tong was the other speaker that day.
Mr. Morris. He is a Communist ; is he not ?
Mr. Friedman, I do not know, sir.
Mr. Morris. He is now in Ked China ; is he not ?
Mr. Friedman. I do not know, sir. ~
Mr. Morris. Have you read the transcript of our public hearing,
Mr. Friedman ?
Mr. Friedman. With reference to what, sir ?
Mr. Morris. This Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy.
Mr. Friedman. I have gone over the transcript.
Mr. Morris. Did you notice our exhibit 8, which is a letter from
the Communist Party of New York State, signed "May Miller, As-
sistant Organizing Secretary," which ends up in the last paragraph
[reading] :
Any inquiries in relation to further activity can be received by writing to the
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy at 111 East Forty-second Street,
New York City.
Comradely yours.
Mr. Friedman. May I look at that ?
Mr. Morris. By all means. I am asking you if you had read that.
That is bearing on your present knowledge as to whether it was a
Communist organization, at this time.
Mr. Mandel, we have put in your citation that this organization has
been listed by the Attorney General ; have we not ?
Mr. Mandel. The Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy
was cited as subversive by Attorney General Tom Clark on April 27,
1949.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ever inquire as to whether any of these
organizations were Communist?
Mr. FitiEDMAN. You are referring to the organization, the Com-
mittee for a Democratic
Senator Ferguson. Yes; the organization that you were joining
and speaking for.
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I did not inquire whether this was a Com-
munist organization when I was speaking for the organization or
writing for its publication in 1947.
Senator Ferguson. You never made an inquiry?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Are you an economist by profession?
Mr. Friedman. I am a political scientist by profession.
Senator Ferguson. You are a political scientist. And you are well
acquainted with communism?
4298 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. I won't say "well acquainted," sir. I am familiar
with some of the writings in the field.
Senator Ferguson. Well, can you recognize communism when you
see it or hear it ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I could recognize a Communist point of
view if I heard it spoken, or I probably could recognize communiim
by looking at a book ; yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Well, the question was, then: When you were
speaking at this organization, did you know it was Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. I did not, sir ; no, sir.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, will you receive into the record the
guest column of the Spotlight on the Far East, which is a publication
of the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy, dated April
1947, a guest column entitled "China's Unions Eefuse To Be Puppets,"
by Julian Friedman.
That is your article ; is it not, Mr. Friedman ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; it is.
Mr. Morris. Will you receive that, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Ferguson. Yes ; I will receive it.
(The material referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 740" and is as
follows:)
Exhibit No. 740
[Source: Spotlight on the Far East, published by the Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy, vol. II, No. 4, April 1947]
China's Unions Refuse To Be Puppets
(By Julian Friedman)
(For the past two years the author was United States labor
attach^ iu China. He became personally acquainted with all ranks
of trade-unionists and speaks with authority on the Chinese labor
movement. )
Genuine trade-unionists are not easy to find in Kuomintang China. To reach
them, you have to visit obscure, innocent-looking alleys or out-of-the-way fields
in the suburbs of the cities.
But it is most dangerous for them to be known as trade-unionists or to work
openly for real trade-unionism.
The Chiang Kai-shek government is absolutely opposed to trade-unionism
because it means democracy, a menace to Chiang's plutocracy. Genuine trade-
unionists are certainly opposed to the present anti-labor National Government.
Many were originally either company-union or Kuomintang headquarters'
appointees. There were also secret-society agents and gangsters in labor roles.
The latter are quickly exposed today by the workers themselves.
As for the company-union and bureaucratic-union officials, the workers have
given them every opportunity to work for the real trade-union movement. So
they now face this dilemma : serve as Kuomintang stooges and "finks" and lose
support among the workers or fight with the workers and be attacked by the
fascists.
That several have chosen the latter course has enraged the National Govern-
ment and Kuomintang, which has retaliated with arrests, threats of violence,
expulsion from official labor circles, purging of official unions, and reorganizing
them.
Nothing illustrates the change in labor so aptly as the Shanghai anti-civil-war
demonstration of June 23, 1946. On the day before, the government had celled
official trade-union representatives to a meeting and dictated resolutions which
said that no workers or unions would participate in the demonstration, and that
any persons in the demonstration could not be considered workers. The resolu-
tions were "unanimously adopted" because the government chairman said so,
with no one else given a chance to speak. But more than 100,000 workers turned
out the next day. And the representatives who had "passed" the resolutions the
previous day marched at their head.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4299
Mr. Morris, Have you read Herbert Philbrick's book, Mr. Fried-
man?
Mr. Friedman. I did not read the entire book.
Mr. JMoRRis. Have you read that that portion which pertains to
you?
Mr. Friedman. I looked at the index and saw my name there, and
turned to that portion of the book where my name appears, and Mr.
Philbrick says I spoke on the public platform, if I recall it, of the
Twentieth Century Association, which he describes as a traditional
liberal organization of Boston; that I spoke with Mr. Lewis Lyon,
the curate of the Nieman Foundation, I believe formerly editor of
the Boston Globe, who was chairman of the meeting, and I believe
the other speaker was Mr. Philip Jaffe.
Mr. IMoRRis. Now, did he say who arranged that meeting?
Mr. Friedman, I knew that the meeting had been arranged at the
request of the Boston committee.
Mr, INIoRRis, Not who asked you, but who made the arrangements
for you to go up there and speak.
Mr. Friedman. I was in Boston at the time, or, rather, I should say
that I was planning to go up to Harvnrd in Cambridge at the time.
I think these plans of mine were known by the Committee for a Demo-
cratic Far Eastern Policy, and that they asked me would I be avail-
able as a speaker, and I believe Rev. Stephen Fritchman, of the Uni-
tarian Service Committee in Boston, actually sent me the invitation.
Mr. Morris. In connection with Senator Eastland's question, have
you ever told anybody that you were a member of the Communist
'Party ?
I am asking you if you were associated in any way with the arbitra-
tion proceeding of Betty Levin.
Mr. Friedman. There are two questions? Or just one question?
Mr. Morris. One question is : Are you acquainted with the arbitra-
tion proceedings of Betty Levin ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I am acquainted with the arbitration pro-
ceedings of Betty Levin.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Would you give us a little background material on that
subject. Mr. Friedman?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr, Morris, My recollection of the testimony is that you were act-
ing behind the scenes in that arbitration,
Mr, Friedman, Mrs. Levin testified?
Mr, Morris. No; Mrs. Widener, a witness before this committee,
has testified that you were active behind the scenes in the arbitration
proceedings of Betty Levin.
Mr. Friedman. May I just read Mrs. Wideners statement? She
does not quite say that,
Mr. ]MoRRis. By all means. I am just asking your recollection of
the episode.
Mr. Friedman. Mrs, Widener contended that she made some in-
quiries about my participation in these proceedings, and she first went
to a Miss Sarah Hoda:ekinson. a friend of hers, employed, so the record
says, by the State Department's Mission at the United Nations, and
Miss Hodgekinson referred Mrs, Widener to a reporter, who even-
tually referred her to Mr. Frederick Woltman, of the New York
World-Telegram.
4300 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. MoRRivS. Yes. Now, Mr. Friedman, I do not want to go into
that with too much detail. I just want to know what your connection
was. I just made general reference. I think she said yoii were work-
ing behind the scenes on it.
Mr. Friedman. May I say she is quoting Mr. Frederick Woltman.
]SIr. Morris. No ; she is not.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Counsel and the witness need not argue about what
is in the record.
Senator Ferguson. Yes. You just answer his question.
Mr. Morris. What was your activity with the arbitration proceed-
ing about Betty Levin ?
Mr. Friedman. I became aware of this case through two sources.
The first source, I believe, was the New York press. And this was
some time after I had returned from China, was in the United States,
and clearly after the case had gone to arbitration.
Mr. Morris. Now, what did you learn from the New York press,
Mr. Friedman ?
Mr. Friedman. I learned of the existence of the arbitration.
Mr. Morris. What was the problem there ? Tell us what the prob-
lem is, Mr. Friedman.
Mr. Friedman. May I finish, Mr. Morris? I would like to be
helpful in this case.
Mr. Morris. Go ahead.
Mr, Friedman. The thing that caught my eye about the reports of
the case was references to a number of books on China, if I recall
correctly, and also references to an organization called the China Aid
Council. And I believe — I am not sure whether this was in the press —
the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy.
Mr. Morris. And you had been connected with all of those things?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. If I may explain chronologically
Mr. Morris. It is all right to explain that, Mr. Friedman, but I
think there is a chairman here, and some Senators,
Senator Ferguson, We want to get along as fast as we can,
Mr. Morris. Not only that, but we also would like to know what
the case was about. You haven't told us that, Mr. Friedman.
Mr. Friedman. If I may tell how I came into the case, since it is
really, Senator, not my full knowledge of the entire case that I can
give
Senator Ferguson. How did you get into it ? Answer that question.
Mr. Friedman, I volunteered my services, because I was interested
in the issues, and I approached the counsel for the union in this case.
Mr, Morris, What was that counsel?
Mr, Friedman, The firm was the New^ York law firm of Boudin,
Glickstein, and Cohen, I am not quite sure if that is the right name,
but I know that the Boudin name is identified with it.
Mr. Morris. What was the union involved?
Mr. Friedman. The union involved, if I may read from the arbi-
trator's award, was the Social Service Employees Union, Local 19,
United Office and Professional Workers of America, CIO.
Mr. Morris. That has been expelled by the CIO as a Communist-
controlled union, has it not?
Mr. Friedman. I do not know, sir.
Mr, Morris. Proceed. Tell me this, Mr. Friedman. Was not the
issue in that case whether or not Betty Levin had been putting books
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4301
into the conncil library, the subject council library, in such a way as
to cause a certain partisan interpretation, a partisan atmosphere, to
the whole library?
Mv. Friedman. I don't believe it was the library, Mr. Morris.
I believe that what was involved in the case were book lists which
she made up in the course of her educational work on behalf of the
national council.
Mr. INIoRRis. That's right. What came to your attention were books
that you had been acquainted with from your own experience in China
and in the State Department ; is that correct ?
Mr, Friedman. Yes, although I had to look over one or two of the
books at the time, since I was not too familiar with them.
Mr. Morris. Now, tell me this, Mr. Friedman. You were acquainted
with those books, were you not?
Mr. Friedman. I was acquainted with almost all of the China books.
Mr. Morris. What were the books ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, if I may read the list of books :
Red Star Over China, by Mr. Edgar Snow
The Good Earth, by Pearl Buck
Man's Fate, by Andre ISIalraux
The Challenge of Red China, by Gunther Stein
Solution in Asia, by Owen Lattimore
Battle Hymn of China, by Agnes Smedley
Report from Red China, by Harrison Forman
Shark Fins and Millet, by Ilona Ralph Sues
And the other book is Village in August by T'ien Chun.
These are the books on China.
]\Ir. Morris. You said you had recognized those books. Where had
you seen those books before ?
Mr. Friedman. I had seen these books in book shops and libraries.
I have read some of tliese books, because I possessed them.
Mr. Morris. You had read them, and you were acquainted with
them.
Mr. Friedman. I had read most of them, and at the time of the
arbitration proceeding. I was not familiar, not fully familiar, with
the book called Village in xVugust, which was a novel ; and I do not
believe it was one of the books on which I had to comment.
Mr. Morris. Tell me further about the books. Now, had you used
those books Avhen you were in the State Department, Mr. Friedman?
Mr. Friedman. I think that I had read these books in the course of
my preparation — at least those which were available at the time I was
in the State Department — read them in the course of my preparation
for the Far East.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Were they general background reading for the State
Department people ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; these were books which were generally avail-
able, which one wanting to find out something about China could read.
Senator Ferguson. Were they anti-Communist?
Mr. Friedman. These books, sir? I don't think I can answer that
question. Senator, because I don't think that one can — at least, an
academic man with intellectual honesty cannot simply say whether
a book is pro- or anti-Communist.
88348— 52— pt. 12 18
4302 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. Can you tell us whether any of them were anti-
Communist?
Mr. Friedman. This is purely opinion you are asking for, but I
believe Mr. Lattimore's Solution in Asia might be classified as an
anti-Communist book, although I would not want to say that any of
these books were essentially anti-Communist or pro-Communist.
Senator Ferguson. Would you think the Communist book stores
would sell an anti-Communist book?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know the selling policies of Communist book
stores, Senator.
Senator Ferguson. Do you know there is now testimony that these
books were recommended as the party line and sold in Communist
book stores ?
Mr. Friedman. I have not seen that testimony.
Senator Eastland. The testimony was stronger than that : that
the employees were instructed by the party to recommend these books
to party members as a Communist program.
Mr. Sour WINE. Mr. Friedman, do you remember what you testified
in executive session with regard to the book, Shark Fins and Millet,
by Ilona Ralph Sues ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I believe I said that this book was critical,
particularly critical, of Nationalist China.
Mr. SouRwiNE. That is not what you said, but is that a fact? Was
it particularly critical of Nationalist China?
Mr. Friedman. Well, may I go into that ?
Mr. SouRwiNE. Just answer the question, yes or no.
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I would say it was particularly critical of one
important section of Nationalist China.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Was it procoalition Government?
Mr. Friedman. If I recall correctly, I believe that was the general
tendency of the book.
Mr. Sourwine. Was it proradical reform in China ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, what I would call radical reform.
Mr. Sourwine. You testified to that effect in executive session, did
you not ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. But you want to say the book is not pro-Communist.
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. I would not say that this book is neces-
sarily pro-Communist, any more than I would like to say any of the
books are pro- or anti-Communist.
Mr. Sourwine. It was certainly pro the Chinese Communists, was
it not ?
Mr. Friedman. I am just trying to remember the book. I haven't
looked at it in a long time. I came to this book for a rather special
interest at the time I was employed by the State Department. May
I explain tliat. Senator?
Senator Ferguson. Yes, if you can do it in a few sentences.
Mr. Friedman. All right. Fine.
This book has an unusual description of Miss Sues' meeting with
a very famous Chinese Nationalist leader closely identified with the
Generalissimo. And that is a Mr. Tu Yueh-Sen, and also identified
with Mr. Tu Yueh-Sen was Mr. Chu Sueh-Fan, the Chinese Asso-
ciation of Labor Chairman, a person who, in my official duties, as
labor attache, I would have to meet. And consequently this was one
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4303
of the books on which I got, you might call it, personality data on
Chinese labor officials and a brief description of Chinese labor asso-
ciation. , •
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you remember testifying in executive session
that Miss Sues was friendly to the Chinese Communists ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I did say that, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you mean her personally? Or her book?
Mr. Friedman. I would say personally, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know her personally?
Mr. Friedman. I have met Miss Sues in connection with the book.
Mr. Morris. I see. Have you read her testimony before this com-
mittee that she was a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall it, sir. If it is in the first five volumes,
I perhaps have read it.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Friedman, when did you first meet Owen Latti-
more?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I met Owen Lattimore some time in No-
vember or December 1944.
Mr. Morris. "Wliere did you meet him ?
Mr. Friedman. I met him, I believe, in the State Department
building.
Mr. Morris. In whose office ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe it was the office of Mr. John Carter Vin-
cent, the Chief of the Division of Chinese Affairs.
Mr. INIoRRis. What was he doing there?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall — no, I don't even know the purpose
of Mr. Lattimore's visit. I do know Mr. Vincent informed me that
Mr. Lattimore was coming into the Department, and that I might
meet him on that occasion.
Mr. Morris. Did you look forward to that?
Mr. Friedman. I certainly did, sir.
Mr. Morris. Now, did you show him any State Department j)apers
at that time ?
Mr. Friedman. I showed him, if I recall correctly, a memorandum,
a background memorandum, which I was preparing on the subject
of Sinkiang, this far western province of China, which was at that
time going through some troubles.
Mr. Morris. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I get back to that arbitra-
tion proceeding?
Mr. Sourwine. May I ask one question about this memorandum,
first?
By "background memorandum," do you mean a memorandum cover-
ing the available information about Mr. T'ien Chun ?
Mr. Friedman. This was a memorandum that summarized the avail-
able information.
Mr. Sourwine. That summarized the available information about
T'ien Chun?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, within, I believe, about a page or page and
a quarter, which was a space assigned to me.
Mr. Sourwine. You got all the available information about T'ien
Chun summarized in a page or a page and a quarter ^
Mr. Friedman. As far as I could, yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. He told you it was a good job you had done?
4304 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, Senator. And as I recall, I was rather
pleased at this, that Mr. Lattimore, who was a recognized authority
in the field of inner Asia, thought that I had done a good job.
Senator Ferguson. And you let him read it, and he approved it?
Mr. Friedman. I did let him read it, and Mr. Vincent knew that
Mr. Lattimore was reading the memorandum.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Friedman, did you aid Betty Levin in her arbitra-
tion difficulty ?
Mr. Friedman. I appeared in the arbitration proceedings as an ex-
pert witness, put on the stand by the union of which Miss Levin was
a member. And I was on the stand, on the scene, on the record, in
front of Mr. James Lawrence Fly, who was the arbitrator, and I was
cross-examined, answered questions on books put forward to me by the
counsel for the National Council of Jewish Women.
Mr. Morris. With whom in ])articular in, that union did you carry
on negotiations prior to testifying in that pr<K'eeding^
Mr. Friedman. The only person I carried on negotiations with, if
you want to use that term, the person in a sense who suggested I might
appear as an expert witness, was the attorney for the union, Mr.
Boudin.
Mr. Morris. I see. Did you meet any union officials?
Mr. Friedman. The only union official I can remember meeting then
was Mr. Bernard Siegel ; my dealings in respect of the case were en-
tii'ely with the lawyer for Miss Levin and the union.
Mr. Morris. I see. Now, did you testify about the books that you
have just mentioned?
j\Ir. Friedman. I was asked to testify to the best of my knowledge,
having recently returned from Chiini, on the accuracy and the con-
tent of the books. That was my pi'incipal service, to read, go over
these books, and to make known whether 1 thought the books portrayed
the situation to the extent that I knew it accurately, and whether the
books represented in that sense coin})etent work.
Senator Ferguson. Was there any question in that case as to com-
munism ?
Mr. Friedman. That was not the particular issue. Senator.
Senator Ferguson. Well, was it an issue at all ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes. Generally speaking; yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. That she was a Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. I do not believe I heard that charged.
Senator Ferguson. Or pro-Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. The reference of "pro-Communist" certainly ap-
pears in the case ; yes, sir. And the ar])itrator himself points out that
there was a bias in the book list, or a lack, certainly, of nonpartisan-
ship.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you point that out when you testified about
the books ?
Mr. Friedman. 1 think that the principal part of my testimony
concerned the content of the books, the accuracy in terms of the scene
that I was familiar with. I recall vaguely being asked whether any
of the books were pro-Communist or anti-Communist. I also recall
that I believe it was the counsel for the National Council of Jewish
Women — that would be ]Mr. Jesse Fiiedon — asked me whether I
thought the books taken together would be pro or anti; and I remem-
ber that I was also asked, I believe by the arbitrator, although I don't
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4305
recall whether it was the arbitrator of Mr. Boiiclin or Mr. Friedon,
Avhether I could make up a list of books, could recomuiend a list of
books which would be pro-Communist.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Have you run down now ?
Mr. Friedman. Have I run down now ?
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Will you answer the question now, please?
Did you in your testimony point out to anybody that these books
had bias?
Mr. Friedman. I do not recall whether I pointed that out, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Wliy didn't you say that in the fTi-st place, instead
of going on here for 3 minutes with stuff that had nothing to do with
the question ? You are fencing with this committee, sir, and you are
wasting the committee's time.
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. I apologize to the chairman if he feels
that I am fencing with the connnittee.
Senator Ferguson. Let us try and keep it on the track and answer
the questions directly.
Mr. Sourwine. Now, one of those books was definitely pro-Com-
munist, wasn't it ?
Mr. Friedman. One of the books on the list could be taken as pro-
Communist, but I still would prefer to refrain from "pro'' or "anti."
Mr. Sourwine, Whicli one ?
Mr. Friedman. The one book in my estimation you could consider
pro-Communist was probably Battle Hynui of China by Agnes Smed-
ley.
Mr. Sourwine. As a matter of fact, regardless of what you said
here this morning about not characterizing anything as pro-Com-
munist, you did characterize that book as pro-Communist in the ex-
ecutive session, didn't you ?
Mr. Friedman. Voluntarily, sir, in reply to questions put to me.
Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Well, if you were not acquainted with commu-
nism any more than you indicate this morning, how could you be an
expert on these books ?
Mr. Friedman. I testified on the books, sir, to the extent of my own
experiences and my preparation reading on the subject. I did not put
myself forward as the only authority, as a supreme expert.
Senator Ferguson. Well, you were asked to testify as an expert?
, Mr. Friedman. I was asked to testify as an expert ; yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Therefore, you had to read the books to find
out.
Mr. Friedman. Yes. I am familiar with almost all of these books.
The ones which I do not believe I had to testify one were the novels,
sir. I may be mistaken on failing to recall that accurately, but I be-
lieve it was essentially the books with which I was most familiar by
actual experience.
Mr. Morris. Well, now, has anyone told you that Betty Levin is
a Communist, is or was a Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. I have heard second hand that Miss Levin was a
Communist. And that was only recently.
Mr. Morris. I see. Now, had anyone told you at that time, or had
you any reason to believe at that time, that Betty Levin was a Com-
munist ?
4306 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. I do not recall that anyone told me at that time
that Miss Levin was a Communist, and I had no reason to believe
at that time that she was a member of the Communist Party or a Com-
munist in the sense of being a Marxist. All I knew at that particular
time — I did not know Miss Levin when I came into the affair. The
proceedings were already under way, and my relations were prin-
cipally with Miss Levin's attorney, Mr. Boudin.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ask the counsel as to whether or not
his client was a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I did not.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ask anyone?
Mr. Friedman. I do not believe so ; no, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Then you went in there to testify as an expert
on these books, and you made no inquiry as to whether or not the per-
son was a Communist that you were in effect defending?
Mr. Friedman. In effect, sir, I wanted to stick to the books and
not to participate in the larger issues of the proceeding.
Senator Ferguson. Sure. The larger issue was whether or not
she was a Communist, whether she was putting out Communist propa-
ganda. And you did not want to know about that. You just wanted
to go in and testify as an expert on the propaganda.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. On the books. Excuse me, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Now, did you inquire from any Communist as
to whether these books were pro-Communist?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I did not. The opinions that I gave the
arbitrator were my own opinions, based on knowledge of the books
and knowledge of the areas which these books dealt with.
Mr. Morris. Now, did you indicate at that time that you thought
Agnes Smedley's book was pro-Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe that at the request of the arbitrator, in
saying which books I would include if a pro-Communist list were
being made up, I believe 1 included Miss Smedley's book ; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. How does ihat answer the question? In other words,
you did indicate at that time that you thought it was pro-Communist?
Mr. Friedman. That it would fit in with a list of pro-Communist
books ; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. But the others you said would not fit in with such a
list.
Mr. Friedman. I believe that was my testimony, yes, sir. I do not
recall it in detail.
Mr. Morris, Have you written anything under the auspices of the
Institute of Pacific Relations?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I have written something under the aus-
pices of the Institute of Pacific Relations, a chapter or supplement,
rather, on Labor in Nationalist China, 1945-48, and this appears in
a larger publication of the institute called Notes on Labor in Na-
tionalist China.
Mr. Morris. Wlio compiled those notes ?
Mr. Friedman. The notes, I believe, were originally compiled by a
Chinese writer, but written up in this country, I believe, or written
up anyway and published under the name of Mr. Israel Epstein.
Mr. Morris. Is he a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. I would have reason to believe he is pro-Communist
sir. I do not know whether he is a Communist.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4307
Mr. Morris. Do you know where he is now ?
Mr. Friedman. 1 believe you told me yesterday he was in Peiping.
Mr. Morris. I didn't tell you that yesterday.
Mr. Friedman. I believe it was suggested to me.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know whether he is in Peiping ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe he is in Peiping.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you have any other information, other than the
information you think you got last night 'i
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I believe I saw an article of his in a Chinese
publication. Not China Today; an English language Chinese pub-
lication which Mr. Epstein has written recently.
Mr. SouRAviNE. What publication?
Mr. Morris. Was it China Monthly ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. China Eeview ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Is this a paper published in Communist China that
you are talking about ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe it is published either in Communist China
or Hong Kong. It used to be published in Hong Kong.
Mr. Morris. Do you read it regularly ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I do not.
Mr. Morris. Didn't you testify in executive session that you dis-
covered, you thought, that Israel Epstein was a Communist when
you heard about his departure for Peiping ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I believe I may have testified to that effect.
Mr, Morris. You did know he left for Peiping, then, at that time?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Morris. How did you hear that ?
Mr. Friedman. I heard — now, how did I hear this ? I am not quite
sure how I learned that Mr. Epstein had left for Peiping. I believe
I heard while I was still in London, but I am not quite sure.
Mr. Morris. Did some Communist tell you that ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know, sir.
Mr. Morris. Now, how was it that you happened to collaborate
with Israel Epstein in this writing project for the Institute of Pacific
Relations?
Mr. Friedman. I did not collaborate with Mr. Epstein in this pro-
ject. I was invited by Mr. William Holland of the Institute of
Pacific Relations, invited in 1948, to write an introduction to this
study of Chinese labor, which Mr. Epstein was preparing under the
auspices of the Institute of Pacific Relations. I agreed to write the
introduction, and then subsequently was informed by Mr. Holland
that he preferred to have a supplement covering the period in which I
was in China and the events immediately following. In writing to
Mr. Holland, I agreed to receive Mr. Epstein's manuscript, and read
over the manuscript, and I replied with criticism of the manuscript.
And it was on that basis that I did write the supplement, and I believe
it was eventually published some time in 1949. Or I should say mineo-
graphed. It was not published in ordinary book form.
Mr. Morris. Had you ever met Israel Epstein at the time ?
Mr. Friedman. I had met Mr. Epstein on one or two occasions.
Mr. Morris. Wliere had you met him ?
4308 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. I believe I met him first of all — I may again be
mistaken — in connection with the Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy. And I dined with Mr. Epstein at his home in Staten
Island some time in 1947, at a time when he wanted to introduce me to
a correspondent for the famous Chinese newspaper, the Dagoon
Bow.
INIr. Morris. Who was the correspondent?
Mr. Friedman. I believe Miss Yang Gong.
Mr. Morris. Where is she now?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know where Miss Yang Gong is now.
Mr. Morri§. Who was the Chinese writer who prepared the original
notes which Mr. Israel Epstein converted into this particular book?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall at the moment. Perhaps Mr. Mandel
would let me see, and I could read it.
Mr. Morris. Is People's China the name of the publication wherein
you read that ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; People's China is correct. It used to have
another name.
Mr. SouRWiNE. How do you receive copies of that magazine?
Mr. Friedman. Oh, I think one- can buy it on newsstands in many
places.
Mr. SoTJRwiNE. Is that how you get it ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I do not subscribe to it.
Mr. Morris. In the October 16, 1951, issue of People's China, there
is an article by Israel Epstein entitled "Return to New China."
Senator Ferguson. Do you want to receive that ?
Mr. Morris. I just want it noted.
Do you know Israel Epstein's wife, Elsie Fairfax Cholmeley ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I do know JSIrs. Cholmeley.
Mr. Morris. How well do you know her ?
Mr. Friedman. I met her at the Committee for a Democratic Far
Eastern Policy, where she was employed, and I met her at her home.
1 may have met her on the occasion on which I spoke, under the aus-
pices of the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy in New
York. And I saw her in London, England, in January, I believe
January 1951. But I am not quite sure whether it was 1950 or 1951.
Mr. Morris. How frequently did you go to the offices of the Com-
mittee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall, sir. In this period of time, I was in
New York City, and I may have dropped in frequently or infrequent-
ly. I don't recall.
Mr. Morris. Do you know that she is in Red China now ?
Mr. Friedman. I do not know that definitely ; no, sir. When I saw
her in London, she informed me that she was returning to the United
States, and I did not see her after that occasion.
Mr. Morris. Was Israel Epstein connected with the Allied Labor
News?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I believe that is the same Israel Epstein. And
also Time magazine.
Mr. Morris. Did you tell Mrs. Widener that you were active on
behalf of Betty Levin in the arbitration proceeding?
Mr. Friedman. From what I can recall of the conversation in the
company of Mrs. Widener on this evening, the date of which neither
Mrs. Widener nor I seemed to remember, but which must have been
INSTITUT3 OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4309
in April or May, 1947, some months after I was out of State Depart-
ment employment— what I recall is that I probably did discuss the
case. And that is particularly the relationship of the books.
Mr. Morris. You say you probably did.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Don't you have any clear recollection of that con-
versation ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I do not, sir. This evening in question was
of the least significance and importance.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know that you did talk to Mrs. Widener ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I could answer that, sir; no, and yes. She
was not Mrs. Widener at the time.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You know the person that we are referring to when
we ask that question, don't you ?
Mr. Friedman. I have reason to believe I know the person, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know the person who is now Mrs. Alice
Widener ?
Mr. Friedman. If she was the former Mrs. Alice Berezhovsky,
then I do know the person and met her one evening at the home of
Mr. Clark Andrews, or rather Mrs. Clark Andrews, and I saw her some
weeks later, I believe at the wedding of Mr. and Mrs. Andrews, at
which she was present.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you talk to Mrs. Berezhovsky at the time of
your meeting ?
Mr, Friedman. I remember that we did have conversation that
evening ; yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwaNE. Do you remember anj^thing about what you talked
about ?
Mr. Friedman. Not specifically ; no, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Then you do not deny what she said.
Mr. Friedman. I do deny it, sir. I should deny it on the basis, sir,
that had she said some of the things which she claims she said, had I
said some of the things which she claims I said, I would certainl}'
have remembered that evening.
May I add a word to that, Senator?
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. Friedman. I have asked Mr. Berezhovsk3% who was subsequent-
ly divorced, a year or perhaps 2 years after this conversation which
Mrs. AVidener talked about. Mr. Berezhovsky informed me that in
his memory he cannot recall any single time
Mr, Morris. He was not there, was he ?
Mr. Friedman. Excuse me. Senator. He was present.
Mr. Morris. He was not there at that conversation.
Mr. Friedman. He came to the home of Mrs. Andrews, at that time
INIrs. Ullman — he came to pick up his wife and take her home. He
had previously, as I recall, been at a concert, which he was either con-
ducting or participating in. He came later in the evening, and I recall
Mrs. Berezhovsky going home with Mr. Berezhovsky.
Mr. Sourwine. Are you quite sure about that?
Mr. Friedman. Yes I am, sir.
Mr. SouRAviNE. You are under oath here. There is no question in
your mind about it. That much you remember clearly. The rest may
be vague, but that much you remember clearly ?
4310 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Not only do I remember it to that extent, sir, but I
have discussed this with Mr. Berezhovsky and with Mr. and Mrs. An-
drews, and both, or all three of them, remember that Mr. Berezhov-
sky came later in the evening and left the house with Mrs. Berezhov-
sky.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Oh, you have tried to refresh your memory about
this incident, have you ?
Mr. Friedman. When I
Mr. SouRwiNE. Answer that "Yes" or "No."
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You have done that since you have read testimony
in these hearings about it, is that right ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Now, with all of your efforts to refresh your memory
about this, you still can recall nothing about it other than what yon
have told us ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, I have asked Mr. Andrews and Mrs. An-
drews and Mr. Berezhovsky, who was present part of the evening,
whether they could remember what was discussed.
The most they could tell me they remember was that in a sense
politics was discussed, but that there were no references which Mrs.
Berehovsky herself says were made that evening.
Mr. Morris. You testified a while ago that you could not recall
whether you had mentioned the arbitration proceeding.
Mr. Friedman. I said I believe I explained the arbitration pro-
ceeding.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you think that is what you said ?
Mr. Friedman. Excuse me, sir ?
Mr. Sourwine. Do you think that is what you said, that you had
explained the arbitration proceeding ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe the record will show that I was interrupted
as I was explaining.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you think the record will show that you said you
explained the arbitration proceeding to Mrs. Widener ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I explained to the persons in the room at
the time what the arbitration proceeding was and why it was so
interesting.
Mr. Sourwine. Was Mrs. Berezhovsky in the room at the time ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe she was, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Well, now, when Mr. Morris asked you if you had
told Mrs. Berezhovsky — using the name Widener ; but you didn't make
the claim that you didn't know who he meant — when he asked if you
had told her about your connection with the arbitration proceedings,
we had a great deal of dijSiculty getting the answer.
Now, the answ^er to that question is "Yes," then, isn't it?
Mr. Friedman. I believe that I did tell her, yes, sir. But based on
recollection, sir.
Mr. Morris. But that is all you can recall about the conversation ?
Mr. Friedman. About that particular conversation, yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Now, have you read the testimony of Eugene Dooman
before this committee ?
Mr. Friedman. I have, sir.
mSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4311
Mr. Morris. Did you ever leak information from area committee
meetings in the State Department to correspondents, left-wing corre-
spondents ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I did not leak information to left-wing
correspondents.
Senator Ferguson. Did you leak it to any one ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. The best of my recollection is I did not.
Senator Ferguson. Well, now, wait. You ought to have a recol-
lection on that, if you leaked information out of a Department of
Government. Did you leak any information to any one outside of
Government ?
Mr. Friedman. Will you please define ''leaked" ?
Senator Ferguson. Did you give information that you were work-
ing on in Government, or obtained as an employee of Government,
to people outside of Government?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I believe, sir, that I have discussed Avith a
number of people matters which were matters of our foreign policy.
Senator Ferguson. Yes.
Mr. Friedman. But I do not remember specifically — in fact, I would
say that specifically I did not leak information.
Senator Ferguson. Well, you and I are having difficulty, then,
over the word ''leak" ; is that it ? Did you give any pamphlets or any
memorandums of any papers to anyone ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. In the course of my employment in the
State Department, I have officially given out publications in the course
of my duties. And in connection with one matter, and that is a study
on Japan, I did make available some notes.
Senator Ferguson. Some notes. And whom did you give those
notes to?
Mr. Friedman. Those notes were given to Lt. Andrew Roth.
Senator Ferguson. Yes.- Now, you do not classify him as a left-
wing correspondent ?
Mr. Friedman. Mr. Roth at that time was known to me only as a
lieutenant in the United States Navy, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Well, now, what was a lieutenant in the United
States Navy doing coming to you for notes on foreign policy ?
Mr. Friedman. These were not notes on foreign policy. Senator.
Senator Ferguson. What were they on?
Mr. Friedman. These were notes on the history of the Japanese
labor movement.
Senator Ferguson. All right. Now, what dicl Roth want with the
notes on the Japanese labor movement ?
Mr. Friedman. Roth at that time had written but had not yet pub-
lished a book entitled, "Dilemma in Japan," and he wanted to check,
if I may continue just a moment, sir, the accuracy of his own material
against the notes which I had.
Senator Ferguson. Wliich was Government material.
Mr. Friedman. Which was material — yes ; which one I think would
properly say was Government material. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. All right. Now, were we at war at that time ?
Mr. Friedman. We were, sir. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And this was material that you had obtained
as an employee of the United States Government?
4312 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; this was information in my possession
as an employee of tlie United States Government.
Senator Perousox. And yon gave it to Lieutenant Eotli?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. This was information which I had com-
piled on the history of the Japanese labor movement, mainly, if not
all, from public sources, from the" usual books on the subject. I had
put it together, and Roth wanted to use the material.
Senator Ferguson. And von were paid for vour labor bv the United
States Government ?
Mr. Friedman. I was in the employment of the United States Gov-
ernment at the time; yes, sir.
Senator Feiujuson. And were paid for your work!'
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferouson. All right. Now, did you ever give anybody
else information?
Mr. Friedman. While I was employed by the Government?
Senator Ferguson. Yes. Or did you take any away with you when
you quit employment with the Government, and give it to them? You
showed j\Ir. Lattimore this memorandum that you had jirepared.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. That was work that you were working on.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever give anything to Y. Y. Hsu ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. What did you give to Hsu ?
Mr. Friedman. Mr. Hsu had written to the Dei^artment to see if
we could provide him with a map which could be used in his study on
conditions, 1 believe social and economic conditions, in the liberated
areas of Ghina. And 1 rej)lied by sending him a nonrestrictecl map
which had come in from the Far East, and which he ac- epted, in
exchange for which 1 believe he sent the Department first copies of
his report.
Senator Ferguson. All right. Now, whom did you consult about
turning this matter over?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall whether I consulted anyone spe-
cifically, sir. I pi-obably took this act on my own.
Senator Ferguson. When did you give Roth this information?
ISIr. P'kiei):\i AN. I would say perhaps March — I am not quite sure —
probably ^larch or February 1945.
Senator Ferguson. 1945.
Mr. Friedman. It.was shortly after I met JNIr. Roth.
Senator Fi:r(jus()N. And when was he prosecuted, or a case made
against him? When was he arrested?
Mr. Friedman. I believe he was arrested some time in June of '45.
Senator Ferguson. And one of the things they arrested him for was
the taking of information out of the State Department, or the obtain-
ing of information out of the State Department; is that right?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall the exact charge, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ever hear of the Amerasia case?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. Of course, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And you knew Roth was one of the parties in
the Amerasia case ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4313
Senator Ferousox. And yon had <riven him information ont of the
State Department in March of tlie same year that he was arrested?
Mr. Friedman. In February or March the same year, I gave him
some notes on Japanese labor history ; yes, sir.
Senator Fergusox. Xow, did you ever give him any other papers?
Mr. Friedman. Xot that I recall, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Well, try to recall.
Mr. Friedman. I am almost certain, sir, that I did not give ]\Ir.
Roth any other pajiers. In fact, Mr. Roth gave me some pa]:)ers which
were not official publications, but what he called information which he
had gotten from outside sources and which I had passed on to Mr.
Vincent.
Senator Ferguson. You sav you obtained that information from
Roth out of the Navy ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I do not believe this was naval information.
Senator Ferguson. Was he in uniform at the time?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I believe he was.
Mr. Morris. When we are talking about Y. Y. Hsu. did you know
Y. Y. Hsu at the time you gave him that material ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I did.
Mr. Morris. Where had you met him?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I first met Y. Y. Hsu through Miss Ilona
Ralph Sues, at the time I was interested in this labor section of her
book, which I described before. And then I subsequently, if I recall
correctly, saw Mr. Hsu at the Institute of Pacific Relations confer-
ence at Hot Springs, and it was at that time that he raised the question
of getting a suitable map for the publication which he was writing
under the auspices of the institute, and I believe after that he wrote
me at the Dej^artment asking if such a map were available or any maps
were available which would be suitable, and we paid to him, sir, the
same courtesy we paid to most scholars in the field, helping make avail-
able what was not restricted, and which would, in a sense, advance
the cause of scholarship.
Mr. Morris. Did you know he was a Communist at that time ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Were you acquainted with his Communist record at
that time?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Do you know where he is now ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe he is in Red China.
Senator Ferguson. Another question. You were working for Mr.
Vincent at the time these papers were given to Lieutenant Roth ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And you had a desk in Mr. Vincent's office?
Mr. Friedman. For part of the time, sir, yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. For part of the time. At the time you gave these
papers to Roth ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't believe so, no, sir. I am not sure at which
time I had a desk in the same room as Mr. Vincent and at which time
I was outside in the larger room.
Senator Ferguson. Did you know Service ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I met Mr. Service.
Senator Ferguson. Did you ever give any information to Service ?
4314 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. The information that I must have given Mr. Service
was official information of the State Department while he was on
assignment to the Department.
Senator Ferguson. Yes. But he was working in your Department?
Mr. Friedman. He was visiting onr department at that time. He
was on leave from China, if I recall.
Senator Ferguson. Did yon know one Philip Jaffe?
Mr. Friedman. I did not know Mr. Philip Jaffe while I was in the
service of the United States Government. I did meet Mr. Jaffe after
I had left Government service.
Senator Ferguson. And that was after the case against Jaffe ?
Mr. Friedman. Long after the case against Jaffe; yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Now, did you ever give any other papers out,
to anyone ?
Mr. Morris. Did you ever give any papers to Rose Yardumian?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I did give a paper to Rose Yardumian,
again a nongovernmental paper, concerning the Institute of Pacific
Relations, which — and I refreshed my memory on this — which I be-
lieve originated with Mr. Ullman, and was handed someone in the
State Department, who in turn handed it on to me, and since it con-
cerned the institute, I let Miss Yardumian have a copy for Mr. Carter.
Mr. Morris. Do you know if she has recently been in Red China ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe she either is in Red China or has been re-
cently in Red China ; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Do you know her sister ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I have met her sister.
Mr. Morris. What is her first name ?
Mr. Friedman. Isabel.
Mr. Morris. Who was she married to ?
Mr. Friedman. She is now Mrs. Stein, Mrs. Gunther Stein.
Senator Ferguson. I would like to now take up the investigation
that the State Department made of leaks or papers going out of the
Department.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Do you recall that investigation?
Mr. Friedman. Well, no sir; because I was never at any time inter-
rogated by the Department officials on this matter.
Senator Ferguson. You ;nean to say that papers disappeared out
of the office of Service and Vincent, and you were an employee there,
and
Mr. Friedman. I was one of several employees.
Senator Ferguson. But you were an employee?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And that no investigation was ever made by
the State Department to ascertain how the papers might have got
to Jaffe and Roth and Service — the papers in the Amerasia case?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. I do not recall any departmental investi-
gation, but my answer to your question is that I was never at any time
interrogated by the Department on this matter.
Senator Ferguson. All right. That is what I am getting at. So,
as an employee, at the time, and now telling us that you did give infor-
mation to Roth, you tell us that the State Department never made an
investigation in that office to your knowledge.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4315
Mr. Fkiedman. To my knowledge, sir, the Department did not make
an investigation.
Senator Ferguson. In other words, tliey did not question you about
leaks, and you had given a leak in March to Roth.
Mr. Friedman. Excuse me, sir. That was not a leak.
Senator Ferguson. All right. Call it what you will. I am going to
use the word "leak."
Mr. Friedman. I think that fails to describe the situation, sir.
Senator Ferguson. All right. The record will show. You gave him
information.
Mr. Friedman. I gave him information on the history of the Japa-
nese labor movement.
Senator Ferguson. Yes, sir. And you had prepared it, and it was
Government property.
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; as I was in the emjjloy of the Government, it
was Government property.
Senator Ferguson. Sui-e. And it was in this office, and it was just
a month or two or three before he was arrested for taking papers or
having papers that were obtained in the Government.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson. And the State Department itself never made an
investigation, to your knowledge, m that Department ?
Mr. Friedman. To my knowledge, sir. May I add — —
Senator Ferguson. All right. But to your knowledge they never
made an investigation.
Mr. Friedman. That is right, sir.
Senator Ferguson. At least no one ever came to you and questioned
you as to how he may have obtained those papers ?
Mr. Friedman. No one in the Department; no, sir.
Senator Ferguson. No one in the Department.
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Now, Mr. Friedman, did you know any correspondents
for the following publications, anyone in Washington for the follow-
ing publications : The New Republic ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. I believe after June 1945, I knew Miss
Helen Fuller of the New Republic.
Mr. Morris. She Avas the Washington correspondent ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. How frequently did you see Miss Helen Fuller?
Mr. Friedman. I don't believe I saw her more than two or three
times between the time I met her and the time I departed for China
in October 1945.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever have lunch with her ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall. I remember having a splendid din-
ner at the home of Mr. Uhl of PM, who was another correspondent
whom I knew, and I believe only since June 1945, or around that
period, perhaps before
Mr. Morris. Did you ever have lunch with him ?
Mr. Friedman, I cannot
Senator Ferguson. Knowing what you do know now, about the
Amerasia case, are you not amazed that the State Department did
not make an investigation ?
Mr. Friedman. I am not saying the State Department did not make
an investigation, sir.
4316 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Ferguson. You never knew what they did ?
Mr. Friedman. I never knew that they made an investigation.
Senator Ferguson. Does it not seem extremely strange that they
would not ask you about the disappearance of papers or the fact that
papers got out of the Government ?
Mr. P'riedman. Well, sir, I think that perhaps one might answer
this question with a bit more information.
Senator Ferguson. Well, can you answer it?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; that at the time of the arrest of the ac-
cused in the Amerasia case, I believe a number of officials in the
State Department were interrogated by the agents of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, and at that time I was in San Francisco and
spent a day or two providing information on the previous period to
two agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I heard nothing
after these 2 days of interrogation, until I read, in fact in the report
of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, the reply of Mr.
Milton Ladd, the Assistant to the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, who, in reply to a question, "Were there any other
employees of the State Department involved in the removal of con-
fidential documents that you know of," Mr. Ladd said, "No, sir." And
this was after I had a discussion with special agents of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation.
Senator Ferguson. But I mean the State Department itself did
not come to you and ask.
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Vincent never asked?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Did you tell Ladd what you had actually give
toJaffe?
Mr. Friedman. I did not speak to Ladd, and I did not give anything
to Jaffe, sir.
Senator Ferguson. Or not Jaffe. To Roth.
Mr. Friedman. To Roth ? Yes, sir.
Senator Ferguson, You were not a witness in that case?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. One question, and I will finish my subject. Senator.
Did you meet the Daily Worker correspondent, Frederick V. Field,
at the United Nations Conference in San Francisco?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. ' To the best of my recollection that is
where I met Mr. Frederick Field. It was in the press room of the
United Nations Conference at San Francisco.
Mr. Morris. And how long did you speak with him on that occasion ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't have the slightest recollection, but there
were a number of pressmen there, and Mr. Field was one of them.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I have just two questions, sir. They are both sus-
ceptible, I think, to very short answers.
When you came back from Great Britain, in 1951, did you bring
with you a number of publications of the British Communist Party?
Mr. Friedman. I brought back from England a number of pablica-
tions put out by several bodies, most of which were put out by the
British Government. But also among the publications were those
of British political parties, including the British Communist Party;
yes, ^r.
Mr. SouRWiNE. And did you give some of those to Mr. Jaffe ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4317
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. In the summer of 1951, I saw Mr. Jaffe.
He was interested in the political situation in England. And I made
available to him a number of these publications.
Senator Ferguson. The Comnumist publications?
Mr. Friedman. Communist and non-Communist ; yes, sir, including
the debates of the House of Commons.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mr. Jaffe was primarily interested in what he
thought were changes in the Communist line of the British Com-
munist Party ?
Mr. Friedman. That was one of the things Mr. Jaffe was interested
in. He was also interested at that time in the background of the so-
called Bevanite or Bevanism movement in the British Labor Party.
Mr. Sourwine. But you knew specifically that he was interested in
the changes in the Communist line of the British Communist Party?
Mr. Friedman. Of the British Communist Party ; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. And 3'ou gave him these documents because of his
interest in that connection?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. All right.
Senator Ferguson. We will recess now until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:05 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m., this
same day.)
after recess
Senator Watkins (presiding). The committee will resume session.
Mr. Morris, have you a witness to be sworn ?
Mr. Morris. Mr. Friedman has been sworn and we are well into our
testimony, Senator.
Senator Watkins. If he has been sworn, then, you may proceed.
Mr. JMoRRis. At the termination of today's testimony, you stated
that you had met Frederick Vanderlult Field, who was acting as a
Daily Worker correspondent at the United Nations Conference in San
Francisco in 1945.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Frederick Field on any other occasion
after that?
Mr. Friedman. I believe, Mr. Morris, that I met Mr. Field in 1947,
and I believe at the Connnittee for Democratic Foreign Policy.
Mr. Morris. On how many occasions did you meet him at the Com-
mittee for Democratic Foreign Policy?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall. I think just one occasion, if I recall
directly.
Mr. Morris. You testified earlier that you also met Israel Epstein
and Fairfax Cholmely at that time. Were they together at that time
or did you meet them on separate occasions?
Mr. Friedman. I believe that I met them on separate occasions.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever met them together?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I think I said before that I had been to their
home.
Mr. Morris. I mean Field and Epstein.
Mr. Friedman. Not that I recall ; no, sir.
Mr. Morris. So your recollection of meeting Field after the United
Nations Conference at San Francisco was at the Committee for Demo-
cratic Foreign Policy?
88348— 52— pt. 12 19
4318 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; that is what I recall.
Mr. Morris. Then you also met Epstein and Elsie Fairfax Cholmely
at the same place but not at the same time as Field ?
Mr. Friedman. I say I am not sure on that particular point.
Mr. Morris. Now, did you know Mildred Price?
Mr. Fried3Ian. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. If you will pardon the interruption, does that mean
that you do know that you met them at the same place, but you are
not sure whether it was or Avas not at the same time, speaking now of
Field and Cholmely ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I have said that I have seen Mr. Field, Mr.
Epstein, and Miss Cholmely at the same place — that is, the Committee
for Democratic Foreign Policy.
Mr. Sourwine. That is right. It is a question of whether that was
at the same time or different times that you are not clear about.
Mr. Friedman. I believe at different times.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mildred Price ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I do know JNIildred Price.
Mv. Morris. Was she the secretary of the China Aid Council ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you have any dealings with Mildred Price, either
individually or in the capacity of secretary of the China Aid Coucil?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I have.
]Mr. IMoRRis. Will you tell us about them ?
Mr. Friedman. Surely. If I recall correctly, I met Miss Price in
New York, January 1945, at a party at the home of Mr. Gunther
Stein. I am not quite sure about that. But the next time I did see
her was in China sometime between October 1945 and my departure
in November of 1946. I don't recall the exact dates of her visit to
China. She was in China on behalf of the China Aid Council which
at that time was a section of the United China Relief. I saw Miss
Price infrequently in China, perhaps once or twice to the best of my
recollection, since she traveled about the country and at that time I
was held down at Shanghai. I was particularly interested in one or
two projects that Miss Price's organization was sponsoring or sup-
porting and particularly the project of the Yutsai School of Dr. Tao
Heng Chi.
Mr. Morris. Wliat was the first one ?
Mr. Friedman. Tao.
Mr. Morris. Was there any reason to believe at the time you met
Miss Price that she was a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; no reason at all.
Mr. Sourwine. We have a question that has been asked a great
many others. It is phrased slightly differently. Do you know of any
reason to believe that Miss Price at any time voluntarily and inten-
tionally cooperated or collaborated with members of the Communist
Party for the furtherance of Communist objectives?
Mr. Friedman. I do not know that she has done so and T do not
beTieve she has done so.
Mr. Sourwine. I asked you if you had any reason to believe.
Mr. Friedman. I have no reason to believe.
Mr. Morris. You have no reason even now, and in view of the fact
that when she appeared before this committee and was asked if she
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4319
was a Communist she refused to answer on the grounds that it might
incriminate her? You would not consider that to be<i reason?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I would not consider such a constitutional
answer to the committee to be a reason.
Mr. Morris. A reason for you to believe that she may have been a
Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; that would not be a reason.
]\Ir. Morris. It is not a reason for you to believe that ?
Mr. Friedman. Exactly.
Mr. Morris. You say j'ou first met her at a party given by Gunther
Stein at his home ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know^ Gunther Stein very well?
Mr. Friedman. I now know Mr. Stein quite well. In the time of
my employment in the State Department, I think, I may have seen Mr.
Stein at the most on three or four occasions. I met Mr. Stein, first of
all, at the Institute of Pacific Relations Conference, Hot Springs, 1945,
when he was one of the members of the British delegations. I attended
a party that Mr. Stein gave some time after the conference, in New
York City, and it is on this occasion that I believe that I met Miss
Price.
I Mr. Morris. Have you read the evidence in the charges relating to
the fact that Gunther Stein was a member of the Sorge espionage ring
in Japan ?
Mr. Friedman. I have heard of the charges. I have not read the
evidence.
j Mr. Morris. When did you last see ]SIr. Stem ?
Mr. Friedman. I saw Mr. Stein in London I think in 1950 or the
, beginning of 1951. I don't recall correctly. He had just come from
} France and I believe was on his way to Switzerland.
Mr. Morris. Do you know whether or not he was deported from
France for espionage?
Mr. Fried^ian. He was deported from France but I do not know that
it was for espionage.
Mr. Morris. Did that enter into your relationship with him at all —
the fact that yon knew he had been deported from France?
^Ir. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Who else was at Gunther Stein's house when you met
Miss Price ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't really recall.
Mr. Morris. Well, there were more than three people.
]\Ir. Friedman. There must have been other people, yes, sir, but I
just don't recall.
Mr. Morris. Were there people who were frequently in attendance
at meetings for the Committee for Democratic Foreign Policy?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Talitha Gerlach ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I met Talitha Gerlach. I know her
name, but I don't think on any occasion I did meet her.
Mr. Morris. You don't think she was at the party ?
Mr. Friedman. If she w^ere, I don't recall meeting her. I am almost
sure that she wasn't. Since I have seen the name many times in
connection with China Affairs, I am quite sure I have never met her.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Doctor Ch'ao-ting Chi ?
4320 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. I liave met Dr. Cirao-ting Chi.
Mr. Morris. Where did you meet liim?
Mr, Friedman. I met Dr. Chi, I believe, first of all at the Central
Bank of China which is alono; the Bund in Shan<i:hai and this would
be again sometime between October 1945, and November 1046.
Mr. Morris. What was the occasion of your meeting him there?
Mr. Friedman. The occasion was to make available some informa-
tion for the bank's monthly publication and to obtain from his re-
search staif some information, I believe, on either social insurance
schemes or wages, labor problems in Swatow, on which his staff was
working.
Mr. Morris. Did he ask you to come to the bank or did you volun-
teer to go to the bank ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall.
Mr. Morris. Did you offer him information before he gave you
information? You give it in that order, you testified in that order,
that you gave him some information that he wanted.
INIr. Friedman. I gave information for the bank publication, yes.
I don't recall.
Mr. Morris. "Wliat was the nature? Was that Government official
information that you gave him?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I do not believe it was.
Mr. Morris. What was it ?
Mr. Friedman. I think it was essentially from American labor pub-
lications. Perhaps, if I am not mistaken, it was from the Monthly
Labor Review of the Department of Labor, which, I should have
added, is really a Government publication.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Dr. Chi on any other occasions?
Mr. Friedman. I think that I have met Dr. Chi socially but I just
don't recall. I am sure that I have met him at parties of the Am-
bassador and of the consul general in Shanghai.
JNIr. Morris. You do know what he looks like ?
Mr. Friedman. I think I would have recognized — I know what he
looked like then ; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Do you have eany reason now to believe that he was
a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I think that his participation as a member
of the government in Peking might indicate that he is a Communist;
yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Do you have any reason to believe that he was a Com-
munist at the time you were giving him information?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I only identified him with Dr. H, H. Kung
at that time.
Senator Watkins. Did you know any Communists at all in this
period of time about which Mr. Morris is inquiring about?
Mr. Friedman. In China?
Senator Watkins. Did you know any?
Mr, Friedman. Yes, sir ; I did.
Senator Watkins. And yet some of these who have refused to
answer the question if they are asked if they have ever been a Commu-
nist or now a Connnunist, they rely on the fifth amendment and say
it might incriminate them, you don't think that has any bearing on it
at all, whether or not they are Communists?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4321
Mr. Friedmax. It may have some, but I just wouldn't venture an
opinion on the basis of this refusal to answer questions and the reli-
ance on the fifth amendment.
Senator Watkins. Now, witli respect to Mildred Price, did she
advocate any principle or any policies or line of conduct for this
country that might seem to be going in the same direction as the
Communist line?
Mr. Friedman. Certainly not in the period that I have known her;
no, sir.
Senator Watkixs. How long haA'e you known her?
Mr. Friedman. I tliiuk either as far back as January 1945 or per-
haps sometime between October 194,5 and November 1940, and 1 have
known her since and am still friendly witli Miss Price.
Senator Watkins. And you don't think there is anything in her
conduct that would indicate to you that she was a Communist or that
she was a fellow traveler. Let us put it that way.
]\lr. Friedman. Certainly nothing in her conduct in the period I
have known her would indicate to me that she was a Communist.
Could 3^oii be more specific on the fellow traveler ?
Senator Watkins. Well, someone who believes pretty much the
same and advocates the same line.
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; then she does not fit that category ; not to
my stipulation.
Senator Watkins. You have had enough experience with Commu-
nists to know one when you see one, have you not ?
Mr. Friedman, I haven't had much experience with them, Senator.
Senator Watkins. No experience.
Mr. Friedman. I haven't had much experience. I have met some
Communists.
Senator Watkins. Have you ever studied communism?
Mr. Friedman. I have studied Communist literature, yes, sir. Not
all of it ; some of it.
Senator Watkins. I am probably at a disadvantage, I wasn't
here this morning. What position in the State Department did you
hold?
Mr. Friedman. I was in originally what was the Division of Labor
Kelations, Division of International Health and Labor and Social
Affairs, from September 1943 until November 1944. and then .subse-
quently I was in the Chinese Affairs Division, roughly from November
1944 until October 1945, with a period of assignment to the United
Nations Conference at San Francisco. And then I was a junior
economic analyst, serving as the American labor attache in China
from October 1945 until November 1946.
Senator Watkins, Was it any part of your job to acquaint yourself
Avith the conduct of Communists and their policies ?
Mr. Friedman. Insofar as it had bearing on labor reporting, yes,
sir.
Senator Watkins. That would be reporting ?
Mr. Fried:man. Yes, indeed. But I don't say that I have become
an expert on the subject.
Senator Watkins. I don't expect you are an expert, but you
ought to be able to tell one if you saw one, and talked to him.
Mr. Friedman. I would have to talk at some length, I presume, to
get some idea.
4322 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. What was tlie extent of your acquaintance with Mildred
Price?
Mr, Friedman. I have known Miss Price for a considerable period
of time, and my stipulation is that she was not a Communist, and I
do not have any reason to believe that she is a Communist.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Solomon Acller?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. I know Solomon Adler.
Mr. Morris. How well do you know Solomon Adler?
Mr. Friedman. I would call Solomon Adlev a friend of mine.
Mr. Morris. AVhen did you last see Solomon Adler ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I saw him in Cambridge, England — it was
either Cambridge, England, in the late summer of 1951 or it was in
London — no, excuse me, not the summer of 1951 but 1950, and possibly
sometime at the end of the -year in 1950 or 1951 when he came to town.
He is on the staff of Cambridge University.
Mr. Morris. Do you now have or did you ever have any reason to
believe that Solomon Adler was a Communist ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; never.
Mr. Morris. Are you acquainted with the testimony of Chambers
and Bentley before this committee with respect to Adler ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I believe the name came up. I don't recall
the testimony.
Mr. Morris. You have not read the testimony?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I have gone over the testimony, but I
don't recall at the moment exactly what they testified.
Mr. Morris. You mean it isn't of any concern to you whether some
man you call a friend has been identified before a Senate committee
by two witnesses as a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. In this particular case of Mr. Adler, I believe he is
not a Communist and I disregard the testimony of the committee. I
simply wait until the committee files its reports.
Senator Watkins. That wouldn't make nuich difference, would it?
You would rely on the evidence more than you would the report itself.
Mr. Friedman. Well, I place great weight in the judgment of the
Senators, Senator.
Senator Watkins. I am glad to hear you say that. Some people
don't.
. Mr. Morris. Did you ever give him any information, any official
information ?
Mr. Friedman. Mr, Adler was the Treasury attache of the Embassy,
and I was the labor attache of the Embassy. I think that we ex-
changed information on wages, on labor conditions, inflation in China,
It was part of our official duties,
Mr. Morris. How frequently did you see Solomon Adler in those
days?
Mr. Friedman. I certainly saw him, I think, only once here in
Washington, D. C., before I went to China, and I couldn't say how
many times I saw him in China, but I know not too frequently be-
cause he was in Nanking and I was in Shanghai ; but I must say prob-
ably four times.
Mr, Morris. Did you know that he and John Service shared the
same apartment together,
Mr, Friedman. Mr. Adler was married in the period I knew him,
and I believe I have read that in the testimony, some references.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4323
Mr. Morris. But that was not at the time that you were seeing Mr.
Adler.
Mr. Friedman. No.
Mr. Morris. Did you know a man named Tung Pi-wu?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I believe Mr. Tung Pi-wu was one of
the Chinese delegates to the San Francisco conference.
Mr. Morris. He was a Communist delegate; wasn't he?
Mr. Friedman. He was a delegate of the National Government of
China, selected
Mr. Morris. To represent the Communists in China?
Mr. Friedman. No sir; he was sent here to represent the Chinese
Government, and he was nominated by tlie Chinese Communists under
a plan of General Hurley.
Mr. Morris. And did you meet him while he was here?
Mr. Fried^ian. Yes, sir. I met him in San Francisco.
Mr. Morris, What was the occasion of your meeting him in San
Francisco ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe in meeting the Chinese delegation. I be-
lieve actually the time in which I met him was either a Chinese
luncheon or dinner party which was given by either Mr. Liu Chieh,
who is now the Chinese Ambassador to Canada, or one of the other
senior officials of the Chinese Government.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet him in the United States?
Mr. Friedman. In addition to this occasion ?
Mr. Morris. Yes ; in addition to this occasion.
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall seeing him again. Yes; I think he
did pay a courtesy visit to the State Department in Washington while
he was here, although I don't quite recall the occasion.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet him at a party — at a social party —
given under the auspices of the Committee for Democratic Foreign
Policy ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall. Could you give me the date ?
Mr, Morris. No; just if you can recall meeting him there.
Mr. Friedman. No ; I just don't recall meeting him.
Mr. Morris. Now, did you ever meet Alger Hiss?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I met Alger Hiss in the State Department.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us about it ?
Mr. Friedman. I think the first occasion I met Mr. Hiss was — I am
not quite sure — this was the meeting of the Area Committee on the
Far East of tlie State Department, of which, I believe, he was a mem-
ber when I was a member representing the Labor Division of the State
Department. I can remember, I believe, seeing him — I think, meeting
him at San Francisco, when he was a secretary general of the confer-
ence— and I recall being in a committee meeting with him upon my
return from San Francisco, at which committee meeting the State
Department was preparing its case or rather making its preparations
for the forthcoming meeting of the United Nations Assembly.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Might I interrupt to clear something up there?
We found confusion in the records during the testimony of previous
witnesses about the phrase "Far East" or "Far Eastern Committee."
I wonder if you would clear up just what committee you were referring
to there.
Mr. Friedman. Well, I believe that it would be the same committee
that Mr. Dooman refers to — that is, the Far East Area Committee of
the State Department.
4324 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRWixE. Does that have anything: to do with the Far East
Committee of SWINK — State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee?
Mr, Friedmax. I am not sure of the rehitionship between the two.
Mr. SouRWTNE. Do you know what SWINK was?
Mr. Friedmax. Yes ; I believe SWINK w\as a State, War, and Navy
Department committee.
Mr. Sourwixe. By definition it wasn't. It was the State, War,
Navy Coordinating Committee. But do you know about the exist-
ence of that committee ?
Mr. FRiEDisfAx. Yes ; I have heard of the existence of that committee.
Mr. Sourwixe. Did you ever have anything to do with any sub-
committee of SWINK?
Mr. Friedjian. The only committee that I had something — now,
I have to clear this up. I was a participant in the State Department's
Area Committee.
Mr. Sourwixe. I am trying to get, first, the question of whether
you had anything to do with any subcommittee of SWINK, any
subcommittee of the State, War, Navy Coordinating Committee?
Mr. Friedman. Well, you see, I am just trying — am wondering
whether you consider the Area Committee a subcommittee.
Mr. Sourwixe. I am asking you. You were the expert. You were
the man who was a member of something there.
Mr. Friedmax. Let me say I was a member of two committees.
Mr. Sourwixe. You might have been a member of any number
of committees. I want to know if you were a member of any subcom-
mittee of SAVINK. Certainly you know Avhether you were or whether
you weren't.
Mr. Fried^iax. I wasn't a memljer of any subcommittee that called
itself a subcommittee of SWINK. So I am not sure of any relation-
ship between certain State Department committees and SWINK.
Mr. Sourwixe. You w^ere in Vincent's office for some time?
Mr. Friedmax. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwixe. You knew that Vincent headed the Far Eastern
Subcommittee of SWINK?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I believe he became the Chairman of that
at the time I was prejoaring to depart or had already departed.
Actually the connnittee of which I was a participant was headed for
most of the period l)y Mr. Ballentine. Mr. Joseph Ballantine.
Mr. Sourwixe. Headed by Mr. Ballantine?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwixe. Did yon know of Mr. Dooman's position before
INIr. Vincent became head of the China Division?
Mr. Friedmax. If I recall, Mr. Dooman was the Special Assistant
to the Under Secretary of State, that is. Mr. Grew, at that time.
Mr. Sourwixe. Did vou know that Mr. Dooman headed the Far
Eastern Committee of SWINK ?
Mr. Friedmax. Well, I don't recall that, sir. All I know is that
IVfr. Dooman did not generally })reside at the meeting of the Area
Committee, that Mr. Ballantine presided and Mv. Dooman would sit
in. I believe, when Mr. Ballantine Avas not present.
Mr. Sourwixe. Do you know what the Far East Connnission is?
Mr. Friedmax. The Far East Connnission located in Washington?
Ml'. Sourwixe. Do you know what the Far East Commission is?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4325
Mr. Friedman. There is a Commission in Washington which is
made up of representatives of the various governments that partici-
pated in the war against Japan. Is that the Commission to which you
are referring?
Mr. SouRWiNE. Is that the Far Eastern Commission 'i Is there any
other Far Eastern Commission that you know about or Far East
Commission that you know about?
Mr. Friedman. Is there not a Commission that existed in Tokyo
to advise the Supreme Commander which was a Far Eastern Com-
mission also made up, I believe, of representatives of those nations
which participated in the war against Japan ?
Senator Watkins. The committee will suspend for a moment.
( Short recess. )
Senator Watkins. The committee will resume session.
Mr. SouRwixE. What I am trying to find out is whether while you
were with the State Department, you were actually a member of any
of the subcommittees of State, War, and Navy Coordinating Com-
mittee, speaking specifically of the Far East Subcommittee of State,
War, and Navy Coordinating Committee?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I was a member of the Area Committee of
the State Department, which called itself the Area Committee of the
State Department, and I do not know whether that fits the descrip-
tion of a Subconnnittee of SWINK.
Mr. SouRWiNE. You do not know whether the Area Committee was
or was not a Subcommittee of SWINK ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I do not know.
Mr. Sourwine. Now, do you know of the Subcommittee of SWINK
which first Mr. Dooman and later Mr. Vincent was Chairman ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, I don't believe I do.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever attend the meetings of any commit-
tee or subcommittee having to do with the Far East as a Deputy for
INIr. Vincent or in Mr. Vincent's stead or representing him or his
office?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I think that I probably attended some meet-
ings of the State Department's Area Committee on the Far East
on behalf of the Division of Chinese Affairs. But actually, if I may
say so, my representation in that Committee was generally for the
Division of Labor Relations and the Division of International Labor,
Health, and Social Affairs, pending that Division obtaining some one
to represent the Division in the Committee.
Mr. Sourwine. \\niat is the answer to my question, "Yes" or "No"?
Mr. Friedman. Could you repeat the question?
Mr, Sourwine. Don't you have the question in mind ?
Mr. Friedman. No, I haven't.
Mr. Sourwine. The question was whether you ever attended a
meeting of a State Department committee or subcommittee having
to do with the Far East as a deputy to Mr. Vincent or in liis stead or
representing his Division ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I did represent his Division on some oc-
casion, yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Before what committee was that ?
Mr. Friedman. This would be the Area Committee on the Far East
of the State Department.
4326 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRWiNE. And do you not know whether that had anything
to do with S WINK?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; that is correct, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. All right.
Mr. Morris. While you attended such committee meetings, was there
any leak of information that came out through the press or through
the radio that you know of?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall on my own, although having read the
record I see that Mr. Uooman testifies to that point.
jNIr. MoREis. Do you know of any ? Do you know whether any news-
paper or radio programs came out with any news that took place with-
in the committee hearing room ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, other than what I have read in your record.
Mr. Morris. But you know of nothing at the time of your own per-
sonal knowledge?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, we were asking the witness of his ex-
periences with Alger Hiss.
Will you go on ? Is that the only time you saw Mr. Hiss ?
Mr. Friedman. I think that I was saying that I was a member of a
committee which was making the preparations for the United States
(jovernment participation in the forthcoming U. N. meeting. I be-
lieve that was the only time or the last time I saw Mr. Hiss while I was
in Government emplo3'ment.
Mr. Morris. Who recommended you to go out to San Francisco
in connection with your job out there?
Mr. Friedman. Actually I was recommended or selected by Dean
Kobert Stewart, of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.
Mr. Morris. That is in connection with your assignment as Assist-
ant Secretary?
Mr. Friedman. Exactly. Doctor Stewart was at that time work-
ing with the State Department group making preparations for the
San Francisco conference.
Mr. Morris. And he knew you ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Knew your work and recommended you?
Mr. Friedman. He wanted me on the staff and Mr. Vincent made me
available; yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. When did you next meet Alger Hiss ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I think that was the last time I met Alger
Hiss, although subsequent to my departure from the State Department
and when he was the chairman of the Carnegie Endowment for Inter-
national Peace, I wrote to Mr. Hiss seeking a fellowship with which
I could sustain myself while studying abroad. Mr. Hiss replied that
he was unable to make any provisions of a fellowship for me.
Mr. Morris. Now, in connection with this arbitration proceeding,
may I get back to that, you said that you first knew about that case
by reading the New York press?
Mr. Friedman. I believe that was my original contact with the
case, was through the press.
Mr. Morris. Did you read the World-Telegram accounts of those
hearings ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I read some of them. I don't recall
specifically.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4327
Mr. Morris. I offer you the New York World-Telegram, an ex-
cerpt from the New York World-Telegram, of August 11, 1947, which
is the announceinent after James Fly announced his decision in that
case, and ask you if you had read that? Do you mind reading aloud,
Mr. Friedman ?
Mr. Friedman. Surely.
[New York World Telegram, August 11, 1947, p. 6]
Arbiteator Oedeks Rehiring of Woman Fired as Pro-Red — Secretary Accused
OF Adhering to the Party Line
(By Nelson Frank, World-Telegram staff writer)
In an important arbitration decision, James L. Fly, former Chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission, after holding that an employee dismissed
for attempting to insert the Communist Party line into her work "acted im-
properly" prepared a "biased" reading list, and "deviated" from the policy of
her employer, nevertheless has ordered the worker returned to her job "with
the hope for unity."
At the same time he stated that the National Council of .Jewish Women, the
employer, need not pay the employee for the 7 months she has lost since being
dismissed for "malfeasance" last January.
The worker, Miss Betty Levin, a member of the Social Service Employees
Union of the United OflSce and I'rofessional Workers (CIO) has been defended
by the union which hailed Mr. Fly's award as "a signal victory * * * for
the entire labor movement."
The arbitration hearing before Mr. Fly lasted for 23 days, a record for any
labor dispute before any American Arbitration Association member. Mr. Fly's
award takes 65 printed pages.
The charges against iMiss Levin, an area secretary assigned to educate the
sections of the council along the lines of its program were that she consistently
gave a pro-Soviet view and recommended pro-Soviet or pro-Communist books,
magazines, and organizations.
In his decision, Mr. Fly states that the area secretary deviated from the
council's policy and program in recommending her list of books, organizations,
and publications in three key cities. Among tlie publications advocated by Miss
Levin were The Protestant and In Fact, both consistent followers of the Com-
munist Party line. Books on China were pro-Communist except in one instance
where a pro-Government book was listed with the notation "a partisan account."
During the period leading up to the arbitration, said Mr. Fly, "so high did
the mutual distrust and suspicion mount (in the council's office) that at one
point a private investigator was hired by the council to guard its files."
It was at this time that the social service branch of the Communist Party,
one of whose members is Bernard Segal, executive director of the union
Mr. ]SIoRRis. Excuse me. Notice how that particular reporter de-
scribes Bernard Segal.
Mr. Fried:man (reading) :
One of whose members is Bernard Segal, executive director of the union.
Mr, Morris. Read the full paragraph.
Mr. Friedman (reading) :
It was at this time that the social-service branch of the Communist Party.
Mr. Morris. "Of the Communist Party "
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Morris. Go ahead.
Mr. Friedman (reading) :
One of whose members is Bernard Segal, executive director of the union,
called the case a te.st case to determine whether a progressive * * * may
be Red-baited out of a job.
Among the organizations recommended by Miss Levin were People's Songs,
a group which writes the Communist May Day tunes, the Council on African
4328 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Aflfiiirs, and China Aid Council, both well-known Communist fronts, and the
National Council of American Soviet Friendship, key pro-Soviet propaganda
outfit in this country. Also recommended by her was the Communist front,
National Committee to AVin the Pe;iee. It was of this organization that Mr.
Fly accused her of acting "improperly * * * (in that) her response to
the Chicago section was designed to encourage cooperation * * *'' with
this committee.
However, because she was not previously warned that her actions were against
the council's policy, he has ordered her reinstated.
Mr. Morris. Is that one of the articles you had read in the New
York Press ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall, Mr. Morris. This would be August
1947. I don't recall whether I read this specific article.
Mr. Morris. You were in New York at that time, were you not?
Mr. Friedman. Let me think. I believe I was ; but I am not sure,
Mr. Morris. You will notice that that particular news article pre-
sents the problem in rather a different light from what you have
testified here.
Mr. Friedman. I have presented the problem in the light of the
arbitrator's statements of it, yes.
Mr. Morris. Did you have high marks at Harvard? The reason
I ask that, Mr. Chairman, is that a witness who has given some testi-
mony before this committee has testified that the person she was
talking about was a person who had gotten high marks at Harvard.
So that is why that question is appropriate.
Mr. Friedman. May I read that section just from the report of the
committee, Mr. Chairman? It is just a sentence or two, and then I
can reply fully to it.
Senator Watkins. I don't see any objection to that.
Mr. Friedman. Thank you. This is Mrs. Widener, speaking on
page 758 of the committee's hearings, part 3.
Senator Watkins. This committee?
Mr. Friedman. This committee; yes, sir [reading] :
Prior to Mr. Friedman's arrival, Mr. Andrews had told me that Mr. Friedman
had graduated with the highest honors from Hai-vard University. I believe
he graduated with either magna or summa cum laude.
Mr. Chairman, I perhaps hate to admit this to the committee but I
did not graduate either magna cum laude or summa cum laude or cum
laude at Harvard, although the marks that I had were considered
Dean's highest marks but not honor marks at Harvard University.
And I believe that I could introduce, if the committee wanted it in
its record, the Harvard indication that I was not an honor candidate
at that time.
Senator Watkins. But you are sure that if you had received such
honors you would be likely to claim them rather than deny them.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. MoRRTS. Can you recall attending a meeting in Shanghai at
which the following people were present : Rose 1 ardumian, Mary
Barrett, Gerald Tannenbaum, Dorothy Campbell ? Those individuals
or any combinations of them ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't really recall attending any meeting xnth.
those individuals together.
Mr. Morris. This meeting was held at the Hamilton House, room
812, just before Christmas of 1946.
Mr. Friedman. Then I don't recall such a meeting.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4329
Mr. Morris. You do not recall such a meeting ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever attend a meeting in Shanghai at which
Rose Yardumian was present?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I have attended a meeting in Shanghai of
tlie International Committee of the Chinese Industrial Cooperative at
which Miss Yardumian was present and I attended as an observer
from the United States State Department.
Mr. Morris. Were not Mary Barrett, Gerald Tannenbaum, and
Dorothy Campbell also active in that organization?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think so. Certainly not Mr. Tannenbaum
who is not in that organization, nor Miss Barrett whom I believe, again
I am not sure, was at that time employed by the United States Foreign
Service. The name Dorothy Campbell doesn't come back to me at all.
Mr. Morris. Did von invite to attend a meetino- of the Chinese in-
dustrial cooperatiA'es another labor attache from the State Depart-
ment ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that, Mr. Morris. "When you say an-
other attache of the State Department, you mean in China?
Mr. Morris. In China.
Mr. Friedman. There was no other labor attache.
Mr. Morris. Who was your successor ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall whether I had a successor or not. I
don't believe the Department did formally succeed me. I don't Icnow
if any one subsequent to my departure carried on the labor-reporting
program.
Mr. Morris. Is it your testimony that there was not another labor
attache present at that time in China from the State Department?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; as far as I know, there was no other labor
attache from the State Department in China at the time I was present.
Mr. IMoRRis. Is it your testimony that you did not invite any other
labor attache to attend a meeting at which these people were present ?
Mr. Friedman. I certainly don't recall the meeting. I certainly
don't recall meeting with such persons present. I don't recall inviting
another labor attache to such a meeting.
Mr. ]\[oRRis. Do you ever remember telling another labor attache of
the State Department that you were a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. May I say perhaps two "No, sirs," to that
question. That is, I do not remember telling any labor attache, and
I am sure that I did not tell any labor attache that I was a Communist,
because I was not a Communist.
Senator Watkins. At that or any other time ?
Mr. Friedman. At that or any other time.
Mr. Morris. The issue, Mr, Chairman, is whether or not this wit-
ness told a labor attache in Shanghai at that time whether or not he
was a Communist.
Do you know a man named Willis E. Etter ?
Mr. Friedman. Willis E. Etter? I don't recall the name unless —
was he a member of the American consulate general in Shanghai ?
Mr. Morris. I believe he was.
Mr. Friedsian. Yes, sir, I believe I do remember that name, but he
certainly was not the labor attache in my tenure of office. If I recall
Mr. Etter worked in the consular section or the shipping section of
4330 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
the consulate, but certainly not in any labor attache section while I
was there. May I, Mr. IMorris, introduce
Mr. Morris. Wait until I finish these questions. Did you ever meet
Lauchlin Currie ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. I did not meet Lauchlin Currie.
Mr. INIoRRis. Did you ever meet John K. Fairbank and his wife,
Wilma Fairbank ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I know the Fairbanks very well indeed.
Mr. IMoRRis. When did you last see the Fairbanks ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I saw the Fairbanks in the autumn of 1951
at their home in Cambridge, Mass.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet the Fairbanks in China ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I met the Fairbanks in China.
Mr. Morris. Did you see them frequently in China ?
Mr. Friedman. No, not too frequently, because Mr. Fairbank was
mainly in Nanking while I was in Shanghai, and Mrs. Fairbank did
a good deal of traveling for the Cultural Office of the Embassy.
Mr. Morris. What was her position ?
Mr. Friedman. She was the cultural officer for the United States
Embassy.
Mr. INloRRis. She was there in China ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I believe she was there for part of the time
the Marshall mission was there.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet Mr. Benjamin Kizer? Do you
know him well ?
Mr. Friedman. Not very well, sir,
Mr. Morris. When did you last see Mr. Kizer ?
Mr. Friedman. When did I see Mr. Kizer? I believe I saw Mr.
Kizer in Shanghai in the end of 1945 or the beginning of 1946, but
I don't think I have seen him since. I have seen members of his
family since that time.
Mr. Morris. What was his position during the war? Was he the
head of the China Division of UNRRA ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall. I recall Mr. Kizer when he was the
Director of UNRRA for the China operation.
Mr. Morris. That is what I meant,
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; he was for some time its Director.
Mr. Morris. What were his duties, do you know, at that time ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I do not know.
Mr. Morris. You do not know what his duties were ?
Mr. Friedman. I do not know what his duties were.
Mr. Morris. Are you acquainted with the Stilwell dispute ? I mean
the dispute that arose over the dismissal of General Stilwell.
Mr. Friedman. Dispute between whom ?
Mr. Morris. There was a general controversy. There was a con-
troversy that took place in many of the newspapers at the time,
Mr. Friedman. I can remember in particular Mr. Brooks Atkin-
son's famous New York Times story on that.
Mr. Morris. Mr, Brooks Atkinson opposed the removal of Stilwell,
did he not ?
Mr, Friedman. I don't recall at the moment.
Mr. Morris. You said you recalled Brooks Atkinson.
Mr. Friedman. I just recall the article because of its importance.
I presume, if -I may, that probably Mr. Atkinson— you see, I would
ESrSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4331
like to say definitely by looking at tlie article, but I believe tliat he was
generally opposed to the removal of General Stilwell.
Mr. ]\ioRRis. Did you favor the removal of General Stilwell?
Mr. Friedman. I don't quite recall exactly what position I took at
that time, but I certainly now, having gone back over the period, do
favor the recall of General Stilwell. And I probably, if I may put
it in terms of probability, favored his recall at that time, because I
did, in a sense, admire much of the work that General Hurley was
doing in the Middle East and in the Far East in that period of time.
Mr. ISIoRRis. Do you know that the Daily Worker took issue with
Brooks Atkinson in his opposition to the removal of Stilwell?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know anything about that; no, sir.
Mr. Morris. The reason I asked that was that you are acquainted
with the episode in connection with the Atkinson article, and it was
the Atkinson article with which the Daily Worker took issue.
Mr. Friedman. But I know that as a reader of the New York Times,
and not of the Daily Worker.
Mr. Morris. But you did favor the removal of Stilwell?
Mr. Friedman. I am saying now that I probal)ly did favor the re-
moval of Stilwell, simply because he was a man who would not get
along with the government with which he was at the time. My opinion
is further confirmed by Earl Mountbatten's reports when he describes
his great difficulties with General Stilwell, plus General Stilwell's own
book, which is not altogetlier diplomatic, either in its words or its
tone.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever visit Owen Lattimore at his home?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I have been at the home of Owen Lattimore.
Mr. Morris. ^Y[mt was the occasion ?
Mr. Friedman. The only occasion that I recall, Mr. Morris, is an
invitation to lecture at his seminar at Johns Hopkins. This was in
the early — it must have been either February or March of 1947, after
I had left the Government service. And I remember either staying
with the Lattimores just before the seminar or just after the seminar,
before proceeding to Washington, where I spent the night at the home
of the Lattimores.
Mr. Morris. In connection with Alger Hiss, did you ever write to
Alger Hiss in connection with his trials ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, I don't recall specifically on that. I think it is
possible that I may have written him at the very beginning of his
troubles a letter of sympathy or lamentation. But I don't recall this
definitely, and I haven't found any such letter among my own papers
or a copy of any such letter among my own papers.
Senator Watkins. Were you in the habit of keeping copies of your
letters?
Mr. Friedman. Not everything, Senator. I think that if I did at
the time, it was because of his negative but nevertheless kind response
from the Carnegie Endowment to which I had written for a fellow-
ship.
Senator Watkins. In other words, he acknowledged your letter,
but did not do anything for you ?
Mr. Friedman. Pardon me?
Senator Watkins. He acknowledged your letter but he did not do
anything for you ?
Mr. Friedman. Exactly.
4332 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Watkins. So you felt kindly about that?
Mr. Friedman. Well
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mark Gayn ?
]\rr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I have knoAvn Mr. Mark Gayn.
Mr. Morris. When did you first meet INIark Gayn?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I met Mr. Mark Gayn at a party of Mr.
Gunther Stein in January or February 1945, to which we have already
referred.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever give him any State Department official
information?
Mr. Friedman. Xo, sir, I did not.
Mr. Morris. You gave him no information and no pai^ers of any
kind?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Mr. Morris, might I inquire at that point very
briefly?
I show you, sir, fixe lines, typewritten. I ask j^ou if you have ever
seen documents with that statement or inscription written or im-
printed upon them ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir; I believe I have seen some documents. I
couldn't vouch for the title, sections, and so forth, but I believe some-
thing of this nature.
Mr. Sourwine. It is generally familiar to you ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
INIr. Sourwine. Have you seen it on documents in the State
Department ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall so much, because the State Depart-
ment's classification system in the period I was there tended to be
either nothing at all or "restricted'' or "secret," with a simple stamp
rather than with this.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Then your testimony is that you do not remember
having seen this on documents ?
Mr. Friedman. On State Department documents as distinguished
from any documents that may have come in to the State Department
from any other agency.
Mr. Sourwine. This note reads :
Warning. This material contains information affecting the national defense
of the United States within the meaning of the espionage law, title XVIII,
U. S. C, titles 79.3 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner
to an nnauthorized person in any manner is prohibited by law.
JVIr. Friedman, did you ever give to any unauthorized person any
documents bearing this stamp or imprint?
Mr. Friedman. I certainly believe not, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever give to any unauthorized person any
documents bearing any stamp or imprint indicating them to be
classified?
Mr. Friedman. Certainly within the State Department
Mr. SouRwaNE. Don't limit the question, sir. Answer it "Yes"
or "No."
INIr. Friedman. I do not believe so.
Senator Watkins. Do you have any hesitation in answering that?
in fact, you indicate by your manner that you do have some doubt.
Mr. Friedman. No. Tliis morning we discussed a matter, Senator,
and that was the matter of some notes to ]Mr. Andrew Roth, notes on
the history of the Japanese labor movement which I prepared.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4333
Mr. SouRwiNE. Were they classified matter?
Mr. Friedman. May I finish, Mr. Sourwine?
INIr. Sourwine. Were they classified matter ?
Mr. Friedman. These notes, to the best of my recollection, at the
time I had it, were not classified.
Mr. Sourwine. Then they do not affect your answer to this question,
do they ?
Senator Watkins. There is not any doubt in 3'our mind as to
whether they were classified ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. The reason I raise the question is that
T think, in the final preparation of the paper, that these notes may
have played a part in the background section, and that is why I
want to be quite specific and frank with the committee. This is a
matter which was mentioned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
at the time of the Amerasia affair, and I believe that the notes, as I
gave them to Mr. Roth, were quite unclassified. But they were his-
torical background material from published sources.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you mean that those notes subsequently be-
came a part of classified material ?
jVIr. Friedman. I am not sure of what the history of the docu-
ments was, that is, any final document. But these are notes which
I was working up, and which were used in connection with a paper
on Japanese labor.
Mr. Sourwine. Now, I would like to get back to the question I
asked earlier. Did you ever give any unauthorized person docu-
ments bearing a stamp or imprint indicating they were classified?
Mr. Friedman. I do not believe so, no, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. That answer indicates that you think there is a
chance that you might have.
Mr. Friedman. This is some years ago, sir, and many papers have
passed over my desk, and I should like to leave the answer, "I do
not believe I have ever given any person classified material."
Mr. Sourwine. Do you mean by that that there is some doubt in
your mind ?
]\Ir. Friedman. No, sir. I want to be on the cautious side.
Senator Watkins. You would not answer categorically, "No," that
you did not, because you think there is a possibility that you might
have done so ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think there is a possibility.
Senator Watkins. Wh}^ do you not say there is not any possibility ?
Mr. Friedman. I would like to leave the answer as it stands. Sena-
tor, if I may.
Mr. Souravine. ]Mr. Friedman, did you ever see a report on the
subject of the need of an American policy toward the problems created
by the rise of the Chinese Communist Party, a report indicating that
the Communists were about one-fifth of the population, and that they
were going to have a definite influence on the future of China?
JNIr. Friedman. I don't recall that report.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever see a report on the subject of the
growth of the new Fourth Army, an example of the popular demo-
cratic appeal of the Chinese Communists, indicating that the popular
support of the Chinese Communists shows their policies and methods
are democratic ?
88348— 52— pt. 12 20
4334 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Again, I don't recall offhand such reports.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you recall having seen a document entitled,
"The Views of Mao Tse-tung, America and China," dated March
1945?
Mr. Friedman. Again, I just don't recall offhand.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Do you know that those papers were circulated
through your division at the time you were a divisional assistant?
Mr. Friedman. I say I don't recall the document, so I don't know
whether they were circulated through the division.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Do you know that all three of those documents men-
tioned were among the so-called Amerasia papers?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, I do not know that.
Mr. SouRwiNE. All right.
Mr. ]\IoRRis. Mr. Friedman, have you ever knowingly associated with
people you knew to be Communists ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
]Mr. Morris. On what occasions ?
Mr. Friedman. On social occasions only. Certainly not on political
occasions.
Mr. Morris. Will you tell us the extent to which you have done
that?
Mr. Friedman. Well, it is not very frequently. In this country,
in England or France when we traveled about, we have met people
Mr. Morris. Wlien you say "we," who do you mean ?
Mr. Friedman. In lecent years, my wife and I. And we have been
in homes of persons who were known to us to be Communists; yes,
sir. But this is not in the period of the State Department, but post-
period.
Mr. Morris. Who were those people you knew to be Communists?
Mr. Friedman. I think the one name I mention is a Mr. John Horner
of Great Britain.
Mr. Morris. Why do you say the one that you could name ?
Mr. Friedman. I say one whose name comes to me, because it was
within the last year or so, I should say within the last year and a half,
when we were in England.
]\Ir. Morris. Tell me this, Mr. Friedman : If you were now in the
State Department — this is a hypothetical question — would you give
information as you have in the jiast, say, to Y. Y. Hsu, and to Rose
Yardumian, and to — who was the other one 3'ou mentioned? Just
take those two. Would you now give such information to Gunther
Stein?
Mr. Friedman. I would rather not answer a hj-pothetical question
of that sort, Senator. Is is so open to
Senator Watkins. That reveals your ])resent state of mind. It
may have some bearing on j^our answers that you have given in the
past.
Mr. Friedman. I think the answer is quite simple: That I would
follow all of the rules and regulations of the State Department with
reference to the circulation of materials which is governmental and
State Department material.
Mr. Morris. And you would impose no higher standard than tiiat
on yourself?
Mr. Friedman. I would follow the rules of the Department by
which I was employed ; yes, sir.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4335
Mr. Morris. Suppose you knew that a Communist wanted some
particular information for a purpose to further the Communist con-
spiracy in the world, and he came to you and asked you for that infor-
mation. If there were no State Department prohibition against it,
would you give it to him ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir. I would report it to my senior official.
Mr. Morris. Did you so report as to Y. Y. Hsu, when you gave him
a map that he wanted ?
Mr. Friedman. Pardon me?
Mr. Morris. Did you report to your official in the State Depart-
ment the fact that Y. Y. Hsu wanted a map from you ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that I did. I am almost sure that
I discussed the matter with a Mr. Chase, but I take full responsibility.
Mr. Morris. And he gave you permission ?
Mr. Friedman. It wasn't a question of permission. It was a ques-
tion of an unrestricted map on the liberated areas of China. It was
for JNIr. Hsu's book, copies of which came to the State Department
shortly afterward.
Mr. JNIoRRis. Knowing what you know about Mr. Hsu now, do you
think that his motive in obtaining that map was completely hann-
less?
Mr. Friedman. At that particular time, it was harmless. It was
for publication, and was published subsequently.
Mr. Morris. I mean, clo you concede now that Y. Y. Hsu was a
Communist?
]\Ir. Friedman. No, sir. I just don't know anything about that.
I believe we have said that he is in Peking, and I presume that he is.
But other than that, I couldn't say any further, on the basis of my
own knowledge of Mr. Hsu.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Mr. Friedman, have you ever seen or read the Com-
munist Manifesto by Marx and Engels?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I have read the Communist Manifesto by
Marx and Engels.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Have you ever read State and Revolution by Lenin ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have, Mr. Sourwine.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you know what that book is ?
Mr. Friedman. No. That is one of the reasons I don't think I read
it, because I couldn't say what the contents are.
Mr. SouRw^iNE. Have you ever read Left AVing Communism and In-
fantile Disorder by Lenin ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, indeed ; I have read that.
Mr. Sourwine. Have you read Foundations of Leninism by Stalin ?
Mr. Friedman. I have read, I think, a part of that book. In fact,
I haven't read that, because it was a matter m which I was looking
into quite recently.
]Mr. SouRw^iNE. What do j^ou mean, "looking into''? You were
looking into the book, or looking into the matter of whether you had
read it?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, into the book itself.
Mr. Sourwine. You would say you have been exposed to it, but
didn't catch it ?
Mr. Friedman. No. As I say, I am pretty sure that I have not read
that book.
Mr. Sourwine. You mean you dipped into it?
4336 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Friedman. Xo. I haven't gotten it yet.
Mr. SouRAViNE. ^Yi\i\t did you mean when you said yon were look-
ing into it ? Do you mean you have ordered it ?
Jklr. Friedman. No, I haven't ordered it yet, either, but I was going
to read it sometime in the course of the year.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Who recommended that book to you ?
Mr. Friedman. Nobody in particuLar.
Mr. SouRWiNE. Did you ever read History of the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union, authored by the central committee of the Com-
munist Party ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, I have never read that.
Mr. Soi'RwiNE. Did you ever read, Program of the Communist
International and its Constitution, the third American edition?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have; no, sir.
Mr. SouRW^iNE. Any edition ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall. I don't think so.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you ever read The Revolutionary Movement in
the Colonies and Semi-Colonies, a thesis of the Sixth World Congress
of the Comintern ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; that, I believe, I have read.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Would you tell us, sir, something of the circum-
stances under which you read those books to the reading of which
you have just testified?
Mr. Friedman. I just don't recall the circumstances.
Mr. SouRW^NE. Did you perhaps read them because you felt they
were necessary or desirable as background for your work ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I would say that I have read those books
because 1 thought that some of them were necessary as part of the
literature of an educated man.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You did not feel that any of them were necessary
in connection with your work in the State Department?
Mr. Friedman. Absolutely not; no, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you read any of them in connection with study
groups, with others?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I don't think I have ever been in the study
group of the type I believe you are referring to.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You read all of these books on your own initiative?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I believe so.
Mr. SouRAViNE. No one I'ecommended them to you?
Mr. Friedman. Not that I recall, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Anthony Jenkinson at any time?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I don't believe I have ever met Mr. Jenkin-
son. I can identify the name, I think, with the Allied Labor News.
Mr. Morris. That is the one; yes. Your testimony is that you have
never met him?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I ever met him.
Mr. Morris. Did you know that he is an Englishman?
Mr. Friedman. I believe it is Jenkinson ; yes. I have heard that he
was an Englishman.
Mr. Morris. You did not see him on your trip to London?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Michael Lindsay?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4337
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet him ?
Mr. Friedmax. Yes, sir.
Mr. jMorris. Wlien was the hist you met Michael Lindsay?
Mr. Friedm vn. I think I met Lindsay, Michael Lindsay, sometime in
London in the last 2 years, I believe prior to his departure as a research
scholar for a university.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet him in the United States?
Mr. Frjedman. Yes, sir ; at Harvard University in 1947.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever meet him at the Committee for Democratic
Far Eastern Policy ?
Mr. Friedmax. I don't recall.
Mr. Morris. Did you know his wife ?
]Mr. Friedman. I have met his Avife; yes, sir.
Mr. jNIorris. Who was his wife ?
Mr. Friedman. ]\Irs. Lindsay.
Mr. Morris. Did you know her before she married him?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Agnes Smedley at any time?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I met Miss Smedley.
Mr. Morris. Where did you meet Miss Smedley ?
Mr. Friedman. When did I meet Miss Smedley ? I met Miss Smed-
ley sometime in 1047 after I left the State Department. I shouldn't
be surprised if I didn't meet Miss Smedley at the office of the China
Aid Council or the home of Miss Mildred Price.
Mr. Morris. Were they closely associated ?
Mr. Friedman. I think thej^ were quite friendly, yes, sir.
Mr. IMorris. Was Miss Smedley active in the Committee for Dem-
ocratic Far Eastern Policy?
Mr. Friedman. I wouldn't know, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet Miss Smedley when she was in London?
Mr, Friedman. Yes, I saw Miss Smedley in London.
Mr. Morris. What was the occasion of that ?
Mr. Friedman. I was invited to an occasion by Lady Scly wyn Clark,
whose husband was the British g-overnor of the Seychelles Islands
and was a very eminent and distinguished medical officer of Hong
Kong.
Mr. Morris. What was the circumstances ?
Mr. Friedman. It was just a social occasion.
Mr. Morris. Were any of these other people you have been discuss-
ing today present at that party ?
^Ir. Friedman. Just my wife present in addition to Miss Smedley
and Miss Clark.
Mr. Morris. How many times did you see Miss Smedley in Eng-
land?
Mr. Friedman. I am sure not more than twice.
Mr. Morris. Did you see her at about the time that she died?
Mr. Friedman. Just before, I believe.
Mr. Morris. Do you know anything about the circumstances sur-
rounding her death?
]\Ir. Fried3ian. No, I do not.
Mr. Morris. Did you read about the circumstances?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I have read about the death, but I don't know
any of the circumstances.
4338 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Morris. You could not tell this committee about any of the
details suiTounding the death?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. INIoRRis. You did read her will in the papers, did you not ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, I believe I have. I am not quite sure. I have
seen references to it if I haven't actually read the will in the paper.
Mr. Morris. You do know that she willed the property to Chuh
Teh, the Chinese Communist general ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Did that surprise you ?
Mr. Friedman. Not at all.
Mr. Morris. In fact, that was consistent to the person Agnes
Smedley ?
Mr. Friedman. I know she had the greatest admiration for General
Teh, about whom she was writing an autobiography.
Mr. Morris, Did you ever meet Anna Louise Strong?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I have met Anna Louise Strong.
Mr. Morris. A^Hiere did you meet her ?
Mr. Friedman. I met her in Shanghai in 1946, I believe. She
came to me and was introduced to me because she was interested in
Chinese labor problems, and I was the American labor attache to
whom many Chinese even turned for explanation of the Chinese labor
scene.
Mr. Morris. Did you turn to her for explanation of the Chinese
labor scene ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Where else did you see Anna Louise Strong?
Mr. Friedman. This is the only period.
IVIr. Morris. Did you see her in the United States ?
Mr. Friedman. No, I have never seen her in the United States.
No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Victor Yakhontoff ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir, I don't believe I have ever.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever met him ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Do you know who he is ?
Mr. Friedman. The author of Chinese Soviet; is that the one to
whom you are referring ?
Mr. Morris. I believe that is the same man, yes.
Mr. FriedMjVn. I don't know him. I have never met him.
Mr. Morris. Do you know Michael Greenberg?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know him.
Mr. Morris. You did not see him in England ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. He is there now ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't know. His book has just been published.
Mr. Morris. From London?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Morris. Are you acquainted with the testimony before this
committee about the Communist associations of Michael Greenberg?
Mr. Friedman. Not specifically. I am sure I have read them.
Mr. Morris. Have you testimony to believe that Michael Green-
berg is or was a Communist ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4339
Mr. Fried3ian. I don't know. I just don't know the man.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever met the Snows, the Edg-ar Snows?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I believe Mr. Edgar Snow and the person,
Mrs. Snow, the writer Nym Wales. I don't recall the occasion for
meeting Eclgar Snow, unless it was at the State Department. I re-
member meeting Mrs. Snow, Nym Wales, at the San Francisco Con-
ference, United Nations Conference.
]\Ir. Morris. In what capacity was she there ?
JNIr. Friedman. I don't recall, sir.
INIr. Morris. Was slie in the press room or one of the official rooms?
Mr. Friedman. I just don't recall.
Mr. Morris. She was there?
Mr. Fried3Ian. Yes; I am pretty sure she was.
Mr. Morris. And yon say you thought you met Edgar Snow in the
State Department ?
Mr. Friedman. As I say, I don't recall the circumstances.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Dolly Eltenton ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't believe I did; no, sir. I don't know the
name.
Mr. Morris. You don't know the name?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Morris. Did yon know Chen Han-seng?
Mr. Fried3»ian. Chen Han-seng.
Mr. Morris. In what capacity did you meet Dr. Chen Han-seng?
Mr. Friedman. I Ijelieve I met Dr. Chen in his capacity as a re-
search scholar at Johns Hopkins University, and I met Dr. Chen in
New York, I think, at the Committee for Democratic Far Eastern
Policy. I believe that is where I saw him in New York.
Mr. Morris. Did you know Mr. Bisson, who was a witness here
yesterday?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I know Mr. Bisson.
Mr. Morris. Did you meet him in connection with the Committee
for Democratic Far Eastern Policy?
Mr. Fried3Ian. No, sir; I believe I met Mr. and Mrs. Bisson at the
Institute of Pacific Relations conference in Hot Springs. I don't
recall seeing Mr. Bisson, I don't think, even in 1947 when I was back
in America, and I have seen him recently where he is a colleague of
mine at the University of California.
Mr. SouRwaNE, Could I interrupt?
Do yon remember testifying with regard to your duties while you
were divisional assistant under Mr. Vincent ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you remember testifying that material coming
into the office reached your desk after it had gone over the desk of
Mr. Vincent or the assistant chief of the division ?
Mv. Friedman. Yes ; I suggested I was down at the bottom of the
routing list.
Mr. SoTjRwiNE. And the exception to that, I believe you stated, was
when Mr. Vincent would give you something directly.
Mr, Friedman. Yes. Well, that was still routing.
Mr. Sourwine. Is it true that you had a number of specific duties
while you were in jNIr. Vincent's office ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, specifically in the sense of writing memo-
randa ; yes, sir.
4340 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. SouRwiNE. You did write memoranda?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr, SouRWiNE. For Mr. Vincent?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. And you summarized dispatches on occasion?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I believe I did.
Mr. SouRwiNE. And you did prepare correspondence for his signa-
ture on occasion ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; I believe I did that, too.
Mr. SouRwiNE. And you sometimes initiated reports or communi-
cations which sometimes involved ])olicy. Is that a fair statement?
Mr. Friedman. Yes; I think it is a fair statement.
Mr. SouRW^iNE. I have been attempting to cut through what took us
several pages in executive session, and I do not want to put words
in your mouth if that is not a fair statement.
Mr. Friedman. I believe that some of the memos or writings may
be considered policy matters, but at my level they were not policy.
Mr. SouR^VINE. No; but you said you did sometimes initiate memo-
randa and they subsequently became policy?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you have anything to do with drafting any doc-
uments which subsequently or ultimately received the signature of the
President of the United States.
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall clearly.
Mr. SouRwiNE. I will give you an example. Mr. Vincent testified
that certain documents had been prepared in his office and that persons
in his office had worked on them, which ultimately became a part of
the directive to General Marshall. Did you work on any of those doc-
uments ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I don't believe I have ever worked on what
would be the preparatory material for General Marshall.
INIr. SouRwiNE. There was a document, a letter or communication,
from President Roosevelt to President Chiang Kai-shek under date of
July 14, 1944, which appears at page 560 of the so-called white paper
of the State Department.
Can you tell me whether you had anything to do with the drafting
of that or a paper preliminary to it ?
Mr. Friedman. Would you repeat the date, please?
Mr. SouRwiNE. I will be glad to show it to you in the white paper —
the one on the left-hand page there [handing document].
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; this was before I was a member of Mr. Vin-
cent's division.
Mr. SouRwiNE. You were with the State Department, but before you
were a member of the division?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRW^NE. In that category of papers, did you ever, to your
knowledge, prepare a memorandum for inclusion in, or what ultimate-
ly became, a paper or document for the signature of the Secretary of
State?
Mr Friedman. I just don't recall. Again, if you could be spe-
cific
Mr. Sourwine. If you had prepared a document which was subse-
quently signed by the Secretary of State, you would be very likely to
remember it, would you not?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4341
Mr. Friedman. Not necessarily, because I might not know that it
liad become a document.
i\Ir. SouRwiNE. Wei], if you knew about it.
Mr. Friedmax. Yes, sir ; I probably would remember it.
Mr. Sour WINE. We all follow our brain children.
Mr. Friedman. Some of us have pride of authorship; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you exclude yourself?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr, Sourwine. So that if you had written something which sub-
stantially, in the form in which you wrote it, was ultimately signed
by the Secretary, you would have known that, would you not?
Mr. Friedman. I believe so ; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you have any knowledge of that happening ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall; no, sir.
INIr. Sourwine. Turning to another question, do vou know Georgi
Dimitroff?
Mr. Friedman. Would you repeat that?
Mr. Sourwine. Georgi Dimitroff.
Mr. Friedman. Could you identify him for me ?
Mr. Sourwine. I am asking you if you know him.
Mr. Friedman. I don't believe I know anyone by that name.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you know that a man of that name was head
of the Communist International?
Mr. Friedman. Yes ; now I know of whom you are speaking.
Mr. Sourwine. You do place that Georgi Dimitroff?
Mr. Friedman. Yes.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever know him ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you ever read any of his writings?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think so.
Mr. Sourwine. I have no more questions.
Mr. Friedman. May I at this point introduce a number of docu-
ments which I think fit appropriately in the record of the committee?
Senator Watkins. I would say that if you want to submit them to
the connnittee that we do not allow the promiscuous introduction of
any documents. You see, your testimony is supposed to be sworn to
here. If you want to leave them with the committee, we will have our
staff check them, and we will make the ruling later as to whether they
will be admitted as a part of the record.
Mr. Friedman. Perhaps if I may take a moment of your record to
get further guidance on this point.
In the record, the printed testimony of Mi-s. Widener, there is a
statement, there is a letter, from Mr. Durbrow of the State Depart-
ment to this committee, explaining that I was terminated from the
State Department without prejudice, and, first of all. Mr. Morris, in
summarizing the letter at one point, substituted — and I am sure in-
advertently— "dismissed" for "terminated."
Senator Watkins. What is the difference?
Mr. Friedisian. The difference is, sir. that the phrase "termination
without prejudice" is the equivalent of an honorable discharge, and
that the term "dismissed" suggests something very uncomplimentary.
Senator Watkins. I just wanted that for the purpose of the record.
Mr. Friedman. I should like to submit into the record, to correct
this inadvertency, the copies of my retirement papers or termination
4342 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
papers, and a subsequent letter from the State Department to me ex-
plaining the meaning of the term "without prejudice."
Mr. SouKwiNE. Could you offer those one by one, identify them, and
let the Chair take them under advisement with regard to inclusion?
Senator Watkins. That would be proper.
Mr. Morris. I would like the record to show, Mr. Chariman, that
I did ask Mr. Friechiian earlier today if he had such papers if he
would submit them to me by way of facilitating their introduction
into the record, and he declined to show them.
Mr. Friedman. Would the record, Mr. Chairman, also show that I
took the initiative in mentioning this to Mr. Morris?
Senator Watkins. You mentioned it, but did you decline to let him
have them ?
Mr. Friedman. I suggested that I would wait until you arrived, sir.
Senator Watkins. As I indicated, the Chair will allow you to leave
the documents here for the purpose of checking them to see whether
or not they are properly admissible.
We do not know what is in them • we have not seen them. We want
to know what goes into this record. In other words, that is our re-
sponsibility.
Mr. Sourwine. The first specific offer you are making is your
record ?
Mr. Friedman. The first specific offer is a Department of Foreign
Service personnel notice, dated October 14, 1946.
Senator Watkins. That is identified sufficiently, I take it, for the
purpose of the record. I do not want you to read what is in it.
Mr. Friedman. I want to describe what is under the words "nature
of action" since it will then identify the document.
Senator Watkins. Is that not self-apparent without you explain-
ing that it is there ?
Mr. Friedman. I feel at this point that if I am leaving it for the
committee perhaps I should identify it b}^ its title.
Senator Watkins. Proceed.
Mr. Friedman. "Nature of action, termination of services without
prejudice."
The second document, also Division of Foreign Service Personnel,
dated June 4, 1947, with the title "Termination and lump-sum pay-
ment."
Air. Sourwine. Mr. Friedman, when a man resigns from the State
Department, is that technically a termination of services without
prejudice?
Mr. Friedman. I am introducing into the record
]\Ir. Morris. You are offering to be introduced into the record.
Mr. Friedman. I am offering. Excuse me. I am not familiar with
the procedures.
Senator Watkins. You can give the date of the letter, and if it is
your letter, without telling us what is in it. That is what we want.
Mr. Friedman. This is a letter dated November 6, 1951, signed by
Elbridge Durbrow, Chief, Division of Foreign Service Personnel.
Senator Watkins. That is enough identification.
Mr. Sourwine. My question, sir, which remains unanswered, is
when an official of the State Department or an employee of the State
Department resigns, is tliat technically termination without prej-
udice ?
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4343
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I believe it is.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Did you resign?
Mr. Friedman. Xo, sir ; I did not resign.
Mr. Sourwine. Your severance was involuntary as far as you are
concerned?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; my severance was voluntary, and I waited
for the State Department procedures to effectuate the act of termina-
tion.
Mr. Sourwine. You mean you elected to leave ?
Mr. Friedman. I desired to leave; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you communicate your desire to the superiors
or superior in any way ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRAViNE. But you did not resign?
]\[r. Friedman. I communicated my desires to my chief in Shanghai
on at least two occasions, and I informed Mr. Vincent in Washington,
and lie was still the Director, that I was preparing to leave the Foreign
Service of the United States.
At that time, legislation on the Foreign Service was about to go into
effect, and I waited for that legislation to take place.
Mr. SouKwiNE. Were you technically in the Foreign Service of
the United States?
Mr. Friedman. I was on the Foreign Service auxiliary which
terminated with this new legislation of November 1946.
Mr. Sourwine. But you did not resign ?
Mr. Friedman, I did not submit a letter of resignation, no, sir.
Senator Watkins. Wliat you did was tantamount, was it not, to a
resignation ?
Mr. Friedman. It was my wish to leave.
Senator Watkins. That is Avhat you say, "I want to leave." That
was a resignation. "I want to leave, and I am going to leave, the
service."
Mr. Friedman. If I may just explain this point, since Mr. Sour-
wine has raised it, that when the State Department inquired which
^ anted to stay and which wanted to leave, in the Foreign Service, and
this was in August of 194G, I tlien informed my superior that I was
prepared to stay on until about June 19-i7, in the course of which I
was hoping a successor would come out and I would break him in.
Then subsequently I decided that I would like to leave by the first
of the year, and the Depaitment decided that the best date was this
date of the new legislation taking effect.
Mr. Sourwine. You have another specific offer for the record?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. This will be your offer number four.
Mr. Friedman. Will I receive from the committee a receipt for
these documents?
Senator Watkins. I think we can.
Mr. Sourwine. Do you want the documents returned to you?
Mr. Friedman. I should like them returned to me.
Mr. Sourwine. You are offering them for the record. How are
we going to have them in the record if you want them returned ?
Mr. Friedman. Perhaps after the conclusion, if the committee de-
cides to include them in the record, the actual documents will be re-
turned to me.
4344 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Mr. Soura\t;ne. I do not see how we can pnt a document in our record
and return it to you at the same time?
Mr. Friedman. Perhaps a copy can be made for that purpose.
Mr. Morris. They are photostatic copies, are tliey not?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. In any event, the record stands clear that you de-
sire to have these documents returned to you.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. These are not originals, are they?
Mr. Friedman. These are photostatic copies.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Wlio procured the ])hotostats?
Mr. Friedman. I did.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Yourself? You did not niake them, did you?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. They were made commercially?
Mr. Friediman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. From the originals?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
]\Ir. SouRwiNE. The originals are in your possession ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. If the originals are in your possession, why do you
want the photostats back ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, if the committee would prefer the photostats,
1 would prefer to keep the originals myself.
Mr. Sourwine. I asked you if the originals were in your possession,
why do you want the photostats back ?
Senator Watkins. In other words, what yo.u are submitting here
are photostats, and we are wondering why you want those back, if you
have the originals.
Mr. Friedman. I think just to preserve them and not to have to make
any new ones, if there are any further hearings.
Mr. Sourwine. What you are oifering the committee here are photo-
stats that you have had made of original documents in your possession,
and you are asking that the photostats be returned to you ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
May I also offer another exhibit which I believe will complete the
description of Mrs. Widener, who testified before the committee, and
whose civil service was introduced into the record with the excei:)tion
of her letter of resignation or termination. Therefore, I should like
to submit for the record and the consideration of this conmiittee two
articles that appeared
Senator Eastland (presiding). You may proceed. Let me get my
bearings. If you want to offer something, you want to otfer something
iu the record?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. You have to submit it to the counsel.
Mr. Friedman. I was following — I don't quite know the procedures.
Senator Easti^and. I say submit it to the counsel and I will hear
from him whether he wants to object to it.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Chairman, generallv if we have witnesses who
want something introduced into the record, by way of expediting and
facilitating its entry into the record it is our practice, either in execu-
tive session or in formal hearings before the committee
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4345
Senator Eastland. Wait a minute. I understand the background.
But whatever goes in, it shouhl be submitted to the counsel, and when
it goes in I will hear from the counsel, whether he objects to it or what.
Mr. SouRwiNE. The witness wanted the record at this time to show
what he was offering for the chair to pass upon after counsel had had
an opportunity to study it.
Senator Eastland. Have you objections?
Mr. Morris. I have objections. I think it is an unnecessary step
that the witness is taking. We have been most liberal in introducing
things into the record.
Senator Eastland. AVhat I want to do is to file the stuff with you,
all of it. Then when you go over it I will hear from you as to what
your objections are, and pass upon it at that time.
Mr. Friedman. Then you just wish me, without saying anything
further, to hand this to Mr. Morris?
Senator Eastland. Yes, file the stuff with him.
Mr. Friedman. Will we be able to identify them ?
Mr. Morris. They will bo ])roperly identified.
Senator Eastl.\nd. It will be properly identified if I let it go into
the record. I w411 let it go into the record if he does not object. If
he objects, I will hear his grounds of objecting, and then I will pass
upon it.
Mr. Friedman. I see. But may I just say a word to indicate to
Mr. Morris which articles I am introducing ?
Senator Eastland. I wish you would just let him have the stuff
that you want to go in. You can make a list of it, if you want to, get
him to sign it, if you want to, and he will give you a receipt for it.
Mr. Friedman. May I then offer another document, sir, which is a
typewritten copy of a testimonial ?
Senator Eastland. The same ruling is going to apply to all of those.
With anything like that, just give it to him and if you want a receipt
for it, he will give you a receipt.
(The documents referred to were marked exhibits Numbers T41A,
741B, 741C, 741D, 741E, and 741F, and are as follows:)
4346
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Exhibit No. 741-A
i
i
rpsAOs
1 i^^^-
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
I.
Friefia&a Jviltm
H.
i_ &.2»m
teralrjation of services without prejudice
to b«
&A-OU-. S.JlU^p->
|;>^&48 l__
: A>^-ff^M^iiiJ^i }i..-vi
1970609
Abol*4h0a
-: WKMABKS
03t.l4,l$M..
1970609
—I
! Re&gorj of t0r«ia«.tioa du« tc lt<|ul<S&tios of Aaxlll«ry Serrioe,
:• SffeotlT® !iat« to be established after arriY&I in U.S. Trsvsi should
:: be coapisted before 11,12,46
3S3
i Amer* can
single
'■■->W Th^ '^CWi^. : A>1Y C^' SfATC
EMPuovees, gpf'v
. f I- O '^f
«XIC£«S^^^^'«VA A^
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
4347
Exhibit No. 741-B
rf:il**(*a f» »4« A«vi««o lA **
F4-:JD3,
omsfON or foressn stsvice persownel
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
6-4»47
^_Taim.-^i Jailax; _Ji. /•.- L<>-2»20
; COB li-15-46
1970551
)■■>•';«: ■':»^' 'ttuft
»a»itC SALAWV
P » O M
ed 63 tisi.nsit uiioisa&l'y by aixli
Ceatre, K,Y. i;
f"
J
SH-69
;'i'><>iT(C''N
! >5i!;MAfti<S; Terisi afttloii c-f aorvicea llucut prejudice sfrective OCS lX-iij-46|:;;
I Isave itfvi j2 1/2 Giiys uccrueu correLt (iiijiUj.l l^^i.ve. i'ayrsieat to ;:» :,;.;t
by D8i,fc-r t-raiijit, Furi-iser C50i;.,Siuaio?atiO«a rs/^ai'liite liijsi -sum puysie.-a s„-,..i^ |;
OS uddrttsssd to tiia Division oi" fia^naei, ;]
-(li- *^ i ■ V 0 ^i t
*■? O^ C')--.,v:<^>j
<l
..**■ or T«6
EMPLOYEE'S COPY
i Of ?o>is "'M se*
li-afso :'X«s*j
Exhibit No. 741-C
Depaetment of State,
Washington, November 6, 1951.
In reply refer to : FP
Mr. Julian R. Friedman,
18 Davison Place, Rockville Centre, New York.
Deae Mb. Friedman : Your letter of September 28, 1951, regarding an article
appearing in the September 19 issue of the Herald Tribune has been referred to
me for reply.
4348 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
In 1946, you were one of approximately 80 officers in the Foreign Service who
were tenuiiiated as a result of the liquidation of the Foreign Service Auxiliary.
As you know, this was a temporary wartime brancx ^^ ch- Department of State
whfch was abolished on Novemlier 12, li)4(J. following the passage of the Foreign
Service Act of 11)40. The term "Without prejudice" was rather broadly used
at that time for separation of employees because of reductions in force, resigna-
tions for personal reasons, or, as in this case, terminations due to the discon-
tinuance of the Auxiliary branch of the Foreign Service.
It will not be possible to supply you with the various communications you
request, since the policy of the Department precludes the release of this material.
Furthermore, the Department released no information to the press regarding your
employment or your termination from the Foreign Service. Any statements
purportedly made by Mr. Eugene Dooman were made by him as a private indi-
vidual, and not as a State Department official. :\Ir. Dooman has not been an
employee of the Department of State since 1945.
Sincerely yours,
[s] Elbridge Durbrow
Elbridge Dukbrow.
Chief, Division of Foreign Service Personnel.
Exhibit No. 741-D
The London School of Economics and Political Science
(Universitj- of London)
Houghton Street, Aldwych,
LONDON, W. C. 2
Mr. Julian R. Friedman was accepted by this School as a graduate student in
March 1!>47. His knowledge of and interest in the social and allied problems of
colonial teri-itories attracted the attention of his supervisors, and as there was
then a vacancy on the teaching staff of the School he was invited to become an
assistant lecturer in colonial social science in the autumn of 1947. At that time
the London School of Economics was conducting a course in colonial social studies
at the request of the Colonial Office, and it was in the arrangements for the
teaching for this course that Mr. Friedman participated. We were entirely satis-
fied with the way in which he carried out his duties, and in October 1950 he was
appointed to a lectureship in colonial administration, since it was in this par-
ticular sphere that his interests were concentrated. Once again we were entirely
satisfied with the manner in which he discharged his duties. He has now
decided to return to the United States, and indeed he had told us from the begin-
ning that his stay in this country would only be for a short period of years.
Mr. Friedman has been a most welcome member of the staff and has taken
a full part in the social life of the School. He served for a period as the secretary
of the Senior Common Room. The teaching duties allotted to him were not
easy to carry out because the field is not very clearly defined ; there is an absence
of literature and no established tradition of instruction. Mr. Friedman over-
came these difficulties. He is a careful and conscientious teacher who has the
interests of his students much in mind. Some of these students have been officers
of British colonial governments seconded to this country for the purpose of taking
a year's course at this School. It was obvious that this country to undertake
the instructi<m of students of this class. Mi'. Friedman showed that he pos.sesses
the tact and accomplishment necessary for this uiuisual and difficult duty, and
this is a very considerable tribute to him. He has shown in his publications
considerable breadth of mind and power of understanding; and he has greatly
deepened and enlarged his interests since he has been with us. He is in a
sense an explorer in a new country, the boundaries of which are not clearly visible,
lluis it is more difficult than elsewhere to produce results. It is greatly to his
credit that he has not rushed in and attempted to make contributions before
he had consolidated his background. What he has contributed shows great
promise of the future.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4349
I have no hesitation whatever in recommending Mr. Friedman as a most
valuable member of the ''^''ff of a university,
(Signed) A. M. Caek-Saunders,
Director.
28th May, 1951.
Original to Dr. B. Stewart, Dean, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy,
Medford, Massachusetts.
Copied by : JRF.
Checked by : .
Exhibit No. 741-E
[New York Journal-American, Wednesday, December 12, 1951]
Accuses Voice of Censoring Slaps at Reds — -Writer Says Script Cut
(By Howard Rushmore)
Voice of America scripts which contained "too hard-hitting criticisms" of
Russia and not enough of the State Department's oflBcial "subtle and indirect
approach" to the subject were censored by the local voice office, a veteran radio
writer charged today.
Mrs. Alice Widener of 829 Park ave., said portions of her original scripts
were cut to eliminate "criticisms which I considered factual and direct based
on thorough research and investigation."
Mrs. Widener, who prepared 40 scripts for the Voice of America's overseas
short wave at the standard rate of $40 per script said some of these documents
were now being studied by the Senate subcommittee on Internal Security.
HER SCRIPT SUBPOENAED
Mrs. Widener, who appeared as a witness before the Senate group in public
hearings last Summer in connection with public hearings on the Institute of
Pacific Relations, said she had testified "for two hours in closed sessions on the
Voice of America."
Copies of her original scripts and those used in the actual broadcast were
then subpoenaed by the subcommittee, Mrs. Widener said.
The free-lance writer worked for the State Department's local oflice, 224 W.
57th St., from January to June of this year.
Mrs. Widener said her chief objection came when her scripts dealing with the
United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund were cut to eliminate
criticism of Russia "turning this worth-while cause" into "a political football,
while refusing to contribute funds."
Since the UN organization was founded in 1946, the United States has given
$75,000,000, with 45 other nations giving $115,000,000 including such "war-wrecked
nations as Belgium and Holland," Mrs. Widener said.
"I was asked to prepare a script for international broadcast pointing up
the value of this children's group," she added.
"Three paragraphs of my script were directly critical of Russia's refusal
to contribute to the world's hungry children. They were cut out of the
broadcast with only a one-sentence rebuke to Stalin left in."
DEa:,ETED ITEM BARED
Mrs. Widener produced her original script and the official State Department
broadcast which eliminated the following criticism :
"A representative of the Soviet Union does play a political part in
UNICEF by setting on the executive committee. However, this man and
his government seem perfectly content merely to sit and talk about suffering
children.
"Today millions of grateful mothers whose children have thrived and
progressed under UNICEF care can say 'the Communists sit and talk about
defending children. But people in free countries act to defend children."
The official broadcast mentioned Russia's refusal to contribute money to
children's relief but all other criticism was removed by Mrs. Widener's superiors.
88348— 52— pt. 12 21
4350 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
RUMANIA SCRIPT CUT
On another occasion, Mrs. Widener said she had been assigned to prepare a
script answering a Rumanian propaganda statement that a mother of nine
children in that satellite nation had gone to work on a factory night-shift to
show her loyalty to Stalin.
Her original script contained the following paragraph which was cut by the
Voice of America in the final broadcast :
"People in free countries wish to know about the sincerity of Olena
Pichkova's (the Rumanian mother) gratitude to Stalin. Is it really pos-
sible that a woman can be grateful to a political leader for the fact that her
nine sleeping children are left without a mother's care at night."
Another script by Mrs. Widener dealing with the same subject had the follow-
ing criticism deleted in the actual broadcast :
"It's easy to understand just why these Rumanian women and all women
in Communist lands are so worried about what a mother can do for her
small children while she's away at work.
"Now that millions of these women have been lured and forced by Com-
munists to take jobs outside the home, mothers are facing the tragic fact
that neither the Soviet government nor any other Communist regime can
provide enough child-care centers and day nurseries to meet maternal needs."
Mrs. Widener said she was dismissed after six months and was told that her
scripts "were too hard-hitting and not the subtle and indirect approach" re-
quired of State Department writers.
"My superiors were not Communists," Mrs. Widener told the N. T. Journal-
American. "They were merely following their orders from Washington.
But most of the principal propaganda points in my scripts were either
eliminated or weakened here.
"But I believe that people behind the iron curtain who risk their lives
to listen to our broadcasts want direct truth and not 'subtle and indirect'
propaganda. That was what I tried to give them. And I found that the
Voice of America didn't want it."
Exhibit No. 471-F
[New York Journal American, December 13, 1951]
"Time Limitations" — Officials Explain "Voice" Deletions
(By Howard Rushmore)
Voice of America oflScials today said that deletions were made in the Anti-
Russian scripts of a writer for the State Department's propaganda agency
because of "time limitations" and "too much editorial content."
Mrs. Alice Widener, 829 Park Ave., had charged that cuts were made in some
of the 40 programs she did for the Voice because her superiors told her the scripts
"were too hard-hitting."
Foy D. Kohler, chief of the Voice of America, said at his office, 251 W. 57th St.,
that Mrs. Widener had "never done anything we considered at all useful."
action defended
In reply Mrs. Widener's accusation that the Voice wanted more "subtle and
indirect" writing dealing with the Russian scene, Kohler said :
"We never considered her one of our psychological warriors, skilled in various
forms of propaganda. We have been accused of being too hard-hitting by West-
ern European audiences where we must use the subtle approach.
"We have to tailor our broadcasts to fit the audiences."
Mrs. Widener's immediate superiors, who terminated her employment as a
free lance script writer last June, complained that Mrs. Widener "used too much
editorializing in her scripts after her point had been made."
deletion quoted "
Mrs. Widener had stated one of the important deletions of her script dealt with
Russia's refusal to contribute any money to the United Nations International
Children's Emergency Fund.
INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4351
The deletion which the State Department now claims was too "editorial" for
their anti-Russian propaganda follows :
"A representative of the Soviet Union does play a political part in UNICEF
by sitting on the executive committee. However, this man and his government
seem perfectly content merely to sit and talk about suffering children.
"Today millions of grateful mothers whose children have thrived and pro-
gressed under UNICEP care can say 'the Communists sit and talk about defend-
ing children. But people in free countries act to defend children'."
"suepeised"
Mrs. Widener said that she was surprised that Kohler had accused her of
incompetence.
"Last Summer Mrs. Olive Eemington Goldman wrote Mr. Kohler praising my
assistance and advice given during the sessions of the UN Commission on the
Status of Women at which Mrs. Goldman was the United States delegate," she
declared.
"In this letter, Mrs. Goldman told Mr. Kohler that the Voice should be praised
for having me connected with it.
"I never knew that Mrs. Goldman sent this letter until she told me several
weeks later. She expressed surprise that Mr. Kohler had not told me about it."
JNIr. Friedman. Fine, thank you, sir.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Mr. Friedman, I want to run throuo^h a list of pub-
lications liei-e, and I will lay the foundation very briefly.
In connection with your work in the State Department and your
interest in the Far East, did you think it necessary or desirable to
do any readincr in literature having to do with the Chinese Commu-
nist movement ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir, I did believe it desirable to read,
Mr. Sourwine. Have you read some such literature?
]\Ir. Friedman. Yes, sir. I believe at the time that I read such a
book as Mr. Gunther Stein's Red Challenge.
Mr. Sourwine. I would like to read through this list and if you
remember having read any of these please say so.
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir. That is, remember reading them at the
time of my employment in the State Department ?
Mr. Sourwine. If you remember you ever read the book. Years of
Fulfillment, by Harriet Moore?
Mr. Friedman. No.
Mr. Sourwine. Soviet Communism, by Sidney and Beatrice Webb ?
Mr. Friedman. I believe I read parts of that; yes, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. The Soviet State, by B. W. Maxwell ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that.
Mr. Sourwine. The Racial Myth, by Paul Radin ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have read Mr, Radin's book.
Mr. Sourwine, Did you read Ryuiche Kaji's review of that, by
any chance?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall ; no, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Soviet Russia Fights Crime, by Lenka von Koer-
ber?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that volume. Is that a book or a
pamphlet ? Would you have some indication ?
Mr. Sourwine. The distinction between pamphlets fonns and book
forms is one I would not be prepared to answer with regard to
that publication.
Mr. Friedman. It might assist.
Mr. Sourwine. A Soviet Study of the American Position in the
Far East, by Harriet Moore?
yar?
Mr.
Friedman.
Mr.
SOURWINE
History?
Mr.
Friedman.
Mr.
SoURWlNE.
Society?
Mr.
Friedman.
Mr.
Sourwine,
4352 msTiTUTE of pacific relations
Mr. Friedman. I don't believe I have read that.
Mr. Sourwine. Literature on the Chinese Soviet Movement, a bibli-
ography prepared by the American Council, Institute of Pacific Re-
lations?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall on that.
INIr. Sourwine. The Agricultural Economy of China, by L. Mad-
No, I don't recall that volume.
Karl Eadek's Theoretical Analysis of Chinese
No, sir, I don't believe I have ever read that.
Safarov's History of the Development of Chinese
I am not familiar with (hat first-hand, no, sir.
The Revolutionary Movement in the Colonies,
Thesis of the Sixth World Congi*ess of the Communist International ?
Mr. Friedman. I may have read that, yes, sir. I am not sure.
Mr. Sourwine. Between the Fifth and the Sixth World Congresses,
1924—28 : A report on the position of all sections of the world Com-
munist Party?
Mr. Friedman. I am not sure of that.
Mr. Sourwine. Yelk's The Chinese Revolution ?
Mr. Friedman. Would you spell the author's name, please?
Mr. Sourwine. Y-e-l-k.
Mr. Friedman. No, I don't believe I have read that volume.
Mr, Sourwine. British Imperialisms in China, by G. Voitinsky?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that volume either.
Mr. Sourwine. Hansu Chan, Sun Yat-sen and the Chinese Revo-
lution, an article in China Today ?
Mr. Friedman. Would you pronounce that again ?
Mr. Sourwine. Hansu Chan, Sun Yat-sen and the Chinese Revolu-
tion?
Mr. Friedman. I don't recall that.
Mr. Sourwine. The Situation in China by G. Voitinsky?
Mr. Friedman. Again I don't recall tJiat one.
Mr. Sourwine. Resolution on the Chinese Question Passed by the
Sixth Plenum of the Enlarged Executive Committee of the Com-
munist International ?
Mr. Friedman. Again I don't recall whether I have read that.
Mr. Sourwine. Did j^ou ever read any of the volumes of the publica-
tion Imprecorr?
Mr. Friedman. I believe not, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. You know what that publication is?
Mr. Friedman. I believe it would be a publication of the Com-
munist International.
Mr. Sourwine. International press correspondence, yes.
Mr. Friedman. International press correspondence.
Mr. Sourwine. You are correct about the publication.
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have read that, no, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Did you read a speech by Stalin in the Chinese Com-
mission of the Seventh Plenum which was published in pamphlet
form?
Mr. Friedman. Again I believe I have read speeches by Stalin on
China and I am pretty sure that would have been included.
mSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS 4353
Mr. SouRwiNE. I have just a few more questions ?
Senator PjAStland. You may proceed.
Mr. SouRwiNE. Are you now or have you ever been a member of
the Communist Party of the United States or of any other country?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I am not a member of the Communist Party
of the United States; I have never been, and I am not a member and
have never been a member, of the Communist Party of any country.
Senator Eastland. Were you ever solicited by any one to join the
Communist Party?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; I don't believe so.
Senator Eastland. Did you ever discuss it with any member ?
Mr. Friedman. I have never discussed joining the Communist
Party.
Senator Eastland, Have you ever discussed communism with mem-
bers of the party ?
Mr. Friedman. Yes, sir ; I have.
Senator Eastland. Who were they ?
Mr. Friedman. I referred to Mr. John Horner, of the British Com-
munist Party, of whom I have discussed communism ; yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. Who in the United States ?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I have ever discussed communism with
any American Communists.
Senator Eastland. AVliat Communists or pro-Communists have you
associated with in this country?
Mr. Friedman. In this country ?
Senator Eastland. Yes. That is, such as Mr. Lattimore. Who else ?
Mr. Friedman. Are you identifying Mr. Lattimore as a Communist
or pro-Communist, Senator?
Senator Eastland. Yes.
Mr. Friedman. The only answer I can give is that I have associated
with Mr. Lattimore ; yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. Wlio else ?
Mr. Friedman. Well, if you could be more specific, perhaps I can
give you a specific answer.
Senator Eastland. I cannot be specific. I want information. I
am asking a question to get information.
Mr. Friedman. I don't think I
Mr. Morris. You have associated with Israel Epstein have you not ?
Mr. Friedman. I have met Mr. Epstein ; yes, sir.
Mr. JNIoRRis. You have associated with him, have you not?
Mr. Friedman. I have been at his home ; yes.
Mr. INIoRRis. And do you think he is a Communist?
Mr. Friedman. I think I can say that he is a pro-Communist; yes,
sir.
Mr. Morris. Are you being responsive to Senator Eastland's ques-
tion under the circumstances ?
Mr. Friedman. If you mentioned Epstein, yes; I know Epstein.
Senator Eastland. I did not mention it. I asked you the question.
Who else is there ?
Mr. Friedman. 1 just don't recall any American Communists or pro-
Communists with whom I have discussed communism.
Mr. Morris. Did you ever discuss it with A^nes Smedley ?
Mr. Friedman. I think I have discussed China with Agnes Smed-
ley without discussing communism with Agnes Smedley.
4354 INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS
Senator Eastland. You associated with Agues Smedley? She was
an associate of yours ?
Mr. Friedman. She was not an associate. I have been acquainted
with Agnes Smedley ; yes, sir.
Senator Eastland. Are you a Marxist?
Mr. Friedman. I don't think so, and I don't think the Marxists con-
sider me one, sir.
Senator Eastland. Would you call yourself a sympathizer to com-
munism ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I would not call myself a sympathizer with
communism. I have my own affirmative views on matters political
and they are certainly not consistent with the views of the Communists.
Senator Eastland. Proceed.
Mr. Sourwine. Have you ever knowingly assisted the Communist
Party of any country, or any person or persons known to you to be
Communists or pro-Communists?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I don't believe I have ever done so know-
ingly, and I don't think I have done so unknowingly.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever been asked to do so ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I don't believe I have ever been asked to —
yes, I anj sure I have made suggestions to Miss Smedley or Mr.
Epstein or Mr. Horner.
Mr. Morris. Such as what kind of suggestions?
Mr, Friedman. Well, I just don't recall specifically.
Mr. Morris. You siiid you are sure you have made such suggestions
to those persons.
Mr. Friedman. Well, I mean suggestions in the sense of "Won't
you come over for dinner?" or "Won't we go out for a walk?"
Mr. Morris. Beyond that you have not made any ?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; not that I recall.
Mr. Morris. Have you ever been asked or invited or urged to join
the Communist Party of any country?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir; I do not believe I have.
Mr. Sourwine. Have you ever received any advice or directives on
policy from any Communist or pro-Communist source during the
entire time you were employed by the United States ?
jNIr. Friedman. No, sir.
Mr. Sourwine. Have you ever received any money, reward, emolu-
ment, decoration, or praise from any Communist government or its
representatives at any time?
Mr. Friedman. No, sir ; not that I know of.
Mr. Sourwine. I have no more questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Eastland. That will be all. You are excused.
(Whereupon, at 4 p. m., Tuesday, April 1, 1952, the hearing was
recessed subject to the call of the Chair.)
INDEX
(Note. — The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee attaches no significance
to the mere fact of the appearance of the name of an individual or an organiza-
tion in this index.)
A
Page
Abe Cabinet (Japanese) 4202
Abe. General Nobuyuki 4202, 4267, 4269
Aberyswyst University (British) 4037
Abo, Baron (Admiral) 4148
Addis, Dr. Thomas 4258
Adjutant General, The 4072, 4074
Adler, Solomon 4322
Advisory Committee 4101
Agrarian China 4231
Agriculture 4070
A. A. A. (Agriculture Administration Act) 4071
Agricultural Economy of China, The 4352
Air Force in China 4134
Akita, Kiyoshi 4148
Allen, Carolyn E 4119
Allen, G. C 4270
Allen, James S 4208, 4209
Allen, Riley 4125-4126, 4146
Aleutian Islands 4109
Alexander, J. W 4089
Alexander, Wallace M 4044, 4092-^093, 4105-4106, 4108, 4109, 4134
Alfred, Helen 4258
Allied Labor News 4078, 4308, 4336
Allport, Gordon W 4119
Alper, Michael (Rabbi) 4115
Alsberg, Carl L 4044, 4092-4093, 4105^106, 4108, 4119, 4130, 4134
Ambassador (German) 4043
Amerasia 4046-4047, 4058,
4069, 4076, 4093, 4097, 4103, 4106-4107, 4120-4121, 4124, 4136, 4141,
4147, 4149, 4188, 4200, 4212-4213, 4254, 4270, 4282-4284, 4286, 4312,
4314, 4316, 4333, 4334.
Amerasia case 4177
American Ambassador 4099-41(K)
American Anthropological Association 4119
American Arbitration Association 4327
American Artist Union 4275
American Association of University Women 4138
American, British and French policy 4205
American Chinese Export Co 4081
American Civil Liberties Union 4116
American Committee for Nonparticipation in Japanese Aggression 4252, 4253
American Communications Association 4116
American Cooperating Committee for Chinese Mass Education Movement__ 4046
Amco {see Institute of Pacific Relations-American Council) 4146
American Congress for Peace and Democracy 4114-4115, 4118
American Consulate General in Shanghai 4329
American Council of Learned Societies 4259
American Delegation (October 27, 1944) 4122-4123
American Economic Association 4119, 4259
n INDEX
Page
American Far Eastern Policy 4056-4057, 4095, 4278
American Federation of Labor (AFL) 4274
American Federation of Teacliers 4116
American Foreign Policy 4135, 4164
American Foreign Policy in the Light of Coming Philippine Independ-
ence (speech) 4127
American Friends of the Chinese People 4064-4005,
4139, 4166-4167, 4169, 4187, 4252^253, 4272, 4276-^77
American Historical Association 4119
American Intervention in Siberia 4090
American League Against War and Fascism 4118
American League for Peace and Democracy 4086,
4114^115, 4118, 4138, 4187, 4253, 4259, 4272, 4273
American League for Peace and Democracy (Women's Division) 4275
American Friends of Chinese People 406o
American Museum of Natural History 4119
American Neutrality Act 41ol
American Participation in the China Consortiums 4047, 4135
American Peace Mobilization 4045^046,4051^053,4075,4098,4140
American Political Science Association 4119
American Psychological Association 4119
American Red Cross 4147
American Red Cross (Russia) 4-.b0
American Russian Institute 4091, 4144-4145, 42o8
American Sociological Association 4119
American Statistical Association 4119
American Student Union 4116, 4277
American Telephone & Telegraph Co 4119
American Youth Congress 4138
AmtGi' Isr3.Gl 4J^i- i
Amtor'g TradinFco7pVrJ"_V_""_ 403^^039, 4042, 4077
Anderson, James 4277
Anderson, Robbins B 4125^126, 4146
Anderson, Sherwood 4115
Anderson, William 4119
Andrew, Seymour L 4119
Andrews, Clark 4309^310, 4328
Andrews, Mrs. Clark 4309-4310
Anglo-American Coalition 4203
Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance 4201
Antarctic 4147
Anti-Comintern Pact (November 1936) 4201-4202
Anti-Japanese Policy 4217
Anti-Nazi Literature Committee 4258
Araki, General 4148
Arens, Mrs 4041^042
Arima, Count 4149
Arneman, Lt. Col. George E 4125
Arctic 4147
Artist, Rev. Edgar R 4115
Arvin, Newton 4258
Ashton-Gwatkin (C. M. G.) F. ("P. J." per name) 4122
Asia 4047, 4165, 4267, 4273, 4280
Asiaticus. {See Mueller, Moeller, Shippe.)
Associated Farmers in California 4113
Atherton, Frank C 4125-4126, 4146
Atkinson, Brooks 4330-4331
Atlantic Charter 4164
Auriea, Juan Mariveilli Vid 4081
Austern, Miss Hilda (Mrs. Nat Bretholtz) 4044, 4053-4054, 4076,
4086, 4092^094, 4097, 4105-4106, 4108-4109, 4131, 4134, 4143, 4241.
Australia 4070, 4080, 4112
Austria 4204
Authors' League 4258
INDEX ni
Pag8
AVCO International Corp 4079
Aversa, Ray 4117
Axis-Japan Alliance 4203
Baehman, Paul S 4125-^126
Bachraeh, Marion 4136
Bacon, Dr. Charles S 4258
Baker, Newton D 4054, 4070-4071, 4086-4087, 4100, 4108, 4130, 4135
Baldwin, Bene 4174
Baldwin, Roger 4115, 4142, 4170-4171, 4174
Ball, Maj. William 4046
Ballantine, Joseph 4324
Bancroft, Frank C 4285
Bank of Japan 4148
Barach, Mrs. Edmond 4136
Barber, Jr., Joseph 4108
Barcelona, Spain 4£'35
Bai-nes, Harry Elmer 4091, 4145
Barnes, Joseph F 4035, 4126, 4130
Barnes, Kathleen 4043, 4086-
4087, 4090-4091, 4094, 4096-4097, 4108, 4135, 4144-4145, 4208-4209
Barnett, E. E 4107
Barnett, Robert W 4075, 4226-4228
Barnett, Mrs. Robert W 4075
Barr, Captain 4046
Barret, Miss Edith 4275
Barrett, Colonel David 4220
Barrett, Miss Mary 4328-4.329
Batavia 4111
Battle Hymn of China 4305
Beard, Mr 4110
Beatty, Bessie 4258
Becker, Maurice 4258
Belgium 4113, 4349
Bentley, Elizabeth 4322
Berezhovsky, Mrs. Alice. (See Mrs. Alice Widener.)
Berger, Mrs. Victor L. (Berger, Meta) 4116, 4142, 4258
Berkeley Public Library 4090
Berlin, Germany 4136, 4200, 4203, 42.34
Berlin-Rome Axis , 4202
Bernal, J. D 4089
Berne, Lewis Alan 4115
Berridge, William A 4119
Bess, Demaree 4135
Biddle, George 4115
Bieberman, Herbert 4038, 4050-4051, 4063, 4066
Binder, Carroll 4140
Bingham, Woodbridge 4226
Birch, Francis 4089
Birk, Louis P 4258
Bisson, T. A 4085-4086, 4089, 4092, 4158-4159, 4288, 4339
Blackwell, Alice Stone 4258
Blake, Katherine Devereaux 4258
Blakeslee, Mr 4127
Blair House 4291, 4293
Blitzstein, Marc 4258
Block, Anita 4258
Blumenthal, Annette 4086, 4108,4118
Board of Economic Warfare 4161,
4226-4228, 4236, 4238-4241, 4245-4246, 4252, 4254, 4279, 4281
Boas, Prof. Franz 4115, 4136
Bodansky, Aaron 4091, 4145
Boddy, Manchester 4136-4137
Bodian, Clara 4142
88348— 52— pt. 12 22
J7 INDEX
Pase
Bogdanov, Peter A 40^
Book and Magazine Guild ) ^j^^^
Borovoy, Mrs J^J^
Borg. Dorothy 41U2
Bosch, John H ^^^^
Boston Globe ^!r^^
Boston University A?Zn~AQnAJAQ(^
Boudiu, Louis B 4089, 4304-4306
Boudin, Gliclistein, and Cohen 4^w
Bowen, Sterling jf^°
Bowie, Mrs. W. Russell ^uq
Bowman, Isiah Jiao
Bowman, LeRoy ^14^
Boyer, Richard 4^^»
Brady, Robert A 4^»»
Brand, Millen 425S
Brandes, Mr 4J^4
Brameld, Theodore B 4U»y
Brannan, Eleanor D 414^
Brant, Miss Phoebe 4275
Branting, Hajalmar ---^ 4234
Branting, Sonya ^oro
Breines, Simon 4^58
Bremen Affair 4235
Bretholtz, Nat 40o3
Rretholtz, Mrs. Nat. (See Hilda Austern.)
Brewster, Dorothy 4089, 4258
Bridges, Harry 4121
Briffault, Robert 4258
Briggs, Marion 4053, 4140
Bright, John 4136
British and American Policy in the Far East 4203, 4211
British Army Intelligence Service 4087, 4131
British Communist Party 4316-4317,4353
British Government 4128
British Labor Party 4317
British Policy in the Far East 4214, 4216
Bromberg, J. E 4258
Bronson, George — 4271
Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers of America, Dis-
trict Council No. 9 4116
Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen 4116
Browder, Earl 4084,
4110, 4142, 4170, 4172-4175, 4177, 4179-4180, 4182, 4237, 4238
Brown, Delmar M 4160
Bryan, Helen R 4117
Bryn Mawr College 4258, 5260
Buck, Pearl 4245, 4301
Buck, Peter H 4125-4126
Budenz, Louis 4078,4167, 4195
Buell, Dr. Raymond Leslie 4130, 4239, 4245
Bunche, Ralph J 4089
Bund in Shanghai 4320
Burden, Bill 4063, 4066-4067
Burden, Shirley 4063, 4066-4067
Rurdick, Usher L 4115
Burdick, Virginia 4091, 4144-4145
Burgum, Edwin Berry 4089,4117,4258
Burke, Fielding 4258
Burke, Kenneth 4089
Buss, Claude 4225-4226
Butkovich, John D 4115
Butler, Maj. Gen. Smedley D 4169
INDEX V
O Page
Caballero, Mr 4234
Cabinet Advisory Council (Japanese) 4147
Cadden, Joseph 4115
Caldwell, Oliver 4143
Callott, M. S 4091
Cambridge University 4089,4322
Campbell, Dorothy 4328-4329
Canada 4004, 4070, 4099, 4118
Canada Institute of International Affairs 4064,4099
Canadian Friends of the Chinese People 4065, 4273
Canadian Historical Review 4150
Canton, China 4046, 4111
Carlson, Captain 4125
Carnegie Corporation 4160
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 4107,4326,4331
Carr, E. H. (John Keith) 4122
Carr-Saunders, A. M 4349
Carroll, Esther 4272-4273, 4277
Carter, Bill 4208-4210
Carter, Edward C 4043-4046,
4050, 4052-4053, 4065, 4067-4069, 4074-4076, 4086-4087, 4092-4100,
4104-4106, 410&-4109, 4111, 4121-il22, 4125-4120, 4129-1131, 4136,
4140, 4145-4146, 4161, 4188, 4208-4209, 4239, 4241-4242, 4244^-4246,
4255, 4263-4264, 4314.
Carter, Elmer 4142
Case of the Anti-Soviet Trotsk'yite Center 4145
Case, Everett 40S7, 4127
Caspary, Vera 4258
Cavert, Mrs. Samuel McCrea 4138
Central Bank of China 4320
Central China 4131-4133, 4226, 4228
Central Committee of the Communist Party 4336
Century Association 4047
Century Club 4044
Chamberlain, John 4117
Chamberlain, Dr. Joseph P 4037,4054,4243
Chamberlain, Neville 4204, 4264
Chamberlain, Mrs. Sellah 4080
Chambers, Maria Cristina 4258
Chambers, Robert 42.58
Chambers, Whittaker 4322
Chan, Hansu. (See Chi, Ch'ao-ting.)
Chang, Gen. Chun 4150-4151
Chang, Ch'un-kawagoe 4213-4214
Changkufeng Incident (July to August 1938) 4132
Chang, Hsueh-liang 4272
Chahar Province (China) 4151
Chapman, Abraham 4078
Chapman, Royal N 4126
Chappel, Winifred 4170-4171, 4175
Chase, Mr 4335
Chatham House (London) 4108, 4122
Chelyuskin (film) 4042
Chen, Han-seng 4057,
4059, 4060, 4069, 409-5-4096, 4141, 4146, 4149-4150, 4231, 4339
Chen, Jack__ 4274, 4276-4278
Cheng, Chung Book Shop 4283
Chevalier, Haakon 4258
Chi, Dr. Ch'ao-ting 4065, 4067-4068, 4092, 4095-4097,
4104, 4141, 4143, 4179-4180, 4182, 4238, 4352, 4261, 4278, 4319, 4320
Chi Hung-chang's army 4213
Chi, Dr. Tao Heng 4318
Chiang Kai-shek 4059-
4060, 4103, 4147, 4149, 4151, 4169, 4215, 4271-4272, 4278, 4283-
4284, 4287-4288, 4298, 4302, 4340.
VI INDEX
Page
Chiang, Gen. Tso-pin 4150
Chien, Tuan-sheng 418(S
Chin-Doihara Agreement 4151
China 4035,
4047, 4053, 4068^069, 4071, 4076, 4077, 4090, 4092, 4095, 4102-
4103, 4106, 4110-4111, 4115, 4118, 4121-4123, 4133-4134, 4139-
4141, 4147, 4149, 4169, 4178, 4184, 4202, 4215-4217, 4219-4220,
4222-4223, 4228, 4232, 4269, 4271-4273, 4276, 4278, 4282, 4285-
4286, 4298, 4300-^301, 4303, 4312, 4321, 4329, 4330, 4333, 4335,
4352-4353.
China Aid Council 4079, 4138, 4300, 4318, 4328, 4337
China Monthly 4307
China Today 4085, 4104, 4166, 4169, 4171, 4174, 4179-
4182, 4187, 4189, 4203, 4237, 426^4271, 4273, 4274, 4276, 4307, 4352
Chinese 4058-4061, 406&-
4070, 4096, 4102-4104, 4138, 4182, 4214, 4215, 4216, 4218-4220, 4231
Chinese Association of Labor 4302,4303
Chinese Benevolent Association 4138
Chinese Communist 4103, 4120, 4150, 4216-4218, 4222, 4231, 4283, 4286, 4287
Chinese Communist Army 4059-4061, 4103, 4215, 4218, 4222, 4282, 4286
Chinese Communist Government 4207,4313^314,4323,4333
Chinese Communist Group at Yenan 4231
Chinese Communist Movement 4103,4104
Chinese Communist Party 4022,4283,4285,4333-4334
Chinese Communist Party Policy 4110
Chinese Industrial Cooperatives (INDUSCO) 4329
Chinese Laundrymen's Association 4079
Chinese Nationalist Army 4103,4170,4205,4222
Chinese Nationalist Government 4022, 4058,
4069, 4071, 4150-^152. 4207, 4214, 4222, 4285-4287, 4298, 4302, 4323
Chinese Revolution,- 4136, 4169, 4216, 4352
Chinese Soviets 4103, 4120, 4169, 4352
Chinese Youth Delegation 4137^1.39
Cholmeley, Elsie Fairfax 4308, 4317^318
Christian Student Movement House 4124
Christy, Mr 4107
Chu, Sueh-fan 4302
Chu, Te (Chu, Teh) 4022,4218,4338
Chu, Tong 4036-4037, 4297
Chun, T'ien 4301-4302
Chungking 4022, 4205, 4283,, 4285
Church, Col. Gerald L 4047,4072-4073
Church League for Industrial Democracy 4115-4116
Churchman (publication), the 4116,4118
City College of New York 4156,4259
Civil Service Commission (United mates) 4045,416^-4165,4246,4253
Civilian Personnel Division 4073
Clark, Lady Sclywyn 4337
Clark, Tom 4163-4164, 4297
Clans, Mr 4234, 4236
Cleaners, Dyers and Truck Drivers Union 4116
Cleeve, Miss 4122
Cliveden Set 4098
Cooperative Unity Alliance 4116
Club Valhalla 4182
Clurman, Harold 4091, 4145, 4258
Clyde, Mrs. Ethel 4091,4145
Coates, Robert M 4258
Cochran, William F 4115
Cohen, Mrs. J. X 4117
Cohen, Lester 4258
Cohen, Rabbi Samuel M 4115
Coffee, John M 4115
Colegrove, Kenneth 4124
Colgate University 4259
INDEX vn
Page
College de France, Paris 4089'
Collier's Weekly 4258
Colman, Louis 4136
Columbia University 4037,
4089^099, 4107, 4116-4117, 4119, 4227-4228, 4245, 4258-4259, 4260
Comintern (see Communist International) 4287
Committee Against Tom Clark, the 4163-4164
Committee for Cultural Freedom 4257
Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy 4080, 4083,
4162-4164, 4183, 4282, 4296-4300, 4308, 4317-4319, 4323, 4337, 4339 :
Communists 4061,
4103-4104, 4154-4157, 4166-4167, 4170, 4172, 4174-4175, 4177, 4179-
4185, 4187, 4207, 4211-4212, 4214, 4215, 4218, 4220, 4221^222, 4232-\
4234, 4303-4304, 4307, 4313, 4317, 4319-4322, 4329, 4335, 4338, 4350- ,
4354.
Communist Book Shop 4302
Communist China 4180, 4220, 4282, 4287f
Communist International 4234, 4341, 4352
Communist Manifesto 4335'
Communist Party 4069, 4073. 4153-4154, 4157-4158,
4162, 4172, 4174, 4177-4181, 4183, 4209, 4213-4217, 4220-4221, 4238,
4293-4294, 4296-4297, 4299-4302, 4306, 4318, 4327, 4336, 4352-4354
Communist Party (Chuman) 4081
Communist Party in Germany 4243,4233
Communist Party in Japan 4183, 4272, 4280
Communist Party (New York State) 4297
Communist Party (Sunnyside) 4081
Comstock, Miss Ada 4044,4092,4093,4105-4106,4108-4209,4134,4143
Congress for Industrial Organization 4274
Congress for Peace and Democracy 4274
Connor, E. C 4064
Conliffe, Mr 4226
Consadine, Mr 4275
Constitution of Japan 4185
Cooper, John 4064
Cooijer, Marion 4064, 4067
Corbett, Charles 4206, 4208, 4210
Corbett, Percy E 4208
Costigan, Howard 4115
Coughlin, Father 4110
Conuell of International Affairs -4151
Ceuncil on African Affairs 4327,4328
Council on Foreign Relations 4047,4093,4097,4104
Counts, George S 4091,4145,4170-4171,4175
Cowley, Malcolm 4117, 4170-4171, 4175, 4179, 4182
Council for Pan-American Democracy 4125,4136
Craigie-Arita "Formula" of July 24 4201
Crane, Dr. Robert T 4086, 4119, 4120
Crawford, David L 4125-4126
Cressey, George B 4258
Crichton, Kyle 4258
Criminal Law of the U. S. S. R 4145
Cristanzi, Mr 4155
Croatian Fraternal Union of America 4115
Cromwell, Doris Duke 4092
Crosl3ie, Paul 4142
Crosby, Alexander L 4152 i
Cross, Judge Anna 4234
Cunard White Star Co 4049
Curran, Joseph 4136
Currie, Lauchlin 4048, 4073-4074, 4330
Curtis, Lt. Col. E. P 4073
Cutler, Addison T 4089
Czaristic regime (Russia) 4060, 4120
Czechoslovakia 4134, 4204f
Vm INDEX
J) Page
"Dagbladet" (publication) 4236
Dahlbers, Edward 4170-4171, 4176
Daily Worker 4116, 4147, 4173, 4180, 4280-4281, 4316, 4331
Daladier 4204
Dauilin, Sergei 4040, 4042
Davis, Jerome 4115
Davis, John P 4116
Dawes Plan 4037
Dean, A. L 4125-4126
Dean, Mrs. Vera Miclieles 4091,4145
DeFord, Miriam Allen 4258
de Goispechea 4235
de Kruif, Paul 4115,4258
de Naucrede, Editb 4170-4171, 4176
Department of Labor (U. S. Government) 4320,4323
Deputy Chief of Government Section 4184
Dennery, Etienne 4021
Dennett, Raymond 4122, 4124, 4255
Dennis, Eugene 4080
Dewey, Ethel L 4170-4171, 4176
Dewey. John 4091, 4145, 4171
Di Donato, Pietro 4258
Dickinson, John 4119
Dies, Mr 4244
Dies Committee 4239-4242, 4244, 4246
Diet (Japanese) 4092, 4166, 4263
Dilemma in Japan.^ 4311
Dillingham, W. F 4125-4126
Dimitroff, Georgi 4341
Dimitrov, Mr 4236
Dobb, Maurice 4089
Dobrer, Ruth 4117
Dodd, Mr 424^-4244
Dodd, William F., Jr 4258
Dodge, Stanley D 4258
Domei News Agency 4022,4121
Doolittle, Major 4169
Dooman, Eugene 4310, 4323-4326, 4348
Dorsey, Lieutenant 4169
Doubleday-Doran & Co 4047, 4070, 4135
Douglas, Prof. Dorothy 4258
Douglas, Melvyn 4062, 4066, 4116
Draper, Muriel 4258
Draper, Theodore 4086, 4093-4096, 4261
DreLser, Theodore 4116, 4170,4171,4176
Drucker, David 4076
Drucker, Mrs. Esther 4076
Duggan, Lawrence 4036, 4086, 4108
Duggan, Dr. Stephen 4107
DuPont, Mr 4127
Dunbar, Barrington 4115
Dunn, L. C 4258
Duranty, Mr 4090-4091
Durbrow, Mr. Elbridge 4341-4342, 4348
Duskis, Miss Nettie 4086,4089
Dutch East Indies 4205
Dutt, R. Palme 4270
B
Earle Committee 4075
East Asia, New Order in__- 4202
East Asiatic Studies (University of California) 4160
Eastern Baptist Association of New York 4116
Economic China 4108
Economic Handbook of the Pacific Area 4047, 4068, 4070, 4122, 4135
INDEX EK
Page
Economic Mission to Far East 4046-4047
Economic Survey of the Pacific Area 4047
Eddy, Harriet G 4258
Editorial Committee of the Atlas 4146
Efron. David 4136
Eighth Route Army 4058,
4060-4061, 4122, 4149, 4169, 4285-4286, 4288
Einzig, Paul 4271
Eliot, Maj. George Fielding 4125
Elmhirst Fund 4142
Eltenton, Dolly 4078, 4339
Eltenton, George C 4078
Embree, Edwin 4092
Emperor Hiroshia 4147-4149, 4184
Engels, Morris 4117, 4335
England 4060, 4134, 4136
Epstein, Israel 4082, 4306, 4308, 4317-4318, 4353-4354
Ernst, Mr 4234
Ethiopian Fiasco 4204
Etter, Willis R 4329
Eurasian 4203
Europe 4103, 4105, 4135, 4200-4201, 4216, 4267
European Theatre of the War of 1914-1918 4147
European War 4104-4105, 4204
Evans, Dr. Roger F 4245
Eyes on Japan 4120
F
Fairbank, John K 4107, 4206, 4330
Fairbank, Wilma (Mrs. John K.) 4188,4206,4330
Fairbanks, Douglas 4063, 4066
Fairchild, Henry Pratt 4116, 4258
Fanelli, Joseph A 4152, 4159, 4187, 4189, 4195
Far East 4046
^4047, 4055, 4070, 4092-4099, 4103-4106, 4114, 4120, 4122-4125, 4128,
4139, 4140, 4201, 4202, 4204, 4207, 4216-4218, 4225, 4255, 4261, 4273,
4276, 4312, 4323, 4324, 4325, 4331, 4351.
Far Eastern Commission 4325
Far East Spotlight 416.3-4166
Far Eastern Affairs 4021, 4202
Far Eastern Policy 4202, 4205
Far Eastern Survey 4047,
4096, 4098, 4103, 4107, 4114, 4128, 4135, 4140, 4144-4146, 4265, 4279,
4282, 4283.
Farley, Miriam S 4086, 4097, 4108, 4124, 4225, 4226-4229, 4263, 4264
Farmer, Miss Frances 4275
Farrar, Mr 4020
Fascist 4069-4070, 4115, 4118, 4203, 4204, 4214^^216, 4256-4257
Faymonville, Col. Philip R 4078
Fearing, Kenneth 4258
Federal Bureau of Investigation 4045, 4137, 4261, 4316, 4333
Federal Communications Commission 4244, 4327
Federal Writers Project 4275
Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists, and Technicians 4116
Federation of Women's Clubs 4276
Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America 4116
Federated Press 4152
Feingold, Abraham 4117
Feis, Mr 4108
Feng. General 4151
Feval, Mr 4091
Field, Edith (Mrs. Frederick V. Field) 4136, 4149
Field, Elizabeth 4108
Field, Alice Withrow 4258
X INDEX
Page
Field, Frederick V 403^-4152,
4ir,S, 4167, 4173, 4179-4180, 4182, 4208-4209, 4211, 4234, 4236-4287,
4238, 4261, 4316^317.
Field, Mrs. Frederick V 4041
Field. Sara Bard 4258
Field, Jr., William O 4091,4145,4258
Fifth National Congress (ALPD) 4115
Fight, the (publication) 4118
Fineman, Irving 4258
Finland 4261
Finlev, Moses ( oZso Mose Finkelsteiu) 4152-4158
Fish, Mr 4244
Fischer, Louis 4091
Fischer, Marjorie 4259
Fislier, Dorothy Canfield 4116
Fisher, Galen M 4105-4106
Fisher, Gerald W 4125
Fisher, H. H 4225,4255
Flaxer, Abram 4116
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy 4291, 4326, 4349
Flores, Angel 4259
Fly, James Lawrence 4304, 4327-4328
Foley, Martha 4117
Food Research Institute 4099
Forbes, Cameron 4046
Ford, Guy S 4119
Ford Foundation 4153
Foreign Policy Association 4093,4102,4111,
4130, 4161, 4167, 4217, 4223, 4226, 4236-4237, 4258, 4267, 4271, 4280
Forman, Harrison 4301
Formosa 4053, 4112, 4113, 4281
Fornwall, H. C 4127
Forsyth, Margaret 4116, 4142, 4277
Fortas, Abe 4195
Foundations of Leninism 4335
France 4069, 4103, 4133-4134, 4136, 4202, 4216, 4264, 4319
Franco 4216
Frank, Nelson 4327
Frank, Waldo 4170, 4171, 4176, 4259
Frazier, E. Franklin 4089
Free Synagogue Women 4275
Freeman, David 4117
Freeman, Joseph 4170-4171, 4176
French, Beals E. L 4170-4171, 4176
French Friends of the Chinese People 4273
French, Myrtle M 4170-4171, 4176
French Indochina 4098
Friedman, Mrs. Julian 4334
Friedon, Jesse 4304-4305
Fritchman, Rev. Stephen 4299
Fujlhara, Ginjiro 4267-4268
Fuller, Miss Helen 4315
Gag, Wanda 4259
Gallup poll 4202
Cannes, Harry 4058, 4079, 4147
Gannett, Lewis _— 4091, 4145
Garland P'und 4143
Garramone, Michael 4136
Garriga, Miguel 4116
Garside, Dr. B. A 4141
Gayn, Mark 4332
Geiger, Ted 4155
INDEX XI
Page
Gellert, Hugo 4136, 4259
Gellhorn, Mrs. Kitty 4078,4139
Gellhorn, Walter 4078
George, Harrison 4084
George, Lloyd 4264
Gerlach, Talitha 4319
German-Japanese Alliance 4151
Germanv 4037, 4058, 4084, 4098, 4106, 4113, 4129, 4134, 4137, 4140, 4201,-
4203, 4205, 4214, 4216, 4232, 4234, 4235, 4240, 4261, 4266, 4269, 4271
Gessner, Robert 4259
Ghidoni, Albert 4116
Gibbs, Mr 4053-4054
Gleason, Mary H 4170-4171, 4176
Godo, Admiral 4275
Goebbels, Mr 4136
Goh, Baron 4148
Gold, Mike -. 4170-4171, 4173, 4176
Golden, Ben 4136
Goldman, Mrs. Olive Remington 4351
Goldstein, Dr. Sidney 4275
Goodrich, Dr. L. Carrington 4245
Goodsell, Willystine 4116, 4259
Government Section in Tokyo 4185, 4224, 4230
Goslin, Alexander Ryllis 4271
Graduate History Society (Columbia University) 4153
Graham, Katherine 4170-4171, 4176
Grajdanzev, Andrew 4208, 4210, 4255, 4281
Granich, Grace 4080
Granich, Max 4158, 4173, 4174
Granna, Eleanor 4117
Graves, Mortimer 4091, 4107, 4145, 4259
Graves, Gen. William S 4090, 4091, 4145
Gray. Dr. John H 4259
Great Britain 4103, 4140, 4202,
4264, 4269, 4276, 4278, 4284, 4316, 4334
Green, H. L. Co 4275
Green, Jerome 4037, 4147
Greenberg, Michael 4161, 4188, 4338
Greene, Roger 4147
Grew, Amba.ssador Joseph C 40.56-4057, 4292, 4324
Gromov, Michael 4040, 4042
Cropper, William 4259
Guadalcanal 4266
Guam 4053
Guggenheim Fellowship 40S6, 4095, 4096
Guggenheim Foundation 4095, 4261
Guggenheimer, Mrs. J. C 4277
Gulick, Sidney L 4271
Gyles, R. M 4170-4171,4176
Haaser, Stephen G 4088,4196
Hadley, Eleanor 4263
Haessler, Carl 4152
Hague Rules of War, the 4228
Hali^erin, Maurice 4259
Hainan 4112-4113
Hammett, Dashiell 42.59
Hamilton House (Shanghai) 4328
Han Fu, Chang 4080
Hangchow, China 4047, 4133, 4169
Hankow, China 4059-4060, 4131-4132, 4284
Hansen, Alvin H 4119
Hanson, Earl P 42.59
Xn INDEX
Page
Hanson, Haldore 4020
Hamvell, Norman 4093
Hara, Yoshimichi 4267
Harap, Louis 4089
Harju, Rudolph 4116
Harlem Peace League 4275
Harman, Francis S 4109,4143
Harper, Prof. Samuel N 4091,4259
Harpers Magazine 4287
Harris, Rev. Thomas L 4259
Harrison, Peyton 4125
Harrison, Shelby M 4119
Hartman, L. O 4116
Harvard Club 4047
Harvard University 4046, 4096, 4107, 4119, 4259-4260, 4263, 4294, 4328, 4337
Hata, Gen. Shunroku 4202
Hathway, Clarence 4116, 4142
Hauser, Ernest 4093-4094
Hawks, Capt. Frank 4169
Hayashi, Group (Japan) 4092
Hayes, Max S 4142,4234
Hazard, John N 4155
Heald, Brian 4117
Hearn, Lawrence 4085
Heminway, Ernest 4141, 4259
Henderson, Donald 4116, 4142
Hendley, Charles J 4259
Hicks, Granville 4089, 4170-4171, 4176, 4259
Himes, Prof. Norman E 4259
Hindus, Maurice 4091
Hiranuma, Baron Kijchiro 4267
Hiranuma Cabinet (Japanese 1939) 4202,4267,4268
Hirose, Hisatada 4268
Hirota, Koki 4151, 4267, 4272
Hirota Principles 4151
Hirsch, Alcan 4091, 4145
Hiss, Alger 4323, 4326, 4331
History of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union 4336
History of the Development of Chinese Society 4352
Hitler, Adolph 4106, 4200, 4203, 4232-4233, 4235-4236, 4264-4265
Hitler-Stalin Pact 4188, 4261
Ho-Umetsu Compromise Agreement 4213
Hodgekinson, Miss Sarah 4299
Hoffman, Alexander 4116
Hogben, Lancelot 4089
Holland (Europe) 4113
Holland, William L 4034,4052.4103,4109,4110,4122,4160-4161,4188.
4193-4196, 4198-4200, 4208, 4221-4231, 4241, 4262, 4263, 4307, 4349
Hollywood Anti-Nazi League 4062, 4066
Hollywood Groups (Left-wing) 4063-4064,4066
Holman, Helen 4274, 4277
Holmes, Eugene C 4089
Hom, Q. Pan 4037
Hong Kong 4046, 4053, 4060, 4069, 4129, 4149-4150, 4201-4202, 4307, 4337
Honig Charlotte 4078, 4080, 4081, 4083-4084
Honolulu, Hawaii 4047, 4124-4126, 4129
Hoover Research Library 4225-4255
Hopei 4103
Hopkins, Johns (Institute) 4091
Ilornheck, Ambassador Stanley K 4129, 4280
Horner, John 4334, 4353-4354
Hotel and Restaurant Employees International Alliance 4il6
Hotel Richmond, Geneva, Switzerland 4120
IIoughton-Mifflin Co 4107
Ilo-Umetsu Understanding 4151
INDEX XIII
Page
House Appropriations Committee 4239, 4244-4245
House of Peers (Japan) 4184
House of Representatives (Japan) 4184
House Un-American Activities Committee 4238
Howie, Miss 4075
Hsia, Dr. C. L 4283
Hsuchow, China 4060-4061
Hsu, Sluihsi 4150-4152
Hsu, Y. Y 4080-4081, 4083, 4312-4313, 4334-4335
Hu, Dr. Shili 4022, 4147, 4242
Huangpu Clique 4216
Huberman, Leo 4089, 4259
Hughes, Langston 4259
Hughes, Nancy C 4108
Hull (Secretary of State), Cordell 4201-4202
Humane Endeavour 4120
Hume, Miss Joy 4137, 4143
Hunter College 4089, 4259
Hurley, Gen. Patrick 4323, 4331
Hyman, Albert 4117
I
Ikeda, Seihin 4148
Hies, Agatha 4259
Imes, Wm. Llyod (Rev.) 4116-4117
Imperial College of Science, London 4089
India 4123,4270
Indo-China 4098, 4205
Inner Asia 4S04
Inner Mongolia 4150, 4226, 4228
Inparel 4087, 4105, 4106, 4108, 4111, 4113, 4121
Institute of Genetics (Moscow) 4089
Institute of Pacific Relations 4033,4035,4038-4039,4042.4044-4046,
4048-4052, 4054-4057, 4059, 4062-4063, 4065, 4007, 4070, 4074-4073,
4078, 4081, 4083^085, 4088, 4091-4098, 4097-^101, 4105-4106, 4108-
4109, 4111, 4114, 4119-4120, 4122-4127, 4129-4131, 4134, 4136, 4138,
4140-4141, 4143, 4145-4147, 4149, 4158, 4160-4161, 4190, 4195, 4199,
4206, 4208, 4210-4211, 4223-4231, 4236, 4239, 4242-4246, 4252, 4261-
4262, 4278-4280, 4292, 4294-4293, 4306-4307, 4313-4314, 4339, 4349
Institute of Pacific Relations (American Council) 4034,
4044, 4043, 4056-^057, 4065, 4067. 4074, 4087, 4092-4094, 4096, 4099,
4100, 4104-4109, 4111^112, 4114, 4124-4127, 4130, 4134-4135, 4141,
4143, 4145. 4225-422C, 4253, 4262-4263, 4265, 4287, 4352.
Institute of Pacific Relations (Central Secretariat) 4100,4102
Institute of Pacific. Relations (Conference, Atlantic City) 4123
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Banff, 1933) 4046,4099,4102
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Hangchow-Shanghai, 1931) 4135
Institute of Pacific Relation (Conference, Hot Springs, American Delega-
tion) 4123, 4291. 4294-4296, 4313, 4319, 4339
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Kyoto, 1929) 4035, 4046
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Mont Tremblant, Quebec,
December 1942) 4099
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Princeton) 4242
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Schofield) 4125
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Shanghai, 1931) 4046, 4101
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Virginia Beach, 1939) 4046,
4077, 4099, 4100
Institute of Pacific Relations (Conference, Yosemite, 1936) 4046,
4121, 4127, 4230
Institute of Pacific Relations (executive committee) 4106, 4111,
4125, 4126, 4130-4131, 4135-4136, 4145
Institute of Pacific Relations (Hawaii Group) 4125-4126
Institute of Pacific Relations (Inquiry Series) 4270
Institute of Pacific Relations (International Secretariat) 4068, 4095,
4131, 4135, 4150, 4270
XIV INDEX
Page
Institute of Pacific Relations (Japanese Council) 4102, 4229-4231, 4263-4264
Institute of Pacmc Relations (Pacific Council) 4099, 4101,
4121, 4135, 4137, 4143
Institute of Pacific Relations Library 4146
Institute of Pacific Relations (San Francisco Branch) 4093, 4105-4106, 4226
Institute of Pacific Relations (Secretary-General) 4130, 4147,
4149, 4224-4226, 4230-4231
Institute of Pacific Relations (Soviet Council) 4035, 4047, 4146
Inter-Continent News 4284
International Committee on African Affairs 4116
International Conference for the Boycott of Japanese Goods 4276
International Industrial Relations Institute 4260
International Institute of Social Research 4107
International Labor Defense 4275
International Labor Office 4108
International I'ress Correspondence 4234. 4236
International Release Committee 4234, 4253-4254
International Relief Commission 4071
International Research Program 4224, 4231
International Research Fund 4224
"International Security" 4100
International Union of Mine, Mill, and Smelter Workers of America 4116
I. W. O. Women 4275
Isaacs, Harold 4103-4104, 4136
Ishii, Viscount 4271
Ishimoto, Baroness 4184
Ishiwata, Sataro -- 4268
Isserman, A. J 4136
Ivens, Joris 4141
Italian Action Party 4283
Italy 4058, 4201, 4203, 4214
Jack, Josephine 4170-4171, 4176
Jackson, Rev. Otis G 4259
Jaffe, Philip J. (see J. W. Philip) 4058,
4065, 4171-4173, 4176-4177, 4213. 4218, 4278, 4299, 4314, 4316-4317
Jaffe, Sam 42m
Jakob. Berthold 4236
Japan 4037,
4046-4047, 4053, 4057-4058, 4061, 4069. 4071-4073, 4076, 4090, 4096,
4098. 4101^104, 4106, 4108-4109, 4112-4114,4123-4124, 4129, 4131-
4132. 4134-4135, 4147, 4149, 4151, 4160. 4161, 4166, 4183, 4200,
4201-4202. 4214-4216, 4218-4219. 4223-4226, 4229. 4231, 4240, 4270^
4276, 4285-4286, 4311, 4:^13, 4332-4333.
Japan Advertiser 4134
"Japan in China" (book) 4089,4218
"Japan Picks Up the Pieces" (publication) 4188,4200
Japanese-American Commercial Treaty 4201
Japanese-American Trade Treaty 4202
Japanese-American war in the Pacific 4205
Japanese Army 4022, 4131-4133, 4265
Japanese Army Yangtzpoo Clearing Hospital 4133
Japanese-Chinese Relations 4219
Japanese Government 4184
Japanese Navy 4112-4113, 4133, 4265
Japanese-Occupied Southeast Asia 4226
Japan Prepares for Peace Offensive 4265
Jenkinson, Anthony 4077, 4100, 4336
Jessup Philip C 4044,
4051-4053, 4074, 4087, 4092, 4097, 4099, 4l00, 4109, 4121-4123,
4131, 4134-4135, 4143, 4227-4228.
Jewish Joint Distribution Board 4260
Jiyu Gakuin School (Tokyo) 4263
INDEX XV
Page
Johns Hopkins University 4104, 4111, 4119, 4136, 4294, 4296, 4331, 4389
Johns, Orrick 4170-4171, 4176, 4259
Johnson, Nelson T 4056-4057
Johnston, Reginald 4271
Johnstone, Anne 4129
Johnstone, Wm. C 4087, 4122^124
Joint Report of Chinese Journalists 4060
Jones, E. Stanley 4116
Jorgenson, Miss 4075
Josephson, Matthew 4259
Jouhaux 4234
Judd, Charles H 4119
K
Kades, Charles L. (Colonel) 4184
Kaji, Ryuiche 4351
Kaji, Wataru 4184
Kalvar, Mrs. Robert 4277
Kamehameha School 4126
Kang, Chen Chia 4080
Kantorovitch 4108,
Kato, Kanju 4143, 4184
Kauffman, G«orge , 4259
Kaufman, Milton 4117
Kaun, Prof. Alexander 4259
Kawagoo 4151
Kawai, Dr 1 4127
Kawai, Mrs 4127
Kayser 42.34,4236
Keeney, Philip O 41(55^166, 4182-4183
Kelly, Fred C 4259
Kelly & Walsh, Ltd 4150
Kent, Rockwell 4116, 4259
Kerner 4226
Kerr Committee 4239-4246
Kerr, Mrs. Isadora W 4277
Kerr, John H. (Hon.) 4244-4245
Kiaotsi 4061
Kido, Marquis Koichi 4267
Kilpatrick, William (Professor) 4037
Kingsbury, Dr. John A 4091, 4145, 4259
Kinkead, Beatrice 4259
Kirstein. Lincoln E 4259
Kishi, Shinsuke 4268
Kiukiang 4132-4133
Kiukiang Army Hospital 4133
Kizer, Benjamin H 4044, 4092, 4109, 4134, 4143, 4330
Knight, Frank H 4119
Kobe, Japan 4134
Kober, Arthur 4259
Kodama, Count Hideo 4268
Kohler, Foy D 4350,43.51
Koike ( Atsimosuke) 4263
Koiso Cabinet (Japan) 4266,4267,4268
Koiso, General 4268, 4269
Kolar, Mrs. Julia Church 4275,4277
Komorowski, Conrad 4274, 4277
Konoye Cabinet 4092
Konoye, Prince Fumimore 4267
Korea 4053, 4129, 4148, 4207, 4217, 4226, 4269, 4272, 4281
Kreymboi'g, Alfred 4259
Krivitsky 4136
Kubota, Miko 4273, 4277
Kung, Dr. H. H 4320
XVI INDEX
Page
Kuomintang 4022, 4121-4122, 4214, 4272, 4282^288, 4298
Killing 4151
Kwangtung 4131
Kwantung Army 4134, 4267
Kweichow 4068
Kyoto Imperial University 4263
Kyushu (Nagaski region) 4149
Labarca, Carlos Contreros 4080
Labor in Nationalist China, 1945-48 4306
Lachatanere, Romolo 4136
Lacld. Milton 4316
Ladijinsky, Wolf 4263
Lamb, Edward 4259
Lamont, Corliss 4036, 4089, 4105, 4170-4171, 4259
Lamont, Margaret L 4259
Lamont, Thomas 4280
Lancaster, William W 4091, 4155
Land, Clayton 4034
Lang, Olga 4231
Langevin, Paul 4089
Laiikes, J. J 4259
Larkin, Oliver 4089
Lash, Joseph 4073, 4116
Lasker, Bruno 4075, 4102, 4129
Laski, Prof 4261
Lasser, David 4116
Latin America 4118
Latin-American Republic 4070
Latourette, Kenneth S 4108
Lattimore, Owen 4048,
4059, 4068, 4082, 40S6-40S7, 4100, 4103-4104, 4106, 4109-4111,
4123-4124, 4136, 4150, 4161, 4195, 4206, 4208, 4210, 4212^213,
421S-4219, 42(>4-4265, 4270, 4280, 4296, 4301-4304, 4331, 4353
Lawson, John Howard 4259
Leaf, Earl H 4087, 4131
League of American Writers 4116
League of Nations 4055, 4077, 4204
League of Women Shoppers 4116, 4139, 4275
Leaning, W. J__ 4208-4210
Lee, Sbao-chang 4125-4126
Leebuck 4127
Leffingwell, Russell , 4054-4055
Left Wing Communism and Infantile Disorder 4335
Leland Stanford University 4099, 4119, 4225-4226, 4258
Lengyel, Emil 4259
I^nin 4110-1111, 4257, 4335
Lerman, Louis 4157
Lerner, James 4142
Lerner, Prof. Max 4116,4259
Lescaze, William 4091, 4145
LeSeuer, Meridel 4259
Levin, Betty 4299-4300, 4304-4306, 4308, 4327
Levin, Meyer 4259
Levy, H 4089
Leyda, Jay 4259
Li, Choh-ming 4141
Li, Tsung-jen (Gen) 4061
Libby, Fred 4129
Library of International Relations 4062, 4066
Licorich, Rev. David 4117
Lightbody, Prof. Charles W 4259
Lillenthal, Philip E 4263
Lin, J. H 4277
INDEX XVII
Page
Lindsay, Michael 4336-4337
Littell, Robert 4091, 4145
Little Era in Old Russia 4091
Litvinov, Maxim 4043, 4135, 4204
Liu, Chieh 4323
Liu, Yu-wan 4087, 4108, 4121
Living Age 4147
Living Buddha 4149
Lobanov 4091
Lobenstine 4107
Locliwood, William W 4058, 4075, 4086,
4093-4094, 4096-4097, 4107, 4129-4131, 4208-4209, 4226, 4228, 4263
Loeb, Julius 4272, 4277
London 4047, 4049, 4098, 4108, 4124, 4128, 4136, 4201, 4204, 4286, 4307-4308
London School of Economics 4348
Loomis, Charles F 4086, 4099, 4100, 4125-4127, 4145
Lopez, Francisco 4235
Lopez, Marina 4136
Loring, Marcella : 4276
Los Angeles Daily News . 4136
Lovett, Robert Morss 4073, 4089
4117, 4142, 4170-4171, 4176, 4259, 4277
Lowe, C. H 4127
Loyang ( China ) 4213
Luan River (China) 4151
Luccock, Prof. Halford E 4259
Luce, Miss Claire 4275
Luce, Henry E 4140
Lui, Yu-wen 4068
Lukouchiao Incident (July 7, 1937) 4131
Lumpkin, Miss Grace 4275
Lumkin, Katherine DuPre 4259
Lund, Thora 4170-4171, 4176
Luzon, P. Islands 4046
Lydall, L. A 4271
Lyde 4146
Lyon, Lewis 4299
Lynd, Robert S 4075
M
MacArthur, Gen. Douglas 4182,4223,4224
MacDonald, Jeannette 4127
MacLeish, Archibald 4078
MacMahon Aline 4259
MacMillan Co 4166, 4270, 4278
Machida, Chuji 4148, 4268
Macy's 4275
Maddalena 4234
Madison, Joan 4186
Midrid ( Spain) 4235, 4236
Madvar, L 4352
Maeda, Yonezo 4148. 4268
Malaya 4098
Males, William 4117
Mallery, Helen 4277
Malraux, Andre 4301
Manchuria 4047,
4053, 4055, 4071, 4129, 4205, 4216-4217, 4226, 4267, 4269, 4281, 4285
Mandated Islands 4112
Mandel, William 4155
Mangold, William P 4142
Manila 4125
Mann, Klaus 4259
Mann, Thomas - 4257
Mao, Tse-tung 4212^213, 4270, 4334
XVm INDEX
Page
Marblu•.L,^ Anita 4259
Marcantonio, Vito 4117
March, Frederick 4062-4064, 4066
Mariana Islands f^bS
Marsliall, Dr. George 4136, 42.09
Marshall. Gen. George C 4340
Mar.shall Library (Cambridge) -1089
.Alartial Spirit, The 4109
Martin, Charles E 4104
Marx 4335
Marxian Quarterly 4089
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 4089, 4260
Masso, John 4142
Mather, Kirtley F 4116
Mathiessen, Prof. F. O 4259
Matsui, Miss 4273
Matsukata, Saburo 4101, 4229-4230, 4263
Matsuo 4230,4262-4263
Matsuoka 1 4148
Matsuzaka, Hiromasa 4268
Maxwell, B. W 4351
]May, Stacy 4107
McAvoy, Clifford T - 4136, 4259
IMcCall, Professor 4277
McCann, Coward 4120
McConnell, Dorothy 4142
McConnell, Francis J 4116
McCoy, Frank 4054, 4055, 4236
McCulloch, Rhoda E 4116
McCune, George 4226
McCune, Shannon 4199
McGill, Prof. V. J 4089,4259
McGregor, Prof. Robert 4259
Mclnerny, Katherine 4116
McKenuev, Ruth 4259
McLaughlin, Mrs. Alfred 4090,4093,4105-4106
McLauiiiilin, Arthur J 4117
McNutt, Waldo 4142
Medical Bureau for Spain (Women's Division) 4275
Meiji Era (Japan) 4151
Merriam, Charles E 4119
Merrill, Lewis 4116
Meserole, Darwin J 4260
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co 4119
Metropolitan Police Board, Tokio 4134
Mexico 4089-4070
Mexican Friends of the Chinese People 4273
Meyer, Ernest L 4152
Middle East 4331
Midkilf. Frank E 4125-4126
IMidway Island 4236
Miller, Prof. Herbert A 4260
Miller, May 4297
Millis, Walter 4109
Mills, Saul 4081
Milner, Lucilo B 4234
Minobe, Tatsukichi 4184
]Mitsui 4148
Mlns, H. F., Jr 4089
Minseito 4148
Mierendorff 4234
Mirsky, Jacob 4117.4142
Mitchel, Kate L 4096, 4100, 4109, 42b4
Mitchell, Broadus 4089
Mitchell, Wesley C 4119
INDEX XIX
Page
Mitsubishi 4148
Modem Age Books, Inc 4258
Moe 4095
Molotov 4043
Mongolia 4100, 4150, 4152, 4202
Monroe Doctrine 4070
Monthly Labor Review 4320
Mood, Fulmer 4089
Moore, Harriet L 4090-4091, 4145, 4188, 4208-4209, 4351
Morgan, A 4270
Morgan, J. P 4055, 4105
Morgenthau, Henry 4056
Mori, Iga 4125-^126
Morrish, William F 4093
Moscow 4035, 4042, 4049, 4108, 4120, 4151, 4208, 42^, 4286
Moscow Trials 4105, 4144, 4145
Moss, Malcolm W 4045-4046
Motion Picture Artists Committee 4066
Motion Picture Democratic Committee 4062-4063, 4066
Motvlev, V. E 4020-4021,4146
Mountbatten, Earl 4331
Movement Against War and Fascism (New Zealand) 4235
Mov, Eugene 4037
Muhle 4208, 4209
Muller, H. J 4089
Munich Agreement 4115, 4201
Murphy, Gardner 4119
Mussolini, Benito 4106, 4204
Musler, Morris 4116
N
Nagano, Mr 4270
Nagasaki (Japan) 4112
Nankai ( China ) 4108
Nanking (China ) 4047.
4138, 4150-4151, 4169, 4213, 4215, 4217, 4220, 4271, 4273. 4322
Nash, Prof. J 4277
Nasu 4231
Nation, the 4260, 4275
National Committee to Win the Peace 4328
National Council of American Soviet Friendship 4328
National Council of Jewish Women 4304, 4.327
National Council for the Prevention of War 4127
National Diet (Japan) 4185
National Farm Holiday Association 4116
National Hosiery Manufacturers Association 4275
National Lamp Shade Manufacturers Association 4275
National Negro Congress ; '__ 4116
National Peace Conference 4103
National Public Housing Conference 42.58
National United Front 4022
Nazi 4205, 4235-42.57
Nazi, Congress at Nurenberg 420')
Needham, Joseph 4089
Neibuhr, Reinhold 4116
Neilson, William Allen 4091, 4145
Netherlands Indies 4098. 4104, 4113-4114, 4267
Neu-Koelln 4236
Neutrality Act 4115, 4128, 4202, 4203
New China Dailv News 4036-4037, 4079
New Fourth Route Army 4284-4286, 4333
New Masses 4069-4071. 4098-4094, 4179-4182, 4238, 4281
New Republic 4259, 4815
New School for Social Research 4273
New Statesman and Natimi 4264
88348 — .52 — pt. 12 2.S
XX INDEX
Page
New York Ameiican 4234
New York Journal-American 4350
New York Post 4234
New York State Consumers League 4115
New York Times 4235,4280,4286,4330-4331
New York Tribune 4234
New York University 4089, 4116, 4258-4260
New York World-Telegram 4299, 4326-4327
New Yorker, the 4258
New Zealand 4235
Newsholme 4091
Newpaper Guild (New York) 4260
Neymann, Mr 4042
Neymann, Mrs 4042
Nichols, Roy F 4119
Nigata 4149,
Nine Power Treaty 4148
Ninomiya, Lt. Gen. Harushige 4268
Nomura, Admiral Naokumi 4265
Norman, E. Herbert 4064-4066, 4154, 4225, 4229, 4231
Normandie (steamship) 4275
North American Trade Consultants 4079
North China 4058, 4131-4132, 4201, 4214, 4218, 4226, 4228
North China Language School 4092
North China Problem, the 4150
North Honau 4131
North Pacific 4124
North Pole 4042
Northern Shensi Province *4022
Norwegian News Agency 4236
Norway 4113,4236
Nuremberg Congress 4201
O
Oak, Liston M 4142
Oakie, John H 4086,4093,4105-4106,4111
O'Connor, Harvey : 4260
Odate, Shigeo 4268
Odegard, Professor 4160
Odets, Clifford 4260
Office of Foreign Relief and Rehabilitation Operations 4099
Ogata, Taketora 4268
Ogburn, William F 4119
Ohara Institute of Social Research 4263
Ohtani, Count 4149
Okada, Admiral Keisuke 4267
Okano, Susumo 4183-4184, 4272-4273
Okura, • Baron ^ 4275
Olympic Games (Germany) 4234
Oregon Commonwealth Federation 4260
Ornitz, Samuel 4116
Osaka, Japan 4134, 4148
Osaka Mainichi (Publication) 4134
Osborn, Fred 4054-4055
Osborne, Herman P 4136
Osgood 4067
O'Sheel, Shaemus 4260
Oshima, Lt. Gen. Hiroshi 4202
Oslo, Norway 4236
Ossietzky 4234
Osumi, Admiral 4201
Otis, Brooks 4089
Ottosen, Colonel 4104
Ouchi, Professor (Hyoe) 4263
Oumansky, Constantine (Mr.) 4043-4044
Oumansky, C. (Mrs.) 4040
Outer Mongolia 4118, 4202
INDEX XXI
Outer Mongolian People's Republic 4120
"Outline for A Proposed Study of Chinese Political Unification and Eco-
nomic Reconstruction," 1931-38 4068
Outlook, the 4150
Ovington, Mary White 4260
P
Pacific Affairs 4047, 4089, 4102-4104, 4109-
4111, 4124-4125, 4135, 4147, 4150, 4161, 4184, 4188, 4264, 4271, 4278
Pacific Club 4127
Pacific Digest (Publication) 4141
Paddock, Robert L. (Bishop) 4116
Page, Charles 4063, 4066
Pai, Chung-hsi 4141
Paine, Mrs. Frances Flynn 4145
Pakhoi, China 4U46
Palembang 4114
Palmquist, Elim A, (Rev.) 4116
Paochia 4061-4062
Paoting 4103
Paotingfee, China 4047
Parker, Philo W 4086, 4109, 4114, 4135, 4143
Parkins, Helen, Miss 4137-4138
Paris, France 4201
Paschal, Marion 4092
Paskoff, Benjamin 4157
Pass, Joseph 4142
Patterson (Secretary of War) 4097
Patterson, Samuel C 4142
Pavon, Benito 4235
Peake 4226-4228
Pearl Harbor , 4112, 4266
Peffer, Nathaniel 4086, 4089, 4102, 4107, 4134
Peiping, China (Peking) 4047,
4057, 4102, 4141, 4218, 4220, 4227, 4307, 4335, 4206, 4212
Peiping Normal University. {See Shih Ta.)'
Peiping Student Union 4215
Penseler, Herr 4235
Peoples Government 4070
People's Livelihood, The 4110
Peoples Revolutionary Army 4149
People's World (Publication) 4137
Perkins 4252
Perelman, S. J 4260
Peters, Dr. John P 4260
Philbrick, Herbert 4299
Philip, Cyril 4117
Philippine Friends of the Chinese People 4273
Philippine Masses 4070
Phillips, John 4069, 4071
Phillips, J. W 4170-4173,4176
Phillips, Herbert J 4089
"Photo History" (publication) 4145
Pichkova, Olena 4350
Pickford, Mary 4127
Pierson, Dr. Emily M 4260
Pittman, Key (Senator) 4128
Pladjos, (N. Indies) 4114
Piatt. Phillip S 4125-4126
Plopkin 4044
PM newspaper 4315
Poffenberger, A. T 4119
Polakov, Walter N 4260
Poland 4113, 4136, 4261, 4264-4265
"Politics in Tokyo" 4121
Pollard, John A*. 4086,4097-4098
Pomfert, John E 4119
Pope, Arthur Upham 4075
XXII INDEX
Page
Pope, James P 4116
Popper, Martin 4081
Porter, Prof. Alan 4260
Porter, Catherine 4075, 4086, 4093, 4096, 4100, 4104, 4106, 4108, 4122, 4241
Porter, .Mrs. (Jeorge F 4091, 4145
Porua, Enrique 4235
Powell, Jr., Kev. A. Clayton 4117
Power, Cynthia 4107
Powers. Eileen 4037
Power, Sir John 4107
Pratt, George D. Jr 4260
Pravda (Russian newspaper) 4020
Prentis, Albert 4117
Preston, John Hyde — 4260
Price, Harry 4104
Price, Mildred (Coy) 4079, 4318-4319, 4321-4322, 4337
Princeton University 4053
Problems of the Pacific 4100
Progressive Women's Council 4275
Propaganda and War — 4102
Prosin, V. F 4039
Prospects for Democracy in Japan 4165-4166
Public Affairs Committee 4047, 4102, 4190, 4194, 4198
Puskin, Alexander 4091, 4144
Putnam, Samuel 4136, 4260
Q
Queen Mary (steamship) 4049
Quick, Percy 4277
Quigley, Harold 4225, 4229, 4231
Quigley, Herb 4263
R
Racial Mvth, the — ^ 4351
Radek, Karl — 4352
Radin, Prof. Paul 4260, 4351
Radius, Walter 4093, 4094
Railway, Chinese Eastern 4037
Railway, Trans-Siberian 4037, 4046, 4135
Rajchmann, Ludwig 4077, 4129
Ramsey, David 4089
Ramspeck, Robert 4246
Randolph. Jeanette 4108
Rathborne, Mervyn 4116
Rautenstrauch, Prof. Walter 4260
Read, Aithur 4131
Realpolitik — ___, i 4124
Recht, Charles 4136
Reconstructionist — 4115
Red Star Over China 4082
Redfield, Robert 4119
Reed, College 4259
Reed, John 4090
U.'t'd, Marie 4139
Reich ( ( Jcrniany) 4136
Reid. Paul M 4142
Reis, Bernard 4260
Reisclmuer, Mr 412.-), 420(5
Keissig. Herman F 4117. 4142
Ueiiwan/.. Lt. Col. Rowland H - 4()72
lleiMirts Russia 4090
Ke(iua, Eldise 40(!2. 4(M)(i
Research Bulletin on the Soviet Union 414.->
Resolution on the Chinese Question Passed by the Sixth Plenum of the
Enlarged Executive Committee of the Communist Internatiofial 4352
INDEX XXIII
Page
Retail Store Employees 4275
Reustle, Rev. Frederick 4117
Revolutionary INlilitary Council 4213
Revolutionary Movement in the Colonies and Semi-Colonies 4336, 4352
Reynolds, Bertha C 4260
Rhoads, Charles, Jr 4044, 4092-4093, 4105-4106, 4108, 4134
Rice, Elmer 4117
Riggs, Lynn 4260
Rinehart i 4120
Robins, Raymond 4091, 4145
Robinson, Ceroid T 4091,4145
Robinson, Reid 4116
Rochester, Mrs. Anna 4275
Rockefeller, John D., Jr 4105,4276
Rockefeller Foundation 4065, 4093-4095, 4103, 4107, 4119, 4160, 4217, 4244
Rodgers, Manvil 4277
Roeder, Ralph 4260
Rogers, Mr. Lind.say 4119,4274
Rogov, Vladimir 4284, 4286
Rollins, William, Jr 4260
Roman, Agnes 4103
Rome, Harold J 4260
Rome (Italy) 4201,4203
Romm, Vladimir 4047, 4050
Roosevelt, Franklin D 4071,4128,4137,4340
Roosevelt, Theodore, Jr 4138
Root, Elihu 4100
Rosen, Dr. Joseph A 4260
Rosenwald Fund 4092
Rosinger, Lawrence K 4093, 4155, 4279
Rosinski, Herbert 4124
Rostovsky 4091
Roth, Andrew 4155, 4311-4314, 4316, 4332-4333
Rothchild, John 4091, 4145
Rothman, Mr 4277
Rowell, Chester 4021
Royal Institute of International Affairs (England) 4047,4064
Rubin, Ruth 4277
Rukeyser, Miss Muriel 4275
Rumania , 4350
Rushmore, Howard 4349, 4350
Russell 4135
Russell, Maud 4163-4164
Russell Sage Foundation 4119
Russia 4090-4091,
4120, 4122, 4132, 4137, 4144, 4146, 4202, 4257-4258, 4264-4265, 4287
Russia and Asia 4091
Russian-China Pact 4189
Russian Embassy (Tokyo) 4020
Russia and the Soviet Union in the Far East 4091, 4120
Russian War Relief 4097
Rutgers University 4152
S
Safarov, Mr 4352
Saionji, Kinichi 4229-4230, 4263
Saipan Island 4265
Saito, Takao 4184
Salisbury, Lawrence E 4263
Samoa 4053
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce 4207, 4208
San Francisco World Affairs Council 4226
Sansom 4224
Sarah Lawrence College 4259
XXrV INDEX
Page
Sassoon 4228
Saturday Evening Post 4135
Savarin 419{>-4200
Scalapino, Robert A 4160
Schachner, A. E 4273
Scherer, Marcel 4037-4038
Schlauch, Prof. Margaret 4089, 4117, 4260
Schlesinger, Arthur M ' 4119
Schoen, Eugene 4260
School for Democracy 4156-4157
School of Economics and Political Science (London) 4046
Schneider, Isidor 43 70-4171, 4177
Schneiderman, Anna C - 4117
Schneller, Oscar 4117
Schrachner, Eugene 4277
Schuman, Prof. Frederick L 4243-4244, 4260
Science and Society 4089
Scott 4067
Scott, Byron N 4116
Scudder, Prof. Vida D 4260
Seeker & Warburg (publishers, London) 4136
"Security in the Pacific" 4100
Seiyukai (Japanese Political Party) 4148
Seldes, George 4260
Sellin, Thorsten 4119
Sen, Henry 4152
Service, John S 4313-4314,4322
Seville, Spain 4235
Seychelles Islands (British possession) 4337
Seymour, Whitney 4091, 4145
Sforza, Count 4283
Shanghai, China 4035, 4047, 4058, 4077, 4103, 4108, 4131^132-
4150, 4201, 4271, 4273, 4285, 4298, 4318, 4320, 4322, 4328-4330, 4338
Shanghai Muncipal Council 4202
•Shanghai Truce, 1932 4151
Shankaikwan (China) 4151
Shansi Province, China 4103,4122,4131
Shantung, China 4060-4061, 4103, 4131
Shaokwan, China 4169
Sharp (Colonel), Frederick D 404.5,4073
Sheean, Vincent 4260
Shensi Province, China 4122, 4213
Shepard, Oscar F 4125-4126
Sherbourne, Maj. Everett 4262
Shibusavva, Keizo 4263
Shidehara Cabinet (Japan) 4263
t^higemitshu 4135
Shigemitsu, Mamoru — Ambassador to London (Japanese) 4202,4267,4268
Shiraada, Admiral Sliigetaro 4265,4237
Shimada, Toshio 4268
Shiman, Russell G 4103,4108,4130
Shipler, Guy Emery (Rev.) 4116,4118
Shippe ( Asiaticus) 4038, 4110
Shiratori, Toshio — Japanese Ambassador in Rome 4202
Shively, Donald 4160
VSholokhov 4091
Shore, Maurice 4110
Shore, Viola Brothers 4116, 4260
Shotwell, James T ^ 4037
Shumlin, Herman 4260
Sian 4213-4214,4272
Sian Incident 4150-4151, 5215
Sibley, H. Norman (Rev.) 4116
Siegel, Bernard 4304,4327
Sigerist, Dr, Henry 4091
INDEX XXV
Page
Sillen, Samuel 4U89
Silverman, Arthur G 4136
Simmons, Prof. Ernest J 4260
Simonson, Lee 4091, 4117, 4145
Singapore 4053, 4113, 4150, 4205
Sinkiang - 4303
Sino-Japanese War 4056-4057, 4103, 4286
Sister, Marion (Miss) 4062,4066
Situation in China, the 4352
Sixth World Congress of the Comintern 4336,4352
Skariatina, Irina 4091, 4260
Slade, Louis F. (Mrs.) 4108
Slichter, Sumner H 4119
Sloane, Gordon 4117
Smedley, Agnes 4146, 4219-4220, 4271, 4301, 4305, 4306, 4337, 4353-4354
Smith College 4258
Smith, Ferdinand 4136
Smith, Jessica 4256
Smith, Stephenson 4260
Smith, Susan T. (Miss) 4086,4090,4091
Smith, Readwell 4136
Snow, Edgar 4082, 4110, 4136, 4212, 4218, 4301, 4339
Snow, Edgar (Mrs.) (Nym Wales) 4218,4339
Social Interpretation of History, the 4110
Social Science Research Council 4118, 4120
Social Work Today 4258
Socialists Student Clubs 4236
Soga, Yasutaro 4125-4126
Sokolsky, George E __ 4125
Solution in Asia 4082, 4302
Sondergaard, Hester 4260, 4275
Soong, T. V 4077
Sorge, Richard 4319
Sorkin, Isidore 4117
Soule, Isobel Walker 4260,4275
South China 4132, 4218
South Manchurian Railway 4132
Southeast Asia 4098, 4104-4105, 4228, 4267
Southern Negro Youth Congress 4116
Southwestern Political Council (Chinese) 4151
Soviet Administration of Criminal Law 4091
Soviet Atlas 4146
Soviet China 4071
Soviet Communism 4351
Soviet Embassy (Washington) 4038,4040
Soviet-German Non-aggression Pact 4187, 4201
Soviet-Japanese Pact 4211
Soviet-Japanese Pact in Historical Perspective, the 4189, 4203, 4211
Soviet Journey 4091
Soviet Russia-- 4039-4040, 4043, 4060, 4071, 4091, 4105, 4122, 4134, 4146, 4257, 4276
Soviet Russia Today 4079, 4189, 4256, 4261
Soviet State, the 4351
Soviet Union 4037, 4039, 4090, 4105-4106, 4109, 4129, 4134-4136,
4144, 4201-4204, 4214-4216, 4256-4258, 4261, 4272, 4284, 4349, 4351
Soviet Union in World Problems 4091
Soviets in World Affaii's 4091
Spain 4069, 4115, 4216, 4235, 4273
Spanish Earth (motion picture) 4141
Spanish Legal Commission of Inquiry 4235
Speer, Robert K., Prof 4117
Spencer, Frederick (see also T. A. Bisson, Frederick V. Field) 4085,
4167, 4170^171, 4173, 4177, 4269, 4270
Spivack, Robert G 4116
Spofford, Wm. B. (Rev.) 4116, 4142
Spotlight on the Far East 4281, 4283, 4298
XXVI INDEX
Page
Spread of the Soviet Movement in Cliina 4104
Sproul. Robert Gordon 4093, 4105-4106, 4109, 4126, 4143
Spykman, Nicholas J 4107
St. Lawrence University 4259
Stachel, Jack 4237
Staley 4226
Stalin, Joseph 4043, 4063, 4066, 4105-4106, 4136-4137, 4335, 4350, 4352
Standard Oil 4114
Stander, Lionel 4260
Stanley, Jean 4276
State, County and Municipal Workers of America 4116
State Department 4069,
4086, 4099, 4108, 4118, 4169, 4207, 4223, 4263, 4289, 4291, 4293-4296,
4301-4302, 4311-4316, 4319, 4321, 4323-4326, 4329, 4332-4334, 4336,
4340-4343, 4347-4351.
State Department (Area Committee) 4323, 4325
State Department (Division of Chinese Affairs) 4290, 4303, 4321, 4325
State Department (Division of International Labor, Health, and Social
Affairs) 4289, 4321, 4325
State Department (Division of Labor Relations) 4289
State Department (Foreign Service Auxliary) 4290, 4294, 4342-4343, 4348
State Department (Mission at the United Nations) 4299
State Department (Office of the Assistant Adviser on International Eco-
nomic Affairs) 4289
State Department (Office of Far Eastern Affairs, Division of Chinese
Affairs) 4292
State Department (Protocol Division) 4291-4293
State and Revolution 4335
State, War, and Navy Coordinating Committee (SWNCC) 4263,4324-4326
Stead, Christina 4260
Steffens, Lincoln 4142
Steig, A. E 4260
Stein, Gunther 4301, 4318-4319, 4332, 4334, 4351
Stein, Mrs. Gunther 4314
Steinhart, Jesse 4105-4106
Steinmetz, Harry C 4089
StekoU, Harry 4090
Stern, Alfred K 4260
Stern, Dr. Bernhard J 4089,4260
Stewart, Dean Robert 4326,4349
Stewart, Donald Ogden 4116,4260
Stewart, John 4063, 4066
Stewart, Mrs. Marguerite A 4124,4268
Stewart, Maxwell S 4102,
4170-4171, 4173, 4177, 4189-4199, 4260, 4272, 4275, 4277
Stilwell, Gen. Joseph 4330,4331
Stimson (Colonel) 4054,4055
Stolley, Herman 4117
Stone, Marc 4152, 4244
Strand, Paul ' 4260
Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan 4161, 4184
Strong, Anna Louise 4338
Strong, Edward K 4116
Struik, Prof. Dirk J 4089,4260
Stuart, J. Leighton 4141
Sturgeon 4108-4109
Suekawa, Prof. (Hiroshi) 4263
Sue.s, Ilona Ralph 4301-4302,4313
Suetsugu (Admiral) 4148
Sugiyama (General) 4267
Suiyuan Invasion 4151
Sumitoma 4148
Sun, Fo 4283
Sun, Yat Sen 4110-4111,4271,4352
INDEX XXVII
Page
Sun, Yat-senism 4110-4111
Sun, Yat-Sen versus Communism 4110
Supreme Command of the Allied Powers (General Headquarters,
Tokyo) 4162, 4166, 4185, 4230-4231
SiUtsuki__i 4148
Suzuki, Bunji 4274
Swedish Prime Minister 4234
Sweezy, Paul M 4089
Swing, Raymond Gram 4075,4286
Switzerland __ 4200,4319
Syracuse University 4258
Szechwan 4061,4068
T
Taggart, Miss Genevieve 4089,4275
Taiehrchuang 4061, 4131
Taiheiyo Mondai Chosakai (Pacific Problems Research Institute) 4264
Takaki 4127, 4261
Takano, Dr. Twasaburo 4263
Takayarogi 4264
Tanaka Cabinet 4148
Tangku (China) 4132, 4134
Tangku Truce 4151
Tani, Masayuk 4266
Tannenbaum, Gerald 4328-4329
Tao, Heng-chi 4277
Tarr, E. J 4087, 4121
Tasker, Robert 4260
Tass 4284
Taylor, C. Fayette 4260
Taylor, George 4124
Taylor, Graham R 4091, 4145
Taylor, Margaret R 4062,4066,4086,4092,4097
Teachers' Union of the City of New York 4259
Teh, Prince 4152
Teigan, Henry G 4116
Ten Days That Shook the World 4090
Tennent, Hugh C - 4125-4126
Terauchi, General 4201
Terrill, Katherine 4117, 4170-4171, 4178
Thaelmann, Ernst 4232-4236
Thailand 4098
Theatre Arts Committee 4275
Theoretical Analysis of Chinese History 4352
Third Reich 4235
Thomas, Norman 4234
Thompson, Virginia 4135
Thompson, Rev. John B 4053
Thorner, Daniel 4153
Thornton, Ernest 4080
Three People's Principles 4111, 4122
Thurber, James 4260
Tientsin (China) 4047, 4134, 4151, 4201-4202
Tientsin-Pukow War Front 4059-4060
Tilney, Frederick 4091, 4145
Timbres, Rebecca Janney 4260
Times Atlas in English 4146
Time magazine 4038
Ting, Leonard G 4108
Tippy, Worth M 4116
Togawa, Daikichiro 4184
Togo, Shigenori 4266
Tojo 4265-4268
Tojo Cabinet 4266
Tokugawa, Lieutenant General 4134
xxvin mDEX
Page
Tokyo 4108, 4134, 4147, 4150, 4182-4185, 4200-4201, 4224-4225, 4262
Tokyo Imperial (Public Finance Japan) 4263
Tokyo Imperial University 4127
Toledano, Vincent Lombard 4078
Tolokonski, Mrs 4041-4042
Toniiking (China) 4046
Totten, Ashley P 4117
Tovarich 4091
Tozzer, Alfred M 4119
Trade Union Service Association 4079
Tredwell, Dr. F 4260
Troiano, Rose 4116
Trone, S. A 4091,4145
Trotsky, Leon 4104, 4110, 4216
Troyanovsky, Mrs 4041
Truman, President Harry S 4280
Tsa-chuang 4060
Tsienpu 4061
Tsinan 4061
Tsingtao (China) 4132
Tsuro 4096
Tu, Yueh-sen 4302
Tung, Pi-wu 4080, 4083, 4231-4232, 4323
Tuttle, Frank 4116
Twentieth Century Association 4299
U
Ugaki, General 4148
Uhl, Alex 4315
UUman, Mr 4314
Uniezu, Gen. Yoshijiro 4265,4267
Unfinished Revolution in China 4082
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U. S. R. R.) 4040-
4041, 4043, 4070-4071, 4100, 4134, 4203, 4257, 4283
United American Artists 4116
United Automobile Workers (West Side Local) 4152
United Cannery, Agriculture, Packing and Allied Workers of America 4116
United China Relif 4318
United Council for Civilian Relief 4138
United Furniture Workers of America 4116
United Nations 4231, 4286, 4316-4317, 4321, 4323, 4326, 4339
United Nations Atomic Commission 4055
United Nations Commission 4351
United Nations (Conference in San Franci.sco) 4232,4290
United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF)_ 4349-4351
United Nations (International Secretariat) 4290-4291,4294
United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA)__ 4099, 4330
United Office and I'rofessional Workers of America 4116, 4143, 4275
United Office and Professional Workers of America, CIO (Social Service
Employees Union I>ocal 19) 4300,4327
United Press (UP) 4284
United States of America 4083, 4094,
4098, 4105, 4109, 4113, 4118, 4120, 4128, 4131, 4134-4135, 4137-4141,
4158, 41G9, 4183, 4202, 4207, 4231-4232, 4234, 4242, 4258, 4288, 4264,
4269, 4271, 4284, 4298, 4300, 4308, 4823. 4332, 4334, 4337, 4353, 4354
United States Army 4035-4036, 4045, 4064, 4072, 4074-4075, 41S5
United States Army Air Force 4045,4073
United States Army Intelligence (G-2)___ 4045-4046,4064,4072-4073,4125,4184
United States Attorney General 4162^164,4166,4187,4244
United States Congress 4072, 4076, 4098, 4113, 4128-4129, 4241, 4290
United States Government 4056-4057,
4069-4070, 4164, 4290-4291, 4311-4312, 4326, 4348
United States gunboats 4118
United States House of Representatives (Special Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities) 4187
INDEX xxrx
Page
United States International Student Service 4116
United States, Justice Department of 4244
United States Marine Corps 4169
United States Navy 4113,4311,4313
United States Navy Intelligence (Office of Navallntelligence) (ONI)— 4073,4127
United States Strategic Bombing Survey (Japan) 4161,4182
United States Treasury Department (Internal Revenue) 4048,4049,4069
United States Senate 4116,4109,4244
United States Senate (Foreign Relations Committee) 4316
United States Supreme Court 4128
United States, War Department 4071-4073, 4185
United States and the World Court, the 4100
University of Aberdeen 4089
University of California 4159, 4160, 4225, 4226, 4258-4260, 4289, 4339
University of Chicago 4047, 4119, 4135, 4259
University of Hawaii 4093
University of London 4037,4296
University of Michigan 4258
University of Minnesota 4093, 4119
University of Pennsylvania 4119
University Settlement Mothers Clubs 4275
University of Washington 4104
Untermeyer, Jean Starr 4260
Untermeyer, Louis 4260
Utley, Freda 4060, 4124
Valencia (Spain) 4235
Valtin 4136
Van Kirk, Walter 4107
Van Kleecli, Mary 4091,4145,4260
Van Veen, Stuyvesant 4260
Vanderbilt 4127
Vassar College 4260
Vincent, John Carter 4279-42S0,
4291, 4293, 4303, 4313-^314, 4324-4326, 4339-4340, 4343
Vaughan, David D 4116
Vixman, Mrs. A. H 4116
Vladivostok 4037
Voice of America 4349-4351
Voice of China 4037
Voitinsky, G. N 4352
Von Koerber, Lenka 4351
Von Plettenberg, Count 4233
Von Seckt, General 4061
Von Trott, Adam 4077,4083-4084
W
Wakatsuki, Baron Reijiro 4267
Wales, Nym. {See Mrs. Edgar Snow.)
Walker, Miss 4093
Walking Wounded Collecting Centre 4133
Wallace, Henry A 4252
Walsh, J. Raymond 4260
Walsh, Dr. William Henry 4260
Walton, Miss Eda Lou 4275
Walworth, Mr 4107
Walsh, Richard J 4245
Wanamakers' 4275
Wang, Dr. C. H 4150-4151
War and the Working Class 4284
Ward, Harry F 4116, 4118, 4142-4143, 4170-4171, 4178, 4260
Ward. Mrs. Harry F 4127
Ward, Lynd 4260
XXX INDEX
Page
Wardwell, Allen 4091, 4143
Wartime Politics in Cliina 4279
VVasliington Comnionwealtli Federation 4115
Watson, Dr. Goodwin 4116, 4243-4244
Watson, Morris 4260
Watson-Schuman-Dodd Case 4244
Watts, Richard, Jr 4091,4145
Weatherwax, Clara 4260
Webb, Sidney and Beatrice 4351
Webber, Charles C 4142
Weber, Max 4260
Webster, Professor 4037
Weisner, Louis 4089
Welch, Clifford 4117
Welleslev College 4260
Wendt, Dr. Gerald 4261
Wertheim, Maurice 4091, 4145
Western Europe 4136
Western Union telegram 4067, 4100, 4141
Whitaker, Rev. Robert 4261
White House 4073-4074, 4098
White Paper 4340
Whitney, A. F 4116
Whitney, Courtney 4185
Who's Who of Pacific Affairs 4122
Widener, Mrs. Alice 4299, 4308-4309, 4310, 4328, 4341, 4344, 4349, 4350-4351
Willnu-, Ray Lyman 4044, 4092-4093, 4105-4106, 4109, 4134, 4140, 4143
Williams, Albert Rhys 4261
Williams College 4259-4260
Williams, Maurice 4110-4111, 4271
Williams, Dr. William Carlos 4261
Willoughby, Maj. Gen. Charles A 4184
Wilson, Edwin B 4119
Winter, Ella 4261
Wiss, Helen 4108
Wise, James Waterman 4142
Wissler, Clark 4119
AVittfogel, Karl August 4096-4097,4106-4107,4147,4153,4155,4278
Woltman, Frederick 4299^300
Womans Press, the 4116
Womens Advertising Guild 4275
Women's Peace Union 4275
WoohVorth 4275
Workers Alliance of America 4116, 4275
Worker's Bookshop 4179, 4181-4182, 4238
Works Progress Administration (WPA) 4259
W. P. A. Teachers Local 4275
World Affairs Council of Northern California 4207
World Education Conference 4126
Worldwide Campaign for Thaelmann, the 4234
World Youth Congress 4138, 4277
Wrenn, Heaton L 4125-4126
Wright, Richard 4261
Wu, Ting-Chang 4151
Y Gasset, E. Ortega 4236
Yakhontoff, Victor A 4086,
4091, 4119-4120, 4144, 4170-4171, 4178-4179, 4182, 4338
Yale University 4259^4260
Yamaislii Securities Co 4263
Yanaibara 4229-1230
Yang, Li-K'uei - 4214
Y,angtze 4132
Yangtze Valley 4133
INDEX XXXI
Page
Yangtze River 4058
Yangtzepao Clearing Hospital 4133
Yarmolinsky, Aorahm 4145
Yarnell, Admiral Harry E 4104, 4111, 4113
Yardumian, Rose 4087, 4122, 4314, 4328-4329, 4334
Yarmolinsky, Avrahm 4091
Yelk, Mr 4352
Yen, Y. C. James 4046
Yenan (China) 4184, 4212, 4217, 4220
Yenanfu (Fushin) _• 4213
Yenehing University 4141, 4215
Yergan, Max ^ 4080, 4116, 4136
Yokota, Prof. (Kisaburo) 4229-4230, 4236
Yonai, Admiral Mitsumasa 4267-4268
Yonai Cabinet (Japan) 4268
Young, Art 4261
Young, Donald 4107, 4119
Young, Judaea . — 4116
Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA) 4138
Young Plan . 4037
Young, Ruth (Mrs.) 4086, 4099
Young, Thomas 4117
Youth Congress at Vassar 4139
Youth Congress in Wisconsin 4143
Yumashev, Andrei 4040, 4042
Yunnan (China) 4046, 4068
Yutsai School 4318
Yzestia Moscow (Newspaper) 4049
Z
Za Industrializaciu (Soviet Newspaper) 4039
Zaibatsu 4166, 4263
Zelitch 4091
Zhulsou 4264
Zimbalist, Mrs. Efrem 4091, 4145
Zions Herald 4116
Zostchenko 4090
Zubillaga, Lius 4235
Zugsmith, Leane . 4261
o
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11