Senator SMITH of New Jersey. Why do we not proceed with the prepared statement? Senator SPARKMAN. That would be my suggestion. That seems to be the more orderly way of doing it. Ambassador JESSUP. May I proceed to go through this rather rapidly, Mr. Chairman? Senator SPARKMAN. Go right ahead. ALLEGATIONS BY ALFRED KOHLBERG Ambassador JESSUP. The current attacks on the Institute of Pacific Relations which assert that the institute output followed the Communist line derive from similar allegations made in 1944 by Alfred Kohlberg, a New York importer with extensive commercial interests in China. On the occasion of the 1944 charges, there was a thorough scrutiny made of the institute's published material. In my judgment. the allegation of Communist bias was false. Mr. Robert Sproul, president of the University of California, then chairman of the board of trustees of the American council; Mr. Robert Calkins, dean of the School of Business of Columbia University and chairman of the council executive committee; and Board Treasurer G. Ellsworth Huggins, member of the New York exporting firm of Catlin, Farrish & Co., concurred in this judgment. On December 19, 1944, we signed a letter stating our view that the American council had properly fulfilled its function to conduct impartial research on important though controversial issues. I shall put that letter in the record, if I may, Mr. Chairman. LETTER TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, DECEMBER 19, 1944 AMERICAN COUNCIL, INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS, INC., To the Board of Trustees: On November 9 Mr. Alfred Kohlberg sent a letter to Mr. Edward C. Carter, secretary-general of the Pacific council of the Institute of Pacific Relations, charging bias in the research of the IPR, and among other things calling for the removal of certain employees in the IPR, and the naming of a responsible body to determine policy. This letter was sent to certain members of and contributors to the American council of the IPR. It was accompanied by an 88-page document of photostated fragments of articles. The charges in this letter were directed against the Institute of Pacific Relations, without identifying any specific council. They were addressed to Mr. Carter, apparently in the erroneous belief that he is an officer of the American council. For this reason the American council takes note of the charges. As one interested in the IPR, you will wish to know the attitude of the organization toward these charges. At its December 11 meeting, the executive committee of the American council reviewed Mr. Kohlberg's charges and demands. It desires to report the following: The executive committee and the responsible officers of the American council find no reason to consider seriously the charge of bias. The character of the personnel associated with the institute, the long history of its research activities, and the demonstrated value of its research testify to the fact that it has properly fulfilled is function to conduct impartial research on important issues even though they are controversial. The committee believes a full presentation and discussion of such issues is desirable, even in wartime. The Institute of Pacific Relations has, and always has had, a responsible body to determine policy. The Pacific council, with which Mr. Corter is asso ciated, is directed by representatives from the national councils and that body, made up of these representatives, determines its policies. The general policy of the American council, which is one of the 10 constituent bodies in the institute, is determined by the board of trustees (membership list attached). The executive committee (membership list attached) acts on behalf of the board of trustees. when the board is not in session. The research conducted by the American council is under the direction of its research advisory committee (membership list attached), to which research planning and policy have been delegated by the executive committee. This committees formulates and approves research programs, and it approves the research personnel who are engaged for their competence to undertake the special assignments required in the research program. Having hired competent research workers, it is not the policy of the committee or of the American council to censor their findings, but to publish them as the research results of the authors themselves. In the postscript of his letter, Mr. Kohlberg indicated that he was broadcasting copies of the letter to Mr. Carter without prior consultation because of his experience with Mr. Carter in Chungking last year, when Mr. Kohlberg preferred charges against one of Mr. Carter's alleged subordinates. In order that this incident may not be misunderstood, the executive committee of the American council desires to point out the following pertinent facts: Mr. Mr. Kohlberg's charges in Chungking were preferred against a representative of United China Relief, who was not connected in any way with the IPR. Carter during his absence from this country had no official connection with UCR and while he with others listened to Mr. Kohlberg's complaint, he naturally declined to concern himself with the question of the discharge of one of the employees of that organization. Later when the charges were addressed to the board of directors of UCR, the board appointed a subcommittee consisting of Mr. James G. Blaine, Mr. Paul G. Hoffman, and Mr. Henry R. Luce to hear Mr. Kohlberg's complaint. (Both Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Luce are members of the board of trustees of the American council.) After a full hearing that subcommittee reported strongly in favor of supporting the representative criticized by Mr. Kohlberg. The report of the subcommittee after further study by the board of directors of UCR was approved by that board, completely exonerating their representative. The officers of the American council would be glad to reply to any inquiries from members of the board of trustees who may desire further information. A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. Kohlberg for his information, and also to various friends of the American council of the institute who are reported to have received copies of his letter to Mr. Carter. Sincerely yours, ROBERT G. SPROUL, Chairman, Board of Trustees. Chairman, Executive Committee. Chairman, Research Advisory Committee. ATTACKS ON IPR IN 1947 Ambassador JESSUP. Despite this finding, the attacks on the institute continued and, in 1947, six members of the institute board of trustees and myself-I was not a trustee but I joined them Senator BREWSTER. How did that happen? Ambassador JESSUP. I was asked to. The question was on what was done over a long period of years and I was glad to associate myself with them again. Despite this finding, the attacks on the institute continued and, in 1947, six members of the institute board of trustees and myself conducted another investigation. The board members participating were: Joseph P. Chamberlain, late professor of public law, Columbia University. Arthur H. Dean, of Sullivan & Cromwell. Walter Dillingham, president of the Oahu Railway & Land Co., Honolulu. W. R. Herod, president, International General Electric Co. This group found the charges false and so stated in a letter, signed by all, which was sent to the members of the American council, and I would like to put that in the record. Senator SPARKMAN. Without objection, it will be included. (The letter referred to appears in the record, as follows:) LETTER TO MEMBERS OF THE IPR, MARCH 17, 1947 AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS, INC., New York 22, N. Y., March 17, 1947. DEAR FELLOW MEMBER: For over 2 years, Mr. Alfred Kohlberg, a former member of the American Institute of Pacific Relations and an importer with substantial business interests in China, has been carrying on a campaign charging the institute with bias in its treatment of the contemporary situation in the Far East, especially in China. In any country as war-torn as China, there may well develop honest differences as to the factors which underlie the current difficulties and, consequently, as to the course which will lead to a solution. Feelings naturally run high. But no reader can draw as severe criticisms of the Kuomintang government from the publications of the IPR as those set forth in General Marshall's report to President Truman. You will note in the enclosure entitled "An Attempt To Stifle IPR Scrutiny of the Chinese Situation" that, as one of the many efforts to meet Mr. Kohlberg's demands, he has been offered the privilege of mailing his accusations on March 20 to the entire membership of the American IPR. In this mailing, we understand, he will ask the members for proxies to be posted direct to him, authorizing him at a members' meeting on April 22 to introduce a resolution appointing a committee to investigate his charges. The executive committee of the board of trustees has investigated Mr. Kohlberg's charges and found them inaccurate and irresponsible. We, the undersigned, have been connected with the IPR over a period of years. We have observed its research and educational program closely and have no hesitation in stating that the charges are false. We believe that you will agree with us that the IPR has an enviable record for unbiased and scholarly research. The enclosed excerpts of letters from recognized experts on the Far East are only some of the many that have been received emphasizing the high regard in which IPR publications are held by scholars. Some of the very publications criticized by Mr. Kohlberg have been highly praised by Army, Navy, and State Department officials in a position to know the facts and were extensively used by the armed services during the war. Indeed, so useful were IPR materials to the war effort that the American IPR was awarded the Navy "E" in 1945. We Please sign the enclosed proxy and return it by quickest mail if you wish to support the present administration of the American IPR under the direction of the recently elected board of trustees, whose names you will find enclosed. hope that you will be present to vote in person. But in any case we urge that you send in your proxy. If you attend in person, your proxy will not be used. Sincerely yours, JOSEPH P. CHAMBERLAIN. WALTER F. DILLINGHAM. BROOKS EMENY. HUNTINGTON GILCHRIST W. R. HEROD. PHILIP C. JESSUP. NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF MEMBERS OF AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS, INC., To be held at its offices, 1 East Fifty-fourth Street, New York City, at 4: 30 p. m. on Tuesday, April 22, 1947 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING Considering a resolution to be proposed by Alfred Kohlberg appointing a committee to investigate certain charges of Alfred Kohlberg, and such other business as may properly come before the meeting. MARGUERITE ANN STEWART, Secretary. (Please cut along this line and sign and return the proxy to the offices of the American Institute of Pacific Relations, Inc., 1 East Fifty-fourth Street, New York 22) PROXY The undersigned member of the American Institute of Pacific Relations, Inc., does hereby constitute and appoint Arthur H. Dean and Joseph P. Chamberlain, or either of them, with full power of substitution, as my duly constituted proxies and attorneys to vote in my behalf against any and all proposals made by Alfred Kohlberg at a meeting of the members on Tuesday, April 22, 1947, or any adjournment thereof, and to vote in favor of sustaining the policies of the board of trustees, with all the power I would possess if personally present, hereby ratifying and confirming all my proxies and attorneys may do in my behalf. (Sign here) Member MCCONAUGHY'S LETTER, MARCH 25, 1947 Ambassador JESSUP. One response to this letter came from James L. McConaughy, Governor of Connecticut, and a member of the board of trustees of the American Council of the IPR between 1943 and 1946. Under date of March 25, 1947, Governor McConaughy supported the position expressed in the letter from the investigating group and declared that he was "convinced of the soundness of the administration of IPR" and had "complete confidence in the unquestioned American loyalty of its administration.” MATERIAL PRODUCED BY IPR Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the question of the IPR and the Communist influence therein must logically be resolved in terms of the material produced by the organization. When I held responsible positions on the American and Pacific councils, the maintenance of scholarly objectivity and impartiality was my duty and my concern. I had no investigatory service at my command and judged by the product. I think the product on the whole was good. I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that that runs through dozens and dozens of volumes of books, and many volumes of pamphlets, as well as periodical publications. It would not surprise me if the Communists recognized the desirability of capturing as a "front" an organization with the standing and the reputation for scholarship that the institute enjoys, and which I venture to say it has enjoyed throughout its years. Neither would it be surprising that the Communists should attempt to infiltrate the staff as a means to that end. Senator SMITH of New Jersey. Do you mean to say that it would not surprise you if they did? Ambassador JESSUP. It would not surprise me if they would try to do that in an organization of this quality and character. Senator SMITH of New Jersey. I am interested in the apparent interest in infiltrating it at a time when they are particularly interested in getting control of the whole Pacific area. This seems to be a coincidence all the way along the line. Ambassador JESSUP. That may have been. However, I am convinced that any impartial study of the institute output will prove that this effort, if it was made, failed completely. I believe that the institute successfully preserved its objectivity under extremely difficult conditions and was able to maintain an operation in which varying opinions on different problems relating to the Pacific area were impartially set forth. In so stating, I am aware that, having had some degree of responsibility for the conduct of the affairs of the Institute of Pacific Relations, I may not be the best judge of its objectivity. I studied my statement here. I was offering a letter from Prof. Harold Fisher of the Hoover War Library, but my recollection is that that has already been read into the record, I think by Senator Fulbright the other day, and to save the time of the committee I will not repeat it. I merely summarize that he says he has used practically all of the IPR publications, and on the basis of their experience I am prepared to say without reservation that I have found no book or publication issued under the auspices of the IPR that follows the Communist Party line or that could be described as presenting the Communist point of view on issues on which there is a distinct and unmistakable Communist position. I believe that represents the position of a sound scholar and the position of other scholars in the field. COMMENTS ON M'CARTHY EXHIBITS I should like to take up specifically certain inaccuracies about my connection with the IPR as they appear in the exhibits submitted to the committee by Senator McCarthy last Thursday. In the first place, the institute is referred to in exhibit No. II on page 13 as "Jessup's organization." The same characterization is repeated in exhibit No. VII on page 19. I think it is already clear from what I have said that neither the American institute nor the Pacific Council of the Institute of Pacific Relations was ever "my organization." Even the most cursory examination of the lists of officers and trustees and member of committees of the two organizations and an examination of their form of organization as well, as any attention paid to the question of dates, would show that this suggestion, whether it be flattering or damning, simply is not true. Another statement which appears in exhibit No. II on page 13 and is repeated in exhibit No. VII on page 19 is that "Jessup had editorial control" of IPR publications. In exhibit No. II it is said that I had such control over the publication of the American institute's Far Eastern Survey in 1943. The only connection I had with this organization in 1943 was that I was one of 50 members of the board of trustees. The chairman was then Robert Sproul. I would like also to say in regard to that charge, Mr. Chairman, which insinuates that I was "guiding" these publications in 1943, that I came down here in February 1943, at the request of Governor |