and so forth.

The impression that I got from that, and various others got, was, as he further says here:

To reporters later Mr. Stassen said he understood the incident occurred late in 1949 or in early 1950, more probably in 1949.

Well, on the basis of that, Mr. Chairman, we looked through all our records to see whether there was any such meeting in late 1949 or early 1950, particularly since he said it was a meeting dealing with the Far East, and that I was at the meeting. We assumed it must refer to that period, because I was not connected with far eastern affairs until along in the summer of 1949.

MEETING ON FEBRUARY 5, 1949

On the basis of this statement and our investigation, the State Department announced, which is the fact, that there was no such meeting late in 1949 or early in 1950, and further the fact that there was no such meeting which I attended.

Now, I gather from the later statement, it appears that he did have in mind-it was not quite clear from this newspaper report-a meeting which took place on February 5, 1949. That is the meeting which I did not attend, but I think it is pardonable that a certain confusion arose, that we originally designed the story which we thought referred to a meeting I attended in late 1949 or early in 1950. There was no such meeting. There was a meeting on February 5, 1949, which I did not attend.

Senator SPARKMAN. Was that February 5, 1949, or February 5, 1950?

Ambassador JESSUP. February 5, 1949, sir.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. Let me ask one further question on that. It is clear you did not attend the meeting. Would it be fair to ask you the question whether you were familiar with what was going to be discussed at the meeting?

Ambassador JESSUP. That is the first point I wanted to make in the statement which I have been approaching.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. I won't interrupt you again.

JESSUP'S FIRST ASSIGNMENT ON FAR EASTERN AFFAIRS

Ambassador JESSUP. In February 1949 I was still up with Senator Austin in the United States Mission in New York. In March and April of 1949 I was conducting these discussions with Malik, of Russia, on the Berlin blockade. Then I came down to Washington in May. I was confirmed as ambassador at large in March 1949. I came down here in May, and then went over to the meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers in Paris in June; got back to New York the end of June, and arrived in Washington on the 29th of June, I think, and at that time, having finished my work with the Council of Foreign Ministers, was asked by the Secretary of State to begin to work on far eastern questions. That is the first point in which my official duties had brought me into the question of the consideration of far eastern policy, except as in the discharge of my duties in the United Nations I had charge of such matters as the Korean question, the Indonesian question, and so on.

This is the first point in July or at the end of June 1949, that I am first asked to deal with far-eastern questions in the Department of State. This was under my new capacity of Ambassador at Large. Now, as we moved along in that summer through July, the Secretary asked me to look into the general problems which were confronting the United States in Asia, and I will offer for the record, Mr. Chairman, a document which, when issued, was top secret, but which has been declassified and which I will now read and then place in the record. It is a memorandum to me from the Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, dated July 18, 1949. I think it is important because it indicates the kind of task which was assigned to me, the views of the Secretary as to what needed to be done, what he wanted me to work on:

SECRETARY ACHESON'S TOP-SECRET MEMO

Memorandum for Ambassador Jessup.

JULY 18, 1949.

You will please take as your assumption that it is a fundamental decision of American policy that the United States does not intend to permit further extension of Communist domination on the continent of Asia or in the southeast Asia area. Will you please draw up for me possible programs of action relating to various specific areas not now under Communist control in Asia under which the United States would have the best chance of achieving this purpose? These programs should contain proposed courses of action, steps to be taken in implementing such programs, estimate of cost to the United States, and the extent to which United States forces would or would not be involved. I fully realize that when these proposals are received it may be obvious that certain parts thereof would not be within our capabilities to put into effect, but what I desire is the examination of the problem on the general assumptions indicated above in order to make absolutely certain that we are neglecting no opportunity that would be within our capabilities to achieve the purpose of halting the spread of totalitarian communism in Asia.

That was the mandate under which I began to operate in participation in the State Department's consideration of policy in regard to Asia.

CONSULTANTS TO ASSIST JESSUP

The sequence there was, Mr. Chairman, that in the beginning of this study it was determined that it would be useful to bring in from the outside two persons of standing, two persons of judgment and background and knowledge, who could give a fresh look at these problems in working with me. Accordingly, in August of this year, 1949-that is only a few weeks after this memorandum which I just read-the Secretary decided to invite Mr. Everett Case, president of Colgate University, and Mr. Raymond Fosdick, former president of the Rockefeller Foundation, to devote some time in the Department as consultants.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. Has either Mr. Case or Mr. Raymond Fosdick been in the Far East?

Ambassador JESSUP. I believe, sir, they have both been in the Far East, but I should like to point out that their selection was not on the grounds that they were experts in the Far East, but that they were men of judgment, of standing, men of sound ability, who could come in and, acting more or less as judges or a jury, look at the evidence in the situation which was developing and contribute the benefit of their thought to the formation of our policies, not as the experts who provided the original material but as men of good,

sound mind and judgment who could weigh that material and participate in advising on what policy should be followed.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. You will recall, Dr. Jessup, that I had the great privilege of meeting with you individually and with these two gentlemen.

Ambassador JESSUP. Yes, sir.

Senator SMITH of New Jersey. I hope you recall that I at that time urged this Commission to go to the Far East and talk with General MacArthur and others in the field, and get the "feel" of the area. You will recall also, that I greatly regretted you could not go. But I was so much concerned. I was going anyway. I did go. I wanted to get some other members of the Foreign Relations Committee to go to get the "feel" of the whole thing until these other policies were determined. I did appreciate talking with you and the time you gave to me here, and my only criticism would be that it seemed to me it was vitally important that this Commission go, and not just take the reports that might be given to them here in lieu of going to the Far East.

Ambassador JESSUP. I think both Mr. Case and Mr. Fosdick really regretted they could not go. They felt they could not spare the time to go. As you know, later I went by myself and we did have various missions which went to various parts of the area on special trips to get the feel of the situation on the ground, of which you speak. I agree it would be very helpful if we could have all gone to make that survey together.

Mr. Chairman, in inviting these two gentlemen, Mr. Fosdick and Mr. Case, to come in the Secretary asked them to work with me in a general examination of the problems confronting the United States in Asia, and when they first came in I showed them this memorandum which I have just read into the record and said, "Now here is the frame of reference. This is what we are trying to do," and they said, "We sympathize and we agree with the general objective. We are delighted to begin this work."

Now, in his letter of August 23 to these two consultants, Mr. Case and Mr. Fosdick, a letter which was made public in State Department press release No. 647, Secretary Acheson said, and I quote:

We desire every possible assistance in reaching wise conclusions regarding the policies which the United States should follow in promoting the interests of this country.

Then he went on to say that all the resources and personnel of the Department would be at their disposal, and he continued:

I hope you will also seek the views of other competent persons in civilian and official life, and weigh all opinions which you can assemble within the physical limitations of the time which you are able to devote to this problem.

CONSULTING EXPERTS TO GET ALL VIEWPOINTS

Now, in pursuance of that suggestion, that they should consult other people in addition to the experts in the Department in order to get all points of view, on August 18, I wrote a letter to a considerable number of individuals who either had extensive personal experience in the Far East, or who had made a special study of the area, or some part of it, again recognizing that none of us three was an expert who

had lived or spent any time in the Far East, and we were calling in the people who had.

On behalf of Mr. Fosdick and Mr. Case and myself and on behalf of the Department, I invited a summary of the views of these people on the objectives of United States policy.

I will file with the committee a copy of this letter, together with a list of those who submitted memoranda in response to this invitation. (The documents referred to appear in the record, as follows:)

FORM LETTER REQUESTING MEMORANDA FOR SURVEY OF THE FAR EAST DEAR MR.

As you doubtless know, the Secretary of State has requested Mr. Raymond Fosdick, Mr. Everett Case, and myself, in conjunction with the officers of the State Department concerned with Far East affairs, to review United States policy toward the Far East as it is affected by current developments there. In making this survey we are seeking, insofar as time permits, the views and guidance of those Americans who have either had extensive personal experience in the Far East or have made the area or some part of it the field of their special study.

We should very much appreciate it if you could find time to draw up and send to us at the earliest possible date a summary of your views as to the objectives which United States policy should pursue and the methods which it should employ at this time either in the Far East as a whole or in that part of it with which you have been particularly concerned. A contribution from you will be most helpful and will assist us materially in providing for our survey the broadest possible base of expert knowledge and advice.

Sincerely yours,

PHILIP C. JESSUP,
Ambassador at Large.

PERSONS WHO SUBMITTED MEMORANDA

Former Consul General Joseph W. Ballantine, now at Brookings Institution. Prof. Hugh Borton, Columbia University.

Former President Isaiah Bowman, Johns Hopkins University.

Dr. A. J. Brumbaugh, American Council on Education, Washington.

Former Ambassador William Bullitt.

Former Under Secretary Castle.

Former Consul John A. Embry.

Prof. Rupert Emerson, Harvard University.

Dr. Carles B. Fahs, New York City.

Prof. John K. Fairbank, Harvard University.

Dr. Huntington Gilchrist, New York City.

Prof. Carrington Goodrich, Columbia University.

Former Under Secretary Grew.

Col. Robert A. Griffin, former Deputy Administrator, ECA China.
Former Ambassador Stanley K. Hornbeck.

Roger Lapham, former Administrator, ECA.

Prof. Kenneth S. Latourette, Yale University.

Prof. Owen Lattimore, Johns Hopkins University.

Oliver C. Lockhart, Export-Import Bank of Washington.
Walter H. Mallory, Council on Foreign Relations.
Prof. Wallace Moore, Occidental College, Los Angeles.
Prof. Edwin O. Reischauer, Harvard University.
C. A. Richards, Economic Cooperation Administration.
Former Minister Walter S. Robertson, Richmond, Va.
Dr. Lawrence K. Rosinger, New York City.
Mr. James Rowe, Washington.

Mrs. Virginia Thompson (Adloff), New York City.
Prof. Amry Vandenboach, University of Kentucky.
Prof. Karl A. Wittfogel, Columbia University.
Prof. Mary Wright, Stanford University.
Admiral Yarnell.

PERSONS WHO ATTENDED ROUND TABLE

The 25 who attended the round-table discussions were:

Joseph W. Ballantine, Brookings Institution, Washingon, D. C.

Bernard Brodie, department of international relations, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Claude A. Buss, director of studies, Army War College, Washington, D. C. Kenneth Colegrove, department of political science, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill.

Arthur G. Coons, president, Occidental College, Los Angeles, Calif.

John W. Decker, International Missionary Council, New York, N. Y.

John K. Fairbank, Committee on International and Regional Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

William R. Herod, president, International General Electric Co., New York, N. Y. Arthur N. Holcombe, department of government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

Benjamin H. Kizer, Graves, Kizer & Graves, Spokane, Wash.

Owen Lattimore, director, Walter Hines Page School of International Relations, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.

Ernest B. MacNaughton, chairman of the Board, First National Bank, Portland, Oreg.

George C. Marshall, president, American Red Cross, Washington, D. C.

J. Morden Murphy, assistant vice president, Bankers Trust Co., New York, N. Y. Nathaniel Peffer, department of public law and government, Columbia University, New York, N. Y.

Harold S. Quigley, department of political science, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.

Edwin O. Reischauer, department of far-eastern languages, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

William S. Robertson, president, American & Foreign Power Co., New York, N. Y.
John D. Rockefeller III, president, Rockefeller Bros.' Fund, New York, N. Y.
Lawrence K. Rosinger, American Institute of Pacific Relations, New York, N. Y.
Eugene Staley, executive director, World Affairs Council of Northern California,
San Francisco, Calif.

Harold Stassen, president, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.
Phillips Talbot, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.

George E. Taylor, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash.

Harold M. Vinacke, department of political science, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.

PERSONS INVITED BUT WHO DID NOT ATTEND ROUND TABLE

W. Langbourne Bond, Pan American Airways, Washington, D. C.
Monroe E. Deutsch, provost, University of California

Anne O'Hare McCormick, New York Times.

Moris T. Moore, chairman of the board of Time, Inc.

Michael Ross, director, department of international affairs, Congress of Industrial Organizations.

J. E. Wallace Sterling, president, Stanford University

Lt. Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer was also invited. He could not attend for personal reasons, but submitted his views in a telegram.

(The five persons who both submitted memoranda and attended the State Department round table conference of October 6, 7, and 8, 1949, were: Joseph Ballantine, John K. Fairbank, Owen Lattimore, Edwin O. Reischauer, and Lawrence K. Rosinger.)

ELICITING VARIED VIEWS

Ambassador JESSUP. I think, Mr. Chairman, in view of the discussion which has taken place, that I should point out, while I won't detain the committee by reading all the names, that it is a list in which you will recognize the variety and the standing of many of the people who are here. We have, for instance, former Ambassador William Bullitt; former Under Secretary Castle; former Consul General John A. Embry; President Isaiah Bowman, of Johns Hopkins; Joseph W. Ballantine, now at Brookings Institution; Stanley Hornbeck; Roger