393.1111 Nelson, Bert N./131: Telegram
The Minister in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State
1005. See Legation’s despatch No. 1160, September 3rd,73 regarding Nelson.
- 1.
- Hankow’s despatch No. 40, November 18th,73 indicates that bandits are convinced that Nelson’s brother has much influence with the Chinese Government; that Nelson himself is a very important person with great magnitude; that goods and money which have been furnished have been provided by the Chinese Government which will be responsible for meeting their further demands and that Nelson or his mission could readily raise an additional $50,000 if necessary.
- 2.
- In the latest attempt to procure Nelson’s release Dr. Skinsnes sent, in compliance with bandits’ demands, 900 bolts of cloth and 100 miles of telephone wire. Upon receipt the bandits again declined to release Nelson. They desired insulated telephone wire and larger pieces of cloth.
- 3.
- The bandits through their so-called “Chief of the Commission of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Government for the Hupeh-Honan-Anhwei district” have now addressed an open letter to Adams stating that Nelson is a very valuable captive whom they wish to utilize for a solution of some difficult problems of supplies faced by the Communists and that since laborers and peasants in Honan and elsewhere in China have been killed and have suffered great losses the quantity of supplies received by the bandits for Nelson’s release is insignificant in comparison with Communists’ losses in other parts of China. Bandit chief proposes to release Nelson if three [five?] political offenders are released in exchange for Nelson and telegraphed [threatened?] failing this “we can only proceed by the extreme measure of revenge [requiting] upon the person of this missionary Bert Nelson measure for measure the treatment accorded to our revolutionary fighters.” Addressee is requested to send a representative to the bandits to discuss terms.
- 4.
- At the specific suggestion of Dr. Skinsnes, Adams has drafted a proposed reply to the bandit chief with the aim of minimizing in the bandits’ eyes the importance attached to Nelson, setting forth the fact that Nelson had been warned by the American authorities before his capture that residence in Honan was unsafe; and the Chinese Government had also prior to that date declined to issue travel passes for foreigners to travel in Honan; that Nelson despite these warnings persisted in residing in Honan at his own risk in order to carry on missionary work and that while the consular office has made every effort within its power to obtain his release, it would have done as much in the case of any other American citizen. Adams states that the American Government has never even considered paying a ransom either for the release of Nelson or of any other American citizen held captive in China; that Nelson’s friends have contributed at considerable sacrifice to meet the ransom demanded by the bandit organizations and that the Consulate General without obtaining the approval of the American Government undertook to procure passes to enable the goods to be sent. Adams intimates that in view of the evident bad faith of the bandits in connection with the negotiations he does not intend to request any further passes to cover goods. He points out that anti-Communist activities of the Chinese Government are solely the latter’s concern and that American authorities have nothing to do with them. The draft ends: “with regard to the question of the release by the Chinese Government of political offenders, I may say that this likewise is a Chinese domestic affair in which the American authorities are not in a position to attempt any action. It is the policy of the American Government to refrain from interference in the internal [Page 977] affairs of China. For the above reasons I must decline to consent to the proposals which you make.”
- 5.
- Adams requests the Legation’s authorization to send this letter. The Minister desires Department’s instructions before replying. I feel that a lengthy letter from the Consulate General at Hankow to the bandit chief such as the one proposed is unwise and may be dangerous. But if in view of the unusual circumstances the Department should approve the correspondence in principle the letter should be very brief and the Department may prefer to suggest its tenor.
For the Minister:
Engert