393.1121 Holland, L. W./73
[Enclosure]
Paper Handed to Mr. Yoshizawa, August 23,
1939, by the Chargé d’Affaires, Mr. Eugene
Dooman
A Domei news report dated Nanchang, June 14, stated that L. W.
Holland was alleged by the Japanese military authorities to be
engaged in anti-Japanese activities, and according to reports in
the local Chinese press, Holland had been arrested by the
Japanese. Inquiry by Mr. Jarvis on June 16 of the Japanese
Consulate General in Hankow concerning this case brought the
reply that a request had been telegraphed to Nanchang for a
report but that none had been received. It was stated that the
matter would be pressed.
On June 22, after several attempts by the American authorities to
obtain information from the Japanese Consulate General,
Lieutenant Colonel Sakurai, the senior Japanese Army liaison
officer, called at the American Consulate General at Hankow and
stated that the Japanese military police at Nanchang, acting on
reports which they
[Page 375]
had
received, and with Holland’s consent, had made an investigation
and had found anti-Japanese literature in the library. The
military officer did not know the amount or disposition of this
literature, but while uncertain as to what action had been
taken, he was positive that Mr. Holland had not been arrested.
No assurances could be given that Mr. Holland would not be
interfered with in future. Lieutenant Colonel Sakurai made it
clear that he was anxious that the case not be taken up
“officially” and agreed to effect an exchange of letters between
Holland and the American Consulate General at Hankow. This
information was considered to be vague and unsatisfactory.
It should be noted that on June 20 a member of the Japanese
Consulate General’s Army liaison staff told a member of the
American Consulate General in Hankow that Holland had been paid
$50,000 by a certain Chinese general with which to conduct
anti-Japanese activities.
A letter from the American Consulate General in Hankow addressed
to Mr. Holland was delivered to the Japanese Army liaison
officer on June 23.
In reply to an informal approach made on June 30, the Embassy was
informed by the Foreign Office in a note dated July 5, 1939,
that a search had been made of Mr. Holland’s residence; that
anti-Japanese literature was found and confiscated; that Mr.
Holland was requested to appear at gendarmerie headquarters but was not taken into
custody. This information confirmed that already received from
the Japanese Army liaison officer in Hankow.
On July 12, the American Consulate General in Hankow, in view of
the unsuccessful attempts to communicate with Holland, requested
facilities for Mr. Davies to proceed to Nanchang by air.
Following further informal representations by the Embassy the
Foreign Office on July 14 promised an immediate and effective
investigation into the cause for delay in hearing from Holland
and in regard to his present welfare. The Foreign Office, while
more than willing to request facilities for Davies’ trip, asked
that it be held in abeyance until a further report had been
received from the military.
In reply to the Embassy’s representations expressing in most
emphatic terms the Department’s concern, the Foreign Office on
July 21 assured the Embassy that a report regarding the Holland
case would be made within two days.
On July 22 [21?], at 4 p.m., a letter from
Holland dated July 6, in reply to the American Consulate
General’s letter of June 22, was delivered to the American
authorities at Hankow. In view of indefinite statements in Mr.
Holland’s letter, it was still believed to be advisable for
Davies to go to Nanchang.
[Page 376]
On July 26, Lieutenant Okuda, chief of the Japanese gendarmerie at Nanchang, called at the
American Consulate General at Hankow, accompanied by an officer
from the Japanese Army Liaison Office at Hankow. His purpose was
to “explain the Holland case”. During the interview which
followed it was brought out that: (1) it was a Y. M. C. A. house
and not Mr. Holland’s which had been searched; (2) Okuda
maintained that Holland had not been interfered with or
molested; (3) the information given by Lieutenant Colonel
Sakurai on June 22 was “a mistake”; (4) Army headquarters had
ordered Okuda to give to the press information concerning
anti-Japanese use made of the Y. M. C. A. residence; (5) Domei
had distorted what he had released. Lieutenant Okuda suggested
that this explanation would probably obviate the need of sending
a consular representative to Nanchang.
This report refuted previous reports by the Japanese military and
declared those reports to be “a mistake”.
