393.1121 Holland, L. W./74
The Consul General at Hankow (Spiker) to the Ambassador in China (Johnson)57
Sir: With reference to previous telegrams and correspondence concerning accusations made by the Domei News Agency and various Japanese officials of anti-Japanese activities on the part of the Reverend L. W. Holland of the American Methodist Episcopal Mission, Nanchang, Kiangsi, I have the honor to report on the concluding phases of the case.58
[Page 380]In conformity with the Department’s* and the Ambassador’s† instructions, Vice Consul John Davies, Jr. proceeded to Nanchang, arriving there on August 24. He was escorted by Major Ishihara of the Nanchang Japanese Headquarters staff and Lieutenant Okuda, Chief of the Japanese Gendarmerie at Nanchang, to the; Nanchang General Hospital, of which institution Mr. Holland is superintendent. There he met Mr. Holland who was well and in good spirits.
Mr. Holland repeated to Mr. Davies the substance of what he had written earlier to this office‡: that his residence had not been searched, that neither he nor the hospital were engaged in anti-Japanese activities and that he had not been molested by the Japanese authorities.
It would now seem to be evident that the original Domei news report of June 14, 1939, stating that the military authorities at Nanchang accused Holland of anti-Japanese activities and that his residence had been raided, grew out of confusing Holland and the Nanchang General Hospital with two Young Men’s Christian Association residences on which the Japanese authorities later claimed they had found anti-Japanese material.§ Whether this confusion of identities was through carelessness or whether it was deliberate is not known.
It is significant that the Chief of Gendarmerie at Nanchang, Lieutenant Okuda, during a call at this office on July 26, stated to Consul R. Y. Jarvis and me that he had in compliance with orders from Nanchang Army Headquarters told the press about the alleged anti-Japanese material found in the Young Men’s Christian Association residences. He simultaneously released to the press accusations against a French priest at Nanchang, who was charged with harboring Chinese soldiers. As it is understood that no Japanese press reports can be dispatched from the field without prior censorship by the Japanese army, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that if the military authorities did not concoct the “facts” of the Domei report about Holland, they at least acquiesced in a malicious distortion of news on the part of the Domei News Agency.
Mr. Davies pointed out to the Japanese officials at Nanchang, as this office has repeatedly from the inception of the case declared to the Japanese authorities here, that the American authorities have from the first been only too willing to be persuaded that the Domei [Page 381] and Japanese official reports concerning Holland were exaggerations. Instead of receiving cooperation from the Japanese authorities in clearing up the case, Mr. Davies continued, we met only obstruction, delay and a most unusual contradiction between the statements of Mr. Holland and responsible Japanese officials (i. e., the Japanese Foreign Office, Lieutenant Colonel Sakurai, Chief Liaison Officer for the Middle Yangtze Area, and the Japanese press spokesman at Shanghai).
As a result of protracted obstruction by the Japanese authorities, Mr. Davies observed, a new issue was introduced. We felt that an important principle had become involved, that of our right promptly to communicate with or, if practicable, to establish personal contact with an American citizen whenever we deemed it necessary. In the present instance, the American involved was living in a city with which the Japanese were in regular contact by air, land and water, and which could be reached from Hankow by air in little more than one hour, yet a letter entrusted to the Japanese military in Hankow for delivery to Mr. Holland was delivered only after a lapse of 13 days, while Mr. Holland’s reply was delivered to this Consulate General only after 15 days had passed. As is known, this unexplained delay naturally resulted in increased concern on the part of the American Government and the public as to the welfare of Mr. Holland and the other Americans in Nanchang. Mr. Davies concluded by saying that he was happy to be able to return to Hankow and report that he had seen Mr. Holland and that Mr. Holland was well and happy.
Respectfully yours,
- Copy transmitted to the Department by the Consul General at Hankow in his covering despatch No. 26, of the same date; received October 17.↩
- Of the extensive previous correspondence on this case, only despatch No. 4104, August 24, from the Chargé in Japan, is printed, p. 374. In his political report, despatch No. 30, September 10, the Consul General at Hankow reported the case closed and commented as follows: “This office is persuaded that the Holland case arose of an ill-contrived attempt by the Nanchang Headquarters to make anti-American propaganda; that it was magnified by the even more bungling efforts of the military authorities to obscure the facts of the case and discourage investigation; and that the tenacity of the American authorities in following the case through to a finish served as a valuable demonstration to the Japanese authorities of the American Government’s concern in the welfare of isolated Americans. From the time that it became evident that this office intended to press the case to a conclusion, Japanese officials began to display a greater degree of cooperation concerning the welfare of Americans in outlying towns of this district.” (893.00 P. R. Hankow/146)↩
- Department’s telegram No. 119, June 29, 6 p.m. to the Ambassador. [Footnote in the original; telegram not printed.]↩
- Ambassador’s telegram of July 1, 11 a.m. to Hankow. [Footnote in the original; telegram not printed.]↩
- Enclosure to Hankow’s despatch No. 4, July 22, 1939, Welfare of Mr. L. W. Holland, Nanchang, Kiangsi, charged with Anti-Japanese Activities. [Footnote in the original; neither printed.]↩
- Hankow’s despatch No. 19, August 31, 1939, Alleged Misuse of American Property at Nanchang. [Footnote in the original; despatch not printed.]↩