893.00/7–1744: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Gauss)
966. On July 10 the Chinese Embassy invited the Department’s attention to the Pearson article quoted in Department’s 950, July 13.36 After consultation with appropriate officers in the Department Mr. Grew informed Minister-Counselor Liu Chieh on July 13 that although we deeply deplored this attack upon the Chinese Government and the Generalissimo and Madame Chiang by an American newspaperman, we regretted that in view of the American attitude toward freedom of [Page 130] the press the Government could not restrain Mr. Pearson or cause him to make amends, and that we had learned by experience that when the Government took action in such incidents the result was a worsening rather than a bettering of the situation. Mr. Grew recalled to Minister Liu that, as he doubtless knew, both the President and the Secretary had had occasion to denounce Mr. Pearson for publishing material detrimental not only to our foreign relations but to the unity of the United Nations and therefore the winning of the war; that the President had stated publicly that Pearson’s column contains many falsehoods; and that therefore, in view of these public denunciations and the low esteem in which the American people hold the column, Pearson’s utterances should not be accorded undue importance. Minister Liu replied that he understood the situation fully and the freedom of the press in this country and that his purpose had not been to ask for action by us but merely to call attention to the unfortunate effect which such articles had on our international relations and on our friendship with China. Minister Liu added that both Chinese in the United States and American friends of China had exerted great pressure on him to take cognizance of the article. He said that many Chinese were unfamiliar with our freedom of the press and our Government’s inability to control the press and he was fearful lest a very unfavorable impression would be created if the article became public in Chungking. He had discussed the matter already with Dr. Kung.
The conversation concluded with a repetition of the Department’s sincere regret that such an article should have appeared in the press.
- Not printed; the article referred to was one by Drew Pearson in the Washington Post, July 10, 1944.↩