393.1115/11–2348

The Consul General at Shanghai (Cabot) to the Secretary of State

No. 981

Sir: With reference to my telegram no. 2489 of November 22, 1948, I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of a letter which the Shanghai Power Company has addressed to me and a copy of my reply to this letter.74 It seemed to me clearly in American interests that we should give the assurances requested by the Shanghai Power Company since any breakdown in the furnishing of light and power to the city might well result in chaotic conditions, disturbances of public order, and, in view of the dependence of other utilities on electric power in epidemics.

In view of the heavy pressure which evacuation problems have placed on the depleted staff of this Consulate General, I have held a meeting with the women members of the staff at which I asked them to remain in Shanghai for the time being despite the fact that authorization had been granted for their temporary transfer to Manila. I felt that this was necessary in the public interest and trust that the Department will endorse the stand which I have taken.

With regard to American business men remaining behind to protect American interests, the Department will appreciate that many established concerns with important investments should not be left, under the circumstances, unrepresented by resident Americans. This applies both in the commercial and missionary fields. I have made it very clear whenever consulted that I think all dependents, even including wives with no children, should leave the Shanghai area at an early date. At the same time I have encouraged American business men to leave their interests represented by key Americans remaining behind. It seems to me clear that it would not be to the national interest to abandon positions held by Americans which have been acquired through patient upbuilding. It is evident that some of the other foreigners in Shanghai are hoping that they may benefit through our abandonment of positions now held.

[Page 895]

It may strike the Department as unchivalrous to give priority to such business men over women and children in any eventual repatriation or exchange arrangement which may be made. Nevertheless I do not think women and children who have disregarded our clearly expressed warnings and have no essential reason for remaining here should feel that they have any just complaint if American representatives of important interests who have remained behind out of a sense of responsibility to the interests they represent are given priority in repatriation arrangements. I may say that there has been much criticism in Shanghai circles of the American families who remained: behind in 1941 and thereby prevented Americans who remained behind for compelling reasons from being included in the repatriation arrangements which were concluded in 1942 and 1943. I trust that the present situation will not develop to the point that any such arrangements become necessary, and I appreciate that even if it should it does not appear likely that we would have anything to offer a Communist regime in return for our nationals who remain behind. At the same time it does appear to me that we should make our attitude, clear at an early date. The mere fact that it might be possible to, get only a few Americans out in such an eventuality would make the question of priorities of special importance.

In this connection I should perhaps make it clear that I do not contemplate setting up a specific list of Americans to whom I would issue priority under category 2. It seems to me that such a list would have to be compiled at the time that any general arrangements for repatriation became possible, and that it would have to be compiled in the light of the record in each individual case. At the same time if I were permitted to make our position clear in this matter I feel that it would encourage the men representing important American interests to remain and might bring home to persons having no compelling reason for remaining here the desirability of their early departure.

Respectfully yours,

John M. Cabot
  1. Neither printed.