120.301/2–949: Telegram
The Minister-Counselor of Embassy in China (Clark) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 9—7:03 a. m.]
[Cantel] 24. May I confirm action outlined first paragraph Nanking’s 238 [328],37a repeated Canton 20, re return dependents China. I had felt that if dependents dribbled back to Nanking by own means no harm would be done. However, when I heard that service Attachés planned arrange flights to bring all service Attaché families back to [by] Government transportation, the political repercussions to be expected were obvious, and it was for that reason Department was informed. I left Nanking January 29 and have no knowledge of subsequent developments in Nanking. However, dependents having returned Nanking, it would seem discrimination against those abiding by Department’s wishes if families remaining Manila tare now [not] allowed similar privilege of returning voluntarily at their own expense to their posts in China. As reported my 13, February 6, repeated Nanking 13,38 this particularly true at Canton.
Sent Department 24, repeated Nanking 23.