◆ SpookStack

COPY the young Dr. Chi-is or yas, unt cently, a Communi nouns 3 and that he at one time was a delezate to the d_Internatio in Moscow and to the effect that the elder Dr. Chi was rémdved Trom his position as Commissioner of Education in the Shansi Province because of Conmuinist y activities, ——— wen - en ae | | ir, Lattimore devoted consideraole time to a discussion of face tional strife anong the Chinese and possible interests on the part of witnesses ziving derogatory testimony regarding Mr. Honge He appeared ~~~ inclined to explain away all accusations of Commnism made against Mr. Hong on this basis. He also advanced as a reason for believing the Chinese Hand Laundry Alliance not to be a Commnist organization the fact that this organization was composed of small businessmen whose in- terests would be affected adversely under Comminism. Mr. Lattimore said he could not understand why the story that the elder Dr. Chi was removed from his position as kinister of sducation in the Shansi Province because of Communist activities would be circulated. Mr. Lattimore also stated that Dr. Chi was known to Congressman Walter H. Judd of Minnesota and that Congressman Judd, a former missionary, spent some time in Shansi Province during the time Dr. Chi was an official there. It was pointed eT epee ny a 1 out to Mr. Lattimore that testimony regarding Dr. Chi's removal sas se=- cured by the Commission both in New York and San Francisco. The infor- mation received in San Francisco came from a source found to_ be reliabdig = in the past by the Commission. The informant did not know Dr. Chi pere- sonally but had to inquire about him to secure this information. That this latter source should be biased against Dr. Chi in making this state- ment appears to be unlikely. After a lengthy discussion of the various AMEIWtthe case, such as the intricacies of Chinese politics, possible motives witnesses testi- fying might have, etc., as well as the derogatory testimony itself, ) Mre Lattimore, sir. Marsh and Admiral kcCullough were asked whether, in view of the information in the case, they felt that Mr. Hong should be retained. Their statements were substantially as follows: Mr. Lattimore stated that he wished to keep Mr. Hong on the job, that he had an efficient setup in the Chinese Section in New York and wanted to keep it that way, that he has explicit confidence in Dr, Chi, that Mr. Hong is under careful supervision and ewen if he were a Commnist that he is not in a position where he could do any damage, that the selection of suitable Chinese was a delicate matter and it is extremely difficult to obtain & com= petent employee who does not have connections which might constitute leaks in the organization, that under the present setup with Dr. Chi and Mr. Hong there had been no instances of confidential information getting into unau- thorized channels and that there had been no attempts on Mr. Hong's part to use his present position for the spreading of Communist propaganda, etc. dr. Lattimore also pointed out that Mr. Hong was recently used by the iray to teach Chinese to 224 officers in India. Mr. Hong was highly praised for this work in a letter from Col. Gilchrist of the United States druy,