Mr. SOURWINE. Go ahead. Mr. VINCENT. He told me that he had made it clear to Chiang that the President had not intended to suggest that he be a mediator between China and Russia. Mr. SOURWINE. Your notes do not indicate anything beyond the unavailability of President Roosevelt as a mediator between Russia and China. Mr. VINCENT. That is right. Mr. SOURWINE. Your notes do not indicate any availability as a mediator between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communists. Mr. VINCENT. The notes here state "President Chiang's suggestion was apparently prompted by Mr. Wallace's earlier statement that the President was willing to act as an arbiter between the Communists and the Kuomintang." Mr. SOURWINE. That is right. Mr. VINCENT. So Mr. Wallace must have made an earlier statement. Mr. SOURWINE. That is right. Mr. VINCENT. To the Generalissimo. Mr. SOURWINE. That is right. Mr. VINCENT. Which, as far as I can figure here, was misinterpreted by the generalissimo because it says here, "Mr. Wallace made no comment at the time." Mr. SOURWINE. What I am trying to get at is whether when he went to Chiang the next morning before breakfast to correct this false impression, against which you had warned him the night before, whether he did it in such terms as to negative his original statement with regard to President Roosevelt's availability as an arbiter between the Communists and the Kuomintang, or whether he made it clear that he was simply fearful that Chiang had broadened his statement to carry a meaning that he had not intended. Mr. VINCENT. I cannot add anything to what is said here, but it would appear here that all he did was to straighten out the misconception that the President was willing to be a-what do you call it—a mediator between U. S. S. R. and China. Mr. SOURWINE. All right. Bearing on the question of your influence on Mr. Wallace, which we discussed before, this is another incident where you did have a considerable influence, is it not? Mr. VINCENT. Yes. It is a case where Mr. Wallace had himself been misunderstood and I pointed out to him that the generalissimo had misunderstood him. Mr. SOURWINE. It is evidence of the fact that Mr. Wallace was receiving and listening to your advice. Mr. VINCENT. That is right. Mr. SOURWINE. Now, we find this statement farther down on the same page, referring to a conversation which Mr. Wallace had had in Tashkent with Ambassador Harriman. Mr. Wallace suggested that Dr. Soong discuss the matter with Mr. Vincent who had probably a better idea of the contents of the memorandum since he had had a number of conversations with Ambassador Harriman. (NOTE. That evening Dr. Soong asked Mr. Vincent about the matter, requesting to see any notes that Mr. Vincent might have made. Mr. Vincent said that he had only his memory to rely upon.) Was that correct? Mr. VINCENT. That is right. 88348-52-pt. 7- -4 Mr. SOURWINE. You had no notes? Mr. VINCENT. I had not made notes of the conversation. Mr. SOURWINE (reading): And informed Dr. Soong of those portions of the memorandum which he thought it appropriate and judicious to give him. What portions of the memorandum did you withhold from Chiang? Mr. VINCENT. I do not recall the portions I withheld from him. I only recall what I had told him. There may have been things in Mr. Harriman's memorandum which were highly injudicious to show him. I had no memorandum. We are speaking now of Mr. Harriman's memo which he showed me in Tashkent. Mr. SOURWINE. Did you write this in your notes because you knew there had been portions of the memorandum which you thought it inappropriate or injudicious to give to Chiang and which you had therefore withheld, or did you merely use this language to protect yourself against any eventuality? Mr. VINCENT. I would say from reading this that I had knowledge of some comments that were in Mr. Harriman's memo which would not have been wise to give him. Mr. SOURWINE. At any rate, that is the impression intended to be conveyed? Mr. VINCENT. Yes. Mr. SOURWINE. I take it at the time you were talking with Dr. Soong, the Harriman memo was clear in your mind? Mr. VINCENT. Fairly clear, yes. I noted this Mr. SOURWINE. How long before had it been that you had seen that memo? Mr. VINCENT. Possibly a week or 10 days. Mr. SOURWINE. It was quite recent at that time? Mr. VINCENT. Yes. Senator FERGUSON. Mr. Sourwine, I do not see any other member of the committee here, and I want to be on the floor, so I will have to recess at this time. Senator McCarran and I have a meeting with other Senators at 2. I would have to put this at 2: 30, so we will recess until 2: 30. Mr. MORRIS. May I ask Mr. Vincent one question? Mr. Vincent, you testified that you did not know Agnes Smedley? Mr. MORRIS. Will you look at that picture, and see if you ever met that woman? Mr. VINCENT. No; I have no recollection of meeting Agnes Smedley. Mr. MORRIS. There is another picture here. According to the back she is identified as the first one on the lower left. That is the same woman? Mr. VINCENT. No. Mr. SOURWINE. May the record show that these photographs and pictures which have been shown to Mr. Vincent are pictures of Agnes Smedley, if that is the fact? Senator FERGUSON. I think there is testimony on that. Mr. SOURWINE. The pictures have not been identified. Mr. MORRIS. The picture has the caption "Agnes Smedley" and there is a designation "Agnes." Mr. SOURWINE. How can that be identified for our record? Will you read what is on the back of it? Mr. VINCENT. "Front row, left to right, Agnes Smedley" and somebody else. I don't know. Senator FERGUSON. That will be marked an exhibit, and so will the pamphlet. (The pictures referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 381 and 381A" and were filed for the record.) Mr. SOURWINE. Just for the sake of the record, I want to ask Mr. Vincent if he will put his initials somewhere on the back of the picture as the picture shown here. That is for his protection. Senator FERGUSON. And the same under her name. Mr. SOURWINE. Just on the back of that photograph, to identify that as the one that is shown you, and which you have not recognized. Mr. SURREY. Put "Shown to me this date." Mr. SOURWINE. Whatever you wish. Otherwise, we could put in any picture. Senator FERGUSON. We will recess until 2:30. (Thereupon at 11:55 a. m., a recess was taken until 2:30 p. m., the same day.) AFTER RECESS Senator FERGUSON (presiding). The committee will come to order. Mr. SOURWINE. Mr. Vincent, at the noon recess, we were discussing the notes you made of the Wallace mission. Mr. VINCENT. Yes, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. I had read an excerpt from page 550 of the white paper with regard to a conversation you had with Mr. Soong, Dr. Soong, about the discussions of Mr. Wallace with Mr. Harriman, at Tashkent? Mr. VINCENT. Yes. Mr. SOURWINE. Reading further from your notes: "Specifically," meaning Mr. Vincent he told Dr. Soong that Mr. Stalin had agreed to President Roosevelt's point that support of President Chiang was advisable during the prosecution of the war, that Mr. Stalin had expressed a keen interest in there being reached a settlement between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communists, basing his interest on the practical matter of more effective fighting against Japan rather than upon any ideological considerations; that Mr. Stalin had criticized the suspicious attitude of the Chinese regarding the Sakhalin agreement with Japan, and that Mr. Stalin felt the United States should assume a position of leadership in the Far East. Is that your own best summary of what you told Dr. Soong at that time? Mr. VINCENT. That is my best summary of that, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Do you have a present recollection of the Harriman conference with Stalin as it was recounted to you? Mr. VINCENT. No; I do not. Mr. SOURWINE. You were not present at that, were you? Mr. VINCENT. No, sir. And I haven't seen the memorandum of that conversation with Stalin since that time. Mr. SOURWINE. Can you tell the committee, sir, whether, in saying in your notes that Stalin based his interest in a settlement between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communists on the practical matter of more effective fighting rather than upon any ideological considerations, you are stating something which Mr. Stalin himself had told Ambassador Harriman, or stating merely Ambassador Harri man's understanding of Stalin's attitude, or stating merely your own interpretation of it? Mr. VINCENT. So far as I was capable of remembering the memorandum, I was reporting what Mr. Harriman had told me had taken place in his conversation with Stalin. Mr. SOURWINE. In other words, it is your impression, your understanding, that Stalin himself had made the distinction, had said, "I am interested in this from the standpoint of fighting the Japanese" rather than from the standpoint of any ideological consideration? Mr. VINCENT. That is my recollection of what Mr. Harriman told me. Mr. SOURWINE. Going over to page 553 of the white paper, the paragraph that begins near the bottom of the page, we find this sentence: "Mr. Vincent inquired as to the progress of conversations between the Communist representative in Chungking"-how do you pronounce that name? Mr. VINCENT. Lin Tso-han. Mr. SOURWINE. "And the Kuomintang representatives of which Dr. Chiang Tse-che was chief.” You were, in other words, saying in effect, "Let's talk about the question of how the negotiations are getting along beteween the Nationalists and the Communists"? Mr. VINCENT. We had an interest in how they were getting along. Mr. Gauss, the Ambassador, had indicated that they were talking. Senator FERGUSON. They were what? Mr. VINCENT. That they were discussing this matter among themselves. I hadn't been back for a year, but this Lin Tso-han-I don't know who he was, but apparently I was told that he was a Communist delegate at that time. Mr. SOURWINE. Just before that, a different matter had been under discussion; is that correct? Mr. VINCENT. I will have to read this to see, sir. Mr. SOURWINE. Yes. Mr. VINCENT. Yes; that is a change of subject. Mr. SOURWINE. It was then one of the occasions where you brought about a change of subject in the conversations; is that correct? Mr. VINCENT. Well, I wouldn't say it was a very abrupt change in subject. Mr. SOURWINE. No; I did not characterize it as abrupt. You were opening up a new subject; you were changing the focus at that point. Mr. VINCENT. Yes. Senator FERGUSON. Was that because you did not want Mr. Wallace to discuss the other point? Mr. VINCENT. No. I mean, I have no recollection of that being in my mind, to change the subject. The conversation may have lapsed. Mr. SOURWINE. It was probably because this was a matter of particular interest to you and you wanted it brought up; right? Mr. VINCENT. That is right. Senator FERGUSON. Had you any instructions as to what to discuss in China when Mr. Wallace was there? Mr. VINCENT. You mean, did we receive any instructions fromSenator FERGUSON. From the State Department? Mr. VINCENT. No; the State Department gave me no specific instructions as to what line of instructions, line of conversations; no. Senator FERGUSON. They had given you warning, Mr. Hull had, not to permit Mr. Wallace to make promises; is that correct? Mr. VINCENT. That is right. Senator FERGUSON. But you had no instructions as to what to take up? Mr. VINCENT. Myself; no. Senator FERGUSON. With the respective parties? Mr. VINCENT. Ambassador Gauss himself was the Ambassador there, and any instructions about what was to be taken up would have come from him. Senator FERGUSON. But he did not give you any instructions? Mr. VINCENT. Mr. Gauss did not give me any instructions. I talked with him, when I got there. Senator FERGUSON. What did you figure the Wallace mission was? What were you trying to accomplish? Mr. VINCENT. As far as I was told at the time, it was the return of the visit that Madame Chiang had made to the United States the year before. I never did know exactly what. Senator FERGUSON. Was that the only purpose; just a return courtesy call? Mr. VINCENT. Well, then it was, too, just that occasion for Mr. Wallace to have conversations with Chiang Kai-shek. Senator FERGUSON. But what was he to accomplish? He was not to promise anything. What was he to accomplish? Mr. VINCENT. You ask me something there, Mr. Chairman, that I don't know, what he was supposed to accomplish. He had himself a little note that he referred to from time to time, as to his conversations with Roosevelt before he left. Senator FERGUSON. In other words, whatever instructions he had came from the President? Mr. VINCENT. Yes. Senator FERGUSON. And whatever instructions you had were that of a warning from the Secretary of State? Mr. VINCENT. That is all I know, sir. Senator FERGUSON. Do you know whether the Secretary of State had any mission for Mr. Wallace? Mr. VINCENT. I have no recollection that Mr. Wallace ever saw the Secretary of State before he went out. He may have; but I say I don't know what he did. Senator FERGUSON. How did you know that, if Mr. Wallace, was making a promise, he did not have a direct authority from the President to make it? Mr. VINCENT. Because from time to time Mr. Wallace would refer to these rough notes he had taken in his conversations with the President, and the main idea of this was to go out and talk to Chiang Kaishek about the situation in China and bring it back and report to him, insofar as I knew. Senator FERGUSON. What were some of the things that Mr. Wallace had on these notes that he was to accomplish in China? |