U.S. FOOD FOR MAINLAND CHINESE ?
1
Keeping food from hungry people is not in the American tradition, but in view
of the circumstances the administration was right to refuse an export license
1
to an American firm seeking to clear the way for a possible sale of American 1
grain to Communist China. No approach from Peiping had been made. The 3
scheme was simply one in which a Hong Kong middleman was trying to arrange
a hypothetical sale which might not have been concluded even if an American
license had been granted .
The Government has not rejected in principle the possibility of American food
being sent to the underfed people of mainland China. Indeed, American food
should be made available by free donation or by sale — to succor the Chinese
people if the arrangements could be carried out in such a way that the Peiping
government would be prevented from using the grain as an anti -American propa
ganda weapon. The U.S. Government, however, is understandably cautions about
authorizing food for the Chinese that would only facilitate Communist
misrepresentation .
The Peiping regime last year let it be known that it did not want American
food, even if given on a private basis with a minimum of publicity . There has
been no official indication from the Chinese Communists that this attitude has
changed. If there is a change, the furnishing of American food for the China
mainland becomes a possibility that ought to receive favorable consideration in
Washington.
[ From Life, Jan. 27 , 1961 )
STARVATION IN CHINA
Unless they get massive help, millions of Chinese people may starve before
spring. They will starve for two reasons : ( 1 ) what their Communist masters
call " natural adversities without parallel in the past 100 years ” ; drought, flood ,
hail, frost, pests ; ( 2 ) the failure of the Communist " commune” system of agri.
culture which broke up families and impressed millions into barracks.
Perhaps most of the tragedy should be blamed upon this stupid and inhumane
system . But that is irrelevant to the stark fact of starvation. By grim paradox,
it flashes on the conscience of mankind at a time when the United States glut of
food is a political and economic embarrassment.
Because of this same paradox , Life more than 6 years ago ( Life, Aug. 23,
1954 ) , at a time of terrible floods, urged that the United States devote some of its
surplus food to the helpless Chinese people. The need now is at least as great as
then. We urge anew that ways be found to move these stores into the emaciated
hands of the men , women, and children who otherwise will die. Admittedly it
will be difficult to guarantee fair distribution , to prevent diversion of the food to
military uses, to graft, or to Communist reexport for trade. But Americans who
managed to save millions of Russian lives amid the Bolshevik revolution, who
sheltered the victims of Japan's 1923 earthquake, who fed the victims of World
War II , such Americans, given the will, can find the way to do this job. Adlai
Stevenson could well make this the subject of his first speech in the U.N.
[ From the Washington Post , May 19 , 1962 ]
STARVING . CHINESE
Whatever grievance the United States justly may have against the Communist
government of China, it has not grievance whatever against the unfortunate peo
ple who are crowding the barricades of Hong Kong as refugees from a starving
land.
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 71
Wang Ping-nan , the Communist Chinese Ambassador at Warsaw , at the close
of a talk with U.S. Ambassador John Cabot, said “ the Chinese people always
have been good friends of the American people.” One suspects that they re
main so, despite years of violent hate-American propaganda . And it is equally
true that the American people remain friends of the Chinese people .
It is no longer possible for them to show that friendship as once they did.
China is not open to the great charitable endeavors that gathered the contribu
tions of Americans from the smallest villages of the land for Chinese missions.
We cannot now send our teachers and preachers into China, to show that this
traditional friendship for the Chinese persists.
We can aid and we ought to aid the hapless Chinese who are trying to escape
the scourge of famine by flight to Hong Kong. The British crown colony already
has absorbed more Chinese refugees than anyone would have thought possible.
The efforts of Hong Kong to block the entrance of more than can be cared for
in the already overcrowded city is understandable. The responsibility is too
great for Hong Kong, but it is not too great for the United States and the free
world.
Until the officials of Red China ask for famine relief it is not possible or
feasible to supply food to the mainland . We do not need to await the initiative
of Red China to take care of the starving masses who are knocking at the gates
of the British colony. We ought to move to lighten a burden that would be un
endurable for Hong Kong alone. We should transport the refugees to Taiwan
or some other less crowded spot. We should then undertake to provide these
unfortunate people with food from our bulging stocks of surpluses. There will
be other costs of course .
Whatever the costs amount to they will give us value received simply by eras
ing the vision of starving men, women, and children standing in need and want
across the Hong Kong barbed wire. To try to find out how and why they are
there, by whose fault they are in need and pain, is a piece of futile inquiry and
conjecture. It is enough to know that they are in need . One cannot believe
that a generation of misunderstanding and conflict with the Red Chinese has ex
tinguished the historic sympathy and affection of the American people for the
Chinese people. Let the gates into Hong Kong be opened. Let us minister unto
the sick and feed the hungry as we have been wont to do in times past. The
bonds of sympathy, compassion , and understanding abide still in spite of all
the winds of doctrine . We can show that this is so by sending relief missions to
Hong Kong.
The President of the United States probably is the only person in the world
who has the power to set in motion at once an organization equal to the task of
caring for these suffering people. A swift response to this crisis, perfected in
cooperation with the British Government whose interests are so directly in
volved, would do much to show that nothing has diminished our feeling for
the stricken people of China.
[ From the Washington Post, May 22 , 1962 )
FAMINE IN CHINA
Famine, that dread and ancient enemy of man, is again abroad in the world,
stalking the vast plains of China, afflicting its teeming city masses, and hurling
multitudes of starving men, women, and children against the barricades of
Hong Kong.
The statesmen of this country, and of other countries which have food to
give, have many reasons why they cannot act to meet this dreadful scourge.
This country does not have relations with Red China . Red China has not
asked for help. There is no room at all in Hong Kong. There is little room
on Taiwan. There is no room anywhere. These are persuasive reasons ; but
they are not persuasive enough . They are not as persuasive as hunger .
They are not the answer to hunger. Hunger admits of no armistices, delays,
treaties, or compromises. Diplomacy has not a good answer for it. Science
has no answer . Politics and diplomacy and science are all very complicated.
Hunger is very simple. And there is only one answer to it. That answer
is food .
Sooner or later the West in general and the United States in particular will
make that answer. The conscience of this country will not permit it to with
hold any help it can give if the people of China continue to flood toward the
72 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
barricades of Hong Kong. We may devise a reason a day why we cannot
act. But the hordes beyond the barrier will produce 10,000 reasons a day why
we must act . And the American people will be moved by these reasons. They
will not understand why there must be hungry people at Hong Kong while there
are granaries bulging with food in the United States. They will begin by
blaming Red China for this dreadful calamity ; but if we do nothing to avert
it, they will end by blaming redtape. For all of our logical , plausible, tenable
political reasons will sould like redtape if we let the dead pile up like so much
debris along the Hong Kong barricade.
The world is face to face with another famine, like the terrible famines
that have scourged mankind since the dawn of history. It is a famine that
somehow seems more terrible because it is happening in a generation when
man has dared even to attempt the conquest of space . How strange if such a
generation cannot cope with this ancient foe. Perhaps it is partly because we
have forgotten what sheer hunger is like. Maybe we need to hear old witnesses
to its horror, witnesses like Laurence Binyon who contemplated the great
famines of World War I and wrote in the London Nation for December 1918,
these lines :
I come among the peoples like a shadow.
I sit down by each man's side.
None sees me , but they look on one another ,
And know that I am there.
My silence is like the silence of the tide
That buries the playground of children ;
Like the deepening of frost in the slow night,
When birds are dead in the morning.
Armies trample, invade, destroy ,
With guns roaring from earth and air.
I am more terrible than armies,
I am more feared than cannon .
Kings and chancellors give commands ;
I give no command to any ;
But I am listened to more than kings
And more than passionate orators .
I unswear words, and undo deeds.
Naked things know me.
I am first and last to be felt of the living.
I am Hunger.
The Government of Nationalist China, by offering to accept Hong Kong refu
gees, has taken a step that will make it possible for others to take useful actions. 41
The way may now be opened for vast and effective operations that hitherto could
not have been so readily accomplished . The world outside of Red China has,
as yet, only the faintest intimations of the dimensions of the tragedy. However
great it is, we have great resources at hand to meet it . 9
Let us rejoice that we have the means to turn back this ancient enemy of man.
Let us embrace the opportunity to send food and blessings to Asia, as well as
soldiers and weapons. Let us embark upon a great mission of mercy. Let us
live up to our most honorable traditions. Let us demonstrate anew our his
toric friendship for the Chinese people. Let us send succor to those who beg
for food at the barbed -wire barricades of Hong Kong.
+
[ From the New York Times, Mar. 30, 1962 )
GRANGE CHIEF FAVORS FooD SALES TO RED CHINA — PROTESTS THE U.S.
PROHIBITION AGAINST SHIPMENTS — WHEATGROWERS ALSO ASK LIFTING OF
RESTRICTIONS
( By Donald Janson )
3
CHICAGO, March 29.—Herschel D. Newsom, master of the National Grange,
challenged today the Government's ban on sale of food to Communist China.
Mr. Newsom said the organization's executive committee would meet next week
to discuss the ban . He said it would probably issue a formal protest against the
administration's rejection last Friday of a Seattle exporter's request for permis
sion to sell some $ 400 million worth of wheat and barley to China and North
Korea .
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 73
" Restraint of trade on the necessities of life is a totally different matter from
an embargo on goods of warmaking potential such as steel," he said in a tele
phone interview from his Washington office.
This is the first time the Grange, which has 800,000 members on the Nation's
farms, has come so close to taking a stand on the question. Mr. Newsom based
his view on humanitarian considerations rather than the need to reduce the
Nation's price -depressing surplus of 1,200 million bushels of wheat.
The position quickly gained the support of representatives of the National
Wheat Growers Association in Kansas. In the association's Washington office,
however, James Dyess, executive vice president, said his organization had no
policy on the matter and “ does not feel we should try to influence the foreign
policy of the country one way or another."
There is now an embargo against shipment of any goods to Communist China
and North Korea , although the law establishing it set up a Cabinet- level review
board with authority to waive it and grant export licenses in specific cases.
President Kennedy said at a news conference 2 weeks ago that there was
" no information " that the Seattle concern had any direct purchase orders from
the Peiping or North Korea regimes. The implication was that an open request
from the Chinese for food to feed a starving populace might get a different
response .
Charles B. Shuman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, said
here that his organization believed " we should sell for dollars anywhere anyone
wants to buy.” But he added that he was not in favor of " soliciting” business
with Communist China even though the competitors of American wheatgrowers
in Canada were doing so .
A new organization , called the Kansas Freedom From Hunger Committee, was
formed in Topeka earlier this week . It hopes to collect the signatures of 100,000
Kansans for an open letter to President Kennedy requesting the shipment of sur
plus food to Communist China “ as an act of human compassion regardless of
ideological and political differences. ” Today, posts of Veterans of Foreign Wars
and the American Legion in Topeka protested the petition .
[ From the New York Times, Apr. 1 , 1962)
MEANY PROPOSES Food AID TO REDS—WOULD SEND U.S. TEAMS TO DISTRIBUTE
FREE GOODS , AS HOOVER DID IN THE 1920's
WASHINGTON , March 31 ( AP ) .–George Meany proposed today a plan to send
American relief teams behind the Iron Curtain to distribute free food and medi
cine. The Communist world , he said , is plagued by starvation.
The labor leader said such a plan was negotiated with Lenin following World
War I had worked out well , and, under the direction of Herbert Hoover, had
saved millions of lives in the Russian famine of the early 1920's.
" It should ,” he said , " therefore be welcomed by Mao Tse - tung, Khrushchev,
Castro, Tito and all the other Communist dictators who now are vying with each
other in expressing undying devotion to everything Lenin ever said or did . ”
Mr. Meany outlined his plan in the American Federationist, monthly magazine
of the American Federation of Labor and Council of Industrial Organizations,
Mr. Meany, who is president of the federation , said Americans would like to
help alleviate human suffering if they had an assured way of getting aid to
those who needed it.
OPPOSES SALES OF GOODS
Mr. Meany said selling grain or goods to dictators " whose policies have brought
misery and hunger” to their peoples would not help . Communist leaders, he
said , are not above reselling such supplies or storing them for military forces
" geared to oppression at home and aggression abroad.”
But he said an organization such as the American Relief Administration in.
the twenties that sent American teams to stricken areas and gave aid directly
to famine victims could work without any “ possible misunderstanding by the
recipients of the aid as to who helped them ."
President Kennedy has said there have been no requests for aid from Com
munist China, which has a severe food shortage. But Mr. Meany noted that
Mr. Kennedy had stated recently about that situation that “ if people's lives are
iuvolved , if there is a desire for food, the United States would consider it
carefully.”
74 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
Saying the Communists had expressed deep gratitude for the aid given after
World War I , Mr. Meany continued :
“ Our country has always shown great generosity and capacity in helping save
people from starvation . The American people would rather give away some of
their rice, wheat, butter, textiles, and medicines to the needy people in Com
munist China, Cuba, and elsewhere behind the Iron Curtain than to sell these
goods for gold mined by slave labor.
" AGAINST ' BUSINESS AS USUAL
“ The suffering is far too great and the human crisis is far too grave to be met
with business as usual transactions and deals. The conquest of hunger must
know no politics.
“ The principles and experience of the American Relief Association in saving
Lenin's Russia from famine could well provide the guiding line for our country's
efforts to help those now menaced by famine behind the Iron Curtain ."
Some Communist countries in Europe, including Poland and Yugoslavia , are
receiving United States surplus food shipments, as well as aid from private
United States relief agencies. No American food is being sent to Communist
China , although Peiping buys some food supplies from Allied countries.
The American embargo on trade with Cuba does not apply to food or medicine.
However, Cuban food purchases here have been dwindling, with Premier Fidel
Castro apparently spending what cash he has for military supplies. Mr. Meany
said the Cuban food shortage was becoming desperate.
[ From the Washington Star, Apr. 1 , 1962 )
SEND U.S. FOOD TEAMS TO REDS, MEANY ASKS
AFL - CIO President George Meany yesterday proposed a plan to send Ameri
can relief teams behind the Communist iron curtain to distribute free food
and medicine to starving millions.
Mr. Meany said such a plan negotiated with the late Communist leader Nikolai
Lenin following World War I worked out well and, under the direction of Herbert
Hoover, saved millions of lives in the Russian famine of the early 1920's.
“ It should,” he said , " therefore be welcomed by Mao Tsetung, Khrushchev,
Castro, Tito and all the other Communist dictators who now are vying with each
other in expressing undying devotion to everything Lenin ever said or did.”
Mr. Meany, outlining his plan in the AFL - CIO monthly magazine, the Ameri
can Federationist, said the Communist world is plagued with starvation. He
said Americans would like to help ease human suffering if they had an assured
way of getting aid to those who need it.
Mr. Meany said selling grain or goods to dictators “whose policies have brought
misery and hunger” to their peoples won't help because he said the Red leaders
are not above reselling ch supplies or storing them for military forces "geared
to oppression at home an aggression abroad.”
But he said an organization like the American relief administration in the
1920's that sent American teams to stricken areas and gave aid directly to
famine victims could work without any “possible misunderstanding by the
recipients of the aid as to who helped them .”
President Kennedy has said there have been no requests for aid from famine
hit Red China. But Mr. Meany noted that Mr. Kennedy had stated recently
about that situation that “ if people's lives are involved , if there is a desire for TI
food, the United States would consider it carefully."
Some Communist satellite countries in Europe, including Poland and Yugo
slavia , are receiving U.S. surplus food shipments, as well as aid from
private U.S. relief agencies. No American food is being sent to Red
China although it buys some food supplies from allied countries.
So far as Cuba is concerned the American embargo does not apply to food
or medicine. However, Cuban food purchases here have been dwindling with
Castro apparently spending what cash he has for military supplies. Mr. Meany ,
said the Cuban food shortage is becoming desperate.
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 75
[ From the Gazette and Dally, Mar. 27, 1962 ]
HUNGER IN CHINA
Refusal of the Commerce Department the other day to permit shipment of 642
million tons of wheat and barley to China and North Korea by a business firm
in Seattle once again pinponts our blindness to reality in dealing with the Chinese
people. The only China we know is the paper government of Chiang Kai-shek
on Formosa ; the 600 some million on mainland China — 20 percent of the world's
population — are officially nonexistent. We haven't recognized them since their
unification and have done all within our power to keep them from joining the
family of nations represented by the U.N.
We seem to be bent on repeating the blunders with China that we made in
dealing with Russia a generation ago ; and with the same ill effect. It took us
15 years before we got around to exchange ambassadors with the Soviets. Dur
ing that period we not only declined to do business with them diplomatically but
turned thumbs down on businessmen who sought commercial opportunities there.
When Col. Hugh L. Cooper, a retired Army engineer , who built the dam on the
Dnieper river for the Soviets, in the twenties, returned with a glowing report of
the business possibilities for American capital and American know - how and
urged American businessmen to take advantage of the opportunity , the then
Commerce Department under Herbert Hoover would have none of it.
The results are now history . We lost a great opportunity, and the friendship
of the Russian people whose efforts at industrialization subjected them to hard
ships which might have been avoided had they been able to benefit by American
capital and American know-how. If our policy was designed to block Soviet
efforts to industrialize, we have succeeded only in alienating the goodwill of a
people with whom , like it or not, we must live and get along in a world much
smaller than it was even a generation ago . There's little doubt but that the lack
of confidence on both sides impeding the disarmament sessions at Geneva, is in
no small degree due to the attitude maintained when the Soviets were the under
dog in world affairs. Our present attitude toward China shows we have learned
little from our experience with Russia.
Refusal to permit shipment of foodstuff to China by American businessmen has
overtones of a far more serious character than political folly . We appear to
be saying by our behavior that because we don't like China's form of government
we don't care how many Chinese men, women, and children suffer from mal
nutrition . These are shipments of food , not guns. Such an attitude belies the
natural generosity of the American people who have never turned a deaf ear to
the suffering of mankind.
A great friend of America in our own days of trial, Edmund Burke, addressing
an unfriendly House of Commons, put it in words worth repeating : “Magna
nimity in politics is not seldom the truest of wisdom, and great empires and little
minds go ill together." How true.
[ Advertisement from the New York Times, May 28 , 1962 )
FAMINE IN CHINA --OUR GOVERNMENT HAS OVER 2.3 BILLION BUSHELS OF SURPLUS
GRAIN - WE HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION To LIFT OUR EMBARGO
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT : We feel acutely the disparity between our abundance
of food and the terrible scarcity in other lands. There is famine on the main
land of China while we in America have a surplus of wheat. The United States
traditionally has responded to a concern for the hungry of the world . Political
disagreements should not interfere with the fulfillment of our moral obligation
to feed starving people wherever they may be.
Mr. President, you reflected this American sense of responsibility in your
first press conference when you said : “ If there is a desire for food and a need
for food, the United States would be glad to consider that need, regardless of
the source . "
In fulfillment of this policy we urge that the United States now take the
following actions :
Authorize the private sale of grain to mainland China.
76 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
Offer to work out arrangements for making grain from our surplus stocks
available as a gift to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
for famine relief in China.
Herbert Agoos Felicia Lamport Kaplan
Ruth Agoos James Lawrence, Jr.
William Alfred Hilda Lieberg
Robert N. Bellah George McCandlish
Crane Brinton Violet Brooks McCandlish
Cecilia Brinton Dr. Samuel G. McClellan
Gorham Brooks David McClelland
Shepherd Brooks Mary McClelland
Katherine Bruner Millicent Cary McIntosh
Hiidreth Burnett Adelaide Marquand
Bishop Donald J. Campbell Leonore Marshall
Hester Hocking Campbell Harold C. Martin
James Carey Perry Miller
Henry Steele Commager Elizabeth Miller
Evan Commager Evelyn Morgan
Francis Judd Cooke Dr. Henry Adams Mosher
Maymay Ludwig Cooke Nancy Mosher
Jacqueline Cooke Henry A. Murray
Albert Sprague Coolidge Robert B. Nathanson
Margaret Stewart Coolidge Reinhold Niebuhr
Phyllis Byrne Cox Ursula Niebuhr
Gordon Crothers David Edward Owen
Marion Crothers Louise Owen
Charles Eliot John B. Paine, Jr.
Regina Eliot Henrietta N. Paine
Alla G. Emerson J. Harlston Parker
Erik H. Erikson Susannah Ayer Parker
Dr. Jacob Fine Hester Chanler Pickman.
Dr. Maurice Fremont-Smith Royce Pitkin
Mary Thayer Fremont- Smith Helen Pitkin
Roger Fisher Dr. Curtis Prout
Josephine Crosby Forbes F. L. W. Richardson , Jr.
Dr. M. Robert Gardner Rebecca B. Richardson
Rabbi Roland B. Gittelsohn David Riesman
John Chipman Gray Norman Rockwell
Helen L. Gray Mollie Rockwell
Rosalind Huidekoper Greene Elizabeth C. Rubel
Lee S. Halprin Florence Selleck
Isabelle Halstead José Luis Sert
Mary F. Handlin Moncha Sert
William Ernest Hocking Stanley D. Sheldon
C. Fenno Hoffman , Jr. Sayre Phillips Sheldon
Ruth Hoffman Elsie B. Sherwood
Irene Hoglund William Shurcliff
Mark DeWolfe Howe Joan Hopkinson Shurcliff
Georgina P. Howland Alice Smith
Celia Hubbard Elizabeth B. Spencer
Everett Cherrington Hughes Polly Thayer Starr
Helen Hughes Paul Tillich
Arnold Hunnewell Hannah Tillich
Mary C. Hlunnewell Rev. Howard Thurman
Gertrude Amory Hutchins Christopher Tunnard
Louis L. Jaffe Sam Bass Warner, Jr.
Mildred M. Jaffe Dr. Richard Warren
Dr. Charles A. Janeway Cora Lyman Warren
Elizabeth B. Janeway Robert W. White
Evelyn Johnson Margaret L. White
Howard Mumford Jones Amos Wilder
Theodore Jones Catharine Wilder
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 77
7
NEW ENGLAND COMMITTEE FOR FAMINE RELIEF TO CHINA
Esmee De Menocal Brooks Mary Manning Howe
Joan Mowat Erikson Evelyn Thompson Riesman
Caroline Speer Fisher Lyle Lobel Warner
We urge you to cut out and sign this advertisement and send it to your
Congressman . We urge you also to reprint this in your local newspaper. Write
New England Committee, 140 Upland Road, Cambridge, Mass.
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION ,
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA OFFICE,
San Francisco, Calif., November 25, 1961 .
President John F. KENNEDY ,
The White House, Washington, D.C.
DEAR JOHN KENNEDY : The enclosed statement urging the sale of wheat to the
Peoples Republic of China has been endorsed by the religious leaders listed below.
It is my understanding that sale of the wheat could proceed if you were to direct
the Department of Commerce to issue an export license for this purpose. It is
the hope of the signers that if this is the situation , you will see that a license
is issued soon . If present law prohibits action, they would appreciate your
efforts to change the law.
Signers of the statement are
Sidney Akselrad, president of the Northern California Board of Rabbis,
Temple Beth El, Arch and Vine Streets, Berkeley.
Joseph Glaser, social action chairman of the Northern California Board
of Rabbis, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 209 Post St., San
Francisco.
George T. Peters, chairman of the Social Education & Action Committee of
the United Presbyterian Church , Synod of California , First Presbyterian
Church, Burlingame, Calif.
James Pike, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California, 1055 Taylor
St. , San Francisco.
Harry Scholefield , minister of the First Unitarian Church of San Fran
cisco, Geary and Van Ness Streets, San Francisco .
Madge Seaver, chairman of the northern California office of the Friends
Committee on Legislation , 2160 Lake St. , San Francisco.
W. Earle Smith, executive secretary of the American Baptist Union of
the San Francisco Bay Cities, 83 McAllister St. , San Francisco.
Sincerely,
HENRY LOHMANN .
A STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SELLING WHEAT TO MAINLAND CHINA,
NOVEMBER 22, 1961
Thanksgiving in America has always been a time for pausing after the harvest
to give thanks to God for providing a land which has brought forth food and
materials in abundance . But can one lift his heart in such thanks without a
deep longing to see fed all those who hunger ?
This week news has come that mainland China is seeking to purchase American
surplus wheat through private channels. It is reported that the purchases are
needed to raise the food ration to 1,500 calories daily for the Chinese, hardly
enough to sustain life. It is reported also that our Government may not allow
this sale of surplus wheat.
Our land has been so blessed in the production of grain that some have come
to view America's overflowing silos as a burden . Now this surplus offers an
opportunity to respond to human beings in extremity.
With thanks to God for his bounteous goodness to us , we petition our Govern.
ment , and the people of our Nation to place no barrier to selling food to those
who are hungry in any land, regardless of the political position of their leaders,
which most certainly we do not endorse in this instance.
We hope that those in authority in China will convey to the Chinese people
the concern that we feel for their welfare. May our action as a nation be
such that it will serve to bring closer the day when swords will be beaten into
plowshares and spears into pruning hooks.
87541_62 -6
78 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
" But whoso hath this world's good , and seeth his brother have need, and
shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God
in him ?" I John 3:17 .
" If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat * * * ." Proverbs 25:21.
[ From the New York Times, May 28 , 1962 ]
RABBI URGES UNITED STATES TO OFFER GRAIN TO RED CHINA - EISENDRATH WOULD
NOT WAIT TO BE ASKED FOR THE SURPLUS - HE FEARS POWER STRUGGLE IS
SUBMERGING MORAL VALUES
( By Irving Spiegel)
A leader of American Reform Judaism urged the national administration last
night to take the " moral initiate ” and offer surplus grain to Red China “ with
out waiting to be asked for it ."
Rabbi Maurice N. Eisendrath, president of the Union of American Hebrew
Congregations, referred to President Kennedy's statements that the United States
would be willing to supply the grain if Red China made such a request. The
spiritual leader said :
“ I deeply fear that in this grueling contest with communism , we often sub
ordinate our moral and human values to our military and scientific power . But
moral impotence on our part will in the long run have a greater impact on the
hearts and minds of the peoples of the world than all our military pyrotechnics,
our troops in Thailand , our rockets to the moon , and our blasting of Van Allen
Belts in outer space .”
Dr. 'Eisendrath“ spoke at a $ 100 -a -plate dinner given by the Combined Cam
paign for American Reform Judaism in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in connection
with the board of trustees meeting of the Union of American Hebrew Congre
gations. The union is the representive body of all reform congregations in
the Western Hemisphere.
The proceeds of the dinner will go toward the support and maintenance of
the programs of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations and the Hebrew
Union College -Jewish Institute of Religion, a reform rabbinical seminary.
Representative Abraham J. Multer of Brooklyn, a member of the union's board
of trustees, received a plaque in recognition of his public service and efforts on
behalf of American Reform Judaism. Jack Davis, general chairman of the cam
paign , inade the presentation.
In his address, Rabbi Eisendrath described as “ ugly” the fact that “under our
basic and permanent immigration law, the immigration quota of the entire
country of China is 104." 1
“ Our immigration laws are based upon racism and discrimination," he said.
In another address, James J. Saxon , U.S. Controller of the Currency , appealed -
to bankers, businessmen and labor leaders not to limit themselves to meeting the
requirements of “ the law ” but to give increasing weight to “ the social impli
cations" of their acts and to conduct their affairs with the national interest in
mind .
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT KENNEDY
We Kansans, living in the breadbasket of America, feel acutely the disparity
between our abundance in food and the scarcity in other lands .
Particularly do we sense the human tragedy of famine and starvation on the
mainland of China. We believe that both we and the Chinees people, in spite
of the ideological and political differences that separate our governments, are
kin in the common root of all mankind : “ God hath made of one blood all nations
of men .” Acts 17:26.
Mr. President, we petition you ( and the Congress of the United States) to
seek ways to make food from our abundance available to the hungry of China
as an act of human compassion . " If thine enemy hunger, give him bread to
eat.” Proverbs 25:21.
.
We realize that many difficulties stand in the way of our desire to alleviate
the distress of the Chinese people. The obstacles notwithstanding, we urge that
the U.S. Government take immediate initiative and quickly make an offer in
good faith through international channels.
For we would not be true to the bedrock idealism of our American heritage
nor to the golden rule of our religious faith if we too easily called ourselves
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 79
helpless to assist our hungry brothers. We must test every means to that end,
which, with the help of God , we will discover.
As you have stated , Mr. President, in your first press conference on January
25 , 1961, the United States would be glad to consider the need for food “ regard
less of the source” where “ peoples' lives are involved .” We believe that it is
urgent that we act now because peoples' lives are involved . To this end we sub
mit the following :
1. That the United States offer to provide famine relief for the Chinese
people under title II of Public Law 480, which permits grants of food to
friendly people regardless of the friendliness of their Government;
2. That such assistance be made through United Nations channels, perhaps
under the auspices of the Food and Agricultural Organization's current
“ Freedom From Hunger Campaign ” ;
3. That the arrangement with the U.N. provide that the Chinese govern
ment repay the U.N. in money or in kind. The amount so repaid could be
used to meet future food emergencies in other parts of the world.
Rev. Harold Z. Bomberger, pastor, McPherson Church of the Brethren, presi.
dent, Kansas Council of Churches ; Dr. Desmond Bittinger, president, McPherson
College, McPherson , Kans.; C. Verne Cochran, farmer, president, Federal and
Land Bank Association, of Topeka ; Rev. R. Dale Ferris , Kansas State director,
Church World Service, CROP ; Dr. E. G. Froyd , executive secretary Synod of
Kansas, United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A.; Alice Margaret Huggins, China
missionary, author, Topeka , Kans.; Professor Emeritus John Ise, University of
Kansas, Lawrence, Kans. ; The Rev. Robert J. Kelly , S.J. , St. Mary's Seminary,
St. Marys, Kans. ; Rt. Rev. Arnold M. Lewis, bishop, Episcopal Missionary Dis
trict of Western Kansas, Salina, Kans.; Dr. NedBurr McKenny, minister, Cen
tral Congregational Church, Topeka , Kans. ; William C. Menninger, M.D. , the
Menninger Foundation, Topeka, Kans. ; Dr. L. M. Rymph , superintendent, Kansas
Congregational and Christian Conference ; Rabbi Elbert Sapinsley, Temple Beth
Sholem , Topeka, Kans.; Bishop Eugene Slater, Kansas area , the Methodist
Church ; Rev. Harold B. Statler, executive secretary, Kansas Council of Churches,
Topeka, Kans.; Mrs. Ernest Tonsing, past president, Kansas United Church
Women, Topeka, Kans. ; Dr. Ewart Watts, minister, First Methodist Church,
Topeka, Kans.; Rev. Ralph Weber, president, Western District Conference, Gen
eral Conference Mennonite Church, Moundridge, Kans.
Senator Fong. Do you feel there is a majority opinion in the United
States to offer food to thehungry in China?
Mr. SNYDER. This Gallup poll was made 15 months ago and the
figures then were 52 percent in favor, 37 percent opposed, and 11 per
cent with no opinion . There have been a number ofopinion leaders,
farm organizations, religious groups, and some of our leading editorial
writers in our newspapers who favored this point of view in one form
or another .
There are differences in the proposals they would support, but they
haveall indicated interest and support for the general idea of using
U.S. surplus food to feed the hungry in China.
Senator Fong. Now , do you know anything about the sending of
food parcels from Hong Kong to the interior of China ? Do you have
any information on that ?
Mr. SNYDER. I think William Channel can speak to that. All I
could speak to would be that it is impossible for an American citizen
to try to send a food parcel to a person in China through Hong Kong
or nay other way.
Mr. CHANNEL. Practically everyone in Hong Kong seems to have a
relative or several relatives in China to whom they are sending food .
During the month of March, I believe, more than a million of these
packages were sent to China through the mails.
Now, the food that goes through the mail from Hong Kong, cannot
exceed 2 pounds per package.
There arealso certain shops that have set up business in Hong Kong
for direct delivery of commodities to China. Customers at these
80 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
shops prepay the duty in Hong Kong dollars for any food they send
into China, so that recipients will not have to pay duty.
Because of the cotton shortage, the Chinese receive a ration of 21/22
feet of cotton per year. Thus, many people who send packages to
China use face towels as wrapping material andput the writing on
the outside of that so at the same time they send food, they also send
a little cotton .
Senator Fong. Do you have any information as to whether these
parcels actually get there !
Mr. CHANNEL. I can only say that individuals whom I know in
Hong Kongwho send food say that the food is delivered .
Senator Fong. The same thing is happening in Macao, is it not ?
Mr. CHANNEL . Yes, I think so; although I think the refugees in
Macao are less affluent than those in Hong Kong. There is a greater
shortage of jobs in Macao, so they are probably not able to send as
much food to China as the peopleof Hong Kong.
Senator Fong. I was interested in your desalination plant. Do
you know whether the Hong Kong government is considering such
a plant ?
Mr. CHANNEL. I have not seen anything in the press inHong Kong
for a little over a year.At that time, the matter was discussed, but
it was felt that the cost was prohibitive. Now that Congress has
passed a law allowing the Department of the Interior to help finance
such projects, construction of a desalination plant might very well be
feasible.
The Office of Saline Water in the Departmentof the Interior could
supply you with additional information as to the possibilities here.
Senator Fong. What did you say was the number of gallons used in
Hong Kong per day ?
Mr. CHANNEL. Approximately 40 to 50 million a day.
Senator Fong. Would you propose a plant that would take care of
100 percent of their needs ?
Mr. CHANNEL. Well, by saying 40 to 50 million gallons a day, I
am saying that at this level, they do not have enough water. For
instance, I know the difference, from experience of living in Hong
Kong when there is 8 hours a day of water instead of only 4 hours a
day of water. The difference in livingcomfort is tremendous. So
that is, during the periods that Hong Kong normally provides its
people with 4 hours of water they could have 8 hours of water a day,
this would make a tremendous difference. So that even though con
struction of аa. desalination plant might increase the supply 100 percent
over the present water supply during the short seasons of the year,
it still would only be a supplementary plant.
By theway, on the cost of this thing, the cost of converting water is
quite high in a small million -gallon-a -day plant. It costs something
like $ 1 per 1,000 gallons. But the cost goes down as production goes
up. According to some estimates, the cost of producing 50 million
gallons a day might be out back to42 cents per 1,000 gallons. The
present cost of producing water in Hong Kong is 20 cents per 1,000
gallons, using the reservoir system . So you see ,conversion is stillnot
as economical as the reservoir system presently used in Hong Kong,
but Hong Kong is in exactly the situation where a more expensive
system should be explored because the shortage is so acute and the
needs are so great. Construction of a desalination plant in Hong
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 81
Kong could provide the world with a valuable laboratory for explor
ing additional techniques for converting sea water to fresh water at
low cost .
Senator Fong. Would you cut the volume down to one-half ? If
you were to cut the volume down to one-half of 50 million gallons,
say to 25 million gallons, would the cost be cut from $40 to $ 20 million ?
Mr. CHANNEL . The cost of installation would be cut, of course , but
the cost of producing water would be higher.
Senator Fong. Mr. Channel, were you in Hong Kong when the
textile agreement was entered into ?
Mr. CHANNEL. Yes.
Senator Fong. Would you tell us something about the reaction ?
Mr. CHANNEL. The reaction was very bitter. Now, I think we need
to consider that some of the bitter reaction that appeared in the papers
was the voice of the big manufacturers. The big manufacturer spoke
of the hardship to refugees, whereas he may have been thinking actu
ally about his own profits. However, the fact does remain that it is
the workingman that suffers and is thrown out of work. I think
Hong Kong has been unrealistic in not diversifying its industry.more
rapidly. The textile industry is comparatively easy to set up and
put into production as compared to some of the heavier industries.
The Hong Kong manufacturers took advantage of this fact because
it provided quick return for their capital . That is why I have sug
gested that we try to give some aid to Hong Kong industrialists, per
haps researchwise, in helping them diversify their industry, so that
they can still employ vast numbers of people but will not become so
much of a threat to our particular markets.
Of course, I understand that the textiles we import are relatively
small as faras ourtotal textile production is concerned.
Senator Fong. The long bell you heard says “ Come and vote," so
I will have to call a recess for about half an hour.
( Recess taken. )
Senator Fong. Mr. Channel, may I ask you one question ?
Mr. CHANNEL. Yes.
Mr. Fong. The American Friends Service Committee, how many
members are there in that committee ?
How big is your membership ?
Mr. CHANNEL. Well, the American Friends Service Committee is
a national Quaker organization formed to operate service programs.
It is aa board of directors and many committees and subcommittees on
refugees, on social and technical assistance, on race relations, and that
sort of thing. The total number of members on these various commit
tees I would not know .
Senator Fong. Thank you.
Mr. Teymuraz K. Bagration.
STATEMENT OF TEYMURAZ K. BAGRATION, EXECUTIVE SECRE
TARY, TOLSTOY FOUNDATION, INC., NEW YORK , N.Y.
Senator Fong. Mr. Bagration is here in place of Alexandra Tolstoy,
president of the Tolstoy Foundation .
Mr. BAGRATION. I am Teymuraz K. Bagration , Executive Secretary
of the Tolstoy Foundation .
82 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
Before I read my statement, may I say a few words of introduction ?
We share the concern of voluntary agencies of the American people
for the refugees in Hong Kong from China. We are very much im
pressed and happy to see the President's emergency program being
enacted. Weare also very much in favor of Senator Hart's S. 3043,
which will enlarge the quota for Chinese people, because this will be a
certain solution to the problem .
But our special concern is for group which is not included in the
President's emergency program, and our statement is about this group .
During the past decade, several thousands of Russian refugees,many
of whom were born in China, have been escaping to freedom from
Harbin , Shanghai, Tsientsin, and other Chinese cities. They enter
Hong Kong on a transit visa and are helped by voluntary agencies,
mainly by the World Council of Churches - I should add by CARE,
with food packages — to emigrate to other countries — mostly to Latin
America and Australia. At the present moment there are 162 Russian
refugees in Hong Kong.
Unfortunately those who are sent to the countries of South Ameri
ca cannot be always considered as permanently resettled anda great
number of those refugees are now immigrating to the United States
on affidavits provided by their relatives or other organizations.
According to the survey just made by the Director of the Tolstoy
Foundation ,Mrs. Tatiana Schaufuss, inArgentina, Brazil, and Chile,
a great number of those refugees have no permanent work and live
in great poverty and need — especially the old and disabled.
After the Russian revolution of 1918 some 80,000 Russians re *
mained in China ; the White Russian Armies of Admiral Koltchak .
refugees from Siberia, and the families of the personnel of the Rus
sian -Chinese Railway. Only a small part was evacuated in the early
fifties by the InternationalRefugee Organization to the Philippines ,
the Tolstoy Foundation took part in their resettlement- others were
forced to return to Soviet Russia. For those who remained in China,
life became unbearable.
At the present moment 6,000 to 8,000 Russian refugees still remain in
China. These people have been suffering for many years under the
yoke of communism , with the only hope to escape and start living
like human beings in a free country. Among those Russians is a group
of religious farmers, of the old Orthodox faith — the so-called old
Believers — residing in Singkiang and Manchuria.
In 1940 those in Singkiang were organized in army groups of the
Nationalist Chinese military units which fought in 1946–48 against
the Red Chinese and the Soviet Army. Out of a group of 200 men ,
that's from Singkiang, only 22 escaped through the Gobi Desert, the
Himalayas, and the snowy mountains of Tibet - finally reached Cal
cutta in 1952 — from where they emigrated with the help of the Tol
stoy Foundation and are now happily resettled in Haverstraw near
the Tolstoy Foundation Farm in Rockland County, N.Y.
Another group of Old Believers, assisted by the World Council
of Churches,immigrated through Hong Kong to the Parana Prov
ince of Brazil, where some of them are not happy, and to our knowl
edge there is still a large number of them in China.
The Russian refugees in China have behind them many years of
physical and moral suffering. It was not easy for the Russians,, many
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 83
of whom fought against Communists and who opposed communism ,
to follow the orders for registration with the Soviet Government rep
resentatives in China so as to be able to have some kind of identifica
tion card enabling them to receive employment and food -ration cards
and not face starvation .
Chinese refugees and refugees from China of European origin
born in Russia or China, have been a problem since the end of World
War II. The American Government has shown its .concern and
given support to the refugees, with funds for transportation and
maintenance through the Intergovernmental Committee for Euro
pean Migration , the United Nations High Commissioner for Re
fugees, the U.S. escapee program and the Far East refugee program .
The President's emergency program to bring several thousand Chin
ese refugees to this country, under the parolee provision of the law,
is a great contribution to therefugee problem and has raised the
sympathy and admiration of all those who work inthe refugee field.
The Tolstoy Foundation sincerely hopes that the European refugees
from China, manyof whom were born in that country, will also bene
fit from the President's emergency program , and that those people
who live under constant threat of deportation, who from month to
month survive on scanty ration cards, whose security is in danger
would also be worthy of consideration and would be given a chance
to start a new life in this country.
The Tolstoy Foundation stands ready to help those refugees.
Mr. Chairman, may I add tothis that the quota under the present
law for Europeans born in China is 105. The preference, the four
preferences are open , but we are concerned about thoserefugees who
are still in China and who are not eligible for any preference quota.
I call them refugees although they are still in China, because they
are refugees from the Russian revolution. They received asylum
in China. They went through the tribulations and all the hardships
of the Chinese people being together withthe Chineseunder the Japa
nese occupation, under the Soviet occupation of Manchuria until 1946 ,
and laterunder the Communist regime.
We feel that no distinction should be made between Chinese na
tional refugees and the Russian refugees in China. They are under
the same difficulties and the same dangers. If there is a possibility
to bring some of them to this country, especially those whocannot go
to Latin America for one reason or another, it would be a great im
provement and a great boost to the morale of the Russians in China .
Senator Fong. You are speaking primarily of the 200 Russian refu
gees in Hong Kong ; is that it ?
Mr. BAGRATION . No, sir, Mr. Chairman . There are 162 in Hong
Kong now. There are usually not over 300, because the crown col
onyaccepts refugees only in transit. They must show evidence of a
final destination , which at the present time is usually South America
or Australia. I am speaking of several thousand refugees who are
still in China. It is a very difficult thing to give a correct figure now .
It varies from the source . Some people say there are 10,000 people ;
others say there are6,000.
I just spoke with Mr. Brown today, who mentioned the figure of
6,000 people in China and 2,000 who are not registered, which makes
about 8,000 altogether.
84 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
Senator Fong. Do you know whether they could get out of Com
munist China ?
Mr. BAGRATION. If they are able to secure an entry visa to some
country, which they are not always able to do, sometimes, because
they are afraid to approach or deal with foreign agencies, or foreign
consulates. The next question is if they are able to raise enough ran
som money for exit purposes. They have to sell property if they still
have it and usually they come out without a penny and on the border,
they are stripped from their clothes and sometimes they appear in
1
their underwear.
It is very difficult to say how the Chinese authorities operate when
they change their minds. Sometimes they let some 300 people at once,
sometimes nobody.
The most difficult question here is that the exit permit, which is
usually bought for a special price, because the Russians have to pay
a certain " donation," in quotes, to the Society of Soviet Citizens, also
to pay to Chinese authorities some " donation ” for specific plans of
the government. Then they wait only 1 year. The difficulty comes
when they are not able to leave the country, China, within 1 year,
they lose their permit and have to start all over again .
Senator FONG. Any questions, Mr. Johnson ?
Mr. JOHNSON. No.
Mr. DE HAAN . Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of questions. Mr.
Bagration, would you say the United Nations High Commissioner for?
Refugees has underestimated the number of Russians still in China
I believe he gives a figure of some 3,800 .
Mr. BAGRATION. Most official figures are in the report of the Special
Subcommittee of the House presented by Congressman Walter.
There is a figure here of, as of June 30, 1961. They give a figure of
16,459 White Russians that have been resettled from HongKong,
They mention that it is estimated that 7,104 White Russians are still
in China, of which 4,708 are visa holders and 2,461 are non visa holders,
Now, recently, Ilia Tolstoy, vice president of the Tolstoy Founda
tion was in Hong Kong. He gave three different figures, emanating
from three different sources, varying from 1,000 to 8,000.
So nobody knows how many there are .
There was a letter received 3 months ago from Archbishop Sava,
the Orthodox archbishop of Australia, who mentions a group of
White Russians, he mentions 1,000 families with many children. This
is only partof the group.
Mr. DE HAAN. I was not quoting figures from the report of Con
gressman Walter's House committee, but from the report of the High
Commissioner to the meeting of his executive committee last month
afar more recent report. Do you believe the program of the U.N.
High Commissioner can be closed out in 1963, as is planned at the
present time ?
Mr. BAGRATION. I doubt it very much, because the High Commis
sioner program is to give protection and assistance for those who
come out. It would not include those who are still in China, of course.
The program would still be continued , because they will be coming
all the time.
REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO 85
Mr. DE HAAN. As I understand it, the High Commissioner has
indicated all the Russians, including those not currently possessing
exit permits, will have left the mainland, and will have been re
settled by the end of 1963.
Mr. BAGRATION. That was the program in 1959.
Mr. DE HAAN. I am referring here, to the report of the High Com
missioner, which I mentioned a moment ago. The facts would indi
cate steady progress is being made in the High Commissioner's pro
gram .
Mr. BAGRATION. I am not aware of that, but there was a program
proposed by the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migra
tion and by the High Commissioner . It depends on the money
available.
Senator Fong. I have a statement here from Paul Empie, executive
director of the National Lutheran Council . He is unable to be here.
His statement will be incorporated in the record .
( The statement referred to is as follows :)
STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL C. EMPIE
NATIONAL LUTHERAN COUNCIL,
New York , N.Y. , June 5 , 1962.
Senator PHILIP A. HART,
Chairman , Subcommittee on Refugees and Escapees of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington , D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : I regret that prior obligations make it impossible for
me to appear in person before your subcommittee which is presently conducting
hearings on the adequacy of present relief programs for Chinese refugees, and
which is gathering information on the possibility of the resettlement of some
of these refugees in various parts of the world, including the United States.
Permit me to state that I am the executive director of the National Lutheran
Council ; the Chairinan of the Commission on World Service of the Lutheran
World Federation ; an officer of Lutheran World Relief ; and have acted as an
adviser to Lutheran Refugee Service, now known as Lutheran Immigration
Service. Represented in one or more of these agencies are seven Lutheran
Churches in America, with a combined membership of about 8 million souls, and
61 Lutheran Churches in 32 countries around the world. These churches have
long expressed a deep concern for Chinese refugees and have supported relief
programs for them in Hong Kong for a number of years.
In view of the close relationship I have had with the refugee problems in
Hong Kong, I would have welcomed an opportunity to discuss various aspects
of the present Chinese refugee program . Inasmuch as this is not appropriate
at these present hearings, I shall merely submit for your records a statement
released by Lutheran Immigration Service, an agency of the National Lutheran
Council and the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, which indicates our response
to the announcement of the President that the United States will admit several
thousand Chinese refugees.
Needless to say , we welcomed the forthright constructive action taken by the
President of the United States and trust that it signifies a continuing sense of re
sponsibility to help in this situation as the resources of our Nation permit.
The statement mentioned above reads as follows :
"The Lutheran churches have long exhibited a deep concern for Chinese
refugees and have maintained a broad and intensive relief program for these
refugees in Hong Kong. Since the beginning of this program in 1954, they have
been disturbed about the limitations within the Colony to reestablish these refu
gees as self -supporting individuals and family units. They have long recog
nized that resettlement outside of the Colony is a primary and urgent need . Thus,
in view of the reluctance of other nations to accept these refugees for resettle
ment within their borders, they have been sympathetic to the problems faced by
the Hong Kong Government in admitting new refugees. Lutheran Immigra
tion Service, therefore, was deeply gratified by the announcenient of the Presi
dent to admit several thousand Chinese refugees into the United States. This
86 REFUGEE PROBLEM IN HONG KONG AND MACAO
was a significant decision and it is hoped that other nations will follow this
lead taken by the United States, and also agree to accept Chinese refugees for