CO537-2192 — Page 97

Q.4.

A.

Q.5.

2.6.

3.

(a) From the 2nd day of January, 1942, and for a continuous period of 6 months thereafter, I was kept an actual prisoner in the offices of the wah Kiu Yat Po, eating and sleeping there

For the first 10 without returning even to my own residence.

days, 2 Japanese soldier guards were stationed with drawn bayonets immediately outside the door of my private office. These were replaced after 10 days by Japanese members of the Peace Preservation Corps, but these were stationed instead at the street door with frequent surprise visits day and night in and around the offices.

(b)

From the very beginning the Japanese appointed a super- visor on the editorial staff who was the real and only con-

The first was an Amoynese troller of the whole publication. called Wong Tung Man. After a year he was replaced by another Wong Wong Chuen Hing, a Formosan who in turn was replaced in 1945 by a Chinese returned student from Japan, one Tung Kin Pang.

K

(c) Over-all was the bestial and autocratic bullying methods of the Japanese rulers and Gendarmerie and the difficult course of apparent collaboration with the real purpose of insertion of insidious propaganda for the Allied cause was one be-set with considerable personal danger to myself and the entire editorial staff throughout the whole of the occupation period. In fact, it was almost a daily occur- rence to receive a summons to Japanese Headquarters for explanation of some publication or other in our paper not to the enemy's liking and it was only the knowledge to the Japanese that the Wah Kiu Yat Po had the support of the en- tire population that made them desist from carrying out their oft-repeated threat to seize the paper and "to cut the heads of its workers"! I was actually on one occasion arrested and detailed.

Did you maintain a branch or agency in China for the circu- lation of the Wah Kiu Yat Po in Canton?

The accusation is not in accord with the true factual position, which is:-

The system of Chinese newspapers distribution existent pre- war, during the occupation period and today is that a news- paper distributor in Hong Kong buy up the whole of the various issues at "wholesale" prices and distribute these at "retail" prices to news-hawkers in Hong Kong or export them from the Colony (without supervision or control of the publishers of the newspaper in question). The alleged Canton distributor agent is, therefore, not a branch office of nor in any way connected with the Wah Kiu Yat Po, but merely a news-stand (which had bought its issues at retail prices from the newspaper distributor in Hong Kong) where a sign- board hangs to the effect that "The wah Kiu Yat Po is obtainable here. For a further example, there is a similar news-stand today in Wanchai with a similar signboard up which has no connection whatsoever with my paper.

e.g.

Do you send your issues direct to these news-stands, whether the Canton one or the Wanchai one, and then enter into general accounting with the newspaper distributor? No. All issues are furnished en bloc to the newspaper dis- tributor, who in turn, without our knowledge and/or super- vision, re-distribute them to the news-stands.

Did you make any and if so what arrangements for the circu- lation of the newspaper anywhere in China?