Office of the Historian

293.1111/7–2552: Telegram

No. 42
The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Holmes) to the Department of State1

confidential
London, July 25, 1952—6 p.m.

491. US natls detained in China.

1.
Recalling three months gone since his comprehensive representations re fon natls Apr. 21,2 and two months have passed since Chou En-lai’s assurance to Mrs. Pandit (Embtel 5237, May 16),3 Lamb July 17 then offered fol suggestions to FonOff:
(a)
Though some persons released since April, others arrested. UKG therefore ought to press Commies about fon natls question lest it appear Brit acquiesce in this unsatisfactory situation.
(b)
Further note shld be given Commies by Lamb on behalf UK, Canadian and Austral Govts, along these lines.

“On April 21 I expressed grave concern (above govts) for their natls under arrest or detention in China, of whom comprehensive list was enclosed. There has since been no material improvement in situation, for though certain prisoners listed have been released (names given), others, namely Father William Westhoven, US citizen, and Sister Veronique, Canadian Sister, understand to have been arrested. In circumstances, I am instructed reiterate continuing anxiety felt by (above govts) for their natls and to repeat my previous request for info re welfare and whereabouts these people, nature of charges against them, and for facilities communicate with them”.

(c)
It might be desirable for new Indian Amb follow-up Mrs. Pandit’s inquiry re missionaries if, as is likely, nothing further has happened by time he arrives in Peiping.
2.
Emb endorses above, and makes fol suggestions: (a) Both approaches shld be used if possible. It not necessary that they be coordinated. However, Lamb’s follow-up shld come first, for its main value may be as additional peg on which Indian Amb cld hang his argument. Note might be publicized with accompanying material emphasizing continued detention large majority of fon natls listed in Apr 21 note, to make it possible for Indian Amb to use it if he wished. (b) Even though it entails some delay, question of implementing Chou’s assurance to Mrs. Pandit shld be raised with CPG by new Indian Amb,4 not by Chargé Kaul, who may not have ready access to Chou. It wld seem appropriate subj for Amb’s initial conversation with Chou, which presumably wld range widely over probs of mutual interest.
3.
Wld appreciate Dept reactions to above for discussions with FonOff.
Holmes
  1. Repeated for information to Hong Kong and New Delhi.↩
  2. See footnote 5, Document 15.↩
  3. Telegram 5237 reported that Panikkar had told Lamb about Madame Pandit’s conversation with Chou En-lai concerning foreign missionaries in Chinese prisons; according to this report, Chou had stated that the Chinese People’s Government proposed to release all such missionaries in about six weeks, except for two or three who had violated Chinese law by using wireless transmitters. (293.1111/5–1652)↩
  4. Nedyan Raghavan was to succeed Panikkar as Ambassador.↩