The committee met, pursuant to the call of the chairman, at 10 o'clock a. m., in room 426, Senate Office Building, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge presiding. Present: Senators Lodge (chairman), McCumber, Borah, Brandegee, Knox, Johnson of California, Moses, Hitchcock, Swanson, and Pomerene. STATEMENT OF MR. THOMAS F. F. MILLARD. The CHAIRMAN. Please give your full name. Mr. MILLARD. Thomas F. F. Millard. The CHAIRMAN. You have been a newspaper correspondent, have you not? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; that is my occupation. The CHAIRMAN. Have you been in China in that capacity? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I have been more or less connected with the Far East for 20 years. The CHAIRMAN. In what capacity? Mr. MILLARD. As a writer, à journalist, a publisher of newspapers, editor of newspapers. The CHAIRMAN. I am going to ask Senator Johnson, as he has given particular attention to this matter, to conduct your examination. Senator SWANSON. If the Senator will allow me, before he begins, 1 would like to ask Mr. Millard this question: Did you ever hold any official position, or were you ever advisor to the Chinese Government? Mr. MILLARD. I can state the circumstances to you, and you can judge for yourself. Last February I was in New York. I left China in December and came to New York, and in January and February I wrote the manuscript for a book; and while I was doing that I received a telegram transmitted through the Chinese Legation in Washington, from the Chinese delegation at Paris, asking me if I would come to Paris to advise them in an unofficial capacity. When I had delivered my manuscript, I went on to Paris, and from the time I left New York until I got back they paid my expenses. I received no compensation. Senator SWANSON. No compensation? Mr. MILLARD. No. If that constitutes an official connection, why, that is what it amounted to. I might say in that connection, that it has been the desire of the Chinese delegation at Paris to employ two eminent Americans of reputation as international lawyers, as their official advisors over there; but by reason of advice given to them by our Government, they did not do that. They had an English and a French advisor. Senator BRANDEGEE. What part of our Government gave them. that advice? Mr. MILLARD. I think the advice was first tentatively rendered through our legation at Pekin and afterwards confirmed at Paris in the early weeks of the assemblage of the conference. Senator BRANDEGEE. Confirmed by whom at Paris? 430 Mr. MILLARD. I think, perhaps, by Mr. Lansing, or perhaps communicated through the Far Eastern experts-the advisors of our commission. Senator BRANDEGEE. Do you know what was the ground of that advice that they should not employ American counsel? Mr. MILLARD. The explanation given to me by the Chinese was that our Government felt that China's position over there was somewhat that of the ward of the United States. I am not saying that they used that term, I am using that term as descriptive of the situation. There had been preliminary consultations with the Chinese delegation at Peking before they left for Paris, in which they had. submitted to our legation at Peking a list of the matters which they wished to bring up at Paris. On the suggestion of our Government, communicated through the minister at Peking, certain matters were eliminated. That is, China was advised that our Government considered that it would be inexpedient and would embarrass matters or complicate matters to raise those questions at Paris, and that led to the elimination of those questions. China did not raise those ques tions. Then the matter of employing some expert American advisors was brought up at that time, but I think was deferred for later considera tion. After the peace conference had met at Paris, as I understand it, the matter was brought up again. I, meanwhile, and others, had advised them in a perfectly informal way, myself acting merely as a sort of general friend of China and a man who was known to be a friend of China and familiar with the political questions out there, that they employ a couple of American advisors. I had suggested Mr. John Bassett Moore and Dr. W. W. Willoughbe, who at one time had been employed out there, but neither of those gentlemen went, and I did not know until after I arrived at Paris why they had not gone. Then I was told by the Chinese over there that it had been intimated to them that our Government would prefer that no Americans be officially connected with the Chinese delegation. Senator BRANDEGEE. Was it stated at any time that the embarrassments to which you refer if they did employ American advisors. would be because the plans of our Government or the intention of our Government or of our peace commissioners to protect China would be interfered with if they had American counsel connected with them? Mr. MILLARD. I could not say that. I could only conjecture about it. That was the explanation given me when I got over there. I asked Mr. Wong, and I asked Dr. Ku, because I had had some correspondence here in America with Dr. Willoughbee, in America, as to whether he was going over there or not. I said "Why didn't you get any of these gentlemen? Their counsel would have been valuable in these circumstances." And then they told me they had not done so because it had been intimated to them that our Government would prefer that they did not. I do not know what the motives of our Government were. Senator BRANDEGEE. These Chinese gentlemen to whom you refer as having told you these things, were they officially connected with the Chinese delegation? Mr. MILLARD. They were official envoys of the Chinese Government at Paris. Senator BRANDEGEE. And your services, as I understand you, were without compensation. Simply your expenses were paid? Mr. MILLARD. My expenses were paid. Senator BRANDEGEE. Did you regard it simply as a friendly act? Mr. MILLARD. It was a friendly act on my part, without any compensation. I probably would have gone to Paris any way. Senator MCCUMBER. What were your services to be? What were they? Mr. MILLARD. Just you might say as a sort of friendly counsellor. Senator MCCUMBER. A counsellor representing the Chinese Government? Mr. MILLARD. No; I did not represent the Chinese Government. My position was entirely unofficial. Senator MCCUMBER. I know, but if you were counsel you must have been counsel for somebody or something, and what I am trying to get at is for whom you were acting. Mr. MILLARD. I have explained the exact circumstances. Senator BRANDEGEE. You did not say you were counsel. You said you were advisor. Who received the requests of the Chinese over here in Washington? Who made the requests from Chinawhat man? Mr. MILLARD. It was Dr. Wellington Ku who sent the telegram. He was one of the plenipotentiaries, the former Chinese minister here in Washington. Senator MCCUMBER. You were to advise on what? Mr. MILLARD. Whatever they would ask me to advise them about. Senator MCCUMBER. That is very broad. I assumed that it was technical advice. Mr. MILLARD. On several occasions-I watched the course of events, and whenever anything came up that I thought worthy of attracting their notice, I would call attention to it or write a memorandum about it or something like that, and on two or three occasions they asked me what I thought about this or that question that came up, and I would write a little memorandum about it. Senator MCCUMBER. But you were not acting officially in any way? Mr. MILLARD. Oh, no, sir; in no sense. It was entirely unofficial. Senator BRANDEGEE. Are you interested in any publications published in the Far East now, or anywhere else, with reference to Far Eastern questions? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I am interested in a publication in China. Mr. MILLARD. Millard's Review. Senator BRANDEGEE. Do you own that? Mr. MILLARD. No, it is owned by a corporation. Senator BRANDEGEE. Are you the editor? Mr. MILLARD. Oh, no; I have been away for the last year or so most of the time, and Prof. J. B. Powell is the editor. Senator BRANDEGEE. Were you ever the editor of it? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I founded that paper. Senator MCCUMBER. Did you live in Japan at any time during the last 20 years? Mr. MILLARD. No, sir. I have spent different times over there, sometimes for two or three months at a time. I have been there very frequently but never resided there. Senator SWANSON. Most of the 20 years you have resided in China? Mr. MILLARD. I went to China to reside in 1911. Before that I had been there frequently, sojourning there. Senator SWANSON. Since 1911 you have lived there? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I founded a daily newspaper in China in 1911, called the China Press, and edited it for the first five years of its existence at Shanghai. Senator BRANDEGEE. Do you speak Chinese at all? Mr. MILLARD. Very little. Senator HITCHCOCK. Were you in China at the times the Germans acquired their leasehold and other interests in the Shantung Peninsula? Mr. MILLARD. No; I was first in China in 1897, and that was done the previous year. Senator HITCHCOCK. Is Millard's Review a self-sustaining publication? Mr. MILLARD. It is just about breaking even now. Senator HITCHCOCK. From what does it derive its revenue? Mr. MILLARD. Ordinary sources-subscriptions and advertising. Senator HITCHCOCK. Nothing else? Mr. MILLARD. Nothing else. Senator HITCHCOCK. It has no subsidy? Mr. MILLARD. None whatever. Senator HITCHCOCK. No revenue except from advertising and subscriptions? Mr. MILLARD. Nothing whatever. Senator JOHNSON of California. Its attitude has been very different from that of any American papers that are engaged in Japanese propaganda, has it not? Mr. MILLARD. I do not know as to that. Senator JOHNSON of California. Your residence in China, Mr. Millard, has been for about 20 years, most of that time at Shanghai? Mr. MILLARD. As far as I have had any residence there it has been entirely in Shanghai. Of course I have always traveled more or less. I have made different trips to Peking, but my habitat has been Shanghai. Senator JOHNSON of California. In addition to your journalistic activities have you written any published books on the Far East? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I have published several books on the Far East. Senator JOHNSON of California. What are their titles? Mr. MILLARD. My first book was published in 1906. It was called The New Far East. In 1907 I published a book called America and the Far Eastern Question. Then I published a small book in 1911. Then I published a book in 1916 called Our Eastern Question. Senator KNOX. What was the title of the 1911 book? Mr. MILLARD. That was called The Revolution in China. It was published out there, right in Shanghai, and then it just dropped out of publication and I incorporated some of the contents of that book in a later book, Our Eastern Question, in a more permanent form. 135516-1928 That was published three years ago. Then I published a book the last of May called Democracy and the Eastern Question. Senator JOHNSON of California. During the time you have been in China you have made an intimate study, have you not, of the Far Eastern question? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I think I may say that I have. Senator JOHNSON of California. Not only in its relation to China, but in its relation to the other powers, including Japan? Mr. MILLARD. Yes. Senator JOHNSON of California. You are familiar, are you not, with the situation that exists there at present regarding China and Japan? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; I think I am. Senator JOHNSON of California. Just amplify what you were asked by my colleague a moment ago. What was the date you went to Paris in the capacity you have indicated? Mr. MILLARD. I left New York toward the end of March and arrived there at the end of March. Senator JOHNSON of California. March, 1919? Mr. MILLARD. March, 1919. Senator JOHNSON of California. And you remained there how long? Mr. MILLARD. I remained there until toward the end of May. Senator JOHNSON of California. During the period that you were there was the Shantung question under discussion? Mr. MILLARD. Yes; it was decided during the period that I was there. Senator JOHNSON of California. It was decided during the period that you were there? Mr. MILLARD. Yes. Senator JOHNSON of California. I presume you followed the proceedings of the peace conference respecting the Shantung decision? Mr. MILLARD. Yes, as well as I could. Senator JOHNSON of California. Please go ahead in your own fashion and describe the problem as it affects Japan and China or the Far East, as to the interest of America in the situation there, and then leading up to the decision that was made in the ShantungKaiochow question, and the effect of that so far as the United States is concerned and so far as China is concerned. Go ahead in your own way, if you please. Mr. MILLARD. Well, gentlemen, it might help a little in this connection if I would somewhat briefly give the background of this Shantung question. I might say that the Shantung question is the crux of the fareastern question. It was one of the contributory causes of the great war in Europe, and it was a contributory cause to the creation of one of the two fundamental foreign policies of the United States, the two that I have in mind being the Monroe doctrine and the Hay doctrine. Senator HITCHCOCK. What other doctrine beside the Monroe doctrine? Mr. MILLARD. The Hay doctrine. We are all the time learning about these matters, and there is a great deal about it in a book called The Eclipse of Russia, published by the great authority on Russia, the Englishman, Dr. E. J. Dillon. This book was not permitted for publication during the war, but it was published three or |