IPR Was Big Business

8/4/2019 IPR Was Big Business

1/13

Published by: The Pacific Studies Center Volume VI ~ Number 4East PatoAtto, C~]ifornia US ISSN (J030-885,1 May-June 1975 ~Was Bigby Jonathan Marshall

If association alone is the test, indeed, it would beeasier to conjure up a picture of the institute as WallStreet, rather than Communist, controlled. Some ofthe influential policy makers in the institute havebeen distinguished representatives of Americanbusiness. Prominent American corporations havealso been among its leading financial supporters. Itis hard to believe that this group, along with someof our greatest foundations and large numbers ofindividual members, could have been duped tofinance Communist subversion through theinstitute. 1 ~illiam L. LockwoodIPR Secretary and Trustee, 1951The Institute of Pacific Relations, a multinational group

played adevelopment of American consciousness of

The Institute achieved great notoriety in 1951, when theInternal Security Subcommittee under Patrick

efensive liberals, harassed during the McCarthythe most important single source of2

In view of this mass of conflicting interpretations and

charges, backed by only the flimsiest of evidence, it is hardlysurprising that much confusion still exists regarding IPRsessential nature. In reaction to the wild charges of theAmerican Right during tlze 1940s and 1950s, Asian scholarshave understandably tended to idealize IPR as a haven fordispassionate scholarship and discussion. Yet, despite thebest intentions of most members and associates, the Instituteacted in both its research and conference capacities to servethe interests of its upper-class, usually Eastern, financialbackers. Even in its origins, IPR was only one of a wholeconstellation of similar organizations funded and directed forthe purpo se of ad vancing the interests of American capitalismoverseas. I.P.R.: ORIGINS AND PURPOSEThe Institute of Pacific Relations originated after WorldWar I as the compromise end of a number of diverse groups

For brcvity~ each Iootnote refers Io the substantial block of material

1. Committee on the .Judiciary (Senatc), Internal SecuritySubeommittce~ hearings, Institute of Pacific Reh~tions. 82ndCongress, 1M Session (USf;PO, 1951), p. 3865, (Hercatlvr, IP RHearings)2, For the McCarran Cmnmittee allegations, see its Repo~q on tlw

INSIDE:Thailands Sangha Has a Friend

at Chase Manhattan Bank --page 14Received--pageooks 15 ~


2/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire Telegramworking to promote cooperation and harmony among Pacificpeoples, As far back as 1916 Alexander Hume Ford of thePan Pacific Union conceived of the idea of improvinginter-Pacific relations through systematic contact betweenthe regions leading representatives, but his particular plansnever matured. After several years delay, the Young MensChristian Association revived the idea with a proposal tosponsor a Pan-Pacific YMCA conference. Contributing to thefavorable atmosphere for such a conference was Ray LymanWilburs massive "Survey of Race Relations," a study ofOriental immigrants on the West Coast. The project attractedmuch positive comment in the Far East, especially thanks toits distinguished participants, including the president ofStanford University (Wilbur) and J. Merle Davis, GeneralSecretary of the International YMCA. The YMCA turned toWilbur to head its Pan-Paclfic conference, soon to becomethe Institute of Pacific Relations.Control of the project, however, soon slipped out ofYMCA hands. As far back as 1921, a leading Honolulubusinessman, Frank C. Atherton (of Castle & Cooke, Inc.)informed the YMCA that he was "deeply interested" to learnof the proposed conference; soon he and fellow Hawaiiannotables such as Clarence H. Cooke, James Dole, and ArthurDean were placed in charge of a central executive committeeto coordinate the conference planning. The group ofHawaiian business and professional men that mo~ed in toformulate the concrete plans for IPR saw the islandspolitical and economic future closely bound up with that ofthe rest of the Pacific. "Keenly aware of the vast new forcesupsurging in Asia," recalls one IPR official, "these menexpressed a need for an organization which wouldconcentrate on the needs and developments of the far-flungregion washed by the Pacific Ocean." Promoting closerregional cooperation and defusing international tensionsthrough an organization like IPR would obviously be to theiradvantage.3

THE YALE CLUB MEETINGAs plans progressed for the Pacific conference, interest inthe idea spread beyond Hawaii and California. In particular,internationally-minded Easterners began taking part in theorganizing effort. In 1924, a group of prominentbusinessmen, professo rs, editors~ and po litical figures formeda temporary organizing committee for the upcomingconference. Ray Lyman Wilbur headed the group. TheCommittee called a meeting of forty-one "well-informedpeople of experience in international and Pacific affairs" to

Frank Atherton

meet at the Yale Club in New York to consider the instituplan.4The February 22, 1925 Yale Club meeting, in its locatiand elite Eastern attendance, reflected a shift in the locus ofpower behind the scheme from Hawaii to New York, homof the foundations and such great internationalistorganizations as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) anthe Foreign Policy Association (FPA). These and othersimilar " " -r rate orgamzatlons grew out of pre-war "peacegroups" (e.g. League to Enforce Peace, World PeaceFoundation), wartime postwar planning agencies (theInquiry), business clubs, and foundations like the CarnegieEndowment for International Peace. All generally favored postwar system of collective security (President Wilsonsdream) based on the predominancb of power remaining inAnglo-American hands. Mobilizing mass propaganda p o w e rIPR hearings, Senate doc. ----, 1951. Othcr right-wingaccounts include Freda Dtley, The China Story (Chicago: HenryRegnery, 1951), John T. Flynn, The Lattimore Story (NewYork: Devin-Adair, 1953), Anthony Kubeck, HOW t he F ar E astW a s L o s t (Chicago: tlem2 Regne~T Co., 1963), and Ralph deToledano, Spies , Dupes, and Diplonmts (New York: D uell, Sloanand Pearce, 1952).

The Australian Communist Party quote is from William L.ttolland testinmny, IPR ltearings, 1223. For an interesting Sovietanalysis of IPR, see ibid., 1226-27.For the RockefeBer Foundatinns assessment, see its AnnualR e p o r t for 1943, frequqntly cited in [Pl/ literature. Note thatmany liberals for~nerly associated w ith tPR today" take a differentline; they take pains to m inimize or belittle its significance. See asan examplc Dorothy B ,, org s statement in Proceedings of theConference on Japanese-American Relations~ 1931-1941" (LakeKavsguchi, Japan, July 14 -18, 1969), mimeo. 62. She se es IPR ashavng "mmmaal i ffluence because of the aiIcged lack of officialinterest in the Far East at the time. Her statement, however,contains a number of factual errors and serious intcrprctivcdistortions.As essential background to this piece, see David Horowit~"Politics and Knowledge: An Unorthodox History of ModernChina Studies," Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Ill(Summer-Fall 1971), pp. 139-168, and hi8 articles in Ramparts .I eluding ~he Foundations: Chanty Bcg ns at lIome " tA,,,1969); Bfihon Dollar Brains, (May 1969); "Sinews of Er~pi~ g(August, 1969); "The Making of Amercas China Policy,"(October, 1971); and "The China Scholars and U.S. Intelligence,"(February, 1972). AJso of relevance is G. William Domhoff, TheHigher Circles (New York: Random Itouse. 1970), ch. 5 ("Itowthe Power Elite Make Foreign Policy"), and a forthcoming bookby Larry Shoup and William Minter on the Council on ForeignRelations. Very litSc work bus vet bcel~ done on the rise of theAmerican "aternallonalist esta])lishment," especially regardingthe ties between British and American elites.J. Merle Davis, "T he Institute of Pacific Relations," Internat ionalConciliation, pamphlet no. 218, March 1926, pp. 125-6 (notethat International Conciliation ~vas published by tile CarnegieEudowment altcr many years of sponsorsbip by thc AmericanAssociation for International Conciliatiom a leading

internationalist "peace" group); R.L. Wilbur, Mem oirs o f RayLyman Wilbur~ 1875-1949 (Stanford: Stanford University Press,1960), pp. 315-18; Institute of Pacific Relations: HonoluluSession, June 30-July 14, 1925: History, Organization,l~oceedings, Discuss ions a nd Addresses (IIolmlulu: 1PR, 1925),pp. 7-8; E.C, Cartcr, "Personal V ew," exhibit no 1382, 1PRllearings, p. 5317.R.L. Wilbur, p. 318 and 318n; quote fromInstitute of PacificRelations, Ilonoinlu Session .... p. 19; Wilbm to John D.Rockefeller. Jr 10 Marcia 1925, ill 1St Honolulu Confcrcncc file,box 1, IPR papers, Hoover Library, Stanford (hereafter, IPR


3/13

Muy-June, 1975

power.The same post-WWI internationalist impetus lay behind

Indeed one of the most striking results of the lastwar and the Paris and other peace conferences wasthe creation of scores of important national andlocal organizations whoge central purpose was: "Itmust never happen again." Among the manynon-governmental organizations that came intobeing at that period are the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs in London [the Britishcounterpart of CFR] .... the Foreign PolicyAssociation and the Council on Foreign Relations inthe United States .... men and women from severalof the Pacific countries . .. formed the Institute ofPacific P~elations as a regional expression of thisbroad movement .... The founders of the IPR wereacutely conscious of a whole world of dynamicforces in the Pacific area which had menacingpossibilities and which cried out for immediatestudy.5The Council on Foreign Relations, with its extremely

Marshall Brown.6 A number of these CFR figures wereGeorge Blakeslee (CFR), C.C. Batchelder (CFR), and

ting. The members decided that the first

concern." IPRs program would thus be7

THE WILLIAMSTOWN MODELThese certified internationalists expressly conceived of the

Institute, originated in 1921 as a bold experiment by thepresident of Williams College, Harry Garfield (CFR), heldannual summer conferences with distinguished international(i.e. Atlantic area) statesmen and scholars for the purpose ofdiscussing international relations and stimulating interest onthe subject in the United States. Like most suchinternationalist efforts, the Willlamstown Institute wasconceived and operated by members of the CFR elite whodominated the Board of Advisors, gave the lectures, and ledthe round table discussion sessions. The WilliamstownInstitute, in accord with its elite-integrative function,developed close ties to the British power structurerepresented by CFRs sister organization, the Royal Instituteof International Affairs (Chatham House). In particular, thepowerful and semisecret British "Round Table" group, which

dominated and founded the Royal Institute, also had a handin the Williamstown Institute, further strengthening its ties tothe upper crust of the Anglo-American elite. Members of theAmerican branch of the. Round Table helped create CFR.sQuote is from E.C. Carters "Notes for Cleveland Speech, March31, 1944," exhibit ~oo 952, IPR Hearings, p. 5066. See alsoCartcrs history of the IPP~ in ibid., p. 5317, a~d typescripthistory in "McLaughlin" file, box 4, Bay Region Division, IPRpape~, IIoover library, Sta~dord.Sec list in Institute of Pacific Relations, Honolulu Session, pp.20-21. CFR membersllip information is from 1930 membershiplist, w hich closely rcflccts membel~hip in 1925.R.L. Wilbur to John D. Rockefeller, Jr., March 10, 1925, box 1,IPR ross.; Institute of Pacific Relations, tlonolulu Session, 21 ;"Minutes of the 1925 Yale Club Meeting," Fvbruary 22, 1925, in"lst ltonululu Conference" file, box 1, IPR mss.On the IPRs conscious imitation of the Wffiiamstown Institutesee the Yale Club invitation, 5 February 1925, in Institute ofPacific Relatioas, Honolulu Session, p. 19; for s~mllarities inconference organization, see ibid., pp. 17-18. See alsoWilbur to John D. Rockefeller, Jr,, March ~0~ 1925, "ls[Ilonolulu Conference" file, box 1, IPR ross.; "Interview withJohn V. MacMurray, Assistant Sccrctal~, of State, january 22,f925," ibld. Stephen Duggan, who called it "[o]ne of the mostpotent ag encies in arousing interest in international affairs amongour pco ple after the first World W ar," describes the Wllliamstow nInstitute in his A Professor at Large (New York: Macmillan,1943), pp. 33-34. CFR members on the Williamstown institutesBoard of Advisors included Archibald Cary Coolidge (editor~Foreign Affairs), Charles Seymour, Philip Marshall Browrh andJames Brown Scott. llarry Garfield (CFR) was chairman. OtherCFR members involved included George Blakeslee (IPR), C.C.Batcheldcr (IPR), E.C. Carter (IPR), Waiter Ma/!ory~ lterbe~tFeis, Sumner Welles, Whitney Shepardson~ Paul Warburg, PaulCravath, Norman D avis, Owen D . Young, and D wight Morrow


4/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire TelegramBesides their similar membership and technicalorganization, the Institute of Pacific Relations and theWilliamstown Institute also shared a common purpose: thepromotion of c onsensu s among international elites. At theYale Club meeting, Dr. Henry Pratt Fairchild articulated thissentiment:If we are to have democratic action at all, we musthave leaders who will be well informed, andunofficial points of view established, based onaccurate information. Such a conference as isproposed would be the best possible place forinforming the leaders of public opinion of thedifferent countries. My contention is that the onlyway to become fully informed regarding some ofthese complex matters is through getting togetheraround a table, and discussing the problems from allangles.9When the Yale Club participants finally madeappointments for the American conference group, Fairchildbecame a member of the Executive Committee, chaired byRay Lyman Wilbur. Wall Street financier Bernard Baruch(CFR), who financed the Williamstown Institute, sat on theExecutive Committee with J.P. Morgan partner T.W. Lamont(CFR) and a Morgan associate, banker Norman H. Davis(CFR; later its president). Other CFR members, includingHarry Garfield of the Williamstown Institute also sat on the

Committee. Included on the Advisory Council were Mrs.Willard Straight, wife of a Morgan executive and owner ofthe New Republic, Harvard president A. Lawrence Lowell(CFR), New York Times editor John H. Finley (CFR),Chicago millionaire Julius Rosenwald (CFR), and others ofsimilar background. Wilbur also named the NominatingCommittee (to work with the Executive Committee on theselection of American delegates to IPR conferences), whichconsisted of Rockefeller Foundation official Roger S. Greene(CFR), Professor George Blakeslee (CFR; Foreign Affairseditor), and Galen Fisher, executive secretary of the Instituteof Social and Religious Research in New York. Ray LymanWilbm, was himself a trustee of the RockefellerFoundation. 10THE FIRST HONOLULU CONFERENCE

The Central Executive Committee coordinated organizingsessions similar to that at the Yale Club in participatingcountries throughout the Pacific basin. Official contacts withthe YMCA were terminated, and the name of theorganization became firm: the Institute of Pacific Relations.The Central Executive Committee arranged for the openingof the first IPR conference in Honolulu on June 30, 1925.Various subcommittees then handled the technical details oforganizing the meeting. Frank Atherton, vice-president andGeneral Manager of Castle and Cooke, chaired the Executiveerican groups organization). President of the

Program Committee. Later, when the conferenceairman of the Institute and Frank Athertonpositions on theGeorge Blakeslee,1 ~This first effort in Honolulu was a distinct success.

the role of the British Commonwealth in Pacific relatioFrank Atherton saw a great future ahead for IPR anexpressed the consensus of the membership in hiobservation that "the future great events of the world twilicenter around the Pacific rather than around the Atlantic" -especially with the exl)ected rapid growth of intra-Pacitrade and investment. ~ zLP.R. ELITE CONSENSUSMore important than the informational value of th

lectures and forums were the personal contacts establishedamong delegation members, both informally and in thround tably discussions. Such contacts allowed members ofthe different national elites, with few inhibitions, to sharideas and common concerns, resolve differences, and evenarbitrate international disputes, hnitating the classicsociological function of a businessmans club, IPR (li~ke CFthus functioned to enhance the cohesiveness of national andthe Cream of finance~ industry, academia, and statcscraft. Seepapers of Sta~ley Ho rnbeck, box 44 4, Hoo ver Library, Stanford;also Shepardson memor~mdum, December 2, 1920, in box 35,Tracy Kittredge pap e~, Hoo ver Library, Stanford.The "Round Table" group, which exercised a powerfulinfluence in Britain and throughout the Comrnonweahh, in favorof a Federation of English-speaking people% was originallyheaded by Lord M]incr, and financed by the Rhodes Trust. Itstwo younger leaders, Philip Ken" (latcr Lord Lothian,Ambassador to thc United States) and Lionel Curtis, werefrequent lecturers at Williamstown. Curtis organized theAngIo-American Institute of h~ternational Affairs at a meeting ofAmerican and British peace conference delegates at HotelMajestic in 1919; later this group split to form the sisterorgat~zations, CFI~ and RIIA.9. "Minutes of the 1925 Yale Club Meeting," February 22~ 1925,1st Ilonolulu Confercncc file, box 1, IPR mss.10. The committee mcrnberships discusscd here include, for the sakeof simplicity, those individuals added at the March 2, 1925meeting of the American group at New Yorks City Club. Forlists, see Institute of Pacific Relations, llonolulu Session, p. 22;R.L. Wilbtu" to John D. Rockefeller, Jr., March 10, 1925(attachment), "1st Ilonolulu Conference" file, box 1, IPR ross.;R.L. Wilbur to Mrs. Willard Straight, March 9, 1925, ibid; and

Wilbur to Baruch. March 19, 1.925, ibid. On Bernard Baruchsfunding of the Williarnstown Institute, see Duggan, p. 34, andChristian Science Monitor, July 26, 1924. Although No"man~)avis never played a major roe n the 1PI~, his connecBon here isImportant because of hi~ enormous inl]uence. He made a smallfortune as head of a Morgan-affiliated bank in Cuba. and laterbecame Ambassador-at-large du ring ~hc B oosevclt admi]~istratioa,when he was considered perhaps the most iuflucnBal foreignaffairs advisor. Ile also became president of ti~c Council onForeign Relations, where he stayed until his death in 1944.Willard Straight died in 1919 of pneumonia. Ills wife was anindependently weaI~hy product of the Whitney and Paynefortunes. Her co~tsit~ was Cornelius Vanderbilt Wl~itney. AsCarrull Quigiey notes in Tragedy and Hope (New York:Macmillan), pp. 938-939, pracBcaliy the entire American upperclass had familial 0cs to Mrs. Straight.On the nominating committee, see M utes of the 192o Yale

Club Meeting," February 22, 1925, "lst IIonohdu Conference"file, box 1, IPR ross.11 . Institute of Pacific Relations, Honolulu Session, pp. 23o26,12 . Ibid, pp. 27-4 0; Frank Atherton, "The Purpose o f the Institute ofPacific Relations," ibid., p. 54.Although the setting was in lIawaii (not yet a US state), theAmerican presence w as strongly felt The US N avy, t i~en holdingextensive war games out of Pearl Ilarbor, had just announcedplans to spend $43 million to fortify the base for Navv use -hardly a move to reassure the Japanese delegation, i~.ayLvmanWilburs brothcr, Curtis, w as Secretary of the Navy at the "time.Ray Lyman W ilbur, p. 320.


5/13

May-June, 1975

community of common purpose.For instance, while official IPR propaganda alwaysmanipulation), organization

William Allen White (CFR), theous internationalist Kansas publisher, remarked after

ain make the sentiment which controls the political rulers."

Such conferences harmonize not only the views ofthe different national groups which meet, but alsoin each national group, the different sectionsdevoted to business and philanthropy. Suchincceased harmony, based on a study of facts, israpidly reflected in the tone of the Press and in thepolicy of governments. Hence the importance ofsuch unofficial conferences as took place atHonolulu.. ,nel Curtis, who wrote these words, expressed identicalearlier.1 sThe elite-lntegration process in IPR did not function on

ion. The American group dominated allings, thanks to superior financial support, larger

William Allen White 5

delegation likewise wielded much influence, especially inconjunction with members from the Commonwealth(Canada, Australia, New Zealand). Chinas delegation, on theother hand, reflected the weak and dependent status ofChinese elites. Almost all came from the pro-West,modernizing elements, especially those surrounding theYMCA or Rockefeller Foundation. All had to speak English,the language always spoken at IPR conferences, which initself was of political significance. IPR conferences,therefore, tended to transmit the views of theAnglo-American elite to their receptive and dependentcounterparts in the Far East. This aspect was reflected by thestatement of a Chinese participant at the 1927 conference,where conversations between British and Chinese memberswere instrumental in bringing an end to the Chinese boycottof British goods:Our little encounters with the British have given us ~the British point of view, and will help us tounderstand British attitudes .... Our understandingwill gradually be reflected, and t hope, will beaccepted by the people in China.I~The B ritish were rarely as submissive.I.P.R.: GOOD FOR BUSINESSIPRs activities greatly pleased a number of enthusiastic,farsighted businessmen who saw in the organization a meansof maintaining peace among the rival Pacific powers and thusturning the Pacific Ocean into the great commercial center ofthe world. Chester Rowell, in an address to the Conferenceparticipants, explained the relation between business andpeace:Across the gulf which once separated us, reachedmany arms which, if used aright, will make formutual helpfulness but which if used wrongly canpromote only increasing discord. The chief of thesearms is business. Japan is industrialized, China isbeginning to industrialize. This is still a capitalisticworld in which industry needs capital. America hasthe capital and the trained organizing ability inprobably greater quantities than any other nation. Itis accumulating an increasing surplus of thesepowers which must find an outlet elsewhere. Whatwe are to determine is whether that outlet shall bebeneficial or injurious, whether it shall make forexploitation or development. In any event it willmake for peace .... Those wilo have a stake in acountry have thereby a stake in its stability.Rowell foresaw an American economic hegemony enforcednot by old-fashioned imperial rule -- those who wouldimpose such an order on the world "would reap thewhirlwind" -- but rather by an organized concert of Pacificpowers gathered together in the Institute of Pacific Relationsto promote peace in the region. Together, he argued, "It is

13. Type script history of 1PR in "McLaugblin" fi le, box 4, BR 1PRlnSS.; W.A. White to R.L. Wilbur, August 15, 1925, box 2, IPR,nlss.; Salter, fioln 1930 annual report ol IPR, quoted in A1Pa~ons, "Philippines: Rebellious Little Brother, " PacificResearch, .~anuary, 1971; Lionel Curtis to Jerome Greene,N ovember ] 3, 1928, in "1929, Jan-March" file, box 7, IPR m ass.See also Frank Atherton, "The Purp ose o~ the Institute of PacificRelations," Institute of Pacific Relations, Honolulu Session, p.58 .14 . On Ang!o-Chincse conciliation~ see Chester Rowell in Sa nFrancisco Chronicle, Jalmary 18, 1945; IPR, Problems of thePacific: Proceedings of the Second Conference of the Institute ofPacific Relations, llonolulu, Hawaii, July 15 to 29, 1927. Editedby J.B. Cond liffe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1928), p.198.


6/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire Telegram

for their navies, together with the British Navy, to keep openthe ways [of commerce] and to guard the peace of thePacific.!5 Rowells vision of an expanding economiccommunity of Pacific nations within a framework of peacewas certainly shared by most IPR participants, and not onlybusinessmen. Professor James T. Shotwell, a founder of theConncil on Foreign Relations and leading light in IPR,expressed identical sentiments, reflecting back on IPRsHonolulu conference:The city of Honolulu lies at the crossing of theroutes of trade from Australia, New Zealand, China,Japan, the United States and Panama, as well asthose of the few ships which still come round theHorn. Almost daily, looking down from the slopesof the Punahou school.., one sees the steamerscoming and going, weaving the web of that newcivilization which is forcing its way into the distantvillages of China .... [Honolulus] growth andprosperity have depended upon the mutual interestsof trading nations. Yet... one is reminded that thisprocess of peaceful development which has broughtwealth to Honolulu has been working underconditions which were never free from the threat of

The Conference at Honolulu envisaged a worldwhere this threat may ultimately cease to menacethe aspirations of mankind; but it recognized at thesame time that world peace cannot be establishedby any sudden improvisation of well-meaningstatesmen, nor by the temporary adherence toexaited principles or sentiments .... One thing isclear to all who took part in the Institute of PacificRelations... and that is that a method has beenfound which must be used in years to come, if thatgreat migration of Europe into the area of thePacific which so fatefully d sturbed the poise]~f theOr ent, is to find a solution in terms of peace.

FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTORSFortunately for the Institute, this dream of a Pacificalso shared by the leadingus financial support and vision, the Institute could

agandistic" activities.1 Hawaiian contributors included Frank Atherton, who gave

isIn 1926 the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

$2,000, Frank Vanderlip (who made a fortune as presidenof National City Bank) gave $1,000, and other large grantwere received from the Twentieth Century Fund, theCommonwealth Foundation, and the Laura SpelmanRockefeller Memorial, which specialized in the sociasciences. (It undoubtedly helped IPR that Ray Lyman Wilburwas a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.) In later years,big contributors included (besides the foundations), T.W.Lamont, Jerome Greene (of Lee, Higginson), FredericSchiff, Charles Rhoades, and Mortimer Schiff, all frminvestment banking families. Ivy Lee (Rockefellers publrelations expert), Frederick Keppel (president of theCarnegie Foundation), Norman H. Davis (Morgan-associatedbanker), and J.P. Mo rgan himself were also gene rous.~ 9With its finances well taken care of, the American Councilbegan organizing itself as a more permanent institution. In1926 the members formed an Executive Committee/headeby Ray Lyman Wilbur (CFR) with T.W. Lamont (CFR) anGeorge Blakeslee (president of the World Peace Foundation;CFR) as vice-chairmen. Blakeslee also sat on the ResearchCommittee and the Subcommittee on Program of the

Bernard BaruchEducation Committee. Stepehn Duggan (CFR), head of theInstitute for International Education, sat on the DelegatesCommittee and the Subcommittee on Educational Method ofthe Education Committee. Frederick Keppel (CFR),president of the Carnegie Foundation, worked with Dugganon the subcommittee. Mrs. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. lookedout for her husbands interests in IPR on the DelegatesCommittee. The famous publishers William Allen White(CFR) and Henry Lace (CFR) controlled the Subcommitteeon Information and Publicity of the Education Committee.The crucial Finance Committee was ruled by a number ofmillionaires whose combined contacts ran into the billions ofdollars: T.W. Lamont (CFR), Henry Robinson (CFR), JuliusRosenwald (CFR), Douglas Elliman, and Wallace Alexander.Jerome Greene (CFR), chairman of the Finance Committee15. Chester Rowell, "American Sentiment on Problems of thePacific," Institute of P acific R elations, Honolulu Session, pp.102ff.16 . The Origin and Present ~4ctivity of the Institute of Pacific

Relations (New York: 1927), pp, 20.21.17 , Ibid., p. 25; J, Merle Davis, "The Institute of Pacific Relation%"129; J. Merle Davis to R.L. Wilbur, Decelnber 1. 1925, lastfolder, box 2, IPR mss. "18. Attachment to agenda of February 27, 1927 meeting ofAmerican Executive Committee (held at the Century Club fromwhich significant numbcrs of CFR members w ere drawn), file No.3, box 2, IPR ross.19. Ibld.; American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations, BiennialReport (New York 1930), pp 60-65, Otller contribution lists arescattered through the IPR papers at the Ho over Library.


7/13

May-June, ~975

Streets2JEROME GREENE

Son of a famous missionary in Japan, Daniel CrosbyGreene, Jerome made his first contacts with theEast Coast business community while acting assecretary to Harvards president and to HarvardCorporation between 1901 and 1910. From therehe moved into the Rockefeller philanthropiccomplex, working various as a high official for theRockefeller Institute, Foundation, and GeneralEducation Board (where he stayed until 1939). Hejoined the Boston investment banking form Lee,Higginson in 1917, and soon became its chiefofficer. A close associate of the British Round Tablegroup, he helped found the Council on ForeignRelations. He later headed the American AsiaticAssociation, strengthening his t ies to these giants o fAmerican finance and industry with an interest inthe Far East. Jeromes brother Roger (CFR) washardly tess influential. He had attended the 1925Yale Club meeting. After serving as a consularofficial in several Far Eastern countries, he becamehead of the Rockefeller Foundation Medical Boardin China, and developed a close relationship withthe American ambassador there, Nelson T. Johnson.Roger returned to the United States to help set upthe American Committee for Non-Participation inJapanese Aggression before the US entered WorldWar II. Once described as "the most importantprivate influence on the course ofJapanese-American relations" before the War,Rogers close relationship with fellow Harvardclassmates Franklin Roosevelt and Joseph Grew(ambassador to Japan) ensured that his voice wouldbe heard. The two brothers Greene, each soinfluential in his chosen field, epitomized theleadership of the American Council.21

THE FOUNDATIONS REORGANIZE I.P.R.Even so, two officials on the Executive Committee, E.Stanley Glines (the Treasurer before Jerome Greene) andC.C. Batchelder (Executive Secretary), failed to win thecomplete confidence of IPRs Eastern financial backers, whoin mid-1926 provoked a significant shakeup of the IPRleadership.E.C. Carter (CFR), a YMCA man who attended theYaleClub meeting and now sat on the Executive Committee,discussed the emerging conflict at length with four top CFRmembers, George Grafton Wilson (IPR ExecutiveCommittee), George Blakeslee (IPR Vice-President),Archibald Cary Coolidge (Yale Club meeting), and EdwinGay. All agreed that the two men in question were not "firstrate," which they would have to be if the American Councilwere to "play its rightful part in the whol~ work of theInstitute...""It is quite apparent," Carter observed, "that i:~approaching bankers who migh~ be interested in theInstitute, that fact that Mr. Glines is a treasurer does notautomatically register the Institute as on as high ~ level as ifw e had Mr. Jerome Greene as treasurer.~.Besides the bankers,foundation officials were agitating for .~ome chang~ of

leadership. The five men saw only ony possible solution:Glines and Batchelder would have to "drop out ofprominence" as quickly as possible. Carter suggested, withthe others concurring, that a reorganization committee beformed to create a new, more acceptable ExecutiveCommittee. "If we can be assured of tile changes that arebeing proposed," Carter concluded, "I feel very much moreoptimistic as to our financial prospects in certaindirections.,,22Edward Carter informally took charge of thereorganization process. Personally very close to topFoundation officials such as Beardsley Rural and FrederickKeppel, Carter was widely respected for his phenomenalfundraisiug abilities. Meanwhile Ray Lyman Wilbur, himselfwith the Rockefeller Foundation, had no qualms aboutletting Carter do the dirty work. After all, Carters viewswere eminently sensible; Wilbur too believed thatreorganization of the Executive Committee would I~ringtogether "a much stronger group.., with less objection to usfrom the standpoint of the Foundations.23On June 18, at a meeting at Harvard, Carter, Gay, Wilson,Blakeslee, and Grafton agreed that all members of theExecutive Committee except President Wilbur should resignto ease the transition. Stepehn Duggan would head a three

person reoganization committee which would submitrecommendations to Jerome Greene (for the bankers) and toRay Lyman Wilbur, Beardsley Rural, Wesley Mitchell, HaroldMoulton, and Edwin Gay (to please the foundations)."Gay Wilson Blakeslee agree highest interests ofreoganization will result if Glines Batchelder and [JohnStory] Jenks are allowed to resign," Carter wired Wilbur thenext day. Soon Duggan had accepted the chairmanship of thereoganization committee; with him worked Galen Fisher andMary E. Wooley, president of Mr. Holyoke college and anardent internationalist. Telegrams began to arrive frommembers of the Executive Committee, expressing theirwillingness to temporarily resign.24On June 24, after accepting the recommendations of theDuggan committee, Wilbur wired the Hanover National Bank(where the American Council held its account) to announcethat Jerome Greene had replaced Glines as treasurer. Wilburasked Carter to replace Batchelder as Executive Secretary,and also to head the Research Committee in the interimperiod, with Gay, Blakeslee, and Wilson as his counsellors.Finally, Wilbur brought in Lamont as vice-chairman of the20 . Lists of thc Committccs (wilich were in a state of flux aroundJune, 1926) ,nay be found in the loose papers of box 3, IPR ross.21. Whos Who in America, 1942-43; Quigley, p. 955; Warren Cohen,"The R ole of Private Groups in the Unitcd States," Pearl flarbor

as History (New Ymk: Columbia University Press, 1973),436-37.22 . E.C. Carter to R.L. Wilbur, June 1, 1926, in loose papers, box 3,IPR ross.23 . Blakeslee to Wilbm, June 11,1926; Wilbur to Blakcslee, June 17,1926; Wilbttr to J. Merlc Davis, June 22, 1926, file No. 1 , box 3,IPR ross.24 . Carter tdeg~am to Wilbur, June 19, 1926; Carter telegram toWilbur, June 22, 1926, file No. 1, box 3, lPl~ ross. Duggan (CFR)had bccn a leadh~g participant in the Williamstown Institute.Mary Wboley was an extraordinarily succcssful woman, as herWhos Who biography makes clear, ller ideological position is. clearly defined by her work with James T. Shotwells LeagueN~tions Association and with the Union for Concerted PeaccEfforts (v


8/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire TelegramExecutive Committee to further appease the Institutesfinancial backers. This "rather drastic" shakeup wasaccomplished with "great rapidity," Wilbur admitted, but ithad to be done. On July 1, Beardsley Rural wrote Carterinforming him of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorialsdecision to grant the Institute another $10,000.25ORGANIZING THE 1927 HONOLULU CONFERENCEWith the American Council firmly in the hands of peoplechosen by Wall Street and the great philanthropicfoundations, the Institute turned next to the question ofreranging the 1927 international IPR conference inHonolulu. Delegate selection proved difficult because ofdebates over the proper "balance" to be sought in theAmerican group. Carter, who had been trying since early1926 to place more women in responsible IPR posts, didmanage to include a number of women in the Americandelegation. However, the Executive and Delegatescommittees turned down his "radical proposal" to includeone Black in the group. He had hoped that such a tokengesture would prove to the Oriental participants at theconference, troubled by Americas racist immigrationpolicies, that the American delegation was sympathetic totheir concerns and enlightened on the race question. Thecommittees that turned Carter down argued that any attemptto equate Blacks with Orientals would be a definite insult tothe Asian delegations!26Also excluded from the American delegation, on the firmorders of Ray Lyman Wilbur, were all pacifists. E.C. Carterhad thought it best to keep Mrs. Carrie Chapman Cart, anadvocate of international arbitration, off the membership listuntil the eminently respectable West Coast internationalistChester Rowell assured the IPR executive secretary that shewas no more a pacifist than such "peace" advocates asex-President William Taft and former Secretary of War ElihuRoot.27The American Councils squeamishness did not extend tobusinessmen, although not surprisingly it experienced somedifficulty in recruiting enough business delegates. Mostbusiness supporters of IPR simply could not spare the timeto attend a full-length conference; they preferred instead to

simply contribute money, secure in the knowledge that theorganization was controlled in their interest by upper class ~Eastern intenlationalists. Hawaiian businessman Frank ~Atherton nevertheless thought that more could be done togain direct representation of the business point of view. Afew months before the 1927 Honolulu conference hecomplained to Wilbur that the proposed American delegationseemed a little "underbalanced from the business side." Hesuggested that Wilbur approach such West Coast businessmenas San Francisco banker Mortimer Fleishacker. Wilburhastened to assure Atherton that "We have tried in every waywe could to get men of business to realize the importance ofattending the meeting. In New York we went over namesfrom all parts of the country, and I hope that we are going tobe able to get at least a few representative business men."Ultimately, such distinguished figures as Jerome Greene,Wallace Alexander (president of Alexander & Baldwin, Ltd.,of Honolulu), Alfred Elkinton (president of PhiladelphiaQuartz Co.), Robert Newton Lynch (vice-president of theSan Francisco Chamber of Commerce), and William Morrish(vice-president of the California Bankers Association) wereable to attend. For the next conference at Kyoto (1929), theAmerican Council planned to reserve 15 spaces out of 35 onthe delegation for business and financial leaders.

8

Ray Lyman WilburAtherton also acknowledged the importance of balancingpotentially opposed elements of the American ruling class."It is interesting to see how many there are in the listsubmitted to us more or less affiliated with the CarnegieFoundation," he observed in a letter to Wilbur. "I wish wecould also secure two or three men who are close to theRockefeller Foundation, since Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jrpersoually, and the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memoriahave contributed so liberally to our financial budget." Wilburtried in vain to invite John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and his wifto the conference. Still, a number of Rockefellerepresentatives attended~ including Wilbur himself and IvyLee, the famous Rockefeller public relations man (whohandled such matters for IPR as welI). Three top officials ofthe Carnegie foundation complex attended -- James

25, Wilbur telegram Io llanovcr National Bank, June 24, 1926;telegrams from Wilbm" to Carler, Blakcslec, and Wilson, June 24 .1926; Carler to Lament, n,d.; Wilbur [o Atbcrton, June 24,1926; Beardsley Rural to Carter, July 1, 1926; Loomis telegramto Wilbur, June 30, 1926; in ldc No . 1, box 3, IPR ross.26. On Carters at t i tude tow ards w omem see Carter 1o Wilbur, April26. 1926, 3rd file, box 2, [PR ross. T he race problem is discuss edin ibe Minutes of tbe Committee mecting~, April 14, 1927,"April" file, box 4, IPR ross. Tht, American Coun cil included o neBlack in its 1929 delegation - James We]don Johnson, authorand a former [J.S. consul in Nicaragua who proved to be a bighit with the Cbimse and Japanese delcgalions, as Carter badhoped. See Carter to Wilbur, December 14, ]929, in "1929 .]~ythru Dec" file, box 8. IPR ross.27 . Chester I~owell to E,C. Carter, December 28. 1926, in "Jan]927" fib~. box 4, IPR mss. On Wilburs general opinions, seeMemobs of Ray Lyman Wilbur, p. 320,


9/13

May-June, i975

~THE BRITISH JOIN I.P.R.IPR conference problems arose on an international level as

conditions to give first-hand

Lionel Curtis, the guidi:~,g spirit of the British Round

Unfortunately, the latter two were extremely

ouse members), and became Britains representative to the3THE ESTABLISHMENT TAKES OVERThe inclusion of the British group from the Royal

Lionel Curtis, that towering influence in British public life

"in this federal organization the

Jerome Greene reacted adversely to Curtigs plan to

9

framework would spell the death of the organization,undermining years of effort. He pointed out to Curtis thatthe foundations supported precisely because it was aninternational agency. He further advised the Britisher thatthe plan ought to be taken directly to the organizationsPacific Council, "rather than to use us, another Anglo-Saxongroup, as a channel for getting your ideas before theothers.31Without waiting for Greenes reply, Curtis went ahead andwon approval for his scheme in the Royal Institute. J. MerleDavis, General Secretary of IPRs Central Secretariat and anold YMCA man, upon hearing of the plan, proposed avigorous counterattack and warned:I believe that Curtis will throw all of his weight andthat of his handpicked group of Kyoto [the 1929IPR conference] for policies that will completelychan~e the organization In conference technique,research, informat on exchange, pub ~c~ty andemphasis of the movement, he is out to build a newkind of Institute. A man of his reputation, intensity,ability and drive can go a long way in gaining hisends when he meets an unprepared and easy goingmajority, if by no other way than by obstructingevery move the majority makes,s2Curtis failed to further centralize IPRs research apparatusin the United States, though he did force some changes inconference style (to enco urage roun d table discussions ratherthan speeches). His main goal, however, in conjunction withkey Eastern members of the American group, was to ~rushthe last remnants of the "do-good" YMCA influence on theorganization, and to focus the Institutes work more directlythe solution of pressing polifical and economic problems inthe Pacific area, in the interests of IPRs Atlantic-basedmembers.Perhaps Curtiss greatest.victory occurred on November 7,1929, when J. Merle Davis tendered his resignation asGeneral Secretary, after being forced out by Curtis, Greene,and Carter using Daviss aide, Charles Loomis, as theiragent.33 Looking back on the incident and its broader28. Ather/on to Wilbur. February 11, 1927. loosc papers, box I. IPRross; Wilbur Io Athcr~om March 12. 1927, ibid.: mcmbcl\~hip lists

1928), pp. 9. 13,


10/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire Telegramimplications, Davis unhappily acknowledged the profoundcontrast between the old YMCA-ideal and the reality thatwas IPR:I resigned two weeks after the opening of the [1929Kyoto and] Nara conference when it became clearthat certain Institute trends of which we have beenaware for some time are probably permanent, TheInstitute has swung away from the concept ofcultural exchange toward that of a mechanism for

handling political and public questions. Thetendency of 1927 in this direction was increased atKyoto. The destinies of the IPR are in the hands ofpoliticatly minded men and it is a different thingfrom what was created four and a half yeas ago atHonolulu.This is an immensely potential change which hasgiven the IPR an opportunity of making history inthe Pacific area .... [But] I have little to offer inthe new activities which have developed.The leadership of the IPR, is in the hands of menwho dont know the Pacific area, Atlantic area menwho have been trained in the European and Atlanticschool of experience and psychology. They areputting the IPR back into the grooves and under thehandicaps from which the Institute was planned toget away .... They are doing just what wedetermined need not be done -- jockeying forcontrol, for building up the prestige of theircountries and making the IPR mill grind personalgrist. They are making the IPR a society for thestudy of Pacific questions, not an Institute ofPacific relations.The Oriental groups are practically negligible inthe matter of leadership. The domination of theAnglo-Saxon groups is so great that their leadersopenly justify it and act on it as a workingprinciple ....The General Secretary has been given largeresponsibilities and a minimum of power to enablehim to carry them out. The direction and control ofthe policies of the [PR are in the hands of men whoare raising the funds in New York. [Emphasisadded.]

Particularly to blame, according to Davis, were Curtis andGreene, the fellow Round Table members. "Curtis andGreene practically ran the [Pacific] Council, moved andseconded most of the motions except for a difference on theResearch issue, supported each other in their attacks onHonolulu," he related, [Honolulu businessman Frank]"Atherton put up a gallant defense but was not a match forthe combination of Curtis, Greene and Carter."Worse yet, Greene and Curtis dominated the PacificCouncils Nominating Committee, giving them the power toperpetuate their influence. The only other member,according to Davis, was no more than "window dressing onthe Committee and Curtis and Greene had thing~ their ownway with tile future of the Institute. The Committeeappointed Greene Chairman of the Pacific Councih Greeneaccepted it in spite of the common agreemen~ at the 1927Council meeting that the next Pacific Council chalrmafishould be an Oriental..."Nor did the situation took .any better when it came tochoosing a successor to Davis, who resigned ostensibly for illhealth:An equally serious blunder was the appointment ofa nominating committee ~o select the new GreneralSecretary composed of four Anglo-Saxons -- all ofwhom live on the Atlanti~ seaboard --tw~ of whomare new to the Institt~te. The Orient/ls WilI have theprivilege of rubber stamping the se}ection ~ this

gaoup of Anglo-Saxon and Atlantic leaders of thenew secretary for the Institute of PacificRelations.34The new nominating committee Davis referred to includedthe ubiquitous Jerome Greene and Charles P. Howland,Research Secretary for the Council on Foreign Relations(Howland also took over the chairmanship of IPRsInternational Research Committee from James T. Shotwell, Carnegie Endowment official and leading member of CFRHowland had been mentioned at Kyoto as a likely choice toreplace Davis; so had Whitney Shepardson, a CFR founderand director and American Round Table member. InsteadE.C. Carter (CFR) won the coveted post. (He also becamSecretary of the Finance Committee of the GeneraSecretariat.)3 sWith Jerome Greene in charge of both the Pacific andAmerican Councils of IPR (Ray Lyman Wilbur, havinstepped down when President Hoover appointed him InteriorSecretary in 1929), powerful Eastern financial interests andthe cream of the internationalist establishment now morethan ever controlled the Institute and guided its policies, Nofundamental changes were to occur until IPRs demise in theCold War. IPR: RESEARCH AND PUBLICATIONIt is the scientists business to undertake.., patientand objective study, it is the business of go vernmentand industry to make use of their results infashioning out of the present whatever future theydesire.--Godfrey Wilso~a, British anthropologist and firstdirector of the Rhod es-Livingstone Insti tute

Although international conferences formed an importantpart of the Institutes activities, IPRs day-to-day workrelated mostly to the dissemination of "non-partisan,""objective" information on Far Eastern problems. IPRpublished books, pamphlets, a newsletter, two majormagazines, and coord inated or funded academ ic research.Practically every scholarly book on the Far East publishedbefore 1945 was printed by the Institute or under itsauspices -- IPR published 249 itself. Many Of these studiesrequired subsidies and would never have appeared withoutIPR sponsorship. While IPR magazines attracted asubscription audience of only about 3,000, its articles andbooks reached millions in the form of editorials, newcommentaries, and radio programs throughout the country.Lacking other major sources of information, the StateDepartment relied heavily on IPR publications, especiallduring World War II. "... most of the leading Americanstudents of the contemporary Far East [have] during thepast 25 years been associated with the Institute of PacificRelations in one way or another," noted a top IPR official in1951. "A list of Americans whose books, articles, or specia

10

Scholars and American Politics ,Seattle: University oWashington Press, 1974), pp. 5-6; J.B. Condilffe, ed.. Problems othe Pacific: Proceedings of the Third Conference of the Instituof Pacific Relations. Nara and K~oto, Japan, October 23 toNOvember 9 , 1929 (Universi ty of Chicago Press: 1930), p. 657.34~ J. Merle Davis to Wilbul. Janatuv 23, t930~ "1930" file. box 8.IPR ross. Cf. Wilbur to Davis, Janqary: 26,1930 ibid.35. Cartcr to Wilbur, Db~ccmber ~4. 1929; in "1929 July thru Dec"[ile,-box B, IPR ross." Wilbur left hks~ IPI~ pos~ w- go intogovenwaent;qater he focuse~l his en~rgles on the newly formeSan Francisco Bay Region Digision of the Institute of Pacifi. Relatio~r~ lest. 1928t, tlmughhe did ~erve as wce-,:hairman mtbe American Council. /de also orga~zed the 1.936 Y ose~rfit~ IPconference. See Memo irs of Ray Lyres, Wilbur, pp. 602-03,


11/13

May-June, 1975

Some IPR publications

When I was a graduate student at Yale, it was myimpression that IPR publications, at least during the1937-41 period, circulated rather extensively amongthe academic community and shaped the views of~raduate students. I know of no other source thatwas more important than these publications inproviding us with facts, interpretations, and grist forthe analyses that we tried to write in seminarpapers. This aspect3~)f the IPRs influence shouldnot be underplayed.In view of its extraordinary importance to the growth of

[the American] people into

profession.THE FOUNDATIONS REORGANIZE I.P.R. RESEARCHOu a fundamental level, because it lacked an endowment,the Institute of Pacific Relations was constantly open to thecontrol and scrutiny of its major financial backers, especiallythe Foundations which already were remoldlug the socialsciences to meet their need s. IPR o fficials necessarily listenedw hen large contributors made helpful sugges tions. As JeromeGreene once admitted to Lionel Curtis, "we must increase[the Rockefeller Foundations] confidence and interest in usby making the best possible use of the nmney it gives us..."William Holland, Secretary General of the Institute in itslater years, candidly explained that "as an executive officer"of an organization dependent on public opinion "as well ason the financial support of foundations and corporations, Ihave to be realistic. In particular, I have to take account ofthe honestly held views of well-informed, genuine friends ofthe IPR concerning the present-day activities of the instituteand the policies which it must follow if it is to keep or regainthe financial support and confidence of the individuals andfoundations that make its existence possible."38One such "genuine friend" of the IPR was BeardsleyRuml, head of the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorialwhich, before it merged into the Rockefeller Fouudation in1929, donated tens of thousands of dollars to the Institute.Ruml saw no reason to allow the IPR to exercise anyindependence or contribute further to the pluralism ofAmerican academia. Instead he hoped to further centralizeall significant research activity in the social sciences byintegrating IPR into the complex of Rockefeller-controlledor funded institutions. Ruml determined to bring order outof chaos in the field of Asian research.At Rumls persuasive insistence, Carter, Blakeslee, GeorgeGrafton Wilson, Archibald Cary Coolidge (SSRC), and EdwinF. Gay (SSRC) approached other members of the SocialScience Research Council (founded by Beardsley Ruml in1923), including Wesley Mitchell (research director, NationalBureau of Economic Research), Harold G. Moulton(president of Brookings), and Charles Merriam (chairman ofthe Political Science department at the Rockefeller-foundedUniversity of Chicago). With their similar corporate-liberalbackgrounds, Ruml knew, these men would ~nderstand eachother. His plan was to establish "very close liaison" betweenthe IPR Research Committee and a newly formedsubcommittee on Pacific questions under the SSRC, whosedirector would be paid out of IPR funds. IPR would thenrefer to this SSRC committee "the various subjectssubmitted to them for valuation, and in many cases forsupe~qision." Together they would coordinate researchpolicy, locate areas of pressing research needs, and "mobilizethe best research throught in America" on Pacific problems.Cooperation between the two committees would be ensuredby providing for a substantial overlap of membership.The Institutes continued existence, essentially, dependedon its acceptance of Rumls polite demand. "I am very muchafraid we cannot expect any very enthusiastic help fromJerome Greene with Lee Higginson and Company, Mr.Lamont and others until reorganization is assured," Carter36. ACIPR, Annual Report, 1939-1940, 6; Holland testinaony, IP RHearings, p. 1230; Lindbeck in Lake Kawaguchi ConferenceProceedings (mimeo.), p. 6237 . Problems of the Pacific... 1927, p. 202;IPR Itearirtgs, p. 1222.38. Grecnc to Cu rtis, January 3, 1929, "1929 JamMarch" file, box 7,IPR ross.; Holland testimony, IPR H e a r in g s , p. 1214.11


12/13

PACIFIC RESEARCH and World Empire Telegramconfided to Wilbur. "I am fairly hopeful that if you andProfessor Merriam favor Rumls idea of cooperatinginformally with the Social Science Research Council, we canget an assurance of approximately $10,000 from the LauraSpelman Rockefeller Foundation in time to be effective withthe [conditional grant from the] Carnegie Endowment.s9The reorganization of IPRs research apparatus ended in1926, along with that of the Executive Committee whichproceeded simultaneously. The new Research Committee,more notable for its respectability than its expertise on theFar East, was composed of Edwin Gay (CFR), GeorgeBlakeslee (CFR), Samuel Holmes, Robert Park, W.W.Willoughby, George Grafton Wilson, Clark Wissler, andQuincy Wright (CFH).aThus Ruml managed to win a. double share of influenceover IPR Research Committee decisions, On the one hand,IPR officials kuew they had to be "realistic" to continuereceiving contributions from the Rockefeller Foundation -- atendency that foundation trustee Ray Lyman Wilburreinforced during his chairmanship of the ExecutiveCommittee of the American Council. On the other hand,Rockefeller-funded organizations like the Council on ForeignRelations were liberally represented in all decision-makingcapacities of IPR. As a result the SSRC had acquired a virtualveto over IPR-sponsored research projects. Of course, mostof the time there was no real conflict, only mutualcoordination; IPR and SSRC officials were too much alike inboth ideology and class background to differ substantially inoutlook.41 I.P.R. RESEARCH PRIORITIESThe first director of the American Councils researchprogram was James T. Shotwell, professor of history atColumbia and a founding member of the Council on ForeignRelations. A staunch co nservative and ardent internationalist ,he directed the Carnegie Endowments research efforts whilealso heading the SSRC Advisory Committee on InternationalRelations. He made certain that IPR-approved and fundedresearch projects were of "practical importance." One studyhe approved, an analysis of agricultural land utilization inSoutheast Asia, was designed to "afford information as toareas available for the production of various agricultural rawmaterials" such as rubber or sugar. Improved knowledge ofagricultural potential around the Pacific basin, therationalization went, would "be valuable" in "planningnational agricultural and commercial policies in the UnitedStates..." The Research Committee agreed that a study oftrans-Paciflc shipping would be "practical" because it would"find strong support from business interests on our PacificCoast.~4 2The SSRC itself, in promoting the "scientific" study ofsocial behavior, likewise demonstrated a marked preferencefor "practical" research, a bias which no doubt rubbed offonto the IPR Research Committee. A confidential SSRCmemorandum on "Research Needs and Opportunities inChina" justified a proposal for the intensified study ofChinese industry and economic structure on the mostpractical ground s:Besides their perhaps some w hat academic interest associal scientists in the study of industry in China aspart of the study of the civilization of a large part ofthe human race, Westerners have a very direct andpractical concern with what Chinese industry is andhow it may be expected to develop. China has beenthought of as a vast potential market formanufactured goods and a great reservoir of rawmaterials .... If modern industry should develop on 12

a large scale in China, the character of Chinaspresent and prospective economic relations withother nations would be radically changed. It is,therefore, of direct concern to other nations as wellas to China to know as accuratelyaa~possible whatthe tendency in Chinas indu stry is.IPRs research program remained in safe hands, even wheShotwell stepped down in 1929. Charles P. Howland, whheaded the research functions of the Council on ForeignRelations and sat on the Board of Trustees of the RockefelleFoundation, took Shotwells place. Naturally, Howland alssat on the SSRC Advisory Committee on InternationaRelations, as did IPRs next Research Secretary, Carl Alsberdirector of Stanfords Rockefeller-funded Food ResearcInstitute. Quiucy Wright, Joseph P. Chamberlain, and LewLorwin (of Brookings) also worked for both IPR and SSRresearch committees. Carnegie Corporation presidenFrederick Keppel attended IPR Research Cdmmittemeetings, as did other CFR members such as Isaiah BowmanEdwin W. Kemmerer, and Raymond Leslie Buell (head of tForeign Po licy Association).4~These IPR policy-makers, however conservative theioutlook, were not as interested in enforcing a rigidideological code as they were in channeling research activityon the Far East into more practical, policy-related lines ospecial use to business and government decision-makers."There is a general tendency to consider China, Japan andIndia as remote countries which do not concern us in anyway," observed IPR-offlcial C.C. Batchelder in 1925, "bwe must realize that their economic competition, and thpressure of population will affect us much more seriously inthe future than at present.as In this spirit IPR leaderssought to find future trouble spots long in advanc? of thegeneral public (or uninformed government officials anbusinessmen) and thoroughly study their implications so thatpotential international conflicts could be overcome beforethey became unmanageable. Thus the American Counciexplained that an "essential part" of its program was "to39. Carter to Wilbur~ June 1, 1926 and June 23, 1926, loose papers,

box 3, IPR ross.; lIerbert Hcaton~ A Scholar in Action (HarvarUniversity Press, 1952), p. 200, 206-14; Charles Loo mis to F.C.Athcrto~a: June 15, 1926, file N o. 1, box 3, 1PR ross.; Loomis toWilbur, June 1, 1926, 3rd folder, box 3, IPR ross. For more o~the reorganization, see Pr oblams of the Paci f ic, 1927.40, Blakeslee to Wilbur, December 31, 1926, loose papcrs~ box 3IPR ~nss.; membership lists in ibid.41. Minutes of the Research Committee meetings scattered throughthe IPR collectio~ show that lPR-approved projects did getpasscd on to the SSRC for final approval. See especially box 6,IPR ross.4 2 = See draft in ".lan thru March 1928" file, box 6, IPR rossResearch Committee minutcs, May 25, 1928, "May thru June"file~ box 6, IPR ross.Armthcr clear indication of the Research Committeeideological leanings is its recommcndatiou that IPR improve itsnews bulletin along the lines of the influer~tial British organ, T hRound Table. See minutes or the May 7, 1927 ResearchColnmittcc mceting, "M ay 1927" file, box 5, IP[( ross.43. SSRC "Con fidential" report to Shotwcll by Grovcr Clark, June 1,1932, in Itoover Library archives, Stantord.For lists ol other cady IPR research projccts, scc "The Originand Present Activity of the Institute of Pacific Relations," (n.d.,19277), box 4, IPR ross.44. ACIPR, Biennial Report, (New York, 1930), p. 25; Minutes oRcsearcll Committee meeting, December 20, 1930, "1930" filebox 8, IPR ross.45. C.C, Batchclder, "The Far R eaching Effccts of Industrializations"Institute of Paciflc Relations, Honolulu Session, 124.


13/13

May- June ~ 1975help different groups in the country to become conscious ofconditions that may at some future time be seen to affectthem vitally, even though now their import for national orgroup policy is not widely felt. Inclusive surveys of theresearch needs for different areas of international contact,like those sponsored by the International Relations Divisionof the Social Science Research Council, will help to revealmany lacunae in available information...,,a6 Conflictresolution among the Pacific powers, and advancement of theAmerican "national interest" were the ultimate goals of theIPR research programWhen the first ~najor research grants to IPR came throughin 1928, the organization launched an intensive investigationof the political, legal, and economic aspects of theManchurian problem -- which proved most timely in view ofJapans later invasion of the area. IPR took the lead instudying land utilization, food, and overpopulation problemsin Japan and China with respect to their implications forinternational stability. (The Rockefeller Foundation stillconsiders the "green revolution" and overpopulation two ofits top priorities for study). IPR-sponsored research onSoutheast Asia clarified the strategic and economic value ofthe area to American officials and businessmen who were just"discovering" the area; the organizations voluminous outputon consumption patterns, industrialization, investment, rawmaterials, and international economic relations in the Pacifichad obvious practical implications. IPR also took the lead instudying the possibilities for "rural reconstruction" (thecounterinsurgency tactic used by the IPRs own Y.C."James" Yen who became famous for his anti-cmnmunistefforts in China and Southeast Asia) and the potential uses of"population re-distribution" to quell rebellions in thePhilippines.a 7True to the applied nature of its research functions, IPRcooperated closely with the whole range of internationalistand applied social science institutions kept alive by corporatecontributions and the largesse of the big eastern foundations.IPR frequently worked with the Foreign Policy Associationto produce educational pamphlets on the Far East whichinundated colleges and schools around the country. R jointlypublished at least one book with the Council on ForeignRelations. Indeed, the American Institute of PacificRelations boasted of its "good fortune to have excellentconnections through the membership of its influentialresearch committee with well-established American researchbodies such as the American Geographical Society, the FoodResearch Institute of Stanford University, the Social ScienceResearch Council, the Brookings Institution .... and theAmerican Council of Learned Societies.mS With theircommon membership, funding sources, and ideological base,these organizations were to bring order out of the chaos ofsocial science research in Am erica.CONCLUSIONSThe Institute strives to influence public opinion[and] education in the schools, and to gather

information for and to promote commoncooperation among the business peoples sharing thecommerce and economic life of the Pacific.--letter from IPR official, 194349The trends established in the earliest years of theInstitute, as already described, only intensified with time.Probably the true culmination of IPR activity was achievedin World War II, when the organization provided trainedexperts to innumerable government agencies, including theState Department, the Office of War Information, and theOffice of Strategic Services. Its comprehensive pre-war 13

studies of the Far East, especially those funded by theRockefeller Foundation on the Sino-Japanese was, providedvaluable background information for the solution ofimmediate military problems and for the consideration ofpostwar plans. Its two wartime conferences attended bydelegations from the major Allied powers established aunique forum for the unofficial exchange of views betweenbusinessmen, government experts, and scholars of manycountries. So great were its services during the war that theU.S. Navy awarded the Institute a special medal ofcommendation.Although in its few remaining years the IPR never againachieved such a close relationship with the US government,IPR continued to act within the framework of thesetraditions. In the light of its long record, familiarinterpretations of the Institute as either a Communist front,or, more reasonably, a mere loose organization of s~holarssharing an interest in objective study of the Far East, seemdisingenuous. They ignore the motivations of IPRs founders,the reasons for its lavish funding by the foundations,corporations, and wealthy businessmen, the applied nature ofits research efforts and the real fonctlon of its round tablediscussions. One need not impugn the motives or integrity ofmost IPR me~nbers to see that the foundations andsophisticated elements of the American upper class "boughta field" through IPR. A classic example of what DavidHorowitz calls "strategic social investment," the Institute ofPacific Relations for a quarter of a century watched after theinterests of the America~i internationalist elite in the Pacific.46. The "~aucattot~al Pro gram o f the American Council, Institute ofPacific Relations (New Yo rk, 1933), box 8, IPR mss~, p. 3.IPR backers hop ed ultimately to us e the organization toinfluence the direction o f research in other institutions alongthese same applied lines. One US d elegate to the 1927conference suggested, "T he research secretary might compile alist of important subjects of the Pacific area requiring research.Such a l ist could be used by many professo~ in giving theirgraduate students topics for study." See ~3"oblems of the Pacific . . 1927, p, 204.47 . IPR Secretariat, The Study of Interttational Affairs in the Pa cificArea (New Yo rk, 1936), pp. 4-6, 42-43; AI Parsons, "Philippines:Rebellious Little B "othe , p. 7.4 8. The Study of lt~terr~ational Af]hirs in the Pacific Area, p. 39.4 9 1 B r a y [ o n 9 4 3 " l " l c , W i l b U r b o x 1 3 , t P a u l i P i l m s s D i e tr i c h O c t o b e r 1 , 1 9 4 3 ~ ~ n " J u l y - D e

ASE~ CARMost new s these days about the Association of South EastAsian Nations concerns the organizations expected shift tointernational neutrality. But ASEAN is also moving slowlytoward economic cooperation. (See "ASEAN Integration,"Pacific Research, November-December, 1973.)The First Meeting of the ASEAN sub-working group oncomplementation on motor vehicles was held in Maniladuring November, 1974. At the meeting the five nationaldelegations presented data on their respective motorindustries, and the group discussed possible guidelines forindustrial complementation (planned division of labor).It is hard to say how long it will take ASEAN to constructa cooperative scheme. It seems clear at this point, though,that the governments will not give multinational companiessuch as Ford Motor carte blanche to arrange its owncomplementation scheme. (See Economic Cooperation[ASPAC, Bangkok], January, 1975.)

IPR Was Big Business

Documents

Transcript of IPR Was Big Business