Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T06:56:23.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ho-Chi-Minh In Hong Kong, 1931–32

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Dennis J. Duncanson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has long been known that, after superintending the secret foundation of the Indochina Communist Party (ICP) in Hong Kong on behalf of the Comintern, between February and October 1930, Ho-chi-Minh stayed on in disguise and was eventually detected and detained by the colonial authorities. What happened to him whilst in custody, and how long he so remained, has often been related but, unfortunately, this has never been done accurately and has sometimes been done fancifully. Indeed, in part because of Ho's own lifelong efforts to mislead the rest of the world about his identity, movements and purposes, error has persisted over the Hong Kong episode, including the version of the late Bernard Fall. To cite but one of many examples, when Ho died in 1969, The Times published an obituary in which the story of his detention in Hong Kong, and of the subsequent appeal on his behalf to the Privy Council on a suit for writ of habeas corpus, was highlighted and accompanied by the gloss that he had been defended by no less a luminary than Sir Stafford Cripps. At once, the late Mr D. N. Pritt, the communist Q.C., (senior attorney) wrote to correct this error, explaining that he himself had been retained as counsel for Ho, while Cripps had acted on behalf of the Hong Kong Government, in his capacity of United Kingdom Solicitor-General. But Pritt fell into error himself here: not only would it have been inappropriate for the Solicitor-General to plead on behalf of the Hong Kong Government, but at the time in question (June 1932) Cripps had been out of office for 10 months. As we shall see below, Cripps's true standing in the matter was as defence counsel retained by the Hong Kong Government's London solicitors, Messrs Burchells. In his version of the story, Pritt's memory had betrayed him into misdating the whole episode from 1931–32 to 1930–31; and, indeed, even J. H. Brimmel, usually such a careful author, had made the same mistake 10 years before.

Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 57 , March 1974 , pp. 84 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Comintern directive quoted in Nhan Dan (Hanoi), 17 05, 1960Google Scholar;

2. Most accounts are traceable ultimately to Ho's virtual autobiography, Trandan-Tien, , Hu Chih-ming chuan (Shanghai, 1949—reissued from Hanoi in translation, 1958–1960), especially pp. 103–106Google Scholar;

3. Fall, Bernard B., Le Viet Mirth (Paris, 1960), p. 31Google Scholar;

4. The Times (London), 4 09 1969Google Scholar;

5. Correspondence column, 6 September 1969. See alsoPritt's, Autobiography (London, 1965–1966), Vol. I, pp. 137–38Google Scholar;

6. Cripps was Solicitor-General in Ramsay MacDonald's Labour Government of 1929; his uncle-by-marriage, Sidney Webb (Lord Passfleld), was Secretary of State for the Colonies, and therefore in charge of Hong Kong affairs when Ho was detained. Neither Passfield nor Cripps supported MacDonald's National Government, formed 26 August 1931, so both were out of office when the Privy Council appeal came up.

7. Brimmell, J. H., Communism in Southeast Asia (London, 1959), p. 95Google Scholar;

8. Public Record Office (PRO), London, Colonial Office (CO) 129/535–82837 (Nguyen-ai-Quoc 1931) and CO 129/539–92610 (Nguyen-ai-Quoc 1932). One Singapore file at the PRO has a bearing on these transactions, CO 273/580–92041 (“Ducroux”) see below: note 21.

9. In full in the South China Morning Post (1, 15, 17, 19, 21 and 25 August and 12 and 14 September 1931), in summary in the China Mail and the Hong Kong Weekly Press and China Overland Trade Report (21 and 28 August 1931).

10. This term is traceable to the bullion inherited by the Bolsheviks in 1917 and exported to western Europe in diplomatic bags from 1918 onwards, under Zinoviev's direction, by Adolf Joffe, Soviet ambassador to Germany. Far from being a secret, the original flow of “Moscow gold” was boasted of by both Joffe and Trotsky. Fischer, Louis, The Soviets in World Affairs (London, 1930), Vol. I, pp. 75–6Google Scholar;

11. Evidence at his trial, Straits Times, 23 June, 1931.

12. Ibid.

13. Brought to light by German police raids in November 1932 and April 1933. Dallin, David J., Soviet Espionage (New Haven Conn.: Yale University Press, 1955), pp. 93 and 101Google Scholar;

14. Onraet, René, Singapore—a Police Background (London, 1946), p. 113Google Scholar;

15. The Comintern's statutes, though revised at the Sixth Congress (1928), retained this early provision right through their history. Degras, Jane, Documents of the Communist International 1919–1943 (London, 1956–1965), Vol. II, pp. 465–71Google Scholar;

16. As told to Lacouture, Jean, Ho-chi-Minh (London, 1968), p. 48Google Scholar;

17. For the ICP's admission of these excesses, going beyond what the Comintern intended, seeTran-huy-Iieu, , Les Soviets du Nghe-Tinh de 1930–31 (Hanoi 1960), especially p. 52Google Scholar;

18. Degras, , Documents, Vol. III, p. 136Google Scholar;

19. Sûreté publication, Contribution à I'histoire des Mouvements Politiques de l'lndochine française (Hanoi, 1933–1934), Vol. IV pp. 113Google Scholar ff.

20. Onraet, Ibid.

21. Brimmell, , Communism in South-east Asia, p. 92Google Scholar;Thanh, Hoai, Hu po-po (Hanoi 1962, in Chinese), p. 95Google Scholar; Contribution, Vol. IV, p. 14. Ducroux and Fu were believed to have collaborated in Germany in 1925 on behalf of the Comintern (CO 273/580–92041) .

22. Straits Times, 23 June 1931.

23. Communication from Mr Dickinson.

24. Straits Times, 23 June 1931. The explanation of the charge which Lacouture here attributes to Ducroux is not borne out by the report of the case.

25. International Press Correspondence (Inprecor) always refers to him as “Ruegg,” but Babette Gross (“Frau” Münzenberg) maintains that the real Rueggs, a Swiss couple, were in Moscow at this time and that their passports had been lent to the Dalburo couple, who wereUkrainians, , Gross, Babette, Willi Münzenberg (Stuttgart, 1967), p. 235Google Scholar; According to one, reluctant, Swiss comrade, the Russians regularly relieved visiting delegates of their passports and copied them or lent them to fellow agents ( Humbert-Droz, , De Lénine à Staline (Neuchâtel, 1971), p. 159Google Scholar).

26. South China Morning Post (SCMP) (Hong Kong), 19 08 1931Google Scholar (copying Shanghai Times);Leang-li, T'ang, Chinas Kampf gegen den Kommunismus (Shanghai, 1935), p. 57Google Scholar;

27. Guillermaz, Jacques, History of the Chinese Communist Party (London, 1972), p. 222Google Scholar;

28. Nollau, Günther, International Communism and World Revolution (London, 1961), p. 142Google Scholar;

29. Degras, , Documents, Vol. III, p. 167Google Scholar;

30. Edgar Snow gave the figure as only $15,000 a month. Red Star over China (London, 1968 ed.), p. 359Google Scholar;

31. Münzenberg, mentions “IRA lawyers active on their behalf” in Inprecor, XI: 83Google Scholar;

32. SCMP, 19 August 1931. According to a former German consul in Shanghai, Wilhelm was not a registered lawyer but an informal “fixer”; he is now dead.

33. Leang-li, T'ang, Chinas Kampf; North China Herald, 16 09, 1931Google Scholar;

34. Inprecor, XII: 71;Leang-li, T'ang, Chinas Kampf, p. 56Google Scholar;

35. Gross, , Willi Münzenberg, p. 235Google Scholar;

36. CO 129/535–82837.

37. This name for the inquiry does not occur in either files or court reports; I use it from having taken part in such procedures myself.

38. Communication from Mr Dickinson.

39. Tran-huy-Lieu, , Les Soviets, p. 114Google Scholar;Sûreté, , Contribution, Vol. IV, p. 35Google Scholar;

40. Affidavit read in court, and promptly rebutted by the Attorney-General with a contrary one sworn by the Superintendent of Prisons, on 14 August. SCMP, 15 August 1931.

41. Yung-ching, Chiang, Hu Chih-ming tsai Chung-kuo (Taipei, 1971), p. 49Google Scholar; quoting the original KMT minutes of the conference; Li Fu-Ch'un of the CCP interpreted. Dickinson confirms Ho's deceptive charm at the inquiry.

42 SCMP, 17 and 20 August 1931.

43. When Tan Malaka (an Indonesian) was deported by the American authorities from the Philippines in 1927, he claimed to be a nationalist and to subscribe “theoretically” to Bolshevik doctrines, but denied “the allegation that there is any proof that I am a Red or a Bolshevik.”The Bulletin (Manila), 16 08 1927Google Scholar andLa Vanguardia (Manila), 23 08 1927Google Scholar;

44. Tran-dan-Tien, , Hu Chih-ming chuan, p. 105Google Scholar;

45. E.g. Our President Ho Chi Minh (Hanoi, 1970), p. 104Google Scholar; Münzenberg's appeals in Inprecor to help “comrades in the hangman's clutches” invariably bracketed the two organs, “LAI and IRA”.

46. A whole issue of Inprecor was devoted to the work of the IRA on 18 March 1928 (VIII No. 13), and a world congress of its helpers was held in Moscow in 1932. The best known case involving “asylum” was that of Georgi Dmitrov after the Reichstag Fire Trial.

47. Gross, , Willi Münzenberg p. 197Google Scholar;

48. Sûreté, , Contribution, Vol. IV, p. 116Google Scholar; In fact, the IRA had no lawyers there on its panel at all - report of “Nguien” to the 1932 Moscow congress inProtokoll des ersten Kongresses der internationalen Roten hilfe (Moscow, 1933), p. 112Google Scholar;

49. Tran-dan-Tien, , Hu Chih-ming chuan, p. 105Google Scholar; Another Chinese author ( Han, Sun, Hu Chih-ming (Shanghai, 1949) p. 65) adds that it was a French official source that disclosed the newsGoogle Scholar;

50. CO 129/535–82837.

51. Campaign mentioned by Lacouture, Ho-chi-Minh; Inprecor concentrated on the Rueggs, however (XI: 82 and 83, XII: 72). “Münzenberg cajoled a host of eminent intellectuals into bombarding the widow of Sun Yat-sen at Shanghai with telegrams begging her intervention on behalf of a couple about whose name and functions they knew, and he told them, nothing,” –Gross, , op cit. p. 234Google Scholar;

52. I am grateful to Mr H. A. Poeze of the Netherlands, a biographer of Tan Malaka, for drawing my attention to the scanty records of Tan Malaka's deportation, alluded to in CO 129/543–13790.

53. The story is told byTan, himself in Dari Pendjaran ke Pendjaran (From Gaol to Gaol) (Djogjakarta 1947–1948), II, pp. 30–50Google Scholar; He too posed as a Chinese, claiming Philippine nationality, and says that Onraet and Dickinson rushed to Hong Kong again to interrogate him; that Onraet visited Hong Kong at that time is reported in SCMP, 8 November 1932.

54. Telegram of 24 July 1931.

55. Semi-official note to the Foreign Office, 27 July 1931.

56. Details of the innumerable liquidations of “traitors,” among other atrocities, and given, not only in Contribution Vols. IV and V (with facsimiles of relevant directives), but also in anti-colonialistViollis's, AndréeIndochine S.O.S. (Paris 1935)Google Scholar; They will have featured among the papers the Sûreté officers had brought to Hong Kong and which had been shown to the Executive Council to prove that Ho-chi-Minh was too dangerous a man to have at large in the colony.

57. Inprecor, VIII: 13. Regular subscribers to Inprecor at that time (1928) might, on reading this, have recalled the observation of Andrei Vishinsky (Stalin's future chief prosecutor) a few weeks earlier that, in the Soviet Union, “the court is an organ of class rule.” VII: 63.

58. Autobiography, Vol. I, p. 129.

59. Sûreté, , Contribution, Vol. IV, p. 104Google Scholar;

60. SCMP, 1 August 31. The amending ordinance had only been enacted six weeks before (according to another file in the PRO, CO 129/535); the article Jenkin quoted was already being challenged by the Colonial Office, and was duly repealed. It appeared not to apply to aliens anyway, but, curiously, that point was not taken up on this occasion.

61. Full text in Hong Kong Weekly Press, 28 August 1931.

62. SCMP 12 September 1931.

63. Not reported in the press, but noted in CO 92610.

64. The words of Rule 2 (b) of Privy Council Rules.

65. SCMP, 14 September 1931.

66. Tran-dan-Tien, , Hu Chih-ming chuan, p. 108Google Scholar;

67. Details communicated by Mrs Loseby.

68. Chen, King C.Vietnam and China, 1938–1954 (Princeton, 1969), p. 60Google Scholar;

69. Letter Truelle to Mounsey (FO) of 22 December (CO 82837).

70. Gross, , Willi Münzenberg, p. 262Google Scholar;

71. Based on entry in Dictionary of Natinoal Biography. Cripps gave the opening address at the Reichstag-Fire Counter-trial, before yielding the “bench” to Pritt. The IRA had been commended years before as “one of the most important instruments for carrying out the tactics of the united front.” Inprecor, VIII: 84.

72. Minute by Harold Duncan, Bushe's deputy to the Colonial Office Legal Adviser (CO 129/539–92610).

73. Letter to the Governor dated 15 July 1932 (CO 92610). Pritt repudiated, as “unsound” in political cases, “the ordinary practice whereby a barrister appears for anyone who employs him, regardless of his own views, convictions and sympathies.” Autobigraphy, Vol. I, p. 125. In 1936 he was invited by Stalin to observe the purge trial of Zinoviev and Kamenev and gave his approval to the proceeding as fair. Gross, , Willi Münzenberg, p. 266Google Scholar).

74. It has even been asserted (without evidence) that Phan-boi-Chau's intended movements, leading him into a Süreté trap, were given away somehow by Ho personally. Boudarel, G., “Mémories de Phan-de-Phan-boi-Chau,” France-Asie (Paris, 1968), No. 194, p. 197Google Scholar;

75. Thompson, Virginia, French lndo-China (New York, 1937), p. 493Google Scholar;McLane, Charles B., Soviet Strategies in Southeast Asia (Princeton, 1966), p. 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar; quoting a contemporary Moscow authority. Phan-boi-Chau, on his return to Indochina, had been tried for conspiracy but sentenced only to forced residence at Hué.

76. Westminster Gazette, 21 July 1932.

77. Communication from Mrs Loseby; also her interview with Reuter, 8 September 1969.

78. 11 August 1932.

79. Governor's despatch and Mrs Loseby's interview with Reuter.

80. The building was in the Chinese city, not under the consular jurisdiction of Kulangsoo, on which France was represented.

81. The particulars about the launch are in the Governor's despatch, the remainder communicated by Mr Lung himself.

82. The usual explanation isTran-dan-Tien's, (Hu Chih-ming chuan, p. 108Google Scholar), that Ho received money “from a wealthy Amoy Chinese who was a friend of Loseby.”

83. Madame Vaillant-Couturier, writing inFiguères, Leo, Ho Chi Minh, notre camarade (Paris, 1970), pp. 115–16Google Scholar;

84. Director Louis Marty writing 1 October 1933, in Sûreté, , Contribution, VoL IV, p. 45Google Scholar;

85. Final despatch.