¹ Shih-i, (pseu. of Hu Hsü-wu), Tu Yueh-sheng wai-chuan (Hongkong, 1962)Google Scholar (hereafter WC), p. 187. Since this book is an important source of information, a word should be said of its reliability. Hu was a personal secretary of Tu for many years, at least from the time of World War II to Tu's death in 1951. Chinese commentators seem to regard Hu's account as reliable. In the course of my research, I have spared no effort in checking the accuracy of Hu's statements, not only with other documentary sources but also with Kuomintang politicians who are acquainted with the specific facts at issue. In general, Hu is remarkably accurate. Of course, I have inserted a large amount of specific information not provided in Hu's book, notably in regard to the history of the opium trade in Shanghai, the reorganization of the Chinese postal service in 1928, the number of Chinese Communists captured by the Kuomintang between 1928 and 1936, Tu's trip to Chekiang in 1945, and his son's arrest in 1948. I have not hesitated to disregard Hu where he is incorrect or on shaky grounds. Thus, Li Yuan-hung went to Shanghai in 1923, not 1919; the attempt on T. V. Soong's life in 1931 had, according to my information, nothing to do with Tu; and Wu Shao-shu's downfall in 1946 was not engineered by Tai Li, who had died several months earlier. A nephew of the late Li Tsu-jung, Mr. Chin-hsien Chen of New York City, told me that it was Tu who leaked advance information to Li about the hike of the official gold price in 1945, not vice versa as claimed by Hu Hsü-wu. Pending further evidence, I have taken into consideration only the undisputed facts.

² ibid., p. 189.

³ The New York Times, November 23, 1945, p. 5:1.

⁴ WC, pp. 48, 190.

⁵ SirAlcock, Rutherford, The Capital of The Tycoon (New York, 1863), I, 37–38Google Scholar.

⁶ Tuh-yueh Lee, “The Evolution of Banking in China,” Unpublished paper, The Graduate School of Banking conducted by the American Bankers Association at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, 1952, pp. 28–32; Kuang-ching, Liu, “Tang Tʻing-shu chih mai-pan shih-tai,” in Tsinghua Journal, New Series II, Number 2 (June, 1961) pp. 143–83.Google Scholar

⁷ Jun, Hsü, “Tzu-hsü nien-pʻu,” in Yang-wu yün-tung (Shanghai, 1959), VIII, 85–227Google Scholar, passim.

⁸ Chung-pʻing, Yen, Chung-kuo mien-fang-chin shik-kao (Peking, 1955), p. 155Google Scholar.

⁹ Ching-yü, Wang, Chung-kuo chin-tai kung-yeh-shih tzu-liao (Peking, 1957), pp. 958–81Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Huang was first listed in the British local Who's Who in 1935. See The China Yearbook of that year, p. 381.

¹¹ North China Herald, January 5, 1929, p. 9.

¹² Pott, F. L. Hawkes, A Short History of Shanghai (Shanghai, 1928), p. 63Google Scholar.

¹³ Morse, H. B., The Trade and Administration of China (London, 1913) pp. 351–53Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Kotenev, A. M., Shanghai: Its Municipality and the Chinese (Shanghai, 1957) p. 258Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Ibid., p. 259.

¹⁶ Chia-pin, Liang, Kuang-tung shih-san-hong k'ao (Shanghai, 1937), p. 372Google Scholar; WC, pp. 46, 192.

¹⁷ WC, p. 192.

¹⁸ Tin-shan, Chʻen, Huang-chin shih-chieh (Taipei, 1955), I, 40–45Google Scholar.

¹⁸ WC, pp. 192–93.

²⁰ Ibid., p. 225.

²¹ Ibid., p. 5.

²² Ke-ming wen-hsien (Taipei, 1958), III, 331–72Google Scholar.

²³ Isaacs, Harold R., The Tragedy of the Chinese Revolution (Stanford, 1961), p. 81;Google ScholarPo-ta, Chʻen, Jen-min kung-ti Chiang Chieh-shih (Peking, 1954), p. 5Google Scholar.

²⁴ It is true that Tu had had something to do with politics before this time. In his will, for instance, it is stated that he “ran errands” for the revolutionaries in 1912 and 1913 (Tu Yueh-sheng hsien-sheng chi-nien-chi [Taipei, 1952], [hereafter Chi-nien-chi], I, 1). He also helped Li Yuang-hung and Lu Yung-hsiang in 1923 and 1924. Nevertheless, Tu's standing was still very low. He could hardly be rated as a politician at that time. See WC, pp. 7, 199 and Chi-nien-chi I, 2. The dates of these sources are, however, inexact: Li Yuang-hung went to Shanghai in 1923, not 1919, and the war between Lu Yunghsiang and Chi Hsieh-yuan took place in 1924, not 1923.

²⁵ North, Robert C., Moscow and Chinese Communists (Stanford, 1963), pp. 92–93Google Scholar.

²⁶ Sokolsky, George, “The Kuomintang,” in The China Yearbook, 1928, p. 1361Google Scholar.

²⁷ Isaacs, op. cit., p. 146.

²⁸ Tzu-chia, Chu (pseu. of Chin Hsiung-po), Huang-pʻu-chiang te cho-lang (Hongkong, 1964), pp. 48–49Google Scholar; Chi-nien-chi, p. 25.

²⁹ Hua, Hu, Chung-kuo hsin-min-chu chu-i ko-ming shih (Peking, 1953), pp. 90–92Google Scholar. An important event in this period was the murder of Wang Shou-hua, a Communist leader, by Kuomintang agents. Wang was kidnapped after paying Tu a call. He was seized literally at the gates of Tu's house. In spite of a denial by Tu, the burden of evidence implicates him in this plot. See Chu Tzu-chia, op. cit., pp. 50–51 and WC, pp. 95–97.

³⁰ WC, p. 97.

³¹ The China Yearbook., 1926. p. 353.

³² The China Yearbook., 1935, p. 246.

³³ North China Herald, July 7, 1928, p. 6; Jan. 26, 1929, p. 136.

³⁴ WC, pp. 97–99; Ko-ming wen-hsien, XXVI, 5467.

³⁵ The China Yearbook, 1929–30, p. 719; North China Herald, March 9, 1929, p. 388.

³⁶ Chi-nien-chi, I, 27b; WC, pp. 6–8; The China Yearbook, 1931, p. 519; North China Herald, August 5, 1930, p. 202.

³⁷ WC, p. 7.

³⁸ The China Yearbook, 1931, p. 74.

³⁹ Ibid., 1933, p. 460.

⁴⁰ WC, p. 235.

⁴¹ Lieu, D. K., The Growth and Industrialization of Shanghai (Shanghai, 1936), passim.Google Scholar

⁴² Chu Tzu-chia, op. cit., pp. 82–92.

⁴³ WC, pp. 4–5, 22.

⁴⁴ As Hu Hsü-wu points out, Tu himself was unfamiliar with the gang rules (WC, p. 164). Furthermore, according to a well-documented source, quite a few of Tu's followers—Ku Chia-tʻang, Chin Tʻing-sun, and Yeh Cho-san, for example—were one generation senior to him in gang standing. Clearly, the traditional secret society was no longer intact by Tu's time. Again, the warlord Chang Tsung-chʻang also belonged to the Green Gang. Yet Tu sided with his opponents, the Kuomintang. See Kuo-pʻing, Chʻen, Chʻing-men kʻao-yuan (Hongkong, 1965), pp. 294, 296, 297Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Ibid., pp. 212, 302; WC, p. 163. According to Chʻen Kuo-pʻing, the Green Gang had a second series of twenty-four generations following the first. At any rate, Tu had low seniority among the gang men of his time.

⁴⁶ WC, pp. 165–68. In one respect Tu remained true to the gang tradition: he was far more concerned with the wellbeing of his pupils than with that of his own children. See WC, p. 159.

⁴⁷ Ibid., pp. 117, 167–68.

⁴⁸ Ibid., pp. 236–37.

⁴⁹ Ibid., p. 240. Another important aspect of Tu's power was his ability to influence the newspapers in Shanghai. By means of bribery (generous personal gifts), implicit threat of violence, and a subtle use of his social prestige, Tu was able to have specific local news items suppressed or reported in a way he liked. See Chu Tzu-chia, op. cit., pp. 75–76.

⁵⁰ Up until this time, the foreign settlements had always provided a haven for Chinese Revolutionaries. For a case study, see my article “The Su-pao Case: A Study of Foreign Pressure, Intellectual Fermentation, and Dynastic Decline” in Monumenta Serica, 1966.

⁵¹ Chung-kuo kung-chʻan-tang chih tʻou-shih (Taipei, 1962), pp. 312–13Google Scholar.

⁵² Ibid., pp. 313–14.

⁵³ Ibid., pp. 315–20.

⁵⁴ Ibid., pp. 399–400; North China Herald, September 22, 1931, p. 400.

⁵⁵ Chung-kuo kung-chʻan-tang chih tʻou-shih, pp. 321, 335, 340, 411–13.

⁵⁶ Ibid., pp. 418–20.

⁵⁷ Ibid., pp. 424–28.

⁵⁸ WC, p. 237; Isaacs, Harold R., Five Years of Kuomintang Reaction (Shanghai, 1932), p. 96Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ WC, pp. 241–42.

⁶⁰ Harold R. Isaacs, op. cit., p. 96. Chang Tso-hsiang, who was very close to Chang Hsueh-liang's father Tso-lin, apparently also belonged to the Green Gang, for when Chang Tso-hsiang visited Shanghai in 1946, he paid a courtesy call to Tu and recognized him by gang signals. I am indebted to Mr. Fu Mu-pʻo, a former chairman of the Industrial Bank of China, for this information.

⁶¹ WC, p. 242.

⁶² Ibid., pp. 68–69.

⁶³ Ibid., p. 50.

⁶⁴ Ibid., p. 51.

⁶⁵ Ibid., p. 69.

⁶⁶ Ibid., pp. 52, 246.

⁶⁷ Ibid., p. 183.

⁶⁸ Harold R. Isaacs, op. cit., p. 97.

⁶⁹ WC, pp. 149–58.

⁷⁰ Ibid., p. 9.

⁷¹ Ibid., p. 12.

⁷² Ibid., pp. 14–15.

⁷³ Ibid., p. 31. Liang, Yü, Kung Hsiang-hsi (Hongkong, 1955), p. 196Google Scholar.

⁷⁴ WC, pp. 18–21.

⁷⁵ Ibid., pp. 33–38.

⁷⁶ Ibid., p. 40; Tzu-chia, Chu, Wang Cheng-chʻüan te kai-chʻang yü shou-chʻang (Hongkong, 1959–64), V, 7–10, 109–20.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Ibid., I, 62.

⁷⁸ Ibid., pp. 62, 66, 67; Chʻun-chʻiu, No. 139 (May 1, 1963) pp. 21–23. Although many people were killed during this era of terror, not a single man close to either Chiang Kai-shek or Wang Ching-wei was hurt in any way. This could be a clue in further researches on this period.

⁷⁹ Chu Tzu-chia, op. cit., I, 67.

⁸⁰ WC, pp. 29–30.

⁸¹ Chu Tzu-chia, op. cit., III, 47–50.

⁸² Yü Liang, op. cit., pp. 202–04.

⁸³ WC, pp. 51–52.

⁸⁴ Ibid., p. 53.

⁸⁵ Ibid., pp. 81–88.

⁸⁶ Ibid., pp. 72–80.

⁸⁷ Ibid., p. 86.

⁸⁸ Ibid., pp. 63–65.

⁸⁹ Chinese Yearbook, 1944–45, pp. 614–15.

⁹⁰ The New York. Times, May 19, 1945, 1:4, 2:2.

⁹¹ WC, pp. 103–06, III.

⁹² Ibid., p. 27.

⁹³ Ibid., pp. 28–29.

⁹⁴ Ibid., pp. III–14. For a brief description of SACO, see The New York Times, March 25, 1946, 11:3.

⁹⁵ WC, p. 119.

⁹⁶ Ibid., p. 117.

⁹⁷ Ibid., pp. 125–26.

⁹⁸ Ibid., pp. 141–42.

⁹⁹ Ibid., pp. 139–41.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid., pp. 128–31; Shun-pao shang-hai shih-min shou-tsʻe (Shanghai, 1946), pp. B 12–13Google Scholar.

¹⁰¹ Ibid., p. F 1.

¹⁰² Ibid., p. F 6.

¹⁰³ The New York Times, January 28, 1947, 19:1.

¹⁰⁴ WC, pp. 124–25.

¹⁰⁵ Shang-hai-shih nien-chien (Shanghai, 1946), p. T 9Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ Tai's death took place on March 17, 1946, according to The New York Times (March 25, 1946, 11:3), but on March 19, according to Hu Hsü-wu (WC, p. 141).

¹⁰⁷ WC, pp. 126–27.

¹⁰⁸ For a vivid description of the conditions at the time, see the novel by Hen-shui, Chang, Wu-tzu teng-kʻo (Peking, 1946)Google Scholar, passim.

¹⁰⁹ WC, p. 124. After the war Tu again became an opium addict.

¹¹⁰ The New York Times, November 23, 1945, 5:1; WC, pp. 138–39.

¹¹¹ Ibid., pp. 147–48.

¹¹² Ibid., pp. 146–47.

¹¹³ Hsin-wen-pao, August 20, 1948, p. 1.

¹¹⁴ Ibid., September 4, 1948, p. 4.

¹¹⁵ The New York Times, September 8, 1948, 7:1.

¹¹⁶ WC, p. 135.

¹¹⁷ Ibid., p. 133.

¹¹⁸ Hsin-wen-pao, September 29, 1948, p. 4.

¹¹⁹ WC, pp. 134–35.

¹²⁰ Yin-tzu, Kao, Chung-hua min-kuo ta-shih-chi (Taipei, 1957), p. 586Google Scholar.

¹²¹ Yü Liang, op. cit., pp. 165–66.

¹²² WC, p. 143.

¹²³ Morgan, W. P., Triad Societies in Hongkong (Hongkong, 1960), pp. 84–85Google Scholar. I am inclined to doubt Morgan's statement that the Kuomintang's first attempt at integrating local Triad societies took place in 1946, for in that year Chiang was still supremely confident of victory over the Communists and had no need to rely on secret societies. Furthemore, after Chiang's return from Chungking, he had so much pressing business on hand that he could hardly turn his thoughts to such trivial matters as secret societies. Hu Hsü-wu's version that the whole matter came up as a result of the Communist advance is therefore more plausible.

¹²⁴ WC, pp. 143–44.

¹²⁵ Ibid.

¹²⁶ Ibid., p. 172.

¹²⁷ Ibid., p. 170.

¹²⁸ Ibid., p. 173.

¹²⁹ Ibid., pp. 173–75.

¹³⁰ Ibid., p. 183.

¹³¹ Ibid., p. 180.

¹³² Chi-nien-chi, I, 3b.

¹³³ WC, p. 208.

¹³⁴ Ibid., pp. 205–07.

¹³⁵ The most important evidence is that Chiang depended heavily on the banks in Shanghai for his financing between 1927 and 1937. It is perfectly clear that (1) the bankers' support was a condition of Chiang's success; (2) the concentrated resources at the bankers' disposal existed only in Western concessions in Shanghai. For a detailed discussion, see my book Chinese Intellectuals and the West (Chapel Hill, 1966), Chap. 13.Google Scholar