[Footnote 11: See William, Maurice, _Sun Yat-sen vs. Communism_, Baltimore, 1932, for an appraisal which stresses the importance and degree of this influence; on the opposite side, see "The Alleged Influence of Maurice William on Sun Yat-sen" by P. C. Huang and W. P. Yuen in _T'ien Hsia Monthly_, V, 4 (November 1937), p. 349-76.] These doctrines form the constitutional foundation of government action, as well as being the Party credo of the Kuomintang. Whoever proposes policy in China must first square it with the _San Min Chu I_. In this the Generalissimo has combined adroitness with profound sincerity. CHIANG K'AI-SHEK Despite a small shelf of biographies, Chiang K'ai-shek remains a personality above and behind the news, not in it. His former teacher and present publicity adviser, Hollington Tong, has written an authorized life, clear, detailed, and well expurgated. The celebrated Sven Hedin published a study of Chiang; virtues, but not specific personality stood forth. An able American newspaperman had recourse to his files, and some Chinese admirers sketched an incredibly soft, lovely picture: the background was clarified, but not Chiang. Two world-famous reporters, trained to epitomize a life or a nation in a double column or sharp review, failed to grasp Chiang. He eludes everyone. Part of the trouble comes from the fact that he possesses virtues which, once lauded, are now suspected of being mythical, wheresoever they occur. Frederick the Great, George Washington, Julius Caesar in his careerist years--authentic in history, as contemporaries these leaders would strike the moderns as characters inflated or incredible. Sincerity has become consistency with one's source of income; persons who fail to fit into the accepted moral and intellectual types of Western industrialist society are labelled fakes. One is a gentleman-liberal, an intellectual-liberal, a capitalist, a picturesque _native_, a war-lord sinister, obscene, cruel, and criminal--one fits such a type, and if one doesn't, one does not exist. Yet Chiang exists, and is thereby suspect to a host of commentators. Sun Yat-sen as First President was an acceptable news figure; as Saint of the Great Revolution he became vulnerable. When Chiang seems neither a general nor a reactionary, he bewilders many Westerners.