國民、共產兩黨對立，至中華民國政府退守臺灣，臺灣海峽政權分立實為20世紀中國重大變局。本文想探討知名自由主義者胡適對此局勢的觀感與如何因應及陳述政治信念，透過胡適與臺灣提倡自由主義刊物《自由中國》的互動進行觀察與討論。胡適自1946年起擔任學術行政職－北京大學校長，個人支持和平的政治改革，無意主動號召並組織團體以從事自由主義言論宣傳。直到1949年初，胡適才倡議創辦刊物宣揚自由主義，隨即赴美。因為雷震堅持，使胡適成為臺北發刊之《自由中國》初期的發行人。雖然胡適於1953年辭去發行人職，仍為該刊顧問，以其聲名庇護刊物持續出刊，並調解執政者與刊物的言論紛爭。本文透過耙梳系列事件顯示，胡適一直關切於《自由中國》及臺灣言論自由進展，不因辭去發行人，亦或返國擔任最高學術行政主管—中央研究院院長後而有所降低或減弱。胡適與《自由中國》實際主持人雷震、刊物重要作者之一的殷海光在如何與執政者互動及關注焦點的差異，一併影響彼此對於如何在臺灣實現言論自由論點之差異。

This essay will discuss interactions between some historical figures-Hu Shih and writers for the ”Freedom China” Magazine from the period of the Kuomingtang-Communist conflict in Mainland China to the establishment of the two rival political regimes divided by the Taiwan Strait. As chancellor of Peking University, Hu Shih supported peaceful political reforms, but was disinterested in organized forms of preaching liberalism to the public in China. But at beginning in 1949, Hu had to take the initiative to found some publications for promoting liberalism, and soon he was advised to go abroad to the U.S.A. Insisted by Lei-chen, Hu became the publisher of ”Freedom China” Magazine issued in Taipei, though he was not in charge of its practical management. Because Hu was one of the famous and important figures in China, his great fame could be used as a kind of protective shield to the magazine for its criticisms of political affairs. After his insistence, Hu Shih resigned the nominal role of the publisher of magazine in 1953, though kept his eye on the issues of the magazine and freedom of speech in Taiwan as before, in addition to the role of adviser and mediator in order to do his best to keep the magazine in running order. As President of the Academia Sinica since 1958, he was the supreme academic leader in Taiwan, and his concern for the magazine did not reduce or weaken, until its unprepared shutdown in 1960. Different relations with political rulers between Hu Shih on the one hand and Lei Chen and Yin Hai-kuang, two of the most important writers for the magazine on the other, not only affected their respective concerns, but also the different ways in which the subsequent fulfillment of liberalism and freedom of speech in Taiwan.