User talk:D.Dur Muhammad Pathan/sandbox

HOME RULE LEAGUE MOVEMENT [The Home Rule movement was a product of the War situation. Mrs. Besant, it appears, Started her Campaign for Home Rule early in 1915 in order to present and press India's claims in England. The Congress platform was controlled by the moderates and they were not likely to go so far as the younger nationalists wanted to do. The older section of Indian Liberals on occasions was found to have been committed to some sort of co-peration with the Government. This had already broadened the gulf between them and the young nationalists. The stalwarts of the older school, Mehta and Gokhale, had passed away. Mrs. Besant who had started taking active interest in politics requested the Congress and the Muslim League to form a Home Rule League which she thought was necessary as a link between the Congress in India and the British India Congress Committee. The Congress and the Muslim League did not, however, come to any conclusions though both had appointed a joint committee for this work. Meanwhile there was a similar move in Maharashtra. Lokmanya after his release from jail (August 1914) had advised his lieutenants to join the Congress. Mrs. Besant herself had tried to bring in the Nationalists at the time of the Madras Congress but had failed and it is clear from Sir Phirojshah's statement that " he never wanted the doors opened for the extremists. And he was determined that so long as matters rested with him he would save the Congress from being captured by the other side." (Sir P. M. Mehta--by H. P. Modi, p. 656). Tilak, though he was anxious to work under the Congress flag, knew that it was bound to take time ; so he started his Home Rule League (May 1916). Mrs. Besant also was being pressed by her followers. She was, in the meantime, prohibited by Bombay and other governments to enter their provinces. She had started a powerful propaganda for self-Government. She formed the London branch of her Home Rule League (June 1916) and her Indian Home Rule League was started in Madras in September 1916. Leaders like Tilak and Besant wanted to take advantage of the War situation and prepare popular sanctions for the demand of "Self Government to be attained, by constitutional means". The moderate Congress leaders perhaps had not the desire to undertake any such new activities nor were they willing to leave the Congress in the hands of the new leaders. Thus the Home Rule Leagues came into existence. Lokmanya started his whirlwind propoganda tours in Maharashtra, Karnatak, Berar and C. P. He was also invited and had gone to other provinces like Sindh, Ajmer, Delhi, etc. The Government, within two years of the life of the Home Rule League could see that the country had assumed a new life and new spirit due to the agitation carried on by the two Home Rule Leagues and particularly due 688 to 'Tilak's entry on the platform after his long imprisonment. The league activities continued even after the Congress was captured by the younger elements and Lokmanya had joined them at Lucknow (1916). This helped Tilak to collect new friends and oolitical workers like Baptista, Vithalbhai Patel, Satyamurti, Jamandas Mehta and others. The League sent out a deputation to London for pressing the demands of Home Rule. The following extracts from government record; throw light on the attitude of the Home Rulers regarding the War effort. The walkout by Home Rulers led by the Lokmanya from the War Conference of Bombay (10th June 1918) and the valiant fight put up by Mr. Jinnah against the proposed Memorial to Lord Willingdon clearly indicate the spirit of the Home Rulers. They wanted an assurance from government that India would be granted Hon,e Rule and that they would cooperate in the War effort only if such an assurance was unequivocally given. Their opposition to the Willlingdon Memorial was indicative of their determination to break the shackles of bureaucratic rule.] THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT. (A short History sketch prepared by the Government of Bombay.) [REF. : APPENDIX I, FILE NO. 521 (1A), H. D., SPECJAL DEPARTMENT. SUBJECT : SATYAGRAHA CAMPAIGN.] The genesis of the Home Rule League may be traced to lhe proceed ings of the Indian National Congress at Surat in December 1907, where the extremist section headed by Mr. B. G. Tilak seceded. When, as will be subsequently related, this seceding group sought and obtained readmission, it was as an invading body whose aim appeared to be not reunion so much as annexation. After this reunion the influence of the Moderate party in the politics of the old Congress steadily declined. MRS. BESANT'S CAMPAIGN FOR SWARAJYA. 2. In March 1915 Mrs. Besant started a compaign in favour of the early grant of Swarajya. In September she gave definile shape to the opinion demanding an executive organisation for the Congress by arranging for a joint meeting at Christmas 1915 of he Committee of the All India National Congress and the Counci of the Moslem League to consider the formation of a Home Rule for India League to co-operate with the National Congress in India and the British Committee of the Congress in England. The meeting of the joint conference was, however, postponed to the day after the 1915 689 Congress and in the interval the Congress and Moslem League passed resolutions directing the appointment of a joint committee of both the associations to meet during the year and to formulate a definite scheme of self-government to be pressed on Government. Mrs. Besant had meanwhile bound herself to abide by the decision of the Joint Conference she had summoned, which was that her proposals should be held over for consideration by the joint committee of the Congress and Moslem League when considering the self-government draft." The younger members of the Congress were frankly disappointed with the decision and pressed Mrs. Besant to launch the Home Rule League at once. She however stood by her promise but decided to continue her press and platform campaign and appointed Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas and one or two others as a small Committee in Bombay to publish pamphlets in furtherance of her campaign. On her way back to Madras from the Bombay Congress she made two speeches in Poona on Swarajya which were ultimately to cause the Bombay Government to prohibit her under, the Defence of India Act from entering the Presidency when she had arranged to come to Bombay later. HOME RULE LEAGUE FOR MAHARASHTRA 3. Meanwhile a Conference of Nationalist leaders from the Presidency, Central Province and Berar was summoned at Poona during the Bombay Congress week, at which it was decided to appoint a Committee of 15 to consider whether they should form a Home Rule League of their own and if so the lines on which it should be based. Early in April 1916 the Committee reported in favour of the proposal but recommended that it should be confined to the Bombay Presidency, the Central Provinces and Berar, till affiliated organisations could be started elsewhere in India when an All India League could be formed. Their recommendation was considered during the Belgaum (Extremists) Provincial Conference on the 28th April 1916 which was also attended bv Nationalists from the Central Provinces and Berar and it was finally decided to establish the League. Its declared objects were the same as Mrs. Besant's proposed League, the attainment by constitutional means of self-government within the Empire. It was however to be an independent organisation. HIGH COURT JUSTIFIES TILAK'S ACTIVITIES 4. Mr. J. Baptista was appointed President and Mr. Kelkar Secretary, and a Provisional Committee for furthering the object of the League was elected. Mr. Tilak himself initialed the campaign by a series of speeches delivered at Belgaum and Ahmednagar after 690 the Conference. The speeches were most objectionable and proceedings were instituted against him under section 1,08, Criminal Procedure Code, as a result of which Mr. Tilak was required by the District Magistrate, Poona, to give security. The High Court reversed the decision of the District Magistrate in November of the same year. The whole Nationalist Press acclaimed the judgment of the High Court as legalising the campaign for Home Rule in the form they contemplated. MRS. BESANT'S HOME RULE LEAGUE 5. After the formation of the Maharashtra Home Rule League, Mrs. Besant without awaiting the result of the deliberations of the Joint Committee of the Congress and League, started the English Branch of her Home Rule League in London in June 1916 and inaugurated her Home Rule League in Madras in September of the same year. Among Mrs. Besant's workers in Bombay were Messrs. Umar Sobhani and Jamnadas Dwarkadas. For the first year their activities were confined to issuing pamphlets till Mr. Jamnadas started a journal named Young India which he edited himself. The Moslem League although already captured by the extreme elements, did not actively co-operate in this campaign. Mr. Jinnah, however, in his presidential address at the Ahmedabad (Moderates) Provincial Conference, shortly after the Belgaum Conference, detailed his scheme of reforms, in regard to the authorship of which there was to be much acrimonious correspondence a few years later when His Highness the Aga Khan published Mr. Gokhale's scheme drafted on his death bed, THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY AND POLITICS 6. Membership to the two leagues accrued slowly in spite of Tilak's successful appeal to the High Court. In November 1916, it was left to individual theosophists to join Mrs. Besant's League or not, but after the Central Provinces Government prohibited Mrs. Besant from entering into the Central Provinces and thus prevented her from presiding over a meeting of a local branch of the Theosophical Society at Amraoti on the 29th October 1916, she declared that the order was a breach of the religious liberties of a section of His Majesty's subjects, suggested that the neutrality of her society in politics was only based on the personal opinion of Colonel Olcott during his life time but that, in view of the necessity for the society taking a leading part in world movements in preparation for the coming of the " World Teacher ", she had no hesitation in announcing that the " Master's wish now was that they should discard their neutrality in politics ". She felt sure that the majority of the members of the society would joy fully come forward to help and recognise its changed constitution. 691 It may be remarked here that Mr. Tilak and his league made no headway in Gujarat and Sind where the Home Rulers en bloc were members of Mrs. Besant's league. SUCCESS FOR HOME RULERS 7. The election of delegates for the Lucknow Congress of 1916 witnessed the first act of co-operation in Bombay, and later in the Congress, between representatives from the two Leagues. In Bombay the Home Rulers assailed the stronghold of the Moderates—the Bombay Presidency Association—and were able to secure election to the Congress of eight out of fifteen delegates. They went further in the election at Lucknow of Bombay delegates on the subject Committee and insisted that none but pledged Home Rulers were to be elected. Messrs. Gandhi and Horniman and Professor Paranjpe, R. P., were opposed by Home Rulers and defeated, and Mr. Gandhi and Professor Paranjpe were only able to get in by direct nomination by the President of the Congress. The Home Rulers made a determined effort to get the Home Rule Leagues recognised as part and parcel of the Congress organisation, but, in spite of their numbers and in view of the necessity for placating the few Moderates that attended to secure the passing of the Congress-League's Scheme of Reforms, they had to rest content with a resolution of the Congress urging the Home Rule and other political organisations to carry on a propaganda in favour of the Joint Scheme. BAN ON TILAK 8. As far as platform agitation in this Presidency went, there were only a few sporadic meetings during April and the usual district and provincial Conferences during May, which were on the whole of an unobjectionable nature but which indicated a growing control by the Home Rule League over the organisations which were responsible for these Conferences. Mr. Tilak, however, made a series of rather strong Home Rule speeches at the Sinnar -Sangamner Conferences, and at Chiplun and Yeola after the Nasik Provincial Conference and Mr. S. M. Paranjpe on the 4th June 1917, shortly after his return from the same Conference, delivered a particularly mischievous speech at Poona on account of which Government made an order under Rule 3 of the Defence of India (Consolidation) Rules prohibiting him from making any public speech. The Home Rule press continued to take their cue from Mrs. Besant's organs and to print copious extracts from New India. 9. After Mrs. Besant's internment in Madras in July 1917, the membership of the league increased rapidly. New district centres were 692 opened and in the flood-tide of the agitation many Moderates either signed the Home Rule pedge or lent their support to the movement. The resolutions at the Special Conference demanded in the main the acceptance of a policy making India a self-governing member of the Empire and the initiation of steps to give effect to the Joint Congress League scheme of reforms at the end of the war. MRS. BESANT, PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS 10. The Home Rulers were however so confidem of then- position that they pressed once more for the recognition of their organisations as part of the Congress organisation and the immediate inauguration of a Campaign of passive resistance. It was apparently due only to the fact that the representatives of the Moslem League had no authority to commit the League in the matter that the Home Rulers failed to carry their first point. The consideration of the question of passive resistance which was carried over well into August degenerated into personalities and was passed to and fro from one committee or sub- committee to another. In the midst of the controversy the announce- ment of August 20th, was made. It formed a strong rallying point for the Moderates and strengthened their position considerably. The Home Rulers and their press could, however, only see in it a victory : for their agitation and tactics. They consequently urged a redoubling of their activities and a resort to passive resistance with a view to obtain the release of all internees and all political prisoners and to convince the Secretary of State of the volume and force of popular opinion behind them. They were therefore in no mood to drop the question of passive resistance, as had been recommended by the Subcommittee appointed by the Bombay Conference to report to the Provincial Congress Committees. The main fight centred round the deli- berations of the Bombay Congress Committee, but the possibilities underlying the August announcement and the recognition of the needs for a favourable atmosphere during the Secretary of State's visit found the opposition in the Provincial Committee swelled by support from the more moderate of the left wing. It was decided to postpone con-sideration of the matter in the hope that Government, recognising the strong feeling in support of passive resistance, would take timely steps to allay public feeling. Other Provincial Congress Committees fell into line and the decision was ultimately ratified by the All India Congress Committee and the Council of Moslem League. With the release of Mrs. Besant and her two lieutenants la ter in the year the campaign in favour of passive resistance, which was pressed for some time in favour of the release of the Ali brothers, gradually evaporated The Home Rule League, however, was able to secure the election of Mrs. Besant as President of the 1917 Calcutta Congress and 693 to dominate the Congress deliberations. The only noteworthy feature of this Congress so far as this note is concerned was the Home Rule League's attitude in regard to the draft self-government resolution. They were not satisfied with the Congress League scheme as a first instalment and pressed for the insertion of a demand for the immediate grant of self-government. It was only the recognition of the alternative of a definitive moderate secession from the Congress, and of the Joint Congress League scheme ceasing to have the united backing of the country in consequence, that determined a compromise asking for self-government within ten years. In deference, however, to the strong views of the All-India Moslem League on the subject, " at an early date " was finally substituted for ten years. MORE AGITATION 11. It was during the agitation over Mrs. Besant's internment that were inaugurated the conclaves at Shantaram's Chawl led by the leaders of the Bombay branches of the two leagues, Messrs. Horniman, Umar Sobhani, Jamnadas Dwarkadas, Doctor Velkar and Saihe and occasionally Messrs. Baptista and Jinnah. They also occasionally went on lecturing tours, generally in Gujerat. This combination came in time practically to control all the District organisations throughout the Presidency and Sind. They would send to every centre printed copies of resolutions to be passed and even printed letters embodying these resolutions to be sent to Government and those concerned. They not only afforded not the least assistance in the matter of recruiting and the War Loan campaign but were ready to give publicity to every report or rumour of any excessive zeal or indiscretion on the part of those engaged in the performance of a supreme national duty, conferring on a press campaign. These obstructive tactics became more pronounced in 1918, after the return of the Home Rule delegates from Colombo and the Bombay War Conference. 12. Mr. Tilak, who does not appear to have ordinarily acted in concert with the Bombay group, was more openly hostile. On June 22nd, 1918, he delivered a speech, the intention of which was clearly to interfere with the recruiting and which referred to Indian soldiers in terms of disparagement. He was, in consequence, prohibited from public speaking under Rule 3 of the Defence of India (Consolidation) Rules. GOVERNMENT REFORM PROPOSALS 13. On the publication of the Joint Report on Reforms of His Excellency the Viceroy and the Secretary of State, the Home Rule press endeavoured to anticipate any reasoned consideration of the 694 scheme by immediate and contemptous rejection. A special meeting of the Congress having been summoned to discuss the scheme the Moderate party decided to hold a separate meeting. Efforts to induce them to unite with the extremists failed, and this fact had a material effect in mitigating the terms of the resolutions actually adopted by the " extremists " Congress. From this point onwards, the Bombay extremist group acted independently, in concert with its country affiliations in Gujerat and Sind. The intensive agitations which followed have been detailed in the general statement. THE BOMBAY WAR CONFERENCE, 1918 (EXTRACTS FROM MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE NO. 1733 OF 1918.) 1 Should it be a Conference or a Public Meeting ? (Pages 7, 8) With regard to the question of conference us. public meeting, I. agree with C. S. (Chief Secretary) that a conference would be preferable. It is not much use dragging people all the way from the mofussil, if they are only to sit on a dais and listen to set speeches and raise their hands in support of formal resolutions. Admittedly it will not be easy to manage a conference with such a large number of persons attending it. But even at the risk of protracted proceedings and much desultory and irrelevent talk I think that free discussion should be allowed. It is certain to be productive of useful recommendations and hints, while at the same time the fact of its being allowed will be appreciated and will tend to produce a good feeling. I notice that in the references to the press, including the semi-official announcements emanating from Simla, the proposed gatherings are generally referred to as conferences. 2 Home Rulers may refuse co-operation (Pages 13, 14.) I am distinctly in favour of a conference rather than a public meeting. Judging by the attitude that has been adopted by Tilak and others I think a public meeting might result in a fiasco. 695 A very difficult question arises as to how far we are to invite representatives of all shades of opinion. Tilak, Jinnah, Horniman and others are likely to adhere to the policy outlined in Tilak's recent speech in Madras, which practically means no co-operation without a promise of the Congress scheme of Home Rule. I do not think that is likely to be granted and we shall certainly not be in a position to say that it is likely to be granted. Tilak and his followers will therefore be bound to refuse co-operation, indeed we may expect from them opposition. No one therefore who is definitely committed to that policy should be invited. The conference should be by invitation not election. BOMBAY GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS HOME RULE PRESS [EXTRACT FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE NO. 3989.] Telegram from Bombay Government to the Government of India. To HOME Simla. Your telegram 951 of 6th inst. article referred to appeared as anonymous letter in Bombay Chronicle, gist is taken from speeches of Tilak and his party. Government of Bombay consider that letter is too insignificant to form basis of energetic action. They prefer to await results of coming provincial conference and then to take strong action against any article or speech which in their opinion will militate against success of man power and resources campaign that will then be inaugurated. Governor in Council trusts that he will have full support of Governor General in Council in any such action which it should be made clear in advance, may involve important newspapers such as Chronicle, Mahratta, Kesari and the like and prominent persons such as Horniman, Tilak, Besant and others, and which will probably be taken under Defence of India Act inclusive of precensorship of newspapers, restraining orders against speaking or writing on certain topics and internment. 696 Confidential. D/O No. 1188-Political. HOME DEPARTMENT : Simla, the 7th June, 1918. Dear Robertson, Please refere to your telegram No. 92-M, dated the 18th May, 1918, regarding the inadvisability of taking action at present against the Bombay Chronicle. In the latter part of your telegram you say that His Excellency in Council hopes that he will have the full support of the Governor-General in Council in any action under the Defence of India Act which the local Government may take against any articles or speeches which in their opinion will militate against the success of the man-power or resources campaign to be inaugurated after the Bombay Provincial Conference. 2. In reply, I am to say that it appears to the Government of India that as the result of what has happened during the past few weeks both in India and outside, and in particular of the Delhi and Provincial War Conferences there has been a distinct improvement all over the country in the attitude of the extiemist press and publicists towards Government and its present war endeavours. They therefore hope that no extensive action on the lines adumbrated in your telegram will be found necessary in the Bombay Presidency. Should this anticipation be proved incorrect, the Government of India have full confidence that, any action which may be taken by the local Government in this connection will be inspired by wisdom and firmness, and they will be most anxious to accord them their full support. If, however, the Government of Bombay desires more than this and seek a definite promise of support in whatever course of action they may pursue, it is hardly necessary to point out that this would amount to the Government of India divesting themselves of authority in a manner that would be entirely inconsistent with their constitutional position. The Government of India trust that His Excellency in Council will subscribe to the reasonableness of this view. Should, however, a case arise in which the local Government are not prepared to take action without an absolute promise of support from the Government of India, I am to request that the particular line of action which commends itself to His Excellency 697 the Governor in Council may be reported to the Government of India who will place the local Government in possession of their views in the matter with as little delay as possible. Yours sincerely, (Signed) ………………….., 7th July. 1918 The Hon'ble Mr. L. ROBERTSON, C.S.I., Secretary to the Govt, of Bombay, Political Department. GOVERNMENT ON TILAK'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS RECRUITMENT (FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE No. 398-J OF 1918, PAGES 97-98.) (From comments by a Council Member on Tilak's speeches on war effect.) Attention is invited to the report on Tilka's speech at Bombay on the 27th April at a pan-supari party to welcome back the delegates to the Delhi Conference. It will be seen that this meeting took place immediately after the private meeting of the All India Congress Committee at which Tilak advocated that help be withheld from Government until an assurance was given of the establishment in India within a reasonable period of a Government responsible to the people ; he only withdrew his suggestion on Mrs. Besant's advice. What Tilak was unable to attain here he tried to effect in his speech. 2. The speech is of the type that has now become usual ; it gives the extremist a loop-hole to make the most of the situation as it may develop, without actively assisting Government. If recruits come in, in the numbers wanted, they can exploit the fact to press for concessions and if voluntary recruiting fails, they can turn round and say " We told you so. You cannot arouse the enthusiasm of the people until you give them the incentive of the early grant of serf-Government : So give it ! " And it seems pretty clear from the whole run of speeches by the Home Rule leaders that their aim is to damp the ardour of the people and kill the voluntary recruitment scheme in advance. Here please see also the concluding 698 portion of the Hon. Mr. Patel's speech as President oi the Bijapur Provincial Conference : the Bombay Chronicle hat. given prominence to this portion in its leader of 7-5-18 headed " The Opportunity." 3. Tilak in his speech has hit on a new and mischievous argument :— "Of course, the bureaucracy tried to do without the assistance of the 30 crores of Indian subjects. That was their……dodge, but when they now find that the Empire is getting helpless without the assistance of the 30 crores of Indian subjects, they feel that now the time has come when they cannot do without the assis-ance of the people of India and, therefore, they will pay money or give bribes in order to get as many recruits as they like. Now, just consider this situation. The bureaucracy do not want to give you Self-Government but they want to be protected by your giving your lives. The bureaucracy want you, the people of India, to protect their lives." 4. Bad as this is, Tilak in his concluding remarks goes one better and he has twisted His Majesty's message to mean a direct intimation that they should exploit England's life and death struggle to wring political concessions from her. Please see portions marked A. B, C and D (pages 31, 33 and 35 ante). The reference to the wresting of the Magna Charta from King John makes Tilak's suggestion perfectly clear and it is for consideration whether this disloyal and mischievous distortion does not merit Tilak being served with a notice under the Defence of India Rules prohibiting him from further speechifying for the present, 5. It is a matter of grave national moment that the Government of India should get all the recruits they can within the next few months; the left-handed co-operation that the Home Rulers are offering can but exercise a check on the flow of recruits, but when Royal sanction is quoted to what amounts to practically an inducement not to join up till self-Government is granted, it would appear to be time for drastic action to be taken. HOME RULERS WALK OUT FROM WAR CONFERENCE (FROM H. D. FILE NO. 398-J OF 1918, PAGE 259.) (Extract from a sheet written by the Chief Secretary of the. Government of Bombay, at the Conference immediately after the walk-out by Home Rulers from the War Conference.) Mr. Tilak expressed himself and all Home Rulers to be loyal citizens of the K. E. [King Emperor]. 699 " But" and he then went to introduce purely, political topics and said that if amendments had been allowed he would have wished to move an amendment. His Excellency interrupting stated that he could not understand that anyone could wish to move an amendment to a resolution conveying an expression of loyalty to the K. E. and that he could not allow the introduction of political matters in the resolution. After some discussion in the course of which Mr. Tilak went on with his speech but on at once diverting into political topics, H. E. interrupted him. Mr. Tilak ultimately declined to proceed and returned to his place. Mr. Kelkar was then called upon to speak. He began as in the case of Mr. Tilak with a perfunctory expression of loyalty. Speaking very fast and almost unintelligibly, he soon began political matter. H. E. interrupting again stated that he could not allow political discussion ! Mr. Kelkar admitted that he was going to touch on political matters, H. E. stated that he could not allow it. Mr. Kelkar returned to his seat. Immediately thereafter the following persons left the hall : — 1. Mr. Tilak, 2. Mr. Kelkar, 3. Mr. S. R Bomanji, 4. Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas, 5. Mr. Horniman. H. E. in further addressing the meeting remarked that he noticed that these people had left the Hall without waiting to vote in favour of the expression of loyalty to H. M. the K. E. There is no doubt that the Chronicle and the rest of the extremist press will make the most of these incidents and that there will be a howl all round the extremist press. I think that it is for consideration whether some steps should not be taken to deal with this situation and to check the uncontrolled criticism and obloquy. We could (1) forbid the extremist press to discuss the War Conference, the speeches that were made at it, or any topic directly on indirectly dealt with in the agenda paper or its etc. etc. 700 (2) or we could order them to submit all their articles on these topics to precensorship before publication. (3) or we could order the precensorship of the whole issues of these paper, and of all printed matter issuing from the press at which the papers are printed. I attach a cutting containing the leading article of today's Chronicle. The last sentence is nothing but a declaration of war ! I would accept the challenge and begin operations invading the enemies' territory. The position as it presents itself to me is as follows. The Home Rulers have declined to cooperate with Government and the remainder of the people of the Presidency. They left the conference without waiting to vote in favour of an expression of loyalty to H, M. the K. E. We cannot expect any loyal co-operation from them. We can expect only opposition. That being so it seems to me that we should take measures to make their opposition as uneffective as we can. For that purpose we must hold their press in strict control. Precensorship seems to be the best way. It must be precensorship of every piece of printed matter that issues from the presses at which their papers are printed. It is possible that they will attempt to evade the order having anonymous leaflets printed at other presses, but it does not seem to me that other presses will lend themselves to this purpose. The papers first to be dealt with : The Bombay Chronicle, The Mahratta, The Kesari, The Sandesh, The Message, Young India. and the presses at which they are printed. The methods to be employed for precensorship would be these. The D. M., Poona, should undertake the precensorship of Kesari and the Mahratta. He may be allowed to employ on this work one or two inspectors to be deputed from the staff of the C. I. D., Poona. At Bombay the Deputy Secretary, Political Department, may be appointed to censor the papers. He should be given the assistance 701 of Mr. Sanjana of the D. Ts. office and one inspector deputed from, the staff of C. I. D., Bombay. With these arrangements there should be no difficulty in disposing of the work quickly. I think that we shall have to go further and stop the following gentlemen from public speaking : — (1) Mr. Horniman, (2) Mr. Bomanji, (3) Mr. Jamnadas Dwar-kadas (4) Mr. Tilak, (5) Mr. Kelkar. Then I think that Mr. Horniman should be interned at Aden, Mr. Tilak in Burma and Mr. Jamnadas in Larkhana. We need not intern Mr. N. C. Kelkar. The first thing to do is to stop the papers by precensorship. At the same time the persons named should be restrained from public speaking and then the internment should be arranged for. I think that G. of I. (Government of India), should be immediately informed of the proceedings at last night's meeting and of our proposed action and asked whether they agree with it. But we should stop the extremist papers at once. I would invite attention to G. of I., D. O., letter of 7th inst received yesterday in which G. of I promise full support. (Signed) ……………………., 11th June 1918. COMMENTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE ABOVE NOTE I (By Sir James DuBoulay) I agree that we should send at once a copy of the proceedings to the Government of India together with the leading article in the Chronicle. I do not however think that the action of these people in walking out before the loyalty Resolution was put to the vote in itself justifies the precensorship of the papers mentioned, or orders regarding public speaking or internment. These may, all have to come, and probably it will be better to issue orders regarding precensorship and public speaking against several papers and several individuals simultaneously, if and when action is taken, provided we can find a reasonable handle for doing so. Chief Secretary states with truth that we cannot expect any loyal co-operation, we can only 702 expect opposition. We cannot however take action under the Defence of India Rules for failure of co-operation, not in anticipation of opposition. We must adhere strictly to the Law, and I still think the course of action sketched in my note of 24th April 1918 is the proper one. (Signed) J. DUBOULAY. 12/6. P.S.—It will have to be considered how far we are bound by recent instructions from the Government of India to lay the matter before an Advisory Committee before taking action. II (By His Excellency Governor.) I agree with Sir J. DuBoulay that we should take no action until and unless the Home Rule Leaguers create trouble. I think that all Commissioners of Divisions should be informed that we expect them to keep a close watch in case any individual tries to prejudice the success of the recruiting campaign, and inform them that we are prepared to act promptly if they have absolutely definite information. (Signed) W. 13/6. Ill (By Hon. J. W. Carmichael.) I agree. We might be right in taking action on the writings and speeches prior to the conference but the general public would not look so far back and would attribute our action solely to what happened at the conference. We must now wait to see whether they repeat their previous performances. (Signed) J. C. 13/6. IV (By Sir Ebrahim Rahimtoola.) I agree with Sir James DuBoulay. It appears to me unwise at the present moment to take any action in regard to pre-censorship, public speaking or internments. The Chief Secretary rightly observes 703 that the article in the Bombay Chronicle is a declaration of War. Let Government give them a long rope and let these people have for a short time full liberty to openly show their hatred. It will then be time to consider wh£t would be the best line of action to be adopted. I cannot keep repeating that any premature action is unwise under the circumstances. (Signed) E. R. 13/6/1918. BOMBAY GOVERNMENT'S REPORT ON HOME RULERS' WALK-OUT FROM WAR CONFERENCE (FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE NO. 3989, PAGES 269 TO 233.; From L. ROBERTSON, ESQUIRE., C.S.I., Chief Secretary to Government of Bombay ; To THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, Home Department. Sir, I am directed to forward for the information of the Government of India the following papers : — (1) List of persons invited to be present at the War Conference held on the 10th June 1918", in the Town Hall, Bombay. (2) Agenda paper of the Conference. (3) Proceedings of the same. (4) Leading article of the Bombay Chronicle dated 11th June 1918. (5) Letter from Mr. N. C. Kelkar, dated the 30th May 1918. (6) Reply to the above. (7) Letter from Mr. S. R. Bomanji, dated the 3rd June 1918. 704 (8) Reply to the above. (9) Explanation of Mr. Tilak and others of their reasons for leaving the Conference. (10)Letter from Mr. J. Dwarkadas and others that appeared in the Bombay Chronicle dated the 12th June 1918 stating their intentions to abstain from attending the War Loan meeting. (11)Article in the Times of India dated 13th June 1918 describing the proceedings of the War Loan Meeting held at Bombay on 12th June 1918. 2. The action taken in pursuance of the resolution passed at the War Conference and the results of the campaign to promote the War Loan will be reported to the Government of India in due course by the Local Government in the Department concerned. This letter will be confined to a description of the proceedings at the two meetings, certain incidents that occurred at the War Conference and the results thereof. 3. From the list of persons invited to the War Conference the Government of India will observe that it was throughly representative of all parts of the Presidency and of all shades of political opinion that prevail. The agenda paper shows that the proceedings were to include the discussion of two resolutions, the first being a loyal message to the King Emperor and the second being concerned with a scheme to give effect to the resolutions passed at the War Conference at Delhi on the 27th- 29th April 1918. From the correspondence with Messrs. Kelkar and Bomanji and from the remarks made by His Excellency the Governor which are printed at page 2 of the proceedings it will be seen that it was decided (1) that no formal amendments were to be allowed to be moved at the Conference, (2) that after the speakers designated in the agenda paper had closed their remarks, any person in the Hall who desired to speak would be permitted to do so. After His Excellency had addressed the Conference, he explained the procedure to be adopted and asked any gentlemen who might wish to speak to send in their names to the Political Secretary. As a result of this invitation and during the time that the designated 705 speakers to the first resolution were making their remarks, the following names were received by the Political Secretary :— On Resolution I :— B. G. Tilak. N. C. Kelkar. Moulvi Rafiuddin Ahmed. On Resolution II :— B. G. Horniman. Jamnadas Dwarkadas. M. A. Jinnah. Subsequently Sir Narayanrao Chandavarkar expressed a wish to speak on Resolution II. His Excellency the Governor's opening remarks were well received by the audience and the loyal sentiments of the speakers to the first resolution met with loud applause. On Mr. Tilak's name being called, he came forward on invitation to the dais on which His Excellency alone was seated. Reading from what appeared to Be a typewritten paper, he opened his remarks by an expression of the deep loyalty of himself and of all Home Rulers to His Majesty the King Emperor. But, he said, if amendments had been allowed he would have liked to have moved an amendment. Proceeding he stated that home defence was intimately connected with home rule and diverged into a purely political discussion. Interrupting His Excellency remarked that he could not understand how anyone could wish to move an amendment to a loyalty resolution and that he could not permit a political discussion on a resolution of this character. After some colloquy in the course of which Mr. Tilak attempted to proceed, he left the platform and returned to his place in the Hall. Mr. Kelkar's name was then called and he came forward to the platform to speak. He followed much the same line as Mr. Tilak commencing with a perfunctory expression of loyalty and immediately thereafter diverging into political topics. On His Excellency interrupting him he asked whether His Excellency wished him to go on. His Excellency replied that he had no wish to stop him but he must 706 ask Mr. Kelkar to respect his ruling that political discussion could not proceed on a loyalty resolution, Mr. Kelkar then retired from the dais. Immediately after these two gentlemen accompanied by Mr. Horniman, Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas and Mr Bomanji left the meeting. Their departure was made in silence and there was no demonstration. Indeed it may be said that the audience took no notice of it. Before proceeding to put Resolution I to the vote, His Excellency the Governor remarked that he regretted that these gentlemen had thought fit to leave the Hall without waiting to vote in favour of a resolution expressing loyalty to His Majesty ihe King Emperor. The Resolution was then put to the vote and carried unanimously. The remainder of the proceedings were not marked by any incident. I am, however, to invite attention to the objectionable remarks which the Honourable Mr. Jinnah thought fit to make while speaking on Resolution II. The last speaker was Sir Narayanrao Chandavarkar who came forward of his own accord. The Government of India will observe that he dissociated himself and his political party entirely from the action and sentiments of Mr. Tilak and his followers and that he entirely endorsed the ruling of His Excellency the Governor which led to the incidents that have just been described. His remarks were received with enthusiasm by the audience, and there can be no doubt that his sentiments represented the real feeling of the meeting. Resolution II was put to the vote and carried without a dissentient voice. It was observed, however, that Mr. Jinnah while he did not vote against the motion, refrained from voting in favour of it. I am to remark that from the fact that both Mr. Tilak and Mr. Kelkar brought prepared speeches with them and from the notes that were seen to be passing between them and other followers of Mr. Tilak during the earlier part of the proceedings, it is a justifiable inference that Mr. Tilak and his party had come to the meeting with the object of creating trouble. I am now to pass to the War Loan Meeting which was held on the 12th June, 1918 in the Town Hall, Bombay. This was a public meeting summoned by the Sheriff of Bombay on the requisition of 707 a number of leading citizens. There was no attempt to restrict attendance. In accordance with their public declaration the home rulers abstained from appearing. At the appointed hour the Hall was full to overflowing by a representative crowd of the citizens of Bombay, mostly of the middle class. For the purposes of this letter it is not necessary to follow the proceedings in detail. On entry His Excellency the Governor received a demonstrative welcome. Later on when His Excellency took the chair and rose to make his opening remarks, there was a prolonged burst of enthusiastic applause, some persons in body of the Hall rising and waving their handkerchiefs as an expression of their enthusiastic approval. Throughout the speeches that followed every expression of India's determination to make a united effort to come to the assistance of the Empire in the hour of need met with enthusiastic approval. Sir Narayanrao Chanda-varkar's appeal to the educated classes and his description of the attitude of the great majority of them met with great approval. I am to invite special attention to the remarks made by Mr. E'. J. Desai. This gentleman, who is a rising barrister of the High Court was a professed home ruler. His remarks, however, clearly indicate that he is not prepared to follow Mr. Tilak and his party in the latest development of their agitation. It is reported that he has resigned his membership of the Home Rule League but this report lacks accurate confirmation. Reviewing the results of these two meetings, I am to remark that the air has now been publicly cleared. It was one of the objects of His Excellency's opening remarks to give the home rulers an opportunity to express clearly their intention to co-operate whole heartedly with Government and people cf the Presidency in making a united war effort and to give an assurance that they would do nothing by word or deed to prejudice the success of the campaign for the development of the man power and resources of the Presidency. This endeavour failed of its object. It is clear that the Home Rule party will co-operate only on terms and that these terms are impossible of acceptance. The Government of Bombay view the results of the, two meetings with cheerful equanimity. The hearty acceptance that His Excellency's action at the Conference met with at the hands of the audience and the striking demonstration that was made on the occasion of the War Loan Meeting constitute a clear proof that the action of the Home Rulers finds deserved condemnation in the minds of the bulk of the 708 people and that the vast majority of the population of this Presidency will devote their best efforts to promoting schemes to achieve victory in the war. The Government of Bombay, however, have no desire to blink the fact that difficult times are ahead. The leading article in the Bombay Chronicle of the 11th instant is nothing but a declaration of war, and much troublesome and dangerous agitation may be expected. On a consideration of the position, the Governor in Council has determined not to take immediate action against the Home Rule party, as for instance precensorship of the party press or interment of the leaders. Such measures will be held in reserve to be used whenever it is clear that the home rule party have by their actions, speeches or press articles actually prejudiced the success of the campaign that has now been launched. Finally I am to state that Mr. Gandhi's name was put down among the speakers on Resolution II at the war Conference. Intimation of His Excellency's desire that he should speak did not reach Mr. Gandhi until the day before the Conference as the telegram conveying it had followed him from place to place. Mr. Gandhi finally refused to speak. A copy of the correspondence with him is enclosed. It is satisfactory to note that in his letter dated the 11th June 1918, to the Private Secretary to His Excellency the Governor Mr. Gandhi promises full support in the man power campaign. While recent incidents throw a measure of doubt on Mr. Gandhi's sincerity in this respect, His Excellency in Council is prepared to accept the promise as it stands, to act upon it and to await the reults. In conclusion I am to suggest that if the Government of India deem fit, a copy of this letter may be forwarded to His Majesty's Secretary of State for India. I have &c, (Signed) L. ROBERTSON, Chief Secretary to Government. GANDHIJI DECLINES TO SPEAK IN THE WAR CONFERENCE (FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE No. 1788 OF 1918, PAGES 303 TO 307.) 1 Gandhiji's letter to Robertson. Bombay, 9th June. Dear Mr. Robertson, Your telegram 4630 was received by me at Nadiad only yesterday evening on my return from Kaira. Before I undertake to 709 support the resolution given in your telegram I should like to know more fully about it. I should like also to see the scheme. My address is care of Mr. Rewashankar Jagjiwan, Laburnum Road, Chowpati. Yours sincerely, (Signed) M. K. GANDHI. 2 Robertson's reply 9 June, 1918. Dear Mr. Gandhi, In reply to your letter of today, I enclose a copy of the agenda with memo (4 copies of the note on recruiting which is in the Press) which explains the scheme. You will see that H. E. has assumed that you will consent to speak. If you don't wish to do so, would you be so good as to inform me through bearer, so that your name may be deleted from the agenda. Yours sincerely, 3 Gandhiji declines to speak Bombay, 9th June. Dear Mr. Robertson, I am sorry I was away when your note was received. I feel that I should not speak on the resolution. I hope, therefore, that His Excellency will excuse me. I observe that my name is included in the man power committee and I note that men like Mr. Tilak are not included. I fear that my usefulness will be materially curtailed if I could not have the benefit of his co-operation and that of other Home Rulers of his calibre. It is hopeless to expect a truly National response and a National army unless the Government are prepared to trust them to their duty. I should gladly serve on the man-power Committee if these leaders are invited to join it. If additions to the committee can be moved, I should be prepared to move that some of these gentlemen may be included in one or more of these committees. Yours sincerely, (Signed) M. K. GANDHI. 710 STATEMENT BY THOSE WHO WALKED OUT (FROM H. D. SPECIAL FILE NO. 398-J, PAGES 285-86, CUTTING FROM " BOMBAY CHRONICLE ", DATED 12TH JUNE 1918.) The following statement is published by Mr. Tilak and others who left the War Conference on Monday : — As your readers are aware, as members of the War Conference held on Monday last, we were obliged to take the unusual step of walking out of the meeting. This step was obviously necessitated by the unusual course which H. E. the Governor as Chairman of the Conference chose to adopt. And we may as well set out the grounds on which our action in retiring from the Conference was based. The object of the Conference was professedly to seek the co-operation of the people in the war measures which Government thought it was necessary to take in this presidency at this critical juncture. It was to be expected, therefore, that Government would be prepared to invite the Conference people of all shades of political opinion in the Presidency and to give them a patient and courteous hearing. Being invited to the Conference, we had to attend it, and having attended it, we had of course to tell Government what we thought of the matter upon which we had met to confer together. But the whole procedure of the Conference was so designed as completely to defeat this purpose. In the first place the resolutions to be placed before the Conference were prepared in the Secretariat and no sub-committees were formed as was done at the Delhi Conference. The wording of the resolutions could not be expected to satisfy all parties to the Conference. And as no sub-committees were formed to consider and draft the resolutions, the Chairman was bound in all fairness to give an opportunity to the members of the Conference, who were to be bound by the resolutions, to move amendments to them in open Conference. But Government had decided beforehand that no amendments were to be allowed to be moved, nor even changes of wording to be suggested in speeches. The only course left open to the members of the Conference to ventilate their views was to speak on the resolutions in a general way without moving amendments ; and even if this had been allowed, the members might to some extent, have served their purpose. But far from this, his Excellency, as Chairman of the meeting, deliberately attacked Home Rulers, made unwarranted accusations and threw unjustifiable aspersions upon them. And when some of the Home Rulers, Messrs. Tilak 711 and Kelkar, attending the Conference by invitation, proceeded to make speeches by way of explaining their position as non-official men invited to co-operate with Government in recruiting manpower and carrying out other war measures, the Chairman peremptorily stopped them, before they had uttered a few sentences, on the ground that no political discussion was to be allowed on the resolution expressing loyalty to the Crown. The only selfrespecting course for Mr. Tilak and Mr. Kelkar under the circumstances was to refuse to take further part in the Conference and to retire from it. And the others of us had no alternative, but to follow their example. We 'felt that if we had not retired from the Conference, our position would have been hopelessly compromised. The whole procedure at the Conference was peculiarly inequitable and unfair. If Government wanted to take the credit for fairness in having invited to the Conference people of all shades of opinion, they should have anticipated that differences of opinion on the resolutions, whether as being imperfectly or inadequately worded, must arise and should have therefore provided some acceptable method for the expression of a variety of views or opinions. But to a hide bound programme of resolutions and procedure, prepared in the Secretariat his Excellency added a high-handed and indefensible exercise of his authority as Chairman. In regard to the contention of his Excellency that any " political discussion," as he termed it, was out of order on the first resolution, we may point out that the resolution was more than a mere expression of loyalty to the King-Emperor. The resolution contained the expression of the determination of the Presidency to continue " to do her duty to the utmost capacity". This, we contend invited the fullest discussion in regard to the whole of the proposals and methods adopted by the Government for the purpose of translating into action the loyal determination of the Presidency to do her duty, methods and proposals to which we were unable wholly to assent. As to the first part of the resolution expressing loyalty to the King-Emperor both Mr. Tilak and Mr. Kelkar emphatically expressed, on behalf of themselves and Home Rulers generally, their firm adhesion to this sentiment. But they desired to point out why the Presidency could not possibly do her duty " to its utmost capacity " so long as certain existing conditions were not altered. We are at a loss to understand how such speeches could be impugned on the ground of their being irrelevant or out of order. There was no intention of moving any amendment, in deference to the ruling of the chair though such 712 a course would have been justified under Parliamentary procedure, for it is well known that amendments to loyal addressees to the Throne are regularly moved in the House of Commons. We had to be content merely with speeches, but even that was denied to us. The main ground of objection on his Excellency's part was that of political discussion. His Excellency's own speech was distinguished by political discussion of a most controversial character. We were entitled to an opportunity of replying to his gratuitous and provocative attack on Home Rulers and that opportunity should have been afforded to us on the first resolution which stated in general terms the objects of the Conference. We may say in conclusion that before the Conference some of us were informed, on behalf of the Governor, in response to enquiries, that " open discussion" on the resolutions would be allowed and that " any criticisms or suggestions which speakers may make in the course of discussion will receive careful consideration of Government". We think this is a conclusive commentary on the arbitrary and inconsistent action of his Excellency in stopping the speeches of Mr. Tilak and Mr. Kelkar. Yours, etc. B. G. TILAK. JAMNADAS DWARKADAS. S. R. BOMANJI. N. C. KELKAR. B. G. HORNIMAN. NO INTERFERENCE WITH RECRUITING (Bombay Government's Circular.) (FROM J. D. FILE No. 398-J, PAGE 269.) A copy of Government Letter No. 4083/140, dated the 15/17th June 1818 addressed to the Government of India is enclosed for information. 713 2. It is requested that the doings of the Home Rulers may be subjected to close scrutiny. If any person attempts to interfere with the recruiting campaign, an immediate report should be submitted to Government in this Department describing the degree or nature of the interference and proposing such action as may be suitable. Government will be prepared to act promptly in cases in which accurate information is forthcoming upon which action may be based. 3. The above instructions are not intended to interfere with the discretion of District Magistrates (or the Commissioner of Police) in taking action permissible to them under the law in cases in which action is justified by the facts before them. (Signed) ………………….., Chief Secretary to Government. To All Commissioner All District Magistrates, The Agent to the Governor in Kathiawar, The Resident, Kolhapur and Political Agent, Southern Maratha Country States, The Commissioner of Police, Bombay. SHRI JINNAH AND WILLINGDON MEMORIAL [The anti-Willingdon Memorial agitation in Bombay (December 1918) which was mainly led by Shri M. A. Jinnah who had emerged by that time as a first rank national leader and as a great advocate of Hindu-Muslim unity was a remarkable event. In fact it culminated in one of those interesting historical ironies which occasionally present themselves in the story of a nation. The agitation to raise a memorial to Governor Willingdon resulted in a memorial being raised, at a cost of Rs. 30,000 spontaneously contributed by the public, not to the Governor but to the most vigorous opponent of that agitation 714 viz., M. A. Jinnah ! The Jinnah People's Memorial Hall still stands in the compound of the Congress House in Bombay and serves as a centre of public activities. A public meeting of the citizens of Bombay—not of the friends and admirers of Lord Willingdon—had been called by the pro-Government elements in the city to meet at the Town Hall on 11th December 1918. Lord Willingdon had made himself unpopular on account of the policy of repression that his Government was pursuing and the treatment he gave to leaders like Tilak at the War Conference, and. large sections of public opinion in the city resented the attempt to raise a memorial, in the name of the citizens, to a Governor whose policy they had criticised and detested. Shri Jinnah, Shri B. G. Horniman, Shri Jamnadas Dwarkadas and other leaders therefore invited the public to attend in large numbers the public meeting to be held at the Town Hall and express their disapproval of the proposals made. The pro-Government elements {who had naturally the sympathy of police officials) attempted not only to muster in strength at the comparatively small Town Hall where the meeting was to be held but allegedly even to physically prevent their opponents from entering the hall and participating in the meeting. The public, however, was not to be taken in by such tricks. As the extracts from contemporary reports given below show, large crowds gathered near the Town Hall and waited for hours outside the hall before the scheduled hour of the meeting in order to be able to get entrance into it. Shri Jinnah and other leaders were with them. At the time of the meeting the hall was almost flooded by anti-memorial crowds who shouted down the proposal to raise a memorial and the meeting ended in a fiasco. Jinnah's remarkable courage in vigorously opposing the move for a public memorial to an unpopular Governor, and his dauntless leadership which triumphed in finally defeating the move were naturally applauded all over the country and added immensely to his popularity.] HOME RULERS OPPOSE MEMORIAL TO LORD WILLINGDON (FROM BOMBAY POLICE SECRET ABSTRACT, 1918, PARAGRAPH 1758.) At the instance of a number of the leading citizens of Bombay, the Sheriff has called a public meeting at the Town Hall on the 11th instant to consider this question (of voting for a memorial to 715 Lord Willington on his departure from the Presidency). His action has given rise to strong opposition in the Home Rule camp, whose leaders are conducting a strenuous campaign in which they are leaving no stone unturned to belittle His Excellency's administration and to vilify his motives. The medium through which the opposition is being worked is the Home Rule Press, the " Bombay Chronicle" being in the vanguard, and the " Young India " bringing up the rear with the " Hindustan ". The tone of the articles appearing in these papers and of the lectures being delivered on the subject is extremely offensive, particularly so when it is borne in mind that the readers of the papers and those who attend the meeting are, for the most part, students and other immature politicians. The writings and speeches of B. G. Horniman and Jamnadas Dwarkadas in particular are most objectionable. Omar Sobhani is attempting to discredit His Excellency by circulating broadcast a leaflet in Urdu in which he categorises a number of the administrative acts of His Excellency's Government and endeavours to deduce that His Excellency has been no friend of the Moslems. Further, the Home Rulers have started addressing meetings of mill-hands and railway workmen in a similar strain, a move which I can only regard with the gravest apprehension. It is clear that the leaders of the Home Rule League are taking a leaf out of the book of General Ludendorf. Just as Ludendorf saw that the hcpes of the German Army lay in a mass attack on the point of junction between the British and French Armies, so the Home Rule leaders see their chances most bright at the moment when His Excellency Lord Wil-lingdon is handing over the reins of his office to his successor. By making the attack more or less one of a personal nature, they hope to tie the hands of Government until His Excellency Lord Willing-don shall have relinquished the Governorship, knowing full well that. it would be much easier to prevent such a movement from spreading than to suppress it once it has gained a hold on the imaginations of the people. They realise as clearly as we do that the effects of an agitation which is deliberately calculated to bring into hatred and contempt the acts of His Excellency's Government and to impugn the bona fides of that Government, although the main attack may be levelled at the Head of the Government personally, will continue when the Head of the Government has gone and the Government has to be carried on under a new head. 716 JINNAH IN THE FOREFRONT M. A. Jinnah is also in the forefront of the attack. It is alleged that his bitterness has been exacerbated by the fact that he was a candidate for election to the Western India Turf Club but that no one can be found who is willing to propose him ; he puts this down to the influences over the Turf Club of His Excellency the Governor. I would invite special attention to the line of attack adopted in the lectures of the mill-hands and workmen. The statements made are false, but they are sufficiently colourable to fire the imaginations of the artisan classes. His Excellency is accused of betraying the railway workshop hands, of leading a life of indolent enjoyment at Poona while the Influenza epidemic was raging in the mill districts and of emasculating their idol, Tilak. Such tactics would be bad enough at Home ; in India they are intolerable unless Bolshevism is to replace Government. December 9th.—The agitation in connection with the proposed meeting in the Town Hall to vote a memorial to His Excellency Lord Willingdon continues. Public meetings have been held, two at Shantaram's Chawl, one at Elphinstone Road, one at Dadar and one on the 9th at Dana Bandar. HOME RULERS' OPPOSITION Signs are not wanting that the organisers of the protest are beginning to realise that there is an overwhelming majority of the public in favour of a memorial to His Excellency. A private meeting was held in the "Bombay Chronicle" office on the 7th instant, attended by the anti-requisitionist leaders. A suggestion was made that it would be more dignified i'f the anti-requistionists were to send to the Sheriff a strongly worded protest with a demand that it should be read out at the public meeting. The suggestion was very favourably received. Mowji Govindji, however, was strongly opposed to any such idea. He advocated that the anti-requisitionists should be present in large numbers to vote personally against the memorial. A sub-committee consisting of Horniman, Jamnadas Dwarkadas, Tairsee and Mowji Govindji was formed with powers to deal with any contingency which may arise and require immediate action. A procession of anti-requisitionists is, according to the present arrangement, to be formed near the Mulji Jetha Market on the day of the meeting, which will march to the Town Hall. The markets are to be closed 717 to enable the employees to attend. A strong protest will be raised if the police intrude either at the Town Hall or on the Town Hall steps. An anti-requisitionists' meeting was to take place at the Mulji Jetha Market on the 8th instant, but Mr. Hormusji Vakil, on behalf of the proprietors of the Mulji Jetha Market, served a notice upon the conveners prohibiting them from holding a political meeting in the Market Chowk. This action was strongly resented, but no meeting took place. A meeting has been called by Jamnadas Dwarkadas to protest against this action. By far the most epoch-making event of the week has been the publication of an interview granted by S. R. Bomanji to a representative of the Jam-e-Jamshed. Bomanji has severely trounced the Home Rulers and exposed their mala fides to such purpose that many have been induced to regard them as charlatans. S. R. Bomanji desired to have his views published in the " Times of India ", but the editor was not prepared to give expression to them. On the contrary, the " Times of India " has published a letter from Mr. Fritchley advocating the abandonment of the proposed meeting at the Town Hall on the plea that it would be far better if His Excellency were to leave India without any unpleasantness or exhibition of partisan spirit'! ! ! I attach a translation of the interview published in the " Jame-e-Jamshed ". BOMANJI'S INTERVIEW The gist of the interview is as follows : — Mr. Bomanji said that he had tendered his resignation of his post as Vice-President of the League in July last, as he resented the highhanded manner in which the administration of the Home Rule League was carried on, and he strongly opposed the tendency to make frequent gifts to the Editor of the " Chronicle " at the expense of the shareholders. There was no truth in the rumour that he had severed his connection with the Home Rule League ; he was and always would be a staunch Home Ruler. He deplored the attitude of the Home Rule party towards the question of a memorial to Lord Willingdon and alleged that certain of the Bombay Home Rulers were entirely actuated by motives of self-advertisement. Mr. Jinnah was very anxious to succeed Sir M. Chaubal as Member of the Executive Council, but as he was not given the post, he was now venting his private spleen against the Governor. There was no question of principle at the bottom of the opposition to the memorial; it was 718 purely personal. It was in the interests of the country that a departing Governor should be kept in a satisfied frame of mind, particularly at such a time as this v/hen the Indian Reforms Bill was about to be submitted to Parliament. The present system of administration was the cause of bringing such men as the leaders of the anti-Memorial movement into prominence. The people were becoming more and more discontended and were on that account ready to listen to any critic of Government, no matter how unreasonable he might be- MEETINGS AND DISTRIBUTION OF CARTOONS The anti-requisitionists proposed to move the High Court to grant an injunction against the Sheriff prohibiting him from holding the proposed meeting but found that they were on very weak ground. Cartoons printed at the Shri Ram Litho Press, Girgaurn, were widely distributed at the second meeting at Shantaram's Chawl and at the Dana Bandar. The first picture represents public opinion being worshipped by Jamnadas Dwarkadas and being flouted by Sir N. G. Chandavarkar and other title-holders. The second represents His Excellency as driving a gag into Tilak's mouth while " Justice " is undoing the handcuffs of Tilak ; the third represents His Excellency receiving presents from the Commissioner, S. D. and the Commissioner in Sind, the former presenting a hare labelled " The Jury System in Belgaum " and the latter a deer labelled " Hyderabad Municipality " ; the fourth represents His Excellency the Governor as the unmoved spectator of the destruction by two bulls (Mr. S. M. Edwardes and Sardar Suleman Cassim Mitha) of a Moorish edifice labeled " Moslem League ". The letter press below the last cartoon runs "Bullock driver :—Well done : This is what is known as work. (Though the Police Commissioner and Mr. Mitha wilfully created a disturbance in the Moslem League meeting in Bombay, yet. no proper and legal remedies were adopted)". The fifth represents a bullock-cart being drawn by two emaciated bullocks : His Excellency is depicted as an R. S. P. C. A. Inspector, the Hon. Mr. Pratt as the cart driver mercilessly lashing the bullocks, and Gandhi as a kind-hearted wayfarer who points out to the Inspector the cruelty being shown to the bullocks by the driver. The Inspector is saying " This does not appear to me to be cruelty ". The sixth cartoon represents His Excellency as a " masth" elephant, in his trunk is a lotus flower in the the centre of which is Tilak's head. Jinnah is represented as saying " Give up this lotus flower, proud fellow " and below the cartoon is written " Lord Willingdon insulted Tilak at the War Conference without any justification." The leaflets are being distributed profusely and there is no doubt that they hold His Excellency up to the derision of the illiterate masses. 719 JINNAH'S ROLE Bombay, December 16th (paragraph 1799)— On Sunday the 8th instant, M. A. Jinnah was to address the men of the Mulji Jetha Market on Lord Willingdon's administration at the Mulji Jetha Market Chowk at 9-30 P.M., but the Managing Directors of the market having objected to the meeting being held in the premises, it was held the next day at Lohana's Wadi, Kandewadi, at 9-30 P.M. At the same time there was another meeting on the same subject at Dana Bandar, and so Jinnah and Jamnadas hurriedly-addressed the audience at Kandewadi for about ten minutes and proceeded to Dana Bandar where they were awaited by a large gathering. At Dana Bandar, Jinnah was in the chair. Jamnadas, Horniman, Syed Hussein, Shivram Mahadev Paranjpe and Mawji Govindji Seth addressed the meeting. On Tuesday the 10th instant, there were again two meetings, one at Shantaram's Chawl and another at Lower Parel near Sun Mill M. A. Jinnah presided at Shantaram's chawl. Horniman, George Arundale, Jamnadas, Krishnaji Prabhakar Khadilkar, P. K., Telang. Mawji Govindji Seth and Shivram Mahadev Paranjpe were the speakers. The proceedings lasted from 6-30 to 9 P.M. At the meeting at Lower Parel, Shivram Mahadev Paranjpe presided and K. P. Khadilkar, Ashtaputre, Pleader, Satara and Dr. N. D. Savarkar, made speeches on Lord Willingdon's administration. The meeting lasted from 10 to 12-30 P.M. On the close of the meeting at Shantaram's Chawl, about 185 Home Rule Volunteers marched from the place of meeting to Kanji Dwarkadas's bungalow on Chowpaty, where they were entertained and instructions were given by Bhimji Jairaj Makanji to Kanji Dwarkadas as to what they were to do in regard to the next day's meeting at the Town Hall. They were told to attend in mufti, to do " plain clothes work " and to give encouragement to their followers. During their march from Shantaram's Chawl to Kanji's bungalow they raised cries of "Vande Maturam" and " Tilak Maharaj ki jay." The same night about 40 men from Tadwadi came to the Home Rule League Office, Girgaum, and stayed there till early morning when they left for the Town Hall. Early in the morning of the 11th instant, groups of youngsters assembled at the Mulji Jetha market which was closed, as were the Lakshmidas Khimji and Murarji Gokuldas Markets, in order to enable the employees to attend the Town Hall meeting. These groups 720 marched off in batches of 30 to 40 in procession to the Town Hall with placards and flags in their hands. About 300 thus proceeded to the Town Hall. The processionists indulged in cries of " Vande Mataram " and Tilak Maharaj ki Jai ". The following inscriptions were noticed on the placards.— (1) Vande Mataram, (2) Do not let us honour the Governor of Bombay, (3) Do not let us raise any memorial to the Governor of Bombay, (4) Do not forget the cultivators of Kaira, (5) They have rights who dare maintain them, (6) The administration of the Governor of Bombay—failure, (7) Democrasis triumphaus, (8) Go into the Town Hall with this procession. Leaflets in Urdu were distributed at the Home Rule League's meetings during the week. Copies of two other leaflets, one in English and one in Gujerati were distributed on the 10th instant. THE TOWN HALL MEETING It soon became manifest that the Home Rule party was out for trouble. Nothing worthy of chronicle transpired until the Hall was full. The crowds as they arrived were formed into a queue along Frere Road in a northerly direction. The foremost place wns taken by the Home Rule party who had formed up in front of the Elphin-stone Gardens. The doors of the Town Hall were opened at about 10 A.M. and by 10-45 A.M. the stewards announced that there was no room in the building. The leaders of the queue were, however, permitted to enter the enclosure and to take up a position on the Town Hall steps. When the steps were crowded, the rest of the queue remained in position along Frere Road. A large number of Home Rulers, the majority of whom were students and a Gujarati servants of the cloth markets, etc., kept their position along the pavment around the Elphinstone gardens facing the Town Hall. It was not long before there were signs of uproar in the Town Hall and very shortly afterwards three or four dishevelled Home Rulers were ejected with some force down the steps by the stewards. Their appearance was the signal for an uproar by their supporters along the Elphinstone Gardens. The ejection of a fresh batch of rowdies from the Town Hall led to further excitement and I deemed it advisable to marshal the 721 crowd facing the Tbwn Hall within the Garden enclosure, The Police in carrying out this order met with some opposition and it became necessary to clear the Gardens. This was done and the gardens remained closed to the public throughout the day. From this point onwards, crowds collected from time to time around the gardens and abutted on the Frere Road and the police perpetually had to remove them. The arrival of the leaders of the requisitionists was greeted with shouts of derision and cries of " shame ". The proceedings in the Town Hall commenced at 5-30 P.M. Very shortly afterwards I was informed that the resolution proposing that a memorial should be raised to His Excellency Lord Willingdon had been put to the vote and carried and that the Sheriff had declared the meeting dissolved, but that the oppositionists were making attempts to obtain possession of the platform and that the meeting was fast becoming disorderly. I was asked to clear the Hall. I accordingly entered the Hall with a posse of police and cleared it. Jinnah, Horniman and one or two others of the anti-requisitionist party were rather roughly handled by some of the stewards while the crowds were being cleared from the Town Hall. Mrs. Jinnah made herself conspicuous in the afternoon by appearing in the gallery of the Town Hall and waving greetings to the crowd outside. She later took up a position inside the Town Hall compound and addressed her husband's supporters advising them to stand by their rights and to resist the police. Throughout the day it was very noticeable that the educated Home Rulers adopted a contuma- cious attitude, refusing to obey the orders of the police, thereby compelling them to execute those orders by force. The "Police" were everywhere greeted by cries of " shame " and a similar reception was accorded to the members of His Excellency's Executive Council. High Court Judges and other high officials who attended the meeting. After the Town Hall meeting was over, the anti-requisitionists headed by Horniman, Jinnah and Jamandas proceeded to Mr. V. A. Desai's office at Apollo Street and held an informal meeting. On the same night at 9-30 P.M. a public meeting was held at. Shantaram's Chwal to protest against the management of the meeting at the Town Hall and the conduct of the police. M. A. Jinnah was in the chair. Jamnadas, Horniman, Narsinhprasad Bhagwandas Vibhakar Barrister, L. G. Khare, M. K. Azad, Mawji Govindji Dr. Erulker and Mrs. Ramibai Kamdar addressed the meeting. About 20,000 men were present. An overflow meeting was held at French Bridge at the same time and was addressed by Jamnadas Dwarkadas, Dr. N. D. Savarkar, Horniman and K. M. Munshi, Advocate. 722 On the 12th instant at 9-30 P.M. a public meeting was held at Morarji Goculdas Hall when Mr. Kanayalal M. Munshi, Advocate, addressed the meeting on the " Delhi Congress" ; Jamnadas Dwarkadas presided. About 75 persons attended the meeting. The attorney and pleader friends of Jinnah entertained him at a garden party on the 15th instant at China Bag in appreciation of his courageous stand for the rights of the citizens of Bombay. OVERFLOW MEETING (EXTRACT FROM THE "BOMBAY CHRONICLE", DATED THE 12TH DECEMBER 1913.) Mr. Jamnadas' Address An overflow meeting was held in Mr. Ratansey D. Morarji's compound near French Bridge, Chaupatty, where about fifteen thousand people had gathered. Several speakers, including Dr. Savarkar, Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas, Mr. K. M. Munshi and others addressed the meeting. Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas, who was received with deafening and continuous cheers, said that Bombay people had shown to the whole world what they were capable of. He the speaker was at first a little diffident about the determination of the people, but he was exceedingly rejoiced to see that they were all made of stern stuff ready to sacrifice everything—even their lives for their principle. (Applause.) That day (11th December) might have been written in blood in the history of Bombay, so many people of their party receiving kicks, boxes and severe injuries at the hands of the police end hired hooligans. (" Shame, shame ! "). He could not adequately describe how thankful he was to the people for their courageous stand, and fulfilling the vow they had taken on the eve of the meeting. Up to that time he was their servant, but from that day he swore to be their slave for ever, and that he and his colleagues would be ready even to give their lives for the protection of the people's right (Applause.) Continuing Mr. Jamnadas said by their deeds that day they had abundantly proved that they would never care for self-interest, but would aim only at the commonweal. (Hear, hear) They all knew what glorious past India had had, but judging from their deeds, he was convinced that if they continued to remain firm in their determination and in asserting their rights, they had a still brighter future for India. (Loud and prolonged cheering.) 723 Mr. K. M. Munshi then rose and related in detail all the principal events of the day. They had proved by their deeds that whatever may be the personal qualities of a Governor, he would not receive a public memorial if he was not popular. (Hear, hear) He then eulogised the firmness and sacrifice of the leaders of the counter-requisitionists, particularly the Honourable Mr. Jinnah, the like of whom, the speaker said, he had never seen before. Md. Jamnadas called for three cheers for Mr. Jinnah which were enthusiastically raised. Three cheers were also proposed and responded to by the audience for Mr. Horniman and Mr. Jamnadas. WILLINGDON MEMORIAL MEETING, A FIASCO (Summary of a Report on Lord Willingdon Memorial meeting from Bombay Chronicle of 12th December 1918.) The attempt to hold a meeting of " the citizens of Bombay to express appreciation of Lord Willingdon's service in the Town Hall yesterday proved a lamentable fiasco It was seven O'colck in the morning when the leaders of the anti-requisitionists arrived at the Town Hall and were received with loud cheering by a band of two or three hundred of their supporters who had arrived on the scene some time previously and were waiting on the roadside in front of the Elphinstone Gardens. The whole place was in charge of a large force of police…..When the leaders arrived in the morning they found the steps occupied by a number of European and Parsi Gentlemen wearing badges as stewards of the meeting and various members of the Requisitionists' committee. Among these was Mr. Cowasji Jahangir who was immediately sought out by Messrs Jinnah, Jamnadas Dwakadas and Horniman. A About ten O'clock the doors were opened the intention to do so being communicated only a few minutes beforehand to the leaders of opposition, who immediately took places in the queue which had been kept for them by their supporters. Thus the first persons to enter the Hall were Messrs Jinnah, Jamnadas, Horniman, Umar Sobani, S. G. Banker, P. K. Telang, Mowji Govindji Sheth, Syed Hussain and other leaders who were closely followed by their supporters. In the meanwhile, it may be mentioned here, Mr. Suleman Cassum Mitha had arrived on the steps and assumed command of the important operations for packing the meeting which had been entrusted to him. 724 Immediately after the reading of the notice convening the meeting by the sheriff Mr. Hornimah rose and addressed the sheriff for the purpose of making a constitutional protest. The latter, however, refused him a hearing and his voice was drowned in the shouts of those on and near the platform supporting the lequisitionists. From that moment the gate o'f the meeting was sealed. For about 20 minutes the antirequisitionists continued their shouts of ' No' ' No' in protest against this arbitrary procedure and Sir Jamsetjee's taking of the chair, while the Stewards, Volunteers and other supporters of the platform shrieked and yelled :n derision, hurling insults and epithets at the anti-requisitionists. What was going on the platform, no body could see or hear. It is said that Sir Jamsetjee put the resolution of appreciation of Lord Willingdon from the chair and declared it carried. It is possible. But the pretence that the Resolution was carried by a meeting of the citizens of Bombay is farcical and an insult to Lord Willingdon, if he had the good sense to appreciate it……………… Unnecessary violence was used by the police in clearing the Hall and several of the antirequisitionists were assaulted including Mr. Jinnah, Mr. Subedar and others. If anything were needed to emphasise the bogus character of the attempt to comemorate Lord Willingdon's memory in the name of the citizens of Bombay, it was provided by the impressive scene outside the Hall. When the leaders of the opposition appeared on the steps, after leaving the meeting, they were received with a long continued roar of cheers from a crowd that could not have numbered less than 25 thousand people. Mr. Horniman in coming down was seized and carried shoulder high round the circle amidst a scene of extra-ordinary enthusiasm, the occupants of the crowded verandahs and balconies also cheering and waving handkerchieves. The Demonstration reached its culmination in Appolo street where Messers Jinnah, Jamnadas and Horniman delivered brief speeches from the windows of the All India Insurance Company's offices. The emphasised the significance of the great victory that had been won for self-determination and declared that never again would flatters and sycophants dare to flout public opinion. No such popular demonstration has ever been witnessed in Bombay before.

SINDH HOME RULE LEAGUE Activities of Karachi & Hyderabad Branches

On 18-02-1917 the D.S.P, Karachi served notices upon Mr. Jamshaid Mehta, president of the local branch of the Home Rule League, Mr. Mari Walla, Secretary of the Propagandist Committee and Mr. Ayar Secretary of the League, prohibiting a procession arranged to parade the city prior to a league meeting in the Khaliq Dinda Hall @8 P.M on the ground that no permission for the procession had been applied for and also adding that no permission would be granted. The procession therefore did not take place. At the evening, meeting @Khaliq Dina Hall a protest resolution was passed. (Page 5, Dated 17-8-1917, Daily Gazette)

A public meeting consisting of certain Musalmans of Karachi and about three times the number of Hindus of Local Home Rules league was held on Wednesday 10-10-1917 evening @Khaliq Dina Hall under the chairmanship of Seth Haji Abdullah Haroon when resolution was passed that the meeting view with regret and alarm the delay in the release of Messes. Muhammad Ali. Shaukat Ali, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, Maulana Kibla Muhammad Hasan Sahib, Fazul Hasan Hasrat Mohani, Maulana Muhammad Sahib Sindhi, and respectfully requested Government to take immediate steps to release them and others interned under similar circumstances. (Page 2 Dated 12-10-1917, Daily Gazette)

A public meeting under the auspices of the Home Rule League, the Citizen’s Association and District Congress Committee was held last night 07-05-1918 in the Khaliq Dino Hall Karachi to protest against the cancelation of passport to the Home Rule deputation proceeding to England. The Honorable Mr. Harchandrai Vishudas, C.I.E, presided; the audience was barely a hundred. The following resolution proposed by Mr. Ghulam Ali G. Chagla and supported by Durgdas B. Adwani, Lalumal Chelaram, Thakurdas Khemsingh and Abdul Rehman was unconsciously passed. “The citizens of Karachi in public meeting assembled strongly protest against the action of War Cabinet in cancelling the passport of Horn Rule deputation granted by Government of India as interesting with the interest right of all people freely to put forth their legitimate demands before the bar of public opinion that this work of deputation was in no way calculated to embarrass the British Government or hamper the vigorous and successful prosecution of the War but would have rather helped Government in coming to right conclusion on the questions of Reforms in the Administration of India. The meeting further emphatically disapproves of the unjust able sentiments expressed by the War Cabinet in this behalf and the language in which they are couched. ” .(Page 5, Dated 8-5-1918, Daily Gazette)

The Karachi Home Rulers held a public meeting last night 1-10-1918, at Khaliq Dino Hall in honour of birthday of Mrs. Basant. Mr. Jewandas Dolatram, B.A LLB chaired the meeting, He and Shrikrishandas Lala, Mehmood Khan, R.K Sidhwa, Chainrai Virbhandas and others delivered speeches eulogizing the head of the Home Rule League. The audience consists of less then 300, all Hindus, except three Musalmans, who were all seated on the platform. .(Page 5, Dated 02-10-1918, Daily Gazette)

In the honour of 51st Birthday anniversary of Mr. Gandhi, the Karachi Home Rule League last night, 2-10-1918 held a public meeting at the Khaliq Dino Hall. Mr. Jamshaid N.R Mehta presided and speeches were delivered by Durgdas B.Advani, Sir Kirshandas Lala and others including Muhammadan but who was seated on the Dias and spoke first time on the public platform. A special feature of gathering was that singing of national songs in the true oriental fashion, accompanied by harmonium, table etc. .(Page 5, Dated 3-10-1918, Daily Gazette)

The Karachi, Home Rule League held a meeting last night 17-10-1918 at Khaliq Dino Hall to protest against the decision of Government of India not to allow a Congress deputation to proceed to England. Mr Durgdas B Advani presided and Mr Shri Krishandas Lala moved the resolution. Another resolution was also adopted appealing for the removal of all restrictions on Prof. Jawaharmal Totiram of Hyderabad who was recently released from the internment but who is not yet allowed to move about freely. .(Page 5 Dated, 18-10-1918, Daily Gazette)

A public meeting under the auspices of the Home Rule League was held last evening (17-11-1919) in the Holmsted Hall when a resolution was passed requesting Government to remove restrictions on Messess Toipin Chandrapal and B.G Tilak from visiting the Punjab and to allow Lala Lajparai and Mr. Harmiman to return to India. Mr. Hiranand Santokram was in the chair. (Page 5, Dated 18-11-1918, Daily Gazette)

The following have been elected as office-bearer of the nearly started Hyderabd Branch of National Home Rule League. Mr. Jethmal Parsram ________ (President) Mr. Bulchand Kodumal ______(Secretary) Santdas Mangharam, Hiranand Santokram and Kewalram Dayaram numbers of the members of the Managing Committee .(Page 5, Dated 2-3-23, Daily Gazette)

A public meeting was held at Hyderabad on Friday (15-08-1919) evening under the joint auspices of citizen’s Association, the Congress Committee and All India Home Rule League to protest against the “Asiatic Trading Act” passed by the “Union of South Africa”. Mr. Hasomal Kalachand, pleader presided and among the speakers were Karamchand Gurmukhdas, Santdas Mangharam and Dr. Choitram P. Gidwani. (Page 5, Dated 18-8-191, Daily Gazette)

In the honour of the 64th birthday of Mr B.G Tilak a meeting was held at the Khaliq Dino Hall last night (23-7-1919) under the auspices of the All India Home Rule League. Mr. Jamshaid, N.R Mehta presided. Speeches were delivered among others by Members Sri Krishandas Lala, Rewachand Vassandas, Lakomal Chellaram and R.K Sidhwa. (Page 5, Dated 24-7-1919, Daily Gazette)

On 20-2-1923, under the president ship of Mr. Jamshed Mehta the lecture was organized by the Karachi branch of Home Rule League. Mr. Jethmal Parsram eminent writer delivered his lecture on the topic of “The Present Political Situation”. (Page 5, Dated 19-2-1923, Daily Gazette)

Under the auspices of the National Home Rule League a meeting was held on Tuesday, 12th January 1926 at 7 p.m at Khaliq Dino Hall. It was presided over by Seth Harchandri Wishndas. Mr. Jamshed Mehta, Rewachand, V.Thadani and Jethmal Persram spoke on the topic of “Political Outlook Ahead and Responsive Co-operation”. (Page 5, Dated 11-1-1926, Daily Gazette)

Under the auspices of the National Home Rule League a meeting was held on 8-1-1926 at Holmstead Hall, Hyderabad. The meeting was presided over by Santdas Manghram and addressed by Jethmal Parsram. Over 400 people were present. (Page 5, Dated 13-1-1926, Daily Gazette)