Menu
Подробнее на сайте: https://buildthehouse.ru https://houseconstruct.ru http://repair-yourself.ruhttps://zedconstruct.ru https://inedvijimosti.ruhttps://thehousebuilder.ruhttps://currenthouse.ru https://samsdelairemont.ru https://econedvijimosti.ruhttps://buildbighouse.ruhttps://dohomebuild.ruhttps://daoconstruct.ru
https://primohouse.ruhttps://fullconstruct.ru https://sdelaisvoidom.ru

SPECIAL

SIND PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE

HYDERABAD (1920)

August 28

At the Special Sind Provincial Conference the President Mr. Durgdas B. Advani said, he took it as a mark of special favour that he had been chosen to preside over a Conference which was to discuss grave problems and was being held at an intellectual centre like Hyderabad where political activity was great and the different lines of political thought well defined. After deploring the death of Mr. Tilak at this critical hour he discussed the Reform Act, which had been unfortunately eclipsed by the Punjab tragedy and the Khilafat question. Speaking at some length he then treated of various questions of the hour, using, however, arguments favored by his party and already familiar to the average ready.

August 29

The Subjects Committee sat till midnight yesterday and again from 8 to 10-30 this morning (August 29, 1920) after which the proceedings of the Conference were taken up. The first resolution expressed grief at Mr. Tilak’s death, who was described as the greatest nation builder and political leader of Modern times. This was passed in silence by the audience standing. A moving song about the event was the sung. Mr. T.L. Vaswani then moved that Non-Co-operation according to Mr. Ghandhi’s plan should be given effect to, to bring about a revision of the Turkish and the demands of the Congress Sub- Committee report on the Punjab atrocities, the mover deferring his speech. He was seconded by Haji Abdullah Haroon of Karachi. An a amendment was moved by Mr. Santdass and seconded by Mr. Gopaldas declaring non-co-operation as futile and inexpedient. Prof. Ghanshyam moved another amendment which was in favour of non-co-operation but slightly differing from Mr. Ghandi’s scheme. Dr. choithram moved a third amendment which differed from Mr. Vaswani’s and Mr. Ghanshym’s in deprecating Police and Army resignations. Swami Govindanand moved a fourth amendment in which an addition was made to Mr. Vaswani’s proposition to the effect that non-co-operation was to go on till India got complete independence. He was seconded by Mr. Lalchand A. Jagtiani of Karachi, after whose speech the conference rose for 3 hours recess when discussion on non-co-operation will be continued. August 31

At the Conference the Non-Co-operation resolution was discussed till 9 p.m. and the speeches were stirring. Mr. T.L. Vaswani the mover of the original resolution replied to some of the arguments on the other motions and was allowed to speak for forty-five minutes while the proposers and seconders of other motions and amendments had only fifteen and ten minutes respectively but he was still dissatisfied and left the hall after informing the audience that he had been ordered by the President to stop and he must obey though he had not finished. He was brought back by the Chairman of the Reception Committee.

 

 

 

LITTLE INCIDENTS

An unpleasant incident occurred here, one Shikarpuri delegates crying out angrily “Sir, here is the gentleman who insults Mr. Vaswani and says to us If you want to hear this Mahatma still further you can satisfy your hearts by paying his fare and taking him to Shikarpur to lecture”. The noise was stopped by the President who said “If any insult had been offered I apologize on behalf of the offender”.

About the same times Mr. Jeswani of the New Times complained bitterly and loudly, going up to the President’s table, “that the self styled Swami Govindanand was canvassing in the galleries for votes”. This storm was also quieted with gentle diplomacy by the President.

When votes were taken between the several amendments and the original proposition there was an overwhelming majority for the latter i.e., Non-Co-operation on Mr. Ghandi’s lines. The amendments against non-co-operation received 33 votes but the other amendments of non-co-operation different from Mr. Ghandi’s did not get even 15 votes.

 

FOUR RESOLUTIONS

After this, four resolutions were moved from the Chair.

1. That the Reform were inadequate, unsatisfactory and had failed to satisfy the aspirations of Indians and the Conference is therefore emphatically of the opinion that the Congress should at the once make a demand for complete Home Rule according to the principle of Self-Determination.

2. That the Conference strongly condemns the Central Provinces Government for sanctioning the proposed slaughter house which is to be established there for export of meat and hides and where thousands of animals will be killed a thing which is most injurious to India and will bring about a dreadful state India. The Conference calls upon all Indians to boycott the factory and if any Indians should join they should be ex-communicated by their brethren.

3. That the Conference vehemently condemns the Hunter Committee’s report, the Government of Indian’s attitude in the matter, the result of the discussion in the House of Commons and still more the result in the House of Lords and generally the attitude of the British Government in respect to the whole question and the Conference declares that on account of this, Indians have lost faith in British Justice.

4. That this Conference consider that on account of the decision in the Khilafat and the Punjab questions having excited grave dissatisfaction in India, no Indian should take part in the reception of the Duke of Connaught or any one else who might be sent to open the Councils.

 

SECONDING THE RESOLUTIONS

The following is the summary of most of the speeches; In seconding Mr. Vaswani’s resolution Seth Abdula Haroon said: That the terms of Turkish treaty were against the opinion of the Ulmas who had declared that it was a religious question and that Jazir-al-Arab should be under the Khalif. They had disregarded the sentiments of Indian Muslims and Indians generally, and since we had tried all other means we must now adopt non-co-operation as advocated by Mr. Ghandi. India was too religious and too weak to do any thing violent. Non co-operation did not mean disobedience of Government or its laws. If we should fail now we fall back fifty years.

 

AGAINST NON-CO-OPERATION

Mr. Santdas moving an a amendment against non-co-operation said: For the first time in Indian’s modern history direct action was being proposed and carried out as a political weapon. It was a critical time. He was pained and surprised that a man like Mr. Vaswani should use the stratagem of reserving his speech for the end giving others no opportunity to meet his arguments but taking the advantage of hearting and replying to all Mr. Ghandi did not want that we should agree with him without reflecting and in the Gujrat Conference where he was president, only the first stage of his programme had been adopted. The speaker’s objections against Non-Co-operation were both ideal and practical. He admitted that the Muhammadans had been deeply injured in the matter of the Khilafat and the Punjab tragedy and the attitude of the authorities had outraged all principles of justice and humanity, but was Non-Co-operation a right or good remedy. The Muhammadans were too impatient. They said that if Non-Co-operation did not succeed soon they would adopt another remedy. They should take care not to vote from mere impulse or enthusiasm but must realize that it meant serious action.

 

TOADIES AND TYRANTS

All knew what kind of people title-holders and Government servants were: toadies and tyrants and yet they were going to be asked to make sacrifices before all others! How would crores of rupees come for feeding the latter? At the time of Satyagrah only twelve persons had resigned and the poor fellows were still going about complaining. The Punjab had been so shamefully treated but how many Punjabis there had resigned? Pleaders also will not suspend practice. So far only one Muhammadan pleaders had stopped practice.

Withdrawing boys from Government and aided schools? He was on principle against the kind of education and the restriction there, the boys being unable for instance to attend such political meetings as this. He had put his boys in the National College, but how was the college supported by the public with funds and otherwise? The response was very poor indeed and it was the only college of the kind in India. People will not withdraw boys from the schools but if they did where are there other schools for them?

Boycotting the Councils? Some very big leaders were against it and were not going to do it. If Councils were boycotted by the leaders fifty rate men would surely go in. We should rather go and try for more reforms.

HARD ON POLICEMEN

How could they expect policemen to make a sacrifice knowing their characters? They should devise something according to which Santdass and Gopaldass and Harchandrai may sacrifice. Why impose the burden upon the poor? As regards the refusal of income tax, did they not know it would lead to attachment of property etc.? Refusal to pay land reverence would lead confiscation and sale of land. Some Muhammadans have said that they were ready to refuse payment provided Hindus would not buy their lands, when Government confiscated them. Would the banias consent? If the army was done away with there would be great insecurity and crime in the country, and who would defend us against foreign invasion? If pleaders stopped practice how many more innocent people would go into jails? Some said that they were going to try this remedy but like a reasonable men they should make sure that it was not an injurious remedy. We should jump into a well and make others do the same

 

Hyderabad, August 31

Mr. Gopaldas in supporting Mr. Santdass saids that the British Ministers had no doubt violated the pledges given to Indian Muslims and the Punjab atrocities had no doubt remained unpunished and the House of Lords resolution about General Dyer was a down right insult to the Indian nation, but he was opposed to the Non-Co-operation resolution because he knew it would be futile and harmful to the good of the country. Mr. Ghandi from whom this proposal had originally come was a man of the highest order, there was none like him in the world but what he proposed was an impossible task for the people though not for him. He referred to some of the steps in the programmed and showed what little would come of it all. He concluded by giving the story of the nice and the cat and asked who was going to bell the Government cat. It was all very well to pass resolution but who was going to act? Referring to the first stage he asked how many there were in the Conference who would have to make any sacrifice. One title holder (Hon. Mr. Harchandrai); no Government servants, a few pleaders, no Honorary Magistrate and so forth. Was any one of these prepared to act according to the proposal except one solitary pleader a Muhammadan? Those who wanted to pass the resolution were those who would have to sacrifice nothing for the present at least and many of them never at all. They too had hardly faith in the movement and were only trying it on. But it was a serious business and they should not bring ridicule upon themselves.

Professor Ghanshyam proposed an amendment which modified Mr. Ghandi’s demand by declaring that Mesopotamia, Syria, Armenia etc. should have self-determination. He said the Turkish Treaty was most unjust and the Punjab happenings had staggered the whole nation, hence the Non-Co-operation movement was justified. If they feared failure they should organizes a society to preach action according to the resolution. Indian’s condition was most lamentable. She had remained under foreign rule for a hundred and fifty years, and it was without honour. Otherwise the Khilafat decision would have been different and the Punjab atrocities would not have happened. We were not men if our hearts did not revolt against and abhor what had taken place. We could not remain subject to England except on terms of equality and fellowship. Constitutional agitation had failed, so they must use another remedy and Non-Co-operation was the very best. The English had lost their head after overthrowing Germany. The partition of Bengal had been cancelled not because of agitation but because of the bombs. The Reform Act was given on account of the war. The English themselves admitted that to alter the form of government was not only a right but a duty. It was said that Non-Co-operation would lead to bloodshed but constitutional agitation had also led to bombs in Bengal. We had suffered too much dishonor. People could bear no more. Nothing would now be of use except sacrifice. Mr. Gandhi had stopped jehad but if we did not support Muhammadans they might become violent. He was sure if we made sacrifices now the Government would come round before things went too far. Success would not come in a day or two, but gradually, they must work steadily. Liberty was never won without great sacrifices. Muhammadans should see that if India wanted self-determination how could Mesopotamia and Syria be refused it. Let them decide themselves whether they should or should not remain under Turkey. They should have a society to preach non-violent non-co-operation.

Dr. Choitram moved another amendment in which he excluded interfering with police and the army and wanted that the Non-Co-operation movement should begin after people had been educated as to how to do it without violence and that about the Councils the decision should be left to the Congress. Agitation had failed with the Rowaltt Act. The Government did not care for us, were in despair. The Mandate meant the oil-fields of Mosul. It would be a shame if the Indian troops went any longer to Mesopotamia and Syria to help in reducing them to subjection. That should stop. Mesopotamia and Syria and Arabia were wanted by Britain as a wall or fortress standing before India in order to reduce India to greater dependence. If we did not see to something India would be ruined in ten years. The present Ministry was of robbers and plunderers. Too much power always turned the head. So it was with England now. He knew what excitement and spirit of Jehad was among Muhammadans. Mr. Gandhi had checked it. If Non-Co-operation failed then some other remedy must be tried. The Congress creed would probably have to be changed. When young men gave their lives on the gallows then would India be saved and there was he knew, a new spirit among the youth. When young men were hanged the fathers and grandfathers would resign appointments easily. The police however were wanted for the sake of order, the army through under the bureaucracy was wanted to repel foreign invasion. We wanted to break the chains of subjection and dishonor but we did not want disorder and foreign invasion. If we only began Non-Co-operation earnestly, it would have an effect. The English were very clever, so clever that they had made a fool even of President Wilson, so they would not like to let thing go very far, and to lose India. They would not be such fools as to be obstinate even at the cost of losing India.

Mr. Govindanand then brought forward his amendment. The Conference is still proceeding. (THE DAILY GAZETTE, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1920)

 

 

 

 

Hyderabad, August 31,

The Sind special Provincial Conference is still sitting.

Swami Govindanand’s amendment added a clause to Mr. Gandhi’s Non-Co-operation scheme to the effect that the agitation should be continued till complete swaraj was given to India. We had petitioned and petitioned, but no good had resulted. We had lost our patience and something had to be done. Even God had lost his patience with men and hence the terrible wars are being witnessed. India had a message for the world, the message of Dharma. She could deliver it only if she was free and for this Non-Co-operation was the best. Some feared revolution. He did not care but a revolution would surely come if Non-Co-operation was not adopted. The Police and Military were the foundation of British strength in India, so they should be taken up first. If they made friends with the Muhammadans they need not fear foreign invasion from Afghan, Arab or Turk. If the Military people resigned Government would come to its senses. Without the military behind them these English were very timid and nervous. The English were suffering from the malady of zulam, They should be given one medicine after another. Just now the medicine was that we stand aside from them and continue to be sulky. When medicine fails, then a surgical operation is employed. Non-Co-operation should be nationalized and have self reliance, otherwise Jahlianwalas and Khilafat would happen again and again. We were sick of the English and wanted our own rule.

 

NON-CO-OPERATION AND NOSE-RINGS

Mr. Lalchand supporting Govindanand said that they heard too much about dangers. There was no danger. Non-Co-operation should not be for Khilafat but should be nationalized, and then it would succeed. In 1896 young men started the movement of doing away with the nose-ring for women. Many said it was impossible but to day how many young ladies had the nose ring? In 1884 Tilak set up the flag of swaraj and many Harchandrais and others said “Impossible,” but to-day Dr. Choitram thought there would be foreign invasion but Mr. Gandhi was than us. There was no fear in doing away with police and army. He had lived and worked among Muhammadans and had found that they were extremely grateful. He would sooner except treachery from a Hindu than from a Muslim. If we supported the Muslims now they would never forget it. They would never join outside invaders against us. Mr. Ghanshyam wanted Muhammadans to agree to give freedom to Mesopotamia and Syria, etc. But that was just the difficulty. Muhammadans rightly said that without these Turkey would be a small and weak state. That was like the Muslim saying to us. “O ye Hindus give up your idolatry and then we will join you”. Was that possible? Mr. Santdas had said that people resigning Government services would starve. Mr. Santdass had left Government service and got into another profession. Was he starving? How many after all were in Government service? Mr. Gandhi did not say that the service of private European firms should be left.

 

INVOKING THE WRONG SIDE

Mr. Virumal of the Sindhi of Sukkur, supporting Mr. Vaswani’s proposition, said some regretted the difference of opinion which now divided old co-workers. He was not sorry. It showed that every one was thinking. It was not disunion; they all had the same goal. He thought they should all bow to Mr. Gandhi’s authority. No better or wiser man existed on earth. He could not be wrong. If they did not follow Mr. Gandhi the great Indians whose portraits were hanging in front-. Tagore, Subramanya, Iyer, Gokhale, Perozeshah Mehta, Mrs. Besant would all be pained, whether in heaven or on earth, otherwise they would be happy and would bless us. (Here there came loud laughter, because the impassioned orator had forgotten that most of these great ones were against Non-Co-operation). Impossible? Did not Napoleon say the word should be taken out from the dictionary. To think ourselves unfit was a blot on India. Troubles and hardships will come but no matter. Neither pen, nor tongue, nor deputations had availed. It was complained that twenty eight days of August had passed as yet how every few had resigned honours, service etc. What! It did not matter. Twenty eight years might pass, even centuries. They should simply preservers. Who was going to bell the cat, asked Mr. Gopaldass. Be comforted there were many now. Mr. Gandhi alone would do it. Nothing would be gained by co-operating with the Government. Mr. Gokhale had done it most earnestly, and others but what came of it. Those who had left the service were not blind or useless. They could make themselves useful in other ways. Queen Victoria had promised life, liberty and prosperity but we have got nothing.

 

Mr. HARCHANDRAI’S SOUND ADVICE

The Hon. Mr. Harchandrai, supporting Mr. Santdass said that the wind which was blowing showed that his words would not avail but still he would speak. Those who had supported Non-Co-operation had forgotten the main issue and were dwelling on the minor points. The troubles and drawbacks every one admitted, so also the injustice of the Khilafat decision and the Punjab happenings, but the question was whether non-co-operation would remedy these. He was sure it would not. It would only lead to anarchy and bring about great evil. They should adopt non-co-operation if they thought that it would really do good. The British Government was very powerful it was not going to yield to pressure from us. Government would only laugh at us and we would be harming our own people. Some speakers said that they should go on with Non-Co-operation for 10, 20, 30 years but would the Turkish Treaty be modified after the present treaty had come into force and Turkey had got settled in the new situation. How were the guilty Punjab officials going to be punished 30 years hence? Wounds had been inflicted on us but they must not act under the impulse of heartiest excitement. They should let their brains cool and then act otherwise there would be much harm. Government did not care if honors and titles were given up. If men give up service the Departments like Revenue and Engineering would stand still. Then how would cultivation go on? Zamindars would fight and fight for water and there would be disorder. Then might would triumph, and not right. We were introducing compulsory education and now we were told to withdraw boys from the schools. Where would they go when and how would other schools be started. Government could get many employees from elsewhere. Without pleaders there would be a police reign of terror. The best thing was to send to the Councils our best men who should try to get full justice. The speaker ended with a story. An opium eater was lying down half senseless with a heavy club by his side. One leg was bent up and seeing his knee in front he thought it was a thief. He took the club and struck the “thief”. In pain he carried out, still intoxicated “Rascal you have hurt my knee, no doubt but you will never forget my club”, To strike Government was to batter, cripple, and destroy oneself.

Mr. Punaya from Karachi supported Mr. Govindanand and being a Madrasi knowing neither Sindhi nor Hindi, he spoke in good English. (THE DAILY GAZETTE, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1920 PAGE NO.5)

 

 

Hyderabad, September 1

 

At the Sind Special Conference at Hyderabad Mr. Punya said that the system of Government had to be changed, that was the cause of all evils. The Khilafat and Jalianwalla what if the Viceroy or the Dyers were punished or even hanged. It was said that Asiatics were unfit. Nonsense! From Asia came all civilization and all the religious leaders of the world. England was powerful, so not physical force but soul force would be of use against her, and it is Non-Co-operation. If we went as beggars we should be treated as beggars, go like men and you will be treated as men.

Pandit Umersee from Karachi supported Mr. Vaswani and said that Mr. Gandhi certainly not started this movement without deep reflection. Mr. Gandhi was a great man and he had thirty years experience of these things. Those who said it could not be done would not be able to do anything. Men who fled from trouble were normally dead. So it was better to die than live like this, we were not men if we thought not of honour. One gentleman had said “Let us ask and we shall get”. Since the history of the Jewish nation, liberty had never been won by mere asking and asking.

Mr. Lokaram of Karachi, Supporting Mr. Santdass against non-Co-operation, said that this was not to be a paper resolution but would necessitate action on their part. This movement arose out of the Khilafat question, yet how many Muslims were in the hall? How many who are for the resolution has any connection with Government which they may break off? There were a few income tax payers, but if the tax was not paid, Government would attach property. How many the speakers will have to sacrifice anything? Ten crores of rupees would be required to feed those who might leave service. Before starting a fund and finding money men were being asked to resign. Where were their national schools and colleges to receive lakhs of boys leaving Government and aided institutions? Dr. Choitram who favoured Non-Co-operation in general, told them that the police and army must remain in act, or disorder and foreign invasion would come. Many nations had their eyes upon on India. For a thousand years outsiders had been invading or coming into India to get wealth. Where was the guarantee that if outside Muslim came upon India the Muslim here would be on our side? He knew the Pathans. Wild and ferocious and what not. It had been said that a great leader like Mr. Gandhi should be implicitly followed. But Mr. Gandhi himself wanted us to follow our conscience, the highest law and had not Mr. Gandhi himself erred in supporting the Punjab Indemnity Bill.

Pundit Lokram supporting Mr. Ghansyam said it was a pity that the same arguments which had been put before us during these three years by leaders like Mr. Harchandrai, Mr. Bhurgari and others in order to awaken us and bring us the political life of independence, were being attached and broken by the same gentlemen now. We use to look upon Government as Ma Bap, to be reverenced and obeyed but we were taught that Bureaucracy was our servant not lord. Why did you, Sirs, bring us it of our shells? Police and Military to remain intact? Oh, no ‘these were the back bone of the Bureaucracy and they must go before any thing else if possible. If we could bring one to its knees such a great Government as ours, we could boldly meet any invader. The Sind leaders had formerly declared that we were fit for self Government but the Government said we were not. Now when we said we were fit to take action the leaders said No. Who had spoken truly? The leaders or the Government. Only a few would act? But Guru Gobindsing began his great work against Aurangzeb with only five men.

 

 

 

 

MR. GANDHI’S ROAD TO RUIN

Mr. Jermadas supporting Dr. Choitram said that the amendment accepted the principle of Mr. Gandhi’s Non-Co-operation and three out of the four steps and made slight additions. Income tax was the fourth steps in Mr. Gandhi’s programmed; in theirs it was second. They also wanted Syria and Mesopotamia to remain independent of Turkey, if they so chose. If we wanted independence ourselves how could we refuse it to others? Mr. Gandhi’s personality was unequalled in the world. It was the first time in the history of the world that in political affairs force was going to be abandoned and Non-Co-operation adopted. It was by following conscience that Mr. Gandhi had become so great. He has displeased father, mother, brother and friends. No Provincial Committee had adopted the fourth steps about the Police and Military. Perhaps many here did not know what was going on in Central Asia. No one of them wanted foreign invasion, so the army must remain. Moreover if the first three steps were carried out the fourth would be unnecessary as Government would surely yield before that. Egypt had gained freedom in a short time by making sacrifices. He would agree with them in preventing Indian troops from going to fight in other countries but for India they must remain. It was provided in this amendment that a preacher of Non-Co-operation must carry out at once any one of the steps which applied to him.

 

 

Mr. Jethmal supporting Mr. Santdass made a very powerful speech which created some thing like a sensation. It was a very delicate question but it was time for being frank and honest. Muhammadans might not like what he was going to say but he could not help it. There was division in the old camp of co-workers. Mr. Bhurgri, Santdas, himself on one side, Jeram and Choitram on the other and Ganshyam on the third. Mr. Virumal was wrong in trying to silence them by Mr. Gandhi’s authority. Was Mr. Virumal sure that in heaven our departed great men were in agreement on this question. Non-Co-operation for Punjab and on Turkey? Since he had entered political life his heart burned within him at foreign supremacy in India. That was more serious than Jalianwalas. He was for self-determination but he was against religion being dragged into politics. He was against creating disorder in the country and opening the door to foreign invasion. Who among us was not profoundly stirred at this moment? There were two movements among Muhammadans. The Pan-Inslamism movement to unite the Muslim of the world. The second was Hijrat. At Allahabad Mr. Shoukat Ali had defined Hijrat as leaving the country of the tyrant and coming back to invade it. Was it not true that some of the Muahmmadans who had gone on Hijrat had joined the army there? So long as there was danger of an Afghan invasion of India, the Muhammadans should not except support from the Hindus. He had Tilak and Malaviya on his side there. At present the British power was keeping back Muhammadan invasion. India had always been harassed by the Muslim invaders. The Amir of Afghanistan had stopped Hijrat into his country because of political reasons. He believed rather the principles of the Gita and Dharam Yudh than in nonviolence or Satyagraha. He would say with Lajpatrai that first we must have a national army, also we must organize trade guild and then there will be no disorder if the authority of the present Government suffers. As regards the reforms they were not Heaven’s word, but they were something. “If you want to bring the British and other nations to a sense of justice, remember all are alike including our Japan, then touch their purse. Bite their stomachs by boycotting their goods. Do not give a ball of fire to the Muhammadan brethren to play with. It is not a toy but living fire”. (THE DAILY GAZETTE, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1920 PAGE NO. 5)


 

Hyderabad, September 2

The Sind Special Conference has now concluded its session. On Thursday evening Mr. Narsinghlal of Karachi spoke in support of Mr. Govindananda’s resolution. He said that an ordinary man like him was not worthy to be followed but he would request delegates to think over what they heard. Mr. Jasawalla of Central Provinces has taken to Parliament 50 lakhs of signatures from India against cow slaughter in India, but nothing at all come of it. They must get rid of the bogy of constitutional agitation as worthless. Mr. Gandhi had not included “Swaraj” or other benefit for India as his ideas were loftily and unselfish, so he wanted to have the movement for the sake of Muhammadans only but we men might well put in the “Swaraj clause.” If we all put into practice the Non-Co-operation resolution for a few days Government would surely come round. At the time of the hartal, when the European heard that it might last for three days, they were frightened almost out of their lives. They think so much of their stomach, usually they bought one day’s provision like penniless people but this time they bought four days provisions. Some had spoken of dangers from Non-Co-operation but while these dangers were only possible, there was certainty of bloodshed, etc. If they did not adopt Non-Co-operation. No one had attempted to prove that if we all united in action Government would not yield. When the Police were not at Delhi for a few days there was no theft at all. Mr. Mahomed Khan here came forward to speak in support of Mr. Vaswani’s resolution. He was a Pathan himself from the Punjab and he wanted chiefly to assure the audience that the Afghans had no thought of invading India and that the Indian Muhammadans would not help them. The fears about trouble from Central Asia were groundless.

A SOULIUL FINISH

Mr. Vaswani, the prosper of the original resolution spoke on it last and replied to all opponents. He spoke in Hindustani (or whatever it was) and said that his voice was weak but not his heart. During recess he heard a little girl outside in the garden crying out in anguish “Oh, where is my brother, my beautiful, brother, my darling little one? Oh find me him”, after much search she found him and with what joy and gladness she took him home. The Hindus had lost their Muslim brothers and searched and searched and now at last the Muslim were found. And the Hindus should rejoice. How the Muslims in their trouble were even looking out for Hindus for help. There should be no condition accompanying the giving of help and therefore he desired that no clause like acceptance of swaraj for India and for Mesopotamia or Syria should be imposed. There was only one condition that there should be no disorder in the Empire. His way was of love and therefore no condition was required. This method of give and take and of conditions was of the west and it must be discarded. Have faith in the Muslims and you will see their manly gratitude. It had been said that we should reflect but speaker’s reflection was Love. Mr. Muhammed Ali had said that the Muhammadans did not object to Arab independence. It was true the Khialfat had often gone from one country to another but the Muhammadans rightly claimed that they, not others, should select the Khilafat, and it was necessary that the ruler should be very powerful. There was no proof of danger of any Afghan invasion. Afghanistan had sympathy for India. The late ruler had stopped cow slaughter there, and now Hindus there could go about on horse back. How was a smaller power like Afghanistan going to wage war upon a great power like England. Non-Co-operation now meant co-operation with Muhammadans. Unite them and follow satyagraha. Therein lay India’s salvation; some had expressed horror of revolution but there were bloody and bloodless revolutions Non-Co-operation would bring the latter. He would never join any one in violent action.

Mr. Vaswani had already taken more than forty minutes speaking in a sermonizing way, slow and measured, and it seems he wanted to go on at least half an hour more and so when the President asked him to hasten he abruptly closed and went out and was brought back. What followed has been already mentioned. After the voting on this and the four resolution already mentioned as put from the chair the President was given a vote of thanks, four gentlemen speaking on it. It was specially mentioned that the Citizens Association, Hyderabad, and the Home Rule movement in Karachi owed much to Mr. Durgdas. The President gave a fitting and brief reply.

The material/data/information can be provided on request

Menu
Go to top