Showing 33 results

Continues his telegram of the 15th [A2/1/7]. Has sent a communication to Lloyd, based on Montagu's suggestion [in A2/1/6]. Lloyd has replied that action against Horniman cannot be delayed, and he will probably be deported today or on Friday. Lloyd prefers deportation to trial, since there are signs that students and others are attempting to tamper with the military and the police, and thinks it best, if there is to be trouble, to have it now; he adds that the situation is so complex to diagnose that it is impossible to be certain of the better course of action, but that they have decided to deal with Horniman first, leaving the others till they see the general mood. Chelmsford has advised in reply that he also prefers deportation. Lloyd, who will address a meeting of leading citizens tomorrow, advises that Gandhi seems 'genuinely perturbed' by recent events, but although his statement may allay the feeling somewhat, Gandhi 'intends to pursue the methods whose results he so easily deplores', and that his actions will not affect the revolutionists, of whom he is merely a tool. Gait [Lieutenant-Governor of Bihar and Orissa] is concerned by the situation in his province, where Hasan Iman has taken the satyagraha vow. Calcutta seems to have settled down. The security of Amrita Bazar Patrika has been forfeited owing to inflammatory articles. Delhi is in a state of nervous tension, and shops are still unopened. In the Punjab, the action by the military at Amritsar appears to have had a good local effect, but the effect on the rural population is still unknown. Sporadic outbreaks of different intensity have occurred across the Punjab, and martial law has been extended to the Gujrunwala district. The Seditious Meetings Act has been brought into operation in the districts of Multan and Jullundur. [The Maharaja of] Patiala sent his Imperial Service Troops to help the patrol line in Bhatinda. Chelmsford is writing to the chiefs in the vicinity of the disturbed areas to urge them to co-operate.

(Carbon copy.)

It is difficult to predict the results of the Congress meeting at Ahmedabad and the Khil-afat Committee of the All-India Moslem League. Hazrat Mohani’s speech in favour of elimi-nating the doctrine of non-violence from the Congress resolution and declaring for complete independence and a republic was well received, though defeated. Gandhi opposed it, but pos-sibly from mere expediency, and some consider he may be preparing eventually for revolution with violence. Lloyd is strongly opposed to a conference, and wishes to arrest Gandhi. The question is to be discussed in Council. Reading believes they should wait until he takes a defi-nite step, and points out that Gandhi’s speeches at Congress concentrated on the enrolment of volunteers sworn to non-violence and to meeting peacefully to promote the cause of the Congress volunteers and to protest against a law which leads to the arrest of those whose only offence, as Gandhi’s supporters say, is non-co-operation. This is the view of Congress, which Reading does not accept, pointing out that intimidatory acts are common amongst the volun-teers but that it is very difficult to obtain evidence against the offenders. In view of the resolu-tion in favour of civil disobedience, they will watch events carefully. ‘Gandhi is appointed Dic-tator and can do as he pleases.’ And if he is arrested another will take his place, with the stimu-lus that Gandhi, ‘the saint’, is in prison. The visit of the Prince of Wales would not prevent him from arresting Gandhi, if necessary. He could not give the assurance requested by Lloyd, but believes he is right in thinking that Malaviya, etc., are working to get Gandhi to assent to a conference. He cannot see any alternative to either pursuing the present line of prosecutions, etc., or meeting in conference.

The position is better in Bombay, but the unruly element in the Punjab still causes concern. He has instructed the military authorities to advise Montagu of 'possible military requirements under possible eventualities'. The real danger point is Moslem discontent, the present unusual fraternisation between Hindus and Mohammedans, undoubtedly fostered by the latter, being indicative of this. A great deal, therefore, turns upon the decisions taken in relation to Turkey at the Peace Conference. Lloyd has not yet taken any measures with regard to the deportation of leaders, but Chelmsford has confidence in his judgement and believes he will not use extreme measures unless imperative.

(Typed.)

Since today is the day fixed for the start of civil disobedience, he believes he must take to Cabinet Reading’s correspondence with Lloyd regarding the arrest of Gandhi. He wishes therefore to have an immediate answer to A3/27/5, and asks what action is to be taken about Mohani and whether arrangements have been made to prevent meetings to discuss civil diso-bedience.

(Typed. Used for transmission.)

He has advised the Viceroy to concentrate on rallying the moderates and to refuse a conference on one-sided conditions. The Government must achieve a victory before it can enter a conference, and now Bengal has acted there is no alternative to ‘going straight ahead’. Mean-while they must hold on while Montagu settles the Moslem question. This settlement must now be a definite one. ‘The Enos Midia line drawn back to include Adrianople is the minimum in Thrace; all Anatolia including Smyrna and Cilicia must be Turkish, and a Vatican position in Mecca and Medina, Kerbela and Nejf.’ He wishes he were at home to take a hand, as he cannot believe a solution impossible.

Wishes to support him in any measure he finds it necessary to take. Points out that if deportation is to be resorted to as a punishment rather than a preventive, it could be deferred till after the restoration of order and might follow a possible inquiry. He feels sure that Lloyd has considered how far deportation, as a preventive, will assist and not postpone the restoration of order, and has considered sending for those he regards as being responsible and demanding good behaviour, or even assistance, under a threat of punitive action.

(Typed, with handwritten alterations. Used for transmission. The telegram was sent in error to Lord Chelmsford, and repeated to Lloyd on the 9th (cf. A2/4/1).)

He is alarmed by the situation in India, which he believes has been altered by the events in Bengal. The riots and the reception of the Prince at Bombay had done a lot of good, and Das, in conjunction with the Poona Brahmins, was preparing to oppose Gandhi at the Ahmedabad Congress. But then came the sudden proclamations of the volunteers at Calcutta and the arrest of Das, which has once more united the factions of agitators.

(i) The conduct and discipline of the Bar should, he agrees, be regulated by the High Court, but its attitude [to satyagraha] is likely to hinder the amelioration of conditions in India. Chelmsford assured him some time ago that the Punjab did not treat satyagraha in itself as a crime, and to act against it now it has been abandoned and the ‘magnificent political wisdom’ of Lloyd has avoided the necessity of proceeding against its originator [Gandhi], and to deprive five advocates of their livelihood, is extremely foolish.

(ii) As (i), with minor variations.

(Typed, with handwritten alterations.)

(i) He did not understand the phrase in the draft telegram (A2/3/2) regarding punitive action, so took it to Holderness. The question of an inquiry into the trouble affects not just Bombay but India as a whole, and it might be better to put the suggestion to the Viceroy in the first instance; but perhaps Montagu had in mind a judicial inquiry under the Defence of India Act such as dealt with the accused in connection with the Shahabad riots. Holderness has added a suggested modification to the draft.

(ii) The telegram must wait till his return. He wishes to state his views clearly, and they are not those expressed in the telegram as amended.

(A handwritten memorandum (i), with (ii) a brief note in pencil.)

Refers to his official telegram of the 16th for the resolutions of the Bombay conference, which he does not think worthy of consideration, as they are merely the views of Gandhi. Lloyd reports that the conference was a fiasco, and that only about twenty would sign the resolutions. Malaviya has arrived, but Reading has postponed seeing him till after this evening’s debate on the matter in the Legislative Assembly. Vincent and Sapru are the chief speakers for the Government, whose view is that the terms put forward are impossible. Sir C. S. Nair, who presided over the first two days of the conference, is convinced that Gandhi only wanted a conference in order to obtain his own ‘irreducible terms’. Gandhi’s irreconcilable attitude is, Reading thinks, a tactical mistake, as it has estranged men who were momentarily inclined to join him. Moreover, the Bombay conference has for the present destroyed all notions of a round-table conference, which was the preferred course of the moderates. He continues in his view that no conference can be considered without assurances that non-co-operationists will cease unlawful activities, and that Gandhi will give no such assurance.

(Cuttings from a larger document, pasted to a sheet of paper.)

Part 3. He believes Purshottamdas and Lamettji Naranji are unduly sanguine as to Gandhi’s attitude, but does not credit Lloyd’s view [see A3/24/18] that Gandhi has sinister motives for wishing to join the conference, and does not believe this is the moment to arrest him. The situation with regard to the police and military has improved. Hasrat Mohani’s speech appears to call for prosecution. Reiterates his view that Gandhi should only be arrested if he takes action with regard to civil disobedience, not for his speeches.

(Typed. Continued from A3/24/20.)

The present outbreak is not particularly attributable to the Rowlatt legislation; rather, India is suffering from ‘an unhealthy condition of atmosphere common to most of the world and a repetition, so far on a minor scale, of recent Egyptian experiences. … Racial feeling, Mohammedan soreness, Rowlatt Bills, high food prices, all come into the picture.’ Outbreaks have occurred at places where British policy has been repressive (Punjab) or laissez-faire (Bombay), or were caused by ‘mere accidental collision’ (Delhi). So far the ‘town rabble’ has been the actively hostile element, not the country folk. There are no indications yet of active disturbance outside Punjab and Bombay, but as the passive resistance movement has spread widely, trouble might occur anywhere. Thanks Montagu for his sympathy. He sees no cause for grave alarm, as the militant part of the movement shows no signs of central organisation. He met with Sir George Lloyd [Governor of Bombay] at Kalka yesterday, and will support him in the action he contemplates against the leaders of the Bombay movement. Military measures have been taken at dangerous points of movement over the country, but they cannot safeguard outlying centres. Has acted so far with restraint, but if there is any further collision in any of the main centres of disturbance, they will be in a position to hit hard. No unrest in the police is reported.

(Typed.)

Continues A2/1/8. O'Dwyer has declined for the present an offer of extra staff, and reports the Punjab situation better. In reply to specifice inquiries, O'Dwyer reports that (a) in rural areas disorderly elements are looting trains and damaging Government property; (b) there is no evidence yet that demobilised soldiers are prominent, though some may have joined disorderly bands; (c) attempts have been made to seduce Indian troops, but so far their attitude is staunch, and they are being used everywhere. Annie Besant was at Simla yesterday, and is reported to have stated in an interview with the Press Association that there is nothing in the Rowlatt Act to which a good citizen could object; she had opposed passive resistance because she believed it would lead to disregard of law and consequently to rioting and bloodshed; she condemned Gandhi; and she admitted the existence of revolutionary movements in some places, and considered it the duty of all leaders to help Government in the task of putting down violence. At Calcutta, moderates have issued a manifesto condemning the passive resistance movement. Roos-Keppel [Chief Commissioner of the North-West Frontier Province] reports organised attempts in Peshawar to work up Rowlatt agitation and Mohammedan feeling. Large demonstrations have been held there, but there has been no breach of peace. Refers to A2/3/4 [a telegram received by him from Montagu, but intended in fact for Sir George Lloyd] and states that they regard deportation at present from a broadly preventative standpoint, but admits that deportation of an individual can lead to serious temporary local outbreaks.

(Typed. Marked 'B'.)

With regard to action against ringleaders, the Ali brothers and Kitchlew have been arrest-ed. The drilling on the part of Moplahs was not extensive. He cannot see anything in the speeches of Willingdon and Lloyd to suggest a difference of opinion between them and his Government regarding either policy or the connection between Gandhi and unrest.

(Typed.)

The prosecutions referred to in his instructions to the Commissioner relate to offences against the State, which require the sanction of Government. In such cases previous report is indispensable.

(Typed.)

Will support him in any measures he takes. He feels sure that Lloyd has considered how far deportation will assist and not endanger the restoration of law and order, and also whether, before resorting to it, he should send for those he regards as being responsible and demand their good behaviour, or even assistance, under threat of punitive action.

(Typed, with handwritten alterations by Sir Thomas Holderness (cf. A2/3/3). The transmitted text is A2/3/4.)

The High Court has issued notices on about five advocates, all from Ahmedabad, for tak-ing the passive resistance vow. The conduct of advocates is entirely a matter for the High Court, so Government were not consulted before this step was taken, and he does not believe it should interfere.

(Typed.)

Part 1. He has asked Lloyd for evidence to support his statements regarding Gandhi [see A3/24/18]. Willingdon and Butler are also against a conference, while Ronaldshay and the Governors of the Punjab, Behar, Central Provinces, Burma, and Assam are in favour. He hopes that the instructions given to Local Governments will reduce the number of arrests. Malaviya, Jinnah, Bhurgri, Purshattamdas, Thakurdas and others have called a conference of all parties at Bombay, which Gandhi has undertaken to attend. If an agreement can be reached, they will send a deputation to Reading.

(Typed.)

Quotes the text of a telegram from Sir George Lloyd, who advises that, as a result of the conference convened by Jinnah, Bhurgri, Malaviya, and others at Bombay, a deputation will probably go to Lord Reading to request a conference. Reports from Ahmedabad suggest that Gandhi would welcome such a conference. Lloyd warns against parleying on such a proposal, and thinks that he should arrest Gandhi promptly for sedition, in order to preserve the forces of law and order from political infection, and as a response to the Congress resolutions and speeches such as those made at Ahmedabad. His Council would support him in such action. Asks for Reading’s views on the subject. Once Gandhi was arrested there should be no further negotiations with him.

(Cuttings from a larger document, pasted to a sheet of paper.)

Thanks him for his supportive telegram (A2/3/4). Horniman was deported four days ago. Arrangements had been made to send him to Burma, but the Viceroy preferred England, so he was put aboard the Takada. The main reasons for this action were: (1) Horniman's continued violent attacks on the Government calculated to bring it into hatred and contempt; (2) his constant efforts to breed race hatred; (3) his open advocacy in the Chronicle of law-breaking in connection with the passive resistance movement, and his fomentation of agitation leading to outrages at Ahmedabad and Virangam; (4) that, after publishing a warning addressed to Lloyd by the citizens of Bombay, he allowed an article to appear accusing the British authorities of torture in the Punjab; (5) that he is believed to have planned and organised a campaign of disaffection, and that his propaganda had certainly produced a dangerous situation in the Bombay Presidency and elsewhere. Judicial proceedings had been considered, in place of deportation, but in view of impending Moslem trouble and the highly-charged atmosphere generally, the Viceroy agreed that 'more immediate and certain riddance' was essential. As questions will probably be asked in Parliament, a more detailed letter will follow. All Europeans and moderates support Lloyd's action; the rest of the native press criticises the principle of deportation but has been moderate. The deportation was carried out without any disturbance so far. It is generally agreed that his Government has shown patience and has so far taken extreme action against Europeans only. He has warned agitators that he will only take further action in Bombay city if further disturbances occur, in which case he will punish severely. The censor order on the Chronicle will be removed soon. He hopes that no hope of reprieve will be given when Montagu replies in Parliament, and is confident that, if so, agitation in India will die down. Sir Basil Scott, who will reach England shortly, can give Montagu his opinion; Stanley Reed and the Advocate-General [Thomas Strangman, Advocate-General of Bombay?] are also returning to England soon.

(Cut from a larger document.)

Refers to Montagu’s letter [about the prosecution of Gandhi] and queries the significance of his comment that firm and steady action must be taken with a view to ‘talk’. He believes that the situation can only be cured by the implementation of a firm policy.

The policy declared at the Congress at Ahmedabad is very serious. Moslem leaders were for complete independence, and though Gandhi hedged in his speeches in an attempt to gain the moderate vote, the resolution of the Working Committee, over which he presides, was more revolutionary. Lloyd and his Council believe that Gandhi should be prosecuted immediately and, in view of the necessary repercussions across India, they sought the Viceroy’s approval to do so, but the Viceroy would not give it. Lloyd has urged him to reconsider.

Gandhi was arrested and lodged in jail tonight, without disturbance or incident.

(Mechanical copy of typed original.)

Has been informed that the Bombay High Court is asking pleaders to show cause why they should not be disbarred for taking the satyagraha [passive resistance] vow. Questions whether it is worth proceeding against satyagraha now it is over. Is telegraphing to [Sir George Lloyd at] Bombay for facts in connection with a question to be asked by Wedgwood [in the Commons] on Thursday.

(MS in the hands of Montagu and S. K. Brown. Used for transmission.)

Refers to Gandhi’s speech at Trichinopoly and his article in Young India, in which he stated that, as non-co-operation is legally sedition under the Penal Code, he objected to the suggestion in Sir George Lloyd’s communiqué that tampering with the loyalty of the sepoy and sedition were fresh crimes committed by the Ali brothers, and went on to encourage Congress and Khilafat workers to reiterate the Ali brothers’ formula and to spread disaffection openly till arrested. They [the Government of India] cannot arrest ‘small fry’ and leave Gandhi free; therefore the speech and article are being examined by lawyers, and Reading has canvassed Local Governments for their opinions as to the effect of prosecuting him. His own impression is that, though Gandhi has recently lost some ground, he remains popular with the masses, and that his arrest would lead to violence. Points out that Gandhi’s article is intended to bridge the gap between Hindu and Moslem.

(Typed.)

(Official.) The Governor of Bombay [Lloyd] has recommended that Gandhi should be prosecuted immediately, and has sought the Governor-General [Reading]’s approval. The Governor thinks the main charge should be based on certain articles by Gandhi, particularly ‘A Puzzle and its Solution’, the object of which is to create disaffection against, and so overthrow, the Government. In reply, the Government of India have signified their general agreement with this view, but as they believe that Gandhi’s next move must involve a more direct challenge to the Government than any hitherto attempted, and as they wish to avoid the idea that Gandhi is being prosecuted because he has made a conference impossible, they suggest that prosecution should be deferred till after 31 January, when Gandhi will probably institute civil disobedience. They also prefer that prosecution should be based on more recent statements than those mentioned by the Governor. No fresh reference need be made to them before prosecuting, if Gandhi embarks on an active campaign of civil disobedience.

(Carbon copy.)

Refers to Montagu’s telegram of the 7th. Has stopped Lloyd coming to him, since it is essential that he should be at Bombay when action is taken. Lloyd has been in Kathiawar, and his health appears to have improved.

(Typed.)

On 8 April Horniman published a passive resistance manifesto in the [Bombay] Chronicle. Gandhi was arrested in the Punjab, taken to Bombay, and ordered to remain in that Presidency. A serious riot at Ahmedabad resulted on the same day. On the 11th a large mob attacked and burnt the telegraph office and several other Government buildings, and injured the power house. On the 12th the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner arrived with a military force, order was restored, and the city remains strongly picketed. Telegraphic communication has been restored. The casualties so far reported at Ahmedabad are one European sergeant and an Indian constable killed, and about 250 rioters killed or wounded. On the 12th a mob at Virangam attacked and burnt the railway station, and are reported also to have burnt Government buildings and stocks of famine grass. An Indian revenue official was murdered and telegraph communication was severed. On the same day two British officers and 200 Indian troops were dispatched from Ahmedabad to restore order. A telegraph and railway party also left to reopen communications. Order has now been restored at Virangam. On the 11th there was rioting at Bombay, but no casualties occurred. The city is now quiet. Gandhi arrived on the 11th and addressed a meeting, making an appeal against violence. He was allowed to go to Ahmedabad the next day. Military forces have been sent to various places in Gujarat where disturbances may be expected. Anticipating that Gandhi’s arrest would lead to disturbance, Lloyd decided to make no prominent arrests till military precautions had been taken in areas where disorder might arise. But immediately he heard of Gandhi’s arrest he made dispositions for maintaining order in Bombay and arranged a meeting with the Viceroy. On his way up, news of Ahmedabad came, and he and the Viceroy decided to leave Gandhi at liberty for the present but to deport Horniman and certain other leaders. Arrangements are being made to do so, but he is having trouble with Sir Ibrahim on this point, and may have to defer action for two or three days, as he does not want to risk the resignation of a Moslem member of the Council. Though he has been very patient, he cannot allow the open advocacy of law-breaking to continue. Opposition to the Rowlatt Bills is a pretext for a carefully planned revolution, of which Gandhi is a tool, not a principal. Mob violence has so far been directed against telegraphs and railways, and the attacks on Virangam show design, in as much as the seizure of that place cuts off all communications with Kathiawar.

(Carbon copy.)

He thinks Reading should know the attitude at home towards affairs in India. The general opinion of the press is that action should be taken against ringleaders. There is perplexity at the fact that action is only taken against those actually dealt with in riots, and great uneasiness at reports of drilling. Recent speeches of Lord Willingdon and Sir George Lloyd suggest a difference of opinion between the former and the Government of India as to Gandhi’s connection with the spreading unrest, for the public believes that if the Government shared Willingdon’s views some action would have been taken.

(Typed, with handwritten alterations. Used for transmission.)

Expresses disapproval of the Viceroy’s decision to postpone Gandhi’s arrest.

(Carbon copy.)