Showing 74703 results

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.)

[Part 1.] The Prince of Wales will arrive on the 24th. Any arrangements must be made before his own departure on the 22nd. The immediate objective is to prevent trouble or demonstrations during the Prince’s arrival. The Calcutta visit is of special because an unpleasant reception there would have a particularly strong effect on public opinion in England and even in India, and would provoke racial bitterness. The proclamation of volunteers in this province and others, and the subsequent demonstrations and arrests, have led to tension, which though presently non-violent, is bent on getting respectable Indians to protest against the Government and to associate prosecution with non-co-operation. The imprisonment of respectable men and reports of high-handed action have caused emotion even among moderates in Ben-gal, though Ronaldshay is trying to prevent excesses and correct abuses. The immediate objective can only be achieved by Reading’s immediate promise to invite members of the various political sections to attend a conference at Delhi, probably in January. He has desired all along to understand the agitators’ practical propositions; the meaning of swaraj, in particular, has never yet been defined. There appears, however, to be a general desire for responsible government. Nothing can be done, of course, without the assent of Cabinet and the approval of Parliament.

(Carbon copy.)

(Draft of A3/21/2. Cf. A3/22/3.)

(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.)

(Carbon copy of A3/25/11.)

Part 1. Reports the contents of a letter received from Gandhi describing the circumstances of the resolution taken at Bardoli to embark on mass civil disobedience, and urging the Viceroy to free non-co-operators imprisoned for non-violent activities, declare a policy of non-interference in all non-violent activities, free the press from administrative control, and restore the recently-imposed fines and forfeitures; if the Viceroy complies within seven days, civil disobedience will be postponed.

(Typed.)

(Text as A3/31/1–2. Leaves from a larger document.)

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.)

The Bombay Government will arrest Gandhi on 14 February, and Montagu can announce the arrest that afternoon. The Bombay lawyers have voted against taking action on the manifesto of 4 February or the Bardoli proceedings.

(Typed.)

(i) Refers to A3/46/3 and trusts that the Cabinet will understand his reasons for postpon-ing Gandhi’s arrest. The present situation is unclear, except that the resolutions show a great change in the non-co-operators’ attitude, which he attributes to a realisation of the danger and difficulties of carrying out civil disobedience. Reiterates his belief that civil disobedience is ‘the best battle-ground for us’, particularly this year, when the crops are good. Reports indicate dissension in non-co-operation ranks. His decision to postpone the arrest was influenced by a feeling that he could not risk the resignation of Sapru and other Indians, and that the division of the European and Indian elements in Council would be awkward at present, particularly with the Budget question before them. He has been advised that a general railway strike may take place when Gandhi’s arrest is announced, and that mill-hands in various centres will come out. Sapru says he will discover the real meaning of the latest move within two or three days, but believes that it means something ‘really good and lasting’ and that Indians generally regard it as a confession of failure by Gandhi.

(Typed. (ii) is a draft of A3/42/2.)

24 Queen Anne’s Gate, S.W.— Thanks him for his letter explaining the position. He does not think the differentiation between cotton Customs and Excise Duties in India could ever be prevented, and as it has been done it does not matter. But he does not regard Interest and Sinking Fund of £100 million a year as a sufficient burden for India with her almost insignificant unproductive debt, and does not think India entitled to special consideration when compared with the burdens laid on other parts of the Empire. Points out that the increased pay of the Indian Army has been practically paid for by allowances for services abroad. Those who make cotton goods in India must, as a result of the differentiation, be allowed to increase the price of their goods. If the State protects any industry it ought to share in the profits, but the question with regard to cotton manufacture in India is very difficult. He wishes that it had been possible to make a policy for the whole Empire before dealing with it in India.

(Carbon copy.)

34 Portland Place, W.1.—Is sorry that what he said in the House should have disturbed Montagu in his travels. [He had apparently referred to criticisms of the India Office made by Montagu before he was made Secretary of State.] The reports Montagu received must have conveyed a different impression from the actual words of his speech. He admits that he was surprised that a man of Montagu’s calibre and experience should have criti-cised the India Office and the Indian Government so heavily, and believes that he would not now suggest that the Secretary of State should be more amenable to the Commons, which is a poor judge of Indian affairs. But he guarded himself against the suggestion that Montagu had any idea of becoming Secretary when he made the speech, and points out that it might be as-sumed from his appointment to that post not long afterwards that he had been sent there to give effect to the views he expressed. It was for this reason that the called the speech into question. Emphasises his desire to remain on friendly terms with Montagu and to co-operate with the Government. He has spent six months trying to assuage the situation in Ireland, but the old feuds have broken out again.

Sheets 16–22, 34–57, 76–108, 185–98, 296, 468[a], 469–84, 484a, 485–520, and 523–43. There are illustrations on sheets 106 (Umar Khayat Khan) and 107 (‘His Holiness’).

Most of the letters are from people noted in the fields of literary studies and bibliography.

31 Endcliffe Rise Road, Sheffield.—Discusses McKerrow’s plan of establishing a journal devoted solely to English studies.

—————

Transcript

31 Endcliffe Rise Road, Sheffield
Nov. 12. 1923

My dear McKerrow,

Many thanks for your kind letter. I am rejoiced to hear that English studies are to have an organ of their own in this country, and that you are to direct it. I have written again & again—to E. K. Chambers I think among others—urging the inadequacy of the MLR to meet the demands made on it & properly to represent English studies {1}—& I have been surprized not to hear earlier of a movement for a Journal devoted to English studies alone.

I pressed on Robertson {2} some time ago (within the last twelvemonths) the desirability of breaking up the MLR so that the English section could appear as a separate Journal. He was evidently against this (believing I suppose that a MLR without English in it could not pay its way)—but said that he thought the solution was a separate Journal for English.

I have at present matter in hand and reviews due that will take all the space for several numbers to come. This means that a book often does not get reviewed in print till 2 years or more after its appearance. It also means that I have to print particularly articles so abstruse or devoid of general interest that they have no chance of getting in elsewhere—& to turn off a popular well-written article—which may be just as valuable—on to some other journal. I have just succeeded in getting an excellent article of Stoll’s on Hamlet into the Contemporary. {3}—There is such an abundance of good matter crying to be published that I hope you will not commit yourself in a hurry to including so much of the nature of Reports of Societies &c. as to limit your powers of publishing the articles & reviews you want. I hope however you will include as the German journals do a page or so of Necrology when required. It has seemed to me sad that the MLR should not be able to include a word on great scholars such as Raleigh & Ker & Vaughan & H. Bradley when they die. {4}

Of course I think the effect on the MLR will be serious. If your standard is as high as ours has been—& it is likely to be higher rather than lower—why should an English student pay for a journal in which English studies occupy only ⅓ of the space as against one in which they hold the field? This is, if the price of your Journal is the same as that of the MLR. Perhaps you will make it less in order to widen your circulation among people who are not actually scholars themselves.

Am I at liberty to send on your letter to Robertson? or are you writing to him?

I understand from your letter that your Journal will not be specially connected with the English Association. However it will no doubt attract the special interest of the E.A. That Association for the last 2 years has made a grant to the MLR to enable it to give 8 more pages to English Of course it will be important for us to know if we may depend on that grant in the future. I am pleased to see that you do not apparently intend giving another quarterly Bibliography.

I suppose you dont intend to pay your contributors—unless for some special articles.

Writing for myself, not for MLR, I look forward with the greatest interest to your Journal. The less it aims at popularity, the more it aims at representing the best English Scholarship, philological, literary-historical, & literary, in my eyes the better—I suppose you will leave articles of technical bibliography rather to the Library?

(I am glad to see that Herford in today’s Manchester Guardian accepts the conclusions of Maunde Thompson &c. as probably sound.) {5}

I dont know if it would be possible to come to any concordat in order to avoid the duplication of reviews. There are a lot of American books sent out by Milford to which justice wd be done if they were reviewed in one English journal only. On the other hand as things are, many books dont get reviewed in the MLR at all. [Footnote: ‘I have not received a copy of the Sir Thomas More book—nor of Herford’s book on Recent Shakespeare Criticism, nor of All. Nicoll’s book on Restoration Drama.’ {6}] The ideal would be for every book of value to be noticed in one journal or the other. I am afraid if this is to be achieved duplication of reviews should be avoided. It might be difficult however to come to any agreement in the matter.

Ever yours
G. C. Moore Smith

—————

{1} Moore Smith was editor of the English section of the Modern Language Review from 1915 to 1927. See MLR, xxxvi (1941). 246.

{2} J. G. Robertson, founder and chief editor of the MLR. See MLR, xxviii (1933), 19.

{3} ‘Recent Criticism of Hamlet’, Contemporary Review, cxxv (1924), 347–57.

{4} Sir Walter Raleigh and C. E. Vaughan died in 1922, W. P. Ker and Henry Bradley in 1923,

{5} The reference is to a review of Shakespeare’s Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More, ed. A. W. Pollard (1923), one of the chapters of which was written by the palaeographer Sir Edward Maunde Thompson. C. H. Herford was a regular reviewer for the Manchester Guardian.

{6} The books referred to are Shakespeare’s Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More (see the previous note), A Sketch of Recent Shakespearean Investigation, 1893–1923, and A History of Restoration Drama, 1600 to 1700, all published in 1923.

Athenaeum Club, Pall Mall.—Encloses a cheque for the Clifford fund.

(With an envelope.)

—————

Transcript

Athenæum Club, Pall Mall
7th April 1876

Dear Mr Pollock—I enclose cheque (£5) for the Conspiracy Fund. I would do the same over again if a fresh application is found necessary. I am very glad that the thing has been undertaken and think that nothing too much can be done that may tend to the preservation of so valuable a life.

Believe me,
Yours very truly
J. J. Sylvester

[Direction on envelope:] F. Pollock Esqr | 12 Bryanston St | Portman Square | W

—————

The envelope was postmarked at London, S.W., and London, W., on 7 April 1876, and is marked ‘Sylvester’ in a later hand.

The items described under this head are, with one exception, autograph manuscripts of short stories written by McKerrow in the last two decades of the nineteenth century. The exception, B1/4, is a series of numbered press-copy sheets, containing a copy of the story ‘The Inevitable Morning’ (B1/3), together with copies of five poems, the originals of which are in B2/13 and B2/15.

The earliest story, ‘Our Trip up “The River”’ (B1/1), was, according to McKerrow’s later annotation, ‘a contribution to a magazine that I tried to start at Wedderlie’. It is in three parts, the first two of which conclude with the words ‘To be continued in our next’. It is unclear whether Wedderlie refers to what Bartholomew’s Gazetteer (1914) calls a ‘shooting-lodge and stream, 1¼ m. NE. of Westruther, Berwickshire’, or some other place; it may be noted, however, that the events related in McKerrow’s story ‘A Strange Adventure’ are said to have occurred while the narrator was spending the autumn at ‘a small house on one of the Scotch moors’. From the style, subject-matter, and handwriting, it must have been written in the 1880s. ‘A Strange Adventure’ (B1/2), which was submitted unsuccessfully to Chambers’s Journal in 1892, was presumably written the same year. ‘The Inevitable Morning’ (B1/3)—the title of which may derive from Emerson’s poem ‘The World-Soul’—is subscribed with the pseudonym ‘Kenneth Niel’ and was written about the same time as a group of poems (B2/13) submitted under the same pseudonym to the Yellow Book about January 1895 (Henry Harland’s letter of rejection is dated the 14th). The next five stories (B1/5–9) are explicitly dated. The dates of the last three items (B1/8–10) are uncertain, but they were probably written at some time in the latter half of the eighteen-nineties.

All these items relate personally to R. B. McKerrow, except those described as printed. Most of the rest are printed forms filled up by hand.

Roundhurst, Haslemere. - Expects he will be at Wallington on 12 [April]; Edward could come then, or earlier in the week; there will be a 'mob of people' he hardly knows such as the Spence Watsons early on but 'the coast will be cleared' after Tuesday; he will get there on Wednesday or Thursday next week. Asks Edward to send Kitty's address [Kitson added in pencil]; they could 'do something to rag him' such as sending a letter 'enclosing a beautiful epithalamium'. 'Here is a fan for Roger [Fry] to paint, which 'may be used to support whichever side of the temperance question you may choose'; includes the text of Bob's poem "For a Fan", with a reference to the Homeric Hymn to Pan.