Date: 10 December 1913
Location: Bombay
Speaker: Aga Khan III
Source: Speeches of Aga Khan III – K K Aziz
Full Text
Calamities in South Mrica have aroused feelings throughout the Empire – solidarity of public opinion – Britain would not have tolerated similar treatment to Englishmen – British citizens of all colours and creeds entitled to protection – elementary human justice – an Imperial problem – Indians have been patient but now losing faith in Britain – many English people and statesmen sympathize with Indians -plight of the Indians – Indian civilization and ideals – the £3 tax in Natal – demand for a fair treatment for those domiciled – rights of citizenship – a conference needed to solve the problems – Indians in East Mrica – the status of Zanzibar – free immigration into East Mrica – appeal to the Government of India – likely consequences of non-action.
As the chairman of this public meeting it falls to my lot to echo the feelings of the people of India which the calamities that have lately occurred in South Mrica have evoked throughout the length and breadth of this Empire. It is no exaggeration to say that in the modern history of India, it is impossible to find a parallel to the intensity of feeling to which Indians have been stirred by the painful occurrences in South Mrica. The solidarity of public opinion in regard to this most difficult and vexatious question is indeed striking, and the fact that the requisition to the Sheriff to convene the meeting is signed by representatives of all the communities furnishes eloquent testimony to the com plete unanimity of opinion that prevails in India as to the unjust and harsh treatment to which our fellow subjects in South Mrica have been subjected. If such treatment were meted out to Eng lishmen in any foreign country it would have been treated as a “casus belli.” If Disraeli, or Gladstone, or Palmerstone or Bright were alive they would have moved the whole of England by their earnestness and eloquence to see that the fair name of England for justice and equity was kept unsullied.
Everybody has heard about the plundering by a Greek mob of the house of a Jew, Don Pacifico, who was a British subject and a native of the Ionian Islands, and how a controversy about the amount and time of payment of a doubtful claim resulted in the despatch of British vessels to the Pirmus and the seizure of some Greek vessels which nearly brought on a European war.
The controversy over the rights of the Jew formed the subject of a memorable debate in the House of Commons, when Lord Palmerstone contended that even the poorest man who bore the name of a British subject should be protected by the whole strength of England against the oppression of a Foreign Govern ment. Lord Palmerstone asked for the verdict of the House to decide whether as the Roman in days of old held himself free from indignity when he could say “Civis Romanusum,” so also a British subject in whatever land he might be, should feel confi dent that the watchful eye and the strong arm of England would protect him against injustice and wrong. The single plea of “Civis Romanus” was sufficient to obtain protection from Caesar’s government. As in the case of the Roman citizen, the British subject of whatever creed or colour must be protected by the British Government from violence to his person and property wherever he went. The loyal, patient and silently toiling Indians expect that the fact of their being the subjects of His Imperial Majesty the King Emperor should be a sufficient protection of their rights of citizenship in any British colony. The Indian leaders in South Mrica are willing to recognise this delicacy of the relations between the Imperial and South Mrican Govern ments, but no question of difficulty should be allowed to stand in the way of elementary human justice beil)g done. Public opinion in India cannot believe the statement that the Imperial Government is helpless in the matter.
The problem has assumed an Imperial aspect and what we desire the Imperial Government to do is to allay the feeling of injustice and humiliation which oppresses our minds. For years, the Indians in South Mrica have approached some of the burning questions affecting their very existence in that country in a calm and dispassionate manner, free from prejudice and passion or oppositions to authority in the hope that antagonism to their rights of British citizenship may be argued into moderation and persuaded into compromise. But the hope has not yet been realised and their patience is exhausted. The very fact that my distinguished friend, the Hon. Mr. Gokhale, effected a compro mise that was so moderate as to provoke the displ~asure of some people in India proves how reasonable our fellow subjects there have been. Our brethren in South Mrica have been treated as if they were the worst type of Pariah. Before the Boer War, President Kruger’s Government chastised the Indian with whips, but the Times pointed out six years ago, the Transvaal Government were chastising the Indians with scorpions. As Lord Lansdowne has said, it was the ill-treatment of Indians before the war which called forth vehement protests from Englishmen and eminent statesmen in Great Britain. Not only have all the restrictions of Kruger’s regime been maintained in all their severity, but additional and disagreeable disabilities have been imposed upon Indians who have appealed in vain to all the elementary emotions of manhood, and fellow citizenship. It is painfully .obvious that the conviction that Great Britain is unable or unwilling to protect her foster children must shake their confidence in the power of the Imperial Government and deal a blow to the prestige of the Empire. We appeal to the sense ofj ustice of the leading statesmen of the Empire to preserve the honour of British Indian subjects lawfully domiciled in a British colony. The sentiment of Empire must begin to lose its meaning, if the Indians in the Transvaal, who have the strongest claims upon British sympathy, find that England is unwilling and pleads helplessness to remove the injus tice that is perpetrated on them owing to the colour prejudice of an autonomous colony.
The recent deplorable events in South Mrica since the strike commenced have complicated an already grave situation, but that should not be allowed to obscure the main issue. I appeal to you all, and through you to our brethren in South Mrica, not to do or say anything which will make the position of the Indian or the Imperial Government more difficult than it is at present. I admit the difficulty of self-restraint, when ·shocking allegations of barbarity and inhuman treatment towards the Indian settlers in the Colony have been made: but I ask you to hold your breath till an independent inquiry is made. Neither in deed nor word should we betray anything which would savour of malice or racial animosity, for we should not forget that the deep and living sympathy of many Englishmen and of some English statesmen is with us: and we should not jeopardise that sympathy by any indiscreet words or indiscriminate actions … …..· ·.” ~’111: ‘ The Indians – men and women, some of whom have been born in South Mrica-have been worried, harassed, and tortured by rules, regulations and taxes recognized to be unfair and unsuited to a civilised Government. This has caused bitterness throughout the Indian Empire which is as intense as it is wide spread, and to ignore it is neither statesmanship nor justice on which the foundations of the British Empire are broadly based.
The Hon. Mr. M. de P. Webb has pointed out in his able contri bution to the Daily Mail that “the Indian problem in South Mrica can only be solved by a frank recognition of the rights as British subjects of those Indians who have already settled there. The further immigration of trade competitors from India can be checked by mutual arrangement and consent but the competi tion of those Indians who have established themselves in South Mrica must be fairly met by civilised manners and not by oppression, exaction and torture which India well never endure.”
It is stated that it is not a question of racial prejudice, but an economic one, because the Indian “in South Mrica undersells in every branch of commerce the white man, who is forced by society to maintain the position of his caste.” Gentlemen, the Indians can boast of a civilisation that was far advanced when South Mrica was unknown and even people in Great Britain were in a very early stage of development. Its soldiers have shed their blood for the honour and glory of the British Empire on a hundred battlefields. Indians have imbibed the ideals of freedom, independence and fairplay from the same source, and they rightly recognise -which does credit to their judgment and sense of fairplay- that unlimited Asiatic immigration into South Mrica is impossible. The present movement has three aspects to be considered. The first is a £3 tax in Natal. This is a provincial one and affects only Indians in Natal whose indentures have expired.
The second aspect is that the Indians who have now organised the Passive Resistance Movement aim at the rights))f free move ment in South Mrica. They are not fighting for the free l immigration of Indians in South Mrica, but what they are fighting for is that those who have already been domiciled there should be treated in an honourable and civilised fashion. They are not asking for new immigration, and their demand is neither extrava gant nor unjust. The third point is the determination of the rights of citizenship of Indians in the self-governing as well as the Crown Colonies, and I think a conference consisting of rep resentatives of the Imperial Government, Colonial Government, the Indian Government and the people of India should be held with a view to settle this whole affair once for all on a satisfactory basis.
The various resolutions that will be moved by different speakers give expression to our views on the subject which has already been discussed threadbare. I will only refer to the resolution protesting against the attempts which are being made to oust the Indians from their position which by dint of industry and aptitude they acquired in Zanzibar and East Mrica long before England had acquired any rights in these countries. Whatever excuses may be made by the authorities in England as to their inability to help the cause of Indians in South Mrica, they have not even a shadow of excuse for forcing Indians in East Mrica to endure a similar treatment unless they wish simply to please a few thou sand white settlers in East Mrica.
Gentlemen, let us warn our rulers in time not to barter away the prestige of England for justice throughout India in order to please a few white Imperialists – Imperialists of the well known type of Lord Cranworth, whose rabid and bitter attack on Indians in East Mrica shows the temper of the White Imperialists to whose tender mercies our people in East Mrica are ultimately to be handed over. There is also a persistent rumour – of course with the stereotyped denial that one knows too well- that Zan zibar is to be kindly handed over by Sir Edward Grey to Germany for the sake of some concession on the Shat-ul-Arab and at Bussra. It is high time that even Sir Edward Grey realised that the people of India and their interests should not be sacrificed as if they were mere pawns in the Imperial game; or cattle on an Imperial Estate, India being already referred to by a certain type of white Imperialists as an Imperial Estate. This type of Imperialist in his heart of hearts looks upon us as the livestock in that estate.
We have every right to protest against our interests beirtg disposed of in such a summary manner. We must make it clear at once that in the first place we want justice done to our brethren in South Mrica already domiciled in that country and their honour and dignity preserved as citizens of the British Empire: secondly, we appeal with all the fervour at our command that the status of Zanzibar be kept intact, and thirdly we want to impress on the Imperial authorities that nothing can be done in British East Mrica further to prejudice the position of His Majesty’s Indian subjects there or their free immigration into the country without bringing on a struggle worse than that in South Mrica. These moderate and minimum demands must be made clear to our rulers in England at any price …
I venture to make one more appeal, and that is to the Govern ment of India not to allow the status of Indians in East Mrica to be changed to their disadvantage. I am convinced that if the state of affairs goes from bad to worse in South as well as East Mrica and Canada and other colonies, it will render the task of peaceful Government in India impossible …
Source: The Times of India, Bombay, 17 December 1913.
Considering the importance and significance of this meeting I reproduce below the report of it given in The Times of India of 17 December: “On Wednesday evening, at a mass meeting which packed the Town Hall to the doors, Bombay joined in the protest that is being made throughout India against the treatment of Indians in South Mrica, at the same time thanking the Viceroy and Lord Ampthill for their championship -of their cause and appealing to the Government and in the last resort to the King Emperor to intervene on their behalf and also taking advantage of the opportunity to protest against the attempts to infringe upon the liberties of Indian subjects in other colonies. “The meeting was attended by representatives of every section of the Indian community in Bombay, and on the platform was also a small sprinkling of Europeans. It lasted nearly two and a half hours and was marked by unusual enthusiasm, which was especially pronounced while Sir Pherozeshah Mehta and Sir Narayen Chandavarkar, who had come to Bombay from Indore in order to be present at the meeting, were speaking. There were in all over 22 speakers, but the principal speeches were delivered by His Highness the Aga Khan, who in spite of ill-health took the chair, this being his first public appearance since his return to India, Sir Pherozeshah Mehta, and Sir Narayen Chandavarkar. “The tone of all the speeches was very similar, and the argument of the Aga Khan that if the same treatment had been meted out to Englishmen in a foreign country as had been meted out to Indians in South Mrica it would have been treated as a “casus belli” was echoed by several of the subsequent speakers, as well as His Highness’ declaration that the problem was an Imperial one. The Aga Khan, however, sounded a warning note lest there should be a betrayal of anything which would savour of racial prejudice which would jeop ardise the sympathy which Indians at present commanded and paid a tribute of praise to the Viceroy for his recent declaration at Madras. “Most of the speakers who followed His Highness modelled their speeches on similar lines. Sir Pherozeshah, in a vigorous address, said the outlook in India could not be viewed with equanimity if the grievances of Indians in South Mrica were not redressed and that controversies of this character brought out more and more the gravity of the white and colour peril. Si:f Narayen Chandav arkar referred especially to the marriage question, and declared that the South Mrican Government had given them an example of legal fraud. All the resol utions that were proposed were carried with enthusiasm. “Among those present at the meeting were: the Hon. Sir Jamsetji Jijibhoy; Sir Dinshaw Petit; Sir Cowasjijehangir; Sir Narayen Chandavarkar; the Hon. Sir Pherozeshah Mehta; the Hon. Sir Ibrahim Rahimtulla; Mr. Mahomedbboy Currimbhoy; the Hon. Mr. Fazulbhoy M. Chinoy; Mr. H. A. Wadia; Dr. Stanley Reed; Mr. B. G. Horniman; the Rev. Dr. Scott; Mr. Purshotamdas Thakordas; the Hon. Mr. Manmohandas Ramji; Sir Vithaldas D. Thackersey; Mr. H. P. Modi; Mr. Cowasjijehangir; Mr. Narotum Morarji Gokuldas; Mr. G. Khatav; Mr Pheroz Hosang Dastur; Mr. K. Natarajan, Khan Bahadur Kersaspji Dadacha~i and others. “A number of telegrams were received sympathising with the movement from His Highness the Gaekwar, who contributed Rs. 5,500 to the Transvaal Indians’ Relief fund, from the Raja Saheb of Bansda, who gave Rs. 500, from the Maharaja of Panna and almost all important towns in the Presidency. A donation of Rs. 10,000 was announced from the Aga Khan, and other donations announced were:- Sir Dorab J. Tata (in addition to Rs. 5,000 already paid), Rs. 5,000; Lady Tata Rs. 1,000; H. H. The Maharaja of Cooch Behar Rs. 1,000; H.
H. the Maharaja of Bhavnagar, Rs. 1,000. “The Aga Khan, whose election to the chair was proposed by Sir Cowa~ji Jehangir and seconded by the Hon. Mr. Manmohandas Ramji, recieved an ovation on rising to address the meeting. “The first resolution stood in the name of the Hon. Sir Pherozeshah Mehta and was as follows:’That this public meeting of the citizens of Bombay expresses its entire sympathy with their countrymen and countrywomen in South Mrica in the sufferings and privations borne by them in their patriotic and united endeav ours for the removal of the racial, social and economic disabilities imposed by the recent Immigration Restriction Act.
It promises them the whole-hearted support, moral and material, of the public of this city and of the Bombay Presidency in their righteous struggle against such disabilities and particularly to secure full recognition of the validity of marriages contracted within or without the South _Mrican Union according to Indian religious rites; and to obtain the repeal of the iniquitous £3 Tax in Natal on ex-indentured Indians and their wives and children.
It exhorts the people of this country of all classes and creeds to subscribe liberally to the funds that are being collected to help their fellow countrymen in their self-sacrificing campaign in vindication of India’s honour and of her peoples’ rights as equal subjects of His Majesty the King Emperor.
And it appeals to His Majesty’s Government to intervene on behalf of His Majesty’s Indian subjects and to insist on the observance by the Union government of those pledges and promises of which the non-fulfilment has compelled the revival of passive resistance; and in the last to exercise the right which vest [sic] in the Crown to veto the Act of which the results are certain to be most injurious to the best interests of India and of the British Empire.’ “The Hon. Sir Pherozeshah Mehta, who was enthusiastically received, at the outset announced that he was not going to make a long speech. For, he added, in the longest speech he might make what could he tell but a thrice told tale of woe and suffering, of patience and resignation, and above all that blessed word moderation, suffered by their fellow countrymen and countrywomen in South Mrica, which had stirred their hearts and the hearts of the country to the depths? Sir Pherozeshah referred to a statement which had been made in one newspaper that the agitation had done one thing, which was to show that there were political agitators who, while far removed from the extremists, were perfectly prepared to use all the means in their power to embarrass the Government. The comment Sir Pherozeshah had to make on this statement was that the writer had utterly failed to realise the depth and intensity of the feeling which pervaded the whole country and had failed to realise the suffer ings of their fellow men and women in South Mrica. “Asking himself what it was that Indians in South Mrica had been – not fighting for – but pleading and praying for, Sir Pherozeshah rapidly traced the trouble from its origin, and declared that it was deplorable that the British Empire should not repress its own subjects from doing what it was ready to resent with all the force of war against foreigners. The effect it would produce upon the loyal people of India was an effect which one could scarcely contem plate with equanimity and a full sense of the benefits of British rule. As to the moderation of the Indian in South Mrica, Sir Pherozeshah pointed out that the poor Indian had never commenced by taking up a defiant or aggravating attitude. He begged and prayed and pointed out that he was ready to help the British in the Boer War, and he asked for no more than that he should be allowed the simplest rights of free citizenship. No ear was given to what he urged until, utterly baffled, he resorted to the one weapon which a loyal but firm asserter of the rights of his own country and resort to passive resistance.
Sir Pherozeshah spoke of the results of the passive resistance movement and of the modesty of the Indian demands, observing that he was one who had always held, and always would hold, that a subject of His M~esty had a right of free entry and free access to any part of the Empire and that was the reason he had disagreed with some of his friends in India. Mr. [M. K] Gandhi was a great believer in reason and in argument. He called him an unpractical man, and with all the admiration he had for Mr. Gandhi he disagreed with him on this point. He asked for too little (Laughter). If he had asked for the full rights of every Indian for access to the British dominions and had stuck to the full demand he might have got something. (Laughter). It was a great blunder, but it showed the reasonable character of the campaign led by Mr. Gandhi. He was again at the old game. What was the result? No-one would listen to him, and still Indians in South Mrica were asked to practice moderation! “The situation had developed in a way which had caused intense pain to the people of India, continued Sir Pherozeshah. And they were told, “What can Her Majesty’s ministers do in a matter of this character, which concerns the internal government and domestic discipline of a self-governing colony?” They were bound under all circumstances to speak with respect of the high authorities of the Crown, but it was impossible not to tell them that the people of India could not but consider that they had not been granted that protection to the Indian subjects of His Majesty which the ministers of the Crown were bound to accord to the millions of subjects residing in the Indian. Empire. It was a piece of singularly good fortune that they had at this moment at the head of the destinies of the Indian administration one who had proved himself one of the greatest and noblest of Viceroys, a man cast in a large mould in every way, a high-minded, a high souled, a large hearted statesma9 who had fully realised that no sound statesmanship could be founded on anything but justice, righteousness and sympathy. Lord Hardinge had done a service to the English Rule in India by the grave and significant words he spoke at Madras. The people in England did not fully realise the great service he had done, and when they could not but be disappointed by the way in which the ministers of the Crown had been treating the question they found themselves consoled by the thought that the Viceroy had all his feelings for them, all his sympathies for them, and suffered with them. “It was a blunder of a most serious character that Indians should be allowed to think that while the white race could enter all the fairest places on the earth’s surface, at the same time they could lay down the principle that all the other races must not enter the places they had occupied. It became a very serious question, and though they might talk of the yellow peril and the black peril, controversies of this character would bring out more and more the gravity and the reasons of the white and colour peril. Asia and EJ.lrope might find themselves confronted with a very serious controversy with regard to this ques tion. He was not a prophet, but he thought that European statesmen had better take warning that while they claimed the right of going over the whole world it was a grave mistake to set out too definitely the policy that they would prevent other races from going into parts occupied by the white races. Lord Hardinge had fully realised the volume of feeling there was in India regarding the treatment of Indians in South Mrica, and they must appeal to him to approach if necessary even the foot of the Throne to ask that the veto of the Crown might be exercised and both in the interests of England and India implore their ruler to bring about a reasonable solution of the question. “Sir Narayan Chandavarkar, in seconding the resolution said the situation in South Mrica, the oppressive and inhuman treatment to which their countrymen had been subjected there in the name of law and government was bad enough but the worst of it was that it would do incalculable harm to British prestige if the Imperial Government would not put forth all its power and get the wrong redressed. The South Mrican Government had given them a concrete example of legal fraud, for when a Government promised to maintain existing rights under and by means of a proposed law and then trampled those rights under foot in the name of that very law by employing language to conceal its thoughts and break its faith, it was law legalising fraud. And the comic feature of the situation, – for tragic as the situation was, a question of life and death to British Indians resident in South Mrica – it had its humorous side also, the comic feature of the situation was that these marriages were declared illegal because the Union Government professed to have a tender Christian conscience, in favour of monogamy. He had no doubt they all respected that conscience; they venerated the founder of that religion and his apostle who saw in marriage a spiritual fellowship of one soul with another soul. But what would the founder of Christianity and his apostle have said to the South Mrican Pharisees who in his name condemned as a concubine a woman, the sole wife of her husband, merely because the religion according to which she married allowed polygamy!
If that was polygamy, with equal ingenuity and Pharisaism they might argue that a Christian marriage was polygamous because it was allowable to a Christian to divorce his only wife and marry another. This sort of cant about polygamy was an insult to law and humanity; for, be it remembered, to the credit of India and Indians that though polygamy was allowed, only eleven in a thousand were polygamous, that was about one per cent.; and the better instinct of India had always been for monogamy and monogamous man had been the object of admiration and imitation, as for instance the hero of Ramayana. The South Mrican policy with reference to British Indians resident there had been a blot on that very civilisation and that very religion whose name the Union Govern ment invoked in defence of their wrongs towards their fellow-countrymen there.
It was said and said truly that the cause they had met to further was an Imperial Cause – the cause and the prestige of the British Empire. To say of it that they pleaded for humane treatment for their countrymen in South Mrica was to do it but inadequate justice and narrow their vision. There was a larger, nobler, wider and more practical view – the real object and effect of the South African policy which they condemned was to drive the free Indian back to indenture and perpetual slavery within British dominions after what Britain had done to exterminate slavery in every form and written her name in the imperishable book of life, not merely in the pages of history as the champion of liberty and the stem enemy of all Governments that made slaves of God’s men, whatever their race. South Mrica was now trying to blot out that book and tear those pages and the question of the hour was – “How long shall that go on?” “The Hon. Sir Ibrahim Rahimtulla, in supporting the resolution, concurred with all that had been said by the previous speakers. “Mr. Jehangir B. Petit, further supporting the resolution, observed that what they demanded was that once and for all the status of Indians in South Mrica and other self-governing colonies should be determined in a way which was compatible with their honour and prestige as citizens of the British Empire. “The resolution was carried unanimously. “Sir Jamse~ji Jeejeebhoy next proposed:’That this meeting conveys to His Excellency the Viceroy its profound grati tude for the emphatic manner in which he has associated himself with the appeal of His Majesty’s Indian subjects to fair and honourable treatment in South Mrica, and begs to assure His Excellency that he has greatly strength ened the foundations of British Rule, in the hearts and affections of the Indian people.’ “The resolution, he said, touched upon the only bright episode in the gloomy tragedy that was being enacted in South Mrica at the present moment. When the situation in South Mrica assumed an aspect full of danger from more points of view than one, the people of India turned instinctively for help and sympathy to the Viceroy on whom they had learnt to rely with absolute confidence. And they were not disappointed. His utterance had been variously criticised. It had been denounced as factless by those who in their handling of the question had not shown any conspicuous tact themselves. It had been attacked as unstatesmanlike by persons whose conceptions of statesmanship were to say the least, peculiar. But the three hundred millions of India had hailed the pronouncement with feelings of profound satisfaction and gratitude. It had soothed their wounded feelings; it had come as an assurance to them, that at this critical juncture, the Indian people were not entirely voiceless or helpless, but they had at the head of affairs a man who sympathised with them in their trials, who was not afraid to publicly avow that sympathy, nor slow in protesting with all the weight and authority of his high office, against the harsh and unjust treatment of the subjects of one part of His MaJesty’s dominions by those of another. How greatly this had relieved a situation which had elements in it of danger, would never be fully realised. It was certain, however, that it had done much to restore public confidence in the in!e~rity and sympathy of the Government, and to place on a firmer basis, that deep-seated loyalty of the masses, which was being put to a greater strain than any it had yet received.
For this India offered its profound gratitude to Lord Hardinge, and assured him that by his courageous and statesmanlike attitude he had greatly strength ened the foundations of British rule and brought the throne closer to the hearts of the Indian people. And long after the memories of this bitter struggle had died away, they would recall with thankfulness the great service which the Viceroy had rendered to India and the empire at large. Their thanks were also due to the Secretary of State for India for his recent sympathetic utterance, and they earnestly hoped that he and his colleagues in the Cabinet would not only recognise the justice of their claims, but be also able to secure for them due recognition by the Union Government. “Mr. Mahomedbhoy Currimbhoy, in seconding the resolution, declared that H. E. the Viceroy had undoubtedly strengthened the foundations of British rule in the hearts and affections of the Indian people by };lis chivalrous and manly stand on behalf of the people of India. Mr. Mahomedbhoy went on to reply to the criticisms which had been made regarding the Viceroy’s pronounce ment. Were they to be told, he asked, that while the South Mrican Government was entitled to say and do what it liked in the name of South Mrican public opinion the head of the Government of India should speak with bated breath and whisper humbleness when he pleaded for bare justice for the Indian subjects of the King Emperor domiciled in that colony? Was it well that it should be allowed to go forth to the three hundred millions of the Indian subjects of His Majesty that the head of the Government of India was con demned and criticised by a section of the British Press because he ventured to demand fair play and civilised treatment for their countrymen in South Mrica.
His Excellency had rendered invaluable service to every part of the Empire by his prompt and timely protest. “The Hon. Mr. Lalubhai Samaldas, supporting the resolution, said the Westminster Gazette, a liberal paper, had said that when diplomats broke loose, there was no limit to which the people went. They all knew what self-restraint the Viceroy had exhibited and he asked who should take up the righteous cause of the Indians if not the Viceroy, who was at the head of the Indian Government? “The resolution was carried by acclamation. “Mr. H. A. Wadia moved:’That this meeting places on record the feelings of indignation with which the people of India have been filled by the reports of the cruel treatment of their countrymen in South Mrica who are taking part in the strikes, and expresses its earnest conviction that nothing short of a full and impartial enquiry into the allegations made, will satisfy public opinion in this country, and respectfully insists that Indians should be adequately represented among those entrusted with the task of carrying out such enquiry.’ “In support of the resolution, Mr. Wadia drew a picture of the sufferings of Indians in the Transvaal. Replying to those who preached moderation to Indians, Mr. Wadia said that those who gave them counsel of moderation had not the honesty to acknowledge that Mr. Gandhi and his followers had refrained from enhancing the trouble of the Union Government by declining to join the strike movement when trouble arose on the gold mines at the Rand. He submitted that the strike of Indians was not a strike against the employers, but it was a protest against the Union Government for not keeping their faith with Indians and breaking their promise given to Mr. Gandhi and others that the £3 tax would be removed. He admitted that there were conflicting statements as to the allegations of barbarity and oppression, but said that was greater reason why a searching enquiry was necessary. It was necessary that Indians should be represented on the enquiry and if the allegations of cruelty were well-founded then those who brought shame on the Empire should be pun ished. There would be no peace in the country until justice was done to Indians. If the enquiry was granted, the loyalty of Indians towards His Majesty’s Government, which was sincere and deep, would be further strengthened by their faith in British justice and British statesmanship. “Dr. Stanley Reed who seconded the resolution, observed that because he did so in a sentence they must not believe that his sympathy for the cause was not as great as those who had made long and eloquent speeches. What they wanted in this matter was to find out the truth, and that object could be achieved by an enquiry of the kind they demanded. “Mr. Purshotamdas Thakordas supported the proposition, which was carried unanimously. “The Hon. Mr. V. J. Patel moved that the best thanks of the people of India be conveyed to Lord Ampthill for his consistent, unwavering and whole-hearted championship of the cause of Indians in South Mrica. “The resolution was seconded by Mr. K Natrajan and carried. “Mr. B. G. Horniman next moved:- ‘That this meeting protests against (a) the attempts which are being made to oust Indians from their position which, by dint of their industry and aptitudes they have acquired in British East Mrica and Zanzibar, and appeals the Government of India to protect the interests of its subjects against the machinations of those who wish to lower their status and to restrict their opportunities in this Crown Colony, and (b) the special restrictions placed on the admission of Indians to Canada, exceeding those applicable to the Japanese and Chinese by means of the law requiring as a condition of admission, immigrants to make a thorough journey from their country of origin to the Dominions, and against the obstacles placed in the ~ay of ad~,itting the wives and minor children of Indians who are domiciled m Canada. “Mr. Horniman sounded a warning note with regard to what was happening and what might happen in the colonies mentioned in the resolution in connec tion with the position of the Indian community. “Mr. H. P. Mody seconded, and Mr. K T. Kaderbhoy supported the resolution, which was adopted. “On the motion of Mr. Narotamdas Morarji Gokuldas, a vote of thanks was passed to the Sheriff, the Hon. Mr. F. M. Chinoy, for convening the meeting. “On the motion of the Hon. Sir P. M. Mehta, a vote of thanks was passed to H. H. the Aga Khan for presiding at the meeting.”
On the problem of Indians in South Mrica see Mian Fazl-i-Husain, Indians Abroad: The Hon. Sir Fazl-i-Husain ‘s Statement on the Position of Indians in Africa, Bombay, 1930; Shafaat Ahmad Khan, The Indians in South Africa, Allahabad, 1946; R. M. Hampson, Islam in South Africa: A Bibliography, Cape Town, 1964; T.
R. H. Davenport, South Africa: A Modern History, London, 1977; J. J. C. Greyling andJ. Miskin, Bibliography on Indians in South Africa, Durban, 1976; E. Hellmann (ed.), Handbook on Race Relations in South Africa, Cape Town, 1949; C. W. de Kiewiet, A History of South Africa: Social and Economic, London, 1941; E. G.
Malherbe, Education in South Africa, Vol. I, 1652-1922, Cape Town, 1925; Vol. II, 1923-1975, Cape Town, 1977; B. Pachai, The International Aspect of the South African Indian Question, 1860-1971, Cape Town, 1971; B. Pachai (ed.), South Africa’s Indians: The Evolution of a Minority, Washingtm:h :pc, 1979; H. J. and R.
E. Simons, Class and Colour in South Africa, 1850-1950, Harmondsworth, 1969; M. Wilson and L. M. Thompson ( eds.), The Oxford History of South Africa, Vol.
II, 1870-1966, Oxford, 1971; and Robert A. Huttenback, “Indians in South Mrica, 1860-1914: The British Imperial Philosophy on Trial”, English Historical Review, April 1966.