Morley-Minto Reforms

 Taken from : http://storyofpakistan.com/minto-morley-reforms#prettyPhoto
In 1906, Lord Morley, the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs, announced in the British parliament that his government wanted to introduce new reforms for India, in which the locals were to be given more powers in legislative affairs. With this, a series of correspondences started between him and Lord Minto, the then Governor General of India. A committee was appointed by the Government of India to propose a scheme of reforms. The committee submitted its report, and after the approval of Lord Minto and Lord Morley, the Act of 1909 was passed by the British parliament. The Act of 1909 is commonly known as the Minto-Morley Reforms.
The following were the main features of the Act of 1909:

• The number of the members of the Legislative Council at the Center was increased from 16 to 60.
• The number of the members of the Provincial Legislatives was also increased. It was fixed as 50 in the provinces of Bengal, Madras and Bombay, and for the rest of the provinces it was 30.
• The member of the Legislative Councils, both at the Center and in the provinces, were to be of four categories i.e. ex-officio members (Governor General and the members of their Executive Councils), nominated official members (those nominated by the Governor General and were government officials), nominated non-official members (nominated by the Governor General but were not government officials) and elected members (elected by different categories of Indian people).
• Right of separate electorate was given to the Muslims.
• At the Center, official members were to form the majority but in provinces non-official members would be in majority.
• The members of the Legislative Councils were permitted to discuss the budgets, suggest the amendments and even to vote on them; excluding those items that were included as non-vote items. They were also entitled to ask supplementary questions during the legislative proceedings.
• The Secretary of State for India was empowered to increase the number of the Executive Councils of Madras and Bombay from two to four.
• Two Indians were nominated to the Council of the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs.
• The Governor General was empowered to nominate one Indian member to his Executive Council.

Lucknow Pact 1916

Posted by: HistoryPak

Introduction       
The Lucknow agreement took a new twist with change in Muslim League’s political doctrine. The Quaid-e-Azam inclusion in the Muslim league was a historic event, which gave new direction to Muslim league’s political struggle. Self-rule for India brought the Muslim league and the Congress closer to each other. The leaders of the both parties agreed that they should cooperate with each other to make the British accept their demands. They acknowledged that the objectives can be achieved if the two major communities of India forget their differences on petty issues and come closer to each other to see eye to eye on the important national issues. The political vicinity had taken a happy turn and ground for cherished Hindu Muslim unity had been smoothed.

Lucknow pact is considered as a significant event in the political constitutional history of India. It is regarded a high water marked of Hindu Muslim unity. It was the first and last pact signed between Congress and Muslim league.

Factor’s Behind the Pact
The relations between the British government and Muslims were tensed due to aggressive and unilateral policies of the British. The annulment of the partition of Bengal in 1911 was a jolt for the Muslims of India; consequently it shattered their confidence in British and brought Muslims closer to Hindus against the British. Similarly the Kanpur mosque incident and the British policies in the international system had caused deep anguish among the Muslims. Thus the Muslims leaderships decided to change the strategy of the Muslim league after the annulment of Bengal in 1911. In December 1912, Muslim league change its aim from loyalty to form self-government suitable to India. However, the league retained the right to modify self-rule in accordance with their needs and requirements.

Jinnah and the Pact
Jinnah arose as a devoted champion of Hindu Muslim unity, he convinced all India Muslim league to change their policies for the better of India. Muhammad Ali Jinnah in his early career was a member of both the Congress and the Muslim league and was well known as a man free of any religious prejudice, as well as a brilliant advocate and debater. In 1915, mainly due to his efforts, both the Muslim league and the Congress party had their annual meeting in Bombay. At the end of this meeting, a committee was formed with the intention to sort the common understanding between the two communities. The committee prepared a scheme in November, 1916. The scheme was approved by both the parties in December, 1916 at the respective sessions at Lucknow.  Quaid-e-Azam, in his presidential speech at Lucknow, said “India’s real progress can only be achieved by a true understanding and harmonious relations between the two great communities. With regard to our own affairs, we can depend upon nobody but ourselves.”

Features of the Pact
The congress party agreed to the right to separate electorate for the Muslims first and last time in the history of subcontinent. The Hindus conceded that the Muslims would have one third representation in the imperial legislative council. A weightage formula was proposed under which the Muslims would get less representation than their population in the legislative council in those provinces where they were in majority but more in provinces where they were in minority. The provincial legislative council will have fourth fifth as elected members and one fifth as nominated members. The member’s would be elected by the people directly for the term of five years. In the major provinces the strength of the legislative councils would be 125 and in the minor provinces the strength would be 50 and 75. The Muslims shall be elected through special electorates and their strength in the different provinces shall be as: Punjab 50%, Bengal 40%, U.P 30%, Bihar 25%, C.P 15%, Madras 15% and Bombay 33 %.

No bill, nor any clause thereof, nor a resolution introduces by a non-official member effecting one or other community shall be presented in the assembly without approval of the concern group. Provincial autonomy will be given to the province with maximum powers vested with the provincial council. The provincial council will have authorized to impose taxes, raise loans, and to vote on budget. All proposals for raising revenues shall have to be submitted to the provincial council for sanction. There shall be an executive council in the province headed by the governor whose half of the member’s shall Indian national elected by the elected members of the legislative council their term of office shall be five year. The members of the assemblies shall have the right to present adjournment motion. Seats were reserved for the Muslims in those provinces in which they were in minority under the system weightages. Protection shall be given to the Hindus in Muslim majority provinces. In the centre there shall be and imperial legislative council consisting of 150 members. Four fifth of the members shall be elected for a term of five years on the basis of direct election. The Muslims shall be given 1/3 seats of the elected members and they will be elected by separate Muslim electorates. The central Government will be headed by the government will be headed by the Governor General, who would be assisted by an executive council. Half of the members of the executive council shall be Indians elected by the elected members of the imperial legislative council.

Importance of the Pact
The Lucknow pact was a great achievement of Hindu and Muslim leaders, who were successful in offering for the first and the only time, a mutually acceptable solution of the Hindu Muslim problem. It appeared as a special significance in the history of India. It was the Quaid-e-Azam, who had always been a staunch supporter of Hindu-Muslim unity. The scheme provided for a substantial step taken halfway towards the establishment of self-rule in India which was main core of the jointly sponsored scheme of Lucknow pact. The Congress first time accepted the demand of separate electorate for Muslims. The pact ensured the protection of political rights of Muslims. Muslim league separate status was also being accepted. Through the pact the both parties were able to put a joint demand before the British. Congress got strength in term of political and masses because it had got All India Muslim League Supports.

It was basically give and take sort of agreement between the both parties. The Muslims had to pay a big price of loosing majority in Bengal and Punjab to obtain some concessions. Similarly, it carried great constitutional significance in the future for many developments. The scheme of representation of Muslim community in the central and provincial legislatures as embodied in the Lucknow pact was generally followed in the Montague Chelmsford reforms.

Conclusion
The agreement was very outstanding and its dreams were fulfilled the whole political scenario of Indian subcontinent were different. But, it was impossible to the parties to make a united India.  The Hindus and Muslims are two different nation and they have different culture and civilization. Therefore the Lucknow Pact failed to make a long lasting cooperation in India among the Muslims and Hindus.

India and World War One

 India and World War One

 India played a significant part in World War One. However, India’s part in the war is frequently overlooked as a result of the horrors experienced in trench warfare and by Europe’s tendency to home in on battles such as those fought at the Somme and Verdun, which many assume only Europeans fought in.

When was broke out in 1914, India was in a state of growing political unrest. The Indian National Congress had gone from being a group that simply discussed issues to a body that was pushing for more self-government. Before the war started, the Germans had spent a great deal of time and energy trying to stir up an anti-British movement in India. Many shared the view that if Britain got involved in a crisis somewhere in the world, Indian separatists would use this as an opportunity to advance their cause.

“The moment Britain gets into trouble elsewhere, India, in her present temper, would burst into a blaze of rebellion.” William Archer (author)

These fears were unfounded. When war was declared on August 4th, India rallied to the cause. Those with influence within India believed that the cause of Indian independence would best be served by helping out Britain in whatever capacity India could – including the Indian National Congress. Offers of financial and military help were made from all over the country. Hugely wealthy princes offered great sums of money, and even areas outside of British India offered help – Nepal offered help and in total sent 100,000 Gurkhas and the Dalai Lama in Tibet offered 1000 of his troops to the cause. Despite the pre-war fears of unrest, Britain, in fact, could take many troops and most of her military equipment out of India as fears of unrest subsided. Indian troops were ready for battle before most other troops in the dominions.

Indian troops were on the Western Front by the winter of 1914 and fought at the first Battle of Ypres. By the end of 1915, they had sustained many casualties. Along with the casualties from sickness, the decision was taken to withdraw the Indian Corps from front line duty at the end of 1915.

In total, 800,000 Indian troops fought in all the theatres of the war with 1½ million volunteering to fight. They fought in most theatres of war including Gallipoli and North and East Africa. In all 47,746 were classed as killed or missing with 65,000 wounded.

The Indian Corps won 13,000 medals for gallantry including 12 Victoria Crosses. Khudadad Khan won the Corps first Victoria Cross.

Such was the cost of the war, that India’s economy was pushed to near bankruptcy.

The Indian support given to Britain’s cause surprised the establishment in Britain. ‘The Times’ wrote:

“The Indian empire has overwhelmed the British nation by the completeness and unanimity of its enthusiastic aid.”

For its endeavours, India expected to be rewarded with a major move towards independence or at the least self-government. When it became obvious that this was not going to happen, the mood in India became more militant. During the last phases of the war Mahatma Gandhi said:

“Seek ye first the recruiting office, and everything will be added unto you.”

The British government’s post-war attitude quickly alienated Gandhi and was a great stimulus for his independence movement.

In 1919, the Government of India Act was introduced.

• This introduced a national parliament with two houses for India.
• About 5 million of the wealthiest Indians were given the right to vote (a very small percentage of the total population)
• Within the provincial governments, ministers of education, health and   public works could now be Indian nationals
• The act planned for a commission to be held in 1929, to see if India  was ready for more concessions/reforms.

However, the British controlled all central government and within the provincial governments, the British kept control of the key posts of tax and law and order.

Many in India felt that they had been badly let down by the British government for their part played in World War One. However, despite this feeling of being let down, India was to play a significant part in World War Two.

Taken From : http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-one/india-and-world-war-one/

How was India involved in the First World War?

The First World War had lasting consequences that extended far beyond Europe. It set in motion forces that developed into India’s independence movement. Anne Bostanci, co-author of the British Council report, Remember the World as well as the War, ponders a promising emerging shift in the UK’s discussions about the First World War.
The UK’s history must include the stories of people from the former British Empire
The UK has a particular responsibility to construct an inclusive history of the experience of the First World War. It was a truly global conflict, and involved many Commonwealth countries that made huge sacrifices vital to Britain’s war effort.
However, as the British Council’s recent international survey — carried out in Egypt, France, Germany, India, Russia, Turkey and the UK — showed, the UK public has only a limited understanding of the extent and significance of the role of Commonwealth countries in the First World War, and is therefore some way away from recognising them appropriately.
Take the example of India
India made a huge contribution to Britain’s war effort. It sent staggering numbers of volunteers to fight and die on behalf of the allied forces. Almost 1.5 million Muslim, Sikh and Hindu men from regions such as the Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar volunteered in the Indian Expeditionary Force Opens in a new tab or window., which saw fighting on the Western Front, in East Africa, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Gallipoli. Volunteering offered a chance to break through the caste system, because becoming a soldier paid well and meant becoming part of the ‘warrior’ caste, which gave high status. However, of these men, around 50,000 died, 65,000 were wounded, and 10,000 were reported missing, while 98 Indian army nurses were killed. The country also supplied 170,000 animals, 3,7 million tonnes of supplies, jute for sandbags, and a large loan (the equivalent of about £2 billion today) to the British government.
But do the UK and India remember India’s role?
While the UK is one of the top ten unprompted associations with the First World War held by Indian survey respondents, India was not mentioned a single time as a top-of-mind association with the First World War among the 1,215 UK survey respondents. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that twice as many respondents in India compared to the UK feel that their country’s role in the First World War is — to this day — often misrepresented and misunderstood in global history (almost one quarter of Indian respondents indicated this).
At the same time, around three quarters of respondents in India as well as in the UK felt that their country is still affected by the consequences of the First World War.
Were Britain and India on the same side or fighting each other?
Looking for reasons why the First World War still looms large amongst people in India, it becomes clear that that period of history is inextricably bound up with the history of the independence movement. And this can sometimes cause confusion.
For instance, only just over half (51 per cent) of Indian survey respondents knew that Britain and India were fighting alongside each other in the First World War. Over one quarter (27 per cent) believed they were enemies.
And while 63 per cent of UK survey respondents correctly identified that India fought alongside Britain, a full third (33 per cent) thought that India was fighting against Britain.
The First World War and the independence movement in India
This is despite the fact that India was heavily involved in the First World War as a key contributor to the allied forces and at that time an important part of the British Empire.
Having made huge sacrifices and demonstrated military valour equal to that of European soldiers, Indians widely expected a transition to self-government. These expectations were shared by nationalist leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi Opens in a new tab or window. and Muhammad Ali Jinnah Opens in a new tab or window. (the founder of Pakistan), but were dashed by the extension of martial law at the end of the conflict.
Following this period, Gandhi launched his first India-wide campaign of civil disobedience against British authority in February 1919. It was not driven by anti-Western or anti-British sentiment per se, but by the pursuit of self-determination. It took a looming Second World War, and the resistance against risking more Indian lives for little tangible return, before nationalist efforts redoubled under the auspices of the Quit India Movement. But the origins of Indian independence can be traced back to the events of the First World War.
The UK’s nascent interest in India’s role in the First World War
Since February this year, when we published our report, Remember the World as well as the War, we have argued that the UK can only gain from developing a global understanding of what was a global conflict with global consequences, and from understanding specific countries’ experiences, such as India’s.
Other organisations and individuals are now echoing this message. In the recent TV series, The World’s War Opens in a new tab or window., the BBC’s David Olusoga Opens in a new tab or window. reveals the experiences of the ‘Forgotten Soldiers of Empire’ — with explicit reference to soldiers from India.
The London School of Economics and Political Science Opens in a new tab or window. has opened out some of its thinking about India’s role in the First World War to an increasingly interested public. TheIndia at LSE blog contains a growing number of articles from different perspectives.
And for those interested in original documents rather than commentary, the National Archives Opens in a new tab or window. have made the 171 First World War diaries of the Indian Infantry units deployed to the Western Front available to download via the First World War 100 Opens in a new tab or window. portal.
The relevance of India’s role for the UK
There’s a growing interest in writing that offers a deeper understanding of the First World War, and what it means for countries such as India, which are historically associated with the UK. The fact that these resources are now more easily available to the public can only be a positive trend.
As Lord Bhikhu Parekh, speaking at Asia House on 20 May 2014 Opens in a new tab or window., summarised: ‘It makes British people realise what they owe to Indians. Their history was not enacted just by them. If you go back in history, you see Indians, Arabs and other[s] all playing an important role. Throughout Britain’s history, they are as much the architects of British history as the British themselves.’
Conversely, he pointed out that ‘it is important for Indians in the UK to realise our history did not begin in the 1950s. Indians have been present in the UK in some form or another for several hundred years. It’s good for Indians in the UK to realise that they are part of Britain’s history — it helps bond a society and form shared memories of mutual gratitude.’
Taken From : https://www.britishcouncil.org/voices-magazine/how-was-india-involved-first-world-war

 

Swadashi Movement

The Swadeshi Movement: The Swadeshi movement had its genesis in the antipartition movement which was started to oppose the British decision to partition Bengal. The formal proclamation of the Swadeshi movement was made on August 7, 1905 at a meeting held at the Calcutta Town hall. At the August 7 meeting, the famous Boycott resolution was passed. Boycott was first suggested by Krishan Kumar Mitra in Sanjivani in 1905.

Phrases Of Swadeshi Movement
1	1905-1909	Movement confined to Bengal and launched as a protest movement
2	1909-1910	Countrywide spread of movement and launching of anti-colonical movement
3	1910-1911	Swadeshi movement merged with revolutionary terrorist movement of first phase and led to the foundation of numerous secret associations.

The boycott of British products was followed by the advocacy of Swadeshi and to buy Indian products only. The leaders of Bengal felt that mere demonstrations, public meetings and resolutions were not in of an something more concrete was needed and the answer was swadeshi and boycott.

An important aspect of the swadeshi movement was the emphasis placed on self-reliance or atmasaki. Self-reliance meant assertion of national dignity, honour and self-confidence.

Leaders of the Swadeshi movement beyond Bengal
Punjab	Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh
Delhi	Syed Haider Raza
Madras	Chidambaram Pillai
Maharastra	Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Andhra	Harisarvottam Rao

Swadeshi Movement and National Education
Setting of the Bengal Technical Institute Emphasis on education through vernacular medium Setting up of a National Council Of Education on August 15, 1906 Opening of way National College at Calcutta with Aurobindo Ghosh as its principle. Efforts of Rabindranath Tagor's Shantiniketan and Satish Mukherjee's Dawn Society to combine the traditional and modern systems of education.

Difference between Moderates and Extremists over Swadeshi and Boycott : The Extremists wanted to extend Swadeshi and Boycott movement from Bengal to the rest of the country. They also wanted to extend the boycott to every form of association with the Government. The Moderates, on the other hand, wanted to confine the boycott movement to Bengal and there who limit it to the boycott of foreign goods.

Simla Deputation

The Simla deputation proved a landmark in the history of modern India, because for the very first time the Hindu-Muslim conflict, which stared with the Urdu-Hindi controversy, was lifted to the constitutional plane. The Indians were not satisfied with the Indian council Act of 1892. Especially, the act failed to ensure the fair representation of Muslims. So, the Indians were agitating for more power. Due to the growing political pressure and increasing social unrest, the British Government decided to make constitutional reforms relating to the electoral bodies. On 20^th July 1906 John Morley the Secretary of State for Indian affairs, speaking on the Indian budget in the British parliament, announced that the Government wanted to increase the number of seats for the legislative councils and also their powers.

John Morley announcement created an anxiety among the Muslims of the sub-continent. The proposed reforms, if implemented, as was demanded by the Congress, would have suppressed the Muslims more under the Hindu Majority. Muslim leaders were of the view that neither elections nor nominations are fulfilled the requirements of the Indian Muslims, and that they needed a certain number of seats in both the central and provincial councils. Their seats should be filled up by votes of their own community.

The weekly Muslim Patriot penned down this important issue to clarify the assumption that India was inhabited by one class. It stated that India consists on a heterogeneous mass of different races whose interests were often different. It although supported the extended representation in the legislature, but also wished that the extension should be based on the class recognition and each distinct community should have representatives of its own in proportion to its population.

Now, many Mohammedans drew the attention of Mohsin-ul-Mulk, the secretary of the M.A.O College, Aligarh, to John Morley’s speech. So, Nawab Mohin-ul-Mulk wrote a letter on August 1906, to Archbold, Principal of the college, in which he expressed his apprehensions about the forthcoming constitutional changes. He was of the view that if combined election would be held on a more extended scale, Mohammedans will hardly get a single seat, while Hindus will carry more advantage because of their majority. He asked Archbold to advise for submit memorial from the Mohammedans to the Viceroy and to request his permission to accept a deputation for discus the issue of forthcoming constitutional amendments. Archbold contacted to Viceroy’s secretary and on 10^th August 1906. He informed Mohsin-ul-Mulk that the Viceroy was ready to meet the deputation.

After receiving the letter of Archbold, Nawab Sahib started to put together a deputation for this purpose. A meeting was held in Lakhnow on 16^th September 1906, in which an address, prepared by Sayyid Husain Bilgarami, was finalized by learned Muslim leaders. Finally, a deligation consisting of 35 leaders of Muslim community meet to the viceroy, under the leadership of Sir Aga Khan, in Simla on 1^st October 1906. The deputation was included the members from Bengal, Punjab, U.P., Bombay, Madras, Sindh, C.P., Deccan, and Delhi. The members of deputation were drawn from the Muslim elite class, but most of the members of deputation were connected with the Aligarh movement through the AIMEC. Besides these members, others were associated with different semi-political parties like Anjuman-i-Islam, National Mohammedan Association etc.

The deputation presented the memorial in front of viceroy, which was consisting of the demands that rights of separate electorates should be given to the Muslims; Muslims should be given three more seats in central legislature; quota should be given to the Muslims in civil services; Muslims should be given representation in universities senates and syndicates; an aid should be given to the Muslims for the establishment of a Muslin university.

Lord Minto, the Viceroy, assured the Muslim delegation that as long as he is associated with the administrative affairs if the country, their national rights would be preserved.

Congress made an allegation that the deputation was engineered by the Government to resist the activities of nationalists. A newspaper, Amrita Bazar Patrika, closed to the Congress, launched the propaganda that the deputation was the part of British policy of divide and rule. It also stated that the deputation did not represent the whole of the Muslim community and self-serving British officers were involved in its formation.

In order to prove the conspiracy theory, Congress leaders had referred to a certain letter written by Archold to an unknown person of Aligarh. There is not single solid evidence available to prove that the deputation was the part of British policy.

The deputation was purely representing the demands of the Muslim community. If it had been launched by the Government then there was no need of Mohsin-ul-Mulk to borrow a sum of four thousand rupees from King and King Company at the interest rate of 7% to meet the expenses of the Simla deputation. The company started correspondence, after the death of Mohsin-ul-Mulk, with the Muslim league for the return of loan and also threatened to get Moshin-ul-Mulk’s property confiscated.

The Simla deputation was unique, because for the first time Muslims were anxious to take their share in the political activities as a separate identity. Another purpose of the delegation was to get a silent permission form the Government to make a political platform for the representation of Muslims, and also was to take the Government into confidence. The demand of separate electorates, which were presented through the deputation, was the foundation of all future constitutional amendments for India. The inevitable consequence of deputation was the partition of Indian and the emergence of Pakistan.

Establishment of All India Muslim League

Muslim Leauge 1906-1911

After the creation of the Indian national Congress and its time as a ‘representative’ party for the people of the Indian sub-continent, there was felt a need to reassess its claims at unbiased representation. From the very start of its existence the Congress had shown clear its interest to safeguard the rights of Hindus, alone. Some of the Congress leaders adopted a revolutionary policy to establish Hindu Raj in the sub-continent under the guise of a national movement.

The prediction of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan Soon proved to be fact that, “Hindus and Muslims are two different nations who have different ideologies.” The Muslims of India were greatly disappointed by the anti-Muslim stance that the Congress seemed to have adopted. The events following the partition of Bengal and Urdu-Hindu controversy strengthened the desire of the Muslims to organize themselves politically as separate community. The birth of All India Muslim League at Dacca on 30th December 1906 came as an expression of that desire.

Following are the reasons for the establishment of Muslim league.

1. Indifferent Attitude of the Congress towards Muslims: All India National Congress was a pre-dominantly Hindu body. Its interests were always at odds ends to those of the Muslims. By 1906, Muslim leaders were convinced that they must have their own party which may speak for the community on all important occasions.

2. Educational and Economic Backwardness: Muslims had lagged far behind from the Hindus in education and economic progress. Educational and economic conditions could only be up graded by establishing a separate Muslims organization that could represent the wishes of the Muslims.

3. Urdu-Hindi Controversy: The Urdu-Hindu controversy began with the demand of Hindus to replace Urdu by Hindi as official language in Deva Nagari Script. Sir Anthony Macdonal, the then Governor of UP ousted Urdu from public offices. Congress clearly sided with Hindi and supported the movement against Urdu and there was no other political party to support Urdu. Thus, the need of formation of a Muslim political party was felt severely.

4. The Evolution of Minto Marley Reforms: The turning point came in the summer of 1906 during John Morley’s budget speech, in which he hinted of constitutional reforms. At that time Muslims did not have a political platform to demand their share. It was reasserted that they wanted a separate political platform.

5. The Success of Simla Deputation: Minto offered fullest sympathy to the Muslim demands. The success of Deputation compelled the Muslims to have a separate political association of their own.

6. To Save Muslim Entity: The belief uttered by sir Syed Ahmed Khan that the Muslims were somehow a separate entity. The Muslims did not believe that Hindus and Muslims formed one nation. They were different by religion, history, languages and civilization. It became essential for Muslims to establish a political party of their own.

A resolution to form the All India Muslim League was passed by Nawab Salimullah Khan and was seconded by Hakim Ajmal Khan, Maulana Muhammad Ali and Moulana Zafar Ali. The resolution was passed by All India Educational Conference on 30th December 1906. A committee was formed to prepare its draft constitution. Sir Agha Khan was appointed as President and Syed Hassan Balgrami was appointed as secretary, while Nawab Mohsim-ul-Mulk and Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk were made joint secretaries with six Vice- Presidents, a Central Committee with forty Members was also constituted. In this way Muslim league was established and become the sole representative of Muslims.

Knowing the circumstances which led to the formation of Muslim league was not difficult to make out what it aimed to. However, the Muslim league laid the following points as its objectives.

1. To create among Muslims the feelings of loyalty towards British Government and to remove misconception and suspicious.
2. To Safeguard the political rights of the Muslims and to bring them into the notice of the Government.
3. To prevent among the Muslims, the rise of prejudicial feelings against the other communities of India.

The first session of all India Muslim league was held at Karachi on 29th December, 1907 and was presided over by Adamji Peer Bhai.

It was being felt from the beginning that the All India Muslim League would not achieve considerable success without winning the British Public opinion to its side. Therefore, Syed Ameer Ali organized the branch of Muslim league at London. The inaugural meeting was held on 6th May 1908, at London Caxton Hall. It was participated by the Muslim and those British people who favoured their view point.

There come into being a political body which was to play a decisive role in the destiny of the Muslim peoples of the Indian sub-continent. The day the Muslim delegation won recognition of the demand of separate electorate, the course of the Muslim freedom struggle was charted. It was the beginning of the growth of Muslim national consciousness. It farmed visible institutional expression in the form of Muslim League which after a forty (40) years struggle was to achieve for the Muslims the culmination of their national aspiration, Muslim League became a mass movement of the Muslims and succeeded in achieving Pakistan in 1974. Actually the new breed of leadership like Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah was instrumental in its metamorphosis.

After the acceptance of the demand of separate representation in the Minto Morely reforms, it was common sense to have political party to fight elections for Muslim representation. Whatever may have been the effects of Muslim league, but it made clear that the interests of Muslims must be regarded completely separate from those of the Hindus. Any fusion of both the communities in future was not possible. It steered the ship of Muslim destiny safely through of Political chaos and turmoil to the safer harbour of Pakistan.

 

 HistoryPak

Partition Of Bengal

Partition of Bengal (1905-1911)

Posted by: HistoryPak

and adopted by out Blog.

 

The partition of Bengal was the most important event during the rule of Lord Curzon. It was carried out mainly for the convenience of administration. Bengal in those days was the biggest province of India extending over 1, 89, 000 square miles with a population of 80 million. It was comprising of Bengal, Behar and Orissa and was under the central of one lieutenant Governor. After Lord Curzon took charge as Governor General of India the discussion over the Partition began due to the following issues:

1.         Vastness of Province: The Province was spread over the area of 1, 89, 000 square miles with the population of 80 million, which was too vast to be managed by one lieutenant Governor. He could not make a tour for the whole province due to its vastness once in his tenure.

2.         Limited Sources of Communication: The sources of communication in the provinces were limited due to rivers and forests. The law and order condition of the provinces was also worst due to insufficient police and in-efficient management. Therefore the need of partition of province was felt severally.

3.         Difference of Language: There was also the difference of Languages and civilization of the natives of West Bengal and East Bengal. The natives of West Bengal considered themselves superior in civilization to the resident of East Bengal. The Condition demanded for the division of Provinces.

4.         Need of the time: The division of Bengal was the need of the time to develop trade in East Bengal and to promote the Port of Chittagong, which could be done only by division of the Provinces.

5.         Partition: The Partition of Bengal was thus calculated to restore efficiency in the Government and administration on one hand and encouraged local initiatives for progress and development on the other. Lord Curzon partitioned Bengal and formed two new provinces of manageable size – East and West Bengal. East Bengal consisted of Dacca, Mamansingh, Assam, Kaula, Rangpur, and Bogra district, the Dacca was capital of East Bengal constituted a majority MuslimProvince, while the Bihar and Orissa constituted a separate province to be called as West Bengal with the capital of Calcutta and become the Hindu Majority provinces.

East Bengal contained a population of eighteen million Muslims and twelve million Hindus. Whereas West Bengal had a population fifty four million of which 42 million where Hindus and thus was the Hindu majority province.

Muslims’ Response

It received a favorable response from the Muslims. It was thought that it would bring the emancipation of Muslims socially and economically. The Muslims welcomed the Partition of Bengal for the following reasons:
1.         In the majority province of East Bengal the Muslims would be free from Hindu dominance in economic field. They would get opportunities of services and advancement of agriculture.

2.         The city of Dacca, where the Muslims were in majority was the centre of Muslim culture. In Dacca Muslims had a great chance of success for social and cultural advancement than in Calcutta.

3.         The Partition could result in political uplift and securing represent action in the Government.

4.         The partition of Bengal relieved the Muslims from competing with Hindus, who were more advanced in every field of life.

Hindus Response

The Hindus did not accept it, as it dealt a telling blow to their monopolies and exclusive hold on economic, social, Political life of the whole of Bengal. They called it as a deliberate attempt by British Government

1.         The Partition of Bengal had brightened the possibility of betterment of Muslims; while the Hindu landlords, capitalists and traders wanted status quo and to continue the exploitation of the Muslims.

2.         Hindu lawyers also reacted to the partition of Bengal because they thought that the new province would have its separate courts and thus their practice would be affected.

3.         Hindu press was not different from that of Hindu advocates. Hindus had their monopoly over almost whole of the province press. They were afraid that new newspapers would be established which would decrease their income naturally.

4.         The Hindus launched Swadeshi Movement whose sole purpose was to boycott of British goods.

Annulment of the Partition

When Lord Hardinage assumed charge as Governor General of India Hindus again became active and sent a representation to him for the annulment of partition of Bengal. He recommended the same to the British Prime Minister for Indian Affairs. On the occasion of the visiting His Majesty George V to Indo-Pakistan and holding of Darbar at Delhi on 12^th December 1911 the partition of Bengal was cancelled.

The united Bengal was placed under a Governor and Assam was placed under a Chief Commissioner. This decision was shattering blow to Muslims. It left them sullen and disillusioned. Their anger and indignation had widespread repercussions. The Muslims leaders and intelligentsia condemned the decision as betrayal of worst kind.

Conclusion

The Muslims of India had appreciated the step and started turning in the favour of the British but the British soon gave in against the mounting pressure of Hindus which helped the Muslims to realize the importance of standing on their feet and to organize themselves politically. It also affirmed the apprehension of Sir Syed that the Muslims might submerge in the majority of Hindus and lose their se