Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
CONTROVERSIAL LITERATURE
AND POLITICAL CONTROL
IN BRITISH INDIA
19 0 7 - 19 + 7
N. Gerald Barrier
MLSU-CENTRAL LIBRARY
813tS C L
OD
MANOHAR
*?76
ijbn 0-8262-0159-8
Cogyright 1974by
The Curatorsof theUmTersity of Missouri
Library of Coc^ress Catalog Card Number 7J -92241
T o S o u rin R o y
D e p u ty D ir e cto r
National A rh h M f India (Ketired)
A K h ivh t. Scholar, wd F r i d o f Scholar*
PREFACE
viii
Preface
llcists were not unique. How and why the British nude certain
decisions, and the results of those decisions, should have implica
tions for anyone who is concerned with other dimensions of free
dom of the press in any part of the world. The shifting rationale
for interference with printed opinion and the mechanisms de
veloped for exercising that control have universal implications.
Research on this topic has passed through several stages. In
1965, while exploring the politics of one region (Punjab) ,1 con
tinually came upon mystifying references in Government o f In
dia Home proceedings to proscription and banning. I had seen
occasional references to banned worts in the standard political
surveys, but the extent of material startled me. As much as 10
per cent of an annual index would be devoted to listing individual
tides seized by the British. Pursuit of the subject might have
been postponed or neglected except for an accident: I purchased
two sets of tracts in Lahore and London that, on examination,
turned out to be essentially banned (proscribed) writings. Simul
taneously, I discovered that the India Office and the British Mu
seum had preserved more extensive collections. N o one had uti
lized the publications because they had been locked away since
1947. The existence of a valuable, untapped resource on recent
Indian history led me in two directions. 1 began handlisting the
surviving material and then moved back into the records to piece
together why and how works were seized.
My research has received support from various sources. Grants
from the National Endowment for the Humanities, the American
Institute of Indian Studies, the American Council of Learned
Societies, the Social Science Research Council, and the Research
Council of the University of Missouri-Columbia supported re
search and writing. M y assistants, Ashok Mahindroo and-Sukhwant Singh (Devinder), helped at the early stages. Satya Pal
Nirash assisted in preparing descriptions of vernacular items and
labored long in teaching me Panjabi- Prem Singh-Joined me in an
intense foray into the London collections during the summer of
1971. The India Office Library and Records, the British Mu
seum, and the National Archives o f India extended permission
to study in their collections. At the India Office, Miss E. M.
Dimes, Mrs. Usha Tripathi, Miss Mary Lloyd, Miss J. R . Wat
son, Mrs. Valerie Weston, Dr. Anthony Domahiddy, and Mr.
Martin Moir gave particular assistance and encouragement.
Mr. J. H . Eisenegger.Dt. G.Ti.Marrison, and M r. Peter Stocks
contributed in many ways at the British Museum. The friendship
and advice of Miss Dhan Keswani, Mr. B. C. Gupta, and Mr.
Sourin Roy at the National Archives of India, New Delhi, made
possible systematic research in British proceedings. Without the
Preface
iz
CONTENTS
P r e f a c e .................................................................................... yu
PartOne: The Politics o f Proscription. . . . . . . . .
163
GOVERNM EN T, POLITICS,
AND THE PRESS
IN IM PERIAL BRITISH IN D I/
The rationale for British Empire in India varied with time sad
personality, but a persistent theme runs through the period of
colonial rule. Maintenance o f order and with it survival o f the
bureaucracy rested on the governments sbility to operate within
a complex and expanding political system. The British stood at
the apex of the system, periodically attempting to develop the
means and tactics to implement political goals. High on the list
of imperial priorities was retention of decisionmaking and policy
functions. This control in turn necessitated satisfactory handling
of pressures and expectations from numerous sources.
Decisions on allocation of resources had to be made in light of
inputs from the publics of India and England, Parliament, po
litical parties, and bureaucrats. These demands were met both in
formal structures (particularly legislative councils) and in daily
decisions at each administrative level. Under most circumstances,
the Government of India infrequently used force to deal with de
mands or with direct challenges in the form of violence and rev
olutionary activity. The foreign-doroinated bureaucracy learned
to compromise and to manipulate patronage so as to maintain
support groups and isolate opponents.
The functioning o f government involved coordination within
the bureaucratic chain stretching from 'Whitehall to the district
office. In London, the Secretary o f State and his advisory Indian
Council exercised ultimate supervision of Indian affairs, but
the Government of India (headed by the Governor General
and Executive Council) formulated most all-India policies in
cooperation with home authorities and had the primary responsi
bility for Implementation o f those policies. The central govern
ments immediate subordinates, the local governments* (pres
idency and provincial administrative units) dealt with issues
directly affecting their domains. Similarly, the thousand or so
Indian Civil Sen ice officers in charge of districts made localized
Contents
Nationalist Biography: A n t h o lo g ie s ................................. 241
Pathans, Redshirts ..................................................................243
Police, Military, Indian O ffic ia ls ...........................................244
Princely S t a t e s ..............................................................246
Revolution, V i o l e n c e ............................................................. 246
Rowlatt Agitation, First Non-Cooperation Campaign . . 253
Second Non-Cooperation Campaign . . . . . . . .
255
Second W orld W a r, Quit India" . * ...................................260
Students, Y o u t h ......................................................................262
Workers, F a r m e r s ........................................................ . 263
M iscellaneous...........................................................................266
Section 4. Patriotic Poetry, Songs. -............................................... 270
B ib lio g r a p h y ........................................................298
Author I n d e x .......................................................................... . 3 1 0
Subject I n d e x ....................................................................................318
Abbreviation*
BM British Museum
C.C. Chelmsford Collection
CRL Center for Research Libraries, Chicago
The depository for the South Asia Microform Project
CRP Crown Representative Papers
G I Government of India
GIPOL Government o f India Home Political Proceedings
IOL India Office Library Collection
IOR India Office Records Collection
J&P Judicial and Public Department Proceedings, IOL
M .C. Min to Collection
NAT National Archives o f India Library Collection
PG Punjab Government
P1B Proscribed Indian Books, British Museum Collection
ILA. Readily available in many libraries
R&L Records and library Department Proceedings
( 1B 8 4-19 12 ), IOR
R&R Registry and Record Department Proceedings
(1 9 1 3 -1 9 4 8 ),IOR
UP United Provinces
T h e Politict of Proscription
T h e Politics o f Proscription
na-i<xv.
T he Politics o f Proscription
Friend.'* The British, at the extreme of their efforts to control
the press, discussed setting up papers to combat lies and to
clear up misunderstandings hut actually did little in the way of
ropaganda.
Throughout the nineteenth century, the Government o! India
oreferred a low-key policy of informal influence over the press
nstead of direct subsidies and persistent application of penalties.
The dreaded gagging act was never used, and only a handful
of prosecutions undeT Sections 124 A and 153 A occurred between
1870 and 1900.,J The bureaucracy remained concerned with
what Indians printed, particularly in times of crisis such as the
Mutiny or a disturbance on the frontier, but the limited scope of
Indian journalism and the general reluctance of editors seriously
to confront British authority did not seem to justify legislating
punitive measures. B y the end of 1905, however, the situation
had changed dramatically.
The Viceroyalty of Lord Curzon, 18981905, brought to
prominence political trends that had been developing since mid
century. One factor was the emergence of regional and communal
political groupings that criticized and put pressure on the bureau*
cracy. A t first working within accepted constitutional channels, a
segment of these politicians became disillusioned with reliance
on petitions and British good will. They accordingly explored
newtnethods and strategies so as to inject themselves more fully
into official decisionmaking. A natural offshoot of these concerns
was a move toward mass politicizing, as exemplified by Bal GangadharTHats popular festivals in Maharashtra and later his labor
campaign in Bombay. Another was a tendency to decry the In
dian National Congress as an effective vehicle for political change.
Indians looked to foreign countries for models of successful pol
itics or back to their own cultural heritage for inspiration and
legitimacy. Accumulated official injustice, the example of the
Japanese and Italian peoples efforts to build their nations, the
imperial attitudes and policies personified by Lord Curzonall
reinforced a new militancy and sense of nationalist mission. The
organizations reflecting these trends did little to disguise their
12. Precis. GIPOL May 1911, 15D. In the Panjab, the pro-British
actUitie* tfT "The Punjab Patriot (subsidized by the gOTermBect) created
great tendon. On such experiments, tee GITOL July 1509, 62A.
13. Statistics From Stuart note (March 9, 190?) and Adamson note
O'ebruary 24.. 1907 KGIPOL July 19QT-, 17&-L8QA.. A. ttw item* juiytd
dangerous on
mues, such !UVan-iilam, were denied entry to India.
Background on two ArabU works and a paper from Qiandemajore is in
Central Rultt and Ordtn Made Under Enactment) in Force tn Brititk
India,11,7274.
ultimate goals: The foreign bureaucracy must be watched, censored, and eventually forced to withdraw; colonial domination
must give way to self-rule.**
Indian literature became a major vehicle for communicating*
and stimulating the new political ideology. Among other means,
mass politics involved using printed matter to affect a widened
audience. By 1905, the potential for developing this means ex
isted throughout the subcontinent. Hundreds of printing presses
regularly turned out books and pamphlets. An increasing num
ber o f these were polemic in tone and focused on politics. The
relative cheapness o f printing also reinforced a trend toward using
publications as a means for political proselytization. A t a cost
o f less than 25 Rupees, a propagandist could publish a 16-page
tract for distribution to the literate or to be r a d aloud to
villagers.15
Journalism provided an even more effective alternative for dis
semination of appeal and ideology. The Indian periodical in
dustry had increased markedly since its early beginnings in the
eighteenth century. In 1905, for example, 1,359 newspapers
and journals reached an estimated 2 milfion subscribers.14 As
indicated by the table on page 20, every region had a network
o f periodicals published both in English and the local languages.
The content of the press reflected the awakening mood of In
dian politics. Although newspapers previously had launched
sporadic attacks on the British, the first substantial signs of tlu
new militancy among journalists surfaced just prior to 1900.
TUak's Kesari lambasted the government; for that he was prose
cuted, as were the editorial staffs of the Bangabasi and later, the
Bande Mataram and Yugaittar. By 1905, over 200 newspapers
commented on political issues. Most of these, according to British
14. Elements la this protest are analyzed in J. R, McLane, "The Devel
opment o f Nationalist Ideas and Tactics and the Policies o f the Govern
ment o f India, 18971907" (Ph.D. diss., University o f London, 1961);
Richard Isn Cashmsn. T ie Politics of Mass Recruitment" (Ph.D. diss.,
Duke Uoivenity, 1969). Lajpat Hai presents an interesting contemporary
history in Young IruJta, 2d ed., rev.
15. Discussed in Kenneth W . Jones, Sources for Arya Ssmaj History,"
The Indian Archive*, 18 (19 69 ), 20-36; N. G. Barrier, "The Sikh Re
surgence, 1 8tS -l947," The Indian Arehnet, 18 (19 69 ), 45-63. Printing
costs based on discussion in Chief Khalsa Diwsn proceedings at the C.K.D.
headquarters. Amritsar, and comments in Munsha Singh Dukhi, Jrvan
Bhai Sahib Bhai Mohan Singh Vaidji (Amritsar: nxl.} .
16. Statistics from Statement! of Engliih, Foreign, Angto-Vemaeular
and Vernacular Neietpapert Published In India end Burma During' the
Tear J905, a confidential police report f Simla: Indian Heme Department,
1907). 210 periodicals hod circulations between 1 and 200; 911, 201
1,000; 204, 1,001; unknown, 34. Several newspaper*, such as the
Bengalee, Knar], and llitoxadi, reached very large audienccs.
10
BaluchUUn, I
East Bengal, Bengal, 179
Bombay, 320
Portugueie Iodia, 9
Burma, 54
A jmer-Merwara, 9
English, 265
English and a
vernacular, 62
Tawul,73
Hindi, 78
Other European, 16
Two er more Indian
vernaculars, 38
Urdu, 336
Gujarati, 97
Marathi, 93
Malayalam, 54
S t o h l .I l
Khasi, J
Kanarese. 30
Telega,29
Burmese, 20
Pas}ah1,12
Persian, 2
Assamese, I
Nagra, 1
Unknown, 14
to accumulate.1*
17. Statistics drown from Statement*- A detailed study of publication
trends in one province ij in Barrier and Wallace, The Punjab Prtu.
18. Based on British commentary in Statement!. Also, review of press
Infinence in eeretariar botes, GIPOL July 1907, 178-160A; Prem Narain,
pTt> and Pcliiit* in Jndia, 1835-1995, trel taut thajAeii
ItatitA
Campbell Ker, Peliiieoi Troubles tn India, I907-I9J7, toodtr,tial C.l JJ.
handbook.
II
llMr.RcrNt P o M - r m m H ii t h m A p m is m t r a t io s
Iluflt into the nature of British rule In India were at I m l three
weaknesses thai potmtiilly affected attempts to confront these
politics] challengr*. First, thf government did not consist o f a
unified bureaucracy, with elearcut chains o f command and im
plementation. Second, the British lacked b tested system o f sur*
seitlance and control specifically designed to meet organised
resistance. Finally, the bureaucracy had not resolsed the inherent
ideological tension between theoretical adherence to democratic
Meat and ultimate m m in e to repmsion at a mean* o f political
survival.
Internal problems plagued t!ie Indian governmentdifficulties
that were usually not apparent until crises demanded rapid, uni
fied action. Red tape c lo s e d administrative channel?, and co
ordination constantly tlireatmrd to break down.** Besides this
normal atate o f a/fain, Curiona attempts at eentralitation
brought (o the nurface the latent suspicions and conflict o f au
thority that existed between the Government o f India and the
provinces. When Curzcn tried to eliminate what he judged were
unwarranted prerogatives of decision making among his subordinates, the resulting clamor le/i the bureaucracy dhided and
jealous of its power. With Currons resignation (1 9 0 5 ), heads of
local governments preferred to return to the earlier pattern of
compromise and, on some matten, open negotiation with the
center.* CeTtainly they were sensitive to any efforts by the central
government to resume powers that had been tacitly reserved for
men on the spot. It wa.s a major task to bring into agreement dis
cordant members o f government and to unify and coordinate
an effective all-India campaign esen in the face o f impending
danger.
Center-provincial relations also affected a second trouble spot
of administration: the paucity of institutions and strategies cal
culated to combat widespread threats. The government had an
assortment of press and sedition laws, but these had been applied
infrequently, and their effectiveness was untested. Similarly, the
rudimentary system for investigating political crime, which like
legislation had developed in response to particular episodes rather
than on a planned basis, had sustained no major test. Local police
20. TJib best orer-sll study on the inner operations of ihe bureaucracy
la In Bradford Spanpenburjj, "Status and Policy,' (Ph-D. <fiss 0u ie
University, 1967).
21. Administrative reform* discussed In DvM Dflks, Curzon in Indie,
1,22I-48.'lTie Intricate nfKt[t(on and compromises affecting one nieca
e f legislation are described In N. G. Barrier, Tht Punfab Alienation of l^tnd
BUIe f 1900.
12
T he Politics o f Proscription
13
]4.
T h e Politics o f Proscription
15
m tia fite r 2
17
The years 1905 and 1906 were uneasy for British administra
tors. Curion had pone, but his successor, Lord Minto, found
morale in the Indian Cit il S m ice at a low level. Another Curzonian legacy was a menacing burst o f political agitation that ex
ceeded earlier demonstration* in quantify and fervor. Much of
the unrest had its origin in the decision to partition Dengal de
spite the protests of well-organized Bengali politicians. There
followed numerous confrontations and violence, the form and
spirit of which soon spread to other parts of India. In discussing
the unrest, the Government of India considered whether accel
erated prosecution might help contain radical writings. The sec
retariats study dragged on throughout 1906, when suddenly the
emergence o f anti-British sentiment in Punjab, a province noted
for iu quiescence and a major recruitment center for the Indian
army, brought the issue to a head.* The resulting deliberations
reflected the seriousness f the problem and the varied opinions
as to how it should be handled.
A member of the Governor Generals Council, Erie Richards,
sounded the alarm after reviewing a C.I.D. report on the Punjab
press. Sedition, he claimed, had reached such proportions that the
government, unknowing, stood on the brink of disaster.* Most
o f his colleagues agreed, and in typical bureaucratic fashion, re
acted by writing long minutes on the subject. A dominant theme
in these notes was the multifaceted threat posed by Indian pub
licists. Papers could influence Parliament with calculated lies
or terrorize moderate politicians. In addition, the councilors S3W
the role of books and newspapers in demoralizing a generation
of Indian students as a basic danger, summarized by this secre
tarial comments A Press which deliberately perverts history and
2. A drtaiffd lutrey o f politic*, 1905-1907, is In a new book by Aruo
Chandra Guha, Firtt Spark c l Revolution, pp. 1133. Oa the Puojb situ
ation, N. C . ftarrier, TTve Punjab Disturbances of lOOT* (Ph.D. dUs.,
Duke University, IC6(S)j Sri Ram Sharma, Punfab in Ftrment.
-3. E. Richard* note (December 23, 1906), nil *ubstjuent notes,
CIPOL July J907, 17B-180A.
18
T h e Politics o f Proscription
19
20
T h e Politics o f Proscription
9.
A<ide from the Tkerrgtl correspondence, the best source on Morley'*
daily activity is the diary of his secretary, Arthur Hirtzel (IOL, Home
Mi*. 864). The relationship between the two men ami background on
their respective viewpoints mre covered in the following-; Wasti, Lord
Motto-, Stephen E. k o n , John Morley at the India Office, 7905-19/0;
Stanley A. Wolpert, Morley and India, 190S-1910-, Martin Gilbert, Ser
ven t cf India.
10. Morley to Minto, September 18, 1908, M.C. Also, Morley to Minto,
May 7, 1908.
11. Morley fo Minto, July 13, 1903, Jane 21, 1907. Moriey's favorite
caricature o f the I.C.S. w*s tthinovnik," a reference to Russian minor
bureaucrats viho aymboliied red tape and dim-witted activity.
t2. Ilirtxcl diary. May 13, 23,1907. Alao, comments by Dunlop Smith
InGflbert.Srrwinf.p. 158.
J
r
MaylO^lWJ?' ** Minto, May IB, 1906, M.C. Ilim d diary, January 17,
21
22
T h e Politics o f Proscription
23
21
25
26
T h e Politics o f Proscription
C*CTemret
ms&a/si n ta
tsy'srari.
27
28
T h e Politics o f Proscription
29
SO
T h e Politics o f Proscription
31
tion o f the new act. The British seized just a few presses in 1908
and 1909. In at least one instance, the bureaucracy defended, not
itself but a sometime political opponent. T w o numbers o f the
Bombay Hindu Punch (M arch and August 1 9 0 9 ) called for
revenge against moderates who collaborated with officials. Gokhale, the articles commented, should be a prune target because
he sat on the Legislative Council while young- nationalists were
giving up their lives. The secretariats notes on the proposed
prosecution o f the paper expressed delight at the opportunity to
perhaps cultivate moderate support: An excellent case to take
action in. W e hare often been charged with deserting our friends;
here we shall come forward in defence o f our most effective
critic."**
The Government o f India combined stringent penalties for
incitement with doubled efforts to punish less dangerous forms
of writing. In 1908 the staffs of over twenty journals were con.
victed under 124A. One prosecution especially drew attention,
the trial of the extremist Tilak for defending the conspirators in
Muzaffarpur and suggesting that the murders demonstrated a
link between religious duty and violence.*0
Difficulties in initiating proceedings against offenders occa.
sionally derived from local governments and not the India Office.
The Punjab, for example, hesitated at prosecuting neivspapere
thought seditious by the Imperial C.I.D. Stung by the Panjabee
riots, the provincial authorities responded to repeated warnings
with a policy o f inaction. The Punjab supposedly was quiet, and
therefore press trials should be avoided; It would be a pity to.
give the editors of such petty prints as Jhang Slal and Hitkari,
both of which ore reported to be in a poor way, the benefit of a
press prosecution for sedition which might tend to disturb mat*
ters generally in the Province. *1 In addition, the government
resisted pressure to break up the Bharat Mata Agency, a pub
lishing firm that specialized in political literature. Prodding from
the Indian government finally prevailed, but according to a sec
retariat note, the Punjab remained the only province in India
where sedition is allowed to flourish with impunity."**
On the whofe, however, the Government o f India believed that
59. Ri?lry note (September 28 ,1 90 9), in GIPOL January 1910,154
1S4A{ bicigTfusd Sn CIPOL- Jufy
J24-J25A, On toother enntn*venial case, Ban*le Mataram, see GIPOL January 1909, 75-93A.
60. Summaries of the trial in The Trial of Bal Gangadhar Tilak,
61. TO to GI, 1044SB. July 30, 1908, GIPOL October 1903,32-34A.
62. Adamson note (May 18, 1909); Stuart note (May 18, 1909),
CIPOL October 3909, 145-I53A. Final prosecutions discussed in GIPOL
Maj 1910,11S-117A
32
T h e Politics o f Proscription
33
T h e Politics o f Proscription
34
1907
xvoa
1909
1910
Madras
27
5S
64
63
UJ>.
74'
88
89
154
Benge]
57
64
165
165
CJ\
44
47
57
58
Punjab Bombay
34
43
39
57
46
64
54
77
Total
284
351
485
525
35
38
T h e Politics o f Proscription
89. Morley note (June IS, 1009), J.*tP 1909, 217- in time file, triegrnn ef Julr 1?, 1909.
00. MarUy tn Min.o, Aw-aw $, \<X, M C. Y a in l. K ^ w n r a g ,
p. 272
'
39
35
T h e Politics o f Proscription
E m ergence o f P .e s t Controls
37
The French
the Imperial C.I.D., which had the tract
notified ^Jer the Sea Customs Act j o as to capture additional
coy':-* that Here being shipped direct!)1from Sarj Francisco.*9
The India Office soon became the n e n e center for disseminat
ing intelligence on Indians abroad. As early as 1907, Scotland
Yard began shadowing radicals in London at the request o f the
India Council, and detectives followed John Morley for a time
to protect him from imagined harm. Morley generally did not
involve himself in surveillance, leaving such matters to the Per*
manent Under Secretary, Arthur Godtey, the head of the Judicial
and Public Committee, Lee-Wamer, and Morley*s political aidede-camp, Curron W ylie.M The J&P Committee studied issues of
T he Indian S ociohgut and notified India o f particularly danger
ous articles. Despite this help, the Indian government felt that
the India Office cared little about controlling sedition in London
or for sending useful intelligence. Morley did not see the India
Office in the role of policeman or prosecutor, although he admitted
to Minto that the Home Office and Scotland Yard were illequipped to handle Indian conspirators:
They have no sort of agency to distinguish Hindu from Muslim,
or Verms from Varna. They are entirely unfitted to obtain infor
mation about secret Indian societies, or traffic in arms, or the cir
culation of certain pamphlets. . . . Both you and I can easily
understand that the ordinary square-toed English constable, even
In the detective branch, would be rather clumsy in tracing your
wily Asiatics. Meanwhile, the only proposal seems to be, by way
o f experiment, the engagement of an Indian police officer (retired)
who is to work under the direction o f somebody in this office. On
the whole, 1 doubt whether this office should in any way make its
own connections here and in foreign capitals, with us as persons
whom they may consult when they like, and who, in turn, may tell
them anything we may think useful.*1
When Scotland Yard did bring in examples of seditious writings,
Morley avoided prosecution because a case might publicize the
03. The pamphlet and proceedings are in GIPOL June 191*. 7S-77A.
I am obliged to Professor ilmily Brown, (/Diversity o f Northern Iowa, for
this and other ttStrtoce* relating to Hat Days!, Japan also forced closure
of especially virulent publications, most notably Bark&tutlah's Itfomie
f ralrmity (published fn Tokyo), due to pressure from the British Foreign
Office. Bose, Revolutionaries, n. 69.
84. llirtzel diary, May 21, 1907; cotes in P&S files 1907, 2573 and
3313.
85. Morley to Minto, June 4, 1008, M.C. Other correspondence relat
ing to the situation includes Kitchener to Minto, January 22, 1908; Stuart
to Piahey, June 19, 1908; Coldstream to D. Smith, Jan. 2, 1909, all M.C.
Ironically, the first British inclination, when confronted with revolution
aries in 1907, was to import European detectives to track dawn sedition-
40
T h e Politics o f Proscription
41
42
T h e Politics o f Proscription
portant step would have been taken towards checking the spread
of disloyal views founded on ignorance of the true facts of the
administration of the country. 101
Provincial heads generally favored support of pro-British jour
nals on two conditions. First, the Imperial exchequer was to
cover the costs, either directly or through expanded provincial
budgets. Second, respondents agreed, funds should go to papers
published in vernacular languages rather than to those published
in English, English periodicals, they suggested, reached only
an elite group, and anyway, they seemed to be more loyal in tone
than their vernacular counterparts. The Government of India
reviewed the replies and then decided that circumstances dictated
a new effort at influence of the press. In May of 1910, Minto
initiated subsidies to journals for a year, at the end of which time
the approach would be evaluated.,M
The sole negative response came from the Punjab. The pro
vincial government opposed ties to papers involved in political.
discourse and countered with a suggestion that a Lahore educa
tional journal be enlarged to present correct views" o f British
policy. When the Indian government refused, the Punjab au
thorities attempted to show why subsidies would be unwise.
Parts o f the document merit being reproduced at length because
they demonstrate how one segment of the bureaucracy evaluated
the variables involved in manipulation of press opinion:
In the Punjab religion plays * very Important part in polities, and
official discretion ho* ever to be on the alert to bold the balance In
the rivalries o f the three principal sects. A newspaper, to secure
circulation, readers, and influence, must either be an organ frankly
hostile to the Government or be the champion o f the interests of
the Muhammadan, Hindu or Sikh community. The state-subsidized
paper would of course be debarred from resort to the matter and
methods which lend zest and relish to the journals which cultivate
sedition. I f religious controversy and sectarian politics also were
to be banned, there would be nothing to commend the subsidized
journal to the ordinary Punjab reader. . . . Experience has shown
that the championing o f religious interests in the vernacular press
in four cases cut of fire resolves itself into n indictment either o f
Coremment'or o f some local departmental official for exhibiting
partiality to the rival sect. Btrt If this feature in Provincial journal
ism thus eonstituten an obstacle to the Government of India scheme.
It is not without its ccmpenssling JyUges. The ritaitian whid}
the Government of India scheme is designed to ameliorate is one
In which the masses are contemplated as being fed with a stream
E n t r g m c r c f P m * C cntrolt
43
cf
47
44
T h e P olilict o f Proicriptkm
45
but the two adamant opponents of the move, Wilson and Sinha,
helped postpone serious debate with the argument that violent
language alone did not justify granting wider powers to the gov
ernment. Neither Indian politicians nor London would agree.11*
O ily a political turn for the worse, a new outbreak cr outrage,
could create the circumstances favorable to an extension of press
controls.
T h e 1 9 1 0 P utss A c t a n d I t s O p e r a t i o n
On November 38, 1 9 0 9 , a bomb bounced harmlessly off the
48
T h e Politics o f Proscription
cause why security should not be deposited, and later, the magis
trate would initiate the proceedings for declaring the security
forfeit.*"
Indian opposition would have been more vocal except for
Mintos efforts to cultivate legislative support. In talks and at
private dinners, Minto tried to convince critic* that the govern*
ment would not misuse the new powers. Moreover, he promised
Gokhale that leniency would be exercised In dealing with already
operating presses.11* These tactics were important because the
recent constitutional reforms had expanded the over*all size, fuse*
tion, and Indian representation of the Imperial Legislative Coun
cil. The British still had a comfortable bloc o f official and
nominated members, but Minto wished to avoid antagonism and
consequent polarization on key issues.
Mintos lobbying contributed to a relatively peaceful passage
of the bill cn February 8. GokhaJe presented amendments to
limit the securities and executive discretion, but most Indians
joined with the government to negate his proposals by a heavy
majority. In reviewing the proceedings, Minto told Morley that
he was proud of the legislatures responsible" debate. Charsc*
teristically, the Governor General salved the feelings of moder
ate politicians (and Morley) by releasing Bengali deportees the
day after enactment of the press bill.***
Maneuvering a controversial measure through legislative
shoals was relatively simple compared with putting it into opera
tion. The initial step involved instructions on procedure. A
March 1 circular contained the Indian governments views as
to the task facing the bureaucracy. First, each local unit would
be expected to assume responsibility for enforcing security obli
gations. The circular did not establish guidelines on which new
papers should give security, but it did mention dispensing with
deposits in case of hardship (as with smatl presses). In order to
make security provisions effective, governments must reexamine
and strengthen arrangements for the surveillance of publications.
The instructions also stressed the need for communication within
the bureaucracy. Local governments could initiate forfeitures
after consultation with legal personnel, but they most keep the
Government of India informed.1*1
Two other circulars supplemented the initial statement The
118. Committee report and notes in JScP 1910. 989. Also. Rot. Lem
(1915 } , pp. <(5-50.
119. Council noting on negotiations, GIPOL July 1910, 5-32A; MJato comment*. Minto to Morley, February 9,1910, M.C.
120. Minto to Morley,February9,1910,M.C.
121. Circular 324-333, March 1, 1910 and notes, GIPOL July 1910,
so
T he Politics o f Proscription
51
54r
T he Politics o f Proscription
55
grncc and coordination equipped the British itli tested, welloiled machinery that came into use in later battles with their
opponents in India.
Statistics on press action indicate that the raj utilized that
machinery jelecthely. Ten papen Mere prosecuted under the
Incitement* Act, all prior to 1911. Between January 1909 and
D e m !x r 1010, the British initiated 57 proceedings against
publicists under the penal cotie, the next two jcars, only 20.
Instead of re-vorting to punitise measures, the government generally preferred invoking the pm entite sections of the 1910 Prtns
Act. A total of 273 securities were demanded from proprietors
c f printing presses ( }PhO-191.1) and 158 deposits fromivwn
o f newspapers. During the same time, local governments pro
scribed approximately 200 tracts, books, handbills, and posters,
and about 100 individual issues of newspapers.1* Chen the ex
citement and fuste surrounding the press hill's enactment, such
wide use of powrr would seem logical. Thrre were signs, how
ever, cf British restraint. Most securities were minimal (Rs.
2 0 0 -5 0 0 ), and o f die 1,341 presses and 1,0G8 newspapers be
gun (1 9 I O -1 9 I3 ), less than 15 per cent were required to de
posit any amount. 41 Moreover, the government forfeited a total
of 15 deposits and did not seize a single press.
Indian authorities undoubtedly would have gone further ex
cept for the political variables that affected their decisions. Al
though (he rationality of bureatrcratic decisionmaking can l>c
exaggerated, four factors appeared constantly in proceedings on
Indian publications. First, assumptions concerning colonial ad
ministration supplied bodt impetus for and checks on extensive
controls. Maintaining the legitimacy o f British rule was a para
mount concern of officialdom. Among other factors this meant a
defense of the rulers izzatface" or honor. Indians theoretically
respected the raj because of its image of strength, its unques
tioned authority; as secretaries repeatedly noted in the files, they
expected swift reaction to seditious literature. If the bureaucracy
instead pursued a policy of toleration, those vi hose attitudes were
not firm would question whether the British had the courage or
143.
SutUtirt eoHeeted from JSrP 1 9 10 , ] J 2 1 f CJPOL JaJ/ J91Q.*
198199Ai May 1913, 9-13A. HritWi companion* hare been adjusted
\v(th data from files on pific works. Although the records are useful,
great caution must be exercised In usinif them because the central aeeretariat (and the India Office) never hod full information from Iocs] depart1+4. These approximate figures are bated on tables in 011*01. February
1914, 67-68.4. adjusted lightly with data from other files. The govern
ment prepared lists <>f tracti, but compilations varied.
56
T h e Politics o f Proscription
57
31
904
MU
4
54
2T
lift
e
21i
8
r
Prowcs'tfQ
a
32
43
IB
T
1
fW th u t*
a
IV tn b p
_
i
4
1
25
9
-
11
1
S
-
It
--- -- - - --X i r.~--------- IS
7*\ rw\irr
mignatKM f
povrmor, lo tto (lbltn>n to Minto, Jun 8 J,
1XS. Ju lr 3 1 , tWW, Minto lo Ibbetw i, Ju ly 2 1 , 23. 190rt, M C.>.
1(1!, T itiln k iutl no data ( U tu tn l from GtPOL 5 (ir IU13, 5-13A|
C11t)L Febmiry 1914, 6?-6SAi April 1914, 41-46A. I t * rrtcmtloni
merit*<nl ettiirr tlta prrttla (n tbti* *t*tit(c*.
58
T h e Politics o f Proscription
60
T h e Politics o f Prescription
61
62
32
A dd rrw d to Army
Addreswd to Sith*
Appeal* to Student*
Acii-HindaTheraes
5
4
3
4
Anti-Mutlhn TTieirei
Cow Protection
2
P5.;
28
Cowttnetiiarie*- Historic*
o f N atnotiinn (Iw Jia,
SacJudisj Mutiny)
27
U b torin e f Rerelatlw i
Outsidt
tm h , R u u iu Polities
flomb MittoaU
S y t w h t t,T r iil Reyert*
B*ojr*phi-*
S
4
W ork, on Tjlak
Son yi, yoemi
2
19
9
18
33
12
*lo
dressed to Sikh*."
16 2 . Several prtrtcribetl n-erts are dHcnssed to Guha. S/>-rZ, vhiTr
Dliarair Paul Sarin,Infurnc* ol P'Afxat M-rr-n
Lucrafsrr,
19-17, *nal)-ir themes in controversial poldi<_ji
163. Background in GIPOl- M j) 1911), ID "The Hrrthii bsnin] tte
book vijdvnat Mein- a copv, tnow cij on!v that ~tt n a bic- book an-i that its
tone it WjMv mBs7nmator>'' <comrwtit bx J H DuBm-lav. Juk 21.
li>09).
'
63
163.
64
T h e Politics o f Proscription
65
67
68
T h e Politics o f Proscription
The Ghadar group end the National Party aimed their publi
cations at several audiences- W h y India Is in Revolt Against
British Rule, for example, attempted to influence neutralist atti
tudes toward the Government of India. England supposedly
entered the war to capture German colonies and to extend her
control over other Asiatics; a concomitant message was that Ger
many alone sympathized with Asian aspirations.* In addition, the
Berlin party prepared brochures in Urdu and Panjabi for distri
bution among Indian soldiers. Dropped from German aircraft,
the material played up poor pay, racism, and British attacks on
Indian religions.4 Similar themes appeared in books and tracts
directed toward India. British atrocities and pro-Turkish rheto
ric were prominent in at least twenty items.5
International politics also affected the attitude of Indian Mus
lims toward the raj. Emerging from a phase of intense self-ex
amination and revitalization, Muslims were particularly sensitive
to issues that affected their interests. Some Muslim politicians,
for example, interpreted the 1911 decision to reverse the parti
tion o f Bengal as a move hostile to their community, and they
raised the cry, Islam in danger!" An incident that centered on
a mosque in Cawnpur, United Prorace, evoked a similar re-,
sponse.' The question of Turkeys future and the related fate o f
the Muslim political institution, the khilafatc, became especially
important because of this growing concern with self-interest and
cultural heritage. According to one section of Muslim leadership,
Britains support of Turkeys enemies indicated yet another for
eign effort to subvert Islam. Tw o newspapers led the pro-khilafate campaign. The Comrade, edited by Muhammad Ali, re
printed caustic essays on British policy and the Balkan situation,
lowing: Thieny Preyer, Atgypten und Indien (Berlin: Ullstein, 19 1 6 ) ;
Gang* Rao Grahmputra, Indun: Stine Stellung sum
und xu
Seiner zu Kunft (Tublingen: 1 9 1 6 ) : A . K , Viator, DeutichLxnd, Anuilan
Ind im Schkita] (Leipzig: 1 9 1 6 ) ; Hermann Von Staden, Indien in Weltkriege (Stuttgart! 1 9 1 5 ) .
3.
Why India It tn Revolt Against DritUh Rule (l^odou, Beilin: In
dian Nationalist Party, 1 9 1 6 ) .The tract went through at least ten editions,
with approximately 2.000 copie* each edition.
<. A listing U in Eur. Mss. E 288. Also, see description in Section 2 of
this volume.
5 . Background on the state of Muslim feeling" In CIPOL. March
1013, 4 5 -J3 A ; on the CawBpur Mosque incident, GIPOL October 1 9 1 3 ,
10 0 - 118 A . Catvnpur Ki Rhuni Doitcn ( The Bloody Mottoere of Countpur) "* typical o f Muslim n g e over the incident. GIPOL October I9 IS
49A.
6. The fallowing GIPOL files cover the Pan Islamic agitation: Anirost
1 9 1 3 , 4 0 - t lA ; January 19 15 .7 6 - 9 7 A , 10 8 -18 2 A ; also, J& P 1 9 1 3 , 1* 7 5 ,
3873; di*cnion in Muhammad Ali, Mv Life- A Fragment, 2d rev. ed.,
pp. 34-49 . The m n t analytic treatment is in Gail Minault Graham, "The
KJuJafat Movement (P h J). din .. University o f Pennsylvania, 19 7 2 ),
69
70
T h e Politics o f Proscription
19 1 4 - 1 5
19 16
19 17
19 16
Demanded
18 2
41
36
SO
Forfeited
5
1
1
4
10
14
11
nj.
9
12
8
4
Enhanced
11
Presiet
19 14 -15
19 16
19 17
19 1B
17 8
84
75
52
71
72
T h e Politics o f Proscription
73
74
T h e Politics o f Proscription
75
76
T h r Politics of Proscription
77
elected legislatures. In an arrangement labeled dyarchy, rtapcRiibtJify (or administration would be divided between the ministers
and a I3ritib-*ppoin?fd go>emor. MinUfenr would determine
aotne matters, ranging from education to agriculture, but ultimate
<ichiotH on oth<rrs would be made by the Governor, who w u
responsible to Parliament. Eletted Indian majorities controlled
the provincial and central legislatures, the litter being divid'd
Into two housesthe Council o f State and die much larger Legit*
latfve Assembly. Because the Governor General would remain
responsible to Parliament, m! not to the central legislature, he
had rrwrre power tr> certify bills and issue ordinances In cases
of emergency.*1The reforms also had provisions affecting princely
India. Montagu and Chelmsford initiated * Chamber o f Princes
In February 1921. The Chamber advised government and aenrd
a* a fonim through which princes could articulate criticism or
demand*."
The constitutional changes had grown out o f India* wartime
MprriencM. The n lly of pri/irn and the Indian public to the Em
pire had impressed the government. As early as 1315, highranking British adminhtntors observed privately that, once the
war ended, the *how of citizenship ahould be matched by aigtuficant concessions.*1 Indiana certainly expected such * mose.
A change,* as a confidential survey o f Chelmsforda viceroyalty
tummarircd, had come over the apirit of Jndia. Moderate
nationalists warned that without atrides toward self-government,
their calls for continued patience among Indians would be
drowned out, a claim high-lighted by an extremist direction
among Congressmen and the appearance of Home Rule lea guea.11
The Government o f India recognized the validity o f the warn
ing*. Official handling of the agitation for Home Rule, which
had begun in 1914 and received support from Con great two
S t . Document* and an*ljl In Maurice Gwyer, ed., Spttchtt end
Documtntten Ihr tnJlan Conititutlan, 1921-47,1, xxlx-xxxli, 1 4 - 1 5 3 .
32. Sonmtrr tstnmt In Urmlla Fhailal*, Toirarjt tht Integrniion
c f Indian S iom im . 25-3-4. For a full trtttmmt of the princes and politics,
re Ptrbara N'ril itsmutack, "Indian Ptfaccs A t Imperial PaUlkUnt, 19141M 9 - (P h J3 . d i ., University of Michigan, 1069 ).
3 3 . For example, the memorandum of Lord lU rdinge on refomu after
the otte. Cap!'* trtbuhU in a^eeral *** o f private pf*r, Including Hiote
of Ifardinpe, Hailey. Summarlied In Mthrotra, IV liiie*,"p. 83. For background <>n shift* in orirnutlon toward India, are Dewtu tlin*-ood, T i e
JlouOti Table Movrmrni and India, 19 0 9 -10 2 0 ," Journal e/ CommonMalth PolititalStud,ft, 0 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 16 1-2 0 9 .
3 * . RrpO't o f Chetmiforti Adninutnuion, p. I.
3 5 . For example, apeechet In Rrport c f Mr S0<h InJlan National Colo
g ra f (n p. Indian National Congm *, 1 0 16 ) , pp. 2 1 - 3 0 ; comments in
Ht(W< af C&ttnuforJ AJ'niftUtralMit, pp. 38-73
78
T h e Politics o f Proscription
79
80
T h e Politics c f Proscription
81
82
T h e Politics o f Proscription
of Turkish territories and a resurgence of khilafate and PanIslamic fervor. Muslims held large meetings, and their propa
ganda agencies, including an Islamic Information Bureau in
London, produced numerous anti-British tracts. Congress and
khilafate leaders joined forces and moved into the countryside to
mobilize mass support.14
The British had never faced such concerted opposition to gov*
eminent fiat. Not only were the disturbances widespread, but
the techniques employed, such as nonpayment o f taxes, resigna
tions from posts, work stoppages, and above all, passive resistance,
also proved disconcerting. Unsure of itself, the government char
acteristically fell back on repressive measures. T he results are
almost too well known to recount. Martial law went into effect in
Punjab, followed by censorship, mass arrests, aerial attacks, and
the shooting of over 400 unarmed Punjabis at Jallianwala Bagh
in Amritsar.** Determined to crush what seemed at the moment
open rebellion, the British unleased a reign of terror. Banning
increased, as did demands for security. Actions against presses
and newspapers had numbered approximately 80 in 1918; there
were 170 in 1919. Most restrictions pertained to the Congress
or to khilafate material; approximately 50 banned items dealt
with the Punjab disturbances and Jallianwala Bagh.**
As the immediate crises subsided, the Government of India
paused for a moment of introspection. The soul searching led to
inquiries on the April disturbances of 1919, amnesty for most
Indians tried summarily, and a reaffirmation of commitment to
constitutional reforms. After making gestures of conciliation, the
government then sat back to play a game of political cat and
mouse with their opponents. In the succeeding two years, the
Governor General and his colleagues maneuvered, compromised,
bluffed, and, when backed into a comer, resorted to a resumption
of repression. Such a situation occurred in late 1921, and the
British hit hard again with prosecutions and bans.17 In addition
54. The Bamford survey and Sitar*msyya (The Indian ffational Confrees, 1,3 7 0 427) cover the basic developments of the period. A s excellent
series o feu ay s on the 19 19 disturbance is in Ravjndai Kumar, ed., Essays
OnCafuffci.iT, Pn!itict:The Rtnulatt Satyagraha of 1919; also Graham ,'The
K h flifit Movement."
55. Two different perspectives are in OUwyer, India, mod V . N . Dans,
Jallianwala Bagh.
56. Statistics and background based on J!tP 4496 and study of file* on
specific newspaper* and banned items, GIPOL. The bitterness of the.
literature is illustrated by this quotation from Panjab Ka Khun {The Blood
Of Punjab, Cawopur, 19 2 0 )i Punjab is weeping with the doing* of coward
Dyer.The soil of Jallianwala Bagt) is still wet with the blood Of our babies."
57. Treatment of the Indian government's strategy b in D. A . Law,
The Government of India and the First Non-Cooperation Movement
19 2 0-19 2 2 , TAe Journal of Alum Studiei, 2 5 :2 (February 19 6 6 ), 2 4 1
83
86
T h e Politics o f Proscription
87
88
T h e Politics o f Proscription
89
90
T h e Politics o f Proscription
91
92
T h e Politics o f Proscription
93
hasabha and shuddhi sabhaa preached a doctrine o f militant scIIdefense and self-strengthening, langathon. Muslims countered
with defense associations, such as the Jam iat-i-Tabligh-ul-Islam,
extensions o f the organizational structure and zeal once focused
on the ihilafate issue.
A pronounced increase in communal literature both reflected
and contributed to Hindu-Muslim tension. Published attacks
among Indian religious groups had been common for at least four
decades, but by the 1920j the erratic exchange gave way to
persistent warfare by tract and journalistic publications. Pro*
duced by dozens of sectarian presses and publishing firms, the
controversial material savagely reviewed the history and religious
doctrine o f opponents. In 1923, for example, Mauivi Abdul Hafc
commented in a Muslim newspaper, Paigham-iSulah, that while
Hindus often made fun of Muhammads marriages, they conve
niently forgot the sexual practices of Hindu gods.** VichUra Jivcn exemplified the corresponding viewpoint o f the Hindu com
munity. Written by an Arya Samaj peacher and polemicist,
Pandit Kalicharan Sharma, Strange Life suneyed the formative
experiences of Muhammad and the evolution of early Islam.
Sharma claimed the book's aim was "not to hurt Muslim feelings,"
but rather to win adherents away from religious falsehood through
reasoning and a correct* view of history.** In addition to em
phasizing Muhammads sexual life and alleged immorality, the
book stressed the spread o f Islam by the sword. All Muslima,
according to the author, were intent on loot, arson, and rape.
Verbal and written conflict eventually became widespread vio
lence. By the mid-1920s, riots occurred on an almost weekly
basis. Between 1922 and 1926, over two hundred incidents were
reported, the most noteworthy being the Kohat riots o f 1924
(leaving 36 dead and driving the Hindu population out of the
Muslim Relations ia British India" (P h D . diJi., Duke University, 19 7 2 ) .
T h e annua! *mortl and material progress reports" capsule j e t n f events,
especially the followings India in 1924-5 (C ilcutti: Government of India,
19 2 5 ) , pp. 3 0 0 -3 0 1; M ia in t923~4 (Calcutta: Government of India,
1 9 2 0 , pp. 2 38 -6 0 . Key files tndude GIPOL, 18 2 4 , 243, 249 /8 ; 19 2 5,
14 0 . A contemporary turvey is In Hugh McPherson, Communal An
tagonism Between Hindus end Muhammadans, In John Cumming, ed..
Political India, 1832-1932, pp. 10 6 -2 3 ; also Reporti on IP ortin f of Conilitvtion, pp. 19 0 -20 3 , 44 3-50 ; G rib am, "The Khiltfat Movement." pp.
4 12-50 5.
93. tiaatstiaBf ta d betkfptttitd fpscs Tiambf, "Afpeetr," p. SS. Jffferences to *ei frequently dealt with nryoga (n Arya Samaj marriage
arrangement, or to relationships between Brahms and consorts).
94. Background in Thurby, Aspets," p. 134. The author received *
sentence of two months* rigorous imprisonment and fine.
9-1
T h e Politics o f Proscription
town) and the 1925 Calcutta riots (1 4 0 killed and much arson).
Sparked by local issues or concern with symbols (the cow, pro
cessional rights, music before religious buildings), the affrays
had a devastating cumulative effect on communal relations. T o
the dismay o f officials and nationalists alike, the situation de
teriorated with each passing year.*3
These assorted developments formed the backdrop ogainst
which the Government of India attempted n wary transition from
colonial bureaucracy to Imperial politician. Direct involvement
in legislative maneuvering became a British priority. Within the
Indian Legislative Assembly, the government hoped to sustain
an atmosphere of constitutional advance combined with careful
nurturing o f coalitions that were sympathetic to official plans.
This effort is nowhere more graphically illustrated than in Read
ings 1924 commentary on the Assembly. While facing contin
uous opposition, he noted, the British had to work as a unit, pre
pare their homework, and then debate each issue with critics.
Care should be taken to supply Indian allies with useful informa
tion with special emphasis on predebate caucusing.** At least
until early 1926, Reading judged the strategy reasonably suc
cessful. Congressindependent groupings formed occasionally,
but on the whole, the government had carried many key votes and
prevented numerous efforts to undercut its authority.*7The Indian
government pursued this course under frequent pressure from
London officials who, not fully appreciating the delicacy of dayto-day negotiations, felt that Delhi's control was inadequate.
Central authorities, therefore, faced the ongoing problem of jug
gling the demands, often conflicting, o f Indian and British politicians.11
-------------Intensification of propaganda comprised another element of
British strategy. The 1919 disturbances, according to a confi
dential circular, had resulted partially from the infection o f pop
ular opinion by rumor and extremist views. Such an interpreta
tion reinforced the growing realization among high officials that
the government must clearly place its views and position before
the Indian people.*9 Utilizing experience gained in wartime, the
9 5. Birkenhead, Secretary of State, accurately warned Irwin on his
becoming Viceroy in April 19 2 5 that a main anxiety would be recru
descence of communal strife." Birkenhead to Irwin, May 12 , 19 26, I.C.
Riots discussed in Thursby, Aspects," pp. 159 243.
96. ReadingtoRam sden,June5 ,19 2 4 ,R.C.
97. Assessment in Report on Reading Administration, pp. 1 36.
98. Exemplified by London concern with Indian communism, Birken
head to Reading, September 2 , November 5 ,19 2 5 , R.C. Also.Templewood,
7 reubUd Ttarty pp. 4248,68103.
99. Note by Rushbrook Williams (December 17 , 19 2 0 ), GIPOL
March 19 2 1.9 2 -9 3 A .
95
96
T h e Politics o f Proscription
CcrrrizrtcvJCcnciluirbt
97
kGot-
1910
10 7 .
For ftim p U , ditutlen In JSiP 19 28, ! 144. Irenkitlj, the ftwMt
drmtk ronfrpnmi<m ttm t, rl over ht ih UritUh rtid. but " h i t O117
i*\ nnl ttob in K(hnin* Mto Ketktr M y t. Tat twcktrrwmi on tb
i li|rn f,
M irw tnjn Jh a , A.'a(Arin .Uuo
In4>4; alio, darumtnu
In J W IMJ.SOfll
109. S ar rj llB T h n b y , A ipecii,"p p .219-78.
98
T h e Politics o f Proscription
100
T h e Politics o f Proscription
into circulation. Without power to ban the booK, the British chose
to prosecute Rajpal for inciting religious hatred. His trial dragged
on for almost three years because o f extensive evidence and
appeals. Meanwhile, the case stimulated controversy and a sec
ondary set of exposSs on Muslim and Hindu saints. A magis
trate eventually found Rajpal guilty and sentenced him to 18
months of rigorous imprisonment. The sessions judge also found
Rajpal guilty of raking together episodes that gave an obnox
ious view of Muhammad. On May 4 , 1927, however. Justice
Dalip Singh of the Lahore High Court ruled that Rangila Rasul
did not fall under 153A, and he freed the publisher. The surprise
verdict left Hindus jeering and Muslims stunned. Ten thousand
Muslims attended an open protest meeting in Lahore, and tele
grams and petitions poured into the Delhi and Lahoie secretar
iats. The Punjabs governor, William Hailey, prohibited public
meetings to prevent further unrest, but when Muslims disobeyed
the order, he met with a deputation and tried to calm heightened
emotions. If necessary, Hailey promised, the British would
amend the law to prevent circulation o f material that was blatandy offensive to religious feelings.11* Shortly afterward, tht
communal chasm widened when contempt-of-court charges wen
brought against Muslim papers for their scathing commentary
on British justice, in particular, the Christian background of
Justice Dalip Singh. T o Muslims, his judgment meant that,
while their opinions would be punished, Hindu publicists could
speak with impunity. 7
Hailey then decided that only successful prosecution of pubiications similar to Rangila Rasvl would calm Muslims and at the
same time illuminate the tangled legal issues involved in the
earlier verdict. Dalip Singh had argued that, since Section 153A
was to prevent attacks on a community as it exists at the present
time* and not to stop polemics against deceased religious lead
ers," the Rajpal conviction had been illegal. Hoping to secure an
opposite ruling from the High Court, Hailey wired Judge Broad
way, then on vacation, to return to Punjab immediately. Broad
way and a second English justice, F. W . Skemp, composed a
special bench to hear arguments against another hostile essay on
Muhammad, an article published in the Hindu Ri$ala-i-VartThe article, A Trip to Hell, described the presence of
Muhammad in hell and elaborated on bis suffering and sins.
1 1 8 . SecrctsrUt note*, (elegrtms from PG in GIPOL 19 27, 13 2 ;
13 2 / 11.
1 1 7 . Hailey to G I. June 2 3 .19 2 7 , in GIPOL 1 9 2 7 ,1 3 2 .
1 1 8 . Correspondence m GIPOL 19 27, 1 3 2 - 1 3 2 H. Also, GIPOL
19 28.7K W .
tOi
13+-W.
12 1.
Muslim
12 2 .
2 7 / 11.
123.
102
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Coercion en d Conciliation
103
pp.
10t
T h e PoJitiet o f Proicnptton
105
106
T h e P o litia o f Proscription
107
If
EIGHTEEN YEARS OF
CONFRONTATION, 1930-1947
110
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
111
112
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
113
112
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
113
114
T h e P olitict o f Proscription
MSO.SOSl.
Confrontation
115
Netaepapers
Securities
Madras
Bombay
Bengal
UJ.
Punjab
Burma
Bihar
CJ>.
Assam
N.'VVJJ .
Delhi
T o o ls
18
45
S4.
13
25
5
1
5
4
Ceasd
Paid
13
13
18
Not ttsrted
4
10
No information
1
4
SO
5
1
2
3
3
3
9
125
63
Securities
SB
22
Ceased
IS
ID
S
5
16
4
1
1
3
13
16
Not started
1
1
No Information
27
Printing Pretiet
Madras
Bombay
Paid
5
6
7
I
2
Bengal
VJ.
Punjab
Burma
CP.
Assam
16
19
21
4
1
5
NAVJ.P.
Delhi
Bihar
25
12
10
6
5
1
154
76
33
Totals
8
S
1
13
3
5
2
35
116
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
117
118
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
119
120
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
121
122
T h e Politics o f Proscription
'
54. Emerson Dole (August 30, 1931) and reports from local govern
ments, GIPOL i9 3 i, 4f$6. fo r one tiiicusston o f propaganda, *ee doenmenti in GIPOL 1932, 35/31.
55. Background in GIPOL 1931, 4/36, J&P 1930, 4977.
56. Note by R. Peel (August 28, 1931), GI telerram (September 5,
1931), J&P 1930, 4977.
57. Telejrrsm, GG to SS (September 1, 1931), and copies of the bill.
Confrontation
123
pared a list of terrorist writings and discussed them and the need
for controls with Gandhi. If Gandhi publicly denounced the leg
islation, the Delhi settlement might crumble overnight. Gandhi
proved receptive, however, and agreed that the worst varieties of
radical material must be taken out of circulation.** Willingdon*
similarly developed support among other leaders, including prom
inent M .L.A j . Legislative allies had examples o f terrorist
material in their hands before the introduction of the bill on Sep
tember 7. The preparations paid off. Although it protested, the
Congress did not denounce the restrictions as a serious breach of
the Delhi Pact. The legislature, in general, agreed to the bill,
probably influenced by official willingness to debate issues at
length and to compromise.1* During five days of discussion, tbe
government bench successfully defended the bill as an emergency
measure with a narrow scope. Speaker after speaker quoted from
the writings in question and drowned out the cries of opponents,
who argued that the restrictions were unnecessary. The vote in
favor o f the legislation, 55 to 21, surprised Wfllingdon and
pleased him immensely.*9
The Governor General soon found that he needed more than
special legislation in order to survive politically. As feared, the
Hound Table Conference achieved little. Gandhi returned home
disillusioned but apparently still committed to working out a
solution with Wfllingdon.*1 The deterioration o f the agreement
in his absence, however, permitted no room for negotiation. Mil
itants in the Congress had intensified their disruptive efforts in
the United Provinces and Peshawar, and the British had re
sponded with force. According to the Home Member, Crerar, the
whole of the Working Committee were unanimous in clamouring
for war, and after futile telegraph exchanges with Willingdon,
Gandhi succumbed to the radicalism ascendant in the Congress.
The Congress resumed its program of civil disobedience on Jan
uary 3 , 1M 2.
The British gave Gandhi no time to move. On January 4,
Wfllingdon promulgated four ordinancesthe Emergency Pow
58. E m m m notes ( Aupust 30, September-4, 1931), GirOL 1931,
4 /3 6 .
,
59. For example, the goTefnment accepted the Select Committee rec
ommendation that the bill be limited to one year. L-A.D., 1931, V, 65-66,
300-340, 347-82; VI, 117&-S4, 1273-1324, 1927-75, 1416-64, 146392.
60. Wfllingdon to Ifoare, October 6, 1931, H.C. The government had
planned to certify ihe bill if necessary.
'
61. Birkenhead,Matyax, p* 317.
62. Crerar to Irwin, January 5, 1932; I.P. Background on incidents in
India in I93J-2, pp. 24-32; Sitaramayya, The Injunt National Congreet,
1, 842-75} Cummiog, Political Indut, pp. 301-18.
124
T h e Politics o f Proscription
ers Ordinance that expanded the 1931 Press Act to deal with ma
terial on civil disobedience, the Unlawful Instigation Ordinance
aimed primarily at no-tax efforts, the Unlawful Association Or
dinance used to seize Congress funds and buildings, and the Pre
vention o f Molestation and Boycotting Ordinance. The British
threw Gandhi and thousands o f his followers in jail, and in isolated
cases, nationalist processions were dispersed by police gunfire.**
Willingdon did not stop with this summary blow to the Con
gress. Using the crisis ar-justification, he made extendc 1 Tcative powers part of the criminal code. On November 15, 1932,
the Government of India introduced the Criminal Law Amend
ment B31, which encompassed most o f the special provisions of
existing ordinances. The bill gave local governments almost total
control over the press, the power to establish summary tribunals,
and over-all authority to outlaw associations. T be speech to in
troduce the measure broadcast the governments intent. If the
legislature chose to enact a pale shadow" o f the restrictions,
Willingdon would End another means of securing powers to deal
with unrest. The Assembly debated the issue but, mindful of
the warning, finally gave the government what it wanted.*'From 1932 to 1934, the British openly pursued a dual policy
that consisted of vigorous maintenance of law and order coupled
with active progress towards the introduction of constitutional
reforms. *5 In the eyes o f government, both goals were achieved.
The civil disobedience movement weakened until, by 1934, Gand
hi suspended the campaign in favor of individual satyagraha.
Simultaneously, a compromise Government of India bill made
its way through parliamentary debate and culminated in the
passage of new constitutional guidelines in 1935.
T h e application o f press laws reflected both aspects o f British
policy. A s the table on the follow in g p age indicates, the cumula
tive application o f security demands w a s heavy. T h e British
banned approximately 1,0 0 0 pieces o f printed matter d uring the
same period.
It w ould b e misleading, however, to assume that most o f the
63. India n, 1931-2, pp. 41-66.
64. Iliig etrnment, LJuD. 1932, VII, 2091. Documents sod discussion
relating to the 4 f t in JStP 1932,3094. Willingdon also anticipated having;
to certify the b ll. W . to Hoare, June 30', 1932, H.C.
65. Dual policy" quotation and summation from India in 193233,
p. 1. Mso, see Victor 'Trendi,' Lcrd TViiVmjion in India, pp. 152-68.
66. An accessible surrey of events is in Sitaramayya, The Ihium Na
tional Congrest, I, 8561021. On the problems underlying passage of the
Government of India Bill, Templewood, Troubled Teart, pp. 6&-103.
67. Based on data in JStP 1932, 616, with additional material taken
from 1A J). and quarterly reports in GIPOL, 19324.
Confrontation
125
Madras
Bombay
Bengal
U.P.
Punjsb
Burma
Bibar-O
SecufMei
S8
liO
13
5
196
7
S
28
5
3
2
G r g
11
1
Total*
48
55
43
CJ*.
Assam
Delhi
Ajmer
Merwara
Deposited
12
20
Forfeited
1
4
6
1
S
2
1
C e e d
67
19
25
31
24
112
2
12
55
3
S
2
1
1
8
St
11
2
124
17
256
131
3
J1
537
Securities
Waived, n i.
12
126
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrcnietion
127
128
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
129
130
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
131
132
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
133
04.
Couplsnd, Ceiuhtutional Problem, II, 8. Jinnib od Muslims
tended to align with Coopts* on *11 but the most basic cammiuti) issues.
M . Telegram to SS, August 26, 1935, J&P 11 7-B -l.
134
T h e Politics o f Proscription
16th, both groups debating the issue toot off their gloves. When
Congressmen claimed that a yellow leaflet of 25 pages" (a ref
erence to the collection o f excerpts circulating among M.L.A.S)
did not warrant controls, Craik exploded. Clutching a dossier of
429 pages o f material, which he said would turn fihej stomach
of any reasonable" person, the Home Member asked rhetorically
whether the Assembly was ready to loosen those forces of chaos
and anarchy which produced such misery and such economic
loss in 1931 and 1932?"*8 Yes," the majority replied. Suspect
ing the governments motives and unimpressed with appeals to
order, on September 16 the Assembly rejected the bill, 69 to 57.
Everyone knew what would follow. Willingdon certified the
measure, and on September 26, it passed the Council of St3te.
The drama did not cease with enactment. Under the 1919
Government of India Act, certified legislation had to be printed
as a command paper and lie eight sitting days before houses of
Parliament. While the remaining days of the former act ticked
away, the India Office realized in horror that Parliament might
not be able to meet this legal obligation. If that happened, and
the act were not signed before December 18, many press controls
would lapse. After repeatedly calculating Parliaments schedule,
the London staff decided that, since the House o f Lords met only
three days a week, another method of ensuring controls had to be
found. Fortunately, the Government of India had at hand an
escape clause hitherto unuseda clause that permitted the
Secretary of State to declare a state of emergency in India and
thus negate the requirement of parliamentary discussion. He
now declared a state of emergency, and the new bill became law
hours prior to the expiration of press provisions.*7
The Government of India did not employ the controls widely
between 1935 and 1939 despite the determined struggle to keep
them. Two political factors helped account for its restraint. First,
the mounting sensitivity of Indians to bans and press security
embarrassed the British and publicized issues. Editorials cen
sured press actions, while the Indian Civil Liberties Union made
bans a matter of primary concern.*8 Legislators proved especially
troublesome over the principle of press freedom. Although they
could not rescind bans, their questioning tended to reinforce
British awareness of the new constitutional setting in which the
raj had to function. A general disdain for interference was spread
96. LA.D ., 1935, V, 944. Debates in V , 883-950, 1059-62. Also,
background in JScP 11 7-B -l.
97. Background in J!iP 117-B -l.
98. Correspondence with I.C.L.U., GIPOL 1928,41/56.
Confrontation
135
136
T h e Politics o f Proscription
(OMtnbaS, 1935).
107
. Docmst*sadb>kcTo<ttidiiiGIFOL
19374
, /l.
Confrontation
137
138
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
139
poor ( o u t.
U&TfAt/.-1 will become Kihyatria (wanttr). I will remore foretrr the taStrbf* c f cow* and r<ue mourning tmoag
butcher*. With Durya** txfp I %ill cnah our opptrswa just
at 1 hate cnithet! ihe Xlritiih *TCcU1a.m
Publications cn die princely itates were a similar btend of com
munal and
politic*."'
Finally, the Punjab government prohibited a range of Jiiera*
turt produced by the rariout factional atruggles in the region.
Polemics often were aimed at other religion*, but a surprising
number c t the banned titles dealt with contfotroies within i
community. The Atya Satnaj, for eiample, resened It* most
tlmlent language for Hindu opponents. The Samaj-Sanatan
Dharm conflict fostered exchanges of pamphlets, which some*
times culminated In tfolence. A faicrrife Arya Samaj tactic was
eipmure* of com enathe Hindus' defense of the Puranas a*
sacred literature (complete with copious translations of passages
relating to s e * ).,,f Sanatan writings tended to be equally intense
and derogatory. One prescribed tract, A Shoe on the Head of the
Arya Serna}, Included a section entitled "Dayanand was an
Abuser of Saints," a second questioning the character of the
Samaja founder, and a third surveying hts views on sex.1"
T w o bitter controversies among Muslims also led to banning.
The obscenity end personal attacks in Sunni-Shia exchanges
easily matched the tone of the Arya-Sanatan contests. A proiwribed Sunni worl: fn the form of a dialogue, for example, quoted
the Encyclopedia Bntanrtica and missionary studies as unbiased
authorities" in labeling Shias butchers" and innovators in reli
gion.''"* The most heated discussions among Punjabi Muslims
centered on the Ahmadiya aect, whose founder claimed special
US. SrlKtloni from Alh Hati+n KUu Surma llerphui Singh M u
(L*torei C. 1036),G lrO L <036. 37/8. O iW example* of thU Irrnt] tad
other material dfocutint ia Part Two or thi* votumv.
116. Tor tttm pit, //i*/ro4o^ Htb An/a Soma) Andetan (Dtlhli n j.)|
KatKnit Or 2Wmi (Afuflam n-J.Ji ffuialn-Maxfum (Lahore! IV36I,
GIPOL 1036,37/3.
117. For example, M in n Him, PuromA Pol Prakath (Loherrt 1036).
U S . Arya SiAnai ft* SAir Par Satuar Ka Jnf* (Dfihl: 1P38)| Sutt^
tmiha K t Ihmavall Ki
Ket Gfll (Bhleanii 1936); Shiv Puja Aur
DevanandKi Talim (Amridan 1937j.
119. AaAar-t Khu.lai Bar Sari Ibne Sabla (Frrozrpun e. 1038).
140
T h e Polities o f Proscription
Confrontation
141
142
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
M3
tary c f State's promise that the Dntlsh did not intend to under
mine the authority o f local governments fell on deaf ears. The
Congress pawed a resolution warning o f its determination to
resist by every possible means s return to unitary, flritish-domihated administration.*** When the situation in Europe worsened
in the summer o f 1939, the Government o f India sent Indian
troops to Egypt and Singapore. Disturbed by this military de
ployment, the Congress called on M.L.A.S to boycott the nett
session o f the central assembly and notified provincial committees
to prepare for resistance to the war effort.*
On September 3, Linlithgow announced that India was at war
with Germany and proclaimed a state of emergency. Days later,
the government introduced the Defence of India Dill, which
legitimized a wide range of wartime powers. The Assembly de
bated the bill for four days, but because Congress had withdrawn
from the legislature, the messure passed on September 19 with
out serious opposition. The Congress ministries In nine provinces
then denounced the declaration o f war and resigned.1** Within
a short span o f time, therefore, any bor* of continued entente
with Indian nationalists disappeared. T he British were on yet
another collision course with the Congress and Mahatma Gandhi.
A T y a a u L t s r Path
to
I ndefendence
144
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
145
146
T h e PoFuics o f Proscription
144.
Mjor EIei on prrperitionj include/SlP 117/B/13; GIPOL 1940,
S/16, 3 /31 . A docnptioii is a Frsnos G. Rutduss, Spmtmtvus RrvoJ**
j i n / X t e G s i - A t e w & s - , 1P71 >. f p . A S S - P 5 .
1<5. M*xweI2l<r,Apr22i, 1940, GIPOL 1940,3/IS.
1*5. Msuricc HiTtett to MuweU, October 10, 1940, GIPOL 1940,
3/16.
147. Docuraeats jo J&P 117/B/1S.
Confrontation
147
534-35.
148
T h e Politics o f Proscription
U
J*.
Confrontation
149
150
T h e Politics o f Proscription
Confrontation
151
152
T h e Politics o f Protcription
Confrontation
153
154
T h e Politics o f Proscription
THE LEGACY
156
157
Istrie* did not deal Mtisfactnrily xvith problem* of law and order.
W ith the fxcqiti'on o f lirief fcljiadon o f Jrga) restraints during
the 1920s, therefore, the bureaucracy kept the legal power ta
demand *ecuritie, to ban works, snd to seize printed matter at
customs and in the mails.
If the legal basil for p ros control* was fatrly conjwtent after
1910, implementation or the Ism* varied widely in time and
locale. Technical problems persisted as a source of tendon and
misunderstanding within adminiifratite circJftj. Government
units (police, customs, pntal inspectors, and censors) had dif
ficulty coordinating decisions and presenting a united front.
Squabbles oter jurisdiction and responsibility were commonplace.
Many difficulties arose from the alternative sanctions that could
be employed in specific cav*. Authors and publishers might be
pnwecutI and or t)ieir w riting confiscated under a variety of
provisions o f the penal code or pres* law. Which lever to pull, if
any, required time-consuming evaluation and planning.* More
over, definitions often created problems. Debate over what con*
stituted a closed cater" in the mails, or if a politically inscribed
dhoti (loincloth) cotifd be dealt with under the Press Act were
not isolated incidents. New situations or propaganda techniques
forced continued discussion on the meaning o f legal terms.
Whether or not gramophone record* of Congress speeches consti
tuted a document as defined in the Emergency Powers Act, for
e*ampJe, Ird to tedious correspondence within the bureaucracy.
Similarly, as late as 1940, the government was still trying to
revive the question o f whether items banned in one province
automatically could be considered illegal throughout India.*
This study suggests that at least five elements accounted for
how and when the British relied on repression of publications as
a political tactic. The first lay outside the subcontinent. Parlia
ment and a parade of Secretaries o f State exhibited no consistent
attitude toward freedom of the Indian press. Rather, home concems depended on the party in power, the personalities o f India
Office officials, and the situation both in Europe and in India.
Alternate cries for repression or conciliation came from London,
sometimes from the same individual such as Morley or Montagu.
2. When dJvrtmfnft Fih?r' That Strangt LittU D'oten M m Gandhi,
/or fxtitnrtce, the Hcmr Dpartjnrnl decided to ban the work but Pot notify
it
S<a Cuiiom* provisions bwause the latter might fjenerate too much
publicity. Document* In GtrOt, 1935, 29/8. A reversal o f unction! in
notlifr cme, India Metcht* Pail, dUctmed Sti GIPOL 1933, 35/13.
*. CorrropoiKlencr end clrcutar 126/3-1 (N'#fmtcT 5, I93l>, GJFOL
lOSi, 120 . TTie government finally decide*! that Ihe records were dacumenu and ahould be banned bcesiue lh*y potential!} reached large uaienM with thr "spoken word."
158
T h e ro ta te s o f Proscription
T h e L egacy
159
160
T h e Politics o f Proscription
The Legacy
161
162
T h e Politics o f Proscription
0 < t r t fT ic o
/ c c f i o i l '/
COLLECTIONS OF BANNED
LITERATU RE IN INDIA
AND ENGLAND
166
167
99
95
49
216
69
594
60
190
110
109
520
65
152
51
55
121
24
169
S3
400
110
61
29
1244
1569
1095
40
581
65
32
168
169
Tm
S c o f f . A x n A r r a x c f m e s t o f t h e G v id f .
13
titleshavefallen
duringthe or
The430it'm
sin cnllntwnand
170
changed its usage frequently. In this study, I hase tried to rerunjze simply and along lines etsily recognizable b y scholars who
are familiar with the languages. Dtaeritical marts have been omit
ted for two reasons: First, the British references left them out,
and unless every tide could be checked, adding marks would
perpetuate inaccuracies because the originals may hate been
spelled in unorthodox fashion; second, conversations with Indian
and Western scholars suggested that incorrect diacritical marks
create unnecessary difficulties for those wlto know the vernac
ulars. These arguments also weighed against the temptaujn to
standardize or to attempt to put British citations tract rafo the
vernacular character. If Western words, such as Congrtts and
Engtith, are used in titles, they hase been reproduced as they
would appear in English rather than in the varied fem < cauied
by transliteration into Hindi or Urdu. Otherwise, the trarsliteralion of names of printing presses, publishers, and authors has
been based primarily on information from the tide pages. I apol
ogize In advance to relatives or associates of authors whose titles
or names may appear in strange spellings. Although I have tried
to eliminate inconsistencies, they still may remain in cases in
which works were published in more than one language or in
which references lave been based solely on background in the
records.
The banned svorks have been arranged in three sections (Re
ligion; Anti-British and Secular Politics/Biography and Collected
Works; and Patriotic Poetry), further subdivided by subject or
issue. Many titles do not fit neatly into one category, but crosslisting and subject/author indexes should facilitate use of the
guide.
Bibliographic information is arranged according to the follow
ing format:
a. Title end Language. G, Panjabi in Gurmukhi script; H,
Hindi; P, Panjabi in Arabic script, U, Urdu. Works are listed
alphabetically by title within each subsection because many
are anonymous- This approach also precludes the need for a
separate title index.
b. Author. The spelling of the names of authors as printed
in the records or on title pages has been accepted. No attempt
is made to sort out individuals on the basis of external evi
dence. Many items are anonymous, and in these instances, title
information will be followed itnmediateh bj place of publica
tion and publisher.
c. Place of Publication, Publisher, P ra t, Dale, ar.d Pc.Vnolton. If the author or editor is also publisher, tint will be
indicated by a notation (pub.) after his name, and the infer-
171
S fe c tio n 2
1.
A Muslim reform and revivalist sect, founded by Mirra Ghulam
Ahmad (1639-1903) and known for its attacks on ether Muslims, Hindus,
Sikhs, and Christians. The standard work on the sect is H. A . Walter. The
Ahmadrya Jlf&vefterte. A new study, soon to be published, treats the
Ahmadiyas in a more detailed anrf scholarly fashion: Spencer Lavan,
T V W.nvwliya M-avrmeot* (Ph.D. diss., McGill University, 1970).
Religious Controversy
173
174
Steam Press, c. 1936. 8pp. IOL 114; PIB 173; GIPOL 1936,
5 7 /2 .
Stretched Revelations. Ahrar attack on Ahmadiyas. Suggests
that Ghulam Ahmad drank wine, ate pork, was a son o f Satan,
and a fool. Concludes with the note that the Ahrars will not be
subjugated by the BritishAhmadiya coalition: If the govern
ment proscribes this pamphlet, we have more ammunition.
Khenchvart Nabi ( P ) . Abdul Karim ( R ahi"), Lahore: Alamgir Electric Press, 1934. 8pp. PIB 173; CRL; GIPOL 1935,
3 7 /2 .
Ahrar denunciation of Ahmadiyas. Labels Ghulam Ahmad
and the sect traitors to Islam, questions their sex life.
Kvkrun Chun ( P ) . Khadim Abdul Amin Muhammad Ibra
him. Lahore: Abdul Hamid, Feroz Printing Works, c . 1936.
8pp. PIB 157; GIPOL 1 9 3 7 ,3 7 /1 .
Anti-Ahmadiya, on sex life and ideas of founder.
Kya Mirza-i-Qadumi Aurat Th't 7a Mard? ( U ) . Lahore: Ha
fiz Abdul Rahim, GQani Electric Press, 1935. GIPOL 1935,
3 7 /2 .
A very controversial and strong attack on Ghulam Ahmad.
Mazhabi Daku ( U ) . Amritsar: Mabahala Book Depot, Sanai
Press, n.d. 136+18pp. IO L 87 ;P IB 95.
Novel on the Ahmadiya movement, with Ghulam Ahmad and
his followers portrayed as lecherous men.
Mtibahash-t-Tarak Mavalat ( U ) . Delhi: Akhbari Itfak Hakai
Press, n.d. 34pp. CRL.
Anti-Ahmadiya discussion between Syed Khafair Ullah (A h
madiya) and Syed Abdul-ul-Barkat.
ftluhammadi Gola ( P ) . Ghulam Mohammad Khan ( Shok"),
pub. Amritsar: Aftab Barki Press, 1930. 4 parts, 8pp. each. Pt.
1, PIB 29; Pts. 2 -3 , PIB 70; CRL; Pt. 4, PIB 70. Full treat
ment in GIPOL 19 32,114,116 .
Virulent Anti-Ahmadiya propaganda.
Navan Kisa Minaiyan ( P ) . Muhammad Ramzan Caragb
Din. Lahore: Inkilab Steam Press, 1933. 8pp. PIB 19.
Anti-Ahmadiya poetry. Examines nature of Muslim orthodoxy
against backdrop of the sects conduct, theology.
Kikamma Nabi Bam Tlrtali Dave ( U ) . Khadim Abdul Amin
Muhammad Ibrahim, pub. Lyallpur: George Electric Press, tt-d.
Another ed., Lvallpur: Anjuman Ahl Hadith, 1937. 8pp. PIB
160; CRL; GIPOL 1937, 37 /1 .
Religious Controversy
175
176
Religious Controversy
177
178
NAI, CRL.
Statement b y an Arya speaker who claimed that he was beaten
while participating in a religious debate.
ilfwra/i Insan Ka Libas Men ( U ) . Prem Candra. Lahore:
Arya Pratinidhj Sabha, Hindu Art Press, 1937. 48pp. PIB 25;
CRL; GIPOL 1937, 3 7 /1 .
Reply to Gopal Misra's Kaljug Insan K e Libas M en, attempts
to expose Puranic literature and sexual orientation of the Sanatan Dharm.
Pandit Buddh Dev Ka Juta Rishi Dayanand K e Sir Par ( H ) .
Pan^t Madhavacarya. Meerut: Atma Ram Sharma, Dharm
Press, 1936. 80pp. IOL B 334; NAI 95; PIB 46; CRL.
On a Hyderabad debate between an Arya Samaj preacher,
Buddh Dev, and the author (a Sanatanist). Buddh Dev hit a rep
resentation of Dayanand to prove that the Samaj's founder was not
sacred (the debate centered on idol worship). Madhavacarya
attacked Samajists for always going around beating people with
shoes (figurative expression referring to Insults) and being re
pulsive to other religions.
Puranik Dharm Ka Jama V rf Puranic Pkakkar Ka Munh
Kola (U ). Vishva Mittar, pub. Amritsar: Aftab Electric Press,
c. 1S36. l\Spp,Y>h\ \90;Pr& 152; CBll; CIPOL 193-7,3 V 1 .
Attack on Sanatanists and especially Hindu publicists such as
Gopal Misra: It has become common with our Puranic brethren
to reply to objections raised by the learned Arya Samajists
R eligiovj Controversy
179
180
*?Wiou Controversy
181
182
Hindu-Muslim
Bahadur Rajput ( U ) . Shanti Narayan Puri ( Shad ) , trans.,
ed. Amritsar: Bharat Pustalc Bhandar, Vazir-MIind Press,
1940. 192pp. IOL 178; PIB 215; CRL.
Exploits of Mahrattas and Shivaji, translated from Bengali.
Fictitious account that stressed Hindu confrontation with Mus
lims, atrocities of Aurangzeb.
Bahadurane Hind ( H ) . Gnnesh Prasad V arna, ed. pub.
Benares: Ramesh Press, 1939. 182pp. IOL B 26; NAI 88; PIB
3.
Historical sketches compiled from numerous books. Coders
India, a .d . 57 0 -1 7 86 , with attention to Muslim rule. Hindu
nationalist viewpoint, highly critical of Muslim policies.
Balidan Citravali ( H ) . Ram Gopal Vidyalankar, ed. 2 eds.
Lahore: Govind Ram Hasand Varma, c. 1927. Calcutta: Vedic
Press, c. 1927. 30pp. CRL.
On Hindu heroes, with pictures such as that of Guru Govind
Singhs sons being walled up alive by Muslims. Colored illus
trations.
Bharat Ki Dasha Ka Bharishtja Sudhar ( H ) . Gorishankar
( Brahmacarya"). Bombay: Shiv Lakshman Range, c. 1941.
48pp. I O L B 166; PIB 134; CRL.
The Future Reformation of India't Condition. Partially auto
biographical. Deals with communal relations, sharply antiMuslim.
Calcutta Men Mussalmanon Par Aryan Ka Zulam ( U ) .
MotiuDah, pub. Casvnpur: Razzaki Press, 1926. 2pp. R&R
1930,720.
Two poems on HinduMuslim riots. Calls for Muslim unity.
Caman Islam K i Sair ( I I ) . Shi\a Sharma, Mahaopdeshak.
Lucknow: Shyama Lala Satvadev Varma, Shukla Printing
Press, 1930. 80pp. NAI 8; PJB 14; CRL.
A Visit to the Garden of Islam. A Hindu document written
because Muslim preacher* maintained in debates that this or
that was not in their traditions. Severe indictment of Muslim
history, theology.
6.
For background on tbe commaBil situation after 1900, see tbe
following: W . C. Smith, Modem Islam m India; Grce Thursby, Aspects
c f IliadaMuslim Relation* in British India (PhJ3. diss., Duke Univer
sity, 1972); Hugh McPherson, Communal Antagonism Between Hindus
and Mohicunadlns," in John Camming, ed- Political India, 1832-1932,
pp. 106-23.
~
R eligh u t Controversy
183
A pr*vMusJjm tilttuWtot) which argues {hat India is mulfiftalitfial, and consequently, ilindut should roe be permitted to
dominate the political tptem . The au tW , a m ired J.C.S. officer,
discuitei Hindus* alleged treatment c f Muslims and untouch
ables.
Cand ^/uiia/n9n Ki Harkaian ( I I ) . Kaghubar Dayal
( A rya"). Cawnpur: Karayan P m i, 1028. 12pp. IOL B 327;
NAI 122; r i B 2 2 ( CnL.
find Activni o f a F ev Muihmt. Charges that Muslims oppcested Hindus and ridicuted the Hindu religion.
Chatpati
( H ) . Calcutta: Baidik Press, 1933. CIPOL
1 9 3 3 ,4 8 /i .
Controtcnial poetry on Hlndu-Muslim relations, Pro-Hindu;
rulogurs Swami Shraddhanand.
Din Sagar (7.'da Gurdaipur) K e Paiitten Virodhi Sammrlan
{I D . Cand/a Gupta VedalanVar, J. I>elhj: IVakash Ca/xlra
A rja, 1941,21pp. NAI 145.
Speech at an anti-Pakistan conference, 1unpb.
The Face of Mother India. Katherine Majo. London: Hamtsh
Hamilton, I93S. App. 250pp. (primarily pictures). R.A.
Pro-Muslim resiew o f Indian history, contemporary proto
tems. Mayo spent much time on Mughal niten, and then labeled
Bengali Hindus as cowan!*. She also noted that Hindus sponsor
child marriage, a theme in her earlier studies, and therefore were
physically inferior to Muslims. Several paragraphs and pictures
on Hindu-Muslim problems, riots (Mopfah). Also, pictures,
commentary on Kali worship, sacrifice of goats, assassinations,
and terrorism. All In all, a sery controversial bool written from
a rabe iren'point.*
FujfAun-J-jVut/rm ( U ) . Azhar Usnuni ("PanapatP). Delhi:
Anjuman-Mslamiya tract 14, Bombay Electric Job Press, Delhi,
1933. 15pp. NAI; PIB 88} CRL.
Wait of the Muttimt. Criticism of Hindu administration in
Kama!, Punjab. Mentions alleged injustices and appeals to the
British for redress, although noting that just as it is silly to play
a flute before a buffalo, so it is equally useless to call on Hindas
for justice.
Government tiahavalpur K i Chair ManulUhat: Javab (U ).
Multan City: Nau Bahar Press, 1936. GIPOL 1936, 3 7/2,
7. Itactgrmind on M ijo In Mtnortnjw Jhi, Katfifrin* MayomJ India.
18*
Religiovs Controversy
J 85
186
Religious Controversy
187
1R8
Hyderabad*
Arya Satyagraha ( H ) . Satyadev Vidyalankar, pub. Delhi:
Arjun Press, 1942. t.c., 290pp. PIB 207; CRL.
Detailed account o f Arya Samaj and Congress activities in
the princely state.
Hyderabad Bkajnavali ( H ) . Tu!si Ram. Ferozepur: Madan
Jit Arya, Goldsbeny Electric Press, 1939. 4pp. IO L F 108;
NAI 28; PIB 167; CRL.
Songs on the Arya Samaj and Hyderabad.
Hyderabad Neb Arya Samaj Andojan ( H ) . Delhi: Hamdard
Electric Press, n.d. 72pp. CRL.
On origin and activities of Arya Samaj agitation in Hydera
bad. Speeches, songs, narrative.
N an Rule of the Nizam o f Hyderabad. Hyderabad Civil l i b
erties Committee, London. London: Hyderabad Civil Liberties
Committee, Wheat]cy-Farringdon, c. 1939. 12pp. CRL.
A propaganda pamphlet attempting to demonstrate that the
Nizam is deliberately attempting to stiSe the rights and liberties
o f his 12,000,000 Hindu subjects." Narrative plus documents
frcm newspapers and speeches.
Nizam Defence Examined and Exposed. International Aryan
League. Delhi: Imperial Fine Art Press, c. 1939. t.c., 104pp.
CRL.
A rejoinder to The Arya Samaj in Hyderabad, an official doc
ument winch in turn was a response to the Samaj's The Case of
Arya Samaj in Hyderabad State. The detailed case studies sug
gest that the Nizam,-not the Arya Samaj, precipitated communal
conflict.
Nizam Hyderabad K e Dharm Tudh Ka Itihas ( H ) . Govind
Ram, ed. Delhi: Arya Sahitya Bhavan, Oriental Arts Press, c.
1939.212pp. PIB 132; CRL.
History of Arya activities m Hyderabad, pictures.
Noam Hyderabad K e Satyagraha Ka Ilihas ( H ) . Tej Singh
Varma. Mathur: Hindi Pustakalaya, c. 1942. 31pp. NAI 1.
Epic poem on Ary* Samaj campaign.
Siasai-i-ftlomin ( U ) . Abdul Samad Siraj-ui-Din, ed., pub.
Hyderabad: Ibrahim Marke Press, c. 1930. 48pp. IOL 215;
9.
Evests in Hyderabad, a Muslim princely state, surveyed in N. Rimetan,
The Freedom Struggle tn Hyderabad. Alo useful is Arya SatMfraAd 0 id Arya Requirements.
Religious Controversy
189
hlam
Balae lluma ( U ) . Asar Zuberi. Amirtabad: Umdal al-Mutalabae, 1940. 31pp. PIB 200; CRL,
O n M uslim history, deals wish fam ous battles and compares
them with contem porary struggles,
190
Id Gail Mioault Graham, *The Khilafat Movement" (PbJX diss.* UniTersity ot Pennsylvania, 1972).
12.
Incident examined fully ia Gene Thursby, Aspects o f Hindu
Muslim Relations in British India," PVi TV diss., Duke University, 1972.
Religious Controversy
191
192
Controversy
193
194
Religious Controversy
195
1110.
196
Akali Darshan ( H ) . Cawnpur: Shiv Narayan Misra ("Pratap ),n .d . 100pp. CRL.
liv es c f Akali leaders and Sikh martyrs; history o f campaigns.
Akaliyon K a Adarsh Satyagraha ( H ) . Babu Sampuranand.
Benares: Hindi Sahitya Mardir, Sri Lakshmi Narayan Press,
1932. 84pp. CRL.
Survey of Akali and Sikh movements, picture of Akali with
his head split open.
All for Law and Order. Amritsar: Shromani Gurdwara Parbandak Committee, Onkar Press, 1922. 16pp. CRL.
Criticism of British treatment of Akalis.
Angrnan N e Nabha Ktkun Lita Arthat Tarikh Nabha (G )
Hamam Singh ( Mast Panchi"). Amritsar: Punjab Khalsa
Press, n.d. 210pp. PIB 61; CRL.
W h y the British Took Over Nabha. Study o f Sikh affairs and
nationalism in Punjab.
Axad Di Garj ( G ) . Rattan Singh. Patiala: Sajan Singh,
Punjab Khalsa Press (Amritsar), 1924. 41pp. PIB 80; CRL.
The Roar o f Freedom. Review o f recent Sikh history and
British policy toward Sikhism. Focus on the case of Ratan Singh,
who was sentenced to five years for writing Baghi Sikh K i Sarkar.
Azadi Di Khie ( G ) . Bhagi Bhag Singh ( Nidharak ) , pub.
Amritsar: Coronation Press, c. 1924. 8pp. IOL; PIB 64A; CRL.
Poetry on gurdwara reforms by a member o f a jatha ( con
frontation group)
Baghi K i K i Sarkar? ( G ) . Bhai Rattan Singh ( Azad ) , pub.
Amritsar: Punjab Khalsa Press, n.d. 64pp. PIB 64A; CRL.
What it the Government of the Revolutionary Sikh? On Sikh
politics and the princely states.
Bal Updesh ( G ) . Lyallpur: Masat Ram, Om Prakash, 1938.
65pp. PIB 118;CRL.
Picture of gurus torture, then primer with political themes.
Bhram Nharan Arthat Kya Sikh Hinduon K e Rakshak Hein?
( H ) . Narayan Lai Gupta, pub. Delhi: Candra Printing Press, c.
1942. 26pp. PIB 134.
Rejects claim that Sikhs were the traditional protectors of
Hindus, trying to show that Sikhs always sided with Muslims.
Bijli Di Karak ( G ) . Darshan Singh ( Daljit ) . Amritsar:
Khalsa Azad Agency, Onkar Press, c. 1922. 64pp. CRL.
S'emd of Thunder. On Akali politics and gurdwara reform.
Religious Controversy
197
122
198
Religious Controversy
199
Ka-Bagb.
200
o f the Sikh sect.*9 The work apparently has two purposes. First,
it tries to inflame Sikh militancy by referring to past bravery:
T h e British and Muslims mercilessly kill cows in your presence,
O Sikhs, why are you alive in this world." Also, attempts to in
gratiate the Kuka group with the rest of the Sikh community by
underlining their alleged role as freedom fighters."
Sardar Rattan Singh Azad Di Car) ( G ) . Amritsar: Sardar
Sajan Singh, Khalsa Press, c. 1924. 41pp. IOL; CRL; GIPOL
192 4,3 3 /1 1 .
Written statement in a sedition case over Rattan Singhs Baghi
Sikh K i Sarkart The following indicates the tone of the tract:
If we had not sacrificed our bodies, minds and wealth and had
not gone abroad and made other countries slaves of the Eng
lish, we would never have suffered the hardships which are en
tailed on us these days while we are engaged in religious work
[Nankana Morcha]. If the Sikhs had not obliterated all trace of
the 1857 mutiny insurgents, not even a spot of the English would
now be left. But such was our fate. W e were misled into loving
snakes."
Shahadat Naniah; Khalsa Manzum ( U ) . Naubat Rai Bali.
New Delhi: Gurumat Vidayala, 1935. S2pp. PIB 99; CRL.
Controversial study on Sikhism; plays up militancy and spirit
of martyrdom.
Skahtd Sardar Seva S'mghji Ashram: Adarsh Unnaii No. 1
(G ).H ariS in gh ( G ardT),pub. Patiala: Praja MandalRiayasat, Punjab Literary Press, c. 19 3 6.20pp. IOL; PIB 120; CRL.
Eulogic study o f the life of Sera Singh Thikrhala, who died
in a Patiala jail. Critical of Patiala state administration.
Shahidi Di Khic. Gutbaksh Singh, pub. Amritsar: Punjab
Khalsa Press, n.d. 8pp. IOL; NAI 193; CRL.
The Appeal of Martyrs, on reforms and Sikh politics.
Shahidi Parvane ( G ) . Autar Singh ( Azad"). Amritsar:
Khalsa Dramatic Agency, Punjab Khalsa Press, 1924. 32pp.
PIB 64A;CRL.
On Sikh reforms, with attention to Nankana campaign. Ends
with a call to fight the government and bureaucratic role: W e
shall never obey laws that interfere with our freedom and shall
know no peace until we have attained religious and political in<jrtjen6mx.tr
Oar
30.
of the eariint S i b reforming group*, tbe Knkn cliirafd their
own piru and frequency Mere faitotved m struggle* nidi ether S ih i.
IWVground ea th* KuVas and tbe ml! tea of reform wilhm tbe community
b N . G . DirrKT.
TheSikh k J TheirU-.eretute
Religious Controversy
201
21,
The origins *nd major events involved in Sikh resurgence diicn l
la Barrier, Sikht; Satxoi, Gurdwara.
202
Religious Controversy
2 03
204
Anukampa Vicar ( I I ) . Javahar Acharyn. Bvyavart (Rajputana): Manmal Surana, Sasta Sahitya Press (A jm e r ), 1930.
352pp. PIB 70.
Strong criticism of Jainism.
Dipmalika K i Prasidi ( I I ) . Ajmer: Sri Ratna PrabbakaT,
Adarsh Press, n.d. 63pp. PIB 215.
Reply to K . L. Bafnas Paryushanon K i Bhent. Attacks Jain
opponents.
Exclusion of Hindus from America Due to British Influence.
San Francisco: Ghadar, 1016. 23pp. IOL.
Charges the British with pressing U.S. officials to limit im
migration of Hindus and to expel especially noisy opponents of
colonial policy.
Morcha ( U ) . Abdul Vahid. Sialkot: Matluba-i-Kaumi Press,
n.d. 26 pts. app. 400pp. IOL 6886; PIB 16.
Collection o f essays on Christianity, Islam. Also anU-Ahmadiya.
Maffc Aur fCawn Ki Hafat ( U ) . Babu Jhuman Lai Jaini.
Saharanpur: Faruki Press, c. 1921. 42pp. IOL 88; PIB 37.
Appeal to Jains to join in anti-British activities.
Social Conquest of the Hindu Race. Lala Har Dayal. Calcutta:
1910. Also, San Francisco, 1910. 22pp. IOL.*3
Reprint from an article in Modern Review, 6 :3 (September
1909), 23948. Shrewd cr.alysis of the relationship between
Hindu religious thought and Indian political awareness. Argues
that the British assumed the role of Brahman and continued dom
ination of the Hindu masses. Focuses on why Hinduism sup
posedly went into decay and suggests how to reclaim past glory.
Apparently banned only when reprinted as a tract.
Sri Sabda Bod ha Prakash (17). Svami Hans J3as. Ajmer:
Pittha Ram, Rajputana Press, 1925. 315pp. PIB 70.
Metaphysics and study of Hinduism; not clear why banned.
WJiy Should the Devadasi Institution in the Hifldu Temples
Be Abolished? S. Muthvlakshmi Reddi. Chintadripet (M adras):
Central Co-opetative Printing Works, c. 1 9 2 3 .14pp. IOL.
Speech on temple girls and their evolution into prostitutes,
22.
1 am indebted to Professor Emily Brown, University of Northern
Iowa, for background on thi title. Her study of Har Dayol, to be published
shortly by the University ot Arizona Press, will be the standard biography
of an important Indian politician and philosopher.
Religious Controversy
205
207
208
209
nil
S.
ort)y
movement
boycott
bffsm i prominent BnS in I90J1906 over tbe
ef the partition of
llffifti). GruK/hi and she Conprrsj made boycott a favorite political weapon.
210
211
214
215
212
213
216
liarDayal,
3.
Background on liar Dajal, a leading publicist in the U.S., Can be
found {n Dhannarira.
and Emily Bro'vn> forthcoming biog
raphy, to be published by the University of Arizona Press.
Wethna!iit%Secular Politics
217
218
219
T he Blaek Prince o f Wardha. Pulakesh De. Calcutta: Frexnendra Biswas, Patheya Printing Works, 1939. GIPOL 1939,
3 7 /2 8 .
Attack on Gandhi as "satanic* and the Black Rasputin of
India,* an Imperialist tool. Supports communism and a *red rev
olution.
Bolshevik Communist ( H ) . United Provinces Communist
Party, c. 1937. 8pp. IOL F 60.
On the Spanish a ril war and its implication for India.
Bofifievism Kya Hail (IT ). Vyakhit Hradaya' (Pinched
Heart). Allahabad: Ram Mohan Lai, Diamond Printing Works,
.1931. 40pp. 1 0 L B 385; NAI 80} PIB 8 ; CRL.
Communist tract on Lenin. Communist theory, and the nature
of revolution.
Communist International De /line Hindustan Communist
Party De A rti Niyamon Da Kharara ( G ) . n.i. i1pp. GIPOL
1936, 3 7 /2 .
Provisional draft rules and regulations o f the C.P.I. Empha
sis on militancy, careful organization, and discipline. A call for
union support and avoidance of Gandhi, M. N. Roy, and other
political organizations.
Communist Manifesto Arthat Samishtrad K i Asti Sidhont
(I I ). Karl Mant, Frederick Engels, trans., Ayodbya Prasad.
Jhansi; Shram Jjvi Sahitya Prakashak Mandal, Matra Bhunsi
Printing House, 1934. 56pp. IOL B 326; PIB 104. Urdu Ter*
aion, IOL 175,
Translation of the Communist Manifesto.
Communut Party Ke Sangalhan Ke Sidhant ( H ) . Bombay:
Communist Party of India, People's Publishing House, c. 1931.
47pp- NAI 114; CRL.
On the principles of the party, resolutions and proceedings of
the Third Congress of the Comintern.
The Communist Reply. Bombay: Workers1 Literature Pub
lishing Company, c. 1933. 60pp. PIB 10; CRL; GIPOL 1933,
4 8 /3 .
Abridged edition o f the joint statement of eighteen Com
munists accused In the Meerut Conspiracy case. General defense
of the defendants, based on a Communist view o f society, capital
ism, and revolution.
2 20
221
2 22
223
S24
J.^d-sh S a n a * , E e*lspee4ia
225
226
Mainpuri.
KrantiKeMandirMen (H ).Brahm acari Indra, Indradev Singh.
Mainpvni: DeshBandhu Pustak Bhandar, 1920. 176pp- I O L B
37; NAI 141; PIB 22; CRL.
Short biographies of revolutionaries, reproducing material
generally banned in earlier works.
Foreign Affairs, International Politics
America JCo Svadhinta Kaise Mili ( H ) . Svami Atmanand.
Lucknow: Somdeo Sharma: Phoenix Printing Press, 1917.
201pp. IO L B 5; PIB 57; CRL.
How America Gat Independence. Suggests similar patterns
for India.
Asia K i Kranti ( H ) . Satya Narain Shastri. Ajm er: Sasta
Sahitya Mandal, Sasta Sahitya Press, c. 1932. 444pp. IOL B
34; PIB 33; N A I 130.
Discussion of nationalism and revolution in Asia, emphasis on
applying lessons to India.
An Attack on the Indian Rupee; Portuguese Fascism Exposed.
Bombay: Goa Congress Committee, 1 9 4 4 .14pp. NAI.
Sharp criticism o f customs policy and currency manipulation
by the Salazar regime. Claims British complicity.
Bhawani Dayal Sanyasi: A Public W orker of South Africa.
Prem Narayan Agarwal. Etawah: Indian Colonial Association,
Fine Art Printing Press, 19S9. vi+1804-xlii. NAI; PIB 30;
CRL.
Biography of an Arya Samajist and Congress (born in Johan
nesburg in 1892} who helped lead Indians in South Africa. On
Hindu reform efforts, racism, atrocities in South Africa. Appendix
includes a report on' a Hindu conference.
Bolshevik Rut ( H ) . Shiv Narain Tandoh. Cawnpur: Pratap
Karyataya, Pratap Press, 193 2 .401pp. IOL B 39; NAI 15; PIB
23.
History of Bolshevik revolution in Russia.
China in Revolt. S. K. Vidyarthi (alias, M. N. Roy) Bombay:
Vanguard Publishing Co., n.d. 80pp. NAI; PIB 72.
Marxist new of China-, 1923-1927Comrade Dimitroff ( I I ). Benares: Jangju Press, n.d. 16pp.
IO L B 195.
Life of a Russian revolutionary.
227
228
329
230
231
2 32
233
23-1
235
236
237
238
be plunder, and who after the Mutiny tortured men, women and
children.*
Tug Dharma ( H ) . Haribhav Upadhyaya. Ajmer: Sasta Sahitya Mandir, Sahitya Pres9, 1931. 266pp. IO L B 16; PIB 27.
Essays on Indian problems from a nationalist viewpoint. Sup
ports non-cooperation.
Congress Ko Samrafvavad Virodhi Sanstha Banao Congress
Memberm Se Appeal ( H ) . Sajjad Zahir, et al. Allahabad: Sri
Seqa Press, 1937. 2pp. IOL F 95; PIB 148.
An Appeal T o M ake the Congress an uAnti-Impenalist Or
ganization. A handbill stressing militancy and united action.
Hindustan Azad Jama'at (U ).- D eo Narain Pande. Calcutta:
Indian Freedom Party, Siiaji Press, 1928. Ip. PIB 71; R&R
1930,720.
A poster on the Indian freedom movement.
Non-Cooperation Tree and Mahatma Gandhi (H , English).
Lahore: Saghal and Sons, n.d. Ip. PIB 170.
A picture filled with symbols including figures of nationalists,
goddesses, council chambers, Krishna, and jail.
, The Right Path to Liberty (H , U , E nglish). Lahore: Saghal
and Sons, 1931. Ip. PIB 27; CRL.
Black-and-white poster, with pictures of jail, Krishna, and the
march to the sea. Also this poem: Doth Ye Remember, O
Krishna, Thy promises made in Gitaf" Yes, Mother ( India) , I
remember. The gulf is being paved. A little more sacrifice and
the road will be completed." Gandhi, Nehru. Sikhs also promi
nent.
Struggle for Freedom (H , G, U ) . Cawnpur: Shvam Sundar
Lai, n.d. Ip. Similar tension, Lahore: Saghal and Sons, n.d. IOL
F 64; PIB 170.
Poster with many pictures and images. Includes a Goddess of
Freedom," a Jail Ditch," Gandhi, and British atrocities ( includ
ing use of planes, guns, bombs).
Nationalist Biography15
Bandi Jhan (H ) . Sacindra Naih Samal, pub. 2 eds- Lahore:
Vidhja Prakash Press, c. J922. Allahabad; Standard Press, c.
13.
Rrfcwice works rtlating to molutKmario include the foI!'>uio~:
Sharma, Encyclopaedia, Ghovh, Roll e f Honour, S. P. Sen, pxtiviuin/ ef
b'ational Biegreph y,
239
2 40
241
2 42
243
244
2-45
Serere Indictment c f British police activities, including atcounts c f alleged atrocities and brutality. Directed toward a
Western audience.
P/utttfiElan ( I I ) . M ch ir Candra ( if t * " ) , e d . , pub. Delhi;
Stem Press, n.d. I6 pp. IOL B 1225.
Patriotic poetry aimed at soldiers.
Police Ka Atyacar ( I I ) . Thakar Sibhun. Delhi: Ciranji Lai
Vidyarthl,e. 193 0.16pp. IO L B 11 1 ;N A I4 5 ;P IB 2 9 ;CRL.
Poetry on "tyranny of the police."
Police Ke Bhaiyon ( I t ) . Allahabad: United Provinces Con*
g m a Committee, e. 1932. 4pp. IOL F 7,
Appeal to Indian policemen to quit and aid the Congress.
Vidhar K e Police Ilartaiiyon K i Phariyai ( H ) . Patna; c.
1947.lfipp.C R L .
Background on the 1947 police hartal (work stoppage) in
Bihar.
Bathindgan-i-Delhi Ka Paigham, Police Ke Sipahiyon Ke
Ncm (U).n.S. Ip. IOL3D.
Message to policemen, calling for non-cooperatran tod resigna
tion from British service.
I{cIlinJuttanSipayo (I I).n .i. Ip. IO L F 105.
Call for Indian troops to revolt.
Long L h e Revolution, Kartar Singh. Erahvan: Republic
P ra t, c. 1920. 2pp. IO L B 203.
Handbill containing resolutions o f the Congress; hfgh-lights
the call for military and police to resign.
Police KaramcariijonSe Appeal ( I f ) . IndumatlGoyanka. Cal
cutta: Raihtriya Mahila Samiti, 1931. Ip. IOL F 90; J!tP 1929,
4580.
Poster on boycott and military revolt.
Police Ki Kartut ( I I ) . Benares: Pancaysn Press, c, 1930, lp.
IO L F 54;P IB 67.
Poster, with poetry on misdeeds of the police.
Police Phauj Aur C .ID . Ke HmduaUmi Karamcariyon Se
Appeal (II).KanhaiyaLalGautam.n.i. lp .IO L F 3 .
Call for Indians to withdraw from the police, army.
Politva (H).RamDvivedLBaliyas c. 1920. lp .IO L F 12.
Poster attacking the police.
246
Princely Stales'*
Chouse, Oh Indian Princes. London: c. 1909. 13pp. N AI;
CRL; GIPOL January 1910, 16 5-1 65 A ; July 1915, 5 6 -7 2 A .
Tract aiming at cultivating support among princes for rev
olution. Threatens a strict accounting on the basis o f princely
responses.
Chic Suppression in Hyderabad. A Hyderabad! Citizen-"
Hyderabad Peoples Condition Series, #4 . Poona: Raghavendra
Rao Sham a, 1 9 3 8 .15pp. CRL.
On internal politics, one o f an eight-item series. Others in
clude Under the Ride o f His Excited Highness, Publicity Cam
paign Against the People, Moslem Attitudes in Hyderabad,
Problem cf Political Prisoners.
Kashmir. Bombsv, All India States Peoples Conference, 1939.
54pp. N AI; CRL. '
Sympathetic treatment of Kashmir nationalist movement,
pointing out its relation to the wider struggle in British India and
urging public support.
Mam K e Ek Crore Rupiya Kaise ( U ) . Delhi: Shaikh Zia-ulHaq, Klnaja Electric Press, 1936. GIPOL 1 9 3 6 ,3 7 /1 .
On scandals vrithin Kashmir, attacks the private life o f the
Maharaja, Hari Singh, and his British supporters.
RiyasatMderkctla Aur Utka Hutamran (U ).L ah ore. Rifahi-Am Steam Press, 1931. GIPOL 1932, 117.
Collection of articles from Riyasta Dumya {a journal. World
o f the Princes) , v hich attacks zamindars, princes. Primarily on
Punjab states.
An Alarm Signal to Indian Prmees. Princes Welfare League.
Amritsar: M . S. Madan, Secretary of the League. Siala Printing
Press. 1931. GIPOL 1932, 117.
Attacks on the Maharaja of Patiala, a poster claiming that the
ruler, the greatest intriguer on earthhas come out with his
torpedo scheme to wreck the Federation of Icdia ship. Calls for
vengeance because Patiala allegedly hurt the Chamber o f Princes
by attacking Bikaner, causing communal trouble in Bhopal.
Revelation, Violence
Ah-i-Fcreag Ki Kariits-.tna ( U ) . Ram Nath. Rawalpindi:
15. The n u *nlc o r K n r a o f pnJhia to the ststn i is Bzrbsrm
Rroo%*<V, lodun Pnncrt Isnpmil PothiciaM.* A lw , *e
dra L *l Handa, Ilutory ef F n t i S i r w f f t e IB P m rtly Stain.
217
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
256
257
258
Navan Zila Rajnaitik Sammelan K i Svagatadhyaksha Shrimati Ganga D m Ka Bhashan ( I I ) . Ganga Devi. Cawnpur: n.d.
2pp. IOL F 25; PIB 9; /Varan 7.ila . . . Sabhapati Professor Raja
Rani Shastri Ka Bhasan ( I I ) . Raja Ram Shastri. Cawnpur: n.d.
2pp. PIB 9.
Speeches of the president, reception Committee chairman,
Ninth District political conference, Caw npur (c. 1 9 3 2 ).
The Nontax Campaign in Karnatak. Andanappa Dodmeti,
Dictator, Knrnatak Pro-Congress Committee, n.p., 1933. 19pp.
NAI; GIPOL 1933, 4 8 /3 .
Background on the campaign In North Kanara, discussion o f
official recriminations. Pictures interspersed.
A Note on Government Excesses in Bihar, n.p., Bihar Pro
vincial Congress Committee, c. 1932. 10pp. CRL.
On police acthities during the 1931 ci\il disobedience cam
paign, Bihar.
Pandit M . N. Malaviya's Statement on Repression in India Up
to April 20, 1032. M . N. Malaviya. Benares: Pandit Govind
Malaviva, 1 9 3 2 .13pp. IOL; N AI; PIB 1.
Background on Congress activities, British response.
Police Raj under Emergency Ordinance. Madura: Tamilnad
Congress Committee, Satvagraha Press, 1932. 54pp. PIB 9;
CRL.
Report on chi! disobedience, April-June 1932, and alleged
police brutality.
Puran Svadhinata Ka Mahatvapuma Divas ( H ) . Agra: Dic
tator of Mainpuri Congress CoTnmiuee, Adarsh Press, n.d. 4pp.
IOL F 110; PIB 21.
Important Day of Total Freedom. Manifestoes, announce
ments.
Rajasthan K i Pukar (H ) . Nar Sinha Das. Ajmer: Rajasthan
Publishing House, n.d. 128pp. I O L B 12; PJB 60.
Description of Congress activities in Rajasthan.
Rashtriya Gan (II). Allahabad: Satvagraha Committee, 1930.
13pp. CRL.
Poems on the Allahabad satyagraha efforts and their place
within the over-all nationalist movement.
Salt Par Katii Biti? Ciranji Lai, Har Govind Pant. Ranikhet:
Congress Committee, Desh Bhakt Press ( Almora), 1931. 32pp.
IO L B 126.
Essay on salt policy and the Gandhi salt campaign.
259
F 6;P I B 1 .
Broadside on hartal and jail life.
Mahatma Gandhi K i Phauj Men Bhsrti Flo (H ) . Lucknow:
Satyagraha Committee, Days! Printing Works, 1930. 2pp. PIB.
Poster calling for participation in non-cooperation activities.
18.
The history of the resolution
this volume.
2 60
261
262
563
204
265
M atdur K 'u s i
266
2G7
268
269
^ S e ctio n &
271
272
273
I'rw i, c. 1930. lfipp. Hr IOL B 314; NAI 184; PIB 64; CRL.
U : IOL 99, 102.
Atahyag (11), Bmdeshvari Prasad Malaviya, ed.,pub. Rfim pur: Jar] Printing Works (Benares), 1921. 2d ed. (another
d., Shambhu Printing Works, Benares). ZJpp. IOL B 164,
190; PIB 52; RJ<R 1922,1110.
Atahyog Anand ( I I ) . NUakanth Gupta, ed., pub. Jhansi:
Uisah Press, 1921. 28pp. IO L B 377.
Asafiyag Bahar ( I I ) . Ram Narayan Mastana, pub. Cawnpur:
Catcah IVes* (also, Uuah Press), 1 9 2 1 .15pp. IO LB 141;PIB
SI; R8tR 1922,1110.
Atahyog Cana (11). Nirbhayanand Etawah: Ganesh Anand
Yatri (A danh Press), 1 9 2 0 .10pp. IOL F 9 ; PIB 153.
Atahyog Ka Agrabomb ( I I ) . Caivnpur; Ramkrishan Lai,
. Rajhans Press (Khatri Press), n.d. 6pp. IOL B 357; PIB 37.
Asahyog Kajal't ( H ) . .Minapur: Brndeshvari Prasad Mataviya, Myatin Press (Aligarh), 1921. 16pp. IOL B 369.
Atahyog Phcg ( I I ) , Dvarka Prasad, pub. AllaJiabad: Krish
na Press, 1921. 18pp. IOL B 138; PIB 51; R&R 1922, 1110.
Asahyag Tarang ( H ) . "Ek Desh Preim. Cawnpur: Madhav
NandanMisra, Rajhans Press, 1 9 2 0 .16pp. IOL B 372; PIB 37.
Asahijogi Divane K i Tarang ( I I ) . Allahabad: Saogam La]
AgarvaJ, Misra Printing Works, n.d. 16pp. IOL B 449.
Atahyogi Vir Bharat ( I I ) . Surendra Sbarma, ed. Cawnpur:
Cunni La! Gaur, Rajhans Press, n.d. 16pp. IOL B 262; PIB 51;
RW l 1922, 1110.
AsliRashlrixja Alha ( I I ) . PragDattPande. rev.ed., Farulhabad: Han Ratna Tivari end Ram Rakshpal, Cintanjiri Press,
1 9 2 2 .10pp. IO L F 3 6 ; PIB 56.
Aral Raj K i Kunji Arthat Mahatmaji Ki Pukar (I I ). Allah
abad: Saryu Lai,Raja Press,n.d. 8pp. IOLB 8 6 ;PIB 47.
A tad Bharat Ke Gane ( I I ). Pandit Ram Gopa! Shukia ( Prakash"), ed. Benares: Azad Sainik Desh Bandhu Samarak Bhandar, Sarasvati Press, 1930. 16pp. IOL B 208; PIB 29; CRL.
Azad Bharat Varth ( H ) . Prabhu Narayan Misra, ed., pub.
Benares; Shri Press, 1931. I6pp. IOL B 389; NAI 40; PIB 29;
CRL.
274
A t a i Gitanjali ( H ) . N. M . Upadhynya, ed. Kandva: Kannavari Press, 1931. 32pp. IO L B 44 5 ; PIB 6; CRL.
Azad Hind Urf Afubarakbadi ( H ) . Pandit Ram Gopal Shukb
- (Prakash ) , cd. Cawnpur: Unshl Singh ( R alna"), Vishnu
Prayag Press, 1930. 6pp. IOL F 107; PIB 29.
Azad-i-Hmd Urf Svaraj K i D eri ( U ) . Had! Hussain. M ora-'
dahad: Shamas Press, n.d. 8pp. IOL 154.
Azade Hind Urf Daman Ka Dfcala, pt. 1 ( H ) . Indra Prasad
Gupta. Benares: Pramed Samaj, Shri Press, 1 9 3 1 .16pp. IO L B
156.
Azadi D e Git ( U ) . Dev Raj Dev. Lahore: Am Ditta Mai,
1931.16pp. CRL.
Azadi Ka B iju l ( H ) . Allahabad: Uraa Shankar Dikshit, Raja
Press, 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IO L B 91.
Azadi Ka Bigu! ( H ) . Kshama Candra Rastogi, ed., pub.
Benares: Sarasvati Press, 1930. 15pp. IOL B 116; PIB 29;
CRL.
- Azadi Ka Bomb ( H ) . Jagannath Prasad Arora, ed., pub.
Benares: Lakshml Press, 1930. 15pp. I O L B 152; NAI 2.
Azadi Ka Danka ( H ) . Vishyanath Sharma, ed., pub. Benares:
Sarasvati Press, c. 1 9 3 0 .13pp. IOL B 3 4 0 ,2 7 7 ; PIB 64.
Azadi KoDanka ( H ) . Allahabad: Beni Madho Gupta, Union
- Job Press, 1 9 3 0 .19pp. PIB 215 A.
Azadi Ka Jkanda ( H ) . Agra: Hindi Sahitya Book Depot, A.
B. Press, 19 30 .8pp. IO L B 3 U ;P IB 64.
AzaJi K e Nushke ( H ) . Yamuna Singh, ed., pub. Calcutta:
Lakshmi Vilas Press, c. 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IO L B 304; PIB 70.
Azadi K e Tarane ( U ) . Comrade Amritsari. Amritsar: Hamidul-Hak, 193 1.32pp. PIB 36.
Azadi Ki Bansuri (H ) . Jogeshvar Prasad (Khalish ), ed.
Gaya: Vijay Kumar Sinha, Citra Gupta Press, n.d. 20pp. PIB 6,
Azadi Ki Camak (H ) . Shiva Ram Parivrajak, ed., pub.
Benares: Sarasvati Press, c. 1930. 15pp. IOL B 184.
Azadi Ki Devi Lakhsmi Bat ( U ). Delhi: Pandit Babu Ram
Sharma, J. M. Press, c. 1930. ISpp. PIB 57.
Azadi K i Garjana (H ) . Gaaga Prasad, pub. Cawnpur: Prem
Printing Press; 1930.8pp. IO LB 425.
275
276
277
278
Gandhi B/gnI (H ) . Cawnpur: Satyagraha Committee, Agarval Press, n.d. 16pp. IOL B 102; PIB 64.
Gandhi Gaurav (H ). Lai Mahabali Singh, ed., pub. Rewah
State: Bhag\an Press (Allahabad), 1930. 37pp. IOL B 415.
279
64.
280
281
282
Kalam Ka Jauhar Tani Svarajya D evi ( H ) . Srami Ilarishankar, pub. Dehra Dun: Tilak Pustak Bhandar, Abyha Press,
1 9 3 0 .6pp. IO L B 429; PIB 21; CRL.
Kangal Bharat ( H ) . Pauper India. Babu Ram Sharma, pub.
Bareilly: Singhal Printing W orks, 1930. 14pp. IO L B 216;
N AI 216; PIB 67; CRL.
Karachi Congress ( H ) . Prabhu Narayan Misra, ed., pub.
Benares: Shri Press, n.d. IGpp. I O L B SOI; PIB 8.
Kashganj Ka Khvab ( U ) . Lai Bahadur Varma. Bareilly:
Arya Granth Ratnafcar, Sadat Press, n.d. 8pp. IOL 141; PIB 52;
R & R 1922 ,1110.
Kaumi Bailon Ka Potha Panjabi Men T e Nali Bismil KiTarap
( U ) . Multan: Asha Nand Pracarak, Aman Sarhad Electric
Press, n.d. 6pp. CRL.
Kaumi Parvana ( H ) . Calcutta: Panna Lai Gujarati, 1931.
16pp. IOL B 230; PIB 1; GIPOL 1 9 3 2 ,116.
Kaitmi Shahid ( P ) . Ram Prasad Bismil, ed., pub. Lahore:
Sanatan Dharm Press, n.d. 7pp. IOL; PIB 162.
Kaumi Tarana ( H ) . Phaiyariund. Badayun: Amil-ul-lkbal
Press, n.d. 8pp. IO L B 72.
283
A rutti Bhajnarali ( H ) . Nand Lai ( Arya*). Gazipur: Prabhu Dayaf, Yureka Printing Works (Benares), n.d. 16pp. IOLB
274; NAI 123; PIB 77s CRL.
Kranti Gitanjali, 2d pt. ( I I ) . Ram Prasad Bhmil. Lahore:
Labhman Patiiik, A. P. P r , c. 1931. 32pp. IOL B 57; NAI
107; PIB 29, 45; CRL. Apparently reprinted at least five times.
Kranti Ka Pufari ( I I ) . Devotees o f Rerslt. Mohan I-l
( Arman''), pub. Ca7tpur: Shankar Press, n.d. 8pp. IOL B
330,398; PIB 27.
Kranti Ka Sandrsh ( I I ) . Babu Ram Sharma, ed. Cawnpur:
Rashtriva Pustak Bhandar, Arjun Press (Benares), 193 0.15pp.
IO L B 267; NAI 17; PIB 29; CRL.
Kranti Ka Sfianthnad ( I I ) . "Azad. Cawnpur: Rashtriya
Puiiak Bhandar, Shukla Printing Press, 1930. IGpp, IOL B
332; PIB 8.
Kranti Ka Singhnad ( I I ) . Vihari Lai Sharma, ed. (Hindu
Social Reform Series, no. 1 4 ). Lucknow: Vimal Granthmala,
1930. 16pp. IOL B 218; PIB 67. Other editions published (for
example,Delhi: n.d. 1 6pp.lO L B 244)
Kranti Ka Smghnad (H ) Cawnpur: Ganga Sahai Chauve,
Rashtriya Sahttya Pracarak Mandal, Brahman Press, c. J930
24pp. NAI 188; PIB 22; CRL.
Kranti Ki Gitanjali ( I I ) . Mohan Candra ( Masta"), cd.
Delhi: Svadesh Shreni Press, n.d. 15pp. IOL B 170; NAI 39;
TIB 70; CRL.
Kranti KiJhalak ( I I ) . K. L. Gupta,ed., pub. Agra: Lakshmi
Printing Press, 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IOLB 201; PIB 74.
Kranti Pushpanjali ( I I ) . Pandit Banshidhar Sharma, ed.
Cawnpur: Rashtriya Pustak Bhandar, V. P. Press, 1930. 16pp.
IO LB 421.
Kranti Pushpanjali (11). Somendra Mukherji, ed., pub. Moradabad: Sharma Machine Printing Press, c. J931. 34pp. IOL
B 402; PJB 27; CRL.
Lahore Ka Congress Ka E/an ( U ). Sadhu Ram Das. Delhi:
J. M. Press, 1931. 16pp. IOL 122; PIB 29; CRL.
Mahatma Gandhi ( I / ) . Ca'vnpur: Mjdad Ali, Azizi Press,
n.d. 8pp. IOL 107; PIB 56.
284
285
n.d. 16pp. IOL B 417; NAI; PIB 70; CRL. U : Drarka Prasad
Shanna, ed. Delhi: Svadhin Press, Delhi. 16pp. IOL 101; PIB
21; CRL.
Mahatma Gandhi K i Sujh ( H ) , Lucknow; Vimal Granth
mala, Allahabad Oriental Printers, n.d. 16pp. IOL B 122; PJB
27.
Mahatma Gandhi Tah Holi ( H ) . Vishveshvar Prasad, ed.,
pub. Benares: Adarsb Press, n.d. 14pp. IOL B 71; PIB 51.
Mahila Gitanjali (H ) . Sushila Deri, ed. Moradabad: VaidrsJ
Ban Ram Misra, Sarasvati Press, 19 3 0 .13pp. IOL B 89.
Manharan Shyam (H ) . Manoharlal Shukla. 2 pts. Pt. I :
Allahabad: Misra Printing W orks, n.d. 16pp. IO L B 419; NAI;
PIB 70; CRL. P t 2 : Allahabad: Raja Press, n.d. I6pp. IOL B
419; PIB 70.
Marvari Rashtra Gil (H ) . Sarvai Ram Sharma, ed., pub.
Malkapur (B erar): Sri Isvar Printing Press, n.d. 8pp. PIB 1,
343.
M astiK e Tarane (H , U ). Pralayaokar: Yadunandan Shanna,
ed.,pub.Laheriyasara{,n.d. 11pp. H: IOLB 305. U : PIB 117.
Mata Ke Pujari ( H ) . Puran Cand Jain, ed., pub. Benares:
Sri Shiv Press, c. 1 9 3 1 .16pp. IO L B 54.
Matvala Gayan ( H ) . Mata Prasad Shukla. Benares: Raghunath Prasad Gupta, Sri Press, 1931. 16pp. IOL B 63; NAI; PIB
27; CRL.
Mausim Vahar ( H ) . Rajendra Prasad, ed. Mcizaffarpirr:
Bihar Standard Press, n.d. 12pp. IOL F 106; PIB 42.
Mazlumon Ki Ah Yani Dukht Hindustan (H ) . Dvarka Prasad
Sharma, ed. Delhi: Ram Richpal, MartandPress, c. 1931.16pp.
IOLB 92; PIB 64; CRL.
Mukib-i-Vatan ( U ) . Guru Prasad. Allahabad: Desh Sevak
Press, c. 1915.50pp. IOL 140.
Mukt Sangit (H ) . Abhi Ram Shanna. Cawnpur: Vishnu
Prayag Press, 1933. 77pp. NAI 382; PIB 65; CRL.
Musafir K e Bhajan (H ) . Kumar Sukhlal Singh. Delhi: Lak*
shman Pathik, c. 1937.32pp. NAI 173.
Namak Ka Gala ( H ) . Ram Candra, pub. Delhi: n.d. 15pp.
IO LB 399; PIB 8; CRL.
2 86
28 7
288
289
290
Rashtriya Shankhnad ( H ) . Yati Yatan Lai, ed-, pub. Cavrnpur: Rajnaitik Sahitya Pracarak Mandal, Kesari Press (A g r a ),
n.d. 16pp. IOL B 414; PIB 70.
Rashtriya Singhnad ( H ) . Visvanath Sharma, pub. Benares:
Sarasvati Press, n.d. 15pp. IO L B 75; PIB 29.
Rashtriya Tan ( H ) . Lucknow: Hindi Pustak Bhandar, Rama
Printing Press, 1 3 3 3 ,16pp. IOL B 151; PIB 78.
Rashtriya Tansain ( H ) , n.p., n.d. 20pp. PIB 37.
Rashtriya Tarang ( H ) . Buddhu Ram. Allahabad: Mohan
Lai, Shishu Press, 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IOL B 321; PIB 47.
Rashtriya Tuphan ( H ) . K . L . Barman, ed., pub. Benares:
Lakshmi Press, 1930. 15pp. IO L B 410; PIB 70.
Rashtriya Umang ( H ) . Uma Caran Lai, ed., pub. Gorakhpur:
Gorakhpur Printing Press, 2 9 3 2 .16pp. IO L B 4 7 ; N A I 2 9 ; PIB
27; CRL.
Rashtriya Vina ( H ) . Gaya: Prabhu Narayan Misra, Srivageshvari Press (Benares), n.d. 26pp. IOL B 381 ; PIB 8.
Reading Shahi Hoti ( H ) . M . P. Gupta, ed. Cawnpur: Ramdulare Sharma, c. 1921. 8pp. PIB 37.
Sangit S a m ar ( H ) . Vishvanath Lai Srivastava (Visharad"). Benares: Sarasvati Press, c. 1931. 128pp. Pp. 1 -1 1 9 ,
Hindi; 120 -1 2 8 , English. IO L B 187; PIB 1.
Sarojini Sandesh ( H ) . InkOab series, no. 2 . Delhi: Govind
Ram Gupta Rahbar,Marland Press, n.d. 16pp. IO L B 215; NAI
158; PIB 67; CRL.
Satyagraha Gitavalt ( H ) . Svama Singh Varma ("Anand ).
Agra: Sri Mukund Mandir, Kesari Press, 1930. IOL B 207;
NAI 121; PIB 29; CRL.
Satyagraha Ka Bigul ( H ) . Gyan Singh Varma, pub. Aligarh:
Jagdish Press, 1923. 8pp. IO L B 358.
Satyagraha Ki Lahar ( H ) . Gokama Nath Shukla, pub. Cawn
pur: National Press, e. 1937. 8pp. IO L B 259; PIB 21.
Satyagraha Sangram ( I I ) . Atta&abatf: Panna Lai Varma,
Raja Press, nA. 25pp. IOL B 441; NAI 61; PIB 64; CRL.
Satyagraha Sangram, Pt. 1 ( H ). Ram Candra Sharma. Delhi:
Tula Ram Gupta, Sreni Press, n.d. 16pp. IOL B 118.
291
Satyagraha Sandran, Ka Di.ful ( ] ! ) , Jbphuvar Dava! Vidyarthi, ed.,pab. Agra: A<brsh Press, c. 1030. 15pp. IOL B 313:
PIB 64.
Saiijagrahi (J I ). Mahaiir Singh Vertna. Cawnpur: Ram
Svarup Gupta. Prem Printing Press, n.d. fipp. IOL B 73; PIB
SO.
Satyagraht Jhankar ( I f ) . Goralhpur: Bfmkar, 1930. 8pp.
I O L B 213; PiB 67.
Satyarati Ka Sar.deih ( U ) . Go'ind Ram Gupta, ed, Delhi:
S D Gupta, Svadhin Press, 1930. 16pp. IOL 103; TIB 67.
Savcn Ka Satyagraha ( I I ) . Gopal I^at Gupta. Benares: Meva
Lai, George Press, n.d. lCpp. IOL B S4C; PIB 64.
Stxran Ka Senapati (11). Gopal Lai Gupta. Benares: Meva
Lai and Co., Sri Bagesbvari Press, n.d. lCpp. IO L B 204; NAI
86; C R L
Sawn Ka Singh ( I I ) . Gopal La! Gupta. Benares: Gauri
Shankar Pratad, Arjun Press, c. 1031. 16pp. IOL B 158; PIB
27.
Savon Svarajya ( H ) . Pandit Bhairab Prasad Sharma. Ben
ares: Bindeshvari Prasad, Sri Bagesh\ari Press, 1930. 7pp. IOL
B 371.
Shahid Garjuna ( I I ) . Allahabad: Btni Madho Gupta, Union
Job Press, 1930. 15pp. IO L B 408.
Shahide Nau Ratan ( I I ) . Vimal Sharma. Cawnpur: Raijnath
Bajpej, N. K . Press, 1 9 3 1 .16pp. CRL.
Shahidi Naz ( I I ) . Canda Lai Dikshst. Delhi: Rajendra Press,
1931. 32pp. NAI 89; PIB 42; CRL.
Shahidon Ka Sandeth ( I I ). Mohar Candra ( Mast"), ed.,
pub. Delhi: SvadeshSreni Press,n.d. lCpp. IOLB 22 6 ;NAI 79;
PJB 29.
Shahidon Ke Tarane ( I I ) . Bhota Nath Dardi. Calcutta: Sa
rasvati Pustak Agency, Kumar Press, n.d. 16pp. PIB 1} CRL
Shahidon K i Garjana ( I f ) . Thakur Devi Singh, ed., pub.
Delhi: Agarval Book Depot, Svadhtna Press, 1931. 8pp. IOL
B 316; PIB 64.
Shahidon Ki Yadgari, Pt. 2 (I I ). Allahabad: Satya Narayan
Lai Dhauria; Abhyudaya Press, 1931. 8pp. IOL B 422; PIB 8..
292
293
294
Svarajya K i Gunj ( H ) . Aksir Sialkoti, ed. Lahore: AngloOriental Tress, 1930. 30pp. N A I 96; PIB 2 9 ; CRL.
Svarajya K i Hai (H , U ) . Ram Lai Chedi, pub. Cawnpur:
Prem Printing Press, 1930. 8pp. H: IOL B 434; PIB 67. U:
IOL 149; PIB 64.
Svarajya Ki Kunji ( H ) . Sita Ram Gupta, ed., pub. Moradabad: Shanna Machine Printing Press, 1930. 32pp. IO L B 134;
NAI 77; CRL.
Svarajya Pratijya ( H ) . Cawnpur: Ganpat Ram Gaur, Sri
Lakshmi Press, n.d. 16pp. IO L B 365; PIB 56.
Svarajya Pukar Atkva Desh K o Cetazanl ( H ) . Kanhaiya Lai
Dikshit ( Indra"), ed. Lucknow: Gaya Prasad Avadh Bihari,
Bharat Bhushun Press, 1 9 3 0 .12pp. IO L B 6 7 ,1 2 0 ; N A I 155.
Svarajya Sangram Ka Bigul ( H ) . K . L. Gupta, ed., pab.
Agra: Lakshmi Printing Press, 1930. 16pp. IOL B 200; NAI
10; PIB 74.
Sxama Vihan ( H ) . Hari Krishna ( 'Prem !"). Ajmer: Sasta
Sahitva Mandal, Sasta Sahitya Printing Press, c. 1930. 102pp.
3 0 L B 4 2 , 186,-PIB 70.
Svatantra Bharat Atha ( H ) . Cawnpur: Mitthan Lai Agarral,
Prem Printing Press, n.d. 20pp. IOL B 303; PIB 47, 64.
Svatantra Bharat Ka Shankhnad ( H ) . Avadh Bihari Lai
Shanna, ed. Lucknow: Vimal Granthmala, Bharat Bhusan
Press, 1930. 16pp. IOL B 344.
Svttantra Bharat Ka Singhnad ( H ) . Candrika Prasad Jigjasu, ed. Benares: Tribhuvan Nath Azad Sainik, Arjun Press,
1932. 16pp. IOL B 77; PIB 67.
Svatantra Gitanjali ( U ) . GangaRam, trans. Delhi: Martand
Press, 1 . 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IOL 100; PIB 47; CRL.
Svatantra Ka Bigul ( H ) . Gorakhpur: Bhasakr Press,'1 93 0.
8pp. IO L B 212; NAI 12; Pffi 29; CRL.
Svatantra Ka Bigul ( H ) . Pandpy Punyatma. Benares: Arya
Sahitya Mandir, Arjun Press, 1 9 3 0 .16pp. IOL B 74; PIB 1.
Sratanlra Ki Shel / H ) . Jlam Sysrvp Gv p a , ed., pub. .Ma
thura:'Hindustan Davjkliana Printing Works,**'1531. 12pp.
IO L B 5 3 ; PIB 27. '
Svatantra Ki_Deri (H ) . Girraj Kishcr Agarval, ed., pob.
Agra: Kesari Press, c. 19 3 1 .16pp. IO L B 6 6 ;PIB 29.
295
2 96
297
1110
BIBLIOGRAPHY
P rivate P apers
G ielmsford Papers (Frederic John Napier Thesiger, 1st Vis
count). IOL MSS Eur E 264
Hailey Papers (William Malcolm, 1st B aron). IO L MSS Eur E
220
Halifax Papers (Edward Frederick Lindley W ood, 1st E arl).
IOL MSS Eur C 152
H im el Diaries (Sir Frederic Arthur), IOL Home Misc. 86-1
Morley Papers ( John, 1st Viscount). IOL MSS Eur D 573
Minto Papers. National Library o f Scotland M 8252100
Montagu Papers (Hon. Edwin Samuel). IO L MSS Eur E 523
Reading Papers (Rufus Daniel Isaacs, 1st Marquis). IOL MSS
E u rE 2 38
Thompson Papers (Sir John Perronet). IOL MSS Eur F 137
Willingdon Papers (Freeman-Thomas, 1st Marquis). IOL MSS
Eur F 93
G o v e r n m e n t P u b u c a t io n s
Bamford, P. C. Histories o f the S'on-Co-cperation and Khitafat
Movements. Delhi: Go\emment of India, 1925 (confiden
tial C.I.D. handbook).
Ewart, J. M . Terrorism in India, 19171956 Simla: Go\emment of India, 1937 (confidential C I.D. handbook).
India. Britain Against Hitlerism. Delhi: Bureau of Public Infor
mation, c. 1940.
Bibliography
299
.....
. Legislative Council Debates, 1007-1919.
------- Publicity Campaign in India. Ddiii: Government of
India, 191B.
Report c f the Administration o f Lord Reading, Viceroy
and Governor-General o f India, 1021-26. Delhi; Govern
ment o f India, 1928 (confidential).
----- Report o f the Press Commission, 3 vols. Delhi: Govern*
ment c f India, 1954.
VnfunusiiFiy
G o v e r n m e n t R ecou p s
300
Bibliography
Bibliography
301
502
Bibliography
Bibliography
303
sen
Bibliography
Bibliography
305
1950
S06
Bibliography
Bibliography
307
208
Bibliography
Bibliography
309
AUTHOR INDEX
till
Ali, Syed Ali Husain, 216
All India Kisan Sabha, 25-1
All India Revolutionary Committ , 253
All India States Peoples* Confe.eixe, 246
Allah, Mohammad Abad, 278
Aly, Shamsy, 227
Amritsari, Comrade, 274
Aajuman AM Hadith, 174
Anjumsn-i-Islamiya, 183
Arora, Jaganmch Prasad, 274,
275, 295
Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Lahore,
178
Arya PubSicity Bureau, 175, 177
Arya Sahitya Mandir, Lahore, 179
Arya Sahitya Patshaft, Delhi, 17?
Aiya Samaj, Bhivani, 178
Arya Samaj, Madras, I&4
Ashraf, Suleman, Bihari,* 192
A i:, Amarntth, 298
Atmanand, Swami, 226
Avasthi, Muaishvai- Ditt, 232
Avastfii, Rjro BiTas, '293
Aranhj, Shankar Daval, 295
-Azad." 283
Azfld, Maulana Abul Kalam, 193
Aziz, Abdnl Rahinv, 190
Aziz, Msulri Misbah-ul-Islam Sid
d ii, 194
Author Index
C^ruwdK v ; . w . S3B
Cawnpur Riots Enquiry Commit,
tec, 184
OiittopaJh^ivi, S tn t C t c * 837
Chsvla, Ram Singh, 221
Chrdi, JJsbs La), 29*
Chisti, Khalil Ahmad, 203
Oiitarj, Bjssnt, 293
Committr* o f Anion for fo<irpmJffict, 263
Communist prt>: Altalnbad, 2 1 1 222. liihar, 3tB; Pur*,
jab, 220, -23 ; United F/vtincei,
219
Communfct Pa.tv o f fndia, 218
219, 221, 2221 25*
Comradu Vomh Le*~u*. 263
Cimgrcu, Indian Niionsl, 259
Cenjrrr** Committee: Agra, 256''lifrfh, 210; Bfnsrei, 259,
266; R3nr, SS8, SS7-, Cawnpur.
2fli D.-IM. 212; Coa. 226, 227Gujarat, 256; Kabul, 217s
Maitipuri. 2J8, Mysore, 212TamiJnaJ, 258; Uo, 266L'nit-if FroTinces, 245, 266
Con^rMi Socialist party, 23
ConRTfve, nichard, 213
Cuphtai, M ina Fahim Brjj, 190
D irt,G . S.. 21*
Dm," Si*
311
Ls), SlO
1T4
Ek Rfcain, 275
Ek D oh Ircmi," 273
"Ek Duthi Klsan," 265
*Elc Itiha> Prrmi, 211
Ek JaiJ Pnvaii," 268
Ek )ihtri}a rrtmi." 217
Rngefl, Fm i'ffck , Sill, 221
Pahsmi, j r , 227
"Frrozr, 192
Phhtr, FredericL B , 231
Free JmJia,* 261
3 12
Author Index
.2M
Gaoba, Kenhslra Lai, 268
Gaur, Raitjdss, 63, 288
Gaur, Vrajendranath, 236
Gautam, Kscliaiya La!, 218
Gbaaaaw, ^ttaa!!ah Khan, ]92
Ghose, SushUa, 203
Ghosh, SaiJendra N h , 253
GoVid/i, RaSha Mohao, SIB
Gorisnankar, Brahsucharya," 182
G out, Ram Das, 234
G ovicta, lodumati, 245
Gujarati, Panaa Lai, 224
Gupta, Bal Bhadn Praiid, *Rasik," 256, 280, 282
Gupta, Carxlra Bhan, 275, 279
Gupta, Channamal, 288
Gopta, Gcpal Lai, 291
Gupta, Gorind Rsin, Rahbar,*
281, 251
Gupta, Indra Prasad, 27*
Gtrpta, Jajannaih P/asSd, 254,
260, 78, 292
Gopta, K . L , 283, 294
Gopta, Latshnu Cand, 234
Gupta, Manmath Nash. 321, 247
Gapta, M. U , 257
Gnpta, M . P., 290
Gupta, MuHidhar, 292
Gcpta, Narayan La], 196
Gcpta, NUakanth, 273
Gopta, Ram Syarup, 25 3,27 5,2 54
Gopta, Rerati Sharan, 255
Gupta, Sita Ram, 204
Gupta, V obn a aib Prasad, S91
Guru ka-Bagh Coagjesa Enquiry
Committee, 199
Gyan, Sad Sadan, 214
Haider, Maulri Ghulam, 202
Haidar, Muhammad, I 9 t
Hale, Hafiz AbdaL 193
Hak, Shaikh Anarn-d- (Prem
Cand), 186
Hamid, Usmani, 189
Hanuman, 297
Harishaakar, Swarni, 256, 282
H u n , Mnashi Zahar *1-, 189
Hassnaad, Gcriad Rant, 310
Haahan, Matilana Mahmud al-,
194
Herat, KlttsbdJl Khan, 229
Hindu Sabha, Lahore, 185
Tfiodansn Cbadar, 2ft*, S10, 213,
215, 217, 223, 244, 248, 2-49,
250, 252. 2S1
Kiadnttan PoIckaI Syndicate, 272
A u th or htdex
314
Prao," 235
Prasad, Rabu G auri SVianVar, 289
Prasad, Comrade Surya, 207
Prasad, Dvarka, 273, 237
Prasad, Ganga, 274
Pras&ii, Govind, 186
N
Prasad, C.uru, 235
Nagar, Ttaja Ram, 207, 286, 295
Prasad, Jag dish , Sharmk,* 257
Naik, Dndabtiai, 287
Prasad, Jan k i, Bedhak," 276. 286
Nand, Samurna, 263
Prasad, Jujjejibvar, Kfoalbb," 274
Namyan, Swami Raj, 176
Prnsad, Mahesh Candra, 292
Nath, Bhola, Dardi," 282
Prasad, Manoranjan, 286, 289
N'ath, Bholda, Bfdhab, 275
Prasad, N aravan, 296
Nath, LalaKidar, 185
Prasad, Habuoath, 251
KaA, Ot>Vir, 265
V raw d , R a^m lra, 2 V2, 2 5 6, 260,
Nath, Ram, 246
235
Nath, Sat\fndra, 278
Prasad. Rajeshvar, 229
Nath, Vishambhar, 224
Prasad, Ram^shvsr Pandey, 234
National War Committee, Bengal, Prasad, SanXhto, 186
222
Prasad, Tbakur, 272, 297
Sau Javan Bharat Society, 221,
Prasad, Vishvfshvar, 285
224, 265
Prfwdent in Council, R fd B engal,"
Nau Javan Bharati Dnl, 252
251
Nmami, Kh\aja Hasan. 18'.*, 191
Princr* W clfjre I^ajTJf, 246
Nsziri. Muhammad Matin Shnmshi, IVo-CongrrM Committee, Karna185
Jak, 258
Kfhru, Jauaharlal, 239
Piw jatm a, Pandej. 294
Nehni, Pandit Mou Lai, 266
Pursnik. D-utairaya, 267
Nirbhavanand, 273
Puri, Shanti Narayan, -Shad." 1B2
Nundy. Alfred, 25S
Porva, Milthan La), 284
O
0,t>urn. ArtKu1- Carre, 215
Q
Qureshi, Mshmud, 176
P
Panchi, 278
Pamhi, M. S., 22 i, 24-4. 280
Panile, Deo Narain, 238
Pamle, Frag Datt, 273
PamJry, Becan Sharma, 234, 235,
219
Pander Harash Date, Shvr.m,"
207, 239
Pnndey, Jagannath, 279
Pandey, Nlt\anand, 293
Pandev, Pandii Chedi Lai, 261
Pnndev, Prahlatl, Shastri," 250,
295'
Panjabi, Oojirt, 220
Pont, liar Ga\ind, 258
Par^har. Slivamji, 281
Paribrajj!., Wiha Ram. 274, 287
Parmanand, Bhai. 184, 217
ParJtad, BHig\at. Banpati 281
PathaV, D<-va Ditt, 2J i
Paih-k, P. V S7
PathaV, Sita Ram, 28'*
JVojTDrna, Uabu Ram, 276
P h aar Enquin Committfr. 244
Phaiyazhind, 282
R
Rnde, Pyare Lai Ganga, 272
Rahman, Abdul, 185
Rahman. Maulona IJabib-ul-, 192
Rai, Lala Lajpat, 235, 236, 237
Ram, Asha, 235
Ram, Buddhu. 290
Ram, Ganga, 294
Ram, Gita, 28fi
Ram. C.ound. 18b
Ram, Mania. 178, 179, 180. 296
Ram, Prndit
2.12
Ram, R aiSah.bJh tm gi, 177
Ram. TnKi, 188
Ramanmrti. S '. 237
Ramanand, B rjh m ^ jri, 287
Ramsnk'tia. Sri. fieniptiri, 244
Kao. S riu iw i U 223
Ua-Jhfi. S a ' i jd \!t Mluwmad,
18*
llasiniji, K-.homa Caiuira. 271
Rather. Bhacrcii Lai. Mitra," 278
K.i\, lljn?
25
HccUli. S MwhUaV,lmii. 24
"lirpnb! C Solclifr," 233
Author Index
315
npginaJJ, 215
Hoy, Mtnjbrrair* Nath, 220. 222,
328. 235. 254
Hoy Defence Committee, 230
Rtmell. P *or, IS))
Rutherford, J. K.. 181
S
Sibari, fmdad, 2 62
Safchun, TTiik*/, 2iS
Sadik, AWul JJoiim, 189
Safari. JJan Raj, 230, 295
Sah, mmnndn, 273
Sahajartand, Swami, 264
Sahni, Om Prakaih, 2t8
Sahni, Ruthi Ram, 199
Saksena, Kihal C'aml, 236
Salim, f-taulvi Hafiz Muhammad
Abdul. 173
Salim, Shaikh, 28J
Babu, 196
StnYil, J)bujef*!ra. 222
Sanyal, Jnendra Nath, 207
Sanya!. Sacirxlrn Nath, 238, 242
Sapre, Mdh*rav, 209
Saraph, ttam Chamlra, 237
Sarawati, S ami Itamanand, 279,
sac
Sanm s'i, Sw ami Vicarafland, 288,
S'J3
Sattir, Matter Abdul. 193
Sattajjroha Committee: Allaha
bad. 25B, 272; Cawnpur. 233.
278, Lucknow, 259
Savarkar, V. D., 233
Savarlar Relea*e Committee, 217
Sw ,U., 266
Scin. Mp. Po. SSI
Srthl, Ooriiul I?sm, Shad," 211
Sevsk, JUihtra, 187
Shaft. Muhammad, Sialkoti, 173
Shah, Atam Syed JIuairt, 203
Shah, Ali Husain, 222
Shah. Inayat All, Siattefl. 203
Shah, Sa'%ad Chafor, 190
Shah, Zahar, 203
Shailendr*, Caturvedi, 237
Shanns, Ahhl Ram, 2K5
Sharma. Akhiland, 177
Sharma, Avani Kunuir. 220
Sharma. Afma Ram, 'Shofc," 510
Sharma, Bat. Ram, STS. 292,283,
Stmpurtnand,
293
205
316
Author Index
Author Index
V n ,
fra u d , 182
V*rre. C t Sinjh, 9*6, 290, 293
Vtrraa, l( u l . I'rw.i," 277, 28
V*rmi, j t t l t Praiad, 296
V w w i, KaiM
StS
V m , L*1 Rihadur, 2S2, CS
Vrm, M ihth Motl Rm, 281
Vfrn, M ih**^ Singh, 291
V*nn*,
S., SS?
PoihpJ S!r?h, 28
V*rm, friyajf Sinfh, 270
V*nn, Tlajbaii. 2S7
flm $*rrj*n, 279
V*rra. Ham Slnjh. 230
Varma, Srarnt S j;b , AoinA,"
StW
Varma, T *} Singb, IBS
Varyu, S>in Lit, 211
V52airt:mf, Candra Oup'a, 183
V rsltitjpithil'*, S., SS7
V * fl-4 . C . 8 . , S O S , 2 1 0 . 2
YUvalankar, JavcanJra, 20!)
VM) ataA t, tlarcv Gsy^f. 182
VijriJaniar, SafraJ**. 18S, 261
VLlrarthl. RalVrwian, 2'JJ
VMrarthl, Ciraojl l.l, 278
317
W
\Vhi, Abdul, HJi, 203
WjJJttr. A, r>ail!n, 267
V u th ia, Muhammad Dai*. 186
Youdff SoclaliH LMipjf, Poona, 221
Yunu.t. >tohamm*J, 2-13
VinaJi, Vtkata, 237
"Vura* HraJjj'a,'* 206
Z*Mr, Pastar Veter Hitt*, 173
Z M t, S /H Rjjjad. 210, 238
Zitu, Ki'htn Car*!. 178
Zubttf, Alar, J89
SUBJECT IN DEX
!-a) 't
G o .e
of
I Burrau of Inforr^at
'
. 95
Subject Index
319
- indepen
politics, 66-67, implications of
121;
Indian support, 77; new legts?*dence pledge, 106-7, 136, 144,
154; Indian Statutory Commis
sion, 1034; participation in con Fiod of the Hindus, The (Ta'am-tflunud), 113
stitutional arena?, 129-32; polit
ic*! strategy (1322-1926), 91; Forfeiture- press, 30- See also Secu
rity demands
press liberties, 141-42{ press pol
icies toward, 140-42; pressure on Fnttcei policy toward Indian revoktionariN36
British (19 41 ), 145; resurgence
after 1945, 153; seizure o f pub- Freedom o f the press; British
bivalenee, 4; discussion. World
locations, 117, 125; World \V.
War I, 80-81; Congress debate
II.-142-43
<ner, 141-42
Cow literature. 60-61
Criminal In\estimation/Intelligent
Department
mvaiuacm ( CJ.D .)s aujm
adraini
nisira.
....
_
ive problem*, 40, 49-50. 54; de- Gandhi. M. K.t ban f ! Indian Home
rentrnfiiation. 33, 132; formation,
Rule, 35; h m 1.W JW , l i rtI-V!. *traie~y
........ ................
.. 34
-.
t .1__ tmin.
ltUjKrdOD.
with W
Invin,
%VdIis?doo,
to strengthen.
Criminal Lau Amendment Act
GandhMn.ia talVs (1930), 120
(ly52). 12*
Germanv: and revolutionaries durCripiw Mksk-n (1942), 145
ins Wnrld War (, C7-68
Critics, foreign. (i-l
320
Subject Index
II
Hailey, Lord, 100, 101
Hok {British propaganda Journal
circulated among troops ) , 73
liar Dayal, 62, 64
Hardinge, Lord, S3
Harphul Singh Jai, 138-39
Herald Tribune, The and censor
ship, 119
Hevett, J. P., 59
Hindu Punch-, prosecution, SI
Hindustan Ghadar party, U S.A .:
formation, 35; link to Germany,
67-66; propaganda banned, 62;
publicity and revolutionary activ
ity, 104
Rirttel, Arthur, 118
Hiscorys British sensitivity to na
tionalist interpretations, 17-18,
49, 63, 112
Hutary of the Stkht, 60
Hiltorini: subsidy, 43
Hoar*, Samuel, 122
Home Buie agitation, 77-78
Hopkinson, %Vj33jam, 35-36
Hume, A. O.s establishment of a proBritish journal, 7
Hyderabad: Congress agitation
(1 9 3 8 ), 142; Hiadu-Mustim contravetsy ISO
Hj ndman, Jktas, 25. See oho Jutlice
Incitement o f class hatred: sec.
153A, Penal Code, 6
Independence Day celebrations, 109
InJepmAenf. British subsidy of, 43
India, Government o f (British): ban
ning proejdures, 51, 52, 95-96,
116; balance o f coercion and con
ciliation, 120-22, 127, 128, 144;
negotiations with I.N.E.C., 1*0
50; teeond non-cooperation cam
paign, 109-12, 116; strategy on
press legislation, 123; role io gov
ernance, 140, 154i transfer of
paner, 151. See oho Executive
Committee: Criminal In'estisa-
JiSf s's 4
* ! i i ? 3! w
i M , { .! =ilii=ll iff j . M i
I s a l i|
; ?
l f c
f M
f l
i
:
;
S i
"1 6
?
* s
M i5
K
* ^7 r k
S 4 .f i l l
> p
2
s 'i P f . I f S -
i l ]
s
s l^ s S jT
..a J ~ n - =
Is! 5 , . i o ,|Si?
!< | S ^ 2 * 8
;- s 2 J ^ . 5 | {
| i 2 - c c 5 *
3 ' P I P I e- | 3 iS r | c **:
l i l i i i e l ^
35 i ^ g S t E
s.s
|-5i; 3 j 3 s | S s = , - r : a T i s 'E i a
sJT
322
S ubject Index
O
Obterver, T h f, 61
Official Secrets Act, 7
Osborn, A . C,: bin o f tlu it Britain
Lott India, 11B
Subject Index
75; military journals, 73; official
efforts In post-1920 era, 94-95;
World W ar I, 72-76; World War
II, 144, 250-51. See else Sub
sidies
Prosecutions. See Communal writ
ings; Sedition; Subsidies
Public Meetings and Press Bill
(1 9 0 7 ), 22-24
Public opinion: British evaluation,
53, 94-95, 159
Public order: rationale for press and
political decisions, 60-61, 97-99,
114, 125, 155} threats in 19 3 0 1931, 113. See alto Communal
writings; Revolutionaries
Publications! registration of, 5, 47,
65
Publicity. See Propaganda
Publicity boards, 7576
Punjab: Harphul Singh J t, 128-39-,
opposition to subsidized news
papers, 4243; religious contro\eny, 42-43, 138-10; Sikh cam
paigns, 91; Socialist literature, 138
Punjab, CoTemmeat of; banned ma
terial, 138-40; banning proce
dure, 52; censorship, 72; com
munal writings, 126; concern with
inadequate controls, 102; insis
tence on executive powers, 78-79;
press actions (1910-1913), 57;
press policies, 18, 31, 58; propa
ganda, 76; second non-cooperation
campaign, 116; security demand,
Obterver, 81; Sikhs and revolu
tionaries (1920s), 60, 95; Stu
dents mail, 39; subsidy of loyal
papers, 7; surveillance of publi
cations, 50
Punjab Advocate* forfeiture, 52
Punjab disturbances (19 07 ), 17, 21
Quit India, 148-49
Rajpal, puol'uher of Rangila Rasul,
100
ItamujBcV, Barbara, 66n
P.angila Rasul, tract critical of Mu
hsmmad, 99-100, 101
Rao, K. Rama, 153
Reading, Lord, 8687, V4
Redshirts: outbreak (1930), 111
Religious contro\ersy: cow protec
tion literature, 60- 61 ; dilemma
of Indian (Congress) ministries,
l-ill The Face of Mother India,
323
S
Sanatan Dharm; banned works, 139
Sapru, Tej Bahadur, 84-85, 89
Satyamurti, S., 135
Satyarih Prakash: ban in Sind, 152n
Savarkar, V . D.s book on mutiny
banned, 62; BritishFrench con
flict o\*r jurisdiction, 36
Scotland Yard; surveillance o f In
dians in England, 37
Sea Customs Act: pre-1900 role in
control of literature, 7; intercep
tions, 35, 38-39. 96, 135, 137,
151; strengthened after 1921, 85;'
weapon against external propa
ganda, 96; widened potters under
1910 Press Act, 47s World War
Tf, 151. See also Socialist litera
ture
Second non-cooperation campaign,
109-26
second World War, 142-43, 151
Secretariat, Imperial, 3J
Security demands: Act V , 1898 {se
dition, class hatred), 7; Emer
gency Powers Bill (1931), 13223; Indian States (Protection)
Act, 131; khilafate literature, 70;
1910 Press Act, 45, 47; relax
ation after 1919, 84; resurgence
324
S ubject Index
Y
Young, Popham: propaganda tear,
T
Terrorism. See Revolutionaries
Tbagi and Dakairi Department, 6,12
Z
Zan.indat\ forfeiture o f secority, 69