NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY SATURDAY, AUGUST 15, 1931. GANDHI TO STAY AT HOME

Northern Advocate, 15 August 1931, Page 8

NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY

SATURDAY, AUGUST 15, 1931. GANDHI TO STAY AT HOME

Registered for Transmission Through the Post as a Newspaper,

The position in India is such as cannot be surveyed with indifference by those who have at heart the interests of India itself and of the British Empire in particular. It is many years since a British Government assured the Indians that no unnecessary obstacle would be placed in the way of their desire to become a self-governing people. That assurance, while satisfying a large section of responsible Indian opinion, has failed to meet the wishes of another large section, who have set absolute independence as their goal. These extremists have done all in their power to hamper the evolution of their country as a self-governing Dominion, but, in spite of rebuffs and open hostility, Britain has persevered in the direction which she considers to be best for the Indian people as a whole. The secessionists have been led by Mr Gandhi, one of the most extraordinary figures on the political stage of recent years. He in a man of high character and is possessed of great personality, needing but to speak, or make a gesticulation, in order to secure the following of millions of his fellow countrymen. Mr Gandhi has instituted a campaign of passive disobedience of the laws of the land, especially those affecting the collection of taxes. He has warned his followers against physical violence, though his advice in this respect has not always been adopted. The opposition to law which he has ordered, however, has been more difficult to overcome than open warfare would have been. Especially has this been so in the matter of a boycott of British industries, which has had a paralysing effect. More recent developments will be recalled by those who have followed the course of the secession movement. Gandhi, declining to desist from advocacy of a boycott and other subversive measures,, was quietly arrested and placed in a pleasant prison, from which he was eventually released after an undertaking reached at Delhi as the outcome of a conference with the then Viceroy, Lord Irwin, Gandhi promising to lift the boycott and the Viceroy removing the prohibition hitherto enforced against the All India Congress and other assemblies of Indians for political purposes. This agreement aroused keen controversy, Britain being at the one time

commended for magnanimity and condemned for weakness. Ike historic decision was productive of good results for some lime, and there seemed to he every reason to believe that Mr Gandhi would go to England in September to attend a Round Table ( onference convoked for the purpose of formulating a constitution for England. High, hopes have been built upon this conference, especially in view of the fact ia Mr Gandhi, the leader of those desiring the independence ot India, would be present, for it was felt that a friendly and open discussion would pave the way to a settlement of what had appeared to be an insoluble problem. At the eleventh hour the scene has undergone a change. Mr Gandhi, 'alleging that undue harshness I has been used in the collection of taxes, and that .this constitutes a I breach of the promise made by Lord Irwin, has refused to attend the Conference. He and his colleagues have cancelled their passages, and, they will resume their campaign ot non-co-operation. It is a pity that this state of affairs should have occurred, but the British Government cannot be blamed if it proceeds with the Round Table Conference in the absence of Mi Gandhi. The task is tremendously difficult, for, as has been shown on many occasions, sharp differences of opinion as to the value of independence exist among the Indian leaders themselves. India is obviously not ready for independence, which cannot be granted until the time is ripe for it. The report of the Simon Commission has emphasised the dangers which must be guarded against 'at the Round Table Conference. As Sir John Marriott said when lecturing to the University Extension Committee of London University, “The problem itself is unique in the political experience of mankind —to frame a constitution for a sub-continent as large as Europe (minus Russia) and containing 320,000,000 of people, divided by race, by language, by caste, by inequalities of education, by degrees of political experience, and above all deeply divided by religion. ”