{"id":2707,"date":"2013-07-13T01:43:22","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:43:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=2707"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:43:22","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:43:22","slug":"79-bande-mataram-17-5-07-vol-06-07-bande-mataram","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/03-cwsa\/06-07-bande-mataram\/79-bande-mataram-17-5-07-vol-06-07-bande-mataram","title":{"rendered":"-79_Bande Mataram 17-5-07.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n\t<\/p>\n

\n\tBande Mataram<\/font><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t
\n\t{
\n\tCALCUTTA, May 17th, 1907 }
\n\t<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n
\nThe Statesman <\/i>Unmasks
\n<\/b>
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nWe do not know why the paper which calls itself the Friend of India and usually puts on a sanctimonious mask of Liberalism,
\nshould have suddenly allowed its real feelings to betray themselves last Wednesday. Its attitude for some time past has been
\nextremely ambiguous. During the height of the disturbances in East Bengal this Friend of India maintained a rigid silence on
\nIndian affairs and discoursed solemnly day after day on large questions of European policy. Like the Levite it turned its face
\naway from the traveller wounded by thieves and passed by. Since the deportation of Lajpat Rai, it has cared less and less
\nto preserve its tone of affected sympathy until on the 15th it appeared as the apologist of despotism and the mouthpiece not
\nof an idea or of a policy, but of the individual grievances of a self-seeking politician whose influence has waned to nothing
\nbecause he could not satisfy the new demand for courageous and disinterested patriotism. Professing to be a Liberal paper,
\nthe Statesman <\/i>has defended the despotic regulation under which Lala Lajpat Rai was deported,\u2014 a regulation opposed to all
\nthe fundamental principles of Liberalism; it has defended the Coercion Ordinance as a proof of the leniency and liberalism of
\nbureaucratic rule in India. Calling itself a Friend of India, it has not scrupled to dissociate itself from its brother friends of India,
\nthe British Committee of the Congress, and sneer at them as ill-informed nobodies. After throwing the Congress, its principles
\nand its friends overboard in this extraordinary manner, it has still the assurance to pose as the guide, philosopher and friend of the
\nModerate party and lecture them on the necessity of supporting the Government in its action with regard to Lala Lajpat Rai.
\n    <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 419<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\tThe arguments with which the Statesman <\/i>defends the deportation as a supreme act of Liberalism, are of a remarkable kind. First, deportation “is not really so bad as it sounds”, because
\n“the lot of the so-called political exile is considerably happier than that of the criminal in the common jail”. Prodigious! A
\nman is arrested without any charge being formulated against him, without trial, without any chance of defending himself,
\nseparated suddenly from his family and friends, his country, his work for religion, society and motherland, and relegated
\nto solitary imprisonment in a distant fortress; yet because he is not treated as Mr. Tilak was treated, as a common criminal
\nwith the daily harassment and degradation which is part of the criminal’s punishment, this remarkable Liberal organ goes into
\necstasies over the leniency of the British bureaucracy. Injustice and arbitrary oppression, in its opinion, is an admirable thing
\nso long as it is not accompanied with vindictive personal cruelty. We remember a correspondent of an Anglo-Indian print at the
\ntime of Mr. Tilak’s sentence calling on the Mahrattas to admire the leniency of the British Government, because it treated him
\nas an ordinary felon instead of impaling him or sawing him to pieces. The Statesman
\n<\/i>writes in the same spirit.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\tThe second plea in defence of deportation is that no act of State is involved in the arrest, it is only a summary dealing
\nunder Municipal law. We do not know what to make of this rigmarole or what the
\nStatesman <\/i>understands by Municipal law
\nor by an act of State. Municipal law may mean the laws and rules which govern municipalities, but we presume it is not the Lahore
\nMunicipality which deported Lajpat Rai; or it may mean the ordinary laws and regulations by which local authorities arrange
\nfor local administration and the preservation of the peace. But here is an extraordinary action, above the ordinary laws, which
\nneeds the sanction of the Government of India and the sanction of the Secretary of State, in which a political leader is arrested
\nfor mysterious political reasons and deported without trial. Yet this is municipal law, not an act of State! and since it is municipal
\nlaw, no one need protest against it! Apparently an act of State in the Statesman<\/i>‘s opinion is an
\nillegal <\/i>act which there is no statute
\n   
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 420<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\tto cover. Any action however tyrannical, if covered by a statute,
\nought to be borne without complaint by Indians as an act of great leniency and liberalism. Mark again the friendship of this
\nfriend of India and the liberalism of this Liberal.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tA third plea is that “the action of the authorities in India,
\nif contrasted with that of the average European Government, is leniency itself.” So then, tyranny is quite justifiable if it can cite
\nan example of another tyranny worse than itself! Let us remind the Statesman
\n<\/i>that the French and German bureaucracies are
\ngovernments supported by the will of the people and that in the measures of stringency they adopt, they have the consent of the
\npeople behind them. And what have the police arrangements of Paris and Berlin to do with the punishment of a man without
\ntrial, a relic of mediaeval despotism of which no modern and civilised Government offers an example?
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tThe real cause of all this special pleading for despotism is revealed in the latter part of the article. “Moderate men are apt
\nto be pushed aside and their services forgotten by new men who seek to force the pace.” “A long apprenticeship to journalism, a
\nweary plodding in the musty by-paths of the law, are the chief or only means by which power and influence can be gained.” This
\nis where the shoe pinches. Who is this apprentice to journalism who is being pushed aside by young and extreme journals?
\nObviously the Statesman <\/i>itself. Who is this weary plodder in the musty by-paths of the law, who claims that only lawyers
\nor, say, only solicitors have any right to be political leaders and whose “fame”, if not his “fortune”, has been affected by the new
\nmovement? It is plain enough now that the motive which so long actuated the Statesman
\n<\/i>was not liberal sentiment or high principles, but its own interest and influence. Since that interest was touched and that influence threatened by the increasing spirit of
\nSwadeshism and self-reliance, the temper of this Friend of ours has been growing worse and worse until he has finally renounced
\nhis liberal principles and become a champion of bureaucracy.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tThe article closes with a curious attack which seems to be
\ndirected at Srijut Surendranath Banerji. “Violent speeches, inflammatory writings, a prosecution, a brilliantly unsuccessful
\n   
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 421<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\tdefence, paragraphs in all the newspapers,
\n\tquestions by ill-informed nobodies in the House of Commons<\/i>, the jail, the exit, fame and fortune, notoriety, maybe a seat in Parliament\u2014 here
\nwe have not altogether a fancy picture of the modern Political Rake’s progress.” This is, we are told, not altogether a fancy
\npicture; in other words, with the exception of the last touch about the possible seat in Parliament, it is taken from life; and to
\nwhom can it be applied but Srijut Surendranath? For, obviously, no leader of the new school is meant, since no leader of the new
\nschool would aspire to a seat in Parliament. Yet after this ill-natured attack the
\nStatesman <\/i>yesterday had again the face to
\nfigure as the patron and counsellor of Srijut Surendranath and advise him to sacrifice his feelings of personal friendship and
\nrespect for Lala Lajpat Rai, his principles, his patriotism, his reputation as a political leader and his influence with the people
\nin order to get the approbation of Mr. John Morley and the Statesman<\/i>.
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\tA more complete unmasking could not be imagined. The Statesman <\/i>not only attacks the new school,\u2014 that would be
\nnothing new\u2014 but turns round and rends his old associates, Srijut Surendranath, the British Committee, the friends of India
\nin Parliament, renounces all liberal ideas and principles, throws off every disguise and stands forth naked and unashamed. We recommend this example of “friendship” to all Bengali customers of the Statesman<\/i>‘s heavy goods, and would advise them either to
\ncease patronising a dealer of such doubtful candour or to insist that the goods they get shall be of the pattern they have paid for.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\t__________<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tSui Generis <\/b>
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\tThe Morning Leader <\/i>in casting about for reasons,\u2014 let us call
\nthem reasons, not excuses\u2014 for defending Mr. Morley’s Russian policy, has discovered the fact that the case of India is
\nsui generis<\/i>,
\na thing apart which stands on its merits and to which ordinary principles cannot be applied. The
\nMorning Leader <\/i>need not have
\ntaken refuge in Latin in order to hide its embarrassment. All   
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 422<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\tIndia, Moderate and Extremist alike, have begun to realise that
\nthe principles of Liberalism which are so loudly mouthed about in Westminster and on the hustings, are not meant to be applied
\nto India. They may be applied to England and the Colonies but they are obviously unsuitable to a subject nation where the
\ndespotic supremacy of the white man has to be maintained, as it was gained, at the cost of all principles and all morality. Ireland
\nalso was sui generis <\/i>once, until by moonlighting, Fenianism, dynamite and Passive Resistance she managed to break down the
\nbarrier and place herself on the same level with other nations. Yes, India is a case apart. In England politics is a question of
\nparties. In India politics is a conflict of principles and of mutually destructive forces,\u2014 the principle of bureaucracy against the
\nprinciple of democracy, the alien force of Imperialism against the indigenous force of Nationalism. Our relations with our rulers
\nare not those of protector and protected, but of eater and eaten. As man and the tiger cannot live together in the same circle of
\nhabitation, so Indian Nationalism and bureaucratic despotism cannot divide India between them or dwell together in peace.
\nOne of them must go.    <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 423<\/font><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bande Mataram { CALCUTTA, May 17th, 1907 }   The Statesman Unmasks   We do not know why the paper which calls itself the Friend…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[54],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2707","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-06-07-bande-mataram","wpcat-54-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2707","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2707"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2707\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2707"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2707"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2707"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}