{"id":2833,"date":"2013-07-13T01:44:05","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:44:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=2833"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:44:05","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:44:05","slug":"90-bande-mataram-4-6-07-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\/90-bande-mataram-4-6-07-vol-06-07-bande-mataram","title":{"rendered":"-90_Bande Mataram 4-6-07.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n\t
\n\t\t\t<b{
\n\tCALCUTTA, May 30th, 1907 }
\n\t<\/b><\/p>\n

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

\n

\n\t
\n\t{
\n\tCALCUTTA, June 4th, 1907 }
\n\t<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n
\nRegulated Independence
\n<\/b>
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nNever before were the utter helplessness and the deplorable demoralisation of the Native Princes of India more clearly demonstrated than at the present moment when our political ideas and ideals are undergoing such a change. Writes the
\nDaily News<\/i>:\u2014 “It is gratifying to learn that some of the Native States are following in the wake of the Government of India for the suppression of sedition, if not political agitation altogether. News comes from Srinagar that His Highness the Maharaja of Kashmir
\nis about to issue a proclamation warning his subjects against the pitfalls of the so-called nationalist agitation. We do not doubt
\nthat his brother rulers in the Punjab will emulate so good an example.” Some of us were at a loss to understand the cause of
\nthe Daily News<\/i>‘s jubilation. Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code runs as follows:\u2014 “Whoever by words either spoken or
\nwritten, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites
\nor attempts to excite disaffection towards His Majesty or the Government established by law in British India, shall be punished with transportation for life.” So sedition in Kashmir is not sedition in British India; and by the attempts of the Kashmir
\ndurbar to suppress sedition one naturally understood attempts to suppress the endeavours of Kashmir subjects to bring into
\nhatred and contempt or excite or attempt to excite disaffection towards the Kashmir durbar. But the Proclamation removed our
\ndoubt. We are asked to believe that the Maharaja of Kashmir, with a wonderful tact for self-effacement, was anxious only to
\nprotect the Government established by law in British India. The Maharaja’s tender solicitude for the safety of the Power which
\n   
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 473<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\thad sold Kashmir to his ancestor and had, only the other day,
\ncondemned him unheard, was amazing indeed. But the matter did not end here. Following close upon the issuing of the Proclamation a durbar was held in Kashmir. Sir Francis Younghusband made a speech and the thanks of the British Government were
\nconveyed to the Maharaja. The Maharaja, we are told, was so greatly affected that he could hardly find words to express
\nhis feelings, which is hardly wonderful considering the circumstances. He was able only to say that the tradition of his house
\nwas one of loyalty to the British Government. “This,” says the Hindu Patriot<\/i>, “is as it should be.”
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\tWe cannot understand the logic of the “oldest native paper in India”. Why should it be so? Did not the founder of the
\nKashmir house pay a very heavy price for Kashmir! True to a disgraceful understanding with the British Government, of
\nwhich both parties ought to have been ashamed, Golab Singh\u2014 to quote Sir Thomas Holdich,\u2014 “deserted his Sikh masters and
\npaid for Kashmir with money looted from the Lahore treasury”. So it was only “give and take”.
\n\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\tBut these pathetic and miraculous happenings appear more intelligible\u2014 and less pathetic\u2014 when we realise that though
\nthe voice is the voice of Jacob, the hands are the hands of Esau. And this fact becomes patent when we find that Kashmir does
\nnot present an isolated instance of such zeal on the part of Native Chiefs to safeguard the interests of the bureaucracy. If
\nKashmir can be made useful to suppress sedition, the Maharaja of Coochbehar can at least help in putting down the boycott.
\nOn the occasion of the distribution of prizes to the students of the Jenkins School the Maharaja of Coochbehar said that
\n“schoolboys were ciphers in politics”, and warned them against the danger of rushing into the whirlpool of politics, or joining
\nin any political movement. Boys must read and play and ought never to concern themselves with matters beyond their grasp,
\nand about which, on account of their age and inexperience, they have not the capacity to form sound, mature and correct opinions. With Swadeshism His Highness declared his full sympathy but he “was totally, entirely and absolutely against boycott”.
\n   
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 474<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\tIf anything approaching the boycott movement was seen in his
\nterritory His Highness gave in clear, emphatic and unequivocal language to understand that he would adopt very stringent measures to put it down. It is a pity that it should have been made necessary for the Maharaja to be so clear, emphatic and unequivocal and we can only extend to him our heart-felt sympathy.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tBut we cannot hold these Indian princes responsible for all
\nthey do or say. Their so-called independence is nothing more than a mere name. Though Lord Curzon called them his “colleagues and partners in the task of Indian administration” the truth was better expressed by Lord Dufferin who characterised
\nthe independence enjoyed by them as a “regulated independence”, regulated by whom and to what extent it is superfluous
\nto say. The incubus of the British Resident is always there. And the results of his intervention\u2014 often disastrous to the Chiefs\u2014 were thus summed up by the Gaekwar of Baroda in the Nineteenth Century
\n<\/i>in 1901\u2014 “Uncertainty and want of confidence
\nin the indigenous Government is promoted. The influence of the Raja, which is indispensable for the individuality of the States,
\nis thereby impaired. The ruler being discouraged slackens his interest in the continuity of his own policy.” Then, of course,
\nthere are the annual visitations to relieve the States of their superfluous wealth and prove to the people that their Chief is
\nno better than a pigmy before the vicegerent of the King of England.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tThe attitude now taken by these Chiefs towards the spirit of Nationalism that is re-creating India, shows merely the degree
\nto which the bureaucracy is determined directly and indirectly to stamp out the spirit. They have greater advantages in the States
\nthan in their own territory, for they can make the measures more thoroughgoing and rigorous than in British India and they can
\nat the same time, through the Anglo-Indian Press, point to this rigour as a proof of the superior liberalism of British bureaucracy
\nas compared with a native rule. This is indeed killing two birds with one stone.
\n   
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 475<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t
\n\tA Consistent Patriot<\/i> <\/b>
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nEven Homer nods, and even the Hindu Patriot <\/i>makes slips at times. Referring to the endeavours of the Kashmir Durbar to
\nsuppress “sedition” the Patriot <\/i>wrote on the 22nd May:\u2014
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t“The Maharaja of Kashmir’s demonstration of fidelity is
\nworthy of note. After upsetting the old law of the State against European settlements and earning thanks from the Masonic
\nbrotherhood for the great concession made to them, His Highness is extirpating from his dominions all sorts of `undesirables’
\nin a right autocratic spirit. But his brother chiefs do not seem ready to follow his noble example, and excepting the `enlightened’ Maharaja of Mysore, they may not care to do so. The Maharaja of Kashmir however is in right earnest. He has prohibited
\npublic and even private meetings of a revolutionary character, and is the pet of the bureaucracy for playing this sort of masterly
\nactivity.”
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\tBut this attempt to imbibe the spirit of the age, perhaps,
\ngot a rude shaking from some quarter and the Patriot <\/i>seized the first opportunity to rectify its “mistake”. On the 30th it again
\nreferred to the subject and remarked:\u2014
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t“The Maharaja of Kashmir’s loyalty and anti-sedition measures have elicited from the Viceroy a tribute of warm appreciation. A grand durbar was held at Srinagar to proclaim the
\nViceroy’s message of thanks. Sir Francis Younghusband, late of the Tibet Mission, delivered a sombre sermon bristling with
\nreferences to the efforts of the Maharaja to keep down sedition, and overflowing with advice and good words which no doubt
\nwent straight and deep into His Highness’ heart and found a comfortable
\n\tlodgement there. The Maharaja was so greatly affected that he could hardly find words to give vent to his feelings. He was able only to say that the tradition of his house was loyalty
\nto the British Government. This is as it should be.” <\/span><\/p>\n

\n\tThis indeed is as it should be. And it reminds us of the
\nHindu<\/i>
\nPatriot<\/i>‘s sudden change of opinion in the matter of the site for the proposed Victoria Memorial Hall and other instances of the
\nremarkable versatility and impressionability of this great organ of private opinion.
\n   
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 476<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t
\n\tHolding on to a Titbit <\/b>
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nWhen the Anglo-Indian Press has got a hold or thinks it has got a hold upon an opponent, it holds on to it like grim death. This
\npeculiarity is shared by its pets and prot\u00e9g\u00e9s. Sometime ago a vernacular paper in Maharashtra published an alleged interview
\nwith Mr. Gokhale in which that carefully moderate politician was actually represented as using expressions which might be
\ntaken for an incitement to rebellion. Mr. Gokhale repudiated the interview but the Nawab of Dacca and his Secretary of
\nComilla fame still persist in calmly ignoring the repudiation and attributing expressions to Mr. Gokhale which he never used. A
\nsimilar spirit is being shown with regard to Srijut Bipin Pal’s repudiation of the Shaktipuja report. The
\nEnglishman<\/i>, flattered
\nprobably by being preferred to the Daily News<\/i>, was gracious enough, in a paragraph full of the most outrageous and insufferable impertinence, to acknowledge that Bipin Babu should not be held responsible for the “sins of the
\n\tBande Mataram<\/i>“.
\nYesterday, however, it published lengthy letters in which its correspondents still insisted on this vicarious punishment. The
\nDaily News <\/i>also seems to have been piqued by not being noticed and tries to belittle the effect of Bipin Babu’s disclaimer. It even
\nproposes to extend the principle of vicarious punishment much farther and make Bipin Babu responsible for the alleged utterances of a Madrasi speaker whom it gratuitously assumes to be his “associate”. We presume the Anglo-Indian journals consider
\nthemselves superior to the ordinary etiquette in such matters as observed in other countries; otherwise we should have imagined
\nthat a disclaimer by a public man of unauthorized reports of his utterances ought to be regarded as final. Whatever responsibility
\nremains for the publication, now rests entirely on the Bande<\/i> Mataram
\n<\/i>whose shoulders are quite broad enough to bear its
\nown burdens unassisted. We have made our own explanation to the Indian public in this matter and we are quite indifferent
\nwhether Anglo-India official or unofficial is satisfied with it or not.
\n   
\n\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\tPage \u2013 477<\/font><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

<b{ CALCUTTA, May 30th, 1907 } Bande Mataram { CALCUTTA, June 4th, 1907 }   Regulated Independence   Never before were the utter helplessness and…<\/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-2833","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\/2833","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=2833"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2833\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2833"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2833"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2833"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}