PRINCE IN INDIA

Hokitika Guardian, 22 March 1922, Page 4

PRINCE IN INDIA

FIRST HALF OF TOUR

INTERESTING SURVEY

An interesting survey of the first , lalf of the Prince of 'Wales’ Indian ( ;our was contributed to the London “Daily Telegraph’ r by Mr Percival Landon in January. “In point of importance, if not of time,” he wrote, “one-half of the Prince of Wales’s tour has now been completed. Five provincial capitals—for the United Provinces boast of two —and five Indian States have been : visited. From oine point of view, , which one encounters ait every turn— ' though, in the writer’s opinion, it is j a serious misreading of the real situ a- , tion—the Prince of Wales has already ■ secured a great, and in the future | will achieve an even greater, triumph i ovef the seditious forces in India. It is a misreading, because never has the issue lain between these. It is true that the Prince’s personal charm, combined with the instinctive loyalty tha.t hostile propaganda neither of five nor fifty years can uproot, have unquostion ably shaken to the core the attitude of sullen boycott advised, ordered, and wherever possible enforced, by , Mr Gandhi and his colleagues. Calcutta, by common consent, was to ] have l>eem the test. CRUCIAL TEST IN CALCUTTA. “Up to the Prince’s visit to the old capital of Tndia the situation remained in doubt. His travels through the territory of the native States had been nothing short of a triumphal progress—and anyone who thinks that ; in those States the disruptive infltten- ; cos of Ghandism arc unknown has misj read, indeed, the recent history of the Peninsula- .for ‘Where tlie devil ean- | not go lie will send.’ On He otner

j hand, in British India, there w:<« no | such clear evidence. The brilliant anti I enthusiastic reception at lit-ninny ; masked the serious trouble in the na- | tive quarters of the city. Lu M now : proved its loyalty. But Al.a.h tbad, I Benares and Bntna betraved the i strength of the terrorist, and not imI possibly bad faith among certain pro- • mine,lit men, to whose lip-lovalty crei dit in high quarters had been 100 ensj ily given. There remained Calcutta, i “No one who knows Calcutta could | describe the condition of the streets ! at the time of the Prince’s arrival as I anything hut a. disappointment. The ! occasion was of course an enthusiastic J triumph in Dalhousio Square, and fair I crowds were present near the entrance ; to Government House grounds, but by j no standard could the scene be. regardi ed as creditable to Calcutta,. But this ! frigidity broke down at once. That | very afternoon the races began the i process, and a night of i llu mi nations " saw the city in open and joyous-heart-ed mutiny against the extremists. Mr ' Gandhi had suffered a serious set- | hack in Bengal. ! “But this though the obvious and as 1 T have said the almost universal stand- | po.int, is one to be regretted. The i fight now going on is between the o xe ~ ! entire and the rebels alone. Most unfairly the latter have dragged the Prince of Wales into the contest; nay. at one time it seemed possible that the executive would follow suit; but better counsels prevailed, and the only j conceivable aspect of the Prince’s tour .that of the visit of the representative of the Sovereign and a| principle above all politics—has been maintain-

LOYALTY BREAKS THROUGH. “Never for a moment has tbe Prince deviated from this clear conception of his purpose in visiting India and of his status therein. Steadily, and with his own characteristic charm, lie has done his Imperial work. Never, by even a hint, ha s ho admitted that he is affected by the ‘malice domestic’ which is seething under India’s surface to-day. His presence has silenced tho open voice of sedition though in places it lias not been able to overcome tho barrier which sedition lias attempted to lay continually beside his path. HP has scrupulously and with dignity maintained his aloofness from all political issues. There is no reason why bis great reception during the latter part of bis visit toi Calcutta should make one iota of difference in his attitude for the rest of tbe tour, and I ami confident that it will make none. He has always assumed- and rightly assumed—that ihe hearts of tbe mass of Indians were with him and whatever) tbe extremists mav n*uv decide to do, the Prince can do nb other or better than he has already done. “Tho Prince can but go on as he has begun. The crucial test of terrorism began in Calcutta, when the tide of

loyalty broke through the dams that Mr Gandhi had constructed. It is to the Prince that the credit for this triumph of liberty is to be given, but it would be a cardinal mistake to represent that success as in any way involving his personal interference in Indian politics.”'