IN INDIA

Hokitika Guardian, 10 September 1930, Page 5

IN INDIA

(British Official Wireless.) (Received this day at 1.5 p.m.) RUGBY, September 9. Reference to the failure, of unofficial efforts by the moderate Hindus, Sir Toj Bahadur Sapru and Mr Jayakar to persuade congress leaders to call off the civil disobedience •’ movement is madq, in the Government of India’s reply in a 'summary of the Indian situation. The failure is ascribed to the unreasonable and impracticable nature of the CongrcSs- leader’s demands. The summary says:—“Apart from prejudicing certain issues of first rate constitutional importance. these demands most closely affect the financial interests of tlie local Governments, and represent attempts to impose the views of one party without, reference to tlie opinions of others, and to practical constitutional and financial considerations. Jn the third aspect they involve the recognition by Government of tlie actions on restraint of trade and continuance of several main activities of the civil disobedience movement under official sanction. The proposals as a. whole are so far removed from practical politics as to suggest that they have been put forward deliberately for propaganda purposes. Intimation has been oonveyed to those responsible for them that the discussion on bams of demands is impossible. At the outset the attitude of the Government was made clear, subject to tlie essential condition that the “civil disobedience movement would be definitely abandoned. Tlie Government were prepared fir/stly; to withdraw those emergency .'methods necessary by movements; secondly to move local 'Governments smpatbeticall.v to review' the sentence of imprisonment passed on persons convicted of nonviolent offences directely connected w'itli the civil disobedience movement, and thirdly to secure further fair and adequate representation at the round table conference, so that they could have full facilities for pursuing the constituional course. Tlie breakdown of. the conversations may give light and a temporary impetus to the civil disobedience movement. On the other hand the conversations have been unscrupulously used in many parts of India of evidence that the Gtovernment was anxious for settlement on any terms and have been employed to encourage volunteers to defy the law on assurance that prisoners would be .very shortly released. The opportunity for organised misrepresentation is now removed. It may also be expected that moderate opinion will recognise that while the Government was right to afford all facilities to pWblic spirited persons for the pursuance of any efforts they might make in the cause of peace, responsibility for the breakdown ol the conversations must be attributed to extravagance impracticable attitude of Congress.