India -- Description and travel; India -- Politics and government -- 1765-1947
When Partition on these lines was first proposed, it excited
strong protest, not only among the Hindu population of Bengal, but
among many Civil Servants and Anglo-Indian papers, also among the
Mohammedans of Eastern Bengal, who are Bengalis by race, but number
three-fifths of the population, and, therefore, might be expected to
welcome the change, especially as they were promised considerable
advantages under the new administration. Large numbers of public
meetings were held throughout Bengal to protest against the
measure, and petitions were sent to the British Parliament. As the
British authorities paid no attention to these representations, the
“Swadeshi” (literally “Our own Country”) movement was started for the
exclusive use of native productions, in the hope that a boycott on
British goods might at last induce public opinion in England to take
notice of an Indian grievance. As Mr. John Morley said, when speaking
as Secretary of State for India in the House of Commons, February 26,
1906: “I am bound to say, nothing was ever worse done in disregard to
the feeling and opinion of the majority of the people concerned.”
Nevertheless, Lord Curzon accomplished the Partition by an unexpected
PROCLAMATION from Simla on September 1, 1905, appointing Sir Andrew
Fraser Lieut.-Governor in Calcutta, and Sir Bampfylde Fuller
Lieut.-Governor in Dacca, both being entire strangers to Bengal. The
Partition came into force on October 16, 1905—a day observed as a
fast of humiliation and prayer throughout the Provinces.
In the same month MR. GOKHALE and LALA LAJPAT RAI came to England as
Congress Delegates, to lay the demands of the constitutional reform
party before English audiences. Lala Lajpat Rai also visited America.
Before the Partition was proclaimed, Lord Curzon had submitted his
RESIGNATION (August 12, 1905), owing to a difference of opinion
with Lord Kitchener over the appointment of a new “Military Supply
Member” to the Viceroy’s Council; and, in reality, over the position
of the Commander-in-Chief and the Military Supply Member with regard
to the Governor-General in Council. The difference does not concern
us, except that, as the Conservative Home Government supported Lord
Kitchener’s view, and thus drove Lord Curzon to resign, it was widely
believed that Mr. Brodrick accepted the Partition the more readily as
a salve to Lord Curzon’s feelings.[6]
The EARL OF MINTO was at once appointed to succeed, but Lord Curzon
remained to nearly the end of the year, partly in order to welcome
the Prince and Princess of Wales on their visit to India. In his
farewell speech at Simla (September 30, 1905) he said:—
“If I were asked to sum up my work in a single word, I would
say ‘Efficiency.’ That has been our gospel, the keynote of our
administration.”[7]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account