pledged word of a British Minister.  Has the Government of India resigned by way of protest against the threatened, shameful betrayal of trust on the part of Mr. Lloyd George?  Why does the Government of India hide itself behind secret despatches?  At a less critical moment Lord Hardiage committed a constitutional indiscretion, openly sympathised with South African Passive Resistance movement and stemmed the surging tide of public indignation in India, though at the same time he incurred the wrath of the then South African Cabinet and some public men in Great Britain.  After all, the utmost that the Government of India has done is on its own showing to transmit and press the Mahomedan claim.  Was that not the least it could have done?  Could it have done anything less without covering itself with disgrace?  What Indian Mahomedans and the Indian public expect the Government of India to do at this critical juncture is not the least, but the utmost that it could do.  Viceroys have been known to tender resignations for much smaller causes.  Wounded pride brought forth not very long ago the resignation of a Lieutenant Governor.  On the Khilafat question, a sacred cause dear to the hearts of several million Mahomedans is in danger of being wounded.  I would therefore invite the English friend, and every Englishman in India, and every Hindu, be he moderate or extremist, to make common cause with the Mahomedans and thereby compel the Government of India to do its duty, and thereby compel His Majesty’s Ministers to do theirs.

There has been much talk of violence ensuing from active non-co-operation.  I venture to suggest that the Mussalmans of India, if they had nothing in the shape of non-co-operation in view, would have long ago yielded to counsels of despair.  I admit that non-co-operation is not unattended with danger.  But violence is a certainty without, violence is only a possibility with non-co-operation.  And it will he a greater possibility if all the important men, English, Hindu and others of the country discountenance it.

I think, that the recommendation made by the friend is being literally followed by the Mahomedans.  Although they practically know the fate, they are waiting for the actual terms of the treaty with Turkey.  They are certainly going to try every means at their disposal to have the terms revised before beginning non-co-operation.  And there will certainly be no non-co-operation commenced so long as there is even hope of active co-operation on the part of the Government of India with the Mahomedans, that is, co-operation strong enough to secure a revision of the terms should they be found to be in conflict with the pledges of British statesmen.  But if all these things fail, can Mahomedans as men of honour who hold their religion dearer than their lives do anything less than wash their hands clean of the guilt of British Ministers and the Government of India by refusing to co-operate with them?  And can Hindus and Englishmen, if they value Mahomedan friendship, and if they admit then full justice of the Mahomaden friendship and if they admit the full justice of the Mahomedan claim do otherwise than heartily support the Mahomedans by word and deed.