An Open Letter to Sir John Simon

Nawab Sir Zulfiqar Ali Khan of Malirkotla

It was with no small surprise that we read in the papers your ”friendly counsel” to the Muslim Deputation, headed by Nawab Sir Zulfiqar Ali Khan, that waited on you. They came to you in the hope that realizing the peculiar situation of the seven crores of Muslims of India, you would try to understand and understanding appreciate the disabilities and handicaps under which that community is labouring. Instead, however, you have been pleased to give them a snub, charging them with communalism. Obviously, the propaganda of the more voluble Hindu community has had its effect on you, which, it is the object of these lines to counteract.

You tacitly accuse the Muslim community of lukewarm patriotism. You have very kindly advised us “to think of the service which you can render to this great and splendid land, not merely because you are members of your community, but because you are citizens of this great country.” Permit us to assure you that in our devotion to the land of our birth we yield to none other of the Indian communities. Freedom from foreign domination political as well as economic, is the greatest service that can be done to a slave land and in this respect the Muslim is not a whit behind his brother Hindu. Perhaps you did not witness the scenes at the Lahore Railway Station to mark your arrival. You were only shown one side of the picture. However, you must have read in the papers that there was a huge demonstration by the people of Lahore as a protest against your mission. You must have read too that there was made by the police a most wanton attack on Indian leaders of world-wide fame who were clubbed as common coolies. We are sure, in your heart of hearts you admire the demonstrators as truly patriotic. Your breeding in the traditions of a freedom-loving nation could not but compel you to respect those who took part in that ” fight ” for the rights of the country. That same breeding, we believe, must also have made you look down upon those, who waited on you with their ” requests,” as so many manikins and toadies. All this we quite understand, knowing as we have the privilege to do, the democratic genius of the English people. But you would please allow us to correct you on one point. You are under the impression that the demonstrationists who went to the station to greet you with black flags belonged only to the Hindu community.

Permit us to tell you that you are mistaken there. ” Simon, go back,” ” Liberty or death,” ” We ask for bread, you give us stones ” – these inscriptions on black flags were carried by no less Muslim than Hindu hands and shouted by no less Muslim than Hindu throats. Even in the matter of “clubs” the Muslims had their due share. Side by side with Lala Lajpat Rai also stood Dr. Shaikh Md. Alam when the police clubs came brandishing down on them. Shoulder to shoulder with Dr. Gopi Chand was also Maulvi Abdul Qadir and the Muslims bore the brunt of police attack with equal courage and devotion. Lala Lajpat Rai has a powerful press at his back. There was regular hue and cry about his injuries which were photographed and advertised broadcast. The Muslims, however, suffered in keeping with the traditional trait of their community, in silence.

It is this same power of propaganda that seems to have given the wrong impression that in our outlook, we Muslims are out-and-out communalists, whereas ” nationalism is only the monopoly of the Hindus. As a spokesman of the Hindu Deputation that waited on you, Mr. Nanak Chand treated you to tall talk about doing away with everything smacking of communalism, separate electorate, reservation of seats, proportionate representation on services and so forth. This must have sounded very sweet indeed. But here too, permit us to bring to your notice, you were shown only one side of the picture, this time by the Hindus, instead of the Government officials. Would you care to have a look at the other?

A glance at official statistics would tell you that these champions of “nationalism” have as a class usurped most of the power and positions of Government. They have seized the trade of the land. In one word, with regard to the Muslims they occupy somewhat the same position as the capitalists in Western countries do with regard to the workman. They have monopolized education and having equipped themselves with this weapon, they virtually rule the destinies of the Muslims. Their “nationalist” pose is in fact the dictate of the worst of communalism. The cry of “no communalism” in their case only means that no other community must be allowed to break their monopoly and share power with them.

The British Raj 1914

Perhaps you would expect us to give you fact and figures. This should take a whole volume. For, there is not one department of the services of the land where this is not the story.  Everywhere the Hindu enjoys the monopoly, and a Muslim candidate is met with an ever-ready reply, ” No vacancy.” Just call upon the Education Minister, Mr. Manohar Lal, to let you examine his portfolio. You will find a systematic Hinduization of the Department. Only recently on August 28, he created five new posts in the higher grade and all these he filled with Hindus. Not one went to a Muslim That is why they don’t want “communalism.” Under the cloak of free competition, they are perpetuating a system of worst communalism. We know of several Muslim youths of Oxford and Cambridge qualifications, even with the highest degree of M. Ed. in education, who are vegetating for want of an opening. Whereas third class men are put in higher grades, carrying hundreds as salary, these poor young men whose names are on the list for years past are met with the one response, ”no vacancy,” every time they knock at the door of service. And for what fault? For none other than that they happen to have been born in a Muslim home.

The spokesman of the Hindu Deputation also talks of deterioration in efficiency as a result of recruitment on communal lines. This is but another similar piece of jugglery and attempt to outwit the greatest wit of England. We could offer no better comment than call attention to a concrete instance of a practically uneducated man, with no university degree, a mere F.A. and S.A.V., put in charge of the most important Division of the Province, Lahore, as inspector. His only qualification is that he is not a Muslim. Obviously, they must have some other definition, of efficiency. Surely a man with English qualifications would have been far more than a mere F. A. But efficiency or no efficiency, the idea is somehow to make another point against separate representation on services:

Sir John Simon
(Simon Commission)

It may thus be apparent to you, Sir, that the Muslims are in no way antagonistic to the interests of their land of birth. It is only because the class whose monopoly they want to break can do more talking and command a more vigorous press propaganda that they have succeeded in inoculating you with the same virus.

Perhaps you must have also read in the papers the common slogan of Neo-Hinduism, viz., Hindustan to be literally Hindu-stan i.e., the land of the Hindus. If not, please ask your colleague, Dr. Gokal Chand Narang, who actually preached the re-enactment of the drama of Spain here in India by wiping the Muslims out. He will be able to tell you all about this new dream of the Modern Hindu, the restoration of the Vedic Age of old, where Malich, i.e., non-Hindus shall have no place. In arriving at a due understanding of the communal problem, it is only just that you take into consideration this recent development of Hindu mentality.

Editor: M.Y.Khan                (The Light November 8, 1928)