Founders
of Pakistan pledged loyalty to British rule of India
Muslim League
declared loyalty to British government its first objective
Extracts from reports
of Leagues public meetings
Foundations of Pakistan - All-India Muslim League Documents:
1906 - 1947 is a compilation in two volumes, consisting of the
proceedings of the annual sessions of the Muslim League from its
inception to the founding of Pakistan. It is edited by Syed Sharifuddin
Pirzada, and was published in Pakistan by the National Publishing
House Ltd. (vol. I, 1969; vol. II, 1970). The Muslim League, as
is well-known, was the political and nationalist organisation which
successfully campaigned to bring the state of Pakistan into existence
under the leadership of Mr. M. A. Jinnah. According to the account
of the Inaugural Session, held at Dhaka (old spelling Dacca)
on December 30, 1906, the very first resolution, which brought the
League into being and defined its objectives, was as follows:
Resolved that this meeting, composed of Musalmans from
all parts of India, assembled at Dacca, decide that a Political
Association be formed, styled All-India Muslim League, for the
furtherance of the following objects:
(a) To promote, among the Musalmans of India, feelings of loyalty
to the British Government, and to remove any misconception that
may arise as to the intention of Government with regard to any
of its measures.
(b) To protect and advance the political rights and interests
of the Musalmans of India, and to respectfully represent their
needs and aspirations to the Government.
(c) To prevent the rise, among the Musalmans of India, of any
feeling of hostility towards other communities, without prejudice
to the aforementioned objects of the League.
(Vol. I, p. 6)
This is the resolution passed unanimously by the meeting, which
we have reproduced in its entirety in the original English, lest
we be accused of quoting out of context. The very first objective
of the Muslim League was to promote feelings
of loyalty to the British Government among the Muslims
of India! Let the opponents of Hazrat Mirza, particularly those
belonging to Pakistan, now consider what verdict they must pass
on the party which brought a free Muslim state into existence.
This resolution was moved by Nawab Salim-ullah Bahadur of Dhaka,
who made a speech explaining these objectives. We quote below a
section of his speech describing why it had been inadvisable to
form a political body in the previous decade, and what was the change
of circumstances which allowed its formation now:
In 1893, we were naturally very anxious to impress upon
the British Government that we were loyal subjects and law-abiding
citizens, for it was considered that our rulers had some doubts
on the subject, which, however unnecessary, were perhaps not wholly
unnatural at the time. Again, education had not toned down the
passions of a war-like community, and turned the irascible temper
of a newly fallen race into sweet reasonableness. There was, in
addition, the great danger of our giving up the difficult and
constructive work of education in favour of the easy task of a
destructive critic in politics. The need of self-help might then
have been ignored on account of the less taxing effort of criticizing
others. The endeavour to deserve might then have been paralysed
by the intensity of the desire to obtain. The voice of the reformer
might have been drowned in the babel of the demagogue. (Vol.
I, p. 8. Underlining is ours.)
It was in exactly the same period, and for very similar reasons,
that Hazrat Mirza made his statements of loyalty to British rule.
There is almost no difference between the position of the Muslim
League as expressed in the above words and that taken by Hazrat
Mirza. He did, however, stress one particular reason for fidelity
to the government not mentioned by the Muslim League. This was that
Muslims were free both to practise their own faith and to propagate
its teachings to others, and had the freedom not only to rebut Christian
attacks on Islam, but to refute and demolish the doctrines of Christianity,
the religion of the rulers. Hazrat Mirza believed that, Islam being
the religion of truth, this freedom gave Muslims a great opportunity
to convert to Islam the nation which ruled them.
The Nawabs speech then continues:
Today the aspect of affairs has greatly changed. The Government
has been convinced of our steadfast loyalty under the most trying
situations. In 1897, Lord Elgin bore testimony to the unflinching
fidelity of the Mohammedan troops that opposed their own co-religionists
on the battle-fields of Chitral and the borderland, and shed
their own blood and the blood of their brothers for their king
and country. This, gentlemen, was a situation which no other
community has had a chance of being tried in. If, then, we have
special claims on the Government, it is because the test of our
loyalty has been specially searching and unique. From those who
were considered so dangerous as to be allowed no other career
than that of the ploughman in the fields, we have risen so much
in the estimation of our rulers, that leading statesmen of England
call us the forces of loyalty in India and one of the greatest
assets of the Empire, some portion of which has been won with
our own support, and the whole of which we are guarding today.
It is no more necessary to waste whole regiments in the interior
in order to guard against an imaginary danger of rebellion,
and the Commander-in-Chief can set free with a light heart the
major portion of our army for guarding the frontier of the Empire.
(Vol. I, p. 89. Underlining is ours.)
So this leader and co-founder of the Muslim League proudly proclaims
that the Muslims have done their duty of proving their loyalty to
the British government, like no other subject community, by fighting
and dying in defence of the British empire, even against other Muslims.
Yet, on the other hand, our critics are offended by Hazrat Mirzas
statements in which he reminded the government of his father's support
for it in the rebellion of 1857.
Towards the close of the speech, the Nawab summed up as follows:
A more active propaganda, a more candid statement of our
needs and aspirations, and the giving of a more public and more
representative character to our Political Association, are more
necessary today than was the case in 1893. But nothing of the
spirit of loyalty is lost thereby, and no amount of candour
shall rob us of our traditional courtesy. The resolution which
I have the honour of moving today has been so framed that the
object of our League is frankly the protection and advancement
of our political rights and interests, but without prejudice to
the traditional loyalty of Musalmans to the Government, and goodwill
to our Hindu neighbours. Whenever it is necessary to do so, we
shall represent our views to the Government, and respectfully
submit our claims for due consideration. But whenever the intention
of any measure of Government is misunderstood by our people, it
shall equally be our duty to remove that misconception.
(Vol. I, p. 9, Underlining is ours.)
Amendment in 1913
A few years on, at the sixth session of the Muslim League, held at
Lucknow on March 22-23rd 1913, a revised constitution was discussed.
The chairman of the meeting was Mian Mohammad Shafi, a leader of the
Punjab Muslim League. In his presidential address, he referred to
an amendment in the first objective of the League as follows:
According to the revised Constitution, the first
object of the League is to maintain and promote among the
people of this country feelings of loyalty towards the British Crown.
The substitution of the words the people of this country
in place of Indian Musalmans and British Crown
in place of British Government constitutes a distinct
improvement which, I have no doubt, you will unhesitatingly accept.
The traditional loyalty of the Indian Musalmans to the Empire,
under the banner of which we live in peace and prosperity, does
not need to be proclaimed with a flourish of trumpets: nor is it
one of those monopolies the successful possession of which depends
upon extensive advertisement. The solid foundation of our loyalty
rests not upon its profession, but upon deeds the incontrovertible
proof of which is writ large upon the pages of history. And the
substitution of the words British Crown in place of
British Government in relation to our devotion to the
Empire of which India is a component part constitutes a more dignified
and faithful expression of our real feelings.
It is the British
Crown alone which is the permanent and ever-abiding symbol of Empire.
It is not to this Government or to that we acknowledge allegiance:
it is to the British Crown itself that we owe unswerving and
abiding loyalty.
But what, you will ask, is my conception of loyalty to the British
Crown? In my humble judgment, it is the paramount duty of every
loyal subject of the King Emperor to abstain from doing anything
calculated to impair the permanence and stability of British rule
in India. (Vol. I, p. 264, Underlining is ours.)
Please answer!
The detractors of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who are largely from
Pakistan, which is the homeland and heartland of the opposition
and propaganda against him, must now face the following question:
What ruling should one issue about the Muslim League and
its founders whose very first objective was to promote
feelings of loyalty to the British government, and who
announced that everyone must abstain from doing anything
calculated to impair the permanence and stability of British rule
in India?
Should they be branded tools and stooges of British imperialism? |