The joint demand

ON another page will be found the text of the joint amendment to Sir Alexander Muddiman’s resolution, which was to be moved in the Legislative Assembly on behalf of the Swarajists and Independents. It will be seen that the amendment is as carefully drawn up as it is comprehensive, and does full justice to all aspects of the question with which it deals. Indeed, there is no conceivable reason why it should not be supported by the whole body of Indian non-official members, including also the Liberals, for there is nothing in it to which any true Liberal can or will object. But for certain minor changes, mostly in phraseology, it is substantially identical with the demand which has been repeatedly put forward on both the Liberal platform and the platform of the ‘Besantite’ Home Rulers: and for our own part, we feel no hesitation in saying that if Dr Annie Besant, Srinivasa Sastri and Dr Tej Bahadur Sapru had been members of the House, they would have lent their whole-hearted support to the amendment. From this point of view, it is a pity that the terms of amendment could not be published earlier, for such publication would have enabled Liberal opinion outside the House to be expressed with sufficient clearness and force before Liberal opinion within the House was called upon to participate in the discussion and voting on the amendment. However, we are not without hope that Sir Sivaswami Iyer, who along with MA Jinnah is a signatory to the minority report of the Muddiman Committee, and the little band of Liberals that follows his lead will do everything in their power to make non-official Indians vote unanimously on the vital matter.