SEDITION IN BENG AL.—A REPLY.
t'ro THE EIHT011. Or ens ,srearavolaaj Sin,—The , Spectator of January 9th had a letter from " Old Liberal" whiob contained an attack on the claims and reputa- tion of the Bengalis, and on one Bengali who was singled out. Many people do not agree with these statements, and believe that one of them is injuriously wrong. No reply has appeared, and this has been the subject of complaint. In justice to the Bengalis, I ask to be allowed to answer. It must be explained that the "Bengalis " are not the populace of Bengal, but the people in Bengal for the description of whom Macaulay's " Warren Hastings" is still the locus classicus. They are not the Moslem, nor the tribes of Bengal, nor even the very numerous helot castes affiliated to Hinduism. They are the minor section which alone produces, or can produce, the Bengali Babu, and their distinctive mark and common bond is that they claim to be Aryan. "Old Liberal" ignores this, and calls all Bengalis Mongolia-Dravidian, as the helots doubtless are. None of them can be a Babu, or " rise to a position of respectability or attain even moderate wealth."
"Old Liberal's" theme is that Bengalis are not Indians at all, are unfit for those posts by which Indians are governed, or to represent Indians. The immediate and relevant answer surely is that in the India movement of the last twenty years these " Bengalis " have taken, and hold, the lead, whether in the Punjab, Madras, or Bombay. What relevancy is there in saying that their claims to be Aryan are invalid, or even absurd, when the claim is conceded among themselves and by the other Indians, and fermi, the common bond P Such a statement as " Old Liberal's "—" the Indians proper like the Bengalis and other aboriginal races about as much as the Americans like and respect their negro fellow-citizens "- even in the correspondence columns of the Spectator, fills me with surprise. " Old Liberal," who does not distinguish between the "Bengalis " and the aboriginals of Bengal, cannot possibly have realised how extraordinarily offensive it is. For the difference between them is the difference between the whites and the.negroes in the Southern States, and is affirmed by their law, as well as by religion and custom. Otherwise the idea conveyed is, in my experience, confined to Anglo- Indian circles in Calcutta, where it is fostered by the up. country men of the swashbuckler and rowdy class,—jainadara, darwins, and other retainers of rich men there, Could negroea lead or head an American movement P As instances of how false it is let me cite: for Kashmir, Balm Nilambar Mulcharji, C.I.E.; for the Punjab, Sir Pratul Chandra Chatterji, K.C.I.E., late a Judge of its Chief Court and still Vice-Chancellor of the Lahore University, Mr. M. l3hatta- charjya, the late Accountant-General, to whom the Punjab is now promoting a public memorial,—Bengali Brahmins these three; for Baroda, Mr. R. C. Dutt, C.I.E.; for Nagpur, the Hon. Mr. Bose,—both Bengali Kayasths.
I reluctantly touch a personal note, but "Old Liberal" has struck it loudly. "The views of the very worthy Bengali gentleman who adorns the Council of the Secretary of State for India can hardly be Indian." This gentleman was my colleague for some years, The Indians whom I have known as pre-eminently cosmopolitan (taking the continent of India as the cosmos) are Mr. R. 0. Dutt, Syed (late Mr. Justice) Ameer Ali, C.I.E., Babu Surendranath Banerjee, Sir Phirozshali Mebta, K.C.I.E., and this gentleman, Mr. K. G. Gupta, late
Previous page
