सामग्री पर जाएँ
सर्वकोश
द इण्डियन स्ट्रगल / भारतीय स्वाधीनता संग्राम (नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस - ऐतिहासिक विश्लेषण)

द इण्डियन स्ट्रगल / भारतीय स्वाधीनता संग्राम (नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस - ऐतिहासिक विश्लेषण)

The Indian Struggle 1920-1934 by Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose

नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस द्वारा

DevanagariHindipublished339 पृष्ठ

पृष्ठ 167, कुल 339 में से

संदर्भ में पढ़ें
पृष्ठ 167

THE BAROMETER RISES 169
Another factor which lent significance to the proceedings
of the Madras Congress was the return of Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru from Europe and his participation in the Congress
deliberations. Pandit J. L. Nehru had had a most interesting
career. After completing his studies at Cambridge he had
been called to the Bar. But when in 1920 the non-co-operation
movement was launched, he threw up his professional work
and joined the Mahatma. According to popular gossip, he
was largely responsible for persuading his father, Pandit
Motilal Nehru, to do the same. He did not agree with the
Swarajists on the question of working inside the Legislatures
and since they came into power, he had voluntarily occupied
a back seat in the councils of the Congress. Latterly he had
been to Europe with his sick wife and during his stay there
he studied some of the latest developments in Europe and
especially in Soviet Russia. Since his return to India he gave
expression to a new ideology and declared himself to be a
Socialist, which was extremely welcome to the Left Wing in
the Congress and to the youth organisations in the country.
The new phase in his public career was first given expression
to at the Madras Congress.
The solid wall of opposition put up against the Simon
Commission came as an eye-opener to the Government.
Something had to be done to soften the opposition. There-
fore, soon after his arrival in India, in February 1928, Sir
John Simon wrote to the Viceroy suggesting that the sittings
of the Commission should be in the nature of a 'Joint Free
Conference' consisting of the seven British members and a
body of representatives chosen by the Indian Legislatures.
In response to an inquiry from Sir Sankaran Nair, Sir John
Simon further stated that the reports, submitted by the
Committees appointed by the Legislatures would be attached
to the main report to be submitted to Parliament by the
Commission. In spite of the above modification proposed by
Sir John Simon, leaders of all parties soon after declared in a
manifesto issued from Delhi that their opposition to the
Simon Commission still held good. In the Indian Legislative
Assembly, Lala Lajpat Rai moved a resolution repudiating
the Simon Commission and this was duly carried. No com-