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 169, कुल 339 में से

संदर्भ में पढ़ें
पृष्ठ 169

THE BAROMETER RISES 171
Mahatma observed in his paper, Young India, that he could
have launched the campaign two years earlier. The respon-
sibility for not utilising the situation in 1928 devolves not
only on the Mahatma but also on the Swarajist leaders who
had the Congress machinery in their hands at the time, but
who had unfortunately lost their dynamic impulse. If a
leader like Deshbandhu Das had been available then, the
events following the boycott of the Prince of Wales' visit to
India in 1921 would have been repeated in 1928.
Undeterred by the opposition which faced them, the Simon
Seven travelled from place to place. Wherever they went,
they met black flags, hostile demonstrations and shouts of
'Simon go back.' The Government tried to organise counter-
demonstrations with the help of a section of the Moslems and
a section of the depressed classes but such attempts did not
meet with success. Though the boycott campaign was kept
strictly within the limits of non-violence, elaborate police
arrangements were made wherever the Commission went and
in some places unnecessarily harsh repression was resorted to.
In the clashes that took place between the unarmed public
and the armed police in different parts of the country,
generally there were no serious consequences except in one
place—Lahore. There the black flag procession which was
being led by Lala Lajpat Rai was charged by the police with
sticks and batons. Lala Lajpat Rai, who was in the front rank
of the procession, was seriously injured in the attack and was
laid up in bed for some time. He recovered to some extent
at first but there was some permanent injury to his heart
which caused a relapse leading to his death. Great sorrow
and indignation followed the death of Lalaji and since the
Simon Commission was indirectly responsible for his death,
the Commission became more unpopular with the people
who used to idolise the great Punjab leader.
The activities of the leaders were not confined to a negative
boycott of the Simon Commission. The great task ahead of
them was to give a fitting reply to the challenge of Lord
Birkenhead by producing an agreed Constitution. To that
end, the All-Parties Conference met at Delhi in February
and March, 1928. The most thorny problem which the