or private rights of foreign residents, but against the special privileges or the measure of control over Chinese affairs exercised by foreign countries as regards extraterritoriality, customs, concessions and other matters.

"Canada has not in the past had any part in shaping or maintaining the policy of acquiring such rights or privileges in China, and has had no part in the recent negotiations for their adjustment. The Canadian Government is, however, in full sympathy with the British Foreign Secretary's announced policy of going as far as possible to meet the legitimate aspirations of the Chinese nation,' and believes that this course is both just and best adapted to insure protection of life and of religious and business interests.

"Under these circumstances it is not considered that it would serve any useful purpose to propose dispatching Canadian forces to China. If the situation should change, the Government will take the earliest opportunity of consulting with Parliament as to the appropriate course to pursue.'

It is to be noted that neither before nor after the sending of Indian troops to China was the so-called parliament of India given any opportunity to pronounce any opinion on the subject.

India's Representation in the League of Nations

We read in the new edition of Chambers's Encyclopaedia, Vol. vi, p. 571-2:

self

"The creation of the League marked an important development in the constitutional relationship of the British Empire in that the four governing dominions of Canada, Australia, South Africa and Newzealand, and also India, were admitted as full members of the League, with complete liberty to act and vote if they chose in opposition to the British delegation." [Italics ours.]

Falsehood becomes more dangerous when it is adulterated with a little truth. It is theoretically true that India has been admitted as a full member a full member of the League, but it is absolutely false that the delegates sent in her name by the British Government of India have complete liberty to act and vote if they choose in opposition to the British delegates. What makes the falsehood more glaring is that a British servant of the British Government is chosen to lead the "Indian" delegation and our elected representatives do not have even an indirect voice in the choice of the delegates. The main ground on which Mr. S. R. Das, the Law Member, has hitherto opposed the appointment of an Indian to lead the "Indian" delegation, is that Indians are not sufficiently conversant with the foreign policy of the British Imperial Government. This

to

gives the lie to the statement of Chambers's Encyclopaedia SO far as it relates India For, it plainly means that the "Indian" delegation must adopt such an attitude as would promote British interests abroad and that the advancement of the cause of India is not its sole or main. concern. It is to be hoped, Mr. S. R. Das appreciates the compliment paid to his country by the selection of himself by the Government to make known this humiliating truth to the Legislative Assembly and the public.

Are the "Indian" delegates to the International Economic Conference and other similar League conferences appointed on the understanding that they are to consult British interests? We have heard at Geneva from a reliable source that the "Indian" delegates to the League Assembly are supplied with certain instructions by the Government of India.

'Oppressed Nations' Congress

The Searchlight of Patna has printed an account of the first session of the International Congress against Colonial Oppression and Imperialism which was held at Brussels from 10th to 15th February. It appears to have been a great success.

Amongst the important personalities who took part in the deliberation and proceedings of the Congress were Messrs. S. 0. Davis (Miners' Federation): George Lansbury, M. P.; Fenner Brookway, M. P. Becket, M. P.; Bridgeman, M. P.: Miss Wilkinson, M. 1'. and many other members of the Independent Labour Party, Henri Barbusse (France); Edo Fimmen, Secretary of the International Transport Workers Workers (Holland); Dr. Helene Theoder Lessing; Ledobour, M. R. Muonzenburg, Stocker: Prof. Gold Schmidt Prof. M. R; J. Vasconcelos, ex-Minister of Public Instructicn, Mexico; Miglioni, Member of the Chamber of Deputies, Italy; Dr. Marteaux, Member of the Chamber of Deputies, Belgium; Hsiung Kwang Suan (Official Representative, Canton Government); Liau (Kuo Min Tang Party, Canton); and several others. India was represented by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru (Delegate of I. N. Congress) and Prof. Barkatulla, V. Chattopadhyaya, T. Sinha and A. C. N. Nambiar, representing various Indian organisations in Europe and America,

Amongst prominent persons who sent their greetings to the Congress can be mentioned Prof. Einstein (Germany), Romain Rolland (France), Mahatma Gandhi and Mme, Cama (the aged leader telegraphic greetings of Mrs. Sun-Yat-Sen and of the Indian Freedom Movement, Paris). The Shrinivas Ayangar were received with tremendous

Important items on the agenda of the Congress were :

1. Opening addresses. 2. Imperialism and its Consequences in the colonial and semi-colonial countries. 3. Imperialism and the dangers of wars, 4. Co-operation between the national liberation movements in the oppressed countries and the labour anti-imperialist movements in the imperialist countries, 5. Co-ordination of the national emancipation movements with the labour movements of all countries, colonial as well as imperialist, 6. Establishment of a permanent world-wide organisation linking up all forces against imperialism and colonial oppression.

a

So far as India is concerned, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in his opening speech narrated brief history of British rule in India and concluded with the remark:

I do submit that the exploitation of India by the British is a barrier for other countries that are being oppressed and exploited. (Applause). It is an urgent necessity for you that we gain our freedom. The noble example of the Chinese nationalists has filled us with hope, and we earnestly want, as soon as we can, to be able to emulate them and follow in their foot-steps, (Applause). We desire the fullest freedom internally for our country, not only, of course, internally, but the freedom to develop such relations with our neighbours and other countries as we may desire. It is because we think that this International Congress affords us a chance of this cooperation that we welcome it and greet it.

Again, at the third day's sitting,

Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, in the name of the Indian delegation, moved a resolution demanding complete freedom for and withdrawal of the British army of occupation from India as well as withdrawal of Indian troops from China, which was unanimously proposed by the Executive Committee of the Congress. In support of it he made a short and forceful speech and cited the example of Egypt, which had not got real independence as long as the British army of occupation was stationed there.

The resolution was unanimously accepted.

Mr. Becket, M. P., read out a resolution formed in a combined meeting of the Chinese, Indian and British delegates, in which fight for complete independence where national forces so desire, withdrawal of troops from China, refusal of war credits, recognition of Canton Government, direct action including strikes and the imposition of the embargo against transport of troops and munitions, have been demanded. This resolution is signed by Lansbury, Brockway, Davis, Manus, Pollit, Miss Wilkinson, Becket, Crawford, Stocks, Nehru and Liau.

Further, a combined declaration signed by Indian and Chinese delegates to renew old cultural ties between the two countries and to carry on

a common fight against against English imperialism, was read out by Mr. Liau.

The formation of a "League against Imperialism and for National Independence" is said to be one of the most important achievements of the congress.

According to its constitution all organisations, parties, trade unions and persons who lead an domination, for the self-determination of all nations earnest struggle against capitalist and imperialist for the national liberty of all peoples, for the equal right of all classes and all persons, shall be allowed to be affiliated to the League. The headquarters of the League will now be situated in Paris. In the Working Committee of the. League Lansbury, Eimmen, Muenzenberg, Barbusse, and one delegate from Latin America, have been Nehru, Liau, Senghor (N. Africa), Hatta (Indonesia) elected as permanent members.

We value the proceedings of this congress, but value them only so far as they may help in molding world opinion. That certainly would be no mean gain. We write in this unenthusiastic tone, because no sympathy from abroad should make us forget that, if we would be free, it is we who must honestly do the most difficult portion of the work, that we must make the utmost sacrifice, that we must make use of all the wisdom and capacity we possess and that we must never relax our efforts.

The

But

Mr. Jitendra Lal Banerjee gave a crushing reply to Mr. M. N. Ray. To be appreciated, his speech should be read as a whole. main points of his speech, summarised in tame language, are -Prof. Sarkar has been accused of officialising the University. 90 percent of Calcutta University Fellows are nominated by Government; how can anybody further "officialise" it? The University has its present constitution according to an Act passed in the teeth of a fierce agitation led by Surendranath Banerjea, but with the help of Sir Asutosh Mukherjee ! Mr. Roy and his party now wanted a democratic constitution, but what were they doing during the ten years of Sir Ashutosh's ViceChancellorship and the years following when they were in power?

What happened was this, So long as a particular party was in power, so long as this party could get its own nominees accepted by the Government, so long we never heard the least whisper of democratic constitution for the Calcutta University Senate. But now that another party is in power and that one clique has given place to another. there is a fierce and sudden outburst of democratic zeal and fervour on the part of all and sundry.

Mr. Banerjee forgot to mention that Sir Ashutosh and his followers opposed even the partial democratisation of the University by Mr. J. N. Basu's Bill.

It has been said that the present Vice-Chancellor is not eminent at all, but I cast my glance over the length and breadth of India and I ask where else shall we find such ripe scholarship, such massive industry and erudition, such keen critical and historical insight as we find in the present Vice-Chancellor ?

As for his being an official (he is no longer an official strictly speaking, as he has retired from Government service), Mr. Banerjee pointed out that Sir Ashutosh, Sir E. Greaves and most other Vice-Chancellors were officials. As for the charge of officialising the University, Mr. Banerjee

P. 58. 27.