|
ARGUMENT Judge :―Does not the witness Sukumar Sen say who was the editor ? Mr. Das :―The witness stated that Bipin Chandra Pal refused to act as joint editor along with Arabinda Ghose. He wanted to have the entire control of the paper as the editor-in-chief. But there was difference of opinion. Arabinda Ghose was offered the editorship but he refused to take the sole responsibility. For he could not do that. He was at that time the Principal of the National College. In only one issue his name was published as editor. But in 'the next issue it was taken off. Judge :―Some addresses were presented to him as editor. Mr. Das :―That was through the impression that he was editor. Arabinda was not responsible for anything that appeared in the "Bande Mataram." There is no magic in the name "Editor." My learned friend says he does not care if Arabinda is editor. He says that he is the paper and that this paper was born in conspiracy. Let us look into it and see if we can find anything dangerous or anything that suggests bombs or conspiracy or waging war against the Government. Far from any such suggestion your Honour will find the suggestions which, I have said, are the ideals of independence, and the means suggested are those of passive resistance. The point on which the greatest stress is laid in the articles is national education, swadeshi and boycott. 'These points are typical of this paper. The fourth point was the general ideal of freedom. To reach that ideal of freedom they advocated the same policy I have mentioned up to the last day. You will find that they not only did not advocate the formation of secret societies but whenever anything happened which drew their attention they deprecated the secret societies in an emphatic language. I do not for a moment suggest that the ideal of the Bande Mataram was not "absolute independence." It was that and nothing but that, and they always deprecated the ideal of improvement of the Government in this country by the putting in of one member in the Executive Council, or additional members in the Viceroy's Council. It was repeated over and over again that they were not in favour of reforms, but what they desired was "a forming." It would not serve the national ideal by legislation of a tinkering kind, that is to say giving some advantages here and some advantages there. All the articles read out by the prosecution in condemnation of Lord Morley's scheme were in reference to that. Those are the honest views of the paper. If those views constitute in any way the waging of war against Government, I will have to say that, Arabinda is guilty. July contention is that it is open to them to preach the ideal of freedom and lay down the methods in the way the "Bande Mataram" has done-the methods of passive resistance, boycott, national education and swaraj. Whenever any Page 124 suggestion of any violence is made your Honour will invariably find that it is necessary for the purpose of repelling an attack. I shall read a few articles to show that it is not true that the "Bande Mataram" was born in conspiracy. I shall refer to an issue of the 18th September 1906 under the heading "That Sinful Desire." (Reads). It refers to those constitutional troubles within the Congress itself. I submit that there is nothing felonious in that article unless my friend means to say that you must read between the lines. Mr. Das then read an article entitled "The idea of National Council" to show the attitude of the Bande Mataram towards secret societies. Counsel read a paragraph dated 3rd October, 1908, which he put to Purno Chundra Lahiri in cross-examination. The article was entitled" Golden Bengal Scare ". Now with regard to the National College I have one word to say. There again I do not quite understand my friend's argument. He does not suggest as I thought at first he did that the Council of National Education was a limb of the conspiracy against the Government. What I understood him to suggest was-I say this subject to correction by your Honour―that Aurobindo made use of the National Council to give effect to his nefarious views. If that was so then no inference can be drawn against him from the fact that he was connected with it. I ask your Honour not to draw any inference from the fact that he was connected with the National College. If inference is to be drawn it must go further; not only must the National Council be not harmless but it must also be proved that the National Council is a part and limb of the conspiracy. Unless that is established, mere connection with the National Council will not give rise to any inference adverse to Arabindo Ghose. You will find in the evidence that Arabindo was connected with it not only after it was started but he came down to Bengal expressly for the purpose of carrying on the National Council of Education. He took part in it before it was started as we find in the evidence of Satish Chander Mukerjee, and the best part of the arguments too shows that he did not intend to use the National Council of Education as a party organ in this conspiracy. At the time the National Council was formed who were the men we find in it? Dr. Rash Behari Ghose, Sir Gooroo Dass Bannerjee, and Mr. Nagendra Nath Ghose with whose names no one will ever try to associate politics. That conclusively proves that Arabinda had no -control over it, or if he had it was not his intention to make it a sort of organ for his political activities. The people in Bengal wanted to keep the National Council of Education free from political activity. This inference clearly arises from the names I have mentioned. It was intended, as the prospectus shows, to be an institution to further the education of the country and it was intended to be free from all political bias of either party. Arabindo Page 125 was selected as the Principal of this College because he was under the circumstances the fittest person. When he came to Calcutta in August 1906 he was still in the service of Baroda. He does not give it up until after he is appointed Principal of the National College. With reference to this I desire to read just a few lines of the evidence of Satish Chandra Mukherji (Reads). There is no evidence even that Arabindo exercised any active control so far as the selection of the course of studies was concerned. I submit that this fact is of no importance at all in arriving at the question whether Arabindo Ghose is guilty or not of the charges brought against him. I submit that although it does not help you in coming to any conclusion as to his guilt it shows―as I have submitted to you before-that the course of the activity of Arabindo Ghose was in accordance with the principles which were enunciated in that letter of 13th August, 1905. That is all that I have got to submit up to this period of 1906. The next period I take is the period from October 1906 to April 1907. This is a period of very little activity on Arabinda's part as you will find during that period he was mostly ill. You will find―I will state the facts before I prove them―that he was at Deoghur from 11th December, 1906 to the 14th December, 1906, and again from 27th January, 1907, to the middle of April 1907, and you have heard from the evidence of Sukumar Sen that on the night he left for Deoghur permission was asked―after his name appeared as Editor of the "Bande Mataram "―if he would agree to be the Editor and upon his refusal his name was removed the next day. With regard to three different dates which I have given there is very little documentary evidence in the case, and from Arabindo's written statement I shall have to refer to it. In this connection we see that he was ill. He had to take leave from the National College on several occasions; in fact he was practically ill during the whole of this period (Reads Arobindo's statement). Satish Chandra Mukerji was asked about it and he said that the statement about Arabindo taking leave was true. Another thing which I should like to point out in this connection is that there is no suggestion that at that time there was any activity in Seal's lodge. That was from a few days before February 1908 to some time in April 1908. With reference to this period my learned friend read out some articles in the" Bande Mataram,1 dealing with autonomy, swaraj etc., and he further said that they contained It show of racial antipathy, that there was no love for. humanity and that they advocated a direct violation of the law. Well, I have lead those articles over and over again and I say that they are absolutely―everyone of them ―free from anyone of those charges, except the charge―and I did not understand my friend to bring that in as a charge―that they wanted to bring in absolute swaraj. What I did understand him Page 126 to say―if I have understood my friend aright-was that the means suggested for attaining Swaraj, was not legal and it was that that made the ideal of Swaraj improper. He took care to say that and I must say that it was very fair on the part of my learned friend to point it out. So far as these articles are concerned I submit that the charge of racial antipathy cannot be brought against the "Bande Mataram." The particular note in the "Bande Mataram" was "love for its own people" and if that in itself involved some antipathy it may be expected, but what I want to lay stress on is, that the dominant note was not antipathy but love for its own people, and in dealing with that it may be that the articles have referred to other nations not in very complimentary languages. If you read the whole thing you will find that the object is not to attack any nation at all, but to point out that we must fall back upon our own resources, and stand on our own legs, or in other words, as I have pointed out before, that you cannot attain your ideal except through your own salvation. The Bande Mataram had to attack other nations because it pointed out that the people of this country were under the spell of foreign civilisation, under alien civilisation and wanted to dispel by these articles that peculiar hypnotism that was cast on the people of this country by European nations. Not that European civlisation is bad, but that European civilisation is for "Europeans." European nation must develop in their own way; they must rise to the noblest and best in them according to their own traditions. So also with the Indians; they must also take their own stand. Not that European civilisation is bad―I want you to particularly notice that―you won't find that in the articles―but that European civilisation applied to us, European traditions brought into this country, are not the materials upon which this nation can grow. That is the philosophy underlying all the articles. The European civilisation is as a tree which grows in the soil of England; if you bring that tree here, it will not attain the same growth because the soil is not congenial. In the same way the development of a nation must be based on its own traditions. If you base it on any other traditions the soil will not be congenial. As for antipathy and dislike for humanity they are not to be found in those articles.· I submit they breathe all that my friend denies. I say according to these people nationalism has no rational basis to go upon unless it be for humanity. I ask your permission here to read an article which comes into this period. It is written in very figurative language, but the thing it brings out is the inner philosophy of this school, (reads article entitled " Nation Day" October 16th .) Counsel next referred to the period from April 1907, to September 1907, i. e. up to the acquittal of Arabindo Ghose in the sedition case. In this period, counsel said, Arabindo's activities Page 127 'were confined to the National College and Bande Mataram. In this connection counsel read a letter written to Arabindo from Tokio sympathising with him in his trouble with the Bande Mataram Trial. There are some articles of the Bande Matararm of that period. Counsel then read the article of the 17th September headed "The secret of prudence and moderation". The article also deals with passive resistance. "Every country fought its battle of freedom in its own peculiar way. We can use our passive resistance in such It way, etc." (Reads). I need not trouble your Honour with other articles because the idea is the same. They are articles on the Congress, Swaraj and so forth. It is a curious feature that the whole evidence against Arabinda is doubtful. When your Honour finds, so far as Arabinda's case is concerned, that there is something unusual, something difficult to understand, I submit that your Honour may come to the conclusion that there is something behind the series of difficulties. When your Honour finds that some act is repeated a number of times your Honor may draw that inference. (Reads) I suggested to him why he did not put any mark. He says he put some mark in blue pencil which was obliterated (Reads). I submit there is nothing in it which goes against Arabinda. The next period I take up now is from September 1907 to December 1907. Your Honour will find that from the middle of October 1907 to about end of December 1907, Arabinda was ill and he was at Deoghur. I ask your Honour's attention to the letters and other evidence on this point because this matter is of some importance in connection not only with this topic but also with different topics. Counsel next read a letter from Mr. Palka which related the entire activities of Arabinda with regard to the Congress. The writer invited a number of extremist delegates. Arabinda wanted to put the Congress on a representative basis. He said that what is alleged to be a national gathering must be national in the true sense of the word. Judge.―The Congress has ceased ? According to the Extremists the Congress has ceased to be. But according to the Moderates it is still going. It is like "The Duma is dead. Long live the Duma." Counsel next referred to the slip which was sent to the Bande Matamm for discussion. Your Honour will find, continued counsel, from the evidence of Mr. K. B. Dutt that Mr. Surendranath Banerjea did not like the idea of giving up boycott at the Conference. A few days after they issued a circular that Swadeshi covered everything. The Page 128 extremists say that it was merely a trick to mislead the people who feel very thoroughly on the question of boycott. Mr. Das referred to a letter from Mr. Tilak to Arabinda Ghose. It asked Arabinda Ghose to invite a large number of extremist―delegates to the Congress. :Mr. Tilak wanted to have a separate Conference for the nationalists. His idea was to have a separate Conference as soon as the deliberations of the Congress were over. Their attitude, was not to break up the Congress. They want to have the question of electing Dr. Rash Behari Ghosh decided by voting. The extremists wanted to have a separate sort of party organisation for them. In England the parties have their own organisations, the Liberals, the Conservatives, down to the socialists. They did not want to force their views. They wanted to see that the views of the delegates were represented by the Congress. I submit the Nationalist Conference was held and passed resolutions. These resolutions were published in newspapers. They assembled not to break up the Congress. They did not say "if you don't accept our views, we shall break your head." They had no bombs in their contemplation. I do not say as my friend suggested that they had bombs in their contemplation. Judge.―It is rather forcing their views on the Congress. : Mr. Norton.―:Surely. - :Mr. Das.―The position of affairs was this. The nationalist delegates did not want Dr. Rash Bihari Ghose as the President. They wanted Lala Lajpat Rai. If he declined, then they would have Mr. Surendranath Banerjee. : Mr. Das.―There is no difference between extremists and moderates. The moderates have the ideal of "swaraj" on the colonial lines while the extremists have the idea of "swaraj" in the independent form. : Mr. Norton.―The moderates have the ideal of Government as obtained in the colonies. : Mr. Das.―What is the difference? Where is the control of England over the colonies? Judge―It is a matter of policy; : Mr. Das.―It is not a question of ideals. The Parliament cannot force its views. The extremists liked to put their ideals in a more logical form. The "Bande Mataram" made this point clear. The moderates and extremists mean the same thing but the moderates have not the courage to say as the extremists. The same letter contained a phrase which was printed as "Government Expression," saying that if Dr. Ghose was rejected, there would be " Government Expression." Page 129 Judge―It is probably repression. Mr. Das next made reference to a letter, from Mr. Tilak to Babu Moti Lal Ghose asking him not to accept Dr. Ghose as the leader. Counsel referred to the manifesto issued by Arabinda Ghose inviting extremist delegates to the nationalist Conference here. Your Honour heard the discussion about the scheme for the constitution of the Congress. That was another point on which there was a good deal of dispute between the extremists and the moderates. Mr. Norton suggested that he got it at Surat, nobody would dispute that. To my mind it was a scheme drawn up for the purpose of drawing a constitution for the Congress. The subjects mentioned were National Fund, Arbitration Court, Primary Education, Swaraj and Boycott. They were to be discussed either in the Congress or it suggests a scheme that is to be proposed before the country for the Congress. The worst point in that is the establishment of Arbitration system, of course from our point of view. There is nothing sinister, nothing, suggestive of bombs, conspiracy or anything of the kind (Reads). Then some other letters appear during that period. I will not read them. They prove Arabinda's connection with the Bande Mataram. It is' admitted. That is the letter which I have referred to in connection with Arabinda's residing at Daoghur. In this letter the writer made suggestions for the improvement of the Bande Mataram. It was from a man of Bombay. He thought that Arabinda had some influence over the Bande Mataram, that is why he wrote it to him. It is clear, that Arabinda had some sort of control and I have all along admitted that both here and elsewhere in connection with the other case. Arabinda's work was a work of love to the "Bande Mataram." He would not be put to such a position so as to be responsible for anything appearing in the Bande Mataram. He had not the time nor his health would allow him to look after or supervise the paper. That is why he refused to be the editor. He was not the editor at any time. It is the case with English newspapers that the reporters send their reports and they are printed and the editor is responsible for what appears. He associates, myself with the views but he does not hold himself responsible for anything that appears in the editorial columns. I can't ask Your Honour to read the whole but there was nothing to show that he was responsible. Continuing counsel said-I have got a few articles of the "Bande Mataram" placed before Your Honour. I placed articles published in December 1906. I have got 3 or 4 articles representative of different views of the different parties. Arabinda was Page 130 arrested on the 2nd May, 1908. I have taken up all the articles from December 1906 to April 1908. They conclusively support the contention that I have made from beginning to end. Mr. Das then dealt with several articles from the paper during this period and assailed the argument of Mr. Norton about the alleged connection between the Nationalist papers. He continued :―I have dealt with the evidence with regard to the so-called conspiracy and I now desire to draw Your Honour's attention to certain points in common between the moderate papers, the "Bengalee" and the "Indu Prokash" for instance and the Anglo-Indian papers like the' Statesman," the "Indian Daily News", the" Pioneer" and the "Englishman." Still these papers have. their peculiarities. I cannot forget the fact that there must necessarily be a great deal in common between them. It is, by no means, a violent assumption to say that. But inspite of the points in common, each paper must stand on its own legs. Your Honour will find certain peculiarities in each paper. Your Honour knows the "Bengalee" and the "Indu Prokash" of Bombay are perfectly moderate papers. I do not know why my friend will extend his triangle so far. So far as the "Bande Mataram" and the "Jugantar" are concerned, I shall show by reference to 'one article that according to the" Bande Mataram," the ideal of freedom must be attained by passive resistance, Swadeshi, Boycott, national education, courts of arbitration etc. To quote from the famous speech of Gladstone, "you must educate yourself for self-government. You must take up as much work of Government as you can do". National education, Swadeshi, all these are methods laid down by the "Bande Matram."The paper says that it is only by perusing these methods that you can attain self-government. Make yourself fit for self-government. This is the doctrine of political philosophers in Europe upon which the view is based. This view has again been analysed by the " Bande Mataram " and adapted to Vedantism pure and simple. Every philosopher in England deals with the growth of democracy. From the time of Hobbs down to the time of Spencer,―passing from the period of English history known as the period of French illumination, it has been held that the Government can only exist with the tacit consent on the part of the people. In point of time, if the character of the Government be most despotic that you can imagine or representative, the mere fact that the Government does exist shows conclusively that the people has consent to it. There was a time, according to Hobbs, when the people and the King used to meet together. They met why? To determine the consent of the people. Locke borrowed his views from Rousseau on this point. Spencer's "Man vs. State" embodies this view. As a matter of fact, Page 131 the relation between the Governor and the governed is based. upon actual contract. It may not be so historically speaking but it must be true logically speaking. You cannot govern people against their wishes. At every point of time that the Government exists, it shows that it exists, because the people lend their support. Continuing counsel said Arabinda also exposes the same theory. He gives a new expression and makes it a new point of his philosophy. This doctrine of the tacit consent of the people and another doctrine which is misapplied, namely "Vox populi vox dei," are applicable in this connection. Arabinda holds the same principles whether with regard to the nation or the individual. He sees in the development of the society or the individual, the manifestation of God. He takes the same principle of development according to the law of Nature or Law of God, in the light of Vedantism. "Vox populi vox dei ", i. e., the voice of the people is the voice of God, because the people are the manifestation of God. No man can attain salvation except by severe self-restraint. Unless he restrains himself, he has no hope of salvation. If you apply this doctrine, as Arabinda Ghose has applied it, to the situation of this country, what is the result? The result is that the people want "swaraj" or self-government. I do not desire to repeat my argument here. Arabinda has taken care never to define the form of "Swaraj". Arabinda has advocated national education, Swadeshi, boycott and court of arbitration whereas the "Jugantar" in its article headed the" Suchona" holds that no progress of the country is possible without independence. Talk of Swadeshi, the" Jugantar " laughs at it. Talk of national education, arbitration court, the 'Jugantar' says all that is a pastime. No progress of the country can ever take place unless you have absolute independence. This is the essential difference between the principles of the Bande Mataram and the Jugantar. Mr. Das here read articles from the Sandhya, Navasakti and other papers to show the difference in the tone of their writings. Mr. Das then went on to discuss some unpublished writings of Arabinda Ghose. My learned friend, observed counsel, argues that the writing No. 2998 furnishes an index of the man's thoughts. This writing is in Bengali: My friend does not show that it is in the handwriting of Arabinda Ghose. Mr. Norton―I suggest that it is the handwriting of Sarajini. Mr. Das-It certainly looks like a lady's handwriting. I fail to understand how it furnished an index of Sarajini's thoughts. Sarajini is not before Your Honour as a conspirator. Referring to the article" morality of boycott," Mr. Das said" since the man did not publish this, I venture to submit that he did not publish as he thought the article might be misunderstood. How can you convict a man for unpublished writings ? Page 132 It is for Your Honour to say whether these writings can furnish an index of the man's thoughts. I submit they cannot. Because the words and phrases employed do not clearly and completely bring out his ideals. Arabinda thought the writings might be misunderstood so he did not publish them. Unless you can show that they were secret documents, intended to be circulated amongst the people secretly, you cannot draw the inference that the writings supply an index of the man's thought. I ask Your Honour to interpret the point charitably. These writings were not published anywhere. Arabinda could publish them easily. They are open to this charitable construction that since Arabinda feared they might be misunderstood, he did not publish them. I ask Your Honour to accept the charitable construction. The writings do not bear the meaning which my learned friend sought to put into it." . Mr. Das read a long unpublished article by Arabinda Ghose entitled "What is Extremism." Referring to a sentence " the law was made for man and not man for the law", the Judge asked if each person was entitled to pass his own judgment on the law. Mr. Norton, interrupting, asked how the societies were to exist ? Mr. Das, continuing with his argument put the question "is it not the same view which obtains in other countries with regard to passive resistance?" Have not the people often disobeyed the provisions of the law and taken the penalty? Mr. Norton―Not on the ground that the law is wrong. Mr. Das―That is Arabinda's view. Proceeding Mr. Das aid that Arabinda put it on the ground of organic unity between he Government and the people. They were not judging the man on account of his ideals. So far as the infringement of the law was concerned it was the same in other countries. The Government do a certain thing and the people say it is wrong and unjust. If they are fined, they are prepared to pay the fine. In the language of Arabinda you have got here an authority which has not sprung from the nation as a part of its organism. The Government has not sprung here from within the people as the Government of other countries. No one can gainsay the truth of that. Arabinda never hesitated to put that forward over and over again. I object to the Government of this country not because it is an autocratic Government, not because it is a democratic Government or of its particular actions which are criticised by others. My objection is based on philosophy; Page 133 that this Government has not sprung from the people as a part of an organism. Arabinda's argument was based on the ground of "utility." And after all, counsel declared, the basis of all legislation in England was utility ; something which helped the growth and development of the nation. That was the claim of the Government. We pass this law because it is in the interests of the people, and the interests of the people, counsel said, could not be considered apart from the development of the nation. Counsel read some further passages from the article where Arabinda discussed the methods by which they were to attain the ideal of freedom. Commenting on this counsel said if a bomb were brought to Arabinda and he were asked" Shall I throw this at the first Englishman I come across?" Arabinda would say "Will this accomplish the great ideal?" The answer, counsel said, would necessarily be 'no' because it would not produce the desired effect. His Honour―If effective, use it ? Mr. Das―If the oppression increases to such an extent and people are so united together, and have got such resources at their back that they think they can fight the Government in battle as it were they may do it, but not now. His Honour―He goes back to the Utilitarian method if you are strong enough to fight. Mr. Das : Yes, that is the whole trend of his argument. Proceeding Mr. Das repeated his former argument regarding the methods advocated by Arabinda, insisting on the point that according to Arabinda violent methods were bad and peaceful methods were good. In the paragraph discussing the methods, which counsel read, Arabinda was taking each particular ideal and probing it in order to test its truth or - otherwise. He was discussing the best ideal. Counsel read a sentence regarding one of the means discussed by Arabinda which ran "whether it is worthy of a great people who is struggling to be" ; counsel called His Honour's attention to this question put by Arabinda. Counsel continued: If there was a section in the Penal Code― which fortunately there was not―that the preaching of national freedom meant sedition, Arabinda's answer would be, "never. the less I must do it. I cannot help it. It is within me and that is what I owe to myself and my God." . Referring to another passage where after discussing certain questions Arabinda said "the result will be anarchy" Counsel said he was surprised at Mr. Norton who was an English scholar saying that he meant anarchist's outrages. He challenged Mr. Norton to point out from the writings of any English writer that the term "anarchy" Page 134 has been used to mean" anarchists' outrages." "Anarchy" counsel said, meant "disorder" and Arabinda was referring to a sort of social chaos. Counsel read some further passages with the object of showing that the metaphors used by Arabinda were taken by Mr. Norton literally. When he spoke of sacrificing their lives for the country Arabinda meant that they should suffer. Referring to the expression "Manuring the soil with their blood" counsel asked if such a thing was possible, it was a mere metaphor. He exhorted the people to suffer to the last extremity. What would happen, counsel asked, if passive resistance could be so well organised that all the people refused to pay taxes. It was not a very pleasurable subject to deal with, but counsel said one could well imagine that there would be firing of guns and the result of that would be that the people would be weltering in blood. Proceeding Mr. Das said he was outlining a passive resistance which it would be impossible to reach, but the man who was writing was pushing a wrong point to its logical conclusion. The point he had fixed his attention on was the method and the ideal. The point he was pursuing was whether it was effective and consistent with the traditions of the country. No nation could grow out of subjection unless it was prepared to suffer. The reference to blood and darkness and death, counsel averred, was figurative. If it led to disorder even then it was welcome because it helped to attain the development they were seeking. It did not help Mr. Norton in thinking that it referred to bombs, ammunition or any other thing. Referring to the word Revolution which appeared in a passage in the article, Counsel said, that this did not have the same meaning as the French Revolution. The word was used in the sense of peaceful revolution. Proceeding with his argument counsel said "If Your Honour looks at the dominant notes in the unpublished writings it is perfectly in accord with the real nature of Arabinda's writings. If you take hold of a word here and a paragraph there you will not get the real intention. Your Honor must read that article with all the other articles. Counsel referred to another article from which Mr. Norton quoted the lines of Wordsworth incorporated in the article" who would free themselves must themselves strike the blow." Commenting on this Mr. Das said: "My friend seems to think that it is indicative of bombs. If Your Honor reads the whole article you will find that it is written in appreciation of Rash Behary Ghose's speech delivered at the Congress. The author quotes this particular line of poetry to support the contention that Mr. Ghose put forward that nations by themselves are made" Page 135 Counsel next dealt with the "sweets letter." He said, "Your Honor will find that having regard to the Circumstances as disclosed in. the evidence of this case, Your Honour cannot accept the document as being in the hand-writing of Barindra Kumar Ghose, or that it was sent to Arabinda Ghose. What does it. show? The letter is supposed to have been written by one brother to another at Surat. Therefore if this letter is genuine both the brothers were at Surat at that time. I submit that it is utterly improbable, assuming that both the brothers are conspirators, that one brother should write to another brother in this way. There, they could have talked to each other, explained their thoughts―each to the other―without writing at all. The letter states "we must have sweets all over India ready made for emergency. I wait here' for your answer." The case for the prosecution is that Barin used to address Arabinda, as "Shejda". Did Barin forget this when writing this letter? He writes "Dear brother". In' this country no younger brother would write to any elder brother, as "Dear brother" except to the eldest brother. Judge :,―What do they write? Mr. Das :―Mejda, Shejda etc. only the eldest brother is addressed as brother. The fact that both the brothers being at Surat, Barin wrote to Arabindo, is extremely improbable. I draw Your Honour's attention to the fact that Barin signs "Barindra Kumar Ghose." My learned friend says that Arabinda and Barindra are Europeanised. But Barin came to India at the venerable age of one year. I left England 15 years ago, I do not know whether the custom has changed there. But when I was in England I noticed that a brother never set out his full name when writing to another brother. Judge :―I would not put my full name. I would omit my surname. : Mr. Das :―Nobody would sign like that. Considering the probabilities I submit that when a brother desires to communicate something to another brother, the proper form of signing his name is not to give the full name like Barindra Kumar Ghose. Mr. Das continuing said, "this Sweets Letter is taken with Arabinda and treasured down. It is taken to different places in the Bombay Presidency, It is brought to Calcutta back again. It is kept at 23 Scott's Lane for a couple of months and the Police are lucky enough to find the letter at 48, Grey Street. It is grossly improbable. I submit that under the circumstances, Your Honour will hesitate to accept this as evidence and proof against Arabinda Ghose." Mr. Das here read from the evidence of Mr. Creagan. Counsel commenting on the evidence said, on the 2nd May, not only Page 136 the 48, Grey Street, was searched, but the other houses were searched as well. .All the articles found at the searches were sent to the Park Street Thana. There is no reason why an exception should be made with regard to 48, Grey Street. The documents of 15, Gopi Mohan Dutt's Lane, and the garden were both sent to the Park Street Thana. Mr. Das then referred to the great confusion in the evidence of the Police witnesses with regard to the finding and examination of the letter at the Thana. Mr. Das : There is just another point about the "sweets" letter which is this―Your Honour will find that the number of the bundle was subsequently added to. Mr. Creagan in his cross-examination says" the letters might have come out of the envelopes." I submit that the" sweets letter" could not have been in the bundle. The number of the letters in the document must at least be 64. There were 64 letters and 20 envelopes. Mr. Das referred to the evidence of several other witnesses and commented on them, after which he summed up. He said "I must thank Your Honour and gentlemen assessors for the very kind ·and patient hearing you have given me throughout this case. My only wish was that the task might have fallen on other hands to place this case before the Court; but as it fell on my hands I did all I possibly could to place the evidence in this case before the Court in a connected form. There is one point which struck me at the outset of this case but I did not refer to it so long, as I thought it could be dealt with more conveniently and appropriately after I had finished dealing with the evidence oral and documentary, on the record. Your Honour will find that my learned friend's case is that Arabinda is the head of this conspiracy. He has credited Arabinda with vast intellectual attainments and with vast powers of organisation and his case was that he was directing this conspiracy and was working from behind. Now it is with reference to this that I make my submission before Your Honour, that having regard to the nature of the conspiracy which has been established by the evidence,―if it has been established at all―it is impossible that Arabinda could ever have believed that that conspiracy was likely to succeed; If you say that Arabinda is not gifted with the intellectual powers with which you have credited him that is another matter. But if you say that he is all that you have been kind enough to say he is and concomittant with that he is the head of the conspiracy and is directing the conspiracy, my answer to that is, the conspiracy is of such a nature that it is impossible to believe that Arabinda could ever have thought in his mind that it could succeed. My learned friend has referred to the thousand and one ramifications of that conspiracy and he has argued that there was a conspiracy from Calcutta to Tuticorin and other places and in order to substantiate this vast conspiracy as it Page 137 were, he has not hesitated to bring a charge of conspiracy against persons of whom there is not the slightest evidence on record to show that they were in any way connected with it. I ask you to disregard all that; the conspiracy is in my learned friend's imagination; I do not for a moment suggest that he does not believe it to be true; I don't suggest that he does not believe every word of what he has said and that he has no misgivings on the point. I wholly concede that he fully believed in the conspiracy which he has put forward before the Court and the only way I can explain that and the only suggestion that I can make is that he has been under the tutelage of the police for a long time and the police have poisoned his mind during the last ten months and no doubt he sincerely believed in it and put it forward before the Court. But the evidence is entirely different. From the evidence as is furnished by the confessions in this Court-confessions upon which the prosecution relies-you will find that it is a childish conspiracy ―a toy revolution. It is impossible that Arabinda could ever have believed in his heart of hearts that by bombing one or two Englishmen, or some Englishmen at different places, they would ever have been able to subvert the British Government. If you credit him with intellectual powers and say that he has a brilliant mind, it is not open to you at the same time to say that he was the leader of a childish conspiracy and a toy revolution. That is the difficulty which comes up at the very threshold of this case. Either drop the suggestion that it is because of his intellectual powers, because of his eminent qualities with which he is credited that you want the Court to believe that he was the leader of the conspiracy; or the other theory that he was in fact the leader of this conspiracy and of this alleged revolutionary project. Apart from that suggestion if you turn to the evidence what do you find ? It is argued that the confessions are evidence against Arabinda. My answer is that the confessions exonerate him. If it is argued that the watch witnesses and the other witnesses have proved conclusively that there has been association between Arabinda and the conspirators, I submit that that evidence is such that yon can't place the slightest reliance upon it: not only that, but that under the circumstances one could only expect the evidence to be of such a character. If the Government takes into its head to believe that there is a vast conspiracy which is threatening the stability of the Government, it is common knowledge, that you do come across spies who give false evidence. I shall just read It passage from a book written by an eminent Judge. "The Government under those circumstances have spies who wriggle into the case, eaves drop into families, abstract correspondence and forge letters." Therefore the evidence given before you is evidence that you can expect in a case like this. It seems to me if you consider the evidence carefully and apply the different tests I have suggested Page 138 and submitted for consideration, I have hardly any doubt that you will reject that evidence as untrustworthy. Is it argued that in the different letters that have been put forward there is a case against Arabinda, that these letters show that Arabinda is implicated in any conspiracy whatsoever? My answer is that the letters themselves don't show anything of the kind. It is my learned friend's interpretation on those letters; and in some cases in regard to Arabinda's connection with certain boys that interpretation has been of such a character that one can hardly resist the temptation of calling it ridiculous, reminding one of the case of Mrs. Bardell against Pickwick. He reads a document and imports into that document things which are not to be found in the four corners of the document, but which have evolved out of my friend's inner conscience. If you read the documents as they are, having regard to the circumstances under which they were written, I venture to submit before you, that there is hardly any doubt, whatever may be the view, that those documents do not bring the guilt home to Arabinda Ghose with reference to any of the charges brought against him. My further submission is that my learned friend to a certain extent realised that and he said out of despair as it were, 'never mind the letters, never mind the evidence but look at the probability, look at the man's thought.' It was in that view that he put before you the different newspapers and the charge of conspiracy and wholesale conspiracy against many men of light and leading in this country. 'Read the "Bande Mataram," read the different speeches and read the other newspapers-my friend says that you must read the other papers because they are all linked together and you discover what his thoughts were. If you analyse those speeches and writings and if you find an indication that the man was putting forward before the country, the ideal of freedom, you must take it for granted that he was also in favour of applying bombs, of secret societies and such other means as some of the evidence in this case discloses.' My submission to you is―I made it before and I do so again―that those papers and the writings and speeches are nut legal evidence in the case at all ; but if you do take them you , find unmistakeable indication that whatever may be Arabinda's views, he is not guilty of the charges brought against him. I have placed before Your Honour the letter of the 13th August 1905. I read to you the whole of that letter and commented on it and I explained to you what the different thoughts in that letter are. (Reads) 'I say, as I have said in my statement, that ever since I came to Calcutta from Baroda, I never for one single moment deviated from the principles laid down in that letter. I have said I never took any part in politics. I have said in my written statement, whatever the nature of my activities, be they political, social or religious, that throughout the whole course of my activities, I never for one single moment deviated from the principle laid down in that letter Page 139 of 13th August. The whole of my case before you is this. If it is suggested that I preached the Ideal of freedom to my country which is against the law, I plead guilty to the charge. If that is the law here, I say I have done that and I request you to convict me. But do not impute to me crimes that I am not guilty of ; deeds against which my whole nature revolts, and which having regard to my mental capacity are something which could never have been perpetrated by me. If it is an offence to preach the ideal of freedom, I admit―having done it―I have never disputed it. It is for that that I have given up all the prospects of my life. It is for that, that I came to Calcutta to live for it and to labour for it. It has been the one thought of my waking hours, the dream of my sleep. If that is my offence, there is no necessity to bring witness into the box to depose to different things in connection with that. Here am I and I admit it. My whole submission before the Court is this. Let not the scene enacted in connection with the sedition trial of the "Bande Mataram" be enacted over again, and let the whole trial go into a side issue. If that is my offence let it be so stated and I am cheerful to bear any punishment It pains me to think that crimes I could never have thought of or deeds repellent to me, and against which my whole nature revolts, should be attributed to me and that on the strength, not only of evidence on which the slightest reliance cannot be placed, but on my writings which breathe and breathe only of that high ideal which I felt I was called upon to preach. I have done that and there is no question that I have ever denied it. I have adopted the principles of the political philosophy of the West and I have assimilated that to the immortal teachings of Vedantism. I felt I was called upon to preach to my country to make them realise that India had a mission to perform in the committee of nations. If that is my fault you can chain me, imprison me, but you will never get out of me a denial of that charge. I venture to submit under no section of the law do I come for preaching the ideal of freedom and with regard to the deeds with which I have been charged, I submit there is no evidence on the record and it is absolutely inconsistent with everything that I taught, that I wrote and with every tendency of my mind discovered in the evidence.' My appeal to you therefore is that a man like this who is being charged with the offences imputed to him stands not only before the bar in this Court but stands before the bar of the High Court of History and my appeal to you is this: That long after this controversy is hushed in silence, long after this turmoil, this agitation ceases, long after he is dead and gone, he will be looked upon as the poet of patriotism, as the prophet of nationalism and the lover of humanity. Long after he is dead and gone his words will be echoed and reechoed not only in India, but across distant seas and lands. Page 140 Therefore I say that the man in his position is not only standing before the bar of this Court but before the bar of the High Court of History. . The time has come for you, sir, to consider your judgment and for you, gentlemen, to consider your verdict. I appeal to you, sir, in the name of all the traditions of the English Bench that forms the most glorious chapter of English history. I appeal to you in the name of all that is noble, of all the thousand principles of law which have emanated from the English Bench, and I appeal to you in the name of the distinguished Judges who have administered the law in such a manner as to compel not only obedience, but the respect of all those in whose cases they had administered the law. I appeal to you in the name of the glorious chapter of English history and let it not be said that an English Judge forgets to vindicate justice. To you gentlemen I appeal in the name of the very ideal that Arabinda preached and in the name of all the traditions of our country; and let it not be said that two of his own countrymen were overcome by passions and prejudices and yielded to the clamour of the moment. Mr. P. Mitra then argued the case on behalf of Asoke Nandy, Debabrata Bose, Indra Nandy, Hem Chandra Das and Dindayal Bose and contended that no charge of conspiracy had been brought home to them. Suggestions and inferences based on assumptions were the utmost that could be urged against them. Mr. P. Lall then dealt with the cases of Nagendra Gupta and Dharani Gupta". Both were convicted by the High Court for possessing arms at 134 Harrison Road and was given 7 years' imprisonment. There was nothing to show they were in any conspiracy. Babu Nagendra Nath Banerjea, vakil, addressed the Court on behalf of Bejoy Bhattacharya and drew the attention of the Court that the crown counsel admitted that the evidence fell short of necessary standard and that the formulae for bomb was not found on the first day and Bejoy was not aware if it. Babu Bejoy Krishna Bose took up the case of Abinash Bhattacharya whom, he said, the Crown Counsel wanted to sacrifice at the altar of Arabinda. Evidence was given that he was connected with Jugantar and was the author of two nefarious books Bartaman Rananiti and Mukti kone Pathey. So long as Abinash was connected with Jugantar there were two prosecutions viz., those of Bhupendra Dutt and Baikunta Acharya. The two issues upon which the prosecutions were based were not printed at Abinash's Press. Abinash was only the manager and though he was prosecuted, he was acquitted. After that he cut off all connections and sold the Press. All letters addressed to him as Manager, after this were not found with him but with Taranath. The articles Page 141 reprinted in the Mukti kone Pathey were those upon which the Government did not elect to prosecute and he did not consider it wrong to print them for sale. He wanted to start the Navasakti as a paper different from the Jugantar―as he thought that by writing violent articles and going to jail the gospel of freedom could not be preached. Abinash's name is not to be found in any note book anywhere. In all the confessions no mention of Abinash was made except only to show that he was connected with the paper Jugantar. Mr. R. N. Roy argued the case then on behalf of Provas De and the three Sen brothers of Sylhet and Babu Dwijendra Nath Mookerjea for B. K. Kane. Mr. E. P. Ghose then addressed the Court on behalf of 9 accused persons. He first stated the general principles of law and evidence which the Assessors should bear in mind. He adopted all the points of law taken by Mr. C. R. Dass as his own. The four overt acts, viz. two on the L. G., one against the Mayor and another against Mr. Kingsford were intended for individuals and could not he construed into waging of war. He submitted his clients were all new comers, novices, who knew nothing of any conspiracy. He then dealt with the individual cases of Purna Chandra Sen, Narendra Buxi, Krishna Jihan Sanyal, Sachindra K. Sen, Hemendra Ghose, Naliny Gupta, Bejoy Nag, Birendra Nath Ghose, and Sishir Kumar Ghose. Mr. J. N. Roy then discussed the case of Hrishikesh Kanzilal. He protested against the way the case was put by the Crown Counsel which made the task of the defence difficult. The Court looked like a fortress with the accused not in dock but in an iron cage. Of the 1500 documents put in many were irrelevant. Mr. Norton placed before the court the whole of the political and moral revolution lately going on in Bengal and had challenged the new life that had sprung up with all its aspirations and manifestations. Everything that is grandest and noblest in the culture and manhood of the nation had been placed on trial. Are you strong P You are then a conspirator. Are you young? that absolutely proves that you are a conspirator. Are you religious? you must he a conspirator. Do you read the Geeta ? Do you study vedantism? Are you a genius P that is proof positive you are a conspirator. After dealing with the evidence against his client he concluded by saying" the eyes of whole Asia, if not the whole world have been upon us for months past. We have done our part and it now remains for you to do yours. You must have observed that in the history of individuals as in the history of nations there comes a time when the sense of judgment is obscured. It is for you to say whether you think that the mere thought of a far off revolution in the minds of half a dozen or dozen men can be accepted as waging war against the King. It is for you to say whether the overt acts Page 142 in this case do constitute overt acts at all. You will remember the magnitude of the trial and your duty is to do justice. You are no politician and politics have no place in a court of justice. Because a man shows some of the beliefs, some of the hopes, some of the fears of a particular generation does that constitute evidence of association in a case of this character? Lastly, gentlemen, you have heard of the price that England has to pay for Empire. Well, I will say this that splendid as the Empire is, you will deem, the world will deem that Empire is nought if it is found wanting when weighed in the balance against justice." Babu Bejoy Krishna Bose was requested to argue on behalf of Nikhileswar Roy Moulik in the absence of his pleader who had. fallen ill. He divided, the case into four parts viz, his alleged connection with the Jugantar ; his connection with the Chattra Vandar, his connection with the different places and the search of his house at Damrai, and his alleged connection with the conspiracy. He got 160 per month for printing the Jugantar in his press. Its office was elsewhere Chattra Vandar was a purely business concern. His client was not seen in any place of conspiracy nor was he named in any of the confessions. He concluded his address with the following words:― . "And now gentlemen you have heard the last of the speeches on behalf of the defence. So far as this historic trial is concerned ―the first of its kind in India- what remain now is for you, gentlemen Assessors, to give your opinions and for, His Honour the Judge to deliver his judgment. I have the unique honour and opportunity, Sir, of appearing before you in two of the longest trials over which you have presided here in Alipur― perhaps the longest in your Honour's experience as a Judge in this country. In the other case―K. E. V. Habib and others―all the accused persons were acquitted by your Honour. I do not know neither can I anticipate what the result of this trial will be, but I have not the least doubt that justice will be vindicated. The task of finding out the really relevant pieces of evidence from the vast mass of irrelevant evidence put in in this case, is indeed harculean. Ridiculed by a reptile press, looked on with suspicion by the prying Police, hampered in our work by the want of facilities for proper instructions, weighed down with the enormity of accumulated prejudice―we have toiled on for months actuated only by the highest and the noblest motives which inspire the profession -holding aloft the glorious tradition for which the Bar stands to help justice and to vindicate innocence-cheered in our labours by the only redeeming feature in the case, the uniform courtesy we have received from the Bench. To think that all the 36 persons arraigned at the dock behind us, are guilty of a conspiracy to wage war against the King is outrageous. I have no doubt, Sir, that you will decide this case as an English Judge would do―for justice is Page 143 the bulwark of the state. British rule in India is broad based upon the hearts and affections of the people, not because of its brave Army or invincible Navy―but on account of its strict and impartial administration of justice wherein lies its real strength. Long after the dust of controversy and racial feeling that have been raised over this unfortunate case will be forgotten and when history alone will remain to bear evidence to this strange episode and to write with its unerring hand on the tablet of Time its just and eternal verdict―the one fact which people will never forget and will cherish with pride and satisfaction will be that there was a British Judge who kept himself cool, whose judgment was not ,warped by prejudices and predilections, who held the scales even and did justice for the sake of justice."
The opinions of the two Assessors were as follows :―
Page 144 |