His Excellency's Speech at the St. Andrew's Dinner, on 30th November 1921

India to-day is honoured by another distinguished guest--the most

distinguished, indeed save only one, whom the citizens of the British

Empire could welcome, namely, the heir to the Empire's Throne--His Royal

Highness the Prince of Wales. He has come with words of sympathy upon

his lips and with feelings of affection in his heart for the "Land we

live in." Can it be doubted, then that from all communities and all

creeds he will receive a royal welcome? I confess that it was with

amazement that I learned that there was a small section of people, in

this land of all lands, who had so far forgotten the dictates of

courtesy as to urge the boycott of the Royal visitor. The promoters of

this movement claim, I believe, to represent the fine flower of the

ancient culture and civilisation of India. Well one lives and learns. I

had always been brought up to believe that courtesy towards a guest was

a deep-rooted tradition with the Indian people. And so I still believe

it to be, though there may be some who have forgotten it. I do not

believe that this attitude represents the real mind of India. Indeed, I

know that it does not--for it was an Indian gentleman whose patriotism

is beyond all possible question, who said to me when he read of the

proposal "now must we bow our heads in shame for in showing rudeness to

a guest we have touched the lowest depths of national humiliation and

degradation." That, I believe, represents the best and, indeed, the real

mind of India, for in India it has always been realised that discourtesy

injures those who are guilty of it rather than those against whom it is

practised, for it lowers them in the eyes of all right thinking men and

indeed is sooner or later found by the man who is guilty of it to be a

wound gnawing at his own self-respect...

Already long strides have been taken along the path towards the ultimate

goal. Indian and European have come closer together--mutual

understanding and goodwill are springing up between them. How much more

could be achieved in this direction were it not for the black cloud of

anger and hatred which has been brought into being by the apostles of

revolution. From my experience of the past 12 months I have no

hesitation in saying that a wonderful new era would have dawned for

India already, had it not been for the wild passions which have been let

loose upon the land by those who have pinned their faith to revolution.

They call the Government "Satanic". Have they then a monopoly of

righteousness? The wild lawlessness and bloodshed at Giridih, Malegaon,

Alighar, Malabar, Bombay and many other places--do these things not

savour of the work of Satan? These are, indeed, but the heralds of red

revolution. Let them look deep into their hearts and ask themselves in

all seriousness if the salvation of India lies along such lines....

His Excellency replying to the deputation of the representation of the

people in the mufassal, held in Government House Calcutta on 2nd July

1921, said:--

Let me, therefore, repeat what I said a year ago. The facts are these:

The Turkish troops in the fort at Mecca, in their attempts to overcome

the Arabs who had rallied round the Sheriff bombarded the mosque

containing the Kaaba. One of the Turkish shells actually struck the

Kaaba, burned a hole in the holy carpet and killed nine persons who were

kneeling in prayer. These are the facts. The outrage was committed by

the Turks, and I solemnly and categorically affirm that the British had

nothing whatsoever to do with it. This being so, can you or any one

suggest any other motive for the propagation of such falsehoods except

the desire to create hatred against the British?...

Gandhi and Anarchy · 第 87 / 136 题