भारतकोश
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-