resolutions to meet his wishes as far as possible. They also were not accepted by him.

Mr. Gandhi does not want a conference or a settlement except on his own impossible terms, and any stray observations made by him amid a cloud of statements supporting any other view are only calculated to mislead. That the Government should be penitent for their so-called misdeeds is, of course, an impossible condition and would never have been put forward by anyone wishing for any amicable settlement.

After reviewing Mr. Gandhi's conditions regarding the Punjab, Khilafat and Swaraj and the unconditional demand for the release of all political prisoners, Sir Sankaran Nair wrote:

It seems to me there is no good of any Government conference with Mr. Gandhi and his party, and it would not be right to request a Round Table Conference to discuss these terms, which the Government will not accept.

To this letter there have been many rejoinders from several gentlemen who attended the Conference. Mr. Gandhi also replied to the letter while the Secretaries of the Committee issued a statement contradicting some portions of Sir Sankaran's letter. They say "that the Committee was practically unanimous in the proposals embodied in the several resolutions passed at the CoLference."

It appears, however, from a paragraph in the Servant of India that, when it came to the taking of ' votes, no more than a minute fraction of persons who attended the Conference recorded their votes'. This 's confirmed by the following observatio is of a correspondent in the Times of India:

The Liberals who went to the Conference abstained from voting, maintaining that their party cannot be committed to them. And there were demurrers even among the signatories, and in the committee which took nearly eight hours to come to a decision, which decision, after all, was not unanimous.'

THE DEBATE IN THE ASSEMBLY.

The Round Table Conference was also the subject of a lengthy debate both in the Legislative Assembly and in the Council of State. In the Assembly Mr. Iswar Saran moved the following resolution on January 18:

That this Assembly recommends to the GovernorGeneral in Council the immediate abandonment of the policy of repression inaugurated in the country.

In moving his resolution Mr. Iswar Saran said that it was not his object to add to the

complexity of the present situation by bringing forward a resolution of this kind. He held that the decision of non-co-operators to call out hartals and the violence resorted to in Bombay and on other occasions must be condemned. Equally strongly they must condemn the Government's repressive policy, which had alienated all sympathy with the Government which had aggravated the evil it was intended to remove, and which, if persisted in, was bound to lead to disaster.

He then condemned the application of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Seditious Meetings Act and pointed out how repression has failed.

No wonder, therefore, that non-co-operators had accepted the challenge to their freedom of speech and freedom of association. Jails were no longer the places of terror; rather they were considered as places of pilgrimage.

He therefore urged the Government to change that policy now, and at once. He appealed to the Government to bear in mind that non-cooperation was not a disease but a symptom. It could never die. Time should not, therefore, be lost to retrace their steps, and to adopt a constructive scheme to meet the causes leading to non-co-operation.

When Mr. Iswar Saran concluded his speech, the President said that he proposed to allow Dr. Gour to move his comprehensive amendment which covered the substance of almost all other amendments. Dr. Gour then moved his amendment which, he said, he had been deputed to move by the Democratic Party of the House. The amendment was as follows.-

Whilst strongly deprecating the aggressive form of non-co-operation manifested by some non-co-operators and resort to violence by them in some places, as also the menace of mass civil disobedience, this Assembly strongly disapproves of the recourse, by Government, to a general policy of repression without previously consulting this House, and recommends to the Governor-General in Council, the immediate abandonment of the policy of repression inaugurated in the country and the reversion to the policy announced in this House on the 23rd March 1921, the release of all persons in detention in pursuance of that policy, and the convening of a conference, comprising of the representatives of all shades of opinion, with a view to concert a practical plan for the restoration of peace in the country, and for assuring its political progress in consonance with its national aspirations.

Dr. Gour in moving his amendment commended the action of the Bombay Government which had kept its head cool despite all the occurrences of violence and bloodshed. He appealed for the release of all prisoners which would act as a palliative followed by summoning a Conference to suggest the cure of the present crisis.

Mr. Jamnadas strongly opposed both the resolution and the amendment and in doing so made a long speech. Mr. T. V. Seshagiri Aiyar deprecated his attitude and said they should not say a word which would injure the prospects of a Round Table Conference. Sir William Vincent, in his speech, asked if the Council was going to encourage violence and disorder by countenancing civil disobedience. Dr. Sapru made statements on behalf of Government, in which he said that the Government was carefully considering "if it was possible to find an alternative form of legislation which should meet with less criticism and be more effective than the Criminal Law Amendment Act." (Applause.) Concluding Dr. Sapru appealed to those who believed in the attainment of Swaraj within the British Empire to remember that SelfGovernment would never be achieved by the methods of non-co-operation.

Several members took part in the discussion including Sir Montagu Webb, Mr. Samarth, Sir Sivaswami Aiyar and others. Sir Sivaswami Aiyar pointed out that

Government had exercised great patience and forbearance and had allowed greater freedom of speech than any other Government could have tolerated. (Hear, Hear). When intimidation and violence had been practised, there was no other policy open to Government than the one they had resorted to. Of course, Local Governments had committed blunders in launching upon a general policy of indiscriminate arrests. They ought to have arrested only those who had actually, and not merely technically committed an offence. He wanted that Local Governments should show a little less zeal in such prosecutions and see that excesses were not committed. All those who had been arrested for mere technical as distinct from actual offence by way of violence or intimidation, etc., should be released.

Sir Sivaswami proposed an amendment on the lines of his speech which was, however, not allowed'

because the Home Member pointed out that it involved a censure of the action of the Local Governments on which matter he had not consulted his other colleagues. Sir Sivaswami Iyer's amendment therefore did not come up.

Sir William Vincent, replying to the debate, said Government was ready to see that no undue severity was shown to those prosecuted and sentenced, and they had already issued instructions to that effect. Moreover, they were already examining the possibility of framing a legislation which should meet with less criticism and be more effective in dealing with systematic attempts at intimidation, violence and other unlawful activities.

But we cannot and will not have the authority of the law defied. That is the duty before every one of us, before every civilised Government, to maintain law and order and I want this Assembly to support us in so doing. We have no desire to see anything except justice done.

Dr. Gour's amendment was then put to vote and declared lost by 52 to 36. Munshi Iswar Saran's original motion was rejected by 53 to 33. DEBATE IN THE COUNCIL OF STATE.

In the Council of State the Hon. Mr. Pheroze Sethna a moved resolution to the effect that

the Governor-General-in-Council should convene immediately an informal joint sitting of both Houses of Legislature excluding the Press representatives and visitors to settle on what lines a Round Table Conference of all party leaders should be held.

Several members took part in the discussion. Sir Alexander Murray opposed and Sir Umar Hayat Khan and Mr. Bhurgri supported the resolution.

Mr. Khaparde moved an amendment to the effect that a Round Table Conference be convened consisting of representatives of both Chambers to consider the present position and make recommendations. Another amendment was brought forward by Lela Suk bir Sinha, Sir M. Shafi opposed the amendment as impracticable and made a long speech condemning the attitude of Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Raza Ali spoke in favour of the resolution as also Lala Sukbir,Sinha, Mr. Kale and Mr. Jaffer and others. Mr. Khaparde's amendment was also lost. Mr. Sethna's motion was then put to vote and declared lost, 10 voting for and 23 against. Thus the two Central Legislatures rejected the motion for a Round Table Conference,

R. Thompson's introduction to the study

MR.

of Rabrindranath Tagore is admirably done. He writes with intense sympathy, based on personal intimacy with the poet and a thorough aquaintance with his works in the original Bengali, but his appreciation is always sane. Indeed he is so conscientious in holding his enthusiasm within the bounds of judicious criticism, that the general tone of his book is slightly austere. There is no concession to those weaker spirits who prefer reading a book about an author to reading the author's own writings, because the former method involves less labour and provides the reader with ready-made phrases that enable him to appear intelligent when the author is under discussion. On the contrary, Mr. Thompson's book makes you eager to read, or to re-read, Rabindranath Tagore, confident that fuller enjoyment is in store.

It is consoling to learn from this book that a reader of the poet's English works may confess, unashamed, to a vague bewilderment, a tantalizing sense that, if the poems were seen in the proper focus, scattered fragments of beauty would coalesce into harmonious, intelligible designs. This sensation of dis appointment was largely responsible for the rapid decline in reputation that followed Rabindranath Tagore's sudden leap into world-wide fame. The decline was, of course, only temporary, though it is doubtful whether, even now, he is appreciated at his true worth. But, at that time, "book after book was hurried out, almost fortuitously, and flung at the public....... The word had gone round that he was a 'mystic.' 'Mysticism' was the current catchword in the circles that think they make and understand literature, and the most unexpected people were talking of it." The poet himself contributed to the calamity. "In translating, he more and more felt along one stratum only of his work, the wistful-mystical one. His boldest, strongest poems he avoided, or else watered down to prettiness. There a word of explanation."

came never

* Rabindranath Tagore, by E. J. Thompson. "Heritage of India Series". (Association Press & Oxford University Press). Re. 1-8,

Poetry is sometimes described as "thought overheard": a poet's reflections, viewed in detachment from the trains of thought that preceded them, and the influences directing his outlook, are like single lines. of a poem separated from their context; the latter either have no meaning or are far less significant than they were in their original setting. In the case of Rabindranath Tagore, the marked individuality of his poems makes explanation particularly necessary. Mr. Thompson, by presenting in close relation the events of Dr. Tagore's life and the sequence of his writings, provides many clues to the real significance of the latter his book is, as it were, a genealogical tree of Rabindranath Tagore's literary work, in which the reader of a particular book can trace the influences that engendered it.

As an example of the thoroughness of Mr. Thompson's methods, take his treatment of Dr. Tagore's poetry. He describes the three principal phases, Rabindranath Tagore as love-poet, as nature-poet, and as religiouspoet he explains the principal influences that affected him,-the intellectual activity of his home, the example of classical Sanskrit literature, the life and thought of 19th century Europe, his love for music, the Brahmo Samaj, his jibandebata (Life-God) doctrine; and he shows how these influences, and other subsidiary ones besides, worked with the circumstances of Rabindranath Tagore's life to produce the moods in which he wrote his various books.

It would be incorrect to give the impression that Mr. Thompson deals exhaustively with the poems alone. Short story, drama, essay, lyric, journalism, all are studied with the same eager care, and there is also full treatment of Dr. Tagore's part in public life, especially as regards education and politics.

Mr. Thompson has written a book that was needed, and he has written it well. It is good news that he is preparing a larger book on the same subject which will include more of his own versions of Bengali poems by Rabindranath Tagore, hitherto untranslated,

BY

EARLY LIFE AND OFFICIAL CAREER

F all the eminent Indians who adorned

OF

the past generation some of whom are happily alive, it would be difficult to name any one who represented what was best in Ancient Indian culture more finely than the veteran educationist, the great Sanskrit savant, reformer and revivalist-Sir Ramakrishna Gopal Bhandarkar. Those who are

DR. BHANDARKAR.

privileged to study, amidst the stormy political controversies of the day, the writings and speeches of the venerable sage, may well realise the need of the present generation, to cultivate those traits of character that won for Dr. Bhandarkar a high place in the republic of letters. Accurate in scholarship and always sound in judgment, of pleasant

manners and yet possessed of an indomitable will, Dr. Bhandarkar's early life and career is a source of deep inspiration to young men of India. Thoroughly patriotic in the best sense of the word, Dr. Bhandarkar's life is a living example of what can be achieved by patience, perseverence and singleness of pur

pose.

Sir Ramakrishna Gopal Bhandarkar was born on 6th July, 1837, of poor Maharashtra Brahmin parents. His father was a clerk under the Mamledar of Malwan. Want of facilities prevented young Bhandarkar from receiving a very early education. But when his father was transferred to the District Treasury of Ratnagiri which boasted of an English school, a great career opened itself before him. Young Bhandarkar entered the school at about the same time that some of his illustrious contemporaries such as Mandlik and Barve left it, to prosecute their studies in the Bombay institutions. After completing his education in the Ratnagiri school, Bhandarkar went to Bombay in 1853 and joined the Elphinstone College. There he studied under distinguished professors among whom was our illustrious patriot, the late Dr. Dadabhai Nowrojee, who was the first to perceive the genius in the boy. He was very assiduous in the college, devoting the day-time to discussions of Western ideas with his fellow-students while "he cheated sleep of a portion of its natural period, by the boyish expedient of tying his hair to the back of his chair as a precaution against an unwary nap." He devoted himself to the study of English literature, History, Natural Science and Mathematics, which last claimed his particular attention. This partiality for Mathematics besides winning for him the admiration of Dr. Dadabhai Nowrojee, gave him a discipline of mind so essential for scholarly pursuits.

Passing his scholarship examinations, Bhandarkar was in due course appointed a Fellow and subsequently transferred to the

Deccan College. It was there that he came in contact with Mr. Howard, the then Director of Public Instruction. Noticing the brilliant academic career of Bhandarkar and full of great hopes in the boy, Howard persuaded him to study Sanskrit. In the midst of his tutorial duties as a college Fellow, Dr. Bhandarkar applied himself diligently to this new task and ere long became very proficient in it. Then came great educational changes. The Bombay University was incorporated and all the Fellows of colleges who underwent the old college course were required to pass the new University tests. He took his B. A. degree in 1862 and his M.A. in 1863, both in English and Sanskrit. A curious mistake is said to have occurred regarding his B. A. results.

"By a mistake-the University by the way, was even then liable to mistake-the marks assigned to a fellow-candidate were entered against his name and Mr. Bhandarkar was one of those who was found to have failed. He was thereupon ready with his resignation of the Fellowship. Fortunately however, Sir Alexander Grant, who was one of the examiners, was struck with the result, being of opinion that the portion of the answer-paper which he himself examined, entitled Dr. Bhandarkar to more marks than were entered against his name for the whole paper. This led to the discovery of the mistake which was soon corrected."

Immediately after passing his M. A. examination, Dr. Bhandarkar thought of joining the law college. The legal profession has attracted some of its best men in the presidency of Madras. But, fortunately in Bombay, some of the most distinguished of our countrymen such as Dadabhai Nowrojee, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, and Dinsha Edulji Wacha, have been able to escape the charms of law. While Bhandarkar was thus hesitating, the tempting offer of the headmastership of a High School at Hyderabad, (Sindh) was made to him. He at once closed with it and his career was shaped.

In 1865 Dr. Bhandarkar was transferred as the head-master of the Ratnagiri English School, his own "Alma Mater." His management of the school is characterised by vast administrative improvements which practically saved the institution from dissolution. By this time, he had acquired fame by the publication of his first and second books in

Sanskrit, text books which have since rendered. the study of that language an easy one.

In recognition of his scholarship, the Bombay University first appointed Bhandarkar as one of its examiners in Sanskrit. It was as an examiner that he came to know that talented scholar and antiquarian, Dr. Kashinath Trimbak Telang.

In 1868, Colonel Waddington, the then Acting Director of Public Instruction, on the advice of Dr. Buhler, the great Orientalist, appointed Dr. Bhandarkar temporarily to the Sanskrit chair at Elphinstone College. His method of teaching and his masterly exposition of the subject soon brought crowded classes. The study of Sanskrit and Prakrit languages was by no means easy in those days and the "dry as dust" method of second-rate teachers had done everything to smother all interest in that branch of learning. But the analytical and synthetical methods pursued by the learned Doctor as well as his mastery of the subject soon gave a fresh impetus to the advancement of Sanskrit education on new lines. The lecture hours flew away rapidly, nobody knew how. Unlike the professors of the present day, Dr. Bhandarkar lived with his pupils as they lived with him. This intimate and personal contact with his students soon brought to the field of Oriental research a group of learned scholars.

Thus from November 1867 to 1872, he was acting as Professor of Oriental Languages in the Elphinstone College, Bombay. In 1872 the Sanskrit chair fell permanently vacant. And contrary to all expectations Dr. Bhandarkar was superseded and the professorship was given to Dr. Peterson, comparatively a junior. This was a great blow to him and any other in the same position would have felt the ignominy and retired into oblivion. But the revered professor had faith in himself and knew that, by patient waiting, the injustice rendered by the Government would be righted. That, however, he felt and long remembered this incident, this injustice due to colour prejudice, is evident from the following extract of a speech which he delivered in a meeting of the Bombay