51
I have so often referred in these columns to the way in which those obnoxious to the party in power are sent to jail or degraded or dismissed or otherwise punished, that I feel I should not ask you, for some time to come at least, for space for further information on the head. Yet I cannot see my way out of mentioning a fact that was pointed out to me the other day in re the Treasury Frands Cases. Jaya Rao is in prison now for countersigning 14 fictitious cheques, while the man whose duty it was to sign cheques after looking into them carefully and who signed these 14 cheques in the first instance is to be promoted. How would you characterise suck justice Mr. Editor?
The local "Hindu Social Club" seem to be a little bit put out by 2 paragraph in one of my letters, with regard to the “Deccan Punch’s” attack on the Raja Murli Manohar Bahadur. They think, I am told, that I have “compromised” the "Club" by my remarks in this connection. I mentioned what 1 know for a fact, and what I said but tended to show that personally the Raja had no grievance to air forth against the Government and no reason to join tie cry of “injustice to the Hindus.” How this could be compromising, I am at a loss to understand. We do not guage the condition of people from the condition of one individual; nor can we judge of the treatment accorded to a class from that given to one of its members. This being so, how can any man think that because the Raja Murli Manohar has personally no grievances against the Government, therefore the whole Hindu community has no grievances against it ?
A recent issue of the “Deccan Punch" has a significant cartoon on the subject of the murder case. It represents Hafiz Ahmed Raza Khan as putting in one pan of the scale of justice a weight too small to balance the other pan with “the box of crime” in it, and Mr. Punch addressing the Judge thus: “Put in more weight, Sir.”
You will be glad to hear that in the Rev, My. Gilder of the Chadarghat Methodist Episcopal Church we have got a well-
