516 NON-COOPERATION
India and the reply thereto of the Secretary of State for India. In spite of the energetic protests of a section of the Press to the personnel of the committee, it might be said that on the whole the public were prepared to trust it especially as it contained three Indian members who could fairly be claimed to be independent. The first rude shock to this confidence was delivered by the refusal of Lord Hunter's Committee to accept the very moderate and reason- able demand of the Congress Committe that the imprisoned Punjab leaders might be be allowed to appear before it to instruct counsel. Any doubt that might have been left in the mind of any person has been dispelled by the report of the majority of that committee, The result has justified the attitude of the Congress Commitee. The evidence collected by it shows what Lord Hunter's Committee purposely denied itself.
The minority report stands out like an oasis in a desert. The Indian members deserve the congratulation of their countrymen for having dared to do their duty in the face of heavy odds. I wish that they had refused to associate themselves even in a modified manner with the condem- nation of the civil disobedience form of Satyagraha. The defiant spirit of the Delhi mob on the 3Oth March, 1919, can hardly be used for condemning a great spiritual move- ment which is admittedly and manifestly intended to restrain the violent tendencies of mobs and to replace criminal lawlessness by civil disobedience of authority, when it has forfeited all title to respect. On the 30th March civil disobedience had not even been started. Almost every great popular demonstration has been hitherto attended all the world over by a certain amount of lawlessness. The demonstration of soth March and 6th April could have been held under any other aegis as under that of Satyagrah. I
�� �
