Founders of Pakistan
pledged loyalty to British rule of India
Muslim League declared
loyalty to British government its first objective
Extracts from reports
of League's public meetings
(From The Light & Islamic Review:
Vol. 69; No. 6; Nov-Dec 1992; p.5-7)
Foundations of Pakistan - All-India Muslim League Documents: 1906
- 1947 is a compilation in two volumes, consisting of the proceedings
of the annual sessions of the Muslim League from its inception to the
founding of Pakistan. It is edited by Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, and
was published in Pakistan by the National Publishing House Ltd. in 1969.
The Muslim League, as is well-known, was the political and nationalist
organisation which successfully campaigned to bring the state of Pakistan
into existence under the leadership of Mr. M. A. Jinnah. According to
the account of the Inaugural Session, held at Dhaka (old spelling Dacca)
on December 30, 1906, the very first resolution, which brought the League
into being and defined its objectives, was as follows:
"Resolved that this meeting, composed of Musalmans from all
parts of India, assembled at Dacca, decide that a Political Association
be formed, styled All-India Muslim League, for the furtherance of
the following objects:
(a) To promote, among the Musalmans of India, feelings of loyalty
to the British Government, and to remove any misconception that
may arise as to the intention of Government with regard to any of
(b) To protect and advance the political rights and interests of
the Musalmans of India, and to respectfully represent their needs
and aspirations to the Government.
(c) To prevent the rise, among the Musalmans of India, of any feeling
of hostility towards other communities, without prejudice to the
aforementioned objects of the League."
This is the resolution passed unanimously by the meeting, which we
have reproduced in its entirety in the original English, lest we be
accused of quoting out of context. The very first objective of the Muslim
League was to promote feelings of loyalty
to the British Government among the Muslims of India! Let
the opponents of Hazrat Mirza, particularly those belonging to Pakistan,
now consider what verdict they must pass on the party which brought
a free Muslim state into existence.
This resolution was moved by Nawab Salim-ullah Bahadur of Dhaka, who
made a speech explaining these objectives. We quote below a section
of his speech describing why it had been inadvisable to form a political
body in the previous decade, and what was the change of circumstances
which allowed its formation now:
"In 1893, we were naturally very anxious
to impress upon the British Government that we were loyal subjects
and law-abiding citizens, for it was considered that our rulers had
some doubts on the subject, which, however unnecessary, were perhaps
not wholly unnatural at the time. Again, education had not toned down
the passions of a war-like community, and turned the irascible temper
of a newly fallen race into sweet reasonableness. There was, in addition,
the great danger of our giving up the difficult and constructive work
of education in favour of the easy task of a destructive critic in
politics. The need of self-help might then have been ignored on account
of the less taxing effort of criticizing others. The endeavour to
deserve might then have been paralysed by the intensity of the desire
to obtain. The voice of the reformer might have been drowned in the
babel of the demagogue."
It was in exactly the same period, and for very similar reasons, that
Hazrat Mirza made his statements of loyalty to British rule. There is
almost no difference between the position of the Muslim League as expressed
in the above words and that taken by Hazrat Mirza. He did, however,
stress one particular reason for fidelity to the government not mentioned
by the Muslim League. This was that Muslims were free both to practise
their own faith and to propagate its teachings to others, and had the
freedom not only to rebut Christian attacks on Islam, but to refute
and demolish the doctrines of Christianity, the religion of the rulers.
Hazrat Mirza believed that, Islam being the religion of truth, this
freedom gave Muslims a great opportunity to convert to Islam the nation
which ruled them.
The Nawab's speech then continues:
"Today the aspect of affairs has greatly changed. The Government
has been convinced of our steadfast loyalty under the most trying
situations. In 1897, Lord Elgin bore testimony to the unflinching
fidelity of the Mohammedan troops that opposed their own co-religionists
on the battle-fields of Chitral and the borderland, and
shed their own blood and the blood of their brothers for their king
and country. This, gentlemen, was a situation which no other
community has had a chance of being tried in. If, then, we have special
claims on the Government, it is because the test of our loyalty has
been specially searching and unique. From those who were considered
so dangerous as to be allowed no other career than that of the ploughman
in the fields, we have risen so much in the estimation of our rulers,
that leading statesmen of England call us the forces of loyalty in
India and one of the greatest assets of the Empire, some portion of
which has been won with our own support, and the whole of which we
are guarding today. It is no more necessary
to waste whole regiments in the interior in order to guard against
an imaginary danger of rebellion, and the Commander-in-Chief
can set free with a light heart the major portion of our army for
guarding the frontier of the Empire."
So this leader and co-founder of the Muslim League proudly proclaims
that the Muslims have done their duty of proving their loyalty to the
British government, like no other subject community, by fighting and
dying in defence of the British empire, even against other Muslims.
Yet, on the other hand, our critics are offended by Hazrat Mirza's statements
in which he reminded the government of his father's support for it in
the rebellion of 1857.
Towards the close of the speech, the Nawab summed up as follows:
"A more active propaganda, a more candid statement of our needs
and aspirations, and the giving of a more public and more representative
character to our Political Association, are more necessary today than
was the case in 1893. But nothing of the spirit
of loyalty is lost thereby, and no amount of candour shall
rob us of our traditional courtesy. The resolution which I have the
honour of moving today has been so framed that the object of our League
is frankly the protection and advancement of our political rights
and interests, but without prejudice to the traditional loyalty of
Musalmans to the Government, and goodwill to our Hindu neighbours.
Whenever it is necessary to do so, we shall represent our views to
the Government, and respectfully submit our claims for due consideration.
But whenever the intention of any measure of Government is misunderstood
by our people, it shall equally be our duty to remove that misconception."
Amendment in 1913
A few years on, at the sixth session of the Muslim League, held at Lucknow
on March 22-23rd 1913, a revised constitution was discussed. The chairman
of the meeting was Mian Mohammad Shafi, a leader of the Punjab Muslim
League. In his presidential address, he referred to an amendment in the
first objective of the League as follows:
"According to the revised Constitution, the first object of
the League is `to maintain and promote among
the people of this country feelings of loyalty towards the British
Crown'. The substitution of the words `the people of this country'
in place of `Indian Musalmans' and `British Crown' in place of `British
Government' constitutes a distinct improvement which, I have no doubt,
you will unhesitatingly accept. The traditional
loyalty of the Indian Musalmans to the Empire, under the banner of
which we live in peace and prosperity, does not need to be
proclaimed with a flourish of trumpets: nor is it one of those monopolies
the successful possession of which depends upon extensive advertisement.
The solid foundation of our loyalty rests not upon its profession,
but upon deeds the incontrovertible proof of which is writ large upon
the pages of history. And the substitution of the words `British Crown'
in place of `British Government' in relation to our devotion to the
Empire of which India is a component part constitutes a more dignified
and faithful expression of our real feelings. . . . It is
the British Crown alone which is the permanent and ever-abiding symbol
of Empire. It is not to this Government or to that we acknowledge
allegiance: it is to the British Crown itself
that we owe unswerving and abiding loyalty.
"But what, you will ask, is my conception of loyalty to the
British Crown? In my humble judgment, it is
the paramount duty of every loyal subject of the King Emperor to abstain
from doing anything calculated to impair the permanence and stability
of British rule in India."
The detractors of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who are largely from Pakistan
(which is the homeland of the opposition and propaganda against him),
must now face the following question:
What ruling should one issue about the Muslim League and its
founders whose very first objective was "to
promote feelings of loyalty to the British government",
and who announced that everyone must "abstain from doing anything
calculated to impair the permanence and stability of British rule in
Should they be branded tools and stooges of British imperialism?