¹ For an excellent study of the organizational changes in the Congress, see Krishna, Gopal, “The Development of the Indian National Congress as a Mass Organization,” Journal of Asian Studies, XXV, 3 (05, 1966), 413–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² See, for example, Weiner, Myron, Party Building in a New Nation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967).Google Scholar

³ These groups will be referred to under the general appellation, “Punjabi Hindu.” This is not to imply that this is a monolithic group. As will be shown below, there was a wide variation in political and social attitudes within this group. For material on the early Congress and Punjabi Hindu attitudes toward it, see Barrier, N. Gerald, “Arya Samaj and Congress Politics in Punjab, 1894–1908,” Journal of Asian Studies, XXVI, 3 (05, 1967), 363–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ For a brief discussion of the various sources of support for the first N.C.O. movement in Punjab, see my “The Politics of Integration: Community, Party, and Integration in Punjab,” unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1971, pp. 50–64.Google Scholar

⁵ The various reforms are discussed in Great Britain. Indian Statutory Commission, Memorandum Submitted by the Government of the Punjab (London: H. M. Stationery Office, 1930)Google Scholar and in Husain, Azim, Fazl-i-Husain (London: Orient, Longmans, and Green, and Co., Ltd., 1946)Google Scholar. See also Tribune (Lahore) throughout November and December, 1922.Google Scholar

⁶ On this bill, see Barrier, N. Gerald, Punjab Alienation of Land Bill of 1900, Center for Commonwealth Studies Monograph, No. 2 (Durham: Duke University, 1964).Google Scholar

⁷ See Husain, , Fazl-i-Husain, op. cit.Google Scholar

⁸ Indian Statutory Commission, Memorandum …, p. 125.Google Scholar

⁹ There was, however, increasing rivalry between the Hindu and Sikh communities as the Sikh Akali Dal pursued its gurdwana reform activities.

¹⁰ The Communal Award, announced by the British Government in August, 1932, was a provisional scheme of minority representation in the legislatures which reaffirmed the continuation of separate electorates for minority communities and also for Muslims in Bengal and Punjab even though they comprised a numerical majority.

¹¹ Open Letter of 16 Congress leaders to Dr. Satyapal, Tribune (Lahore), 05 13, 1934.Google Scholar

¹² Virendra, publisher of Pratap, interview in Jullundur, November, 1968. Virendra, a former MLA, was just entering Congress politics at this period (he became a member of Punjab A.I.C.C. in 1937). His father, Mahashe Krishna, was a leader of the Gurukul Arya Samaj and active in the anti-Communal Award movement.

¹³ Tribune (Lahore), 08 30, 1934.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Tribune (Lahore), 12 10, 1935Google Scholar; December 11, 1935.

¹⁵ Ibid

¹⁶ Tribune (Lahore), 03 10, 1936.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The Nationalist “challenge” to Congress policy was not limited to Punjab. In the United Provinces Pandit M. M. Malaviya, who was the leading national dissident, had a considerable following. In Bengal the bulk of the Congress leadership was “Nationalist” and strongly opposed to the Communal Award. In 1936, it launched an “anti-Communal Award” agitation in defiance of the A.I.C.C.'s directive not to participate in “one-sided” agitations on the issue.

¹⁸ Jawaharlal Nehru to Secretary, Bengal Provincial Congress Committee, Tribune (Lahore), 08 20, 1936.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Letter, Dr. Satyapal, Tribune (Lahore), 09 25, 1936.Google Scholar

²⁰ Letter, Professor Gulshan Rai, Tribune (Lahore), 06 12, 1936Google Scholar. The orthodox Hindus in Punjab never systematically organized themselves as did reformers such as the Arya Samajists. The Punjab Santan Dharma Sabha (Society of the Eternal Religion) was formed in 1889. For material on the early Sanatanist leaders, see Jones, Kenneth, “The Arya Samaj in Punjab: A Study of Social Reform and Religious Revivalism, 1877–1902,” (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, 1966), pp. 9–10Google Scholar. Both Dutt and Malaviya were congressmen: the former a major political figure in Lahore; the latter, a U.P. congress leader.

²¹ Tribune (Lahore), 05 5, 1936.Google Scholar

²² Tribune (Lahore), 05 16, 1936Google Scholar; August 4, 1936.

²³ Letter, Bhai Parmanand, Tribune (Lahore), 04 15, 1937.Google Scholar

²⁴ Letter, Raja Narendra Nath, Tribune (Lahore), 09 4, 1937.Google Scholar

²⁵ ProfessorRai, Gulshan, “The National Progressive and National Unionist Parties,” Tribune (Lahore), 04 15, 1937Google Scholar, special section, p. I.

²⁶ Ibid

²⁷ Letter, Raja Narendra Nath, Tribune (Lahore), 09 9, 1937.Google Scholar

²⁸ Tribune (Lahore), 04 15, 1937.Google Scholar

²⁹ Coupland, Reginald, The Indian Problem (London: Oxford University Press, 1944), p. 182.Google Scholar

³⁰ Ibid

³¹ Press statement, Tribune (Lahore), 10 18, 1937.Google Scholar

³² Press statement, Tribune (Lahore), 10 19, 1937.Google Scholar

³³ Tribune (Lahore), 07 19, 1938.Google Scholar

³⁴ Tribune (Lahore), 09 12, 1938.Google Scholar

³⁵ For a discussion of factional maneuvers in the Congress, see Wallace, Paul A., “The Political Party System in Punjab State,” unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1966.Google Scholar

³⁶ Ibid, p. 160.

³⁷ Jagat Narain, M.P. interview in New Delhi, February, 1969.

³⁸ Tribune (Lahore), 02 23, 1938.Google Scholar

³⁹ Tribune (Lahore), 09 1, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Tribune (Lahore), 10 22, 1937.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Tribune (Lahore), 11 7, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴² Tribune (Lahore), 07 7, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴³ Tribune (Lahore), 07 8, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Tribune (Lahore), 07 29, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Ibid

⁴⁶ Tribune (Lahore), 07 30, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ For the various resolutions passed, see Tribune, 08 13, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Tribune (Lahore), 09 26, 1938.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Mitra, N. N. (ed.) Indian Annual Register, 1938 (Calcutta: Annual Register, 1939), II, 280.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ibid

⁵¹ Tribune (Lahore), 04 12, 1940.Google Scholar

⁵² Letter, Dr. Mohammed Alam, M.L.A., Tribune (Lahore), 03 4, 1940.Google Scholar