672 NON-CO-OPERATION
of India as also the Government of Bengal. Repression there was even before that time, but nothing was said or done in connection with it. But the repression that came in the wake of the notifications proclaiming the Criminal Law Amendment Act for the purpose of dealing with volunteers' associations and the Seditions Meetings Act for the purpose of dealing with public meetings held by Non-Co-opertors, came upon the Non- Co-operation community as a bombshell.
I repeat, then, that these notifications and the arrests of Deshbandu Chittaranjan Das and Maulana Abul Kalam Asid in Bengal, the arrest of Pandit Motilai Nehru and his co-workers in the U. P. and of Lala Lajput Rai and his party in the Punjab made it absolutely necessary to take up, not yet aggressive civil disobedience, but only defensive civil disobedience, otherwise described as passive resistance. Even Sir Hormusji Wadia was obliged to declare that, if the Bombay Government followed the precedents set by the Governments of Bengal, U. P. and the Punjab, he would be bound to resist such notifications, that is, to enrol himself as a volunteer or to attend public meetings in defiance of Government order to the contrary. It is thus clear that a case has been completely made out for civil disobedience, unless the Government revised its policy which has resulted in the stopping of public meetings, public associations and the Non-Co-operation press in many parts of India.
Now for the statement that the Government have embarked on a policy of lawless repression instead of an ample expression of regret and apology for the barbarous deeds that have been committed by officers in the name of Jaw and order. I regret to find in the Government
�� �
