Tilak's disloyalty, the Government fixed on these Home Rule speeches to launch their offensive against him. Through their counsel, they took care to inform the court and the world at large, that they took exception to Mr. Tilak's lectures on Home Rule and not to Home Rule itself. Mr. Binning in opening the case on 7th May 1916 before the District Magistrate, Poona, did not hesitate to call Mr. Tilak's declarations of loyalty as a mere cloak to defend himself from the clutches of law. He (Mr. Binning) questioned Mr. Tilak's bona fdes, laid stress on isolated passages and pressed for conviction. Mr. G. W. Hatch, District Magistrate placed rehance on Mr. Justice Strachey's interpretation (misinterpretation, we must now say) of the word dis- affection which was regarded as meaning " absence of ajffection." " Looking at these speeches, as a whole, fairly, freely and without giving undue weight to isola- ted passages " the only impression produced on the- mind of the Magistrate was that " Mr. Tilak wanted to disaffect his audience towards the Government " and knowing that he could not interest his audience in his arguments unless he illustrated them forcibly told them " that they were slaves, that their grievances remained undressed and that the Government only considers its interests, which are ahen to those of the Indians, and intends to keep the people in slavery under the excuse that Indians are not fit to rule themselves. The Magistrate, therefore, under Section 108 of C. P. Code, directed Mr. Tilak to enter into a bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000, with two sureties each in the sum of Rs. io,ooa to be of good behaviour for a period of one year.
The decision was, however, reversed (9th November
