The Life of Lokamanya Tilak/Chapter 9
CHAPTER IX
THE FIERY CROSS
Rejoice and fear not for the waves that swell. The storms that thunder, winds that sweep. Always our Captain holds the rudder well. He does not sleep.
THAT, for nearly eighteen years of his life, Mr. Tilak was involved in a private litigation, arising out of an unnatural alliance between an inexperienced young widow, a number of unscrupulous persons inimical to him and the mighty Bureaucracy hopelessly prejudiced against him, is known to all. The Tai Maharaj Case was really a flank movement on the public career of Mr. Tilak and was intended to drive him out of public life by judicially proving his dishonesty. Fortunately Mr. Tilak did ultimately triumph. But before the final victory came, he suffered two reverses which were fully exploited by his political enemies. The judgment of Mr. Justice Chandavarkar (1910) with its unwarranted aspersions on Mr. Tilak's character, was of invaluable aid to Sir Valentine Chirol in villifying him. Apart from the capital made out of it by the allies of the Bureaucracy, the Tai Maharaj case, in its winding courses, threatened to ruin Mr. Tilak in every possible way. It put him to an expenditure of thousands of rupees and promised to crush him financially. It took huge slices from his leisure; in fact, during some of the stages of this never-ending case, the task of vindicating his character was his principle business and politics or literature was the work of leisure. A careful calculation of the actual time spent by him in fighting out the case from its commencement to the conclusion shows that it took away six precious years of his time. Nor was the loss of time and money his only misfortune. The dread uncertainty of it all threw a shadow on his cheerfulness. Mr. Tilak's life during the better part of this period can be compared to the course of a ship which every minute stands in danger of being blown over by a stray mine or a torpedo. In the end, truth triumphed over falsehood, justice over injustice, and Mr. Tilak's character was completely vindicated, first by the judgment of the Bombay High Court (1904) and then by that of the Privy Council in 1915.
Mr. Tilak was never a fatalist; but his experiences in the Tai Maharaj case must have shown him what a great part, seeming accidents play in men's lives! When on August 5th, 1897, Mr. Tilak was released on bail by Mr. Justice Badruddin Tyabji, he must have felt extremely thankful. But, had the High Court not released him on bail on August 5th, Mr. Tilak would not have been able to attend (Aug. 7th) the death-bed of his friend Baba Maharaj ; and had Mr. Tilak not met Baba Maharaj on that mournful day, he would not have been, in all probability, required to undertake the thankless duties of a Trustee. When Mr. Tilak saw that his friend was on the point of death ,he asked him to make a will; for he knew that his friend was to leave behind him a widow of fifteen and an estate, burdened with debts. Baba Maharaj readily agreed and requested Mr. Tilak to draft a will. Mr. Tilak did so, in consultation with the dying man, and unwilling to take upon himself the onerous duties of a trustee, he put in the names of two of the neighbours of Baba Maharaj as Trustees. But Baba Maharaj knew that his estate would be better taken care of by Mr. Tilak than by anyone else so he struck off the names suggested by Mr. Tilak and put in those of Mr. Tilak, Rao Saheb Kirtikar, (Hon.) Mr. Khaparde and of Messrs. Kumbhojkar, and Nagpurkar—two clerks in his employ. Mr. Kirtikar having refused to do the work the main responsibility naturally fell upon Messrs. Tilak and Khaparde. During the period of Mr. Tilak's incarceration Mr. Khaparde arranged for the Probate, made inventories and did the rest of the initial work.
The will of Baba Maharaj contained the following important paragraph regarding succession and adoption:
"My wife is now pregnant. If she does not give birth to a son, or if the son after birth is short-lived, then, for the purpose of continuing the name of my family, with the Vichara of the trustees a boy should be given, as often as may be necessary, in adoption, on the lap of my wife, in accordance with the Shastras, and the Panch should, on behalf of that son, carry on the management of the immoveable and moveable estates till he attains majority."
On January 18th, 1898, the widow gave birth to a son but he died within two months. When Mr. Tilak came out of jail (Sep. 1898),) he commenced looking after the affairs of Tai Maharaj, widow of his deceased friend. The estate was heavily burdened with debt and Mr. Tilak found that retrenchment was the only way of saving it. But this "could not be agreeable to the young widow, who fancied herself to be the equitable owner of the estate and regarded her possible divestment by an adopted boy as a legitimate grievance. There were also harpies who fed on her, had made themselves more or less dear to her as the objects of idle amusement in her widowed leisure and who gradually and slyly nestled into her confidence as counsellors that whispered agreeable words and made pleasant suggestions." What these evil counsellors did, will be seen later.
For nearly three years, Mr. Tilak in consultation with Tai Maharaj and other trustees made frequent enquiries and numerous efforts towards the securing of a suitable boy for adoption. The circle of relations was considerable, but a suitable adoptee could not be found in the Kolhapur or Poona branches of the family of the deceased. As we now know some secret efforts were, about this time, being made to induce Tai Maharaj to adopt Bala Maharaj, brother of Pandit Maharaj of Kolhapur.
A meeting of the trustees was held on June i8th 1901. The records of this meeting show that there were no boys available (for adoption) in the Kolhapur branch of the family. There were some in the Poona branch, but of them none was approved of. The trustees, therefore, decided in consultation with Tai Maharaj, to see if one was available in the Babre[1] branch of the family. "(Thereupon)[2] Messrs. Tilak and Khaparde, accompanied by the widow, went to Aurangabad and selected five boys within the circle of relationship. The boys stayed with the widow for several days, being entertained and kept under observations. Certain astrologers cast the horoscopes of the children. These proved favourable to (the appellant) Jagannath; and her personal likings appeared to point in the same direction. All this course of conduct pointed to the entire acquiescence on the part of the widow in the Testators' wishes and directions, and so far there is no substantial suggestion to the contrary. On June 27th (therefore) a meeting of the Shastris and of other persons in Aurangabad was summoned. The father of the boy being present, it was announced by the trustees that the boy was selected. The father was taken to the widow; she asked him to give her his boy in adoption and he agreed. The fact was announced to the assembled guests and there and then, the duplicate deeds of adoption were drawn up, both intended to be signed and attested by the widow. (Another) document was a letter from the widow, addressed to the father and agreeing to take the boy in adoption. So far as giving and receiving of the child, these documents were prepared for and pointed to actual adoption in fact.
"The preparation of the documents, however, occupied time and the hour being late, the proceedings were stopped but were resumed early next morning. A gathering was accordingly again held early on the 28th. The deeds of adoption and the letter were duly executed, the boy was given in fact by his natural father to his adoptive mother, he was received in fact by her on her lap in performance of the requisite essential of adoption, and—all being done—the formal ceremonies and festivals were postponed to take place afterwards at Poona."
Under ordinary circumstances, nothing further would have been heard of the adoption. But this simple transaction was destined to create a world of worry and involve Mr. Tilak into troubles from which God's Grace and his resourcefulness alone saved him. Referring to the origin of the Tai Maharaj case, Mr. Tilak wrote in the following strain (Kesari March 8th 1904):—
"Every flock has its black sheep" says the proverb; the City of Poona too, far famed as a centre of culture, has its set of scheming persons, who in the language of the poet: 'hate for the sake of hatred.' These 'philanthropic' persons are not necessarily confined to one party or to one set of professions; orthodox or heterodox, moderates or extremists, lawyers and bankers, cultured and uncultured—they join together for their own selfish ends and revel in pulling down any good person or thing. As long as Mr. Nagpurkar (one of the Trustees) had not lost his head, he tried his best to keep Tai Maharaj safe from the machinations of these unscrupulous persons. But a time came v/hen he himself went over to these persons and set himself to betray the interests of his deceased master.
"It is these people whom Mr. Lucas, the Sessions Judge, in his judgment, refers to as Mr. Tilak's deadly enemies. These people however knew that they were not sufficiently strong to ruin Mr. Tilak. They, therefore, plotted to bring to their aid a powerful ally, viz. the Government. They knew that Mr. Tilak's person was most distasteful to the Government. They, therefore, induced Tai Maharaj to see Mr. Aston (Agent to the Sardars of the Deccan and District Judge) at his bungalow and seek his protection against the 'tyranny' of Mr. Tilak. They would surely have failed in this diabolical intrigue had Mr. Aston been less impulsive or more fair-minded. But Mr. Tilak was to Mr. Aston what a red rag is to the bull. It was impossible in the very nature of things that Mr. Aston, who once had sentenced a poor editor to transportation for life for simply writing against the Government, to lose this golden opportunity of distinguishing himself and earning the gratitude of Government. When moreover he saw that some respectable (?) persons in the town supported Tai Maharaj, his fury knew no bounds. His fury incapacitated him from making inquiries regarding the truth or otherwise of the allegations. The earnest appeal of a young widow for protection, the strong support she had of a number of respectable-looking men, and the golden opportunity of crushing an individual odious to the Government—all this was too much for Mr. Aston, who promised protection to Tai Maharaj in his double capacity as District Judge and Agent to the Deccan Sardars. As regards the Bombay Government, their relations with Mr. Tilak are well-known, and their implicit faith in the conduct of and procedure followed by Mr. Aston was apparently perfectly natural."
On July 29th, 1901, Tai Maharaj applied for revocation of the Probate granted to Mr. Tilak and other trustees. Mr. Aston, before whom the proceedings went on, should have really confined himself to the question viz. whether the grant of Probate to Mr. Tilak and others had become inoperative owing to the birth (and death) of a son to Tai Maharaj. He had no business to decide the question of the Aurangabad adoption. But in spite of Mr. Tilak 's protests, Mr. Aston allowed the Plaintiff to put in evidence regarding the adoption. Mr. Tilak was cross-examined for full 14 days. The Judge's opinion of Mr. Tilak as a witness is worth recording "Fencing, prevaricating, quibbling witness; demeanour distinctly untruthful. A great deal of time was wasted by ambiguous replies to plain questions, which were repeated over and over again. Witness was repeatedly cautioned about fencing." Mr. Aston revoked the Probate, held the Aurangabad adoption disproved and committed Mr. Tilak under Sec. 476 (C. P. Code) to the City Magistrate " to be dealt with according to law." Seven charges were formulated against him. They were:—
(1) Mr. Tilak had made false complaint for breach of trust against Mr. Nagpurkar, one of the trustees.
(2) Mr. Tilak had fabricated false evidence for use by making alterations and interpolations in the accounts of the Aurangabad trip.
(3) Forgery in connection with (2) . .
(4) Mr. Tilak had corruptly used or attempted to use as genuine evidence known to be false.
(5) Mr. Tilak had corruptly used as genuine the adoption deed. (6) Mr. Tilak had fraudulently used as genuine the adoption deed containing his interpolation over Tai Maharaj's signature.
(7) Mr. Tilak had given false evidence intentionally.
Regarding none of these irrelevant charges had Mr. Tilak put in even a scrap of paper as evidence. Still the learned Judge committed Mr. Tilak to the City Magistrate.
"The Commitment was made on the 4th of April 1902 which may be taken, as perhaps, the darkest day, that ever dawned upon Mr. Tilak. Just conceive a man of Mr. Tilak's position standing before the world which already contained a large number of prejudiced critics, a fair number of active and bitter opponents,—conceive a man in this condition, judicially denounced, as an obstinate, high-handed unchivalrous and unscrupulous character, whose hand did not stop even at perjuries against a young, weak, and defenceless girl in a high family! Here was a man who had been already convicted for sedition, an offence of a purely public character. But now was his turn come, for the bottom becoming knocked out of him and for his being exposed to the world as a character as unworthy in private as it had been proved to be in public life. The world wondered and stared and then blinked and stood aghast. To a man of Mr. Tilak's education and position, the hour must have indeed proved the darkest! But the lamp of faith was burning bright within him and those alone, who knew the kind of faith he had in him, could discern the distant silver lining with which even the heavy and the black clouds ranging over his head were relieved "[3] While the proceedings in connection with the Probate apphcation were going on, Mr. Tilak had approached the High Court for a transfer of the case from Mr. Aston, who having granted several interviews to Tai Maharaj and having advised Tai Maharaj—according to her own admission—on certain points, had refused even to see the Trustees and had thus betrayed his prejudice against Mr. Tilak. But the High Court did not grant Mr. Tilak's request for a transfer of the case, though when a regular appeal was made against Mr. Aston's judgment, the High Court reversed the Probate Decision. So Mr. Tilak and his colleagues were once more restored to their powers as trustees and executors.
A special Magistrate was appointed to go into the seven big charges against Mr. Tilak. The proceedings commenced on September 15th, 1902. The alleged false complaint made against Mr. Nagpurkar by Mr. Tilak was first taken up for hearing. Mr. Justice Beaman, while finally disposing of this question declared, that there was nothing wrong or illegal about Mr. Tilak's complaint against Mr. Nagpurkar, a "salaried servant and agent for the estate and as such a responsible custodian of the valuable jewllery entrusted to him." It was his clear duty, said the learned Judge, "to allow inspection of the ornaments when demanded by a majority of the trustees, on pain of dismissal for suspected dishonesty and criminal misappropriation." Indeed, the Prosecution counsel himself, had to admit, that there was not a single untrue statement in the complaint! Mr. Justice Beaman further said: " Mr. Tilak said to the Magistrate exactly what he had said to Nagpurkar himself. He said 'Nagpurkar has been in possession of a great deal of valuable jewellery belonging to the estate; we have now dismissed him; we have called upon him to surrender the property and account for it; he declines; from his conduct and these circumstances I have strong reason to suspect that he had criminally misappropriated some of it and I invoke your assistance as Magistrate to make him answer, to make him give an account of himself and his property'. I believe 99 out of 100 persons would have done exactly what Tilak did." And yet Mr. Tilak had to fight full 8 months before he could extract this clear judicial statement on such a simple question.
But this was only the first charge. Mr. Tilak, no doubt was successful here; but six remained. The next in order related to forgery and fabrication of false evidence. But these were triable by a Sessions Court with the aid of a jury while the last and the mildest of all charges did not require the aid of a jury. Apparently the Prosecution had not the courage to take the case to a jury. Mr. Tilak formally applied to the Magistrate requesting him to take up the more serious charges first. But the challenge—for so it was—was not accepted. Mr. Tilak was tried for perjury by Mr. Clements, the Special Magistrate and on 24th August 1903 was convicted and sentenced to 18 month's rigorous imprisonment to which a fine of Rs. 1,000 was added.
"Mr. Clements had kept ready a warrant for the Police and he refused to interfere in their discretion which was evidently to result in Mr. Tilak 's removal to jail without being allowed a sufficient time to give instructions for lodging the appeal by his pleaders on the spot. All this, however, was anticipated, so that the appeal* memo was drawn almost completely at home, by Mr. Tilak himself and his pleaders who knew what to expect in that day's judgment. Mr. Tilak was removed to jail immediately after the pronouncement of sentence on him, even to the surprise of the Sessions Judge himself who, while admitting the appeal and ordering bis release on bail, almost without any arguments from Mr. Khare (Mr. Tilak's counsel), openly expressed his surprise at and disapproval of the indecent haste shown in the execution of the Jail Warrant."[4]
Mr. Lucas, the Sessions Judge, reduced the sentence but confirmed the conviction. Mr. Tilak was hand-cuffed and taken to the Yeravda jail (Jan. 4th 1904) whence he was released on January 8th by an order of the High Court. The handcuffing of Mr. Tilak aroused Intense public indignation. Said a Calcutta Daily:—
"We were not by any means prepared for the startling and shameful tidings which reached us yesterday; the news of a distinguished gentleman of Bombay having been, in the Court and in the presence of the District Judge of Poona, manacled as a common felon. We say at once, and we say with the strongest feelings, shame upon the perpetrators of this foul and disgraceful act!! Whence the necessity for handcuffing Mr. Tilak? Was it through fear of his escaping? Nothing of the kind. It was, as some might say, to gratify the spite of a few Government underlings, who experienced the delight which the cowards always feel by treading on the fallen man. * * * * Our only wonder is and we wonder much indeed, why the Governor of Bombay stands by, with his hands in his pockets, when in his Presidency such a shameful act takes place . . . . ."
Proceedings in the re visional appeal in the High Court commenced on February 24th, 1904. On the third of March, judgment was delivered. It was worthy of the judicial independence of that legal luminary, Sir Lawrence Jenkins. Mr. Tilak's conviction was quashed and the fine was ordered to be refunded. The Advocate-General wisely withdrew the remaining five charges.
After the criminal case was thus disposed of, the civil case for the declaration of adoption, filed on September 23rd 1901 and adjourned, pending the criminal trial, was again taken up by the 1st Class Subordinate Judge in June 1904. In this case, also, evidence had to be taken on commission at Aurangabad, Amraoti and Kolhapur. This work occupied several months. The First Class Subordinate Judge decided (July 31st 1906) the case in Mr. Tilak's favour. The opposite party (that of Bala Maharaj)[5] appealed to the High Court (Octo. 3rd 1906). About two years were taken in translating the records. The Bombay High Court eventually decided (1910) against Mr. Tilak. Leave was obtained (1911) to appeal to the Privy Council and the translated exhibits were printed and sent to England in April 1914. On March 26, 1915, the Privy Council quashed the decree of the High Court and restored that of the Sub- Judge. In spite of this clear decision, the Bombay Government delayed the execution of the decree on executive grounds and the estate was received by Jagannath Maharaj from the Court of Wards as late as Feb. 1917.
We have already seen, how Mr. Aston, by his obstinate persistence in importing irrelevant matter in the hearing of Tai Maharaj's application for revocation of the Probate, had succeeded in inflicting an amount of men- tal torture upon Mr. Tilak and in prolonging unnecessarily the proceedings by a few years. Had Mr. Aston resisted the temptation of going into the question of adoption and trying to find matter for which Mr. Tilak could be criminally taken to task, the case would not have assumed these disproportionate dimensions. It would seem that the lesson of Mr. Aston was lost upon Mr. Justice Chandavarkar, who imported into his judgment the criminal proceedings against Mr. Tilak. The rebuke of the Privy Council on this point is severe:—
"Their Lordships have viewed with surprise the charge which is made not only against the trustees but against the whole body of the Plaintiff's witnesses. Mr. Justice Chandavarkar in his judgment states * we are driven to believe that a considerable number of men of good position have conspired together to give false evidence.' The conclusion thus is of the most serious character amounting to a plain judicial finding of conspiracy and perjury. Their Lordships {however) do not think that one ivord of it is justified by the evidence in the case.[6] Referring to Messrs. Tilak and Khaparde, Mr, Justice Chandavarkar observes that: 'They were men of mature years, of exceptional education and mental equalities, lawyers and men of affairs of great repute and good standing and both men of dominating personality/ Some of the witnesses who gave evidence for the Plaintiff are also persons of considerable standing. It is difficult to understand how these men, with no object to gain and no interest to serve, could be supposed to have entered into the conspiracy and committed the perjury which the High Court judgment found. The conclusion come to by the learned Judges {is) entirely unwarranted on the facts.[7]
"Large masses of irrelevant matter (have been introduced in the Judgment of the High Court Judges). In July 1903 proceedings were begun to revoke the probate granted to the trustees and subsequently criminal proceedings were instituted in respect of perjury. Their Lordships regret to observe that not only are the circumstances with regard to the criminal proceedings referred to in the present litigation by the parties but that the depositions therein, become matter apparently of materiality in the judgment of the learned judges of the High Court.
"This was an irregularity of a somewhat serious character. Particularly the depositions in the Criminal Case seem to have been imported in bulk into the present. There is a risk, by such procedure, of justice being prevented. A civil cause must be conducted in the ordinary way and judged of by the evidence led therein. The depositions could not have been used to support the evidence of the Plaintiff. There (is) no warrant for using them for the purpose of either contradicting or discounting the evidence. It was stated to their Lordships that the prosecution for perjury had in the end completely failed. Successful or unsuccessful, the introduction of the criminal proceedings in this civil action (was) illegitimate.
"A further mischance in point of procedure must now be mentioned. As already stated, the testimony of the Plaintiff's witnesses is not contradicted orally, and is internally a consistent body of evidence. But various minutes and documents are the subject of minute analysis, observation and comment by the learned Judges with a view to rebutting it. Their Lordships think it right to observe that, in view of the serious nature of the verdict of the High Court, they have considered it within their province themselves to peruse the documents. Having done so, they are of the opinion that, taken together, they completely confirm the case made in the witness box and that there is no ground' for the conclusion that they either contradict the testimony or cast reasonable doubt upon it."
The part, the Government played during the course of this case, decidedly lowered the people's respect for them. It is certainly an unconscious tribute they paid to Mr. Tilak. During the last hundred years, India has produced a number of patriots whose distinguished abilities and remarkable services to the cause of India's freedom will forever lie recorded in our History. If, out of these many persons. Government singled out Mr. Tilak for their kind attentions, what does the fact show? It was not by mere accident that Mr. Tilak was thus persecuted for well nigh two decades. It was because the Government dreaded the personality and the prestige of this Poona Brahmin that they went out of their way in using the Tai Maharaj case for their political vendetta. There were, and there are leaders whose record of political service might be longer than that of Mr. Tilak. But they have not disdained to bask in the Sunshine of Government favour. In spite of their brave fights, they have more delighted in co-operating with Government. Their efforts in the cause of the Nation were made in the leisure of business or profession. They devoted their attention only to the intelligent few and never cared to approach the masses. In these and several other respects Mr. Tilak's career bears a striking contrast to theirs and it was this new ideal of leadership which Mr. Tilak placed before himself and the country that frightened the Bureaucracy. It was Mr. Tilak's virile methods of political agitation that were responsible for the implicable hostility with which he was pursued. Mr. Tilak never made complaints, he never sought relief. He knew that such persecutions were the necessary price he had to pay. But we may now ask "What did the Government gain by all this?" They could neither bend nor crush Mr. Tilak. They only succeeded in getting deserved odium for having unduly harassed a righteous man.
The apathy with which Mr. Tilak's political opponents in the Presidency could behold the conspiracy that well-nigh threatened to engulf him, is no less reprehensible. They had undoubted influence with the Government; they had very frequent occasions of meeting very high officers of the Government. Did they ever utter a word of protest regarding the Government's attitude in respect of this case ? Did they do their duty by Mr. Tilak? Nobody ever thinks of holding the Moderate leaders responsible for Mr. Tilak's troubles in the Tai Maharaj case. But their indifference to Mr. Tilak's fate is certainly culpable. We have yet to learn how to shield or protect our brethren even though they belonged to the opposite school. The Moderates might freely quarrel with the Extremists but while facing the Government, we all must present a united front.
This long struggle was not without its benefits to Mr. Tilak. No doubt, it left him very little leisure, especially in the earlier stages of the case. It did not enable him to take part in public activities with his characteristic ardour. Once he had to absent himself from the Congress; on another occasion he was too busy with the case to find time to give evidence before the Police Commission. He had to cancel so many public engagements; he had to restrict his activities to the narrowest possible limits. We do not deplore all this undoubted loss for the reason that this period (1901-1904) synchronised with that of the political reaction of which Lord Curzon was the most distinguished author. Until the reaction had reached its height, the movement of Regeneration could not start.
When, with the Partition of Bengal, the movement of Regeneration started, Mr. Tilak had come unscathed out of this fiery ordeal. The glory of martyrdom with which he started work was not the most important benefit he had derived from the Tai Maharaj case. Mr. Tilak himself was changed. The Tai Maharaj case aimed at knocking the bottom off his character; the course of its first stage (1901-1904) tested and strengthened his character. The vast conspiracy aimed at proving him to be nothing better than a perjurer utterly collapsed and Mr. Tilak could not, out of the gratitude of his heart, but recognize the Divine Hand that saved him from the machinations of the tremendous odds against him. The realisation, of this Divine favour created a revolution in his mentality. With all his great and heroic qualities of the heart—his sterling self-sacrifice, his magnificent courage, his genuine humanity and his inborn purity, it must be admitted that Mr. Tilak was more of a Dnyanin than of a Bhakta. The immense intellectual and other powers lavishly bestowed upon him by an all-wise Providence were somewhat inconsistent with that tenderness, pathos and humility which are the essential characteristics of a Bhakta.. But the the excruciating mental tortures of the Tai Maharaj case—we are talking of the earlier stages— convinced him, how weak, how little man after all is, in spite of his intellectual and moral powers, and how in the last resort we have to depend upon dispensations from Above. When his enemies had gathered thick about him and had well nigh caught him in their toils, Mr. Tilak's spirit conferred with the Divine and strong in the consciousness of Divine support, hurled defiance at those mortal enemies. From this period Mr. Tilak's speeches and writings shine with the fire of a prophet. To him the national struggle ceased to be merely intellectual. It was now no longer a fight of arguments. His politics was now spiritualised. It was this spiritual fire that enabled him to tide over reverses yet in store for him and bring his country within the sight of the Promised Land.
- ↑ A Village in the District of Aurangabad.
- ↑ From the Privy Council Judgment (1915).
- ↑ From the Mahratta (March 6th, 1904).
- ↑ From the Mahratta (March 6th, 1904).
- ↑ Tai Maharaj died in September 1903; and then her work was continued by Bala Maharaj who claimed to have been adopted son by her. Thus, it was a fight between Bala Maharaj and Jagannath Maharaj.
- ↑ The italics are ours.
- ↑ The Italics are ours.