1924

"Simmel kann sehr viel schreiben und sehr gut schreiben. Simmel ist [??]. Ihm nachzuweisen, dass ihm Sätze misslingen, ganze Passagen und Partien, kann jeder von uns. Aber Simmel hat wie kaum ein anderer zeitgenössischer Autor einen fabelhaften Blick für Themen, Probleme, Motive. Muss man anerkennen. Dass er sprachlich kein Meister ist, leider."

"“Strafen gegen den Besitz einer Droge sollten für ein Individuum nicht schädlicher sein als der Konsum der Droge selbst; und wo es so ist, sollte es geändert werden. Nirgendwo ist es deutlicher als in den Gesetzen gegen den persönlichen Besitz von Marihuana für privaten Konsum.“"

"Es gibt bei vielen in diesem Land ein tief verwurzeltes Gefühl, dass ein Afroamerikaner nicht Präsident sein sollte."

""Wer nicht handelt, wird behandelt.“"

"The scale, intensity, and extent of Muslim mob violence in Kohat was so unprecedented and incomparable to anything that had happened in the past that it shook even the Imperial British Government. The Kohat Deputy Commissioner and Brigade Commander almost gave up citing helplessness against this level of determined mob barbarism."

"The Kohat matter also took an ugly turn. Muslims were the overwhelming proportion of the population. Hindus and Sikhs had been set upon and driven out. They had been thrashed, killed, forced to undergo conversions. But to the astonishment of all, in December 1924 at the session in Bombay of the Muslim League (of all things), the till-recently president of the Congress, Maulana Mohammed Ali, moved an embellishment to what, even to begin with, was a partisan resolution. The resolution maintained that ‘the sufferings of the Hindus of Kohat are not unprovoked, but that, on the contrary, the facts brought to light make it clear that gross provocation was offered to the religious sentiments of the Mussalmans, and the Hindus were the first to resort to violence; and further that, though their sufferings were very great, and they are deserving of the sympathy of all Mussalmans, it was not they alone that suffered...’"

"The relations between the two communities were strained throughout 1923-24. But in no locality did this tension produce such tragic consequences as in the city of Kohat. The immediate cause of the trouble was the publication and circulation of a pamphlet containing a virulently anti-Islamic poem. Terrible riots broke out on the 9th and 10th of September 1924, the total casualties being about 155 killed and wounded... As a result of this reign of terror the whole Hindu population evacuated the city of Kohat..."

"Left Delhi on the 3rd morning. Kohat was the only subject discussed at Hakimji’s residence right up to 10.30 p.m. on the preceding night. Dr Ansari and Hakimji (Ajmal Khan) held the view that the separate inquiry reports were best left unpublished. But Motilalji Nehru strongly opposed. ‘That’s impossible. The public was certain to expect the publication of the Inquiry Committee’s findings and it is incumbent upon us to satisfy it.’ It was at last decided to publish the reports, but with some changes. Shaukat Ali accompanied us in the train up to Sawai Madhopur on the 3rd morning to make them. Bapu first revised Shaukat Ali’s report. He kept his every view intact, but cancelled only unnecessary repetitions. Shaukat Ali accepted the deletions. His last paragraph was a little clumsy and Bapu rewrote it for him. Bapu then began to amend his own report. Shaukat Ali vehemently insisted that Bapu must drop the comparison with (Gen.) Dyer, the paragraph showing Bapu’s reasons for his blaming Muslims and the sentence that it was, by and large, not the Muslim community that had suffered but the Hindus. Bapu slashed all that. I protested, though not strongly, against all those incisions and said that that mind itself was vitiated which could not bear the statement of even bare facts. ‘But what else can be done?,’ Bapu rejoined, ‘that is the only way to change his attitude. Moreover, he too has conceded much.’"

"Never do anything in a hurry. The resolution of Zafarali Khan is really better than yours. You have meant well but you have done badly. Your resolution reads as if Hindus richly deserved what they got. You state as facts that provocation was from Hindus, that violence too was commenced by them. You state that the Hindu suffering was great, (but) the Hindus were not the only ones to suffer, meaning thereby that both suffered almost equally or if not equally, certainly not so much as to call for any special mention. The resolution, after recording its emphatic findings on the main facts, asks the public to suspend its judgment on the details of the allegations of the Government. Does it not follow that the Government version being true on the main facts, their finding on the details is likely to be true? If all parties are agreed on the main facts, is it worthwhile asking for a Commission on details? You make the League ask the Mussalmans to invite the Hindus to go to Kohat and to settle their differences with the Mussalmans honourably and amicably. This means that the Hindus are the offenders in the main. But if such is your opinion, then again why a Commission? You then proceed to invite the Hindus not to provoke and ask the Mussalmans not to resort to violence. This means that there was extraordinary provocation by the Hindus. The fact is that the kind of language used in the vile verses has become the normal condition of the Punjab. You might have said that such language was unpardonable for Kohat. Your condemnation of the Government coming at the end and in the language it is couched has no force whatsoever and you have made no case for condemnation either. Zafarali Khan’s resolution is in every way much superior to yours, and far less offensive. You have erred grievously in that you have made no mention of the destruction of temples. How I wish you had remained silent: I have read the resolution again and again and the more I read it the more I dislike it. Yet you must hold on to it, if you don’t feel that it is wrong. What I want to do is to act on your heart and thereon (on) your head. I am not going to desert you whilst I have faith in you. The resolution is a revelation of the working of your mind. However crude the language, it shows your belief. I must, therefore, put forth greater effort still and see if I cannot bring you to a correcter perspective. You should not be ignorant of Hindu opinion on these matters. You must not say that Hindus even denied provocation and initial violence. They may be wrong in so believing, but seeing that they believe so, you should not have stated what you have. If you could not have the resolution like the Congress one, you might have protested and voted against it without dividing the League."

"The most serious outbreak occurred at Kohat in N. W. P. P., a predominantly Muslim area. On the morning of 9 September, 1924. the Muslims looted and burnt all the shops of the Hindus. On the night of 10 September the Muslims made a number of breaches in the mud walls of the city, and committed wholesale plunder and incendiarism, the alleged provocation being firing from some Hindu houses in self-defence. Before noon there were wide- spread fires in Hindu quarters. The Deputy Commissioner and Brigade Commander were unable to prevent the raid, and apprehending that theie was a grave danger of who- lesale slaughter of the Hindus, removed them to the Cantonment. Later on the Hindus removed to Rawalpindi. Gandhi, who made a joint inquiry into the incident with Shaukat Ali, observed : On 10 September, "the Muslim fury knew no bounds. Destruction of life and property, in which the Constabulary freely partook, which was witnessed by the officials and which they could have prevented, was general. Had not the Hindus been with- drawn from their places and taken to the Cantonment, not many would have lived Even some Khilafat volunteers, whose duty it was to protect the Hindus, and regard them as their own kith and kin, neglected their duty, and not only joined in the loot but also took part in the previous incitement.""

"The Kohat tragedy formed a subject of discussion in the Indian National Congress, the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. The manner in which it was treated by these three bodies throws interesting light on the way in which the communal question was looked at by different sections of Indians. Motilal Nehru, who moved the resolution on the subject in the Congress, began by saying that “in Kohat a tragedy has taken place the like of which has not been known in India for many years’', but scrupulously avoided casting any blame on any party, merely observing that "this is not the time for us to apportion the blame upon the parties concerned", though more than three months had passed since the incident. The Congress resolution deplored the incident, urged the Musalmans of Kohat to assure their Hindu brethren of full protection of their lives and property and invite them to return, advised the refugees not to return except upon any such invitation, and asked everybody to suspend judgement till a proper inquiry was made."

"The Kohat riots from 9th September 1924 onwards deserve special mention, for they sent waves of shudder throughout the country. Pattabhi Sitaramayya wrote: ‘“‘The Kohat riots really broke the backbone of India.’’ Hindus were just five per cent of the population of Kohat, a small town in N.W.F.P. As many as 150 Hindus were murdered. The entire Hindu population had to seek shelter in Rawalpindi-320 km away. The terrible death dance of murder, rape, loot, abduction, etc., let loose on the Hindus there made Gandhiji, accompanied by Shaukat Ali, visit Rawalpindi."

"The Kohat tragedy formed a subject of discussion in the Indian National Congress, the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. The manner in which it was treated by these three bodies throws interesting light on the way in which the communal question was looked at by different sections of Indians. Motilal Nehru, who moved the resolution on the subject in the Congress, began by saying that “in Kohat a tragedy has taken place the like of which has not been known in India for many years’*, but scrupulously avoided casting any blame on any party, merely observing that “this is not the time for us to apportion the blame upon the parties concerned**, though more than three months had passed since the incident. The Congress resolution deplored the incident, urged the Musalmans of Kohat to assure their Hindu brethren of full protection of their lives and property and invite them to return, advised the refugees not to return except upon any such invitation, and asked everybody to suspend judgement till a proper inquiry was made. The Muslim League repeated all these but added the following : “The All-India Muslim League feels to be its duty to place on record that the sufferings of Kohat Hindus are not unprovoked, but that on the contrary the facts brought to light make it clear that grosss provocation was offered to the religious sentiments of the Mussulmans and the Hindus were the first to resort to violence. The Hindu Mahasabha “expressed grief at the loss sustained by Hindus and Muslims in life and property, the burning of about 473 houses and shops, the desecration or destruction of many temples or Gurudwaras which compelled the entire Hindu and Sikh population to leave Kohat and to seek shelter in Rawalpindi and other places in the Punjab.’’ Lala Lajpat Rai, speaking on the motion, asked “whether, even admitting that the Hindus were at faulr, their fault was such that it deserved the punishment inflicted on them.” All the three resolutions blamed the Government for the tragedy and urged the necessity of an independent public inquiry. A joint inquiry was made by Gandhi and Shaukat Ali, and as they differed on essential points, both issued individual statements. There was not much difference about the atrocities committed by the Muslims. Shaukat Ali exonerated them on the ground that the burning and firing on the 9th were quite accidental and the Hindus gave the first provocation on the 10th. Gandhi did not endorse this view and observed : “During these days temples including a Gurudwara were damaged and idols broken. There were numerous forced conversions, or conversions so-called, i.e. conversions pretended for safety. Two Hindus at least were brutally murdered because they ( the one certainly and the other inferentially ) would not accept Islam. The so-called conversions are thus described by a Musalman witness. ‘The Hindus came and asked to have their Sikhas cut and sacred threads destroyed, or the Musalmans whom they approached for protection said they could be protected only by declaring themselves Musalmans and removing the signs of Hinduism’. I fear the truth is bitterer than is put here if I am to credit the Hindu version”. Shaukat Ali admitted the murder of two Hindus for refusing to embrace Islam and the pretended conversions which, he added, were really no conversion at all. But he was not satisfied that there were any forced conversions to Islam."