Page:A Nation in Making.djvu/156

those submitted by the other Indian witnesses, in a separate volume, as a Congress blue-book.

It is worthy of notice that Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji, although a member of the Commission, submitted himself for examination.

My examination lasted for a whole day, from eleven o'clock in the morning till about four o'clock in the afternoon, with an interval for lunch. Sir Louis Peile, who was a member of the Commission and of the India Council, severely cross-examined me with regard to that part of my evidence which related to the wider employment of Indians in the higher offices of the Govern- ment. 'Have you read the Public Services Commission Report?' he asked me. 'Very thoroughly' was my reply, and I think I was able to turn the tables against him. I especially protested against the practical exclusion of our countrymen from the higher offices in the Educational Service. Mr. Gokhale, who was present during my evidence in cross-examination, said, 'It was brilliant'.

Immediately after my examination I went to a function where I met Sir Charles Elliott. He warmly shook me by the hand and invited me to dinner. Notwithstanding wide differences of opinion, our relations were friendly and continued to be so till 1909, when he wrote to me during my visit to England as a member of the Imperial Press Conference, asking me to disavow my sympathy with anarchical crimes, and offering me in return the honour of his hospitality. I showed this extraordinary epistle to several of my friends, including Sir Henry Cotton. I declined to take any notice of it, and did not reply to it. But this little cloud, which darkened our relations, had not then appeared, and we were good friends, glad to meet one another.

The Calcutta Municipal Bill was then before the Legislative Council, and I had a talk with him about the matter. Sir Charles Elliott was no friend of Local Self-government, but I found that in the free atmosphere of England and as the result of his contact with the institutions of Local Self-government, a change had taken place in his ideas. He was a member of the London School Board and he said to me, 'Now that I have seen how these things are worked in England, I think more about your Corporation than I ever did before'. He was not in sympathy with the drastic changes that had been introduced in the Calcutta Municipal Bill. He had the inclination, and if he had had the power, he certainly would have helped us.

After my examination as a witness, I had a little time to spare