History commonly refers to the events which happened earlier in time and are responsible for our present. These are the sequence of events that occured long time ago.

All Parties Conference, All Parties Committee and Nehru Report

The boycott of Simon Commission by the Indian National Congress, the Liberal Federation, the Muslim League, the Hindu Mahasabha, the Khilafat Conference and several other parties led to a parallel attempt to formulate plans for an Indian constitution. The boycott of the Commission made it incumbent upon the Indian leaders to discharge the duty of(…)

Second Phase Of The Revolutionary Movement in North India and Bengal

The revolutionary terrorism witnessed a second revival in the post-1922 period. It was borne out of the disillusionment caused by the failure of the Non- Cooperation Movement and the vacuum created in the political activity thereafter. Dispirited with the lack of results of the non-violent Gandhian methods, the educated youth of Bengal, the Punjab, U.(…)

Simon Commission and Anti-Simon Commission Agitation

It was in the background of the growing political unrest in India after the suspension of the Non-Cooperation Movement, particularly after the rise and growth of the second phase of the revolutionary terrorism, and the great ‘economic recession’ between the two World War that in November 1927, the British government announced the appointment Indian Statutory(…)

AISPC Activities and Response of the Indian Princes

The programme of early Praja Mandals in different states was moderate in tone. It called for representative institutions as a preparation for responsible government under a monarch supported by the loyalty of his people. Some of their manifestations even contained expressions of sympathy and support for the princes in their effort to maintain their rights(…)

Butler Committee Report (1926) and Indian Princely States

Meanwhile the Princes were getting restive. The gradual Indianisation of the Government made them very sensitive about their position and prestige. They shrank from the idea of acknowledging the suzerainty of Indian ministers responsible to popularly elected legislatures. For some time past they had been protesting against the extent to which the Paramount Power interested(…)

Formation of “The Chamber of Princes” or “Nripendra Mandal”

The British Government while tightening us control over the Indian princes, realised the necessity of securing their co-operation in view of the troubled political situation after the partition of Bengal. Lord Curzon and Lord Minto wanted to form a consultative body composed of representatives of different States. The need for such a body to co-operate(…)

Changes in British Policy During the Post-Revolt Phase

With the assumption of the Government of India by the Crown in 1858, the relations of the Indian States with the British Government entered upon a new phase. Till now these relations were neither uniform nor well-defined as they grew up at different times and under different circumstances. Hence there was much uncertainty about the(…)

States Peoples’ Conference Movements (Praja Mandal Movements in Princely States)

The British India comprised of two types of territories—the territories annexed, conquered by or ceded to the British, which were under the direct British rule under the British laws. These British territories had been divided into Provinces and Commissioners Territories, etc. The rest of British India comprised of Princely, Native or subsidiary states, having signed(…)

Other Political Parties and Movements in 19th Century

In the period 1922-27 a number of political forces rose up aside from the Swarajya Party. In 1919, the Moderates who had walked out of the Congress in the second split formed National Liberal League which later came to be known as All- India Liberal Federation. And true to their moderate ways, they cooperated with(…)

Achievement and Activities of Swaraj Party

The Swarajists fought the election of 1923 and were pitted against the Liberals. They did not join the Liberal Federation because the letter was identified with the British and had achieved little during the past three years of its existence. The Liberals hardly ever condemned the bureaucracy even for its serious lapses and the Swarajists(…)