349
{ Libnry . I G1PE-PUNE-044928 - - .. -- --- - -...

Meerut Conspiracy Case Judgement Volume II

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

{ Libnry. IG1PE-PUNE-044928 - - ..-- --- - -... \10\'1t --:-.ab', .VO\.VME. :11. 4. XVL b.P.794. PHILIP SPRATT. ,Icomenowtothecasesof individualaccusedandinwith snaIl Iollo.W'the.same order ineases were arguedilj. the finalSIlDlIIlmr-"" IIponbeUa Ifofthet.hiSordef was .selectedwithaview tothe avoidance' asfaraspossible'In thelightof the' statenulptby. Nimbkar accusecl..atpagesta:tEmiel.ltsof the accusedwhere,speaking5' t. of thebblU'geoisdemocraticrevolutionwhich twill achievethecomplEltefreedom of Indiaff8pt the.control of British impericlism and,will result in the elltablish-mentoran Independentdemocratic republic, he said that". this is rev;olution f01'whichwereworkipg", it wouldseemalmostunaecessarytogeintothe casesof theindividuill accusedwhoput1n an application to theCourt declaring10 that thisstatementby 'Nimbkarembodiedtheir considered -views.But it isnot possible todismissthecases these19accused In thissuinmary; 'fashion.Wehaveofcourse.in the 90urs\{ofhistoryof theconspiracybeen abletogetsome,ideaofthepari taken:byeachaccusedliutinthefirstplaco, .thatideaisUlorflafgenumberorcasesveryjncomplete; whichmightlead ono15 to.takeafuss'seqeusviewM'theirac.tivitiesthan :is reallyjustifiable,and secOlidly the l'ositioIJ,'o!leor two llceused as setin the joint statc-ment does'llot tllllye.xactly wit.n wbat wealready 1!:riowfrom the evidenceor with theconclusionswhichwewouldnaturally denvefrom theiroriginal individual " statements to thisCourt,The"best example ofthisis the case of Radha.Raman.20 Mittraj;awhich Ishall comein due course,. ...,.'- . Icome firstnieI!tQtl:fecase QfPhilip Spratt accused.Ithink it will be safe todealfairly.pummarUywithSpraJl accused'scase.Hisnamehisbeenmen. tionedsofrequently ready' that it iidmpossibletoieelanydoubtthathe intheconspiracy"descriped. This: accusedwaseducated25 at Downing CollegeCambridge and lefr'CAmbridgein 1925..After that wehav\! it on his ownlIuthority-that h(}joinedthe C01UIDupistParty. of Great Britain aud theN"auonalMinority. Mo;ve:mell.tand was i.Workers' UWon_ . andofthe. Shop.Asilisitants: Thiswasapparently' whilehewas working as 1ml'riJ.ployeein thp bookselling firm.of Birrell and Garnett.During30 .thisperiod illEngland he'also .connected ,iith the"J..abourResearch Depart-mentforwhichhesays he todovoluntarywork,Sprattaccusedarrived inIndiainDecember1926..Aceording .tohisownstatementhe. twu 'pUp08.1976, atyped documententitled" Party Training" whichincludesasyllabusforan elementarytrairunggroupandalsoabibliographywhichincludesalongwith someother booksthosenamedinP.1949referredtoabove.P.1978isa membership oftheWorkers'andPeasants'PartyofBombay.P.1979 containsthe' notesof - Spratt 'sspeechon"RevolutionsandIndia"tothe Bombay Student's Brotherhood whichhasbeenmentionedearlier.P.1980con-sists of notes in Spratf's handwriting on the" Contemporary political situation in India" in August1927,andcontainsasuggestionforthecaptureofthe Congressby thl oppositiontot.hecapitalistsection,theideabeingthatifsuch acaptureweretobesuccessfullycarriedouttheCongress' organisationcould then bes'oaltered ast&admit oftheaffiliation. oflabourunionsandpeasant organisations.Theparagraphconcludeswiththefollowingwords:"If the Congressremainsunderbourgeoiscontrolitwillbenecessary"toestablisha newnationalorganisationontheselineswhichwillembodytheallianceofthe petty bourgeoisie,-thepeasantsand theworkers."P.1981consj.stsoftype-written notesonTrade Union work; acopy of thiswasfoundin thepl1!session ofTheng-diaccusedalso.P.1982aremanuscriptnotesinSprattliccused's handwriting perhapsmadeforthepurposeofP.1981.P.1983isSpratt accmled'sreviewofShah'sbook"Onehundredpercent.Indian";which characterisesGandhiasreactionary.p,.1984containsa.typedcopy'anda manuscriptcopyinSpratt'shandwritingofthereviewof"ModernIndia " and the" Future of Indian Politics" whiej;t waspublished iD.Kranti 5 10 15 20 30 andGalli-vaniaridacopyof. whichwasalsofoundat 211E.A.Laneandft!in 'evidenceasP.415(10).P.1985containsamanuscriptcopyinSpratt'shand-writingofanarticleonMayDay,othercopiesofwhichareP.407foundat 211E.A.LaneandP.482foundwithThengdiaccused.It alsocontainsa typedand alsoamanuscript copy inSpratt accused's 'handwriting ofan article entitled"The meaningofMayDay".Thesedocumentsandtheletteb "re-coveredinthissearchwerein the main notadmittedbySprattaecusedinhis statement, buttheans:wersincross-examinationofInspector Desai, P.W .. 215,.j1.Q whoconductedthesearch,certainlydonotcastanydoubtonthegenuineness 35 oftheirrecovery.InthiesearchanumberofdraftlettersinSpratt'shand-writing wererecoverednamelyP.1967,P. 1968,P.1971andP.1975 "Bbou.all ofwhichthereistheevidenceofCol.Rahmli'!lP.W.133whohasrecognised thehandwriting.AsregardsthetyPe-writtenlettersnamelyP.1954,P.1955, P.1956,P.1962(2)andP.1974,thesehavebeencomparedwiththetype-writing inP.1005,tbesearchlistofthe6thSeptemberwhichwastypedon Spratt'smachille' and>ithasbeenshownsatisfactorilythatthe,seletterswere typedontha'1;machine.BUtthatisnottheonlyevidencethattheyemanated fromSprattaccused.-Inthecaseofalltheseletterswefindcertain, tricksof typinA'whichshowthatthey all emanatefromthesameperson.Innearlyall theselettersthewritertypestheword"Dear" in theopeningwords'Dear Robin'or 'Dear X'tothe left of the margin of the body of the letter.Second-ly,insteadof,a.sis.moreusual,goingback 'aspaceortwowhenstartingthe second line after the opening words healwaysgoesforwardaspacetotheright ofthecomma.Thirdlyhehasatrickwhichappearsinfouroftheseletters oftypingtheaddresswiththe.. Writinginthedifferentlinesnotset,asis commonlythecase,in akindof ,echelonbutwiththefirstletterofeachline directlvunderthefirstletterofthelineabo.ve.Thenthecontentsofthese letters" giveclearindicationsthattheyorsomeofthememanatefromSpratt accusedhimself.aS,indeedonewouldnaturallyinferinthecaseofanydraft letterfoundinhispossession.ForexampleP.1954suggestsplainlythatin speaking ofareport opeProfessorS:prattaddressedameeting, the writer is referring to areport, whichconcernedhunself.In thesameletterhespeaks ofattending" yesterday"anextraordinarygeneralmeetingoftheG.1.p, RailwavWorkmen'sUnion.Theletterwaswrittenj1nthe18th-andSpratt's diarYmentionsthatonthe17th hewenttoMahmgatoattendsuchameeting. P.1955whichhas thesametwocharacteristicsinr(lgardtotheopeningwords . .. 45 50 55 60 65 O.P.81!1- O.P.804. O,P.8011. 318 andtheaddress,is .actuallyadmittedbySprattaccusedhimself.P.1956also themandmentions resolutionswhichthewritersaysthathesent ill.roughlastweek,illthepreviousweekaletterpurportingtohavebeen wntten by wasillte!ceptedand copiedandisP.1828C(F.C.197),and thatletterItselfhasdefinItesupportforitsauthenticityinthefactthatit mentionsSpratt'shavingbeenill inbedwithatemperatureof102afact whichiscorroboratedbyMajidaccU)!edatpage527ofthe ofthe accused,and alsoin thefactthat Spratt accusedhimselfwasseen byP.W.269. Deputy. Insy;>ectorChawanpost.ingtheoriginal.P.1974againcontainsthe same. trIcksill.rega!dtothetypmgoftheopeningwordsandtheaddressand themtentiontogotoAhmedabad,anintentionwhichSpratt'sown diaryP.1947showswasputintoeffect.Andthatdiaryisalsocorroborated byDange'sletterP.1973(I.C.48),alsorecoveredinthis'searchinwhich Dangementionsonthe24thJunehavingseenareportofSpratt'sAhmedabad speechesintheTimes(ofIndia).InthisletterP.1974thereisalsoamen-tionofthereceiptofaletterfromBurtonandthewriterasksRobintotell BurtonthathewillwritetohimassoonasThiswaswrittenonthe 6thMay1927andonthe21stJulyinP.1968,aletterinSpratt'sownhand-writing,wefindhim saying that" thepaper" Kirti "whichBurton mentioned tomeisconductedfromAmritsar.".Sothatwehavetwolettersonein Spratt'sownhandwritingandonetype-writtenbothinhispossessionand bothmentioningorimplyingthereceiptofaletterfromBurton.Andfinally in P.1975wefindSpratt himself writing inmanuscripttoBurtonfromLahore andsayiI!gthathehadpromisedtowritehimsomemonthsearlier.This leavesnoroomfordoubtthatP.1974hasemanatedfromSprattaccused. Butth&'eisstillanotherpoint.Inthelastparagraphwefindthewriter saying:"MahatmaGandhiwasunfortunatelythechief .herocelebratedinthis way(that is with" Jai's "), but JhabwalaSahibgotagoodshowing,andIam afraidMr.SprattSahibgidalso." Thenthereareoneor twoother' type-writtenlettersinregardtowhich .thereis thatthetypewritingwasdoneonSprattaccused'smachine. anditwillbeconvenientheretomentiontheconcomitantproofinsupportof that conclusionwhichistobederivedfromcircumstantialevidence ..P.2328P (2)isaletterofthe14thJuneaddressedtoDearDouglasandintercepted ellronte to Iyengar.Ihave already indicated at an earlier stage the coincidence ofsubjectsandexpressionsbetweenthisandotherletters.Moreoverinthe courseof thesearchonthe6thSeptemberitletterP.1008(F.C.232) foundinSpratt'spossessionwhichisaddressedtoDes(P.2328P(2)was signedDesjn typewriting)andmentionsreceiptof"yourletterdated14!6." ThisletteralsodealswiththesamesubjectsasP.2328P(2).It isofcourse afairlvclearinferencethatifaletterorlettersaddressed" DearDes"are foundInSprattaccused'spossession,Desisanamllwhichisbeingusedfor him.andinthatcaseit isimpossibletodoubtthatadraftletterfoundinhis possessionsignedDesishisandnooneelse's.Anotherlettercomingunder thesamecategoryisP.2329P(1)dated15thAugust: (F.C.235).Thisis anotherletterinterceptedenrontetoIyengarand-likeP.2328P(2)was accompaniedbvacoveringlettersignedGeorge.It isobviousfromthefact that it issignedDes,and fromtheevidencewhichIhavealreadymentionedin regardtotheconnectedlettersP.1010andP.1011,thatthisletteralsoema-natesfromSprattaccused. Coming;backtothelettersfoundinthesearch,P.1962(2)isor course unsignen.hutit. wasfound Incompanywithr.1962(1)and.P.1962(3),two lettersfromMr.Meherally.onthcsamesub,wetbothofwhIChareaddressed toDear Mr.Spratt.. P. 1829(F.C.190)is another typed letter in regard tothetyping ofwhich there is evidence whichliS in the otheris 1).otthe only evidencefixing Spratt withresponsibilityforit.ForinstancctheletterissignedDes,and there is the cvidenceof P.W.269,Deputy Inspector Chawan,to theeffpctthat Sprattaccllsedwas .secnpostingit.Thisisalsoaletter ,inthecaseofw:hich there is a corroboratIon from the contents, namely, the mentIon that the" umver-sitiesconvocation" "'ill be heldnextweekcouplr.dwiththe factthatin the fol-lowingweek,asSpratt himselfsays,hedid hurryofftoDelhifortheT.U.C. Astheidentificationofthetypewritingit willbesufficientIthink tosay that Mr.Stott the handwriting expertP.W ..277gaveadetailedexplana-tion of theresemblances and soon at pages 14 and 19(a)of his statement.All documentswerecarefully inthecompanyofthea.'lSessorsand 10 15 20 25 30 35 45 50 66 60 O.P.806. O. P. 807. O.P.808. 319 Icannot seeany reason to dffi'erfromMr.Stott's opinioneven hadtherebeen nocorroborationfromoutsidecireumstances.Sprattaccusedcontendedthat. there was no evidence that Desmond wasaname for himself,afactabout which 1 donot feelthatafter afullconsiderationofthedocumentsthereisroomfor thesmallest doubt.He alsocontendedforexamplethat there was noevidence15 that anyone in Colombo knew anything about the accused or was likely to supply themwithmoney.It isnotnecessary formetorepeattheevidenceinregard toarrangementsat ColombotowhichIhaverefprred .already.Inregardto P. 2002 C. Spratt accused denied that he ever received the original and drew atten-tionto the fact that the letter thoughattributed toDutt was not allegedactually10 tobe in hi!' handwriting but tohave been written by Glyn Evans.Consistently withthis denial he alsodenied thereceiptof P. 2189,theOrmMasseltelegram . and when he came to P. 2190which is hisown reply slgned Spratt and isproved flobeinhisown handwriting hemerelysaysthathecouldnothaveanswered P.2189because he never. receivedit,Rndhesaysthathissupposedrepliesare111 not necessarily the replies to this telegrllm.It canonly be said that it is curious that in reply toatelegramaboutconfidenceincertainpersonsSprattaccused should have replied ,. no confidence," if the alleged reply was not really what it seemstobe. In the courseof hisstatement Spratt accused wenton todeal with the num- 20 ber ciphllr with whichhe entirely failedtocometoclosequarters,and then-with theinvisibleink writing..Hebeganbydenyingthat P.1009wasinhishand-writing,apointwhichIhavedealtwithalready.Hefurtherdeniedthathe had ever nsed invisible writing or developed such writing written by others.So far as the use oit goes Ihave. mentionedat an earlierstage letters which'imply25 thatSprattaccusedhadusedinvisibleinkwritinghimself,andthereisgood reasontothink that hemade useof it inthe letter,ofwhichP.1009 isadraft. There isnoother apparent reasonwhytheportionofthisletter,whichrelates plainlytoinvisiblewritingin lettersreceivedbythewriter,shouldhavebeen written between the lines, whentherowasplentyofroom tohavewrittenit all30 either at the top of the page or inthe margin attheside.In regardtoP.1859 he commentedon the absence of evidence as to the actualsubRtanceused for the purposeofthissupposedinvisiblewriting.Iseenoforceinthisargument. The writing is there,. and it is 'obvious that it canllotoriginally have beenvisible, becauseDOone but alunatic wouldhave written the words,as they nowappear,35 between the lines as part oflhe original letter.Spratt accused devoted fourand ahalf printed pages of foolscapto argument on thesubject ofthe invisible writ-ilng;howit wasdoneorhowiteouldhavebeendoneandthedefectsinthe proseeution theory.It appears to meto be uselessto argue at any length on the subject of this wriiting.We have on the record tWoinstances of letters with botll40 ofwhichSprattaccusedisconccrned,inwhichthereiswriting,aboutwhicli we. canfeelnodoubtthatit wasoriginallyinvisibleandsubsequentlybecame more visible, some of which has since faded.We donot know what the material waswith whichthiswriting wasdone,orwhat processwasusedtodevelopit. Wedoknow. andSprattaccusedhinlselfagrees,thatonemethodistowrite45 with astarch solution and developwith Tincture ofIodine.It wouldseem that anotherpossiblemethodisto:writewithPotassiumIodideanddevelopwitll Hydrogen Peroxide.The references to developing and iuten:Slifi.cationin P. 1009 clearly relate towriting;- and are not compatiblewiththetheorythattherefer-enceistoordinaryphotographs.AgainthereisaclearreferencetoSpratt50 accused's having written something whichtherecipient was unll ble tomake any-thing of.It is noanSwer tosay that the prosecution ought tohave proved' what substance wasused01'tosay that theprosecution. havebeenstupid.What the accusedhasfailedtodoistodealwiththefacts.Butthatofcourseisthe methodwhichhehasfilllowedthroughouthisdefence .asput:t;oNardinthe56 courseofhisThe sequeltothesearch inwhich so many ofthese documentswerereccver-edwasSprattaccused'sprosecutioninCOll1lectionwith" IndiaandChina ",. whichresulted in his acquittal.After that he went totheCawnporeSession ot the A.I. T. U.C., where he was elected to the Council of Action and as amember60 andconvenorofthesub-committeefordraftinga!./abour.Constitution.From Cawnpore he went on toCalcutta and after ashort stay thore toMadras for the IndianNationalCongress.HethenreturnedtoBombayandattendedthe BombayPresidency YouthConferenceandthe Enlarged E.C.oftheWorkers andPeasants' Party,at whichMuzaffarAhmad wasalsopresent(P, 1348(41)65 andP.1348(50.It wasat thistiniethat themainresolutionsappearing in "ACall to'Action "weredrafted, vinethllremark the footofthe firstpage Lo2J]ICO o. P.O. P.8JO. oftheprefaceof".A: CalltoAction",itis statedthat.. fivemail resolutionswereongmallydraftedbyaJomtcommitteeoftheWorkers'and. Peasants' PartiesofBen&,alandBombay."Mter theEnlargedE.C.meeting Spratt a(!cused .tookpart m .the organisationofthedemonstrationonthe00081-sionoftheoftheComInission.P.548(5),anexhibit,rejected ?y theprosecutIOnbut put bySpratthimselfasadefencedocument, mc!udesacoprofa byNlmbkllrlindJoglekarIIccused,in whIChthey claIm for arrangmg the oneday strike of theMunicipal workersonthatoccaSIOn.Another documentofthisdatein hishandwritingi8 P. 1348(46)(printedasP.827(1, adraft.circulllrletterforissuetoTrade Unions,snggesting opposition totheproposal to affiliatethe A.I. T.U.C.to the 1.F. T.U.and suggestingthat if any affiliationistobeconsidered,it shouldbe infavouroftheR.I.L.U.Thisdocumentisdatedthe11thFebruary1928, lind contains a portion in the handwriting of Bradley accused also.P.545(3), a letter of 6th December 1928, shows that Spratt. accusedalso circulated at this time copiesofnnoteonthe"FunctionsoftheConstitutionSub-ComInittee"and alsoofItdraftofaproposedstatement--" Labour&Swaraj ".P.545(1)is apparentlytheoriginaldraftofthe.circularletterandthetwoenclosure&. C.P. Dlltt alludes to this draft on"Labour and Swaraj".in his letter toSpratt aecused,P.526(43)(F.C.445)onthe14thJune 1928,fromwhichit iseVident thatSpratt sentDutt acopy.Mter thisSpratt accusedwenttoDelhi for the fIleetmgof theE.C.oftheA.I.T.U.C.,aboutwhichbewrote'a letter toMuZaffarAhmad,P.479,(1.C.120),ontbe6thofMarch.Therearealso onrecordsome manuscriptnotesillhis handwriting put in bySpratt himselfa8 D.145(30).After themeetingat Dellii hewenttoI,ahore,andtookpart iua meetingattheBradlaughHallincompanywithDange,SahgalandMajid accus('d,after whichhereturuedtoBombay,whenceonthe 9thMarchhewrote the letter, P.526(46), toPage Arnot,inwijich he mentionsthis visit toLahore. HedidnotstaylonginBombay,butlefttherebeforethegeneralmeetingof theBombayPartyandproceEldedtoCalcutta.Therehetookpart ina seriesofa('tivitiesinthecourseofthesummerof1928,toallofwhichIhave maderpferen('esearlier oninthisjudgment.During thisperiod wefindcorres-pondencebetweenhimandBasakaccused.Wefindhimtakingan interestin the Chengail union and strike, in the East Indian Ra.ilwaystrike and particularly initsextensiontoOndalandAsansol,andworking inassociationwithMittra, Goswami.GhoshandMuzaffarAhmadaccused.Duringthisperiodhesent aletter. P.526(11),datedthe20thof May,tothe" Forward" urging thatthe onlypossiblepolicyforIndianLabourwasarevolutionaryone.Therei8no evidence,suchasevidenceofhandwriting,toshowthatSprattaccusedwas personallyre8ponsibleforletter,butitisfoundinapersonalfile,which containsnumerousaddresRedtoSpratt,andalargenumberofletters whichare in hishandwri.ting,andits('ontentsmakeit fairlyclear that hemust betheauthor.In Juneof yearSpratt8.(,eusedisreferredtobythename of' Des' in C.P. Dutt's letter toBradley accused, commonly called theSandwell letter. P. 674.(F.C.425),whereDuttsays:"It isapity that it hasnot yet beenfoundpossibletorestartthepaper"",obviously.theKranti);"I had hopedthatsomethingofwhatDeshasgotmIghtbeavailableforthISpurpose. Anvway.Ihopeyouwill keeppreparationsinmindsothatthegroundispl"ll'-pared."remarksElhowquiteclearlythatwhatmoneySpratt receivedwas not by any means merely aSfl.lary.He must havebeenteeelVlng a good deal more than asalary, if C.P. Dutt could have hoped of what wasreceivingwouldbeavailablefol"'thepurposeofsubsldlslngtheKrang. Knowing,as wedo,thepurposeof the Krantiastheofficial.ofationaryparty deliberatelysetonfootandrunbyCommbmstllWithaViewto furtheringtheaimofbringingaboutarevolutioninIndia,weeanfee]no doubtthatSprattac)eUsedwasreceivingmone)"fromEtH"opeforthat \"ery purpose. .Much abnnt thetime Spratt accu!ledillCalcntta and accusedin 'Bomhaybothre!'civedmoneyforusein withthesendmgofa gate' tothellllnchl'stel'Conference,that 18the6thCongressof theCommuDlRt International atClosely connected with this wasthe Oo,!ference of the Young('ommunist International. which was to be heldat MoscowmAUgDl!t.,for whichC. P. Dutt iu P. 526(43), referred to above, pressed Spratt nrgent,ly to 11suitable representativE', .. a real factory rank andknows what 81 what. Unfortunately no-l!lleJirepresentative WaRfortheommg,as we learn fromSpratt .accused'sletter toMellonie, P. 546(10)(F. C. 456).Not long after thISwe 1ind Spratt aeensed in touch withSohan Singh acmsed, with whose for an atticlefortheKitti hecomplied "bysendingIRtl'l'on(>.()Jlif'AofhiS on 5 10 15 25 30 35 55 60 0. P. 811.-therhe could havebeen underany misunderstandingastotheobjectofthe conspiracy.WhateverSprattaccusedhasdonehehasdonewiththefullest understanding ofthe thing&whichhewasdoingandtheobje('tswithwhichhe wasdoingthem.Agreeingwith4outofthe5assessorsIamquitesatisfied thatSpratt accusedhastaken part inaconspiracytodeprivetheKingofhis sovereignty of British Indiaand Iconvicthim accordinglyofanoffenceunder section 121-.0\I. P. C. 10 14 20 25 30 315 327 PARTXVII. ...827.Bradleyaccusedstatesthathefirstbegantoworkinafactoryattheage BiuDLEY.of14and. after. ashorttime downt?learntheengineeringtrade(he II.haddescrIbedhimselfatthebegmnmgofhisstatementasbyoccupationa JourneymanEngineer).In thecourseoftheGreat Warhewas,hesaysled astraybyfallingapreytopropagandaaboutfightingforthefreedomofall5 countriesandjoinedthenavyin1916.He'Wasdemobilisedin1919andsays thathethenfoundhimselfinthethickofthe"classwar".In1920 'hetook part inthe"HandsoffRussia. "campaignandinOctober1921afteralong spellofunemploymentcametoIndiafOTthefirsttimeunderacontractwith theGovernmentofIndia.HereturnedtoEnglandthefollowingyearandin10 consequence, he says, of what he had seen in India and his experiences in England began totakeadeeperinterestintheclass,struggle.In 1927hewasoffered an opportunity toreturn toIndia by hiselderbrother,whowastheproprietor ofthefirm"TheCrabPatentUnder-DrainTileCompany",inorderto develop the firm's business in this country.He goeson to say:"At thesame15 timeIsawanopportunitytorendersomepracticalassistancetomyfellow , workersin India ; to furtherstudy theirconditions,tobein clo,secontact with themandtoparticipateintheir'strugglealongwiththem.Iseizedthis opportunityandinSeptember1927IcametoIndiaontheP.andO.boat Ranpurausing my ownname,myownpassport and. quite, openly. "Isuppose20 thatBradleyaccusedisemphasisingtheuseofhisownnaineandhisown passportinordertosuggestacontrastbetweenhiscaseandthatofDonald CampbellAs' regardstheTileCompany there is, noevidenceontherecordas o. P. 828.towhether it doesor doesnotexistandthoreisnoevidencewhatsoeveravail-O.P.829. abletoshowthatBradleyaccusedeverdidanhour'sworkonbehalfofthe25 CompanythroughoutthewholeofhisstayinIndia.Onthe' contraryallthe evidencegoestosuggestthatthrough9uttheperiodofhisre.sidenceinIndia prior to his arrest the only work in which heinterested himselfwastrade uuion workof Onekindor another.Had it beel!- possibleforhim todosotherewas nothingwhatever prevent. himfromproducingevidenceofworkdoneon30 behalfofthe. firmin India duringthisperiod,. In this counection Ishouldnotethat Bradleyaccusedhassugge,stedin the courseof hisstatement at ,page579followingthat themoneywhich Imentioned earlier in thisjudgment at. origin!,-l734followingasreceivedby .himEnglandwassalaryforhisseTVlcesonbehalfofthefirm;sentto hirrIbyhis35 brother or by his mother on his brother'S behalf.It appears to methat Bradley accused'sexplanationinthiscounectionismostinadequate.Hehasnever statedwhathissalary was.Thefollowingarethesnmsprovedtahavebeen receivedby himwhilehewasin India : (1)70on21stDecember1927fromL.O.Bradley..a (2)80on13th March1928from L.C.Bradley. (3) 100on3rd May1928fromH.P.Rathbone. (4)40on 12th June 1928fromLen withamessage" towardssending delegate ".' (5)Rs.500on30thDecember1928from Spratt accused.4,5 (6)80on 12th March 1929fromMrs.withamessage" irom motherwirereceiptLeague". Forthetworemittanceswithwhichwerereceivedthemessages"towards sending delegate" and" wirereceiptLeague"Bradleyaccused'sexplanation is th1lltheunderstood that hewastosendthereceiptfor thismoneytoahotel50 inBirminghamwhichwastheheadquartersoftheCommercialTravellers' Associationandsomeotherorganisationsofwhichhisbrotherwa,samember, because his brother was on tour in the Midlandsand had fixedthat as an address towhich eJlcorrespondenceshouldbesent.(Seetheparagraph in themiddle of the page 580and theshort paragraph in themiddleof page582.)Theonly50' reasonablemeaningwhichcouldbegiventothewordsIt towardssending delegate" in thesecircumstances. wouldbethatBradley'sbrother . 40Bradley in June 1928toenablehim tosend adelegatetosomeorgamsationm Birmingham.Tosa,ythe least of it suchasuggestion unsupported by evidence, tocarryconviction.OntheotherhandthecoincidencethatllI;0ney(a60 similar sum of 40)wasremitted fromapost officeonly about half amile away to Spratt accused at Calcutta on the same dny with amessage" For representa-tiveManchesterConferenceRobin",andthefactthatthiswouldhavebeen IA2JMOO 0.1.880 o. P. 881. o. P. 832. 328 dated mO,steonvenientlyforthesendingofadelegatetotheSixthCongressof theCommunistInternational,seemstobehighlysuggestiveinviewofthefact thatbothSprattandBradleyaremembersoftheC.P.O.B.,seeBradley's statementat page578of thestatements' oftheaccused.Theninregardtothe sumof 100sentbyRathboneallthatBradleycansayaboutitis:"It is quitepossiblethathe(Rathbone)wasaskedbymypeopletoforwardthi.s amounttome."BntunfortunatelyweknowthecirclesinwhichBradley accusedmovedinIndia,weknowhisassociationwithSprattaccusedandwe know that thissamegentlemanRathbonesentasumof 200toSpratt accused at very much about the sametime.It looksmuch more likely thereforethat the purposeofRathbone'ssendingmoneytoBradleywasnotverydifferentfrom hispurpose' in sending moneytoSpra,tt.Inthisconnectionreferencemaybe madetoP.1505(F.C.410)whichshowsthatRathboneremitted 100to BradleythroughThos.Cook&SonLtd. 'schiefoffice(thati ~theirLondon office)onthe30thofApril1928,audP.2474Series(F.C.411to413)which showsthatheremittedthesumof 200toSprattthroughthesameLondon officeonthe3rdMay.Thetruthofthematteris,Ifeelnodoubt,thatthis salary hadnothing to dowiththeallegedtileeompany.Onthecontraryit is muchmorelikelythat ithadsomethingtodowiththerealobjectofhisvisit toIndiSJ which is perhapsthat stated(or ratherpartially .stated)byhiminhis . speechat aMillStrikemeetingonthe16thSept,ember1928,P.1729(2), at page77of thenew volumeofspeeches.In thishesays,"IcametoIndia fromEngland withtheobjectof making theworkersrealisetheimportanceof unity,ofuilion 'and i:tJ.order thatthepeopleinIndia,therailwayworkers,the millworkers,thedockworkersshouldorganise'themselvesJUBtasunionsof lakhsof menhavebeenformedinourcountry(England)." InaIVeal1'eadyalludedtoanumberofreferencesintheconspiratorial correspondence which it is reasonable toassume were meant to forecastBradley accused'sarrivalinIndia.Iamofeourseforthl'momentassumingtheeon-elusion ,towhichtheevidenceaboutthisaccusedinevitably leads.Theserefer-encesareas follows.In P.1012(F.C.227)C.P.Dutt'sletterofthe25th JulyJ,927DuttsaystoDesmond(Spratt):". It isveryunfortunatethrut Nelson is ih'noeondition to travel.On the other hand there isanengineer who .will be goingtoGlasgow soon,whoshouldhelptheuniversitythereasyouwill bl!gladtolearn."It isobviousthattherecanbenoreasonwhySprattin India shouldbeglad tohear that anengineerwillshortlybegoingtoGlasgow tohelptheuniver.sity,andtherearegoodreasonsforsupposingthatbythe universityDuttmeanstheTradeUnions.Inthecircumstancesit. isfairly reasonabletoinferthatbyGlasgowhemustbemeaningBombay.Againon the9thAugustDuttwritingtoDesandacknowledgingSpratt'sletter P.2328P(2)ofthe14thJunesays:"I haveheardthatthereisauniver-sity fellowgoingout before long ..... heshould try to followtheexampleofhis friend whopreceded him.That is the latest advice wehave for him and Ithink you willbeabletoconveyit."AnotherobviousreferencetoBradleyaccu,8ed as the" engineer" is tobefoundinDange'sletter writtenat thebeginningof 1930,P.2512,wheretherecanbenodoubtwhateverthat itisBradleyaccused whois beingreferred to. He actually arrived at Bombay onthe 23rd September 1927on the P. and O. S.S. "Rnnpura"as he himself says,see also the passenger list, P.672.Within afewdaysofhisarrivalhewrotea.letterP.1673P(F.C.303),dated29th Septllmber1927,tooneAsa!ofHyderabad,Deccan,anditwlIsthroughthis letterthatDeputyInspectorChaudhri,P.W.262,wasabletoidentifythe letterP.1671Paddressedto.E.J.Horseman,10Hitching'sAvenne, Walthamstow, London, which with its envelope was written in blockcapitals and containedtwopassages in numbercipher,oneof whichgivesthecoveraddress ofKaranth.Ihave,Ithink,dealtsufficientlywiththereasonsforthinking Bradleytohavebeenresponsibleforthisletteratanearlierstage.Inthe courseof hisstatementasanIIccusedBradleydeniedthathehadwrittenthis letter andsaid thatwheninP.1673,thelettertoAsafhesaid"I have writtenalettertoMac" hewasreferringtooneM.ElliswhomheaiDdAsa! had both knownonthe boat.Hesaidthat hewouldcallevidencetoprovehis contention,butwhenthetimecamehelikealltheotherCommunistaccused preferredtodeprivetheCourtofthevaluableassistancewhichaccordingto himhiswitnessesmighthavegiven.Apartfromthecircumstantiale v i d ~ n c e supportingtheviewthatthelettertoMacemanatesfromBradleythereISa curiouseoincidenceofphraseologybetweenthisletterandtheletter P.1673PtoAsa!whichBradleyadmitstobehis.Inbothwefindthe 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 45 55 O.P.8S3. O.P.8M. O.P.8SS. 329 phrase"I amkeepingwell"andthereareotheri.n$tancesofthesamekind. Then again the writer of this letter says hehasbeen in touch withF.H.which, applying the transposition code(remembering that this letter is in block capitals throughout soth8Jtwecannotget"Fho"), wouldstand forG.H.(orGh)that isGhate,andthereisevidencetoshowthatthi,scoveraddressKaranthwasIS usedbyGhateaccused,infactthatitwashewhoapproachedthewitness' Karanthtolet him useit.Thenagainif it wasnotBradley whowrotethis letteritisdifficulttounderstand whyDutt in P.674(F.C.425),theSand-wellletter,shouldwritetoBradleythathewasafraidthattherecoveryof P.1686(F.C.348)fromthelascarAbidAlimeantthatKaranth(written10 innumbercipher)wasnolongeranygood.Astothe. applicabilityofthe transpositioncodetothe.caseofthisletter,thatisofcoursosupportedby . P.674inthemaunerwhichIhavejustindicated,andfurtherbythefact thatinP.674DuttaskedFred(Bradley)towirewhethertheSocial ServiceLeaguegaveitsConsenttohisusingJliurdekuq(Khardikar)forthe15 NewYorkmeeting,towhichareplywassentinP.2186(F.C.489)tothe effectthat" inquiriesshowuniversitygivesnopowers".Thisreplywas addressedtoDutt,162BuckinghamPalaceRoad,butthe- personwhosentit wasnotBradleybutGhatefromwhichitisreasonabletoinfertheexistence of'8 closeconnectionbetweenBradleyandGhateaccused.Thereisoneother20 pointinconnectionwiththisletterP.1671P.,namelY'thatin'writingthe numbercipherthewriterhasused ,towardstheendafigure7whichis'veT'Y distinctive and which is to be found in the date at the head of the admitted letter P.1673P.andofcourseelsewhereinBradley'swritings.It isalsowort;h notingthat thesamedesiguofcapital R,M andKand averysmaJlcapital025 aretobefoundinthisl e t t ~ rP.1671asappear.in ,Po2411P.etc.,which are proved by theevidenceof Colonel Rahman to' bein Bradley accused'shand-writing.Bradley,accusedwas'inclinedtosuggestthatthesupposedreason fortheidentificationofthisletter givenbytheinterceptingofficer,P.W.262, l'IamelythatthecovetwasofthesamesizeandcolourasP.1673P.etc.,30 wasnotcorrect, ,andthetwoenvelopeswerenotreallythesame.Hebased thisonthefai'luretoproducephll'tographiccopiesofthe' envelopes.Butthis isaveryfeebleargumentbecauseitwould ,havebeen. obviouslyabsurdfO:l1' F. W.262toreportin P.1672thatthecoverwasof thesamesizeandcolour asthat of yesterday'sletterofBombaywhenhewaRsubmittingtheletterto.35 theveryofficertowhomhehadsubmittedtheoriginalofP.1673P.' the previous day.So wehave Bradlev within aweekof hisarrival in India writing aletterobviouslyintendedforC:P. Duttandusinganumbercipherwhichin averyslightlydifferentformwehavefoundalreadytohavebeenusedby C.P.'Dutt,byFazlElahi,anallegedco-conspirator,andbySprattaccused.40 Bradleyaccuser]'11nextappearancewasatthe'CawnporeSessionofthe A.I.T.U.C.wherehesays that hecamein contact withmanyoftheaccused in the dOl'kandmade friendswith many of them.In his statement tothis,Court hecommentsontheactionoftheGovernment in notpermitting thedelegateof theAllRussianTradeUnionCounciltoattendthisCongress,' andsaysthat46 BritishImperialismknowstheharmlessBritishT.U.leaders,andonlythey may beallowed to enter India.Ido not understand him to include himself amc.ng harmless British Trade Union leaders.That hewascloselyin touchwithsome ofthe accusedin themonthswhich followedtheCawnporemeetingisshowntly the fact that his handwriting appears in the last paragraph of the circular letter60 dated11thl!'ebruary1928,addressedbytheW.P.P.ofBombaytotheTrade Unionsregardin!l' the proposedaffiliationof the A.I.T. U.C.totheLF.T.U. P.1348(46)(equals P. 827(1.Another piece of evidenceleading to thesame conclusionistheentryintheminutesof themeetingoftheE.C.oftheParty heldonthe25thMarch,wherewefindasub-committeeconsistingofthePresi- 55 dent,theSecretaryandComradeBradley(asadviser)withpowertovote, appointedtodiscusstheMunicipalelectionsandsubmitareportwithinthree weeks.'PhereportsubmittedbythisSub-Committeeappearsinevidenceas P. 1348(7).TheCommittee thought that theParty should trv tosecure2 01'3 seats in theCorporation,whereacertainamountofpropagandacouldbedone60 anlidst thepettybourgeoissection.It might not bear muchweight at theoutset but the Corporation could be used to acertain extent as a "loud-speaker" of the Party. IntheCOUI'se,ofthesummer,thatis.duringthestrikes,Bradleyaccused spoke in public fromtimeto time, for example on the 24th of April and again ou65 MayDay, 'whenheis said tohaveadvocated aLabour Raj.He wasaway from Bombay forashort period inMay,whenhepresidedat anon-PartyPeasants' 330 afdCon.ferenceat .Nagpur.Onthe ofMayhemadeaspe{'chat NWadi,P. ill thecourseofwhichhetalkedaboutSwarajlind s!lld ,the real. SwaraJ1Softheworkers."Thenspeakingoftheconstitu-bOllbmldersbe.said:" aretalkingofframingaconstitution,butthey havelIotyetltndfoundatlOnforSwaraj.Letthemapplytheirmindtothe6 ofthepeasantsfacingtheminBombay,CalcuttaandLahore.By you. workersthey wouldlaythe foundationofthe massmovementand willfreeIndiafromthebondofcapitalismandImperialism."Onthe24thof Mayhespokeagainat astrikemeetingandsaidinP.2240(2):"Ihaveno love for the empire though Ihad fought for it.Since then Ihave learnt a l{'sson.10 Theempiremustbeinternationaloftheworkers.Thepresentempireiscon-structedon('xploitation."Hespokeagainonthe30thofMayinP.2241(2). Inthecourseofthisspeechwefindhimsaying:"EnglishmenlikeSpratt Purcell,and myself are like nuisance tothe Bara Sahibs,because:wanttohelpyouill yourstruggletofreeyourselffromthebondageofcapital- 10 Ism. _.. . . . ....Further, thisstruggleisnot yoursonly.Financialandmoral support is going to come from the Textile International of Russia and the workers oftheworld...........Youhavegottoorganiseamachinefromthis strugglesothatyourmachinemightbecomeapartoftheInternationalmove-ment."Onthe4th of June in P.2244hecontradictedthereport that hewasa20 memberoftheW.r. P.whichhadnodoubtarisenfromhiscloseassociation with its members as an adviser tothe G.K.M.M.and subsequently a member of o. P. 836.the ManagingCommittee of theG.K.U.He however said that hehad watched withinterestwhattheWorkers'andPeasants'Partyhaddoneandadded: "I intheWorkers' and Peasants' Party aparty that willleadtheworkers26 ofIndiatofreedom." The nexteventof importancein Bradley accused'scasemust havebeenthe receiptbyhimoftheletter,P.674,whichwasfound,afterhisarrest,inan almirahinaroomwhichhadbeeninhisoccupationuptoadatenotverylong beforeheWIISarrested.This almirah wasin aroomin thehouseofMr.Sand- 30 well,whichwasnotoccupiedbyanyoneelsebetweenthetimewhenBradley accusedvacated it andthe time whenthisletter wasfound.Ihavealready dis-cussedtbisletter,P.674,andthecircumstancesofitsrecoveryatconsiderable length, and Ineed saynomore than that Isee no possible reason for disbelieving theevidence inregard toi,tsrecovery.It is further wellproved that thisletter36 wastypedononeofC.P. Dutt's typewriters.Ihavedealttosomeextent with thecontentsofthisletterbefore,buttbereareoneortwomorepoints,which are worth bringingout.First ofallthewriterC.P.Dutt mentionsthereceipt offourlettersandareport,noneofwhichhaveneenintercepted.'Aftermen-. tioningthesehesays:"Canyouletusknowif anylettersaremissing ". ob- 40 viouslyimplyingthatin viewofinterceptionsit isquitelikely that somemigbt be.ThenhecomestoamentionofhavinghadalongtalkwithJack,atalk whichis alsomentioned in aletter written by Dutt toSpratt a week later, P. 526 (43)(F.C.445),.latedtho, 14th June 1928.Thenextparagraphrelatestothe NewYorkmeetingandthequestionofusingtheyoungfellow,Jhurdekuq45 (Khardikar),thereplyaboutwhichwasaddressedtoDuttasImentioneda o. P. 837.liitleearlier.Inalaterparagr-aphhetalksabouthavingsomeonefor"the youngfellowsin August"whateverispossiblei.e.evenif nothingispossible fortheN.Y.Julymeeting.Hereagainthesamesubjectisreferredtointhe' letter toSpratt accused,P. 526(43).In the next paragrapb we have the remark50 aboutarrangp.mc,utsllavinghepnmadeforthesupplyofcarbons,towhichhe adds: "Butjustat the wearefacedwithdifficultiesreodespatch.It would be good toget some idea how you use them also", which is aplain request foranaccountoftheusemadeof moniessent tocomradesinIndia.Thenhe goeson to refer to Alec andNelson and to expresssatisfaction in regard to 55 "news of events in your region ", which is presumably a reference to the Textile strikeinBombay.Insubsequentparagrapbstherearethereferencestothe cottonshipments,there-startingofthepaper(theKranti),themeetingofthe youngfellows(YoungCommunistInternational)inAugust,thesupplyof "boost" andthediscontinuanceofthe"mail,"andtotheunfortunateaffair60 in cOlmection with the search of the lascar Abid Ali.Just about the end of June BradleyaccusedPlust 'haveJ"ceeivedaletterfromMrs.Mellonie,P. 654,(F.C. 459)which is identical with P. 546(9)(F. C.454), from the same lady toSpratt towhichhereplied inP.546(10).There is noevidenceas towhether Bradley accusedeverreplied toit.Towardstheendof July and in Angustwe65 comeacross anumberof letters in whichSohanSinghJosh accusedpresses for theattendanceof Bradleyat thesecondsessionoftheWorkers'andPeasants' ConferenceofthePunjabtobeheldatLyallpuronthe28th,29thand30th 0. P. 838. 831 September.P. 549(18)(equals P .12M)(L C.201)and P. 1&4:1{I, Co216)are letters of this kind issued by Sohan Singh accused al\Secretary of the W.P. p: of the Punjab.In these letters wehave it proved that Bradley accusedWasU. with members of the W.P. P. not only in Bombay but also i:a the Punjab. The Bextspeec1Y of' Bradley accused.whichis ontherecord. is P: 1703(3),I dated the24th July, whicbis llrinted at page 49of the new volumeof Rpeecb(osj He beginsby saying Now-a-daysIcannot comeevery day.The causeofb is that the other mattersin connectionwiththestrike havebeenplacedbefore the o,vners, and so alsoIhave been fighting out the question of the G.I. P.waymcn. . . . . . . ..Both yOUl'struggle and that of the G.I. P. Railwaymsnis10 similar. . . . . . . . .Botharefightingagainstcapitalismtokeeptheirwages ll1fficient.TheG.I:P: RailwaymenarefightingagainsttheGovernmentand the RailwayBoard and weare fightingagainst theowners.That is both ot us arealsofightingwithcapitalism.".Lateronhesays:" It isprovedthat wherever the Government exists, it is the Government of Capitalism."Bradley11 accused spoke agirin on the 29th July in P.1705, which appears at page 55of the new volume.In this speech he says : .. The owners thov.ght that no one will help these workmeu.They(the owners)were undeceived.At this time acheque of Rs.3,000hascomeforhelpingyoufromourSaklatwalaSahib,whoisin Britain. "This is presumably a sum sent by the W. W. L.I., though it would be20 interestingtoknowwherethatorganisationwasabletoobtainsolargeaSlim of money.Later oninthisspeechhesays:"Todayoutsidershavebegunto raise It llubbubalrninstusaboutCommunism..Theywantto makeit appear as' . abighogey."Thenhepreachestheworthlessnessofthelawas it standsat present.He says: .. We say that these laws are wrong. . . . . . . . . .But we are211 preparedtodisregardevenlawsthemselves.Wedonotrespecttheselaws. 0. P. 839.Theworldis comingto formtheopinion thatthat law isnecessary whichwill provideCorourlivelihood.Thelawsafterthiswillbeframedbyus,sothat arrangementswillbemadeforprovidingforthelivelihoodof everyperson." And furtheron hesays: "The power ofthese laws lies in our wrists.... Weshallmakesuch arrangementsas wouldproVldelivelihoodforeverywork. man.That strengthhasbeguntobringaboutunityamongnB.Weshallnot failtoimprove our conditionsby 'UIlifyingour strength." This rl'[l!\,cnceto/IsumofRs.3,000 has", particular interest in connection "ith thecorrespondence betweenGlynEvans' at theofficeoftheW.W.L.I.in311 LondonsndC.P.DuttcloBadhuriinBerlin.Onthe9thAugnst1928inP. 2401P.(F.C.515\AU"(G1ynEvans)wrotetoJ. '(C.P.Dutt)adknowledging Dutt'sletter which he had received on the 2nd August and saying that he did the requeststhereincontained,oneofwhich,it willberemembered,wasevidently tIledespatchf.f'theletter,P.2002C.(F. C.513)dated the 2ndAugust 1928 to40 Spratt, enquiring about Rhuden and Uke-Rhug.The letter goes on as folloWS:.....: .. The little sum wehad to send over was sent and Ihad a reply from Fred on the 4thaclmowledgingsame."It wouldseemhighly likelythatthisisa tothisparticularsumofmoney.Inhisnextlett.ertoC;P.Dutt,P. 2402P. - (}'. C.526), dated the 21st August 1928,Alf said towards the end: "By the way411 Ihave badafewlettersfromFredt. ofag. eneral nature forthe W.W.L.con.' tainingreceiptsmostly,withafewlines {)fcommentson the general POSiti011. ,. Nowit is important to note the date of this letter, 21st August 1928, because only twodayslaterP{)tiel;':Wilson,Secretaryofthe.'W.W.L.J.,wrote toBradley o:P. Md.accused in P. 1860 as follows:- ...60 ... Dear Comrade-I haveto''tthankyouforthevery interesting lettersyo. havesenttome ...... alsothereceiptsforthemoneystheLeaguebasbeeu abIotocollect:I'rom-theBritisl.workersforthest-rikeatBombay;"Thes& twoletters when put side by sideclearly ;suggest the identilication ofFred ,with Bradley. IhavealnndyshowntheconnectionbetweenBradleyaccusedlind' the: Workers'andPeasants'PartiesofBombayand.thePunjab.InP:' 16160. a letter from Mnzaffar Ahmad accused to Ghate accused, weget evidence that511 :.1Workers'andPeasants'PartyofBengalalso.knewallabout'Bradleyaccused'. andregardedhimasoneoftheirfriends.InthisMuzaffarAhmad60 accusedstatesthathehassent50copiesof"A'Call toAction'"to Ghate,of' which25are fordistribution and therest forsale.He asks Ghatetogive free copiestoShah,Parvateandothers,andtoMirajkar,Nimbkar,J oglel!:arand' Bradlevaccused.Thiswasonthe3rdofAugust1928.Onthe'5thAugust BradleyattendedtheAU-IndiaRnilwaymen'sFederation 'meetin[ !.l.t'Mad. rail;66 whichhementionedtoPotter Wilson in hisletter, P.f861P.{F.IJ.568)datc4 r.2.JlIOO'... O. P. MI. O,P.M2. 0. P.W. 332 the 8thSeptemberwrittenat atimewhen,ashesaidhimselfhewasterribly busy,andwhichhehadtocloseratherhurriedly,because,as' hesaidhehad gotanengagementwhichhemustattend.Boththesearenodoubtto hisvery importantengagementsat theParty officefor theSeptemberCoun-' cilof. War,of, whichwehavehisownnotes.Inthis BradleyaccusedII proDllsedtosend afurtherreport,but that report is not in evidence.Thereis, however,areferencetothismeetingoftheFederationinthereport,P.2416P .. (61),whichBradleyaccusedsenttoPotterWilsonwithhisletter,P.2416P, (F.C.762)onthe18thJanuary1929.ThisisacopyoftheAdministration report of 4-.I.R.F. 1927-28andmentionsthatonthe5thAugust1928the.10 GeneralCouncilofFederationmetatMadrasandresolvedthatapro-grammeofc,!Ulmor.deJ?lltllds. ofalltheRailwaymenshouldbeprepared.so thateveryrrulwaymanmIndiashouldputupacommonfightonthelinesof the 9nhiswaybackBradleyaccusedvisitedSholapur,afact, by hun maspeech madeon the 9th of August after hisreturn.This111 ISP. 17.10(2)at page 81of the new volume.Apart from the reference to Shola-purandthestrikethere,thereisanotherofinteresttowardstheend, whereafte!speakingofthePublicSafetyBillhesays:.. TheLegislative AssemblyISoftheGovernmentandnotoftheworkmen.The, Legislative isoftheKing.If anybillwhatsoever, ispassedinitwedonot20 acceptthatlaw.Whatyoupeopleoughttodoistobuildupalegislatureof yourownbystarting abigunion.AndGovernmentmustbeconfrontedwith thisourlegislature .............. WeshallplaceforthourlawthroughUnion, andthusweshall ,createtwornlingpowers(Kingdoms)inIndia,oneofthe, Governmentandoneoftheworkmen."Bradleyaccusedspokeagainonthe211 25thofAngus,tin P.1721,whichisprintedat page140ofthenew volume.In speechagaintalkingaboutthePublic SafetyBillasalawframedtodrive himoutofIndiahesaid:"Bolshevismisnotabadthing.Whatit meansis Rajof the people,of theworkers,Rajofthe peasants,Rajof thewholepeople. ThatmeansBolshevism.Bolshevismisnotbad."Meanwhilethoughnota30 memberoftheBombayPartyBradleyaccusedhadstillbeenactinginthat caparJty.AtthemeetingoftheE.C.heldonthe19thAugust,(seeP.1344), it wasdecidedthattheTradesCouncilandtheW.P.P.shouldco-operatein carryingonacampaignagainsttheTradeDisputesBill.It isfurtherstated intheminutesthat" aresolutionwastobedraftedby Bradleyand.Joglekar,36 tohecirculatedtodifferentUnionstobeadoptedbythemattheirprotest meetingsagainstTradeDisputesBill."Nodoubtthemeetingofthe4th SeptemberreferredtoinBradley'sdiary,P.645,wasameetingofthatkind. Fromthe6thtothe '10thSeptemberBradley accusedwas,ashesaidto, Mr.Potter Wilson, very busy indeed withtheCouncil of War at the Party office,40 of whichwehavehis notes,P. 670.Incidentally theletter toMr.Potter Wilson, P. 1861,isdated the8th September,whichwasactually mail day,andBradley's diaryshowsthatonthatdayhehadtwoengagementsatthePartyofficeat 9 ... M.and 2 P.M.Presumablythereferencetoanimportantengagementwhich hementionedtoPotterWilsoninthisletterwasthe9A.M.meeting.Bradleyj6 accusedmadefurtherspeechesonthe10th,1ft-th,16thand18thSeptember. The .firstof theseP. 1725(page 155ofthenewvolume)consistsalmost entirely ofanattackonMayekar.ThesecondP.1728(page170ofthenewvolume) containsnumerousreferencestothePublicSafetyBill.It isaspeechfrom whichIhavequotedatan earlierstage.Inithesays:"Whatabigoffence60 IhavecommittedfopwhichIamtobesenttojail!.... ReferringtowhatI taught,toldyouduring thesefouror ,fivemonths,theeffortwhichImadeto tell you that the workersshouldorganisethemselves,should makeunity,should not "wim in such adefective mann,er,should fight with the owners, shouldsecure their ownrights fromtheowners,thecapitalistshavebegnntosay that I 6' committedthisoffence.Thecapitalistsareto-dayintheAssemblyaslegIsla-tors.Therefore by making such lawsthey maybeintendingtosend .meeither to jail or tomycountry."Thenhegoesontosay that hisdeportatIonwould not be sufficient to stop the Labour Movement.Further on he says:.. Rem.em-berthat if that happens"(that is,if theownersandtherichare mtoGO thesea)"then alonewillthelabourers'movementstop,thenaloneWillthe movementof Communism,of Bolshevism,stop,thenalonewill the Union move-ment stop for a time.When do Communism and Bolshevism come'Thismentbeginstoincreaseonlywhenaconditionofextremepenuryprevails anIongtheworkers,whenworkerspass .inmffering. this movementisCli tobestoppeddriveoutfirstthesecaPltahsts,owners,IDlll-owners,factory owners. " heconcludesthisspeechbyurgingthew?rkers .to afterthestrikeis over,averybigUnion,andtofightWithcapItalism,With O.P.1It(. 333' ownerismandwithGovernment.:Inhisspeechonthe16th,P.1729: (2),he repeats this behest for the formation of a big Union of mill-workers, and then goes on to state the objeot with which he had oome to India in the passage whioh Ihave quotedbefore.ThereisaninterestingllassagetowardstheendofBradley's speech on the 18th September, P. 1730(2)(page 185of the new volume), aspeech translated into Marsthi by Dange accused for the benefit of the audienoe.In this he speaks of the General Strike in 1926 in England and says:"Two years back, that is in theyear 1926,an effort forrevolutionwasmadethere(inEngland), but owing to the treaohery ofsomeleaders it wasfrustrated;But it iscertain that thenext effort will notnow befrustrated.Therefore it isoertain that we shallsoonbring aboutarevolutioninourcountryandthatwillbesuccessful Whilewearemakingthatrev.olutionthere,theworkersherealso--whatever betheresultof thisstrike--must organiseatremendousUnionand mustm a k ~ preparationsforgainingc.()ntl'oloverthewholeofownerism. "Braclloy accusedwaspresentat furthermeetingsonthe21stand25thSeptember,see the entries in hisdiary,P.645.On the 4thOctober the strikecameto anend, not so the activitiesof the aocnsed whohad been taking an active interest in it. Onthesamedaythere wasameetingoftheW.P.P.TradeUnionGroupat 2P.M.,whichismentionedinBradley'sdiary.Thismeetingwasapparently occupiedwithconsiderationoftheresolutionsfortheA.I. T.U.C.Jharia meeting whichIhave mentioned before.Onthe12thofOctobertheManaging CommitteeoftheGirniKamgarUnionissuedaleaflet,P.967,callingforin-creasedenrolment,foraspecialfundforagitationaboutthenewtwosides-threeloomssystem,and forspecialeffortstoraiseaRed Army of5000men,a companyof100lecturersand afundof2 lakhsfor thestrikefund.Thisleaf-let was signed by Bradley, Alwe, Joglekar, Kasle, Dange, Nimbkar and Mirajkar accusedandoneGadkari. 10 16 20. 25 Allthistime,aswehaveseenfromvariouslittlebitsofevidence,Bradley accusedwasalsooccupiedwithworkiutheRailwayUnions.Throughout OctoberhewasoutontourattendingmeetingsalongtheG.I.P.line.This30. fact is mentioned in his letter to Mr.Potter Wilson, P. 2412P( ~ ' .C.616),dated 0. P, fN6.'the26thin whichhesays that"althoughIamnotworkingwithJhabwalain hismillunion,Iamstillworkingwithhimorganisingrailwayworkers.The G.I.P.Railwaymen'sUnionisgoJngstrong.IoftenhavetoleaveBombay fora 'dayortwoandattend meetingsupthelineatplaces."This letteralso36 givesagoodidea of thepositionat theendoftheMillstrikeandofthe work which was being done and its object.He says at one place: "Anyway it is not agoodsettlementfortheworkers,andsothesloganthatit isonlyatruceis used. "After speakingoforganisational work in connection withtheG.K.U. and Ihl! opening of centres in th!' mill area he says:"We are holding meetings40 throughoutthemillarea,andthesearewellattended.Thespiritofthe workersisstill good.'l:hesloganof preparation fornextMay is being accept. ed bv all."And again: "The union is organising the workersrotPldadefinite programmeofdemands,andif organisationgoeson,asit isgoing,inashort time avery strong union will come into being and the workers will be prepared. "45 From1111ofthisit isqniteclenrthat in everythingthat wasbeing gsl'dtotheevidencein support ofthat46 participation. There arc only two other points to which Ineed draw attention in Bradley's case.The :firsti:lthat theabove is of 'courseonlyabriefsummaryof theevi-denceagainst him.There arc actually onrecordsome 62documents in hisown handwriting and approximately'150 documents affecting his case apart from dOelI- 60 :menta relating to :r. M.O. 's and the like.The second is that he is a signatory t.o .thejointstatementmadeonbehalf .,-,fall-theCommunilltaooosedbyNimbkar 8OOused,a statcment to which he made a reference in srgning his ease saying that it gave the wholp. l){)sitionfromthe Comnmnist point of viewand that hehimself adhered to it.56 It appearstomethatthecaseagainstBradleyaccuseddcesnotadmitof allYdoubt It is clearthat under the of being an agent fO.r sale of tiles lIeWIISeentout to India by the CommumstParty of GreatBntam, working pt'rnaps mainly throughtheagency of itssubordinateorganisation the Workcrs'"Welfare Leagne of India,to doCommunistwork in the trade unions,60 in fact to follow in the footsteps of Donald Campbell.It appears to me from the evidence that lIe did what he was intended to do and did it very welland that be 'took anactivepart as aCommunist fraction anumbe,rof unions. bellt work was certainly done in the. G.I.P. Rallwaymen8Umon .but he al!Mdid.8" 8lot of work in theB. B. C.I. Umon..Healsotookavery activepart lnthe" Textile Mill Strike and an interest in the Trust Railway and Port T1"!'st em-ployees,the Municipal workers,on workersandTramwaymenand alsomJute 941 workersand TransPort workers in BengallIe has himselfe ~ l a i n e dwhat hill objects were in all that he did.In addition tothis he served to some extent(of ooursetonothing like the sameextent asSpratt accused)asalink between the European and Indian endsof the conspiracy.The correspondeneeof hiswhich wehaveontherecordisonthewholefairlyinnocuouswiththeexceptionofII P. 674.But it is obvious that agreat many of his letters escaped censorship, and if wemayjudge fromthe factthat immediately onhisarrival !hetookstepsto secure that correspoudence should reach him without undergoing censorshipthe remainder of hiseorrespondenee must have been of akind which he did not wish to come to the eyes of the authorities.That he occupied aD.important position in10 the conspiracy is evident from hispresence at theCouncilof War in September 1928,his notesat whichshow afull understanding of everything that was going on or that was intended to be done in future.In addition to the above he did not-able fraction work in the A. LR.F. and in the A.I. T. U.C.and the fruit of the work donebyhim and othersof theaccusedin the latter organisation wasseen15 in the split mentioned in the statements of the accused which took place in ayear or BOlater.'. Agreeing with fourand disagreeing with oneassessor,Iholdthat Bradley accused hasparticipated in aconspiracy todeprivethe King of the sovereignty of India and Iconvict him accordingly of an offence under section 121-A., I. P. C.20 O.P.887. S.V. GRATE. 8.' O. P.868. O.P.8611. 343 PART XV:Uk: .' ..,'. "'Ghate accused's first appearance in'thethis'ease Is in connection Withthe CommunistConferenceheldatCawnPIlt:ein Deceinber1925.P.1287 (11), a document recovered in the search of Appoji Rag (see the search list P.1283 and theof 1:'.W. 2.12,DeP!lty Souza), contains an account of the proceedingsofthe First Indian CommurustConference held in Cawnpore5 on the 26th Dccember 1925and of the meeting bf the Central Execntive held on theOf .tlle Altinad,J oglekatandGhatewerepresent at this Executive Comnnttee meeting.The docliine'D.t!ihows that J oglekar; Ghate, Nimbkar,MnzaffarAhmadandAbdulMajidaccused' allelectedtothe Executive Committee of the Party on this oCCRsion, as also were J. P. Begerhotta'10 andKrishnaS,wamyIyellgar(Madras),andthatBegerhottaandGhatewere electedGeneralSecretariesoftheCentralExecutive.Iyengar(Madras)and MuzaffarAhmad(Calcutta)wereamong those appointed asSecretaries for the circlesnoted against their names.It wasalsoresolvedat this meeting that the CentralOfficeofth(>Committee be transferred toBombay for theensuing year,15 and that Ghate be paid Rs. 60 a month for his own private expenses and be placed in charge of the Head Officeat Bombay.Early in the following year there WIIS aconsiderableamountofcorrespondencebetweenJoglekar,MuzaffarAhmad andGhateaccused,whowereendeavouringtorecoverfromV.H.Joshithe balance leftover fromthe fundcollected in 1924forthedefenceof thea