The Nehru Report and Muslim Rights — Page 4
[ 4 ] made in this direction. Thus, the League in a plain rnanner debarred its representatives from taking part in the committee that had undertaken to frame a constitu tion for India. The Nehru-Report admits that this deci sion of the Muslim League Council placed the Nehru Committee in a difficult position inasmuch as the dele gates of the League, in view of the resolutions t could not take part in the deliberation upon the report unless and until the resolutions of the League had been accepted in full, or unless the Council itself had issued instructions anew. Under the circumstances, the All-Parties Confer ence had to re-assemble on March 8,-the persons attend ing the meeting have not been mentioned in the report and two sub-committees were f ormed,-one to consider the question of the separation of Sindh, and the other to investigate the question of representation. The report of the committee appointed on the 22nd February could not be taken up for consideration be cause the delegates of the Muslim League refused point blank to discuss it. The conference, thereupon, ordered its publication and adjourned its sitting till 19th May, 1928. During this time the Hindu Mahasabha met in April and vehemently opposed certain demands of the Muslim League. The All-Parties Conference again met in Bombay on May 19, but as the conditions prevailing hardly warranted a unanimous decision, it was proposed to form a small sub-committee to investigate the problems. Accordingly a sub-committee, consisting of Sir Ali Imam and Mr. Shuaib Kureishy (Muslims), Messrs. Annie and Jayakar (Hindu Mahasabha), Mr. Pardhan (Brahmins), Sardar Mangal Singh (Sikhs), Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru (Liberals), Mr. Joshi (Labour ), Mr. S. C. Bose and Pandit l\tlotilal Nehru, ( nine in all-7 Hindus and 2 Muslims ) was duly constituted. From the report it appears that