The Reminiscences of Zafrulla Khan — Page 21
21 REMINISCENCES OF SIR MUHAMMAD ZAFRULLA KHAN It looked at one time as though the Commission would be completely boycotted in India, and to a large degree it was. The absence of Indian representation on the Commission was fatal but an attempt was made to soften the blow by arranging that when the Commission arrived in India on its second visit, it would have associated with it, a committee elected by the Central Assembly and during its visit to each Province also a provincial committee elected by the Provincial Legislature. That did not, however, meet the wishes of the people. The Central Assembly set up a committee; and so, in due course, did the Punjab Legislative Council. Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan and I were both members of the Provincial Committee, which was composed of seven members. We chose Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan as our Chairman. We sat with the Commission when it visited the Punjab. We took part in all the proceedings, the examination of witnesses, etc. but we wrote our own report as did the Central Committee and each of the other Provincial Commission. In any case, again, it was an excellent piece of training to be associated with these eminent people that came from England, and those who were members of the Central Committee and of our own committee. I might mention that a move had been made behind the scenes, which was attributed to Sir Fazle Hussain who was himself at that time an Executive Councillor and not a Minister - I never checked up on it - that the Provincial Committee that was to be elected should contain the three Indian Ministers, but this attracted little support and no Minister was elected to the committee. The Unionist Party had always followed the line that while the objective was the same everywhere - to march forward to complete responsibility and independence as quickly as possible - there were two distinct methods which could be pursued to achieve that purpose: one, to attack and fight from the outside; and the other, to push forward through criticism, persuasion and co-operation. The Unionist Party while recognizing that both were necessary and, indeed, were complementary to each other, had chosen the latter. The Commission made its report in due course, and it became a "best-seller," especially the first volume, which was descriptive of the conditions and institutions and of their historical background and development. It was an excellent piece of work. But the recommen-