File 705/1916 Pt 2 'Arab revolt: Arab reports; Sir M Sykes' reports' [‎177v] (352/450)

country and throw off the Turlnsh yoke ? Elsewhere the paper re.ers to the meeting
of the Lucknow Mahommedans, at which abhorrence was expressed at the conduct of
the Sherif, and says that in all probability this opinion is entertained by only a few
particular Moslem residents of Lucknow, and that even these will have o change their
views after pondering over the real facts. It is difficult to understand why the
Mahommedans in any other country should take umbrage at the independence of the
Arabs. The Arabs can achieve greater progress if they are a fiee people than by
continuing as the slaves of Turkey.
XI.—United Provinces.
1. Moslem Papers.
The “ Indian Daily Telegraph” (Lucknow) of the 29th June, 1916, contains an
account of the proceedings of a largely attended Mahommedan meeting at Lucknow on
the 27th June to discuss the Arab revolt. Mr. Saiyid Nabi-ullah, barrister-at-law, who
presided, pointed out the deep anxiety and alarm which had been caused among
Mahommedans bv the reports of the Arab outbreak in the Hejaz. I he first resolution
was moved by Maulvi JNlizam-ud-dm Hasan, seconded by Mr. Muhammad Nasim,
advocate, and supported by Hakim Abdul Qavi and Mr. Mumtaz Husain, barrister-at-
law. The resolution recorded the deep abhorrence and indignation of the Mahommedans
of Lucknow at the reported detestable conduct of the Arab rebels, endangering the
safety and sanctity of the Holy Places of the Hejaz and Mesopotamia. The resolution
condemned the Arab rebels and their sympathisers as enemies of Islam. The speakers
dwelt on the unique sanctity of the Holy Places of Mecca and Medina and laid emphasis
on the sacred Islamic injunction which declared these places to be Dar-ul-Aman or the
“ Abodes of peace.” They condemned the action of the rebels, who had let loose all the
sanguinary horrors of war around their holiest shrines. I hey said a true Mussulman
could only look with detestation on these happenings, as long as he remembered^ his
supreme duty to preserve the House of God and the tomb of the holy Prophet from
desecration and outrage.
The second resolution was moved by Mr. Shahid Husain, seconded by the Honourable
Mr. Saiyid Wazir Minister. Hasan and supported by Mr. Saiyid Zahur Ahmad and Dr. Nasir-ud-
din Hasan. This resolution repudiated the suggestion contained in a Calcutta telegram
that any class of Mahommedans can be delighted with the reported Arab rebellion or
can view with any feeling other than alarm and disgust the consequences likely to ensue^
therefrom. Mr. Shahid Husain, in the course of his speech, referred to the loyalty of
Indian Mahommedans to the British Government, He said that the Arab revolt in the
Hejaz was to Mahommedans a purely religious question, as it involved the safety and
sanctity of their Holy Places. This question and the equally important one of the
Caliphate touched them most deeply, and they could not tolerate any gratuitous
suggestion or advice in regard to them.
The other speakers denounced the attempt recently made to show that the
Mahommedans welcomed the news of the revolt and characterised it as mischievous and
misleading.
The “ Indian Daily Telegraph ” further says that information has been received
from Maulvi Salamat Ullah Sahib, secretary, Majlis Alia Anjuman-i-Khuddam-i-Kaaba
that “ the Mahommedans repudiate in the most emphatic manner the suggestion that
any guidance or assistance by the British Government in the affairs of the Hejaz will be
welcome to them ; and consider it imperative in the interests of the Government that it
should be apprised of the fact that even the contemplation of a contingency of an
un-Islamic protectorate would be repugnant and most painful to them, being wholly
opposed to the principles of Islam.”
The Nizam-ul-Mulk ” (Moradabad) of the 30th June, 1916, refers to the reported
Arab revolt and remarks that every Mahommedan will be perturbed at hearing the
news.
He asks his Indian co-religionists to exercise patience and to entertain the hope
that the British Government will find some way to remove the unrest among
Mahommedans.
In “ A1 Khalil” (Bijnor) of the 1 st July, 1916 (received on the 5th July), the
editor says that it is a matter of the greatest pride to Indian Mahommedans that they