Sindh Ten Years Before Pakistan: A History Based on Declassified Documents of Secret Correspondence During British Colonial Rule (1937 to 1947)
Compiled by Qazi Asif  
Centre for Media Development, Pakistan
ISBN: 9-786277-924058
1,028pp.

The decade from 1937 to 1947 was one of the most eventful time periods in the history of the Indian Subcontinent.

The hallmarks of this period were the end of the British Rule in South Asia and the emergence of the two independent states of Pakistan and India instead, devastating Partition-related violence, the rise of the Indian National Congress (INC) and the All-India Muslim League (AIML) — coupled with their increasingly divergent political posture and policies — the first experiments in provincial autonomy under the Government of India Act 1935, leading to Congress-led governments in the majority of Indian provinces, Muslim grievances arising out of the Congress rule, and the passing of the Lahore Resolution of 1940, to name a few.

While all this was taking place on the broader Indian stage, Sindh was passing through its own political thunderstorms. It had regained its provincial status after remaining a commissionerate under the Bombay Presidency for about 90 years, since 1847. The first-ever elections of the Sindh Legislative Assembly were held between January and February 1937, with the Sindh United Party emerging as the single-largest party, securing 21 seats in a house of 60.

But the British governor decided to appoint the leader of a minority party that had secured only three seats as the chief minister. This subjected the province to an era of unending political intrigues, manoeuvres and machinations, resulting in acute political instability during the decade under reference.

This decade also witnessed communal violence between Hindus and Muslims — for the first time in the history of Sindh — resulting in hundreds of deaths on both sides throughout Sindh, in the wake of the Masjid Manzilgah riots in Sukkur. Other hallmarks of the era in Sindh included the Hur Movement, the imposition of martial law in the province, the assassination of Sindh’s former chief minister, Allah Bakhsh Soomro, the founding of the Sindh Muslim League and, most importantly, Sindh’s pivotal role in the Pakistan Movement.

A compilation of declassified reports by three British governors of Sindh between 1937 and 1947 offers a treasure trove of anecdotes about a tumultuous decade

In the midst of all this, as events unfolded, the British governor of Sindh quietly sent his fortnightly reports to the viceroy and governor-general in Delhi, highlighting not only key events but also his interpretations and insights as well. Additionally, the practice was for the chief secretary to send his version of the events in his fortnightly report through bureaucratic channels to the capital, Delhi. The governor also used to share with the viceroy a copy of the chief secretary’s report with his letter.

In addition to political developments, these reports also highlighted law and order, price control, issues related to communal harmony, agriculture, irrigation, trade, transport, labour unrest, student strikes, the state of the media and press, and developments related to the war in the province during World War II.

The book under review, compiled by senior journalist Qazi Asif, is a collection of such reports from three governors of Sindh — Lancelot Graham, Hugh Dow and Francis Mudie — from 1937 to 1947.

The book begins with a report dated May 8, 1937, from the first chief secretary of Sindh (who was also the first Sindhi to join the Indian Civil Service), H.K. Kirpalani, to the secretary to the Government of India. The opening paragraph informs him that the “first session of the Sind Legislative Assembly was held on April 27 and lasted for four days.” He further informs that the governor addressed the Assembly on the third day, but the “Congress Party [INC] abstained from attendance on that occasion.”

According to this report, the first bill presented in the first session of the Sindh Assembly pertained to the fixation of ministers’ salaries. It proposed to fix the ministers’ salaries at Rs2,000 per month. Remember that the price of gold in 1937 was about Rs44 a tola. By this standard, the proposed ministerial salary was equal to the cost of 45 tolas of gold which, in present terms, amounts to over Rs 18 million. It is pertinent to note that the proposed salary was not exceptional in India, as some other provinces had higher salaries for their ministers.

But the Congress members in the Assembly objected to this proposal and instead proposed “Rs 500 as salary plus Rs 300 as house and motor car allowance”, as mentioned in the chief secretary’s report. It also states that it “was the only one [agenda item] that was seriously debated.” Finally, a compromise was reached: Rs1,500 per month for ministers and Rs800 per month for the deputy speaker.

However, it goes to the credit of Speaker Diwan Bhoj Singh G. Pahlajani that he, on his own accord, reduced his salary to Rs300 per month, that too only “during the currency of the sessions.” We may thank him posthumously for his consideration.

One of the governor’s reports highlights the Sindh Assembly’s “defiance of the law” by preferring Sindhi over English in assembly business. The background to this issue was that Section 85 of the Government of India Act, 1935, required that “All proceedings in the Legislature of a Province shall be conducted in the English language”, with a small window in the law that allowed the “persons unacquainted, or not sufficiently acquainted, with the English language, to use another language.”

Taking advantage of this provision, all local members, including those well-versed in English, began delivering speeches in Sindhi. This ‘breach of law’ was reported to the viceroy, who directed the governor to dissuade the Assembly speaker from allowing members to speak in Sindhi. An embarrassed governor met the speaker, asking him to ensure that the business of the house was carried out in English, but in vain. He reported the matter to the viceroy in his letter dated September 3, 1937, stating:

“You will remember that you urged me before the session began to use my best efforts with the Speaker to secure respect for the provisions of section 85 of the Government of India Act, 1935. In accordance with your directions and my own personal convictions, I had a long discussion with the Speaker before the session began.”

However, the governor was astonished to find that, instead of discouraging, the speaker was actually encouraging the members to speak in Sindhi. Things reached such a stage that when one of the parliamentary secretaries began speaking in English, the speaker directed him “to speak in Sindhi,” complained the governor, attributing his defiance either to “gain popularity by breaking the law, or influences were brought to bear on him.”

The entire book, consisting of over a thousand pages, is rich with such anecdotes. However, it has some weaknesses too, the most important being poor proofreading and editing. As the compiler mentioned in the foreword that he worked single-handedly, without any help, these shortcomings are understandable.

It would be a good idea for the Government of Sindh to assist the compiler in addressing deficiencies in the next edition, as the subject is an important source on Sindh’s history.

The reviewer is the president of the Citizens’ Education and Empowerment Society and a former vice-chancellor.

He can be reached at drshaikhma@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, December 14th, 2025