On 13 March, 1940 Udham Singh shot and killed Michael O’ Dwyer

FOREWORD

  (Abstract)

V.K. Krishna Menon                                                                         TEL. 34625
(M.P.)                                                                                    19, Teen Murti Marg, 
(Formerly Union Defence Minister)                                                NEW DELHI

I am privileged to write this a short note to introduce Mr.  B.S. Maighowalia’s book SARDAR UDHAM SINGH: A PRINCE AMONG PATRIOTS IN INDIA.

…I have however had some acquaintance with the matter set out has herein and also knew the central figure of Sardar Udham Singh, both as an Indian resident in England and as a client whom I helped to defend at the Old Bailey Court. The author however has the advantage of knowing and further acquainting himself with the background of Sardar Udham Singh and the circumstances that made him a revolutionary.

Sardar Udham Singh who joined the National Movement, early in his life, soon parted company with Gandhiji and his approach. The key factor, in this conversion was the Jallianwala massacre, which impelled him to rebel against authority, almost individualistically, but with determination coupled with bitterness.

…Sardar Udham Singh was driven to avenge the death of the martrys. The grimmest element in his determination of vengeance, seems to have been the acceptances of the request, of an Indian woman who had decided to immolate herself at Jallianwala Bagh. But Udham Singh under took to rescue the body of the dead husband, against, the Draconian laws and rules in this regards, of the Martial Law regime. From then, it would appear that the revolutionary career of Udham Singh had begun. He wrote articles. He was convicted for an offence under the Arms Act and the Appeal was rejected. He was sentenced to imprisonment and served his full term. In 1930 he left India, still determined to avenge the insult and the crimes at Jallianwala. In England, he led a quiet life to all external appearances. But the fire of revenge was in his heart. He was popular with hawkers and workers and continually was under the surveillance of Scotland Yard. Subsequent event show, that he looked upon Sir Michael O’ Dwyer, who was the Lt. Governor of Punjab at the time of the Massacre of Jallianwala, as the arch villain of the Punjab tragedy. I came to know that in the months proximate to the killing of O’ Dwyer by Udham Singh at Caxton Hall, London he saw O’ Dwyer several times and drove his car for him and worked for him. On the day of the killing he seems to have said to some of our countryman that they would soon hear something unusual. On the 13^th March 1940, Michael O’ Dwyer was killed while addressing a meeting at the Caxton Hall. Needless to say, that it was an anti Indian performance, despite the fact, it was under the auspices of East India Association which claimed objectively. Few self- respecting Indians attended or spoke at that or such meetings of the Association. Udham Singh fired. I believe two shots with an antiquated and long (almost 16”) revolver and the retired Lt. Governor fell.

At the Old Bailey, I appeared as his counsel led by St. John Hutchinson K.C., one of the leading criminal lawyers of England, who was a firm believer in the Rule of Law. The defence was that shots were fired to create an impression. St. John suggested that Udham Singh did not fire with the intention to kill. The weapon itself he said was antiquated. The people in the crowd near Udham Singh tugged at his arm which brought the revolver in line with Michael O’ Dwyer’s body, instead of it, remaining aimed at the ceiling. The case, if I remember, lasted several days. It was clear enough from the beginning that our client would be sentenced to death. Udham Singh was surprisingly gentle in talk. He was unhelpful to our attempts at his defence. He however stood by the story that was pleaded before the courts. It came as part of instructions from him and his behalf. The Jury found him guilty of murder.

            …After the verdict, by the jury, the Judge before he donned his black cap according to custom, when are sentence of death is about to be pronounced, asked the prisoner whether he had anything to say? The prisoner did not seek any advice from his counsel or hesitate to reply. He delivered an impromptu tirade against the court. British justice and the wrong done to the Punjab. The judge pronounced the death sentence. He was removed by the warders to the cell below and ultimately to Pentonville prison to await execution. I visited him in jail several times and asked him to sign a petition to Crown for mercy. This is usual in all capital cases. It was difficult to obtain any response from Udham Singh. But I believe others who visited him also entreated him to sign the petition. On the last day of my visit he signed. But it was of no avail. He was hanged.

            Mr. Maighowalia has brought out some of the unknown facts to light by much research, both here and abroad. Whatever the reader might think of political murders, revenge or violence, there is little doubt that Udham Singh was moved by firm conviction and determination. He did not at any time show timidity or whine at the result of the trial. Irrespective of the mercy petition, his own attitude was one of a duty discharged and a crime avenged, even though so many years had passed.             

Source: Chauhan Shivdhan Singh Papers, Printed Material, MSS, NMML