pleasure-hunting, yet there is every ground to say that the sensation created by his murder is not at all analogous to the position he held in public. What was he? Surely he could not be compared with Sardar Sir Lee Stack of Egypt nor was he of any importance and popularity, similar to those claimed by the late Mr. Jackson, the unfortunate Collector of Nasik. Mr. Bawla they say,was one of the wealthiest men in Bombay sure. Was the Late Sheriff and Banker of Bombay Dwarkadas Dharamsi less wealthy and less popular than Mr Bawala ? Certainly not. But no such sensation was created, when Dwarkadas was classed among the ordinary –every casualities- occurring in Bombay and no more. Mr Bawla was the member of the Bombay Municipal Corporation. May Be. Seats in District Local Boards, Municipalities, and Legislative Council are the priviliegs of wealthy men only, that none need be told; but how the greatness of his personality can be sought to be justifiled by this argument we do not know. How many immoral wretches and steel-hearted members of the bourgeoisie should we point out from among the lot of these Corporators,Councillors and socalled leaders ?. It is foolish to elevate Bawala to the level and rank achived by the late Sir Pherozsha Mehta. Readers should particularly bear in mind that so far as the easiest methods of self-advertising that go unhampered and unquestioned among wealthy people of Bawla s type are concerned, any empty-brained jack can pose himself as a John of the Corpotion simply on the strength of his opulence Though the public is still diffident to call a spade a spade, the really intelligent element certainly values .such bourgeoisie in their true light. Opulence cannot at all be the Insurance. Policy of Mr. Bawla’s populaarity or his public worth, He may be an influential magnet in his own Memon community; so anybody He was a silent membar of the Corporation, they say. What can be expected of a man, who thought of nothing but the fair sex?. They say he was a Big Merchant; Bombay is superfluously flooded with them. He was, they say a Jolly Social .Friend in the tiffin club of the Corporation; certainly it may be a fact. But what dose all this go to prove? To sum up, we can Only say that Bawla was a healthy youth. A recklss hedonist. Persued his work, his vices, his pleasures, his fancies to his heart's content. Enjoyed his father’s big estate and enormous wealth in any way he liked. That is all. What more ? We find the following information publishd in almost all news papers of Bombay, regarding the
. Wealth and character of Bawla.
“Bawla’s father left behind him wealth, which could be measured not by thousand or lacs but by Crores Abdul was the only son of his parents. Bred up in profuse opulence, he turned out a staunch pleastlrist. Uncontrolled indulgence since his cradle-day’s made a very bad impression upon his after-life. He developed a very hot and peevish