THE PUNJAB PRESS AND THE GOLDEN TEMPLE CONTROVERSY 43 centre of Sikh religion, the Golden Temple has always been a place of veneration both for the Hindus and the Sikhs. Along with Guru Granth Sahib, which resides in the Sanctorium, idols of Hindu gods and goddesses had been placed on the bank of the sacred tank for a long time.14 These idols had been brought by the Brahmins who performed religious ceremonies for the incoming devotees. The management of the Golden Temple had always attracted the attention of ruling powers. Before Ranjit Singh, various Sikh "m/s/s"15 had claimed their share in the income of the Golden Temple. Maharaja Ranjit Singh had appointed Desa Singh and Lehna Singh to look after it. After the annexation of the Punjab, the British also considered it politically important to exert their hold over it and regulate its administration.16 Initially, the Extra-Assistant Commissioner of Amritsar was made responsible for looking after the management of the Golden Temple. He was empowered to fine the Pujaris for their misconduct and could even debar them from entering the Golden Temple for six months. In 1859, a Council consisting of Sikh representatives formulated a 'Dastur-Ul-Amal'', for its management. In 1862 Mangal Singh was appointed as the Manager. The Golden Temple Committee was appointed to direct the Manager not to interfere in religious matters, the mode of worship and the observation of rituals and customs. His sole function was to collect revenue of the land attached to the Golden Temple. This reflected the direct involvement of the colonial rulers in the affairs of the Golden Temple and they were determined to perpetuate it. In his letter dated 16 September 1880, which wras addressed to C. Grant, the officiating Secretary to the Government of India, W.M. Young, the Secretary to Government, Punjab emphasised that the post of Manager of the Golden Temple should be continued. Similar concern was shown by the Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab, R.E. Egerton. In his letter addressed to Lord Ripon, dated 8 August 1881, he observed that official control over the Committee looking after the management of the Golden Temple should be continued. The absence of official control was perceived as politically dangerous by him.17 The prevailing arrangement as maintained and continued at the behest of the British authorities and regulated through the Manager evoked criticism. The Singh Sahai and the Aftab-i-Punjab in their issues of 28 June 1895 and 29 June 1895, respectively highlighted the inefficiency of the Manager and neglect of duty by the Granthis. It was asserted that both were more interested in grabbing a large share of the offerings.18 The Khalsa Gazette lamented that the Sikhs took no interest in the affairs of the Golden Temple and the duties performed by Granthis.and Pujaris and concluded, that very few were capable of performing it properly.19 The prevailing dissatisfaction among the Sikhs surfaced when Bawa Sarmukh Singh of the Malwai Bunga, Amritsar, issued a notice in which he openly deplored the conduct of