Within the constitutional field, the moderates never visualised a clinical separation from the British empire; what they wanted was only limited self-government within the imperial framework. In light of this statement discuss the contribution of moderates to the National Movement along with their limitations.

Contributions of moderates: (i) Economic virtue of the British rule => readers like D.B. Naoroji (Poverty and Unholy He'd rule), R.C. Dutt (Essay on colonialism) and U.K. Upadhaye (Economic history of india) => Brain of wealth theory. (ii) Constitutional demands => self-government within imperial framework.

=> separation of executive from judiciary => Indian isation of administrative iveries. => reduction on defence expenditure, and welfare of the people. (iii) Formal political organization => provided a discussion forum for the formal presentation of demands and increasing participation of indians in colonial government. => led to some of liberal reforms like voting powers, discussion on budget, and the non-radical reforms. Limitations: (i) slow pace of progress => believed in the power of protesting within constitutional bounds, ignorance let in British govt. (ii) Lacked the capacity in mass movements => kept the freedom struggle aloof from the masses. (iii) Political mendancy - the extremists dubbed the 'PFC' formula => petition, Prayer and Propaganda' of moderates, as ineffective. (iv) could not stand united with the extremists => issued stick policy of British to separate the congress => Great split of 1905. Therefore, the dissatisfaction with moderates gave rise to extremist phase of congress (1905-1919), which further paved the way for nationalist revolution.