The proclamation highlights several major issues against British rule. First, it condemns the British for annexations they carried out and treaties they had broken, stating that the British could not be trusted. Second, it attacks British land revenue settlements that had dispossessed landholders, both big and small. Third, it mentions how foreign commerce had driven artisans and weavers to ruin. Fourth, a widespread fear was expressed that the British were bent on destroying the caste and religions of Hindus and Muslims and converting them to Christianity. The proclamation accused the British of destroying a way of life that was familiar and cherished and described them as infidel and treacherous.

The proclamation addresses different social groups strategically. For pundits and fakirs, it appeals to them as guardians of the Hindoo and Mohammadan religions, urging them to join the holy war against the English who were enemies of both religions. For wealthy people and those connected to Mohammedan royal families, it calls it their bounden duty to stake their lives and property for public well-being. It also acknowledges how landholders were dispossessed and artisans and weavers were ruined by British policies.

The language of the proclamation is carefully formulated to appeal to various sentiments. It uses religious appeals by invoking holy war and calling the British infidel, urging people to save their faith. It appeals to honour, identity, and livelihood – describing the fight as for the greater public good. The proclamation uses emotional language like tyranny and oppression to describe British rule. Notably, it appeals to unity between Hindus and Muslims, harking back to the pre-British Hindu-Muslim past and glorifying their coexistence under the Mughal Empire. It even appeals to people to join under the standards of both Muhammad and Mahavir.