History Of Modern India Part 12

As students of history we should also know that the manner in which Indian history was taught in schools and colleges In those days also contributed to the growth of communalist feelings among the educated Hindus and Muslims. British historians and, following th&n, Indian historians described the medieval period of Indian history as the Muslim period. The rule of Turk, Afghan, and Mughal rulers was called Muslim rule, Even though the Muslim ma.s.ses- were as poor and oppressed by taxes as the Hindu ma.s.ses, and even though both were looked down upon by tbe rulers, n.o.bles, chiefs, and zamindars, whether Hindu or Muslim, with contempt and regarded as low creatures, yet these writers declared that all Muslims were rulers In medieval India and all non-Muslims were the ruled. They failed to bring out the fact that ancient and medieval politics in India, as politics everywhere else, were based on economic and political interests and not on religious considerations. Rulers as well as rebels used religious appeals as an outer colouring to disguise the play of material interests add ambitions. Moreover, the British and communal historians attacked the notion of a composite culture in India. Undoubtedly, there existed a diversity of cultures in India. But this diversity did not prevail on a religious basis. The people of a region as well as the upper and lower cla.s.ses within a region tended to have common cultural patterns. Yet the communal historians a.s.serted that there existed distinct Hindu and Muslim cultures in India.

Even though the cominunal view of politics and culture was unscientific and was largely the product of reactionary thinking and British tactics, it played upon the fears which

Unfortunately, while militant nationalism was a great step forward in every other respect, it was a step back in respect of the growth of national unity. The speeches and writings of some of the militant nationalists had a strong religious, and Hindu tinge, They emphasised ancient Indian culture to the exclusion of medieval Indian culture. They identified Indian culture and the Indian nation with the Hindu religion and Hindus. They tried to abandon elements of composite culture. For example, Tilak'B propagation of the Shivaji and Ganapati festivals, Aurobindo Ghose's semi-mystical concept of India as mother and nationalism as a religion, the terrorists. oaths before G.o.ddess Kali, and tfte initiation of the anti-part.i.tion agitation with dips in the Ganga could hardly appeal to the Muslims. In fact, such actions were against the spirit of their religion, and they could not be expected as Muslims to a.s.sociate with these and other similar activities. Nor could Muslims be expected to respond with full enthusiasm when they saw Shivaji or Pratap being hailed not merely for their historical roles but also as "national. leaders who fought against the foreigners*. By no definition could Akbar or Aurangzeb be declared a foreigner, unless being a Muslim was made the /ground for declaring one a foreigner. In reality, the struggle between Pratap and Akbar or Shivaji and Aurangzeb had to be viewed as a political struggle in its particular historical setting. To declare Akbar or Aurangzeb a foreigner* and Pratap or Shivaji a national. hero was to project into past history the communal outlook of 20th century India. This was not only bad history; but was also a blow to national unity.

This does not mean that militant nationalists were anti-Muslim or even wholly communal. Par from it. Most of them, including Tilak, favoured Hindu-Muslim' unity. To most of them, the motherland, or Bharatmata. was a modem notion, being in no way linked with religion. Most of them were modern in their political thinking and not backward looking. Economic boycott, their chief political weapon, was indeed very modern as also their political organisation. Even the revolutionary terrorists were in reality inspired by European revolutionary movements, for example, those of Ireland, Russia, and Italy, rather than by Kali or Bhawani cults. But, as pointed out earlier, there was a certain Hindu tinge in the political work and ideas of the militant nationalists. This 'proved to be particularly harmful as clever British and pro-British propagandists toolc advantage of the Hindu colouring to poison tbe minds of the Muslims. The result was that a large number of educated Muslims either remained aloof from the rising nationalist movement or became hostile to it, thus falling an easy prey to a separatist outlook. Even so, quite a large number of advanced Muslim intellectuals -such s the banister Abdul Rasul and Hasrat Mohani joined the Swadeshi movement and Muhammed Ali Jinnah became one of the leading younger leaders of the National Congress.

The economic backwardness of the country also contributed to the rise of communalism. Due to the lack of modem industrial development; unemployment was an acute problem in India, especially for the educated. There was in consequence an intense compet.i.tion for existing jobs. The farsighted Indians nagnosed the disease and worked for an economic and political system in which the country would develop economically and in which, therefore, employment would be plentiful. Howevef, many others thought of such short-sighted and short-term remedies as communal, provincial, or caste reservation in jobs. They aroused communal and religious and later caste and provincial pa.s.sions in an attempt to get a larger share of the existing, limited employment opportunities. To those looking desperately for employment such a narrow appeal had a certain immediate attraction. In this situation, Hindu and Muslim communal leaders, caste leaders, and the officials following the policy of 'Divide and Rule. were able to achieve some success. Many Hindus began to talk of Hindu nationalism and many Muslims of Muslim nationalism. The politically immature people failed to realise that their economic, educational, and cultural difficulties were the result of common subjection to foreign rule and of economic backwardness and that only through.common effort could they free their country, develop it economically, and thus solve the underlying common problems, such as unemployment.

The separatist and loyalist tendencies among a section of the educated Muslims and the big Muslim nawabs and landlords reached a climax in 1906 when the AU India Muslim League was founded under the leadership of the Aga Khan, the Nawab of Dacca, and Nawab Mohsin-ul-Mulk. The Muslim League supported the part.i.tion of Bengal and demanded special safeguards for the Muslims in government services. Later, with the help of Lord Minto, the Viceroy, it put forward and secured the acceptance of the demand for separate electorates. Thus, .while the National Congress was taking up anti-imperialist economic and political issues, the Muslim League and its reactionary leaders preached that the interests of the Muslims were different from those of the Hindus. The Muslim League.s political'activities were directed not against theJo reign rulers but against the Hindus and the National Congress. Hereafter, the League began to oppose every nationalist and democratic demand of the Congress. It thus played into the hands of the British who announced that they would protect the special interests. of the Muslims. The league soon became one of the main instruments with which the British hoped to fight the rising nationalist movement.

To increase its usefulness, the British also encouraged the Muslim League to approach the Muslim ma.s.ses and to a.s.sume their leadership. It is true that the nationalist movement was also dominated at this time by the eduoated town-dwellers, but, in its anti-imperialism, it was representing the interests of all Indiana-rich or poor, Hindus or Muslims. On the other hand, ihe Muslim League and its upper cla.s.s leaders had little, in common with the interests of the Muslim ma.s.ses, who were suffering as much as the Hindu ma.s.ses at the hands of foreign imperialism.

This basic weakness of the League came to be increasingly recognised by the patriotic Muslims. The educated Muslim young men were, in particular, attracted by radical nationalist ideas. The militantly nationalist Ahrar movement was founded at this time under the leadership of Maulana Mohammed Ali, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Hasan Imam, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, and Mazhar-ul-Haq, These young men disliked the loyalist politics of the Aligarh school and the big nawabs and zamindars. Moved by modern ideas of self-government, they advocated active partic.i.p.ation in the militant nationalist movement.

Similar nationalist sentiments were arising among a section of the traditional Muslim scholars led by the Deoband school. The most prominent of these scholars was the young Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who was educated at the famous A1 Azhar University at Cairo and who propagated his rationalist and nationalist ideas in his newspaper Al Nllat which he brought out in 1912 at the age of 24r Maulana Mohammed Ali, Azad and other young men preached a message of courage and fearlessness and said that there was no -conflict between Islam and nationalism.

In 1911 war broke out between the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) and Italy and during 1912 and 1913 Turkey had to light the Balkan powers. Tbe Turkish ruler claimed at this time to be also the Caliph or religious head of all Muslims; moreover, nearly all of the Muslim holy places wen situated within the Turkish Empire. A wave of sympathy for Turkey swept India. A medical mission, headed by Dr. M.A. Ansari, was sent to help Turkey. Since Britain's policy during the Balkan War and after was not sympathetic to Turkey, the pro-Turkey and pro-Caliph or Khi'afat sentiments tended to become anti-imperialist. In fact for several years-from 1912 to 1924^-the loyalists among the Muslim Leaguers were completely over-shadowed by nationalist young men.

Unfortunately, with the exception of a few per&ons like Azad who were rationalists in their thinking, most of the militant nationalists among Muslim young men also did not fully accept the modern secular approach to politics. The result was that the most important issue they took up was not political independence but protection of the holy places and of the Turkish Empire. Instead pf understanding and opposing the economic and political consequences of imperialism, they fought imperialism on -$s ground that it threatened the Caliph and the holy places. Even their sympathy for Turkey was on religious grounds. Their political appeal was to religious sentiments. Moreover, the heroes and myths and cultural traditions they appealed to belonged not to ancient or medieval Indian history but to West Asian history. It is true that this approach did not immediately clash with Indian nationalism. Rather, it made its adherents and supporters anti-imperialist and encouraged the nationalist trend among urban Muslims. But in the long run this approach too proved harmful, as it encouraged the habit of looking at political questions from a religious view point. In any case, such political activity did not pYomote among the Muslim ma.s.ses a modern, secu)ai*approach towards political and economic questions.

Even though no organised party of Hindu communalists was formed in this period, Hindu communal ideas also arose. Many Hindu writers and political workers echoed the ideas and programme of the Muslim League. They talked of Hindu nationalism. They declared that Muslima were foreigners in Tndia, They also carried on a regular agitation for Hindu. share of seats in legislatures and munic.i.p.al councils sind in government jobs.

THE NATIONALISTS AND THE: FIRST WORLD WAR.

In June 1914, the First World War broke out between Great Britain, France, Italy, Russia, j.a.pan and the United States of America on one side and Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey on the other. We have already seen in Chapter X that the industrialised capitalist countries of the world had begun to compete in, and struggle for, the possession of exclusive markets and colonies in the sccond half of the 19th century. By the beginning of the 20th century, this struggle had become very intense and bitter as the area of the world still available for conquest began to shrink. Those powers, such as Germany and Italy, which had arrived late on the world scene and had therefore not been able to grab as much as the early starters, such as Britain and France, now demanded a redivision of the colonies. They were willing to seek such a redivision by * force. Every major country of the world now began to prepare for a possible war to retain its possessions or to acquire fresh ones. The * opening years of the 20th century witnessed a 6erce armament race among the powers. The people of these countries got emotionally involved in the struggle for colonies as they were told by their rulers that the prestige, power, and fame of a nation depended on the extent of its colonial possessions. JineoisL newspaper served as the main vehicle for such propaganda. Thus, for example, the British felt proud of the fact that The sun never sets on the British Fmpire., while the Germans clamoured for "a place in the sun". Afraid of being politically and militarily isolated by its rivals, every county sought alliances with- other countries. Very soon, the powers got divided into hostile sets of alliances or power blocs. Finally, the war started in August 1914, World politics now began to change rapidly. In India the years of War marked the maturing of nationalism.

In the beginning, the Indian nationalist leaders, including Lokamanya Tilak, who had been released in June 1914, decided to support the war- elfoit of the Government. This was not done out of a sense of loyalty or sympathy with the British cause. As Jawaharlal Nehru lias painted out in his Autobiography.

There was little sympathy with the British in spile of loud professions of loyalty.

Moderate and Extremist alike learnt with satisfaction of German victories. Were was nc love for Germany of course, only the desire to sec oiu1 rulers humbled.

The nationalists adopted an actively pro Bi itisK att.i.tude mainly in the mistaken belief that grateful Britain won Id repay India.s loyalty with grat.i.tude and enable India to take a long step forward on the road to self-government. They did not realise fully that the different powers were lighting the First World War precisely to safeguard their existing colonies.

The Home Rule Leagues At the same time, many Indian leaders saw clearly that the government was not likely to give any real concessions unless popular pressure was brought to bear upon it. Hence, a real ma.s.s political movement was necessary. Some other factors were leading the nationalist movement in the same direction. The World War, involviag mutual struggle between the imperialist powers of Europe, destroyed the myth of the racial superiority of the western nations over the Asian peoples. Moreover the War led to increased misery among the poorer cla.s.ses of Indians, For them the War had meant heavy taxation and soaring pfic9 of the daily necessities of life. They were getting ready to join any militant movement of protest. Consequently, the war years were years of intense nationalist political agitation.

But this ma.s.s agitation coiild not be carried out under the leadership of the Indian National Congress, which had become, under Moderate leadership, a pa.s.sive and inert political organisation with no political *work among the people to its credit. Therefore, two Home Rule Leagues were started ill 1915-16, one under the leadership of Lokamanya Tilak and the other under ihe leadership of Annie Besant, and S. Subra- maniya Iyer. The two Home Rule Leagues carried out intense propaganda all over the country in favour of the demand for the grant of Home Rule or self-government to India after the War, ft was during this agitation that Tilak gave the popular slogan: "Home .Rule fe my birth-right, and I will have it. The t wo Leagues made rapid progress and the cry of Home Rule resounded throughout the length and breadth of India.

The war period also witnessed the growth of the revolutionary movement. The terrorist groups spread from Bengal and Maharashtra to the whole of northern India. Moreover, many Indians began to plan a violent rebellion to overthrow British rule. Indian revolutionaries in the United States of America and Canada had established the Ghadar (Rebellion) Party in 1913. While mcst of the members of the party were Sikh peasants and soldiers,their leaders were mostly educated Hindus or Muslims. The party bad active members in other countries such as Mexico, j.a.pan, China, Philippines, Malaya, Singapore, Thailand, Indochina and East and South Africa.

The Ghadar Party was pledged to wage revolutionary war against the British in India As soon as the First World War broke out in 1914, the Ghadarites decided to send arms and men to India to start an uprising with the help of soldiers and local revolutionaries. Several thousand men volunteered to go back to India. Millions of dollars were contributed to pay for their expenses. Many gave their life-long savings and sold their lands and other property. The Ghadarites also contacted Indian soldiers in the Far East, South-East Asia and all over India and persuaded several regiments to rebel. Finally, 21 February 1915 was fixed as the date for an armed revolt in the Punjab. Unfortunately, the authorities came to know of these plans and took immediate action. The rebellious regiments were disbanded and their leaders were either imprisoned or hanged. For example, 12 men of the 23rd Cavalry were executed. The leaders and members of the Ghadar Party m the Punjab were arrested on a ma.s.s scale and tried. 42 of them were hanged, 114 were transported for life, and 93 were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment. Many of them, after their release, founded the Kirti and Communist movements in the Punjab. Some of the prominent Ghadar leaders were: Baba Gurmukh Singh, Kartar Smgh Saraba, Sohan Singh Bhakna, Rahmat Ali Shah, Bhai Parmanand, and Mohammad Barkatullah.

Inspired by the Ghadar Party, 700 men of the 5th Light Infantry at Singapore revolted under the leadership of Jamadar Chisti Khan and Subedar Dundey Khan. They were crushed after a bitter battle in which many died. Thirty-seven others were publicly executed, while 41 were transported for life.

Other revolutionaries were active in India and abroad. In 1915, during an unsuccessful revolutionary attempt, Jatin Mukerjea popularly known as Bagha Jatin* gave his life fighting a battle ^with the police at Balasore. Rash Bihari Bose, Raja Mahendra Pratap, Lala Hardayat, Abdul Rahim, Maulana Obaidullah Sindhi, Champak Raman Pillai, Sardar Singh Rana, and Madam Cama were some of the prominent Indians who . carried on revolutionary activities and propaganda outside India.

Lucknow Session of the Congress (1916) The nationalists soon saw that disunity in their ranks was injuring their cause and that they must put up a united front before the govern- e growing nationalist feeling in the country and the urge for inity produced two historic developments at the Lucknow the Indian National Congress in 1916. Firstly, the two wings ngress were reunited. The old controversies had lost their nd the split in the Congress had not benefited either group, of all the rising tide of nationalism compelled the old leaders e back into the Congress Lokamanya Tilak and other militant s. The Lucknow Congress was the first united Congress f, at Lucknow, the Congress and the All India Muslim League old differences and put up common political demands before the it. While the War and the two Home Rule Leagues were new sentiment in the country and changing the character of ess, the Muslim League had also been undergoing gradual We have already noted earlier that the younger section of the Vluslims was turning to bolder nationalist politics. The War nessed further developmnents in that direction. Consequently, lie Government suppressed the Al-Hila! of Abul Kalam Azad omrade of Maulana Mohammed Ali. Tt also interned the Ali Maulanas Mohammed Ali and Shaukat Ali, Hasrat Mohani, Kalam Azad. The League reflected, at least partially, the lilitancy of its younger members. It gradually began to out- imited political outlook of the Aligarh school of thought and irer to the policies of the Congress.

ty between the Congress and the League was brought about ning of the Congress- League pact, known popularly as the Pact. An important role in bringing the two together was Lokamanya Tilak. The two organisations pa.s.sed the same i at their sessions, put forward a joint scheme of political reforms eparate electorates, and demanded that the British Government ke a declaration that it would confer self-government on India ' date. The Lucknow Pact marked an important step forward Muslim unity. Unfortunately, it was based on the notion of Dgether the educated Hindus and Muslim as separate ent.i.ties; ;ords without secularisation of their political outlook which ke them realise that in politics they had no separate interests or Muslims. The Lucknow Pact, therefore, left the way open ire resurgence of communalism in Indian politics, immediate effect of the developments at Lucknow was tremen- e unity between the moderate nationalists and the militant s and between the National Congress and the Muslim League reat political enthusiasm in the country. Even the British nt felt it necessary to placate the nationalists. Hitherto it had relied heavily on repression to quieten the nationalist agitation. Large numbers of radical nationalists and revolutionaries had been jailed or interned under the notorious Defence of India Act and other similar regulations. It now decided to appease nationalist opinion and announced on 20 August 1917 that its policy in India was "the gradual development of self-governing inst.i.tutions with a view to the progressive realisation of Responsible Government of India as an integral part of the British Empire." And in July 1918 the Montague-Chelmsford Reforms were announced. But Indian nationalism was not appeased. In fact, the Indian national movement was soon to enter its third and last phase- the era of struggle or the Gandhian Era.

EXERCISES.

1. How would you explain the growth of militant nationalism or Extremism in the beginning of the 20th ccntury?

2. In what way did the militant nationalists differ from the Moderates? How far were they successful in realising their political objectives?

3. Trace the course of the Swadeshi and Boycott movement.

4. Examine critically the important factors which were responsible for the growth of commnnalism in India in the early part of the 20th century. Bring out clearly the role of the British policy of Divide and Rule., the educational and economic backwardness of the Muslim upper and middle cla.s.ses, the teaching of Indian history, the militant nationalism and the economic backwardness of the country.

5. Write short notes on:

(a) Lokamanya Tilak, (b) Growth of revolutionary terrorism, (c) The Surat split, (d) The Morley-Minto Reforms, (e) Muslim League, (f) The growth of militant nationalism among the Muslims, (g) The First World War, (h) The Home Rule Leagues, (t) The Ghadar Party, (j) The Lucknow Pact.

Struggle for Swaraj A.

S we have seen in the previous chapter, a new political situation was maturing during the war years, 1914-18. Nationalism had gathered its forces and the nationalists were expecting major political gains after the war; and they were willing to fight back if their expectations were thwarted. The economic situation in the post-war years had taken a turn for the worse. There was first a rise in prices and then a depression in economic activity. Indian industries,which had prospered during the war because foreign imports of manufactured goods had ceased, now faced losses and closure. The Indian industrialists wanted protection of their industries through imposition of high customs duties and grant of government aid; they realised that a strong nationalist movement and an independent Indian Government alone could secure these. The workers, facing unemployment and high prices and living in great poverty, also turned actively towards the nationalist movement. Indian soldiers, returned from their triumphs in Africa, Asia and Europe, imparted some of their confidence and their knowledge of the wide world to the rural areas. The-peasantiy, groaning under deepening poverty and high taxation, was waiting for a lead. The urban, educated Indians faced increasing unemployment. Thus all sections of Indian society were suffering economic hardships.

The international situation was also favourable to the resurgence of nationalism. The First World War gave a tremendous impetus to nationalism all over Asia and Africa. In order to win popular support for their war effort, the Allied nations-Britain, the United States, France, Italy, and j.a.pan-promised a new era of democracy and national self-determination to all the peoples of Ihe world. But after their victory, they showed little willingness to end the colonial system. On the epntrary, at the Paris Peace Conference, and in the different peace settlements, all the war-time promises were forgotten and, in fact, betrayed. The ex-colonies of the defeated powers, Germany and Turkey, in Africa, West Asia, and East Asia were divided among the victorious powers. The people of Asia and Africa were suddenly plunged from high hopes into deep despair. Militant, disillusioned nationalism began to arise.

Another major consequence of the World War was the erosion of the White man.s prestige. The European powers had from the beginning of their imperialism utilised the notion of racial and cultural superiority to maintain their supremacy. But during the war, both sides carried on intense propaganda against each other, exposing the opponent.s brutal and uncivilised colonial record. Naturally, the people of the colonies tended to believe both sides and to lose their awe of the White mail.s superiority.

A major impetus to the national movements was given by the impact of the Russian Revolution. On 7 November 1917, the Bolshevik (Communist) Party, led by V.I- Lenin, overthrew the Czarist regime in Russia and declared the formation of the first socialist state, the Soviet Union, in the history of the world. The new Soviet regime electrified the colonial world by unilaterally renouncing its imperialist rights in China and other parts of Asia, by granting the right of self-determination to the former Czarist colonies in Asia, and by giving an equal status to the Asian nationalities within its border which had been oppressed as inferior and conquered people by the previous regime. The Russian Revolution brought home to the colonial people the important lesson that immense strength and energy resided in the common people. It was the common people who had not only overthrown the mighty Czarist government, the most despotic and one of the most militarily powerful regimes of the day, but also defended the consequent military intervention against the revolution by Britain, France) the United States, and j.a.pan. If the Russian Czar could be toppled, then no regime was invincible. If the unarmed peasants and workers could carry out a revolution against their domestic tyrants, then the people of the subject nations need not despair; they too could fight for their independence provided they were equally well united, organised, and determined to fight for freedom.

Thus the Russian Revolution gave people self-confidence and indicated to the leaders of the national movement that they should rely on the strength of the common people. Bipin Chandra Pal, for example, wrote ID 1919; Today after the downfall of German militarism, after the destruction of the autocracy of the Czar, there has grown up all over the world a new power, the power of the people determined to rescue their legitimate rights-the right to live freely and happily without being exploited and victimised by the wealthier and the so- called higher cla.s.ses.

The nationalist movement in India was also affcctcd by the fact that the rest of the Afro-Asian world was also convulsed by nationalist agitations after the war. Nationalism surged forward not only* in India but also in Turkey, the Arab Countries of Northern Africa and West Asia, Iran, Afghanistan, Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, Indo-China, the Philippines, China and Korea.

The Government, aware of the lising tide of nationalist and anti- government sentiments, once again decided to follow the policy of the 'carrot and the stick,. in other words, of concessions and repression.

The Montagu-Obelmsford Reforms In 1918, Edwin Montagu, the Secretary of State, and Lord Chelmsford, the Viceroy, produced their scheme of const.i.tutional reforms which led to the enactment of the Government of India Act of 1919. The Provincial Legislative Councils were enlarged and the majority of their members were to be elected. The provincial governments were given more powers under the system of Dyarchy. Under this system some subjects, such as finance and law and order, were called reserved. subjects and remained under the direct control of the Governor; others such as education, public health, and local self-government, were called transferred. subjects and were to be controlled by ministers responsible to the legislatures. This also meant that while some of the spending departments were transferred, the Governor retained complete control over the finances. The Governor could, moreover, overrule the ministers on any grounds that he considered special. At the centre, there were to be two houses of legislature, the lower house, the Legislative a.s.sembly, was to have 41 nominated members in a total strength of 144. The upper house, the Council of State, was to have 26 nominated and 34 elected members. The legislature had virtually no control over the Governor- General and his Executive Council. On the other hand, the Central Government had unrestricted control over the provincial governments. Moreover the right to vote was severely restricted. In 1920, the total number of voters was 909,874 for the lower house and 17,364 for the upper house.

Indian nationalists had, however, advanced far beyond such halting concessions. They were no longer willing to let an alien government decide their fitness for self-government, nor would they be satisfied with the shadow of political pover. The Indian National Congress met in a special session at Bombay in August 1918 under the presidentship of Hasan Imam to consider the reform proposals. It condemned them as "disappointing and unsatisfactory" and demanded effective self-government instead. Some of the veteran Congress leaders led by Surendranath Banerjea were in favour of accepting the government proposals and left the Congress at this time. They refused to attend the Bombay session, where they would have formed an insignificant minority, and founded the Indian Liberal Federation. They came to be known as Liberals and played a minor role in Indian politics hereafter.

The Rowlntt Act While trying to appease Indians, the Government of India was ready with repression. Throughout the war, repression of nationalists had continued. The terroiists and revolutionaries had been hunted down, hanged, and imprisoned. Many other nationalists such as Abul Kalam Azad had also been kept behind the bars. The Government now decided to arm itself with more far-reaching powers, which went against the accepted principles of rule of law, to be able to suppress those nationalists who would refuse to be satisfied with the official reforms. In March 1919 It pa.s.sed the Rriwlatt Act even though every single Indian member of the Central Legislative Council opposed it. Three of them, MoJiommed Ali Jinnah, Madan Mohan Malaviya and Mazhar-ul-Huq resigned their membership of the Council. This Act authorised the Government to imprison any person without trial and conviction in a court of law. The Act would thus also enable the Government to suspend the right of Habeas Corpus which had been the foundation of civil liberties in Britain. MAHATMA GANDHI a.s.sUMES LEADERSHIP

The Rowlatt Act came like a sudden blow. To the people of India, promised extension of democracy during the war, the government step appeared to be a cruel joke. It was like a hungry man being offered stones. Instead of democratic progress had come further restriction of civil liberties. People felt humiliated and were filled with anger. Unrest spread in the country and a powerful agitation against the Act arose. During this agitation, a new leader, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, took command of the nationalist movement. The third, and the decisive, phase of Indian nationalism now began.

tiandhiji and His Ideas M.K, Gandhi was born on 2 October 1869 at Porbandar in Gujarat. After getting his legal education in Britain, he went to South Africa to practise law. Imbued with a high sense of justice, be was revolted by the .injustice, discrimination, and degradation to which Indians liad to submit in the South African colonies. Indian labourers who had gone to South Africa, and the merchants who followed were denied the right to vote. They had to register and pay a poll-tax. They could not reside except in prescribed locations which were insanitary and congested. In some of the South African colonics, the Asians, as also the Africans, could not stay out of doorS after 9 p.m.; nor could they use public footpaths. Gandhi soon became the leader of the struggle against these conditions and during 1893-94 was engaged in a heroic though unequal struggle against the racist authorities of South Africa. It was during this long struggle lasting nearly two decades that lie evolved the technique of satyagraha based on truth and non-violence. The ideal satyagrahi was to be truthful and perfectly peaceful, but at the same time he would refuse to submit to what he considered wrong. He would accept suffering willingly in the course of struggle against the wrong-doer. This struggle was to be part of his love of truth. But even while resisting evil, he would love the evil-doer. Hatred would be alien to the nature of a true satyagrahi. He would, moreover, be utterly fearless. He would never bow down before evil whatever the consequence. In Gandhi.s eyes, non-violence was not a weapon of the weak and the cowardly. Only the strong and the brave could practise it. Even violence was preferable to cowardice. In a famous article in bis weekly journal, Young India, he wrote in 1920 that "Non-violence is the law of our species, as violence is the law of the brute", but that "where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence____ I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour, than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour." He once summed up his entire philosophy of life as follows: The only virtue I want to claim ft truth and non-violence. I lay no claim to super human powers: I want none.

Another important aspect of Gandhi.s outlook was that he would not separate thought and practice, belief and action. His truth and non-violence were meant for daily living and not merely for high sounding speeches and writings.

Gandhi returned to India in 1915 at the age of 46. He was keen to serve his country and his people. He first decided to study Indian conditions before deciding the field of his work. In 1916 he founded the Sabarmati Ashram at Ahmedabad where his friends and followers were to learn and_ practise the ideals of truth and non-violence.

Champaran Satyagraha (19X7) Gandhi.s first great experiment in Satyagraha came in 1917 in Champaran, a district in Bihar. The peasantry on the indigo plantations in the district was excessively oppressed by the European planters. Tliey were compelled to grow indigo on at least 3/20th of their land and to sell it at prices fixed by the planters. Similar conditions had prevailed earlier in Bengal, but as a result of a major uprising during 1859-61 the peasants there had won their freedom from the indigo planters.

Having heard of Gandhi.s campaigns in South Africa, several peasants of Champaran invited him to come and help them. Accompanied by Babu Rajendra Prasad, Mazhar-ul-Huq, JB. Kripalam, and Mahadev Desai, Gandhi reached Champaran in 1917 and began to conduct a detailed inquiry into the condition of the peasantry. The infuriated district officials ordered him to leave Champaran, but he defied the order and was willing to face trial and imprisonment, This forced the Government to cancel )ts earlier order and to appoint a committee of inquiry on which Gandhi served as a member. Ultimately, the disabilities from which the peasantry was suffering were reduced and Gandhi had won his first battle of civil disobedience in India. He had also had a glimpse into the naked poverty in which the peasants of India lived.

Ahmedabad Mill Strike In 1918, Mahatma Gandhi intervened in a dispute between the workers and millowners of Ahmedabad. He undertook a fast unto death to force a compromise. The millowuers relented on the fourth day and agreed to give the workers 35 per cent increase in wages. He also supported the peasants of Khaira in Gujarat in their struggle against the collection of land revenue when their crops had failed. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel left his lucrative practice at the Bar at this time to help Gandhi.

These experiences brought Gandhi in close contact with the ma.s.ses whose interests he actively expoused all his life. In fact he was the first Indian nationalist leader who identified his life and his manner of living v'ith the life of the common people. In time he became the symbol of poor India, nationalist India, and rebellious India, Three other causes were very dear to Gandhi.s heart. The first was Hindu-Muslim unity; the second, the fight against untouchability, and the third, the raising of the social status of women in the country. He once summed up his aims as follows: I shall work for an India in which the poorest shall feel that it is their country, in whose making they have an effective voice, an India in which there shall be no high cla.s.s and low cla.s.s of people, an India in which all communities shall live in perfect harmony. ..There can be no room in such an India for the curse of untouchability.. .Women will enioy the same rights as men.. .This is the India of my dreams.

Though a devout Hindu, Gandhi.s cultural and religious outlook was uniyersalist and not narrow. "Indian culture", he wrote, " is neither Hindu, Islamic, nor any other, wholly. It is a fusion of all." He wanted Indians to have deep roots in their own culture but at the same time to acquire the best that other world cultures had to offer. He said: I want the culture of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any. I refuse to live m other peoples. houses as an interloper, a beggar or a slave.

Satyagraha against the Rowlatt Act Along with other nationalists, Gandhi was also aroused by the Rowlatt Act. In February 1919, he founded the Satyagraha Sabha whose members took a pledge to disobey the Act and thus to court arrest and imprisonment. Here was a new method of struggle. The nationalist movement, whether under Moderate or Extremist leadership, had hitherto confined its struggle to agitation. Big meetings and demonstrations, resfusal to cooperate with the Government, boycott of foreign cloth and schools, or individual acts of terrorism were the only forms of political work known to the nationalists. Satyagraha immediately raised the movement to a new> higher level. Nationalists could now act in place of giving only verbal expression to their dissatisfaction and anger. The National Congress was now to become an organisation for political action.

It was, moreover, to rely increasingly on the political support of the poor. Gandhi asked the nationalist workers to go to the villages. That is where India lives, he said. He increasingly turned the the face of nationalism towards the common man and the symbol of this transformation was to be khadi, or hand-spun and handwoven cloth, which soon became the uniform of the nationalists. He spun daily to emphasise the dignity of labour and the value of self-reliance, India's salvation would come, he said, when the ma.s.ses were wakened from their sleep and became active in politics. And the people responded magnificently to Gandhi.s call.

March and April 1919 witnessed a remarkable political awakening in Tndia. There were hartals, strikes, and demonstrations. The slogans of Hindu-Muslim unity filled the air. The entire country was electrified. The Indian people were no longer willing to submit to the degradation of foreign rule.

Jallianwalla Bagh Ma.s.sacre The Government was determined to suppress the ma.s.s agitation. It repeatedly lathi-charged and fired upon unarmed demonstrators at Bombay, Ahmedabad, Calcutta, Delhi and other cities. Gandhiji gave a call for a mighty hartal on 6 April 1919. The people responded with unprecedented enthusiasm. The Government decided to meet the popular protest with repression, particularly in the Punjab. At this time was perpetrated one of the worst political crimes in modern histroy. An unarmed but large crowd had gathered on 13 April 1919 at Amritsar

(in the Punjab) in the Jallianwalla Bagh, to protest against the arrest of their popular leaders, Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlu and Dr. Satyapal. General Dyer, the military commander of Amritsar, decided to terrorise the people of Amritsar into complete submission. Jallianwala Bagh was a large open s.p.a.ce which was enclosed on three aides by buildings and had only one exit. He surrounded the Bagh (garden) with his army unit, closed the exist with his troops, and then ordered his men to shoot into the trapped crowd with rifles and machine-guns. They fired till their ammu- nition was exhausted. Thousands were killed and wounded, ''.After this" ma.s.sacre, martial law was proclaimed throughout the Punjab and the people were submitted to most uncivilised atrocities, J A liberal lawyer, Sivaswamy Aiyer, who had received a knightUtrnd^Trom the Government, wrote as follows on the Punjab atrocities: The wholesale slaughter of hundreds of unarmed men of Jallianwala Bagh without giving the crowd an opportunity to disperse, the indifferences of General Dyer to the condition of hundreds of people who were wounded in the Cling, the firing of machine'guns into crowds who had dispersed and taken to their heels, the flogging of men in public, the order compelling thousands of students to walk 16mi!cs a day for roll-calls, the arrest and detention of .SCO students and professors, the compelling of school children of 5 to 7 to attend on parade to salute the flag... the flogging of a marriage party, the censorship of mails, the closures of (he Badshahi mosque for six weeks, the arrest and detention of people without any substantial reasons., the flogging of six of the hipest boys in the Islamiah school simply because they happened to be schoi1. , s and to be big boys, the construction of an open cage for the confinement ui .irrested persons, the invention of novel punishments like the crawling order, the skipping order and others unknown to any system of law, civil or military, the handcuffing and roping together of persons and keeping them in open Jallianwalla Bagh (Courtesy: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library)

trucks for fifteen hours, the use of aeroplanes and Lewis guns and the latest paraphernalia of scientific warfare against unarmed citizens, the taking of hostages and the confiscation and destruction of property for the purposes of securing the attendance of absentees, the handcuffing of Hindus and Muhammadans in pairs with the object of demonstrating the consequences of Hindu-Muslim unity, the cutting off of electric and water supplies from Indians. houses, the removal of fans from Indian houses and giving them for use by Europeans, the commandeering of all vehicles owned by Indians and giving them to Europeans for use. ..These are some of the many incidents of the administration of martial law, which created a reign of terror in the Punjab and have shocked the public C.

A wave of horror ran through the country as the knowledge of the unjab happenings spread. People saw as if in a flash the ugliness and brutality that lay behind the facade of civilisation that imperialism and foreign rule professed. Popular shock was expressed by the great poet and humanist Rabindranath Tagore who renounced his knighthood in

declared: The time has conic when badges of honour make our shame glaring m their in-congruous context of humiliation, and, I, for my part, wish to stand, shorn of all special distinctions, by the side of my countrymen who, for their so-called insignificance, are liable to suffer degradation not fit for human beings.

THE KHILAFAT AND NON-COOPERATION MOVEMENT (1919-22).

A new stream came into Lhe nationalist movement with the KMafat movement. We have seen earlier that the younger generation of educated Muslims and a section of traditional divines and theologians had been growing more and more radical and nationalist. The ground for common political action by Hindus and Muslims had already been prepared by the Lucknow Pact. The nationalist agitation against the Rowlatt Act had touched all the Indian people alike and brought Hindns and Muslims together in political agitation.

For example, as if to declare before the world the principle of Hindu- Muslim unity in political action, Swami Shradhanand, a staunch Arya Samaj leader, was asked by the Muslims to preach from the pulpit of the Jama Masjid at Delhi while Dr. Kitchlu, a Muslim, was given the keys of the Golden Temple, the Sikh shrine at Amritsar. At Amritsar, such political unity had been brought about by governmental repression. Hindus and Muslims were handcuffed together, made to crawl together, and drink water together, when ordinarily a Hindu would not drink water from the hands of a Muslim. In this atmosphere, the nationalist trend among the Muslims took the form of the Khilafat agitation. The poli- tic ally-conscious Muslims were critical of the tfeatment meted out to the Ottoman (or Turkish) Empire by Britain and its allies who had part.i.tioned it and taken away Thrace from Turkey proper. This was m violation of the earlier pledge of the British Premier, Lloyd George, who had declared: "Nor are we fighting to deprive Turkey of the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in race." The Muslims also felt that the position of the Sultan of Turkey, who was also regarded by many as the Caliph or the religious head of the Muslims, should not be undermined. A Khilafat' Committee was soon formed under the leadership of the Ali brothers, Maulana Azad, Hakim Ajmal Khan, and Hasrat Mohani, and a country* wide agitation was organised.

The All-india Khilafat Conference held at Delhi in November 1919 decided to withdraw all cooperation from the Government if their demands were not met. The Muslim League, now under the leadership of nationalists, gave full support to the National Congress and its agitation on political issues. On their part, the Congress leaders, including Lokamanya Tilak and Mahatma Gandhi, viewed the Khilafat agitation as a golden opportunity for cementing Hindu-Muslim unity and bringing the Muslim ma.s.ses into the national movement. They realised that different sections of the people-Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians, capitalists and workers, peasants and artisans, women and youth, and tribes and peoples of different regions-would come into the national movement through the experience of fighting for their own different demands and seeing that the alien regime stood in opposition to them, Gandhi looked upon the Khilafat agitation as "an opportunity of uniting Hindus and Mohammedans as would not arise in a hundred years." Early in 1920 he declared that the Khilafat question overshadowed that of the const.i.tutional reforms and the Punjab wrongs and announced that he would lead a movement of non-cooperation if the terms of peace with Turkey did not satisfy the Indian Muslims. In fact, very soon Gandhi became one of the leaders of the Khilafat movement.

Meanwhile the Government had refused to annul the Rowlatt Act, make amends for the atrocities in the Punjab, or satisfy the nationalist urge for self-government. In June 1920, an ail-party conference met at Allahabad and approved a programme of boycott of schools, colleges, and law courts. The Khilafat Committee launched a non-coopera tion movement on 31 August 1920. Gandhi was the first to join i and ho returned the Kaiser-i-Hind Medal awarded to him earlier for services during the War.

The Congress met in spccial session in September 1920 at Calcutta. Only a few weeks earlier it had suffered a grievous loss-Lokamanya Tilak had pa.s.sed away on 1 August at the age or 64, But his place was soon taken by Gandhiji, C.R. Das, and Motilal Nehru. The Congress supported Gandhi.s plan for non-cooperation with the Government till the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs were removed and Swaraj established. The people were asked to boycott government educational inst.i.tutions, law courts, and legislatures and to practise hand-spinning and hand- weaving for producing khadi. This decision to defy in a most peaceful manner the Government and its laws was endorsed at the annual session of the Congress held at Nagpur in December 1920, "The British people will have to beware," declared Gandhi at Nagpur, "that if they do not

want to do justice, it will be the bounden duty of every Indian to destroy the Empire..* The Nagpur session also made changes in the const.i.tution of the Congress. Provincial Congress Committees were reorganised on the basis of linguistic areas. The Congress was now to be led by a Working Committee of 15 members, including the president and the secretaries. This would enable the Congress to function as a continuous political organisation and would provide it with the machinery for implementing its resolutions. Congress membership was thrown open to all men and women of the age of 21 or more o'n payment of 4 annas as annual subscription. In 1921 the age limit for membership was reduced to 18.

The Congress now changed its charactcr. It became the organiser and leader of the ma.s.ses ir their national struggle for freedom from foreign rule. There was a general feelings of exhilaration. Political freedom mrght come years later but the people had begun to shake off their slavish mentality. It was as if the~very air that India breathed had changed. The joy and the enthusiasm of those days was something special, for the sleeping giant was beginning to awake. Moreover, Hindus and Muslims were marching together shoulder to shoulder. At the same time, some of the older leaders now left the Congress. They did not like the new turn the national movement had taken. They still believed in the traditional methods of agitation and political work which were strictly confincd within the four walls of the law. They opposed the organisation of the ma.s.ses, hartals, strikes, satyagraha, breaking of laws, courting of imprisonment, and other forms of militant struggle. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, G.S. Khaparde, Bipin Chandra Pal, and Annie Besant were among the prominent leaders who left the Congress C.R. Du, N.C. Kelk&r, Salyamurthl and others at the time of Nagpur Congress in 1920. (Courtesy: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library)

during this rrK 1.

The years 1921 and 1922 were to witness an unprecedented movement of the Indian people. Thousands of students left government schools SiJBLIC MEETING AND.

BONFIRE or m&m OMIKS Wili like plus il the Maid&ti near Efptiinalona Millj * Opp. Elptiuiitone Road Station .

On SUNDAY the 9th Inst, at 6-30 P. M.

When the Rewhition of the X>rhl Khilala! Conference and nrtolher CnngratulfcLing Ait Brothers And others wiiE be paitefl> A lira requested lo attend in Swadeshi Clothes of Khadl. Those who h& a nol yet given away their foreign Clothes ara requastad lo sand them to their respective Ward Congress Committees lor inclusion in GREAT BONFIRE.

A Publicity poster published in the Bombay Chronicle of 6 October 1921 {Courtesy: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library) and colleges and joined national schools and colleges, ft was at this time that the Jamia Millia Islamia (National Muslim University) of Aligarh, the Bihar Yidyapith, the Kashi VidyajSith. and the Gujarat Vidyapith came into existence. The Jamia Millia later shifted to Delhi. Acharya Narendra Dev, Dr. Zakir Husain, and Lala Lajpat Rai were among the many distinguished teachers at these national colleges and universities. Hundreds of lawyers, including Chittaranjan Das, popU' larly known as Deshbandhu. Motilal Nehru, and Rajendra Prasad, gave up their legal practice. The Tilak Swarajya Fund was started to finance the non-cooperation movement and within six months over i crore of rupees were subscribed. Worpen showed great enthusiasm anO frely offered their jewellery. Huge bonfires of foreign cloth were organised all over the land. KJbadi soon became a symbol of freedom. In My 1921, the AH-India Khilafat Committee pa.s.sed a resolution declaring that no Muslim should serve in the British Indian army. Tn September the Ali brothers were arrested for sedition*. Immediately, Gandhiji gave a call for repet.i.tion of this resolution at hundreds of meetings. Fjfty members of the All India Congress Committee issued a similar declaration that no Indian should serve a government which degraded India socially, economically, and politically. Tne Congress Working Committee issued a similar statement.

The Congress now decided to raise the movement to a higher level. It permitted the Congress Committee of a province to start civil disobedience or disobedience of British laws, including non-payment of taxes, if in its opinion the people were ready for it.

The Government again took recourse to repression. The Congress and Khilafat volunteers, who had begun to drill together and thus unite Hindu and Muslim political workers at lower levels, were declared illegal. By the end of 1921 all important nationalist leaders, except Gandhi, were behind the bars along with 3,000 others. In November 1921 huge demonstrations greeted the Prince of Wales, heir to the British throne, during his tour of India. He had been asked by the Government to come to India to encourage loyalty among the people and the princes. Tn Bombay, the Government tried to suppress the demonstration, killing 53 persons and wounding about 400 more. The annual session of the Congress, meeting a* Ahmedabad in December 1921, pa.s.sed a resolution affirming "the fixed determination of the Congress to continue the programme of non-violent non-cooperation with greater vigour than hitherto __ till the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs ware redressed and Swarajya is established," The resolution urged all Indians, and in particular students, "qiiietly and without any demonstration to offer themselves for arrest by belonging to the volunteer organisations." All such Satyagrahis were to take a pledge to "remain non-violent in word and deed", to promote unity among Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Ptfrsis, Christiana, and Jews, and to practise swadeshi and wear only khadi. A Hindu volunteer was also to undertake to fight actively against untouchability. The resolution also called upon the people to orga'nise, whenever possible, individual or ma.s.s civil disobedience along non-violent lines.

The people now waited impatiently for the call for further struggle. The movement had, moreover, spread deep among the ma.s.ses. Thousands of peasants in U.P. and Bengal had responded to the call of non-coo pera-

tiotk In the Puiyab the Sikhs were leading a movement, known as the Akali movement, to remove corrupt mahanis from the Gurudwaras, their places of worship. In Malabar (Northern Kerala), the Moplafu, or Muslim peasants, created a powerful auti-za_mindar movement. The Viceroy wrote to the Secretary of State in February 1919 that "The lower cla.s.ses in the towns have been seriously affected by the non-cooperation movement....In certain areas the peasantry have been affected, particularly in pttfts of a.s.sam valley, United Provinces, Bihar and Orissa, and Bengal." On 1 February 1922, Mahatma Gandhi announced that he would start ma.s.s civil disobedience, including non-payment of taxes, unless within seven days the political prisoners were released and the press freed from government control.