modern india · the revolt of 1857 15 5. rise and growth of indian national movement 22 6. early...

Add : D-108, Sec-2, Noida (U.P.), Pin - 201 301Email id : [email protected]

Call : 09582948810, 09953007628, 0120-2440265

MODERNMODERNMODERNMODERNMODERNINDIAINDIAINDIAINDIAINDIA

CONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTS

1. Evolution of British Paramountcy over Princely States 3

2. British Colonialism in India 6

3. British Economic Policies and their Impact 11

4. The Revolt of 1857 15

5. Rise and Growth of Indian National Movement 22

6. Early Nationalists and Militant Nationalists 25

7. Partition of Bengal 28

8. Home Rule Leagues 31

9. Emergence of Gandhi 33

10. Non-cooperation Movement (1921 - 1922) 36

11. Militant Revolutionary Terrorism 40

12. Simon Commission 42

13. Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-34) 44

14. Quit India Movement 50

15. Indian National Army 53

16. Naval Mutiny of 1946 55

17. British Policy of Divide and Rule 57

18. Partition of India 58

19. Important Legislations 61

20. Regeneration, Reforms and Renaissance in India 65

21. Development of Education in British India 69

22. Trade Union Movement in India 71

23. Peasant Movements in Modern India 75

24. The States People's Movements 80

25. Rise and Growth of Left Wing within the Congress 84

��

3©Chronicle IAS Academy

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YGENERAL SURVEY

By 1855-56, the British Empire in India was firmlyestablished. Major portions of the country were underdirect British rule. In other areas, Indian rulers werecompletely dependent on the British. In short, theBritish had emerged as the paramount power in India.This British paramountcy was established essentiallyby two methods: (a) by outright annexation throughwars, and (b) by brining the Indian states within theSubsidiary System which often led to their annexationon one pretext or the other. Mysore and Sindh are thebest examples of outright annexation through wars.But it was the latter method which was frequentlyused by the British for establishing their paramountcy.

Under the 'system of Subsidiary Alliance', asevolved by Lord Wellesley, the Indian rulers paid forthe maintenance of British troops while the Britishwere in no way responsible for the administration,including maintenance of law and order, within theprotected state. The increased expenditure on accountof the maintenance of British troops was met by theIndian rulers by levying heavy taxes on the peasants.Assured by a sense of security, the rulers becameindifferent to the problems of the people which led tofinancial crises and breakdown of law and order.Whenever this happened in a state, the British werequick to use it as an excuse for annexing the state.Thus the Subsidiary System created conditions forsubsequent annexations.

The British also found other excuses forannexation. One such excuse was the application ofthe Doctrine of Lapse which was more frequentlyresorted to by Lord Dalhousie, though some othershad done it before him. According to this doctrine, ifan Indian king died without his own son to succeedhim, his state was to be annexed by the British. TheIndian tradition provided that if a king had no son,he could adopt his or his wife's near relation as his

EVEVEVEVEVOLOLOLOLOLUTION OF BRITISHUTION OF BRITISHUTION OF BRITISHUTION OF BRITISHUTION OF BRITISHPPPPPARAMOUNTARAMOUNTARAMOUNTARAMOUNTARAMOUNTCY OCY OCY OCY OCY OVERVERVERVERVER

PRINCELPRINCELPRINCELPRINCELPRINCELY STY STY STY STY STAAAAATESTESTESTESTES

son who became his successor. During Dalhousie'speriod, it so happened that many rulers of dependentIndian states died without leaving a male heir to thethrone. Dalhausie annexed Satara (1848), Jaitpur andSambalpur (1849), Bhagat (1850), Udaipur (1852),Nagpur (1853), and Jhansi (1854). Besides, the adoptedson of the Peshwa Nana Sahib was refused thepension which the Peshwa had been receiving.Similarly, after the death of the Nawab of theCarnatic, his relative was denied the pension. Thegrowing fears of the Indian rulers were furtheraggravated by the deposition of Wajid Ali Shah, thelast Nawab of Avadh, and its annexation on thecharge of mismanagement.

What was the essence of the Britishparamountcy?

The rapid strides with which British paramountcyhad progressed in India since 1757 invariably affectedthe destiny of the Indian states that had arisen on theruins of the Mughal Empire. Their relation with theBritish varied according to changing politicalconditions and personal views and ambitions of thedifferent Governor-Generals. Yet the conviction whichdeveloped in the late 18th century and continued upto the early 20th century that the governance of thewhole of India directly or indirectly by the Britishwas part of a preordained system which had aconsiderable influence in shaping British policytowards the Indian states. We can examine thisevolution of British paramountcy over princely statesin three broad phases. During the first phase, lastingfrom 1757 to 1813, the British followed the policy ofRing Fence. In the second phase, covering the periodfrom 1813 to 1858, its policy was known as the policyof Subordinate Isolation. The third phase, extendingfrom 1858 to 1947 witnessed the policy of SubordinateUnion.

11111

4 ©Chronicle IAS Academy

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

POLICY OF RING-FENCE (1757-1813)

What was it?

During this period, the British, as Lee-Warnersays, endeavoured as far as possible to live within aRing Fence, and beyond that they avoided intercoursewith the chiefs as the English Company was not yetstrong enough to interfere in the internal affairs ofthe Indian states. More specifically the EnglishCompany neither had the strength nor the resourcesto defeat the Indian states. It was in fact only one ofthe important powers in India; the Marathas, theNizams, the French, etc. being the other powers.

Warren Hastings, confronted with the task ofsafeguarding British territories against theencroachments of the Maratha and the militant rulersof Mysore, generally followed the policy of a Ring-Fence. The Pitt's India Act of 1784 even laid downthat the Home Government should not approve ofthe intervention of her officers in India in the internalaffairs of the Indian states. After the battle of Buxar,Avadh lay at the mercy of the British but they did notannex it. After the Rohilla war; Warren Hastingsconferred the conquered territories on the Nawab ofAvadh instead of retaining them; the First Ango-Marathaa war ended in the restoration of the statusquo by the Treaty of Salbai and the four Mysore warsbenefited the allies of the British (Marathas andNizam) more than the British themselves at least inthe short term.

Yet it cannot be denied that during this periodthe Company did intervene in the affairs of the Indianstates on a number of occasions. Warren Hastings,for instance, fought the First Martha War (1775-1782)and the Second Mysore War (1780-1784) without anyjustifiable reason. Similarly, Lord Cornwallis foughtthe Third Mysore War (1790-1792) and annexed halfof its territory. Lord Wellesley fought the FourthMysore War (1798-1799) and the Second Maratha War,and also compelled the rulers of Hyderabad andAvadh to sign the Subsidiary treaties with theCompany. Lord Minto not only concluded the Treatyof Amritsar with Ranjit Singh but also grantedprotection of the Cis-Sutlej states whose very existencewas being endangered by Ranjit Singh.

POLICY OF SUBORDINATE ISOLATION

(1813-58)

During this period of 45 years, the British EastIndia Company made all states subordinate to itself

by compelling their rulers to sign Subsidiary treatieswith it. The Indian states, without exception, wereprevailed upon to accept the Company as theparamount power in India. They were required togive either money or territory, so that the Companycould maintain a Subsidiary force either in theconcerned state or outside it for its protection. Theconcerned state could no longer appoint non-EnglishEuropeans in its service. It could not conduct anyforeign relations except through the Britishgovernment. In all its dispute with other states, it hadto accept British arbitration. In turn, the Companypromised the territorial integrity of the state. Inpractice, however, all the Indian states entering intosubsidiary alliance, and being dependent on theCompany for self-protection, began to suffer from allthe evils of 'dual government' like those which haddestroyed Bengal between 1765 and 1722. Regardingpitfalls of the Subsidiary system, Sir Thomas Munrorightly remarked that, it is the natural tendency torender the government of every country in which itexists weak and oppressive, to extinguish allhonourable spirits among the higher grades of society,to degrade and impoverish the whole people.

The nature and significance of this phase of theevolution of British paramountcy over princely statesis euphemistically brought out by Colonel Luard whenhe says, "This period is by far the most important inthe history of the relationship of the states to theBritish government, step by step, solely against itswill, the Company had been driven by inexorablefate to abandon its policy of Ring Fence and non-interference, and to pass through the system ofsubordinate alliance otherwise and generous policyof cooperative partnership which holds at the presentday.

POLICY OF SUBORDINATE UNION

(1858-1947)

The Revolt of 1857 made the British reverse theirpolicy towards the princely states. Prior to the Revolt,the British had made use of every opportunity toannex the Indian states, but after it they abandonedthe policy of annexation in favour of another policyknown as the policy of 'subordinate Union'. Duringthe Revolt, most of the native rulers had not onlyremained loyal to the British but had actively helpedthe latter in suppressing it. Their loyalty was nowrewarded with the announcement that their right toadopt heirs would be respected and the integrity of


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

their territories was guaranteed against futureannexation. As pointed out by Lord Canning in 1860- "It was long ago said by Sir John Malcolm… that ifwe could keep up a number of Native States withoutpolitical power, but as royal instruments, we shouldexist in India as long as our naval supremacy wasmaintained. Of the substantial truth of this opinion Ihave no doubt; and the recent events have made itmore deserving of our attention than ever".

Like many other changes in British India, the new

policy of 'Subordinate Union' was slowly andgradually evolved, partly by written declaration ofpolicy, but mainly by precedents and conventions.New policy was heralded by a definite pledge in theQueen's Proclamation (1858) that 'we here announceto the Native Princes of India that all treaties andengagements made with them or under the authorityof the Hon'ble East India Company are by us acceptedand will scrupulously maintained, and we look forthe like observance on their part'. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

GENERAL SURVEY

The British colonial rule in India is generallydivided into three stages. First stage (1757-1813)represents the mercantile phase. Second stage (1813-1860) represents the free trade phase and third stage(1860 onwards) represents the finance capital phase.During the mercantile phase the aim of all activitywas to accumulate wealth. In order to pursue afavourable trade, the British company startedaggressive policies in India. The government passedthe Regulating Act and the Pitt's Indian Act to gainmore and the direct control over the affairs of thecompany. The company officials transferred theirfortunes acquired in Indian to England. The financialbleeding of India started with the British gaininghegemony over Indian territories. New revenuesettlements were imposed upon the agrarian structure.They fought several wars, crushed many princelystates and brought them under the colonial authority.Soon the mercantile phase came to an end.

By the dawn of the 19th century, the Britishbecame an industrial power following IndustrialRevolution in that country. It was in need of rawmaterial to feed its industries. The emerging capitalistclass found the Company a stumbling block for itsmarket. The Company's monopoly in India wasbitterly attacked by the British industrial community.Thus, the need for raw material and markets for theBritish manufactured goods resulted in theformulation of free trade policy towards India. Thespecial feature of this policy was that it was a oneway traffic wherein British goods entered Indiavirtually free while Indian products entering Britainfaced high tariffs. The protective policy towardsBritish trade was thoroughly guarded, leaving India-made products to face stiff competition.

The impact of such policy on Indian economywas ruinous. The traditional handicraft and cottageindustry was disturbed, and faced virtual extinction.The displaced workers of this industry had no othermeans to survive except coming to the agricultural

BRITISH COLONIALISMIN INDIA

sector. This policy, which started in 1813, practicallycontinued till the very end of the colonial rule in mid-20th century though formally it was renounced in1860. Having accumulated capital through suchvicious polices, England by 1850's faced a differentsituation, where it could not invest its capital on itssoil. It also had to compete with other industrialpowers in Europe and America in trade andcommerce. Finding India as a safe haven for its capitalinvestment, it soon started establishing modernindustries in India: its industrial policy only aimed atcommercializing India. Basic industries werecompletely neglected. It tried to destroy the chancesof Indian entrepreneurs who made attempts tostart modern industries. By this large-scale buildingof infrastructure through massive injection ofcapital, the British enabled the growth of Britisheconomy. To facilitate smooth conduct of exploitation,the colonial power brought in several changes inIndian society and economy. Its judicial policy aimedat legitimizing its misdeeds, its social policy aimedat brining a human face to its exploitation, whileits educational policy was designed to providecheap and loyal agents for promoting colonialinterests.

DETAILED ANALYSIS

Stages of Colonialism and Changes inAdministrative Structure and Policies

What is colonialism?

Colonialism generally means lust for territory,meaning expansion of a state's power beyondits border. It is related to a relationship in onearea and its people are subordinate to another areaand its government. Ever since the Britishacquired Indian territory its policies were framedwithin this context. The nature of its relationship withIndia changed according to the colonial interests.

22222


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Mercantilist Stage

The Mecantilism envisages that precious metalsconstituted national wealth and thus encouragemaximum exports and minimum imports, the balancebeing settled by the flow of gold. With this motivethe British fought crucial mercantile wars andestablished their monopoly over India. But soon theprevailing economic opinion had swung against thenotion that a mere accumulation of wealthtantamount to increasing national interest. The aimof all activity now was the increase of consumablegoods. The objectives of a proper government shouldbe to stimulate the production of goods and servicesnot merely to stock the exchequer with gold and silver.The changing industrial character of the British in the18th century necessitated the imports of raw materialin addition to the original imports such as spices, sugarand tobacco. Thus the supposed rule of the colony ofIndia was to specialize in the manufacture of rawmaterials and other goods that would not competewith the mother country. Aggression becamenecessary for the pursuit of trade. The governmentapproved the company in India to combine trade withwarfare, fortifications, military production andpolitical government.

The result was that the colonial power completedits hegemony over India. The establishment of itssupremacy was followed by its plundering of India.The dual government in Bengal resulted in unashamedplunder. Drain of wealth from India started in theform of gifts. It became clear that the old Indianhandicraft industries were redundant. The officialmind proceeded towards a policy of converting Indiainto a strong and stable supplier of raw materialgoods, which resulted in forced cultivation and theexploitation of the artisans.

The stage of free trade

The chief charsteristic of free trade policy wasthe unrestricted entry of British goods in which Indianhandicrafts were exposed to the fierce and unequalcompetition of the machine-made goods of Britain andfaced extinction. It prevented direct trade betweenIndian and European or other foreign countries bythe operation of Navigation Acts.

Throughout of the Napoleanic wars Britishpoliticians aimed at political domination in theadjoining French colonial possession throughout theworld. Viewed in this context India was of crucial

importance. On the other hand the pressure fromBritish industries against the company monopoly wasever increasing following the increase in theCompany's political functions, the British governmentfound it necessary to exercise a more positive controlover the affairs of the Company. The result was thepassing of the Charter Acts of 1813 and 1833. Withthis, the company's monopoly trade with India ended.The new stage of exploitation of India began.

Having established a tariff system in Indiafavourable to Britain, it started crushing indigenousindustry to the point of no return. Simultaneouslywith the drastic reduction of import duties on Britishimports in India, the British tariff was made stifferfor Indian commodities entering Britain. For instancein 1824 the Indian calicoes and muslins enteringBritain were subjected to 67.5 per cent and 37.5 percent duties. In fact protection was demanded andgiven to the prosperous and powerful shipbuildersagainst the relatively young Indian shipbuildingindustry.

Even when there was no competition betweenIndian and British goods, Indian goods were treatedin Britain as if they came from an independentcountry. Indian exports of sugar were particularlyaffected. In addition to the dutiable goods, there wereitems like silk exports and imports, which were totallyprohibited in Britain until 1824, and even afterwardsthey were charged 25 to 30 per cent ad valorem duties.

To facilitate smooth functioining of exploitation,several changes were contemplated. The villageautonomy was disturbed, police system and judiciarysystem were overhauled and new methods wereintroduced. From 1853 recruitment to civil serviceswas made through competitive examination.However, in almost all branches of the government,Indians were excluded from being appointed to higherposts. To secure a supply of clerks and subordinateagents English education was introduced.

The Third Stage

By the middle of 19th century, the British ruleover India had firmly established and the Crownovertook the sovereign rights of the Company in 1858.This period coincided with the maturity of Englandas the workshop of the world. Queen Victoria reignsaw Britain accumulate vast quantities of capital tosuch an extent that not all of it could be profitablyutilized at home. And India, with its amazing


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

potentialities of raw material, cheap labour and soforth, ruled benevolently but firmly by the British,seemed an obvious outlet for the British surpluscapital.

It was also the period which saw the rapidspread of the Industrial revolution to other parts ofthe world. When the exports of British capital goodsfell owing to the industrialization of the United Statesand the Western European countries, investment inBritish industries was diverted to home industry andthe public sector. When this phase was over in about1879, Britain was once again in troubled waters. Theperiod from 1873 witnessed a favourable shift interms of trade, a fall in the interest rate, equity prices,profit margins and commodity prices. Thus the easierflow of savings tended to seek safer avenues ofinvestment even at somewhat reduced rate ofinterest. In the meantime, both American andEuropean financial groups had been showing theircapacity to compete with the British in foreigncountries and hence the British investors werelooking towards the Empire for investmentopportunities. The availability of employmentopportunities, particularly for middle class youth,was the greatest attraction of the Indian empire.

India had a stable and secure administrativestructure and millions of acres of fertile anduncultivated land ready to produce all the food andraw material requirements of the mother country.Considering all this an observer said in 1857 thatIndia is of infinitely more importance to Great Britainthan all its other possessions of the Globe.

During the 1870's British industry beganincreasingly to feel the pressure of internationalcompetition from the rapidly industrializing nations.Whereby, in the succeeding decades Britain ceased tobe the prime industrial nation. This decliningimportance in relation to other countries gave rise totwo phenomena. One was the mounting vigour aimedat preserving the British market for local industriesthrough retaliatory tariffs. The second phenomena wasthe rise in popularity of the so called 'NewImperialism' or 'financial capitalism'.

The result was the large scale development ofinfrastructure through massive injection of Britishcapital as well as heavy public investment.Government intervened actively to enable the Indianeconomy to develop its resources fully so that Indiacould play a significant role in the Britisheconomy.

The railways were built primarily for themovement of troops and for the dumping of Britishgoods in every corner of India. Communicationnetwork was introduced for the purposes ofupholding the British bayonet. Irrigation was givendue attention for the commercialization of agriculture.Educational system was developed to ensure cheapand loyal agents. Foreign capital found employmentin all major fields like government loans, railways,shipping industries, foreign trade, banking, miningand plantations. However it should be noted that theBritish capital investment in India was in reality firstraised from India from the plunder of the Indianpeople, and then written down as debt from the Indianpeople to Britain, on which they had to pay interestsand dividends.

The finance capital of Britain did not permitindigineous capitalists to come up. Thediscouragement to Indian industrial development was,in fact, confined to administrative action or inaction,but was supplemented by positive tariff policy. Itshould be remembered that when the very weakcotton industry began to develop in 1860's and 1870's,agitation was immediately raised in England for theabolition of revenue import duties which operatedalso on cotton goods. Thus, under British rule, Indiaunderwent a commercial transformation and not anindustrial revolution. In a way, Indian capitalismsuffered from infantile paralysis and thisdistortion in the growth of capitalism can be felt eventill today.

On the administrative side the managing agencysystem throttled the advancement of Indian industry.It was one of the main weapons for maintaining Britishcontrol over Indian industrial development. Underthis system a relatively small number of managingagency firms promoted, controlled and to a largeextent financed the various industrial companies andenterprises, governed their operations and output andmarketed their products. The cream of the profitspassed, not to the shareholders, but to the managingagency.

Though these policies that aimed at developingIndia and linking its economy with that of Britain,the British hoped to reduce its own economicdependence on other countries. Thus colonial policiestrimmed its sail according to the shifting breezes andnecessities of British capitalism.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

REVENUE POLICY

Permanent Settlement

Anxious to secure a regular payment of landrevenue, the British decided to 'settle' the payment ofthe government demand with certain intermediarieswho would hold themselves responsible for paymentof the revenue. After prolonged deliberations'permanent settlement' was introduced by LordCornwallis in Bengal and Bihar in 1793. Under thissystem, zamindars were given full rights of ownershipover their estates, who were till now only revenuefarmers. Lord Minto and Lord Wellesley, thesuccessors of Lord Cornwallis, were great believersin large estates property rights, fixed revenues andfixed taxation; consequently they tried to introducepermanent settlement in the newly acquired regionsof northern India. This happened in Orissa as well ascertain parts of Madras Presidency in the first twodecades of the 19th century.

Purpose and Impact: The important purpose ofthis policy was to create a new class of landlordsbased on the English model as the social buttress ofEnglish rule. It was felt that with the small number ofEnglish, holding down a vast population, it wasabsolutely essential to establish a social basis for theirpower through the creation of a new class whoseinterests, through receiving a subsidiary share in thespoils (One-eleventh) would be bound up with themaintenance of English rule. This contention wasproved several times and the best example would bethe 1857 revolt during which the landed aristocracystood finely on the side of the British, which madeLord Canning to call zamindars as 'breakwaters' inthe storm. Its impact on peasant cultivator wasdisastrous. Zamindars instead of living in their estatespreferred to live in luxury in cities and became sortof distant suction pumps; literally sucking the bloodof the peasants. As the income from land decreaseddue to high rents and taxes and increase in population,the gap between the zamindar and tiller began togrow wide. Thus, the greatest amount of agrarianunrest can be found in zamindar areas.

What was Ryotwari System

In Madras Presidency, when Thomas Munro wasthe Governor, the decision was taken to introduce the'Ryotwari system', as permanent settlement would notbe possible in the absence of zamindars in these

regions. Moreover, by this time (1825) the governmenthad a well developed machinery of an administrationand felt that it was capable of collecting revenuedirectly from the cultivator, thus avoiding financiallosses which could occur under permanent settlement.Land revenue was assessed according to the fertilityof the land and the net income from land during theprevious 20 non-famine years. Under this system,there was a provision for periodical revision of landrevenue once in 30 years. The gift of property rightswas made to the cultivator in these areas, which infact was a far better arrangement from the point ofview of the peasantry than the Permanent Settlement.But the rigidity of crop production in India due to thevagaries of monsoons soon made Ryotwari ensurethe bane of Indian agriculture. A large number offarmers grew indebted and land came to be grabbedby moneylenders who later established themselves asthe new landed-oligarch.

Other Systems

In the united provinces of Agra and Awadh andalso in Punjab, a new method of land revenue systemwas introduced know as 'Mahalwari' or joint villagesystem. Under this system, the assessment was madeon the principle of ownership farming. But all theowners of land in the 'Mahal' or village were madejointly responsible for payment of land revenue. Thehead of each village had a special responsibility forcollecting land revenue. Under the Mahalwari system,provision was made for periodical revision of landrevenue.

In the Central provinces, where the British tookover the administration from the rulers, the landrevenue system known as 'Malguzari System' wasintroduced. Under this system, the 'Malguzars', whowere originally village officers, were given proprietaryrights on land. Here too the government retained theright of making periodical revision of land revenue.

All these systems departed fundamentally fromthe traditional land systems of the country. All overthe country, land was now made saleable,mortgageable and alienable. In fact, the entirestructure of rural society began to break up.

JUDICIAL POLICY

In the early days of its rule, the Company wassatisfied with the provision of courts of the trial ofcases of the Europeans, and early in the 18th century.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Mayors' courts were established in the threePresidency towns, with the right of appeal to the localgovernment in certain cases. In the King-in-Council,at the time of the transfer of Diwani to the Company,Clive set up what was known as the 'Dual system'.Under Warren Hastings, Collector was placed incharge of the local civil and criminal courts. Abovethese courts were the Sadr Diwani Adalat (for civilcases) and Sadr Nizamat Adalat (for criminal cases).The Regulating Act of 1773 brought into existence theSupreme Court of Calcutta which administeredEnglish law to the confusion of Indian litigants. UnderCornwallis, significant changes were made. Thesewere the separation of judicial and executive powersin the district courts and the introduction of the Ruleof Law. It was in the mid-19th century that the penaland criminal codes were completed largely due tothe efforts of Lord Macaulay. The Indian High CourtsAct was passed in 1861. In 1865, High Courts wereestablished at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay and, ashort time later, at Allahabad to replace the SadrCourts of Diwani and Nizamat.

However, the development of judiciary was inline with other changes in the colonial administration.When Lord Ripon tried to remedy the evil byintroducing the Ilbert Bill, there was a lot of oppositionfrom the European community and the same couldnot be passed in the original form. The judiciary wasused only to legitimize the exploitation of the colonial

rulers and their allies, viz. zamindars, moneylendersand civil servants.

SOCIAL POLICY

After establishing complete control over Indianterritories and taking firm steps to encourage trade,Britain found it necessary to evolve a social policy toadminister the country in a way favourable both forthe country and the British Government. In thisdirection, it took several steps to ameliorate the sociallife of the people. The important among them are theabolition of 'Sati' (1829), prohibition of infanticide(1795 and 1802), enabling widows to get married bylaw (the Hindu widows' Remarriage Act of 1856),revival of the ancient heritage of India and evenencouraging the expression of the people's opinion.

These reformatory activities were, however, carriedas long as they did not come into conflict withcommercial interests and profit motives, reformmovement following the 1857 revolt. In fact, it startedmaking alliance with the conservative classes thereafter.Thus, its progressive outlook and activities wereoccasioned because of the fact that the colonial powerfrom the 19th century onwards propagated that it tookon itself the responsibilities of bringing up the 'Whiteman's burden'. But it can be said that whatever benefitsthat Indian society got from the British was because ofthe economics exploitation of the day associated withsome fair principles in their home country. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

GENERAL SURVEY

Before the advent of the British in India, especiallyduring the 17th and 18th centuries, India was theindustrial workshop of the world in a pre-capitalistsense. It was endowed with fertile soil and aprosperous agriculture; a good geographical locationand climate suitable for production, possessingmineral resources. Centres in Western India, Bengaland the Coromandal Coast had built up extensiveinternational trading links, financed manufacturingin the interior, engaged in ship building and evendeveloped sophisticated forms of banking andexchange. Such a prosperous India turned into adumping house of finished goods from Britain andexporter of raw materials in the wake of crude andcruel imperialistic policies of British colonial rule.

A Bottleneck: The economic policies of thecolonial power proved to be the chief bottleneck inthe development of the Indian economy. The Britishrule resulted in the drastic changes in the system ofland tenure and land ownership. In thecommercialization of agriculture, in rural indebted-ness, in growth of modern industry (though lopsided)and rise of capitalist class, the land revenue systemintroduced by the British caused a radical change inproperty relations in land. A new proprietary class,consisting mainly of businessmen, came on the scene.They looked up on zamindari as an income yieldingasset. The main motive of the British behind this policywas to stabilize and increase its source of revenueand to create a loyal class of landlords in its colonyto assist in its shameless and ruthless plunder ofIndian economy. The impact was disastrous. Thecultivators, unable to withstand the burden of rentand taxes soon turned into tenants-at-will.

Commercialisation: To feed its industries, theBritish transformed the self-sufficient Indianagriculture into a commercial enterprise. Thistransformation, though ending isolation of the villagesocial and economic life, proved disastrous as itresulted in the decrease of food grain production,unprecedented rents and compound interest rates

BRITISH ECONOMICPOLICIES ANDTHEIR IMPACT

coupled with natural calamites. It forced the peasantsinto the hands of money lenders. The legal protectionunder British law gave a further boost to the usurerto squeeze the cultivator of his meagre income.Neither the government's credit policy nor the debtlegislations helped the indebted peasants to escapeform the clutches of the moneylenders. The new landrelations, rural indebtedness and the destruction oftraditional handicraft and cottage industry by theBritish to save its own industry resulted in the growthof agriculture labour as there was no other means tosurvive. This in turn resulted in over-pressure onagriculture and during famines, this trend playedhavoc with millions of lives.

Drain of Wealth: Whatever was accumulated bythe British in India throughout their stay wastransported to their mother country, this type ofexploitation is popularly known as 'drain of wealth'.This was in the shape of home remittances, gifts,gratitude's etc. If this was spent in India, it wouldhave immensely benefited the Indian masses. Theexchange policy monetized the Indian economy andfacilitated easy transactions for the British financiers.It undermined the peasants' natural economy anddestroyed the traditional economic ties. Its industrialpolicy aimed at crushing the growth of modernindustries in India. However, despite the hostility ofthe British, modest beginnings were made in thissphere. The infant capitalist class had to wage aconstant struggle against British to survive.

During the various stages of colonialism, the onlymotive behind the British policies was to plunder asmuch as they could, to which Karl Marx referred asa bleeding process with a vengeance. Not even a singleaspect of Indian economy went untouched nor leftunexploited. Thus, its agriculture became commercial;rural indebtedness grew by leaps and bounds; theworld- famous handicrafts industry was destroyed;following the ruin of artisans and craftsmen,agricultural labour swelled; the country's richness wasdrained; the infant Indian industry was strangled; therise of capitalist class curbed and famine-conditionswere aggravated putting millions to death.

33333


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Agrarian Changes

In pre-colonial India, the zamindars were onlytax farmers and could not extract the rent as matterof course through the ordinary legal channels. Thepeasants had hereditary and customary rights overland cultivation. However, these relationshipschanged radically with the advent of the British. TheBritish decision to recognize the concept of individualownership aimed at creating an enterprising and loyalclass of landlords. Whether in the case of PermanentSettlement of Bengal in 1793, or the Ryotwari systemthat came into force in Madras, Bombay and thePunjab some decades later, the underlying principlewas the idea of individual ownership. Land becamethe property of the individual. The feudal structureturned into semi feudal.

This policy paid rich dividends to the British inform of increased and stabilized revenues and a loyallanded aristocracy, but posed sharply the landlord-peasant problem. While the Ryotwari peasants facedexorbitant rates of revenue, the zamindari peasantsuffered unprecedented oppression. Between 1800 and1810, rents nearly doubled. Raja Ram Mohan Roy,himself a Bengal zamindar, admitted that theconditions of cultivators had not improved althoughthe income of the proprietors had increased. Thegovernment conferred on the zamindras powers toconfiscate the property and arrest the cultivator,leaving him no other means of redress against theillegal or unjust confiscation or arrest. The civil courtscould do little because the settlement was made withno previous survey, on record of rights and withouteven a defined method of assessment. The zamindars'domination became an accepted fact to such an extentthat the tenants who, in theory had substantialoccupancy rights became tenants at will.

The burden of revenue led them into the firmgrip of the moneylender and also towards cash cropcultivation which had disastrous consequences. Thepauperization and appalling condition of thepeasantry were echoed in Lord Cornwallis statement,when he said: 'I may safely assert that one third ofthe Company's territory in Hindustan is now a jungleinhabited only by wild beasts, which once wasbustling with cultivators'.

How was Agriculture Commercialized?

In pre-British times, Indian agriculture had beencharacterized by self-sufficiency, geared mainly toproduce food to meet the requirements of village andlimited quantity of raw cotton and jute for localhandlooms. However, conditions created by Britishrule encouraged a slow transition towards commercial

agriculture. The opening of the Suez Canal in 1869shortened the sea-route between India and Englandby over 3000 miles. By linking India with theinternational market where industrialization hadcreated a steady demand for raw materials, byimproving the mode of transportation, mainlyrailways, and by providing the necessary expertisefor the improved cultivation of such crops, the Britishgave a sufficiently strong stimulus for the growth ofsuch crops as cotton, jute tobacco, sugarcane, indigo,tea, coffee and poppy on a commercial basis. If theBritish encouraged commercialization for rawmaterials and food grains, the Indian peasantsproduced cash crops to pay his rents, interests andland revenue in cash.

Was it beneficial to India?

At least one positive aspect developed from thischange. An active trade in agricultural produceemerged in the country. Now it was no longernecessary for any village or even a whole region to beself-sufficient in food grains and other necessities oflife. The isolation and self sufficiency of the villageswere now broken.

What were its negative impacts?

The disastrous consequences that thecommercialized agricultural had were numerous. Thepeasants had to depend upon the vagaries of theinternational prices situation. Bombay's cotton forexample after a spectacular increase earlier,experienced a sudden fall in the prices level in thelate 1860s owing to the unsettled conditions in theUSA.

Despite enormous increase in the foreign demandfor Indian agricultural produce, the Indian peasantscould not develop his agriculture due to lack ofresources for technological improvements. The peasantmet the new situation not so much by the extensionof the area under cultivation, not by increasingproductivity of land per acre but by substitution ofcommercial crops food grains, fodder, and other cropswhich proved disastrous and resulted in occurrenceof a series of famines. The example of poppy seedcultivation will serve as a clear testimony to the blatantcolonial attitude towards the Indian farmer and hisfood.

When the Crown assumed full control of Indiathe opium revenue, next to that from land and salt,was the largest source of income to the Indiantreasury, aggregating something over one tenth of itstotal income. The lands where opium was cultivatedwere among the best in Indian dominions. The


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

diversion of fertile land for poppy caused shortage offood grains and indirectly contributed to famineconditions. British statement, while defending thestand of the government of India with regards to theIndo-Chinese opium trade, argued that one of thegreat evils of China was over population and if opiumwas not imported from India, the Chinese wouldcultivate it in place of cereals and other food andthus deprive China of some of her fertile land forcereals.

DRAIN OF WEALTH

This from of exploitation was a peculiar featureof British colonial rule. In this sphere, major share ofwealth earned by the British in India through variousmeans was exported to England, depriving India ofits profits. This accounted for home charge which weredue from India to England on account of interest ondebt, charges for civil administration, militaryadministration, costs of army training, transport andcampaigns outside India, besides charge on Indianfinance, stores, guaranteed railways and irrigationworks.

The plunder of this nature began from Bengalwhen British acquired Diwani rights. The profits madefrom duty free inland trade and the surplus fromDiwani revenues were used to purchase Indian goodsfor export purpose. These purchases were called'investments'. This type of income accounted for nearly6 million pounds between 1758 and 1765, which infact was more than four times the total land revenuecollection of the Nawab of Bengal in 1765.

In addition to these extracts, there were othercharges of the army such as rewards, pensions andgratitudes which had to be paid every year. It is saidthat the pensions payable to the retired militaryofficers amounted to almost half the salt tax gatheredfrom the whole of India. The other cause of drain wasthe exchange rules fixed by the British governmentfor India. Through this, India lost a lot of money.Large portion of the salaries received by the Britishofficers in India was also sent by them out of India.There were also European and English traders,capitalists, planters, ship-owners, gold-miners, etc.who remitted every year huge amounts. WilliamDigby calculated the total drain up to the end of 19thcentury and put it at 60,080 million pounds. Theburden of home remittances became much moreintensified in the 20th century absorbing even largerquantities of the productive resources of Indianpeople. In fact, the British capital invested in Indiawas in reality first raised in India by the plunder ofthe Indian people.

There were loud protests against this colossaldrain of wealth from India. It took a concrete shapein the writing of Dadabhai Naoroji, who led a bitterattack against the drain of wealth.

EXCHANGE SYSTEM

The long lasting result of colonial rule was thestructural change brought about in the exchangesystem. The deep-going structural changes in the mainsectors of Indian economy during the period ofdomination of industrial capital was contemplated bynew features in the exchange system. The abolition ofthe East India Company's trade monopoly and theincrease in imports of British goods compelled thecolonialists to pay serious attention to the monetaryand credit system in India.

In the pre-colonial period, as well as in the timesof the EIC, the country had no unified monetarysystem. A large number of silver and gold coins ofvarious values were in circulation. Even the value ofthe silver rupee was not the same in different parts ofthe country. At the time of trade - in other words,plunder - this monetary chaos was used to get moregoods out of the country to enrich the merchants,traders, and black marketers. The industrializationhowever needed a single united monetary system.The exchange rate was all the more important for itspromotion since the rupees earned from the sale ofgoods in India had to be changed into pound sterling.

New standards

By the two Acts of 1818 and 1835, India was puton the silver standard. The silver rupee of a set weightand silver content was proclaimed the basic monetaryunit for the whole country. This tended to stabilizethe fiscal revenue of the colonial administration andmade it possible to introduce the cash system.However, the introduction of the cash taxes, especiallyin agriculture, undermined the peasants' naturaleconomy and destroyed the traditional economic tiesin the communities, which were founded chiefly onbarter. It also helped to create a market for Britishmanufactured goods and forced the peasants toproduce commodities that were in demand in themarket and that could be sold for cash.

BRITISH INDUSTRIAL POLICY

Since the advent of British, its only aim was theruthless exploitation of Indian riches. The industrialpolicy was not any different from this trend. Thispolicy proved disastrous to the development ofindigenous capitalism and industry. By the middle ofthe 19th century, Queen Victoria's reign saw Britain


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

accumulate vast quantities of capital to such an extentthat not all of it could be profitably utilized at home.India with its amazing potentialities of raw materials,cheap labour and so forth attracted Britishentrepreneurs for sale investments. Competition fromthe newly industrialized nations in Europe andAmerica also chased Britain towards India. But itspolicy was not to make India an industrial capitalisteconomy, but to make it a dependent andunderdeveloped economy. Its investments inplantations and mines, jute mills, banking, insurance,shipping and export-import appear undoubtedlysignificant innovations. But actually these werepromoted through a system of inter-locking managingagency firms which usually combined financial,commercial and industrial activities, all working underthe umbrella of foreign control, constantly inhibitingthe development of Indian economy. Free trade policy,favours shown to British industry, foreign bankingsystem working in conjunction with the government'sfinancial and exchange policy, etc. made the Indianrising capitalist class panic-stricken. In severalinstances even Indian-controlled enterprises weredominated by foreign owned financial agencies.

Why did the British Introduce Modern Industry inIndia?

The basic economic conflict between the newIndian bourgeoisie and their British counterpart wasregarding the abolition of cotton duties in 1880s. Whenthe weak Indian cotton industry began to develop inthe 1860s and 1870s agitation was immediately raisedin Lancashire and Manchester for the abolition of therevenue import duties which operated also on cottongoods, where there was competition. They wereabolished and in 1882 all import duties except on saltand liquors, were removed. The expansion of railways,instead of helping India, led to the opening up ofvast and hitherto virtually untapped markets. Therailway undertakings in India were glaring instanceof state protection to British capital and indirect statebounty to British trade and industry at a time whenBritain was boasting of free trade. Lord Dalhousiehimself admitted that his object for the introductionof railways in Indian empire was to bring British

capital and enterprise to India, to secure commercialand social advantages to India and bring into theports, products from the interior. The railways becamean excellent means for accelerating the export of rawmaterials from India and opened up an extensivemarket for British industrial products. Thus, therailways helped the conversion of India into ahinterland of British industries, further diminishingthe chances of indigenous Industrial development.

Labour: Policy behind Labour Acts was onlyanother attempt to curtail the progress of IndianIndustry. Labour legislations whose genuine motivewas to improve the conditions of workers, could nothave lost sight of the plantation labour whilevigorously trying to apply the labour laws in thecotton and Jute factories in India. The motive in factwas not to help labour, but to discourage the growthof industries and especially cotton industry which wasshaping into a bid rival for Lancashire andManchester. The purview of the factory legislationdid not extend towards the indigo planters underwhom cultivators were practically treated like slaves.

Foreign Trade: India's foreign trade which wasnot beneficial to the masses as well as to the aspirantcapitalist class made India to be a mere exporter ofraw materials and market for based on Laissez-faire(e.g. tariff policy) as well as state intervention (e.g.labour legislation) had an adverse impact on the riseof a stable and strong industrial base. Though, duringthe first world war, the government due to military,strategic and competitive economic reasonsproclaimed that industrialization was its official aimin the economic field, it did not do much to itsprogress. The industrial sector was starved of fundsand a new principle was introduced - the principleof increased imperial preference of favoured ratesfor the entry of British manufactured goods. The tariffpolicy which was originally proclaimed to assistIndian industry was soon exploited for encouragingBritish Industry, costing heavily to the nativeindustry. The imperial policy constantly andvigorously maintained and protected the obsoleteeconomic structure of India in order to strain theemerging productive forces. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

GENERAL SURVEY

There was no aspect of public life which wasuntouched or unexploited by the colonial power. Itcompletely disrupted the traditional economy. Thecolonial regime hurt the religious sentiments of boththe Hindus and Muslims in India and activities ofChristian missionaries created suspicion. Politically,the arrogance and dictatorial attitude of LordDalhousie and his predecessors shocked thetraditional rulers of the country. His policy ofannexation sent a wave of resentment over thecountry. The annexation of Awadh for misgovernmentwas the most dangerous step which put thegovernment in bad faith. The conditions of Indiansepoys, employed in the British army, were heinousand unbearable. Slightest pretext was enough to playhavoc, and this was supplied by the introduction ofgreased cartridges. The greased cartridges alonewould not have, however, sufficed to provoke suchan explosion, there was a mix of political, social,economic as well as religious factors.

The Revolt began and spread like wild firethrough most of north India. It was put down onlyafter severe military operations. The importantincidents were:• the siege of Delhi and its recovery by the British

force in late September,• the military operations around Kanpur and

Lucknow and;• the central Indian campaign in 1858 of Tantia

Tope and the Rani of Jhansi.In these events, several native Princes, Sikhs and

certain other sections supported British operations.Besides, Deccan and south India was largely passive.It was fought with great ferocity on both sides, andreprisals were often savage.

There is also a general controversy on the natureand character of the revolt. Like - whether it was justa mutiny as the British called it or the first nationalwar of Indian Independence as characterized bynationalist historians; whether it was a spontaneous

THE REVOLT OF 1857

outburst of sepoy discontent or an organized andpremeditated revolt; whether it was limited to thearmy or was it a popular rebellion.

However, the revolt of 1857 was the first and themost severe outburst of anger and discontentaccumulated in the hearts of Indian people ever sincethe advent of British following the Battles of Plasseyand Buxar. Though the apologists of imperialismdubbed it as a 'Sepoy Mutiny', the Indian historianshave praised it as the 'First War of IndianIndependence'. In the words of Nehru: "It was muchmore than a military mutiny and it rapidly spreadand assumed the character of a popular rebellion anda war of Indian independence".

DETAILED ANALYSIS

Causes of the Revolt of 1857

It is in the very nature of colonial rule toexploit the conquered land. To quote Lenin:"There is no end to the violence and plunderwhich is called British rule in India". When theEnglish established their authority through dual'government' in Bengal, the financial bleeding of

ADMINISTRATIVE AND ECONOMIC CAUSES

� Annexation of Indian states deprived the Indianaristocracy of the power and position which theywere enjoying earlier. Under the British rule all HighPosts were reserved for the Europeans.

� New land revenue settlements made by the EastIndia Company in the newly-annexed states drovepoverty in the ranks or aristocracy and the peasantswere the worst affected class due to the heavyassessments and ruthless manner of collection.

� The East India Company destroyed Indian Handicraftand Industry by using its power and made Indianindustry an appendage of a foreign exploitativesystem.

� Further, the Indian Handicraft and Industry wasadversely affected due to the loss of its consumersin the country in the form of princes and aristocrats.

44444


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

India began. Introduction of Permanent Settlement,huge and revenue assessment, burden of debt, etc.The legal system, over-crowding and pressure onagriculture (due to de-industrializa-tion) all ledto the stagnation and determination of thepeasants thus alienating them from the British.The machine-made cotton goods from Englandruined the weavers. In fact, India underwent acommercial transformation and not an industrialrevolution. Introduction of England and change inthe nature of administration deprived the middle andupper classes of highly-paid posts. Those who enjoyedthe power and privilege under the patronage of IndianStates were now crumbled and crushed by the mightyBritish army. The British Company confiscated anumber of Jagirs form landlords and talukdars,especially from Awadh (this shows why the revoltwas so strong in this province). Even in the Deccan,the Inam Commission at Bombay, appointed by LordDalhousie, confiscated some 20,000 estates in the earlyfifties of the 19th century. Following the annexationof native states, thousands of soldiers serving thembecame jobless. For instance, as many as 60,000families lost their livelihood when Awadh's army wasdisbanded. Even religious preachers, pandits andmoulvis were divested of their livelihood with theextinction of native kingdoms. Thus peasants, artisans,and a large number of traditional zamindars and chiefswere seething with anger and were seeking anopportunity to strike at the new regime which haddeprived them of their traditional hold and livelihood.

The new regime created suspicion among theIndians that they would be converted to Christianity.The activities of Christian missionaries andestablishments of Chaplains and Churchesstrengthened this fear. The religious sentiments of thepeople were further hurt when a tax was levied onproperty held by temples and mosques. An Act waspassed in 1856 called the 'General Services EnlistmentAct'. which imposed on the Indian sepoys theobligation to serve wherever required. They dreadedsea voyage and considered this measure to be againsttheir religious customs. By passing the ConvertInheritance Act in 1850, the Britsh made no secret ofHindu Widows' Remarriage Act of 1856, the abolitionof the practices like Sati and infanticide and even theintroduction of railways and the telegraph wereviewed by the conservative sections of Indian societyas an attack on their time-honoured customs andpractices. The people at large were alarmed at therapid spread of English education and Westerncivilization.

The Indians were considered no better than thedrawers of water and hewers of wood'. Theforeignness of British was exposed by its treatment ofIndians who were subjected to the racial prejudicesof he Englishmen. The later took pleasure in callingIndian the creatures of an inferior breed, 'half Negro'.Dr. Majumdar points out the mood of the Indianswhen he says: "The impurity with which the membersof the royal race could insult, humiliate, injure andeven kill the Indian subjects was far more galling tothe people than their political or even the morematerial losses they suffered at the hands of theBritish."

A wave of resentment rocked the country as asequel to Lord Dalhousie's policy of annexation. NanaSahib, the adopted son of the last Peshwa, Baji Rao II,was refused the pension which his father had beengetting. Rani Laxmi Bai was not allowed to install heradopted son on the throne after the death of herhusband (1853). Nagpur met the same fate. Theabolition of titles of the Nawab of Carnatic and theRaja of Travancore was rude shock to the nativeprinces. The house of the Mughals was humiliatedwhen Lord Dalhousie announced in 1849 that thesuccessors of Bahadur Shah Zafar would not beallowed to use the historic Red Fort which is theirPalace and must move to a place near the QutubMinar. To add insult to injury, Lord Canningannounced in 1856 that after the death of BahadurShah Zafar, his successor would not be allowed touse the title of king. Awadh was annexed to theCompany's dominions in 1856 without satisfactoryreason, although its ruler had always been faithful to

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS CAUSES

� Like every conqueror, English rulers of India wererude and arrogant towards the subjects anddescribed the Hindus as barbarians with hardlyany trait of culture and civilization, while theMuslims were dubbed as bigots, cruel andfaithless.

� There was discrimination on the basis of religionin the administration and Judiciary between theIndian and Europeans.

� Indians were called as 'nigger' and 'Suar'.

� In the Religions Disabilities Act of 1850, provisionwas made that change of religion did not debar ason from inheriting the property of his father. Thiswas seen by the Indians as an act of conversion toChristianity.

� Further, strange rumours were current in Indiathat Lord Canning is specially charged to convertIndians into Christianity.

� Activities of Christian padris and Bethune towardswoman education made Indian's feel that througheducation, the British were going to conquer theircivilization.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

the British Government (in fact, it was the immensepotential of Awadh as a market of Manchester goodsthat prompted the imperialists to annex it).

The impression regarding the invincibility of theBritish army was shattered when they were badlybeaten in the First Afghan War, the Anglo-Sindh warsand the Santhal rebellion.

The Indian soldiers who became the ladder forthe Britishers to climb to the paramountcy were lookeddown upon as inferiors by their superiors. They werepoorly paid, ill-fed and badly housed. Indian soldiers,formerly occupying high positions in the armies ofnative princes, could not rise above the rank ofRisaldar or Subedar. They were grievously shockedwhen they were deprived even of their foreign serviceallowance. They groused when they were required togo to strange and distant countries. The Bengal armyconsisted of Hindu sepoys of high caste who dislikedmenial services and dreaded sea voyage which, theybelieved, endangered their caste. Their discontent wasexpressed on many occasions before the Revolt of 1857also. The pent-up emotions of the Indian sepoys burstforth in 1856 when they were ordered to use the newEnfield Rifles. The cartridges of which were greasedwith the fat of cows and pigs. The sepoys had toremove the greased covers of the cartridges with theirteeth before loading them into the rifles. Both Hinduand Muslim sepoys refused to use these cartridgesand felt that the English were defiling their religions.The issue of cartridges fell on the already existinggrievances as spark on dry timber and very soon thewhole country from the Sutlej to the Narmada wasablaze.

In February 1857, the 19th Native Infantry atBerhampur refused to use the cartridges but, beforethe tide could turn against the British, it wasdisbanded. In March 1857, Mangal Pande, a youngofficer of 34th N.I. at Barrackpur wounded his officer,an Englishman. He was hanged and even this unitwas disbanded. This news travelled to Meerutcantonment. In May 1857, when the new cartridgeswere issued to 90 Indians in Meerut, 85 of themrefused to use them. These 85 soldiers were court-martialled and sentenced to ten years imprisonment.After a few days the excited cavalrymen attacked thejail where the 85 persons were imprisoned. The skywas rent with deafening shouts of 'Maro FirangeeKo'. The same night the mutineers marched to Delhiand thousand able-bodied civilians also joined them.

The British Garrison at Delhi could not resist therebels and consequently fell into their hands. TheMughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah II, joined therevolutionaries after initial vacillations and wasproclaimed Emperor of India. Here, the mutineerswere headed by General Bakht Khan, the personresponsible for leading the Bareilly troops to Delhi.The loss of Delhi lowered the prestige of the British

POLITICAL CAUSES

� Lord Dalhousie annexed Punjab, Pegu and Sikkimby the right to conquest.

� Satara, Jaitpur, Sambhalpur, Baghat, Udaipur, Jhansiand Nagpur were annexed by the application of theDoctrine of Lapse.

� Awadh was the only state which was annexed onthe pretext of the 'mis-governance'.

� The Regal titles of the Nawabs of Carnatic andTanjore were abolished.

� The Pension of Peshwa Baji Rao II's adapted soncalled Nana Saheb was stopped.

� Lord Canning declared that the next Mughal princewould have to renounce the regal title and theancestral Mughal palaces, this greatly angered theMuslims.

� The Indians held that the existence of all states wasthreatened and absorption of all states was a questionof time.

� The annexation of Bhagat and Udaipur was cancelledand they were restored to their rulers.

� When Dalhousie wanted to apply Doctrine of lapseto Karauli (Rajputana), he was overruled by the Courtof Directors.

MILITARY CAUSES

� Three-fifth of the recruits of the Bengal Army wasdrawn from Awadh and North-Western provinceand most of them came from high castes such asBrahmins and Rajputs who were averse to acceptingthat part of the army discipline which treated themon par with the low caste recruits.

� Since most of the recruits in Army were from Awadh,the annexation of Awadh on the pretext of mal-administration marked the rebellion mood in thearmy.

� In 1856, Lord Canning's government passed theGeneral Service Enlistment Act which declared thatall future recruits for the Bengal Army would haveto give an undertaking to serve anywhere evenoutside India. This was considered by the casteHindus as defiling of their religion because goingoverseas was considered by the Hindus as beingpolluted religiously.

� By the passing of the Post Office Act of 1854, theprivilege of free postage, so long enjoyed by thesepoys, was withdrawn.

� In 1856, the Government decided to replace the old-fashioned musket "Brown Bess" by the "Enfield rifle".The loading process of the Enfield rifle involvedbringing the cartridge to the mouth and biting offthe top paper with mouth.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

in India. To retrieve their prestige they put everythingat stake and Sir John Lawrence sent a strong Britishcontingent under John Nicholson. After a long siegeof four months, the British were able to recover Delhiin September 1857. Bhadur Shah II was captured atthe tomb of Humayun. Two of his sons and agrandson were shot in cold blood before his eyes.The emperor was deported to Rangoon where he diedin the year 1862. The other highlights were theoperations around Kanpur, Lucknow, Gwalior, Jhansi,Bihar and Faizabad.

The tide of revolt touched its zenith in Awadhwhere the common people the taluqdars went to helpthe dispossessed Nawab, Wajid and Ali Shah. GeneralCollin Campbell himself marched towards Lucknowat the head of English and Gorkha soldiers. Finally,Lucknow fell into the hands of the British after a fiercebattle in March 1858.

Sir Hugh Rosed the British forces against therebels in central India. The Rani of Jhansi was holdingout with the help of Tantia Tope. Jhansi was taken byheavy attack in April 1858, but Rani Lakhshmi Baislipped away and managed to occupy the strongholdof Gwalior. Finally, the Rani; 'the best and bravest' ofthe rebel leaders, as Sir Hugh Rose described her, fellfighting in June and Gwalior fell into the hands of theEnglish. Tantia Tope carried on a guerrilla campaignin the traditional Maratha fashion with great skill untilApril 1859 when he was caught and hanged.

In Bihar, the revolt was led by Kunwar Singh, aZamindar of Jagdishpur, who played a dominant partin the revolt despite his old age. He fought the Britishin Bihar and then joined Nana Sahib's forces and tookpart in various encounters with the English in Awadhand central India. He died in April 1858 leavingbehind a glorious record of valour and bravery.

Maulvi Ahmadullah, a native of Madras, led therevolt at Faizabad. The Muslim community under hiscommand took part in various battles in Awadh andRohilkhand. He was, however treacherously killed.

At Kanpur, the struggle was led by Nana Sahib.The British commander Hugh Wheeler, finding theodds heavy against him, surrendered in June 1857.Only with the arrival of a large force under GeneralHavelock was Kanpur recaptured after defeatingNana Sahib in a hotly contested battle in June 1858.In the meantime, Tantia Tope was successful inwinning over the troops at Shivajinagar and Morarby appealing to their sense of patriotism. With theconcerted strength of these troops, Nana Sahib andTantia Tope recaptured Kanpur in November 1858.But this was only a short term victory. The Britishunder Campbell, won a decisive victory against theforce of Nana Sahib in a battle. Nana Sahib fled towards

Nepal where he probably died after sometime.

Officers Places where theysuppresed rebellion

John Nicholson DelhiHavelok, Outram Lucknow

& Sir Colin CampbellSir Colin Campbell KanpurSir Hugh Rose JhansiCol Neill Banaras

Leaders Their fate after the revolt

Bahadur Shah Zafar Imprisoned and deportedto Rangoon where he diednatural death.

Nana Saheb Fled to NepalBegum Hazrat Mahal Fled to NepalKhan Bahadur Died fightingRani Laxmibai Died fightingKunwar Singh Died fightingMaulvi Ahmadullah Died fightingTantia Tope Treacherously murdered in

the forest of Central India.

By mid-1853 the revolt was violently crushed. Itis not necessary to follow the complicated operationsof the British to put down the Great Revolt. But it canbe said that it was a popular revolt in north India, aswas evidenced by the British operations against entirevillages in almost all the places where the uprisingtook place.

Nature of Revolt: Divergent views

Divergent opinions have been expressedregarding the nature or the great outbreak of 1857.These views may be broadly divided into twocategories. One section considers it as primarily amutiny of sepoys though in certain areas it driftedinto a revolt of the people. The other categoryexpresses a feeling that the revolt was really a rebellionof the people rather than merely a mutiny of thesoldiers and goes further to state that it was indeedthe first war of Indian independence. Both these viewsneed a detailed examination before coming to aconclusion.

After much uneasy and unconvincing argument,British historians, anxious to minimize Indiangrievances and to preserve the good faith of theircountry, for many years insisted that the rising wasnothing more than a sepoy mutiny. They viewed it asa wholly unpatriotic and selfish attempt with no native


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

leadership and no popular support. The main pillarsof this comforting belief were that the Sikhs remainedloyal and that the native states which had escapedannexation were mostly neutral. The Britishconcentrated on the greased cartridges, the activitiesof the rebellious sepoys, and the British campaigns of1857-58. The civil unrest which accompanied themutiny was made to look insignificant or ignoredaltogether. But the popular participation in the revoltis an open secret. The speed with which it spread andthe swelling mass sympathies cannot be ignored incharacterizing the revolt. The fact that the British armyburnt and massacred villages in large numbers showshow popular the revolt was.

Indians, generally speaking, subscribe to theview of V.D. Savarkar who called it the 'First Warof Indian Independence'. But a general revolt or awar of independence necessarily implies definiteplan and organization. The circumstances, underwhich Bahadur Shah, Nana Saheb, Rani Lakshmiand others cast in their lot, with the mutinoussepoys, were rebelling, are sufficient to expose thelimitations of the theory that it was a struggle forindependence. All the leaders had their own axesto grind. Bahadur Shah's association with the rebelswas half-hearted. Rani Lakshmi of Jhansi offeredto stop her resistance if her adopted son wasrecognized as the legal heir to the throne.

The sudden and unexpected way in which theunity spread across the country has always excitedthe suspicion that it must have been planned in

advance. Many Englishmen could, in fact find noexplanation for this baffling outbreak other thatdeliberate conspiracy. The wide circulation ofchapattis just before the outbreak of 1857 is regardedby many as an important evidence in favour of anorganized conspiracy. But this mysterious circulationof chapattis in the villages of northern India does notprovide any satisfactory explanation. The chapattisapparently meant differently to different people andto many signified nothing at all. Thus, it will be totallymisleading to say that the revolt was the result ofcareful and secret organization.

It would also be a travesty of truth to describethe Revolt of 1857 as a national war ofindependence. National, it certainly was not, forthe upsurge of the people was limited to mainlyNorth India. Moreover, nationalism of the moderntype was yet to come. No leader of the revolt hadeven the slightest idea of what sort of powershould replace British authority once it wasoverthrown. Moreover, in this violent upheaval,the civil participants were not so much againstthe political supremacy of British as against thewhole new order of things which they wereimporting into India. A large section of people, infact, actively cooperated with British during therevolt. Thus it can be said that the so-called firstwar of independence was neither first nor nationalnor a war of independence. It was definitelysomething more than a sepoy mutiny butsomething less than a national revolt. It took placeeverywhere in the name of one sovereign andunder one flag. The rapidity with which the revoltprogressed and the vast area over which it spreadproves that it enjoyed, in that area at least, strongmass support.

Religious flavour: The war was fought as muchfor Swadharma as against the discontentment.Religious grievances formed an important ingredient

Western Historians Their Views about the

nature of RevoltSir John Lawrence "Sepoy's Mutiny".

and Seeley

L.E.R. Rees "A war of fanatic religion-

ists against Christians."T.R. Holmes "Conflict between civiliza-

tion and barbarism."

Sir James Outram "A result of Hindu-Mus-

lim conspiracy.'W. Taylor "It was a Mohammedan

conspiracy making capital

of Hindu grievances."

Benjamin Disraeli "A National rising."Prof. Stanley Wolpert "It was far more than a

mutiny.... yet much less

than a first war of Inde-pendence."

Modern Indian Their views aboutHistorians the Revolt

V.D. Savarkar "A planned war of NationalIndependence."

R.C. Majumdar "Neither first nor National nor

War of Independence."

Dr. S.N. Sen "What began as mutiny endedas a war of Independence."

Dr. S. B. Chaudhary "Revolt of 1857 can be bifurcated

into two sub-divisions;

mutiny and rebellion."


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

of the dynamite that caused the explosion. A 'maulvi'aur a 'pundit' used to be attached to every regimentto administer the spiritual needs of the men. Fakirs(beggars) are reported to have played an importantpart in the espionage services of the rebels. Thoughreligious feelings strengthened the courage andcompose of the rebels, it did not make them fanatical.Religion heightened the appeal of the revolt but itscontent remained predominantly political. Its leaderswere temporal, not spiritual, spokesmen of society.

Reasons of Failure

� The Revolt of 1857 was limited to the areas of Awadh,Rohilkhand, Delhi, Kanpur, Western Bihar and someportion of Central India. A large part of the countryremained not only unaffected, but also helped insuppression of the revolt.

� A large section of society, particularly the middleclass intelligentsia and barring the peasantry class ofOudh the peasants as well as the lower castes weretotally kept away from the revolt.

� The Superior weapons and better discipline in theBritish Army and use of Electric telegraph was faradvanced against the old-fashioned and traditionalweapons of Indian soldiers.

� The Revolt was ill-organized.

� Indians had no match to the exceptional militaryleader's the East India Company had in the form ofLawrence, Nicholson, Outram, Havelok andEdwards.

Was it backward looking?

The revolt reflected the social ethos of the time.It was infused with traditional as well modernist ideas.Any assessment of its character must carefully reviewthis duality at its core. This revolution, however, wasan attempt to return to the earlier and traditionalrelation in rejecting the new classes who hadsupplanted them, the old and traditional ruling classeswere assisted by their former subjects. In fact, it canbe said that it was the decaying reactionary element,the discontented princes and feudal forces, which ledthe opposition. They were joined by common peoplewho were groaning under the burden of over taxation,rack-renting and social humiliation. The revolt wasthus a feudal upheaval.

Failure of the Revolt

Lack of planning, organization and leadershipwere some of the most important causes for thefailure of the revolt. The leaders had no clear cutplans and targets. The movement lacked a leaderwho could command obedience from all and putup a concerted action. The leaders of the revolt

could never agree on a common plan. They weremutually jealous and continually intrigued againstone another. In fact, these personal jealousies andintrigues were largely responsible for the Indiandefeat.

It was a tragedy that some of the Princes helpedthe British to suppress a bid for freedom by theircompatriots. Sikh princes of Nabha, Patiala andKapurthala and the rulers of Hyderabad and Gwalioropenly helped the British with men and money.Holkar and Sindhia remained loyal to the British.Regarding Sindhia's help, General Innes says: "Hisloyalty saved India for the British".

The money lenders (who were the targets ofattack by the villagers) and educated Indians (whothought that the British would destroy the feudal forces)also did support the revolt. Besides, Bombay, Madras,Bengal, Rajputana and western Punjab did notparticipate in the revolt.

The superior resources of the British in men,money and materials, their control over the seas, bettermeans of communication at their command and thehelp from the natives put them definitely in anadvantageous position.

Significance

It was a glorious landmark in history in as muchas Hindus and Muslims fought shoulder toshoulder against a common enemy. Though therevolt was unsuccessful, the spirit of the peopleremained unshaken. The revolt left an indelibleimpression on the minds of the Indian people andthus paved the way for the rise of a strongnational movement. In the words of Dr. Majumdar

Impact of the Revolt

� The Administration of the India was transferred fromthe East India Company to the Crown by theGovernment of India Act, 1858. The Act of 1858provided for the appointment of a Secretary of Statefor India, who was to be assisted by an AdvisoryCouncil of Fifteen. Eight members are to benominated by the Crown and seven members are tobe selected by the Court of Directors.

� The Queen's announcement declared against anydesire for extension of territorial possessions andpromised to respect the rights, dignity and honourof native princes.

� Indian army was thoroughly re-organized, thestrength of European troops in Indian army wasincreased from the pre-1857 figure of 45,000 to 65,000and the number of Indian troops reduced from thepre-1857 figure of 238,000 to 140,000. All higher postsin the army and police were reserved for Europeans.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

- 'It has been said that Julius Caesar when deadwas more powerful than when he was alive. Thesame thing may be said about the revolt of 1857.Whatever might have been its original character,it soon became a symbol of challenge to themighty British power in India. It remained ashining example before the nascent nationalismin India in its struggle for freedom from theBritish yoke'.

After the revolt of 1857, the British rule in Indiaunderwent major transformation in its policy. Itstarted protecting and fostering the princes as itspuppets. The reactionary social and religious survivalswere jealously guarded and preserved against thedemands of progressive Indian opinion for theirreform. After initial harsh treatment of Muslims, therulers started talking for the betterment of the Muslimsubjects. Realising that Hindu-Muslim unity would

pose a serious danger to them, the British re-employedthe policy of "Divide and Rule"

Direct consequence: The direct result of therevolt was the end of the Company's rule and thepassing of the responsibility of the Indianadministration of British India into the hands of theBritish Queen and the Parliament. The Board ofControl was abolished and the Board of Directorswas done away with. An Office of Secretary of Statefor India with a 15-member council was constitutedfor the administration of India. The designation ofthe Governor-General was changed to Viceroy. Whilehe remained Governor General for the provincesunder his rule, he came to be known as Viceroy whiledealing with Nawab, Rajas and native princes. Thearmy was reorganized thoroughly. The economicexploitation of India became more serious and muchwider. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YGENERAL SURVEY

Before the Revolt of 1857, the British viewed Indiaas one nation since it suited their immediate purpose.They were in the process of conquering India andthey argued that the conquest of the entire sub-continent would alone provide administrative andpolitical unity to this country. Thus, the conquest ofIndia was justified on the ground of benefiting thepeople of this country. But, in the aftermath of theRevolt of 1857, when they realized the dangers oftreating India as one nation, they reversed their stand.They gave up the policy of annexation as they realizedthat existence of the native states was useful to them.The policy of dividing the Indians was pursued withvigour and, therefore, it became necessary to discardthe concept of one Indian nation. British historiansand scholars also upheld that India was never a nation.It was a land of different languages, dresses, socialcustoms, religions, races, ideas, etc. Politically too, itwas never united. These scholars maintained that theattempts to unite it politically always failed miserably.The Indians developed the concept of nationalism onlyduring the British rule. Thus, the British scholars havemaintained that Indian nationalism was the heritageof the British rule.

The Indian scholars, however, have refuted thisopinion of the British scholars. They have contestedthat India is undoubtedly a country of varietyprimarily because of the geographical vastness of thecountry and the liberal cultural attitude of its people.But behind all this variety in its culture, religions,manners, customs, etc., there has always existed abasic unity among the Indian people. Though Indiahad remained divided politically and the efforts tobring about its unity always failed, culturally Indiahas always remained united. Vedic religion, Sanskritlanguage, Hindu customs, places of pilgrimages whichare spread all over India, values of life, etc. havealways provided unity to India. Even the IndianMuslims have become part and parcel of this countrypolitically and culturally. The British deliberately

RISE AND GROWTH OFINDIAN NATIONAL

MOVEMENT

divided the Muslims and Hindus leading to communaldifferences between the two communities. Thus,factors which contribute towards theformation of nationalism already existed in India. Yet,it is accepted that nationalism in the modernsense developed in India only during the Britishrule, especially in the later half of the 19thcentury.

As reaction to oppression

By the 1870s, it was evident that Indiannationalism had gathered enough strength andmomentum to appear as a major force on the Indianpolitical scene. However, it required the reactionaryregime of Lord Lytton (1876-80) to give it a visibleform and the controversy around the Ilbert Bill (1883)to assume an organized form. The Afghan war duringthe period of Lord Lytton adversely affected theeconomic resources of India. He arranged the DelhiDurbar to declare Queen Victoria as the Empress ofIndia at a time when a large part of India was in thegrip of famine and epidemic. He passed the VernacularPress Act which curbed the liberty of Indian press,and his Arms Act was a means to prevent the Indiansform keeping weapons. All these measures of Lyttonfed the smouldering discontent against the British.These measures were followed by the Ilbert Bill whichwas presented in the Central Legislature during theviceroyalty of Lord Ripon. According to this Bill, theIndian judges would have the right to try Europeansas well. It was elementally opposed by the Britishresidents in India, who collected funds, organized asystematic campaign against the Bill both in Englandand India and ultimately succeeded in getting the Billamended so that it lost its very spirit. The Indians tooorganized an all-India campaign in favour of the Bill.Though their agitation failed, they learnt the mostuseful lesson that, in order to get their demandaccepted by the government, they too must organizethemselves on a national scale and agitate continuouslyand unitedly.

55555


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YPre-Congress associations

The first political organization to be started inIndia was the Landholder's Society at Calcutta in1838, but it was started with the narrow aim ofprotecting the class interests of the zamindars ofBengal, Bihar and Orissa. In 1843, the Bengal BritishIndian Society was organized with wider politicalobjectives. In 1851, the British Indian Associationwas formed. Simultaneously, the Madras NativeAssociation and the Bombay Association wereestablished in 1852. Many similar associations andclubs were established in smaller towns and citiesall over the country. Almost all of them weredominated by wealthy commercial or zamindarielements and were local in character. They workedfor reform of administration, association of Indianswith the administration and spread of moderneducation. These associations sent long petitions,putting forward Indian demands to the BritishParliament.

The period after 1858 witnessed a gradualwidening of the gulf between the educated Indianand the British Indian administration. As theeducated Indian studied the character of British ruleand its consequence for the Indians, they becamemore and more critical of British polices in India.The discontent gradually found expression inpolitical activity. But the existing associations nolonger satisfied the politically conscious Indians.

Issues taken up: Dadabhai Naoroji organizedthe East India Association in London in 1866 todiscuss Indian questions and to influence Britishpublic opinion. Branches of the Association wereorganized in major Indian cities. Naoroji soon cameto be known to his contemporaries and thesucceeding generations of Indians as the 'grand oldman of India'. His greatest contribution was hiseconomic analysis of the British rule. He showedthat the poverty and economic backwardness ofIndia were not inherent in local conditions but werecaused by colonial rule which was draining Indiaof its wealth and capital. He was honoured by beingelected thrice as the President of the Indian NationalCongress.

Justice M. G. Randade, Ganesh Vasudev Joshi,S. H. Chiplunkar and others organized the PoonaSarvajanik Sabha in 1870. The Sabha carried on activepolitical education for the next 30 years. It alsobrought out a quarterly paper. The younger elementswere also active in other parts of India. In 1884, M.Viraraghavachari, G. Subramaniam lyer, AnandaCharlu and others formed the Madras MahajanaSabha. In Bombay, Pherozeshah Mehta, K. T. Telang,Badruddin Tyabji and others founded the BombayPresidency Association in 1885.

The most important of the pre-Congressnationalist organizations was the Indian Associationof Calcutta. The youth of Bengal had been graduallygetting discontented with the conservative and pro-landlord policies of the British Indian Association.Now, led by Anand Mohan Bose and SurendranathBanerjee, these young people founded the IndianAssociation of Calcutta in 1876 with the aim ofcreating a strong public opinion in the country onpolitical programme. The first issue taken by the newassociation for agitation was that of reform of thesystem of the civil service examination. The associationsent Surendranath Benerjee as a special delegate toother parts of the country to canvass support for theagitation. He was perhaps the first modern Indian togain all-India popularity. In order to involve thecommon people in the activities of broad politicalmovement, the leaders of the Indian Associationorganized agitations in favour of the right of the

What was the role of early Nationalists?

The second half of the 19th century witnessed astrong national political consciousness and thefoundation and growth of an organized nationalmovement. During this period, the modern Indianintelligentsia created political associations to spreadpolitical education and to initiate political activity inthe country. This political activity was to be based onnew political ideas, a new intellectual perception ofreality, new social, economic and political objectives,new forces of struggle and resistance; and newtechniques of political organization.

The new political activity was to represent a turningpoint in ideology, policy, organization and leadership.The task was difficult since Indians were utterlyunfamiliar with modern political work. Even the ideathat people could organize politically in opposition totheir rulers was novel one. Consequently, the work ofthese early associations and of the early political workersproceeded rather slowly and it took more than half acentury to bring the common people within the fold ofmodern politics.

Ram Mohan Roy was one of the first Indian leadersto start an agitation for political reforms. He fought forfreedom of the press, trial by jury, the separation of thejudiciary form the executive, appointment of Indians tohigher offices, protection of the ryots from zamindarioppression and development of Indian trade andindustries. His agitation was carried on after his deathby the radical Bengali Youth known as the Derozians.They started numerous public associations to discussmodern ideas and their application to India and a largenumber of newspapers and journals to propagate thoseideas. Thus the germs of modern political consciousnesswere sown in the 1820s and 1830's by Ram Mohan Royand the Derozians.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

tenants against the foreign tea planters. The associationalso opened branches in different towns and villagesof Bengal, and in many cities outside Bengal.

Though all the above organizations had served auseful purpose, they were basically narrow in theirscope and functioning. They dealt mostly with localquestions and their membership and leadership wereconfined to a few people belonging to a single city orprovince. Even the Indian Association, despite itsefforts to become an all-India body through conveningtwo all-India conferences, could not succeed inbecoming a representative body of political workersand leaders all over the country.

Indian National Congress

The politically conscious Indians wereincreasingly becoming aware of the need for an all-India organization not only to provide a commonforum for the meeting of minds and the formulationof a common programme of activity but also to carryon public education with a view to creating a broad-based freedom struggle. The social basis for suchan organization was now well laid and enoughexperience had been gathered. Dadabhai Naoroji,Justice Ranade, Pherozeshah Mehta, K.T. Telang,etc. in western India, G. Subramania lyer, AnadaCharlu, etc, in southern India, and W. C. Banerjee,Surenderanath Bannerjee, Ananda Mohan Bose, etc.,in eastern India, simultaneously began to plansetting up of an all-India nationalist organization.The idea was given a concrete shape by the Bombaygroup of nationalist political workers who co-operated with A.O. Hume, an Englishman andretired civil servant, to bring together at Bombayin December 1885 political leaders from differentparts of the country. These leaders formed theIndian National Congress, the first session of whichwas presided over by W. C. Banerjee.

Why was INC organized?

Sometimes it is remarked that Hume's mainpurpose in encouraging the foundation of theCongress was to provide a 'safety valve' or a safeoutlet to the growing discontent among theeducated Indians. He wanted to prevent the unionof discontented nationalist intelligentsia with the

discontented peasants. By patronizing a mildpolitical movement, he hoped to prevent it fromgetting out of control.

This explanation is, however, totally inadequateand misleading for the foundation of the Congress.At the most, it explains to a limited extent Hume'srole in the whole episode. The Indians who activelyworked for the creation of an all-India politicalorganization represented new social forces that wereincreasingly opposed to the exploitation of Indiafor British interests. They needed an organizationthat would fight for India's political and economicadvancement. They were patriotic men of highcharacter and were in no way stooges of the foreigngovernment. They cooperated with Hume becausethey did not want to arouse official hostility to theirearly political efforts and they hoped that a retiredcivil servant's active presence would allay officialsuspicions. It should be noted that even Hume wasmoved by motives nobler than those of the 'safetyvalve'. He possessed a sincere love for India as wellas its poor cultivators.

Significance

There is no doubt that with the foundation ofthe Indian National Congress in 1885 the strugglefor India's freedom was launched in a small, hesitantand mild but organized manner. It was to grow instrength year by year and, in the end, involve theIndian people in powerful and militant campaignsagainst the foreign rulers.

It would, however, be wrong to look upon theCongress as the sole or even the chief medium forthe spread of nationalist consciousness during theearly phase, i.e. between 1885 and 1905. There werenumerous other channels for the development andarticulation of nationalism during this period.Numerous local and provincial political associationscarried on day-do-day political agitation. Above all,the nationalist newspapers acted as the organizersand publicists of nationalism. Most of thenewspapers of the period were not carried on asbusiness ventures but were consciously started asorgans of nationalist activity. Their owners andeditors had often to make immense personalsacrifices. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YA fundamental difference existed between thepolicy and programmes of the early nationalists andthe militant nationalists. It is essentially due to thisthat the first group of nationalists (early nationalists)are described as the 'moderates', and the second group(militant nationalists) as the 'extremists' and theconsequent periodisation of the Indian nationalistmovement into the moderates era (1885-1905), theextremist era (1905-1919) and the Gandhian era (1919-1947). Though much can be said in favour of thisdivision of the Indian nationalist movement, the basiccontinuities and changes involved in this periodisationare subject to diverse opinions. As a matter of fact,there has existed a general tendency to overlook someof the basic continuities from the early nationalist orthe so called moderate era to the militant nationalistera or the extremist era. To see discontinuities orchanges where none existed, and to over emphasizeor wrongly interpret the change that did occur.

THE MODERATES

The moderates did not advocate a direct strugglefor the political emancipation of the country, instead,they worked towards a number of politicalachievements. The most important of these activitieswere:• completion of the process of unifying Indian

people into a nation,• creation of a national political platform,• exposing the exploitative character of British

imperialism,• introduction of modern politics,• creation of a feeling of self-confidence among

Indians,• promotion of the growth of a modern capitalist

economy in India, etc.They were fully aware of the fact that India was

a nation in making and Indian nationhood wasgradually coming into being and could not, therefore,be taken for granted. They were also aware that the

political leaders had to constantly work for thedevelopment and consolidation of the feeling ofnational unity irrespective of region, caste or religion.The economic and political demands of the moderateswere formulated with a view to unite the Indianpeople on the basis of common economic and politicalprogramme.

Moderates' Programme

Moderates desired to create a national politicalplatform on which all Indians belonging to differentregions, religions and social classes could agree andwhich could serve as the basis for all-India politicalactivity whose basic aim was not just goodgovernment, but democratic self government. TheIndian National Congress, for instance, wasestablished apart from other reasons with the hope toprovide a national political platform and thus promoteclose contact and friendly relations among activenationalists from different parts of the country.

From the beginning the moderates believed thatIndia should eventually move towards democraticself-government. But they did not demand immediatefulfillment of this goal. Instead, they suggested agradual approach towards it. Their immediate politicaldemands were extremely moderate. Initially, theydemanded that Indians should be given a large sharein the government by expanding and reforming theexisting legislative Councils. They also demanded thewidening of the powers of the councils and an increasein the powers of the members who were to be theelected representatives of the people. The IndianCouncils Acts of 1892 and 1909 were passed mainlydue to the efforts of the moderates, though these Actsdid not secure much for the Indians. But by the turnof the 19th century, the moderates made goodprogress in their political demands. Their demandswere no longer confined to petty reforms but wereextended to full self-government, including full Indiancontrol over all legislation and finances, on the modelof the self-government colonies of Canada and

EARLY NATIONALISTSAND MILITANTNATIONALISTS

66666


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Australia. This demand was initially made byDadabhai Naoraji in 1904 and later by Gokhale in1905.

Economic Critique: Exposing the exploitativecharacter of British imperialism and spreading theirunderstanding of the British rule in India among thepeople was another important item on the agenda ofthe moderates. They took note of all the three formsof contemporary economic exploitation, namely,through trade, industry and finance. Realizing thatthe essence of British imperialism lay intosubordination of the Indian economy to that of Britain,they strongly opposed the British attempts to developin India the basic characteristics of the economy, viz.,the transformation of India into a supplier of rawmaterials, a market for British manufacturers and afield of investment for capital. Moreover, in everysphere of economic life they advocated the lesseningand even severance of India's economic dependenceon England.

Agitations: Besides, they organized manyagitations against all the important official economicpolicies based on the colonial structure. For instance,they organized a powerful all-India agitation againstthe abandonment of tariff duties on imports from 1857to 1880 and against the imposition of cotton exciseduties in 1849-96. This agitation played a major rolein arousing country-wide national feelings and ineducating the people regarding the real aims andpurpose of British rule in India. Thus, all the effortsof the moderates finally resulted in the growth of anall-India opinion that the British were exploiting Indiaand thus leading to its impoverishment, economicbackwardness and under development.

Sovereignty: Another important programme ofthe moderates was the introduction of modern politicsbased on the doctrine of the sovereignty of the peopleand on the notion that politics is not the preserve ofthe ruling class only. They formed several politicalassociations, including the Indian National Congress,to spread political education and to initiate politicalwork in the country. This work was to be based onnew political ideas, a new intellectual perception ofreality, new socio-economic and political objectives,new forces of struggle and resistance and newtechniques of political organization. It was to representa turning point in ideology, policy, organization andleadership.

Capitalism: They also wanted to promote thegrowth of modern capitalist economy in India. Theyrightly believed that the British economic policies wereresponsible for bringing about the ruin of India'straditional handicraft industries and for obstructingthe development of modern industries. Most of them

opposed the large scale import of foreign capital forinvestment in the Indian railways, plantations andindustries on the ground that it would lead to thesuppression of Indian capitalists and a further increasein the hold of the British over India's economy andpolity.

Remedy: The chief remedy they suggested forthe removal of poverty was the modernization ofIndian life in all fields and, in particular, thedevelopment of modern industries, which are essentialfor the proper growth of a capitalist economy. Butrapid industrialization required active state assistanceand a policy of tariff protection. So, they urged theBritish government to aid Indian industries throughfinancial subsidies, loans and guarantees throughstate-aided or controlled banks, by borrowing abroadand lending in India, by pioneering state-ownedindustries in fields such as steel and mining whichIndian capitalists were too weak to enter, but whichwere essential for industrial development, bycollecting and disseminating industrial andcommercial information and by promoting technicaleducation.

Constraints: The task was difficult for Moderatessince Indians were utterly unfamiliar with modernpolitics. Even the notion that people could organizethemselves politically in opposition to their rulers wasa novel one. Consequently their work proceededrather slowly and it took more than half a century tobring the common people within the fold of modernpolitics.

THE EXTERMISTS

The programmes of the militant nationalist or theextremists were almost similar to those of themoderates. Their programmes were built on theirpredecessors' programmes and their i.e., themoderates concrete exposure of the character of theBritish rule in India. But they differed from the latterin one important respect, i.e., the extremists demandedcomplete independence, while the moderates werecontent with democratic self-government as in thecolonies of Australia and Canada.

However, this difference in their political goalswas not substantial as the moderates were as muchinterested in the question of political power as theextremists. In fact, Tilak himself repeatedly pointedout that there were no real difference between himand the moderates regarding the goals of the nationalmovement. The moderates did not strive for completeindependence mainly because of the feeling that thetime was not yet ripe for it. It is interesting to notehere that even Tilak had no hesitation in going backtime and again from the demand for completeindependence to dominion status.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Thus, the basic difference between the earlynationalists and the militant nationalists did not lie intheir programme or in a different definition of thenationalist political goal. The real difference, if therewas any, lay in their policies or the methods ofstruggle to achieve the agreed goals. In other words,the difference was not in the programmes or whatwas to be done, but in the policies or how it was tobe done.

What were the Extremists' policies?

Some of the extremists deviated from themoderate method of peaceful and bloodless strugglein theory. In practice, however they too operatedwithin its basic framework. The tenet was to serve asa basic guarantee to the propertied class that theywould at no time be faced with a situation in whichtheir interests might be put in jeopardy eventemporarily. The only difference between themoderates and the extremists in this matter was intheir attitude towards non-violence. It was a matterof personal conviction for most of the moderatesthough practical considerations too played animportant role in determining their attitude towardsnon-violence. To the extremists, it was mostly apractical expedient. The extremists, therefore, did notcondemn violence as such, though they themselvesdid not resort to violent methods.

More importantly, the extremists advocated theorganization of mass struggle against Britishimperialism. This was, in fact, the most importantand, perhaps the only significant difference betweenthe policies of the extremists and those of themoderates. Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Raiand other extremists had infinite faith in the powerof the masses for action and in the Indian people'scapacity to bear the strain of a prolonged politicalstruggle against imperialism. They believed thatsuppression by the government would not throttlethe mass movement. It would instead, educate thepeople, arouse them further, strengthen their resolveto overthrow imperialism and lead to a heightenedpolitical struggle. They therefore, advocated theorganization of a mass struggle against imperialismas a first step in making the masses politically active.They talked of bridging the gulf between theeducated people and the masses though not all ofthem.

Different Concept: The extremists evolved ahigher concept of the forms of political struggle inorder to improve the techniques of political action.In other words, the extremists apart from employingthe moderate forms of agitation gave a call forpassive resistance, to cooperate with the governmentand to boycott, government service, government

courts and government schools and colleges. But theywere unable to implement this concept fully and asa result, not transcend agitation (the form adoptedby the moderates,) though their agitation was muchmore militant and effective than that of themoderates because the former had a broader basethan the latter.

P-C-P strategy: The extremists too like themoderates, had adopted the P-C-P (pressure-compromise-pressure) strategy in order to attaincompleted independence, Because the extremistsgave several calls for immediate independence, it iseasy to be misled into thinking that their strategicapproach was deferent. In fact, such calls were partof the same overall strategy. Every such call wassucceeded by a set of immediate demands whichhad little direct relation to the demand for immediateand complete independence. So what changed after1905 was not the basic strategy of P-C-P. Theextremists were not working for the direct overthrowof British rule. They too emphasized the techniqueof negotiations backed by controlled mass action.

Different Mode: The extremists did, however,change the mode of persuasion or putting pressure.They put greater mass pressure behind demands. Theyshifted from intellectuals to the masses to a significantextent; and from memorials, petitions and resolutions;to processions, demonstration and large massmovements. The sanctions behind their demand weredifferent and far stronger. But the political advancewas still to occur by stages and through compromise,that is, ultimately through British consent and action.

Short-comings: While recognizing this differentbetween the moderate and the extremist eras; weshould also make a distinction between hope and thefulfillment. For one even at the height of the extremistmovement in Bengal, the peasantry was not mobilized.The alienation between the educated extremistpolitical workers and the masses was not lessened toany significant extent. In fact, the extremists did noteven know how to go about the task. In practice whatthey succeeded in doing was to spread the movementdeeper among the lower middle classes who werealready brought within the ambit of nationalism inthe moderate era.

Failure: The failure of the extremists inevitablyled to revolutionary terrorism. Since most of theextremist leaders had wrongly defined theirdifferences with the moderates (they had concentratedon 'action' and sacrifices rather than on the need toevolve a different type of politics), the young menbrought upon an ideology of 'action' and sacrifice whichwere soon disenchanted with militant agitation, demanded'action' and took recourse to individual terrorism.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YThe conditions for the emergence of militantnationalism had thus developed when in 1905 thepartition of Bengal was announced and the IndianNational movement entered its second stage.

On 20 July 1905, Lord Curzon issued an orderdividing the rest of Bengal with a population of 54million, of whom 18 million were Bengalis and 36million Biharis and Oriyas.

It was said that the existing province of Bengalwas too big to be efficiently administered by a singleprovincial government. However, the officials whoworked out the plan had also other political ends inview.

They hoped to stem the rising tide of nationalismin Bengal, considered at the time to be the mervecentre of Indian nationalism.

Risely, Home Secretary to the Government ofIndia, wrote in an official note on 6 December 1904 asBengal united is a power. Bengal divided will pull inseveral different ways. One of our main objective isto split up and thereby to weaken a solid body ofopponents to our rule.

The Indian National Congress and theNationalists of Bengal firmly opposed the partition.

Within Bengal, different sections of the population- zamindars, merchants, lawyers, students, the citypoor, and even women - rose up in spontaneousopposition to the partition of their province.

The nationalists saw the act of partition as achallenge to Indian nationalism and not merely anadministrative measure.

They saw that it was a deliberate attempt to dividethe Bengali territorial and on religious grounds - forin the Eastern part Muslims would be in a big majorityand in the western part Hindus - and thus to disruptand weaken nationalism in Bengal.

It would also be a big blow to the growth ofBengali language and culture.

They pointed out that administrative efficiencycould have been better secured by separating the

Hindi speaking Bihar and the Oriya-speaking Orissafrom the Bengali speaking part of the province.

Moreover, the official step had been taken in utterdisregard of public opinion.

Thus the vehemence of Bengal's protest againstthe partition is explained by the fact that it was ablow to the sentiments of very sensitive andcourageous people.

The Anti-Partition Movement

• The Anti-Partition Movement was the work ofthe entire national leadership of Bengal and notof any one section.

• Its most prominent leaders at the initial stage weremoderate leaders like Surendra Nath Banerjee andKrishna Kumar Mitra; militants and revolutionarynationalists took over in the later stages.

• In fact, both the moderate and militant nationalistsco-operated with one another during the courseof the movement.

• The Anti-Partition Movement was initiated on 7August, 1905. On the day a massive demonstrationagainst partition was organised in the Town Hallin Calcutta.

• From this meeting delegates dispersed to spreadthe movement to the rest of the province.

• The partition took effect on 16 October, 1905.

• The leaders of the protest movement declared it tobe a day of national mourning throughout Bengal.

• It was observed as a day of fasting. There was aHartal in Calcutta.

• People walked barefooted and bathed in theGanga in the morning hours.

• Rabindranath Tagore composed the national song'Amar Sonar Bangla', for the occasion which wassung by huge crowds parading the streets.

• This song was adopted as its national anthem byBangladesh in 1971 after Liberation.

PARTITION OF BENGAL77777


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• The streets of Calcutta were full of the cries of'Bande Mataram' which overnight became thenational song of Bengal and which was sung tobecome the theme song of the national movement.

• The ceremony of Raksha Bandhan was utilizedin a new way.

• Hindus and Muslims tied the rakhi on oneanother's wrists as a symbol of the unbreakableunity of the Bengalis and of the two halves ofBengal.

• In the afternoon, there was a great demonstrationwhen the veteran leader Ananda Mohan Bose laidthe foundation of a Federation Hall to mark theindestructible unity of Bengal.

The Swadeshi and Boycott

• The Bengal leaders felt that more demonstrations,public meetings and revolutions were not likelyto have much effect on the rulers.

• More positive action that would reveal theintensity of popular feelings and exhibit them attheir best was needed.

• The answer was Swadeshi and Boycott.• Mass meetings were held all over Bengal where

Swadeshi or the use of Indian goods and theboycott of British goods were proclaimed andpledged.

• In many places public burning of foreign clothwere organised and shops selling foreign clothwere picketed. The Swadeshi Movement was animmense success.

• An important aspect of the Swadeshi Movementwas the emphasis placed on self-reliance or'Atmasakti'.

• Self-reliance meant assertion of national dignity,honour and self-confidence.

• In the economic field, it meant fosteringindigenous industrial and other enterprises.

• Many textile mills, soda and match factories,handloom weaving concerns, national banks andinsurance companies were opened.

• Acharya P.C. Ray organised his famous BengalChemical Swadeshi Stores.

• Even the great Rabindranath Tagore helped toopen a Swadeshi store.

• The Swadeshi Movement had severalconsequences in the realm of Culture.

• There was a flowering of nationalist poetry, proseand journalism.

• The patriotic songs written at the time by poets

like Rabindranath Tagore, Rajani Kant Sen, SyedAbu Mohammed and Mukunda Das are sung inBengal to this day.

• Another self-reliant, constructive activityundertaken at the time was that of NationalEducation. National Educational Institutes whereliterary, technical or physical education wasimparted were opened by nationalists whoregarded the existing system of education asdenationalising and, in any case, inadequate.

• On 15 August 1906, a National Council ofEducation was set up. A National College withAurobindo Ghose as Principal was started inCalcutta.

Role of Students, Women, Muslims and the Masses

• A prominent part in the Swadeshi agitation wasplayed by the students of Bengal.

• They practised and propagated Swadeshi andtook the lead in organising picketing of shopssetting foreign cloth.

• The government made every attempt to suppressthe students.

• Orders were issued to penalise those schools andcolleges whose students took an active part inthe Swadeshi agitation; their grants-in-aid andother privileges were to be withdrawn, they wereto be disaffiliated, their students were not to bepermitted to compete for scholarships and wereto be barred from all services under the government.

• Disciplinary action was taken against studentsfound guilty of participating in the nationalistagitation. Many of them were fined, expelled fromschools and colleges, arrested and sometimesbeaten by the police with lathis.

• A remarkable aspect of the Swadeshi agitationwas the active participation of women in themovement.

• The traditionally home-centred women of theurban middle classes joined processions andpicketing. From then on they were to take anactive part in the nationalist movement.

• Many prominent Muslims joined the SwadeshiMovement, including Abdul Rasul, the famousbarrister, Liaquat Hussain, the popular agitatorand Guznavi, the businessman.

• Maulana Abul Kalam Azad joined one of therevolutionary terrorist groups.

• Many other middle and upper class Muslims,however, remained neutral or, led by the Nawabof Dhaka (who was given a loan of Rs. 14 lakh by


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

the Government of India), even supportedPartition on the plea that East Bengal would havea Muslim majority.

• In this communal attitude, the Nawab of Dhakaand others were encouraged by the officials.

• In a speech at Dhaka, Lord Curzon declared thatone of the reasons for the partition was to investthe Mohammedans in Eastern Bengal with a unitywhich they had not enjoyed since the days of theold Musalman Viceroys and Kings.

All-India Aspect of the Movement

• The cry to Swadeshi and Swaraj was soon takenup by other provinces of India.

• Movements in support of Bengal's unity andboycott of foreign goods were organised inBombay, Madras and north India.

• The leading role in spreading the SwadeshiMovement to the rest of the country was playedby Tilak.

• Tilak quickly saw that with the inaugurationof this movement in Bengal a new chapter inthe history of Indian rationalism hadopened.

• Here was a challenge and an opportunity to leadto a popular struggle against the British Raj andto unite the entire country in one bond of commonsympathy. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• During the First World War, the nationalistfeelings grew stronger, which outburst into riseof two Home Rule Leagues in India. One wasfounded by Tilak at Poona and the other by Mrs.Annie Besant at Madras.

• Mrs. Annie Besant was one of the firebrandpoliticians of the national movement. She was oneof the leaders of the Theosophical movement andhad adopted India as her home and worked forits social, educational and religious regeneration.She was disillusioned with the tone of themoderates.

• Like a true patriot, she wanted to do somethingtangible and concrete for the political liberationof India. It was with this aim in view that sheorganized the Home Rule Movement.

• Annie Besant was inspired by the Irish Home RuleMovement. In the Congress session of 1915, sheproposed that a similar movement should bestarted in India. Bal Gangadhar Tilak and otherextremists supported the move whole-heartedly.They felt that under the Moderates, the Congressorganization had become lifeless and that itshould be made more vigorous so as to win overmass sympathy.

• Tilak and Mrs. Annie Besant decided to put anew life in the national movement of India. Theystarted two separate Home Rule Leagues to carryon propaganda all over the country in favour ofthe demand for the grant of Home Rule after theFirst World War. Tilak set up the Home RuleLeague in December 1915. Its headquarters wereat Poona. Annie Besant set up a similar HomeRule League in September 1916. Its headquarterswere at Adyar near Madras.

• The leaders of the Home Rule Movement followedconstitutional means to achieve their aim. Theyshunned violent and revolutionary methodsbecause they did not like to embarrass the BritishGovernment during the war.

• Tilak's activities were confined to BombayPresidency and the Central province while AnnieBesant popularized this movement in the rest ofIndia. The branches of the league were set up allover the country.

• Tilak made a whirlwind tour of the country in1916 and in his speeches he said, "Swaraj is mybirthright and I shall have it." He said that HomeRule was the only cure of India's political ills andthe grievances of the Indians. He preached theidea of Home Rule through his two newspapers- Kesari and Maratha.

• Annie Besant also toured the country and createda lot of enthusiasm among the people for the causeof Home Rule. She carried on the propaganda infavour of it in the newspapers named New Indiaand Commonwealth.

• The movement reached its peak in 1917. TheGovernment got panicky at the activities of theHome Rule Movement and it thought ofsuppressing it with a heavy hand. TheGovernment made use of Defence of India Act tocurb the activities of the agitators. Students wereprohibited from attending Home Rule meetings.

• Tilak was prosecuted for his fiery and excitingspeeches and his entry in Punjab and Delhi wasbanned. Important leaders of the movementincluding Annie Besant were interned.

• Various restrictions were imposed on the pressby using the Indian Press Act of 1910. But therepressive policy followed by the Governmentonly added fuel to the fire. Strikes, agitation andprotest meetings were organized throughout thecountry.

• The government realized the seriousness of thedemonstrations that broke out in support of theHome Rule League. The Indians seemed to beprepared to pay any price to achieve the HomeRule. Therefore, to appease the nationalists, theSecretary of State for India made a declaration on

HOME RULE LEAGUES88888


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

August 20, 1917 announcing the British policytowards India.

• As a result, the Home Rule Movement died outgradually.

Importance of the Home Rule Movement

• It transformed the national movement into thepeoples' movement as more and more people

began to take part in it. It worked as a light housewhen the political atmosphere in the country wasfull of disappointment. It put new life in thenational movement.

• It gave definite shape and direction to themovement for Swaraj. It also influenced theforeign statesmen and several of the Americanleaders. Many British members also supportedthe demand for Home Rule to the Indians.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

M.K. Gandhi had not played any leading role inthe Congress and was unknown to the masses beforehis arrival in India in 1915. But, surprisingly, hebecame the undisputed leader of the Congress andthe leader of masses within a short span of 5 years,i.e. from 1915 to 1920. Was this phenomenon anoutcome of a skilful political game on the part ofGandhi or was it due to the circumstances? A numberof factors contributed to the rise of Gandhi as theundisputed leader of the Congress.

Reasons for his rise

Satyagraha: A major factor responsible for theemergence of Gandhi in Indian politics was the successof his resistance, namely Satyagraha, based on truthand non-violence in South Africa. The South Africanexperience (1893-1914) contributed in a number ofways to the foundations of Gandhi's ideology andmethods as well as to his later achievements in India.Till 1906, Gandhi was a rising lawyer-politician. Hefollowed the 'moderate' techniques of prayers andpetitions in the struggle against racial discrimination,a totally new departure began with three campaignsof Satyagraha during 1907-1908, 1908-1911 and 1913-1914. The peculiar conditions of South Africa enabledGandhi to bring together people of different religions,communities and classes.

South African experience: This South Africanexperience projected Gandhi as an all India figurefrom the beginning of his work in India more thanany other politician all of whom (like Tilak, LajpatRai or Bipin Chandra Pal) had essentially regionalbases. The South African experience made him aninternational celebrity. Further, the connections whichmany South African Indians had with their originalhomes in different parts of the country helped tospread the name of Gandhi throughout India. Thirteenout of the first 25 inmates of the Sabarmati Ashram(1915) came from Tamilnadu, something which wouldhave been inconceivable then for any other Indianleader.

Disappointment from Moderates: Thedisillusionment of the people with the methods andfailures of the Moderates was another contributory

factor. The methods and techniques of the moderatesdid not include any technique for mass mobilizationbecause, in their opinion, the masses were not yetsufficiently educated and enlightened to take part inthe nationalist movement. Their achievements also didnot bring about any substantial relief to the masses ingeneral and the peasants and the workers in particular.So, the masses were eagerly waiting for a leader whocould lead them in a movement aimed at removingtheir hardships.

Inability of Extremists: Equally important wasthe failure of the Extremists to reach and mobilize themasses. Though the extremists made a departure intheory from the methods of the Moderates byincluding mass participation in their methods andtechniques of political agitation, they could not put itinto practice essentially because they had doubts abouttheir ability to control the masses once they arearoused. Thus, the Extremists too, like the Moderates,did not provide leadership to the eagerly waitingmasses, though they believed that mass action couldbe a variable weapon for achieving their aims.

Failure of Revolutionaries: The failure of theRevolutionary Terrorists to achieve their main goal ofexpelling the British from India through the use offorce was as much responsible as the above factorsfor the emergence of Gandhi. The RevolutionaryTerrorists did not bother to involve the masses in theiractivities. Even if they wanted to do so, they wouldnot have succeeded in their goals because of theessentially peaceful nature of the Indian masses.

Personality: Above all, the personality of Gandhiand his simple and saintly habits were also responsibleof his emergence in Indian politics. Gandhi had agood knowledge of the people and hence deliberatelycultivated certain simple and saintly habits or whatthe non-disciples usually consider Gandhian Fads suchas vegetarianism, nature therapy, experiments insexual self-restrain, etc. Also, his use of simpleHindustani in preference to English and of religioustexts, travelling in third class, wearing simple clothfrom 1921 onwards etc., had the same impact on theminds of the common people who at once took himto their hearts. Gandhi was thus firmly rooted in the

EMERGENCE OF GANDHI99999


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YIndian traditions and it was from that fact that hedrew his immense strength.

Satyagraha in India

In India, the first time Gandhi was obliged toresort to Satyagraha was in Champaran district inBihar where he got the grievances of the indigocultivators redressed in 1917. For the second time, heput the technique of Satyagraha into practice in 1918at Ahmedabad in order to solve a dispute betweenthe textile mill workers and the owners there. In thesame year, he launched Satyagraha for the third timein the Khera district of Gujarat in order to force theBritish government to meet the peasants' demand ofsuspension of land revenue for the famine period. All

these Satyagrahas were launched to solve the localissues. But they provided him with the requiredexperience to launch future movements at an all-Indialevel.

The technique of Satyagraha, being based on non-violence, could easily attract the masses to participatein the nationalist movement. However, as a politician,Gandhi in practice sometimes settled for less thancomplete non-violence. This was evident in hiscampaign for military recruitment in 1918 in the hopeof winning post-war political concessions, Further, hisrepeated insistence that even violence was preferableto cowardly surrender to injustice sometimes createddelicate problems of interpretation. But historicallymuch more significant than this personal philosophy(fully accepted only by a relatively small group ofdisciples) was the way in which the resultantperspective on controlled mass participationobjectively fitted in with the interests and sentimentsof socially-decisive sections of the Indian people.Indian politicians, before Gandhi, had tended tooscillate between moderate mendicancy andindividual terrorism basically because of theirinhibition about uncontrolled mass movements. TheGandhian model proved acceptable to business groupsas well as to the relatively better-off or locallydominant sections of the peasantry, all of whom stoodto lose something if political struggle turned intouninhibited and violent social revolution. In moregeneral terms, the doctrine of 'ahimsa' lay at the heartof the essentially unifying role assumed by Gandhi,mediating internal social conflicts, contributing greatlyto the joint national struggle against foreign rule, butalso leading to periodic retreats and sometimes majorreverses.

Gandhi's idea of 'non-cooperation'

To Gandhi, non-cooperation with the evil-doers;in this case the British government, was the duty ofthe virtuous man. It was considered by Gandhi as amild form of agitation, and it was resorted to by himbetween1921-1922 during the Non-cooperationMovement. This technique, with its programmes likethe surrender of titles by the patriotic Indiansconferred on them by the British, boycott ofgovernment schools and colleges by students as wellas teachers, boycott of courts and other governmentservices, boycott of foreign goods etc, had animmediate appeal to the masses who were sufferingunder the British rule.

Gandhi's views about 'civil disobedience'

Civil disobedience of the laws of the unjust and

What is Satyagraha?

'Satyagraha' was based on truth and non-violence(ahimsa). Though Gandhi's 'Satyagraha' revisedconsiderate originality and was, in fact a meticulouslyworked out philosophy, nevertheless was influenced byThoreau, Emerson, and Tolstoy.

The term, Satyagraha was coined by Gandhi toexpress the nature of non-violent direct action of theIndians in South Africa against the racial policy of thegovernment there. The literal meaning of Satyagraha isholding on to truth. He was anxious to distinguishSatyagraha from passive resistance (the method adoptedby the Moderates). Passive resistance is an act ofexpediency where as Satyagraha is a moral weapon basedon the superiority of soul-force or love-force over physicalforce. Passive resistance is the weapon of the weak, while'Satyagraha' can be practiced only by the bravest whohave the courage to die without killing. While in passiveresistance the aim is to embarrass the opponent intosubmission, the aim of Satyagraha is to wean the opponentaway from error by love and patient suffering. Passiveresistance is static, while Satyagraha is dynamic. Whilepassive resistance is a negative approach, Satyagraha ispositive in content and it emphasized internal strength ofcharacter.

Techniques: There are different techniques ofSatyagraha. Fasting is one technique, but it has to beapplied generally against those who are bound by ties ofclose personal affection. Hijrat or voluntary migration isanother technique of Satyagraha. Gandhi, however, madeit very clear that people who adopt this technique shouldonly aim at getting their legitimate rights and status andnot be hostile to the other party. Thus, he felt that strikesand hartals could be effective weapons if they did notaim at destruction and sabotage. Gandhi would notconsider scorched earth policy to be a technique ofSatyagraha. He also ruled out underground activities. Forhim, means were as important as the end.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

tyrannical government is a strong and extreme formof political agitation according to Gandhi. Also, in hisopinion, this technique can be more dangerous andpowerful than armed rebellion and, hence, should beadopted only as a last resort. To the masses who hadbeen the main victims of British imperialism andwhose suffering reached the extreme point in the late1920's due to the worldwide economic crisis (1929-32), this technique of agitation with its programmessuch as the breaking of the notorious Salt Laws,picketing foreign cloth and liquor shops, hartals andstrikes, non-payment of taxes (restricted to only a fewareas) etc., seemed to be the only way to remove theirsufferings.

Gandhian socio-economic programmes

His socio-economic programmers consisted ofthose of Khadi, village reconstruction, Hindu-Muslimunity, Harijan welfare, etc. To begin with, his

programme of Khadi and his anti-industrial themehad a real attraction of the peasants and the artisanswho suffered heavily due to the process ofmodernization and industrialization particularlyunder colonial conditions. The programme of villagereconstruction could immediately get him the supportof rural folks who formed the overwhelming majorityof Indian population. His programme of Harijanwelfare, which included opening of wells, roads andtemples and also some humanitarian work, aimed atimproving the lot of the untouchables (called Harijansor the people of God by Gandhi), naturally endearedhim to the hearts of these people. Thus, thisprogramme indirectly helped to spread the messageof nationalism down to the lowest and most oppressedsections of rural society and Harijans in many partsof the country developed a traditional loyalty towardsthe Congress which helped the party even afterindependence. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The Non-Cooperation movement was launchedby the Gandhi-led Congress Party in January 1921 inorder to pressurize the British to redress three of itsgrievances:

• Punjab wrong• Khilafat wrong• Denial of SwarajPunjab wrong: Indian leadership wanted the

British to remedy the 'Punjab wrong', i.e., the Britishgovernment should express its regret on thehappenings in Punjab, particularly in Amritsar.

The government, determined to suppress thenationalist agitation against the Rowlatt Act of 1919(under this Act, anyone could be arrested andimprisoned without any trial), decided to meet thepopular protest with repression, particularly inPunjab. At this time was perpetrated one of the worstpolitical crimes in modern history. An unarmed butlarge crowd had gathered on 13 April 1919 in theJallianwalla Bagh (a garden) at Amritsar to protestagainst the arrest and deportation of two of theirpopular leaders, (Dr. Satya Pal and Dr. Kitchlu).General Dyer, who had been recently given chargeof the town to restore law and order, had alreadyissued a proclamation banning all meetings but itwas not made public. The General now surroundedthe garden and closed the only exit and opened fireon the large peaceful crowd without any provocation.This massacre of innocent people sent the whole ofthe Punjab into ferment. As a result, martial law wasproclaimed throughout Punjab and the people weresubjected to the most uncivilized atrocities such ascrawling on the ground, flogging, being deprived ofwater and electric supplies, etc. People got a glimpseof the ugliness and brutality that lay behind the façadeof civilization that imperialism and foreign ruleprofessed.

Khilafat wrong: Indians demanded thegovernment to remedy the 'Khilafat Wrong', i.e. theBritish should adopt a lenient attitude towardsTurkey which stood defeated in World War I. TheIndian Muslims became apprehensive of the fate ofTurkey and its Sultan who was also the Khalifa orthe religious head of the Muslims all over the world.

The Muslims, therefore, formed a Khilafat Committeeunder the leadership of the Ali brothers (MaulanaMohammed Ali and Shaukat Ali), Maulana Azad,Hakim Ajmal Khan and Hasrat Mohani. Its purposewas to organize a countrywide agitation if theposition of the Khalifa was undermined. Britainannounced its peace terms to Turkey on 15th May1920 and decided to abolish the title of Khalifaenjoyed by the Sultan of Turkey. The Central KhilafatCommittee adopted the Non-Cooperation resolution(suggested by Mahatma Gandhi) at its Bombaysession on 28th May 1920. A meeting of the Hindusand Muslims was held at Allahabad on June 1st and2nd, and an appeal was made to the governmentthat Britain should offer better peace terms to Turkeyand should not take away the title of the Khalifa. Incase the government did not agree to their demand,they would refuse to cooperate with the government.Gandhi and many other Congress leaders viewedthe Khilafat agitation as a golden opportunity forbringing the Hindus and Muslims together on thenational front. Therefore, the Congress decided tocooperate with the Khilafat movement and club itsdemand with those of the Khilafat Committee.

Swaraj issue: Indians demanded a new schemeof reforms which would take India nearer to its goalof Swaraj. However, the word Swaraj was not yetproperly defined by the Congress leaders at thisstage.

But the British government had refused to annulthe Rowlatt Act, make amends for the atrocities inthe Punjab, satisfy the nationalist urge for Swaraj,and offer more lenient terms to Turkey. So, in June,1920 an all party conference met at Allahabad andapproved a programme of boycott of schools, collegesand law courts. The Khilafat Committee launched anon-cooperation movement on 31st August, 1920.

What was the programme of Non-cooperation?

The Congress, under the leadership of Gandhi,started the Non-cooperation movement in January1921. The movement included some negative as wellas positive programmes. The negative programmeswere: surrender of titles and honorary officers and

NON-COOPERATIONMOVEMENT (1921-1922)

1010101010


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

resignation from nominated seats in local bodies;refusal to attend government or semi-governmentfunctions; boycott of government schools and collegesby the students and teachers; boycott of British courtsby lawyers and litigants; boycott of elections for thecouncils as suggested by the reforms of 1919; boycottof foreign goods; refusal on the part of the military,clerical and labouring classes to offer themselves asrecruits in Mesopotamia. These programmers werenegative in nature as through these, Indians soughtto refuse to cooperate with the British in administeringand exploiting their country for the benefit of theforeign rulers.

Some positive programmes were also undertakenduring the non-cooperation movement so that theIndians in general would not have to suffer undulydue to the above mentioned negative programmesand also in order to make the movement a success.They were: establishment of national schools, colleges,and private arbitration courts (known as panchayats)all over India; popularization of Swadeshi and revivalof hand spinning and hand-weaving for producingKhadi (hand-woven cloth); development of harmonybetween the Hindus and Muslims; removal ofuntouchability and other measures for Harijanwelfare; emancipation and upliftment of women. Thefirst two programmers sought to remove thehardships caused to the people by the negativeprogrammes, while the last three ensured theparticipation of Muslims, Harijans and women in theNon-cooperation movement.

Phases of Non-cooperation

Four phases may be distinguished in the courseof the movement, specifically responding to successivecalls from the Congress. During the first phase, i.e.from January to March 1921, the main emphasis wason students leaving government, schools and collegesand lawyers giving up practice. Even the 'charkha'(the spinning wheel) programme initially had a strongintelligentsia orientation; with students and educatedurban people in general being urged to take upspinning on a voluntary basis is a symbol of theiridentification with the rural masses and as a quickroad to Swadeshi. After spectacular beginning withmassive student strikes at Calcutta and Lahore andeminent lawyers like C.R. Das and Motilal Nehrugiving up their practice, this exclusively intelligentsiamovement soon began showing signs of decline.

The second phase (April to June 1921) startedwhen the Vijaywada session of the All IndiaCongress Committee (AICC) found the country notyet sufficiently disciplined, organized and ripe for

civil disobedience. So, it decided to concentrate onraising Rs. one crore for the Tilak Swaraj Fundenrolling one crore Congress members and installing20 lakh charkhas by 30th June.

The third phase covered the period from July toNovember 1921. In the face of mounting pressuresfrom the masses, the Bombay AICC meeting of Julyadopted a somewhat more militant stance,concentrating on boycott of foreign cloth (includingpublic bonfires) and boycott of the expected visit ofthe Prince of Wales in November, though full scalecivil disobedience through non-payment of taxes wasagain postponed. At this juncture, Gandhi gave acall for flooding the prisons with volunteers, andorganization of volunteer brands was given toppriority. Viceroy Reading quickly grasped thesignificance of the new mass orientation involved inthe picketing and courting of arrest by tens ofthousands. He realized that the change from Gandhi'sappeal to intellectuals to appeal to ignorant masseshad altered the situation but it had the advantage ofbringing intellectuals and persons of property closerto the British. The Prince of Wales was treated withan extremely successful country-wide hartal on 17thNovember and there were violent clashes in Bombaywhich made Gandhi denounce the violence andpostpone once against plans for civil disobedience inthe selected single taluka of Bardoli.

The developments in the fourth phase (betweenNovember 1921 and February 1922) nearly broughtthe government to its knees. Some Khilafat leaderslike Hasrat Mohani, angered by the jailing of the Alibrothers in November (for speeches at the KarachiKhilafat), were demanding complete independenceand giving up of the non-violence dogma. The newgovernment policy of large-scale arrests and ban onmeetings and volunteer groups threatened to alienatethe liberals while much of the country seemed to beon the brink of formidable revolt. Gandhi finallydecided on the issue of infringed liberties of speech,press and association to begin from the second weekof February 1922. As is well known, this campaign,together with the entire movement, was abruptlycalled off on 11th February, at Gandhi's insistence,following news of the immolation of 22 policemenby angry peasants at Chauri-Charua in Gorakhpurdistrict of Uttar Pradesh on 5th February, 1922.

Participation in Non-cooperation

The response of different social groups andclasses to the movement was quite varied. To beginwith students and teachers actively participated inthe movement. Hence, the programme of educational


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

THE SWARAJIST PARTY

� When C. R. Das and the other Bengal leaders were in Alipore Central Jail, they evolved a new programme ofnon-cooperation with the Government through legislatures.

� Their idea was to enter the legislatures in large numbers and "carry on a policy of uniform, continuous andconsistent opposition to the Government." Motilal Nehru also shared the views of C.R. Das. In July 1922, C.R.Das came out of jail and began to carry on propaganda in favour of Council-entry.

� When a meeting of the All-India Congress Committee was held at Calcutta in November 1922, there weredifferences of opinion among the Congress leaders on the question of Council-entry. While C. R. Das, MotilalNehru and Hakim Ajmal Khan were in favour of it, C. Rajagopalachari, Dr. Ansari, etc., were opposed to it.

� Inspite of lengthy debates, no decision was arrived at. At the annual session of the Congress held at Gaya inDecember 1922, the "No-changers" won a victory and the programme of Council-entry was rejected. C.R. Daswho presided over the session resigned from the Congress and announced his decision to form the SwarajistParty.

� The Object of the new party was to wreck the Government of India Act, 1919 from within the Councils. InMarch 1923, the first Conference of the Swarajist Party was held at the residence of Motilal Nehru at Allahabadand the future programme of the Party was decided. The keynote of the programme of the Party wasobstructionism.

� Its members were to contest elections on the issue of the redress of the wrongs done by the British bureaucracy,to oppose every measure of the Government and to throw-out all legislative enactments proposed by the BritishGovernment. The view of the Swarajists was that the seats in the legislatures must be captured so that they didnot fall into the hands of undesirable persons who were tools in the hands of the bureaucracy in India.

� Leaders of the Swarajist Party declared that outside the Councils, they would co-operate with the constructiveprogramme of the Congress under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi and in case their methods failed, theywould, without any hesitation, join Mahatma Gandhi's Civil Disobedience Movement, if and when launchedby him.

� The Swarajist Party fought the elections in 1923 and refused to come to any understanding with the LiberalFederation. The Swarajist Party won a majority in the Legislative Council of the Central Provinces.

� It was the dominant Party in Bengal. It also won good support in U.P. and Bombay. However, the Swarajistparty was at its best in the Central Assembly under the leadership of Motilal Nehru. By winning over thesupport of the Nationalist Party and a few other members, the Swarajist Party was able to command a workingmajority and was thus able to accomplish a lot.

� On 18th February, 1924, the Swarajist Party was able to get a resolution passed by which the Government wasrequested to establish full responsible Government in India. A demand was also made that a Round TableConference consisting of the representatives of India should be called at an early date to frame a Constitutionfor India.

� The appointment of the Muddiman Committee was the result of a resolution of the Swarajist Party. MotilalNehru was requested to become a member of this Committee but he refused. Some of the demands in thebudget of 1924-25 were rejected by the Central Assembly as a result of the efforts of the Swarajist Party.

� The Assembly also refused to allow the Government to introduce the entire Finance Bill. In February 1925,V.J.Patel introduced a Bill asking for the repeal of certain laws and with the exception of one, the Bill waspassed. A resolution was passed with the help of the Swarajist Party demanding the release of certain politicalprisoners.

� The Swarajists resorted to walkouts as a mark of protest against the policy of the Government. They boycottedall receptions, parties or functions organized by the Government. What was done in the Central Assembly wasalso done in those provincial legislatures where the Swarajists had some influence.

� For the first time, the Legislative Assembly wore the appearance of a truly National Assembly where nationalgrievances were fully voiced, national aims and aspirations expressed without any reservation and real characterof the British rule exposed. The British autocracy and Indian bureaucracy stood exposed to the whole world.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

boycott was quite effective, particularly in Bengal. All-India figures collected by the Intelligence Departmentrevealed the impact to have been considerable incolleges, but non-existent at the primary level. Aconsiderable number of national schools and collegeswere also founded (like the Jamia Millia Islamia inAligarh, later shifted to Delhi, the Kashi Vidyapeethat Banaras and the Gujarat Vidyapeeth) along with442 institutions started in Bihar and Orissa, 190 inBengal, 189 in Bombay, and 137 in Uttar Pradesh.Many of these proved short-lived, as the pull ofconventional degrees and jobs naturally reasserteditself when Swaraj failed to come in a year but quitea few survived to serve as valuable seminars ofnationalism.

For the peasants, the Gandhian programmesenvisaged economic revival through self-help.Panchayats proved very popular in Bihar and Orissawhile in Bengal 866 arbitration courts were set upbetween February 1921 and April 1922 and at theirheight they considerably outnumbered thegovernment courts. The anti-liquor campaign becameformidable partly because lower castes found in it anopportunity for sanskritizing and social upliftment.No definite statistics are available about theimpact of the charkha drive but handloom clothproduction did go up sharply between 1920 and1923. The Khilafat agitation made Hindu-Muslimunity a powerful, though temporary fact. Progressregarding untouchability was much less marked,though Gandhi deserves all credit for bringing theissue to the forefront of national politics for the firsttime.

Labourers seemed to be running amuckthroughout 1921 by the middle of 1920. The post warboom had succeeded by as recession particularly inthe Calcutta industry, with the mill-owners trying tocut back production with a four-day week. Theworkers fought back, and there were a number ofstrikes in Bengali jute mills in 1921. SwamiVishwanand and Swami Dersananand tried toorganize the coal miners of the Raniganj-Jharia belt,initially with some help from Indian mine ownersfighting European hegemony. Though Gandhi himselfdid not include strikes, particularly political strikes,in the various programmes of the Non-cooperationmovement, some regional Congress leaders did takeactive part in some strikes, most notably in Bengaland Madras.

The initial appeal for self-sacrifice to the upperand middle classes was hardly successful. Only 24titles were surrendered out of 5,000 odd, and thenumber of lawyers giving up practice stood at 180 inMarch 1921. Polling was low in many places in theNovember 20 elections, falling to only 8% in Bombaycity and 5% in Lahore, but candidates offeredthemselves in all but 6 out of 637 seats, and councilfunctions could not be disrupted as planned.

A good number of merchants participated in themovement by refusing to indent foreign cloth. Thevalue of imports of foreign cloth fell from Rs. 102crores in 1920-21 to Rs. 57 crores in 1921-22. Forimporters of Lancashire cloth, nationalism in 1921nearly coincided with short term business interests,as with the fall in the rupee sterling exchange ratio,Indian merchants were being asked to pay much morefor British goods than previously contracted for. Theirsupport was decisive in bringing about a qualitativechange in the Congress funds. The Congress had onlyRs. 43,000 in its coffers in 1920 but was able to collectmore than Rs. 130 lakhs between 1921 and 1923.

The big industrialists and capitalists, however,still remained hostile, and an Anti-Non-CooperationAssociation was started in 1920 by PurshottamdasThakurdas, Jamunadas Dwarkadas, Setalvad etc.While the textile was certainly helped by the nationalSwadeshi upsurge, fear of labour unrest was probablycrucial in keeping industrialists ambivalent.

What the Non-cooperation achieved?

The Non-Cooperation movement, despite itsfailure to achieve any of its three major objectives,had great significance in the Indian nationalmovement. The Indian nationalist movement, for thefirst time in its history, acquired a real mass basewith the participation of different sections of Indiansociety and more notably of peasants and workers.The nationalist sentiments reached the remotestcorners of the country during this movement. Besides,it transformed the Indian National Congress from adeliberative assembly to an organization for action.The movement, above all, demonstrated thewillingness and ability of the people in general toendure hardships and punishments caused by thegovernment to a remarkable degree. The movementalso inspired the people for further sacrifices in thecause of national independence. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The rise and growth of revolutionary terrorismin India from the beginning of the 20th century wasdue to several factors. The youth, particularly thoseof Bengal, Punjab and Maharashtra, were increasinglygetting frustrated with the moderate methods andtechniques of political struggle such as petitions,meetings, resolutions, speeches, etc. The youth werealso gradually losing faith in the extremists' methodsof passive resistance (i.e. to refuse to cooperate withthe government and to boycott government service,court, government schools and colleges) to achievenationalist aims. This feeling was further strengthenedby the failure of the Swadeshi and Anti-partitionMovement. Besides, there was growing hatred amongthe Indian youth for foreign rule due to the racialsuperiority and arrogant behaviour of the British. Thishatred was also due to cruel measures adopted bythe British to suppress the national movement.

Secret Societies

Several secret societies were set up especially inBengal and Maharashtra. In Bengal, the firstrevolutionary secret societies started around 1902 - theAnushilan Samiti of Calcutta founded by BarindraKumar Ghosh and Jatindranath Banerji (Aurobindo'semissaries) and Promotha Mitter, and the AnushilanSamiti of Dacca founded by Pulin Das. In Maharashtra,the first secret society, viz., Mitra Mela, was foundedby the Savarkar brothers in 1889. Later, when V.D.Savarkar went abroad, his elder brother GaneshSavarkar started it in 1907 the 'Abhinava Bharat' whichsoon had many branches all over western India. Secretsocieties were also established in Bihar, Orissa, Punjaband other regions of India as well. A few of themsucceeded in keeping mutual contact among them butmost of them worked as isolated groups of leaders.

It was only in the 1920's that revolutionary militantgroups came at forefront. The 'Hindustan SocialistRepublican Association' even established centres ofrevolutionary activity aboard. In London, the lead wastaken by Shayamji Krishnavarma and V.D. Savarkar, inEurope by Madam Cama and Ajit Singh, while in theU.S.A and Canada Sohan Singh Bhakna and Har Dayalwere the prominent leaders, While the Indian

revolutionaries in Britain and Europe were no morethan fairly isolated emigre groups, those in the U.S.Aand Canada acquired mass base. These people, underthe leadership of Sohan Singh Bhakna and Har Dayal,had established the 'Ghadar' (revolution) party in 1913.While most of its members were Sikh peasants, workers,petty traders, soldiers, etc., their leaders were mostlyeducated Hindus or Muslims. The party had activemembers in other countries such as Mexico, Japan,China, Philippines, Malaya, Singapore, Thailand, Indo-China and East and South Africa.

How did they spread their ideas?

The revolutionary terrorists, both in India andabroad, published a number of newspapers, journalsand pamphlets in order to propagate revolutionaryideas. Newspapers like 'Sandhya' and 'Yugantar' inBengal and 'Kal' in Maharashtra began to advocaterevolutionary terrorism. A good number of Journalswere also brought out by Indian revolutionariesabroad. Some of these journals were - 'IndianSociologist' by Shyamji Krishna Varma from London,'Bande Mataram' by Madam Bhikaji Cama from Paris,'Talvar' by Virendranath Chattopadhyay from SanFrancisco, etc. The most important pamphlets broughtout by revolutionaries were the 'Bhawani Mandir'(by Aurobindo Ghosh in 1905) and 'Oh! Martyrs' bythe London group in 1907.

Assassination of unpopular officials

A beginning in the direction of assassination ofoppressive and unpopular officials had been madein 1897 when the Chapekar brothers, Damodar andBalakrishna, assassinated two unpopular Britishofficials at Poona. Again in 1907, an unsuccessfulattempt was made on the life of the unpopular Lt.Governor of East Bengal, Mr. Fuller, by somemembers of the Anushilan Samiti of Calcutta. In 1908Khudiram Bose and Prafulla Chaki threw a bomb ata carriage which was believed to be occupied byKingsford, the unpopular Judge of Muzzaffarpur. Therevolutionary terrorists became so bold that two ofthem, Rash Behari Bose and Sachindranath Sanyal,

MILITANT REVOLUTIONARYTERRORISM1111111111


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

threw a bomb at the Viceroy Lord Hardinge while hewas riding on an elephant in a state procession inDelhi in 1912. The Viceroy was wounded but notkilled. Another dramatic manifestation ofrevolutionary terrorist activity was the assassinationof the British police officer, Saunders, by BhagatSingh, Azad and Rajguru in 1928. The police officerhad earlier ordered lathi-charge on a demonstration(against the appointment of the Simon Commission)led by Lala Lajpat Rai, and this 'Sher-e-Punhab'incurred a fatal injury to which he succumbed later.

Conspiracies hatched

The revolutionary terrorists also tried to organizemilitary conspiracies with the help of Indian soldiersin the British army and also that of the foreigncountries hostile to Britain. For revolutionaries strivingfor immediate complete independence, the FirstWorld War seemed a heaven-sent opportunity,draining India of troops (the number of white soldierswas reduced to just 15,000) and bringing thepossibility of financial and military help from theenemies of Britain, mainly Germany and Turkey.Britain's war with Turkey brought about closecooperation between Hindu nationalists and militantMuslim pan-Islamists. As a result of this cooperation,important Muslim revolutionary leaders emerged like- Barkatullah in the Ghadar Party and; MuhammadHussain and Obaidulla Sindhi in Deobandh.

On Indian Soil: In Bengal, most of therevolutionary groups united under Jatin Mukherjipopularly known as 'Bagha Jatin'. These groupsplanned the disruption of rail communications,seizure of Fort William in Calcutta (contacts had beenmade with the 16th Rajput Rifles stationed there) andlanding of German arms (for arranging this, NarenBhattacharji, later known as M.N. Roy, was sent toJava). The grandiose plans were, however, ruined bypoor coordination and Jatin died a hero's death nearBalasore on the Orissa coast where he had beentracked down by the police through the help of localvillagers. The Bengal plans were part of a far-flungconspiracy organized by Rash Behari Bose andSachindranth Sanyal in cooperation with the returnedGhadarites in Punjab. But many of the Punjabis whoreturned after 1914 were quickly rounded up by theBritish and the plan for a coordinated revolt on 21stFebruary, 1915, based on mutinies by Ferozpur,Lahore and Rawalpindi garrisons was foiled at thelast moment by treachery. Rash Behari Bose had to

flee to Japan and Sanyal was transported for havingtried to subvert the garrisons of Banaras andDanapore. Though the plan for an all India revoltmisfired badly, its organizers, and particularly theGhadarites, were still pioneers in taking revolutionaryideas to the army and the peasants. There were somescattered mutinies, most notable of them are - atSingapore, by the Indian sepoys of the British armyon 15th February 1915, of the Punjab Muslim 5th LightInfantry and the 36th Sikh Battalion.

On Foreign Land: Efforts to send help torevolutionaries form abroad were centered during thewar years in Berlin where the Indian IndependenceCommittee was set up in 1915 under VirendranathChattopadyay, Bhupen Dutta, Hardayal and someothers in collaboration with the German foreign officeunder the so-called Zimmerman Plan. An Indo-German-Turkish mission tried to stir up anti-Britishfeelings among tribes near the Indo-Iranian borderand in December 1915, Mahendra Pratap, Barkatullahand Abaidulla Sindhi set up a 'ProvisionalGovernment of Free India' at Kabul with some backingfrom crown prince Amanullah but not from the Amir,Habibulla. Funds were channeled through Germanembassies in the far East and from Japan. Rash BehariBose and Abani Mukherji made several efforts to sendarms after 1915.

Dacoities and Robberies

Revolutionaries organized a number of raids ongovernment armouries, banks and police stations toraise funds, arms and ammunition. According toofficial record, between 1907 and 1917, the numberof dacoities that were conducted in different partsof India was 1121. The Chittagong groups ofrevolutionaries headed by Surya Sen brought off themost spectacular coup in the entire history of militantnationalism in April 1930 by seizing the localarmoury and issuing an independence proclamationin the name of the 'Indian Republic Army'. TheChittagong raid proved to be the curtain raiser foran extremely intense wave of terrorism in Bengalwith no less than 56 incidents reported in 1930 (asagainst just 47 for the entire decade 1919-29). Amongthem, the most spectacular raid was the one on theGovernment headquarters in Writer's Building inCalcutta in December 1930. In Punjab also, wherethe Hindustan Socialist Republic Association hadbecome very active, 26 incidents of robberies werereported in 1930. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• The Indian Statutory Commission was a group ofseven British Members of Parliament that hadbeen dispatched to India in 1927 to studyconstitutional reforms there. It was commonlyreferred to as the Simon Commission after itsChairman.

Background

• The Government of India Act 1919 had introducedthe system of dyarchy to govern the provinces ofBritish India. However, the Indian publicclamoured for revision of the difficult dyarchyform of government, and the Government of IndiaAct 1919 itself stated that a commission would beappointed after 10 years to investigate theprogress of the governance scheme and suggestnew steps for reform.

• In the late 1920s, the Conservative government,then in power in Britain, feared imminent electoraldefeat at the hands of the Labour Party, and alsofeared the effects of the consequent transferenceof control of India to such an "inexperienced"body.

• Hence, in November of 1927, Prime MinisterStanley Baldwin appointed seven MPs (includingChairman Simon) to constitute the commissionthat had been promised in 1919 that would lookinto the state of Indian constitutional affairs.

• The people of the Indian subcontinent wereoutraged and insulted, as the Simon Commission,which was to determine the future of India, didnot include a single Indian member.

• The Indian National Congress, at its December1927 meeting in Chennai, resolved to boycott theCommission and accepted the challenge of LordBirkenhead, the Secretary of State for India, todraft a constitution that would be acceptable tothe Indian populace. A faction of the MuslimLeague, led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, alsodecided to boycott the Commission.

• In Burma (Myanmar), which was included in theterms of reference of the Simon Commission, therewas strong suspicion either that Burma's

unpopular union with India would continue, orthat the constitution recommended for Burma bythe Simon Commission would be less generousthan that chosen for India; these suspicionsresulted in tension and violence in Burma leadingto the rebellion of Saya San.

Death of Lajpat Rai

• Almost immediately with its arrival in Mumbaion February 3, 1928, the Simon Commission wasconfronted by throngs of protestors. The entirecountry observed a hartal (strike), and manypeople turned out to greet the Commission withblack flags. Similar protests occurred in everymajor Indian city that the seven British MPsvisited. However, one protest against the SimonCommission would gain infamy above all theothers.

• On October 30, 1928, the Simon Commissionarrived in Lahore where, as with the rest of thecountry, its arrival was met with massive amountsof protestors. The Lahore protest was led byIndian nationalist Lala Lajpat Rai, who had moveda resolution against the Commission in the CentralLegislative Assembly of Punjab in February 1928.

• In order to make way for the Commission, thelocal police force began beating protestors withtheir lathis (sticks). The police were particularlybrutal towards Lala Lajpat Rai, who later thatday declared, "The blows which fell on me todayare the last nails in the coffin of Britishimperialism." On November 17, Lajpat Rai diedof his injuries.

Report of the Commission

• The Commission published its 17-volume reportin 1930. It proposed the abolition of dyarchy andthe establishment of representative governmentin the provinces. It also recommended thatseparate communal electorates be retained, butonly until tensions between Hindus and Muslimshad died down.

SIMON COMMISSION1212121212


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• Noting that educated Indians opposed theCommission and also that communal tensions hadincreased instead of decreasing, the Britishgovernment opted for another method of dealingwith the constitutional issues of India.

• Before the publication of the report, the Britishgovernment stated that Indian opinion wouldhenceforth be taken into account, and that thenatural outcome of the constitutional processwould be dominion status for India. The outcomeof the Simon Commission was the Governmentof India Act 1935, which established represen-tative government at the provincial level in Indiaand is the basis of many parts of the IndianConstitution.

NEHRU REPORT

• The "Nehru Report" (1928) was a memorandumoutlining a proposed new Dominion constitutionfor India. It was prepared by a committee of theAll Parties Conference chaired by Motilal Nehruwith his son Jawaharlal acting as secretary. Therewere nine other members in this committee,including two Muslims.

• The Constitution outlined by the Nehru reportwas for India enjoying dominion status withinthe British Commonwealth. Some of the importantelements of the report were:

(i) Unlike the eventual Government of India Act1935, it contained a Bill of Rights;

(ii) All power of government and all authority -legislative, executive and judicial - were to bederived from the people and the same would beexercised through organizations established by,or under, and in accordance with, theConstitution;

(iii) There would be no state religion; men and womenwould have equal rights as citizens;

(iv) There was to be federal form of government withresiduary powers vested in the centre. (Somescholars, such as Moore in "The Making of India'sPaper Federation, 1927-35" in 1988, consideredthe Nehru Report proposal as essentially unitaryrather than federal);

(v) It included a description of the machinery ofgovernment, including a proposal for the creation

of a Supreme Court and a suggestion that theprovinces should be linguistically determined;

(vi) It did not provide for separate electorates for anycommunity or for weightage for minorities. Bothof these were liberally provided in the eventualGovernment of India Act, 1935. However, it didallow for the reservation of Muslim seats inprovinces having a Muslim minority of at leastten per cent, but this was to be in strict proportionto the size of the community;

(vii)The language of the British Commonwealth wouldbe Hindustani, which might be written either inDevnagri or in Urdu character. The use of theEnglish language would be permitted.

• The Nehru Report, alongwith that of the SimonCommission was available to participants in thethree Indian Round Table Conferences 1931-1933.However, the Government of India Act 1935 owesmuch to the Simon Commission report and little,if anything, to the Nehru Report. Historicalsignificance of the Jinnah Report.

JINNAH'S FOURTEEN POINTS

• With few exceptions, Muslim leaders rejected theNehru proposals. In reaction, Mohammad AliJinnah drafted his Fourteen Points in 1929 whichbecame the core demands of the Muslimcommunity put forward as the price of theirparticipating in an independent united India.Their main objections were:

• Separate Electorates and Weightage - the 1916Congress-Muslim League agreement - theLucknow Pact, provided these to the Muslimcommunity whereas they were rejected by theNehru Report.

• Residuary Powers - the Muslims realized thatwhile they would be a majority in the provincesof the North-East and North-West of India, andhence would control their provincial legislatures,they would always be a minority at the Centre.Thus they demanded, contrary to the NehruReport, that residuary powers go to the provinces.

• The inability of Congress to concede these pointsmust be considered a major factor in the eventualpartition of India. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The Lahore Session of the Congress, symbolizingthe new militant spirit of the whole nation, passed aresolution declaring "Poorna Swaraj' (FullIndependence) as the objective of the Congress. Thenewly adopted tri-colour flag of freedom was hostedon 31st December 1929. January 26th, 1930 was fixedas the first Independence Day. This session alsolaunched the Civil Disobedience movement, but it didnot draw up a programme of struggle. That was leftto Gandhi, the Congress organization being placed athis disposal. Once again the nationalist movementled by Gandhi faced the government. The countrywas again filled with hope and exhilaration and thedetermination to be free.

The Lahore Session was followed by a two-monthlull, while the country and the government waited ofGandhi to decide on the precise methods of Non-violent struggle for 'Poorna Swaraj'. Independencepledges were taken at innumerable meetingsthroughout the country on 26th January denouncingthe British for having ruined India economically,politically, culturally, and spiritually. In the pledges,it was asserted that it was a crime against man andGod to submit any longer to such a rule. The Congresslegislators were ordered to resign on 6th January 1930.

Gandhi issued an eleven-point ultimatum to LordIrwin on 31st January, 1930. Further serious appealswere made for Civil disobedience, including non-payment of taxes. The choice of salt as the main issuesalso appeared some what eccentric at first, and Nehrulater recalled his initial sense of bewilderment. Thoughthe eleven points seemed a kind of retreat, they atleast concretized the national demand and related itto specific grievances.

Demands

The eleven points included redressal of twopeasants grievances, three specific bourgeois demandsand six issues of general interest. The peasants'demands were:

• 50 per cent reduction in land revenue and;• abolition of the salt tax and government salt

monopoly.The three specific bourgeois demands were:

• lowering of the Rupee-Sterling exchange ratio,• textile protection and,• reservation of coastal shipping for Indians.• The six issues of general interest were:• 50 per cent cut in military expenditure,• 50 per cent reduction in expenditure on civil

administration (civil service salaries),• total prohibition of Intoxicants,• release of all political prisoners,• reforms in the Central intelligence Department

(C.I.D.) and;• changes in the Arms Act enabling citizens to bear

arms for self-defence.

What is Dandi March?

The Civil Disobedience Movement was startedby Gandhi with his Dandi March (12th March to 6thApril 1930). The Dandi March, from the SabarmatiAshram to Dandi (a village on the Gujarat sea-coast)with 71 Ashram members drawn from all parts ofIndia, attracted enormous publicity and attention fromthe entire country and even abroad. Gandhi declaredon 11th March 1930 that wholesale illegal manufactureand auctioning of salt should begin after he hadhimself violated the law at Dandi; it could beaccompanied by boycott of foreign cloth and liquorafter his own arrest and everyone would have a freehand, subject to the pledge of non-violence and truth,though local leaders should be obeyed.

Stages of Civil Disobedience

The three different stages of the civil Disobediencemovement witnessed varying role of different socialgroups and classes.

First stage (March to September 1930): It sawthe high point of bourgeois participation in townsand controlled peasant mobilization in the villages

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCEMOVEMENT (1930-34)

1313131313


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

on issues selected by Gandhi such as salt, non-payment of revenue, picketing of liquor shops, andnon-payments of Chaukidari tax. Amongindustrialists, G.D. Birla donated approximately 5 lakhrupees to the movement according to BritishIntelligence estimates. His letters reveal him as activelytrying to persuade the Calcutta Marwari foreign piece-goods importers to establish trade contacts insteadwith Ahmedabad and Bombay cotton mills. WhileJamnalal Bajaj was unique among capitalists in beinga full time Congress activist (he served as AICCtreasurer for many years and went to jail in 1930),Walchand Hirachand urged fellow-businessmen in aletter to the FICCI in April 1930 to give up the policyof sitting on the fence and throw in their lot withthose that were fighting for Swaraj. In May 1930,FICCI also decided to boycott the Round TableConference as long as Gandhi stayed away from itand till the Viceroy made a definite promise regardingdominion status.

During the period 1921-22, the merchants andpetty traders were, on the whole, much moreenthusiastic supporters of the national movement thanindustrialists and capitalists. Collective pledges bymerchants not to indent foreign goods became verycommon in Bombay, Amritsar, Delhi and Calcuttaand represented a more effective form of boycott thanthe spectacular picketing by (often women) volunteers.The overall impact was a remarkable fall in Britishcloth imports. Other British imports also suffered and,from May to August 1930, the British TradeCommissioner's office was flooded with panic-strickenreports and complaints from 'white' firms.

In the countryside, the initial Gandhian CivilDisobedience movement took place in areas whichhad already witnessed some amount of Gandhianrural constructive work through local ashrams. Saltprovided the initial vital catalyst, but illegalmanufacture became difficult with the onset of themonsoon. Naturally, salt became the basis for asustained campaign only in the coastal parts ofBombay presidency, Balasore in Orissa and Midnapurin Bengal. Picketing of liquor shops and of exciselicense auctions became an important element of CivilDisobedience movement both in small towns andvillages. On the other hand, the peasants in manyareas firmly refused to pay the chaukidari tax despiteenormous physical correction and sale of property.Rural taluka of Khera district and Bardoli of Suratbecame centres of very successful no-revenuecampaign with peasants taking refuge in theneighbouring Baroda state in a 'Hijrat' (voluntarymigration) which, at its height on October 1930,

involved over 15,000 peasants in Khera. In the CentralProvinces, Maharashtra and Karnataka, the Congressleadership tried to utilize in a controlled manner thepotentially explosive issue of poor peasants and tribalgrievances regarding forest laws. Setting up trainingcamps for 'forest satyagrahis' and carefully selectingsatyagraha centres.

Second stage (October 1930 to March 1931): Fromthe beginning of this stage, there was an evidentdecline in enthusiasm and support from urbanmerchants with dealers breaking Congress-imposedseals on foreign cloth at a number of places. The gainsfrom Swadeshi demand were counter-balanced byfrequent hartals which dislocated trade and industry.The alarm-signals from business groups calling forcompromise, as well as the ultimate nationalistresponse to them, were more probably connected withdevelopments in the countryside.

In the rural areas, the more purely Gandhianforms based on the relatively propertied peasants werelosing some of their earlier potency in the face ofruthless British suppression. At the same time, therewere signs of a 'second wave', taking less manageableand socially dangerous forms, like no-rent or tribalrebellion. (No-rent campaigns were different from Norevenue campaigns, since the former were aimed atthe local zamindars and landlords, whereas the latterwere aimed at the Government). In scattered incidentsthroughout the country, the peasants were resistingthe arrests of their leaders and the seizure of theirproperty, mobilizing neighbouring villages throughthe blowing of conch-shells and surrounding andattacking police parties.

In August 1930 itself, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru andMr. Jayakar attempted to bring about compromisebetween the Congress and the government but failedbecause the government insisted on the withdrawalof the movement first. Meanwhile, the report of theSimon Commission had been submitted. The Britishgovernment decided to call the first Round TableConference to deliberate and discuss futureconstitutional reforms with the Indian leaders. TheConference started its deliberations on 12th November1930. But the Congress did not participate in it.Realizing the futility of talks in the absence of therepresentatives of the Congress, the Conference wasadjourned 'sine die' on 19th January 1931.

The government now realized the necessity ofcoming to terms with the Congress. He released themembers of the Working Committee of the Congress,including Gandhi on 26th January 1931. Efforts for acompromise between the Congress and the


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

government were revived by Tej Bahadur Sapru, Dr.Jayakar, etc. The efforts proved successful this timeand the Gandhi-Irwin Pact was signed in March 1931.By it, the government agreed to:

(a) Withdraw all ordinances and end prosecutions.

(b) Release all political prisoners, except those guiltyof violence.

(c) Restore the confiscated property of the Satyagraha.

(d) Permit peaceful picketing of liquor, opium andforeign cloth shops and;

(e) Permit the collection or manufacture of salt, freeof duty, to persons residing within a specificdistance of the seashore.

The Congress, on its part agreed to:

(a) suspend the Civil Disobedience movement,

(b) participate in the second Round Table Conference,and

(c) not to press for investigation into police excesses.

The Congress ratified it in its session held atKarachi in March 1931 due to the persuasion ofGandhi. Gandhi was deputed to attend the secondRound Table Conference as the sole representative ofthe Congress. The spirit of the pact was alreadymarred by the execution of Bhagat Singh and hiscomrades on the eve of the Karachi Session of theCongress. Certain other changes also took placebetween the signing of the Pact and the holding ofsecond Round Table Conference. Lord Irwin wasreplaced by Lord Wellington as the Viceroy of India.Lord Wellington was staunch conservative andrevived the repressive policy of the government soonafter his arrival in India. In England, while theConference was still in session, general elections tookplace and the Conservative government was in nomood to grant any concession to India. Gandhireturned to India in December 1931 as a dejectedperson and found that the government had alreadyrevived its policy of repression. He therefore, decidedto revive the Civil Disobedience movement and theCongress Working Committee approved it.

Third stage (January 1932 to April 1934): Thethird phase of the movement was officially withdrawnby the Congress in April 1934 though, unofficially,the Congress admitted defeat in the 1933 itself.Outmaneuvered and facing repressive measures onan unprecedented scale, the national movement underthe Congress still fought on valiantly for about a yearand a half. The movement, during this phase

comprised a wide range of activities almost totallysuppressed. The forms of defiance included picketingthe cloth and liquor shops, closing of markets andboycott of 'white' or loyalist business concerns,symbolic hoisting of Congress flags, holding in publicof 'illegal' Congress sessions, salt satyagrahas, non-payment of chaukidari taxes, no-rent as well as no-revenue, forest law violations, etc.

But by the second half of 1932 itself, the CivilDisobedience movement was evidently losing ground.It is true that the decline in peasants' participation,evident for instance in Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh andU.P., was clearly a submission to overwhelminglysuperior force rather than any loss of faith in theCongress. The halo of sacrifice and martyrdom, wonby the latter during 1930-34, helped decisively in thewinning elections from 1934 onwards. But we shouldnot forget that voting was not the same as agitating.The days of the classic satyagrahas had passed and,though the propertied peasants would go on votingCongress, they were no longer ready to sacrifice theirland, now that Gandhi had failed to get it restoredfor them in 1931. In some areas, most notably Gujarat,they would also become more prosperous afterDepression was succeeded by a war boon andcorrespondingly less militant.

How Civil Disobedience collapsed?

As the mass movement declined, political 'realism'and certain sectional economic calculations pushedsome business groups towards collaboration much assigning agreements, giving preferential treatment andlower import duty rates to British textile imports andother British commodities. Yet strong objectivecompulsions, both economic and political, existed toprevent anything like total sell-out or unqualifiedcollaboration by Indian business groups. Britishinsistence on retaining the existing exchange ratioremained a permanent grievance. Above all,collaboration was made difficult by the fact that theyears 1932-34 were marked by a full-scale counter-offensive by British business interests. With Lancashirein particular closely aligning itself with the ultra-Toryopposition led by Churchill to any constitutionalconcession going beyond the Simon Commission'sframework.

The ultimate result of the opposite pressurestowards collaboration and conflict was an importantre-alignment of business attitudes in support of achange in Congress policy away from mass agitationand towards Assembly and eventually ministerialparticipation. This realignment enabled Indian


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

capitalists to overcome the fairly sharp split betweennear loyalists and nationalists within their own rankswhich had become quite marked during the early1930's. It also fitted in with developments in theCongress leaderships as it came to terms graduallywith the evident decline of Civil Disobedience in theface of overwhelming repression.

Significance of Civil Disobedience

The Civil Disobedience Movement of 1930-34 wasan advance over the Non-cooperation Movement of1921-22 in quite a few respects.

• First of all, the stated objective of the movementof 1930-34 was the achievement of completeindependence and not just the remedying of twospecific 'wrongs' plus a very vague Swaraj.

• Secondly, in sharp contrast to what had happenedafter Chauri Chaura incident, Gandhi, during1930-34, pushed ahead with the non-violent mainstream despite sporadic incidents which wererealistically recognized now as more or lessinevitable.

• Thirdly, the methods adopted during the 1930-34movement, from the beginning, involveddeliberate violation of law and not mere Non-cooperation with foreign rule.

• Fourthly, participation in this movement involvedmuch greater risk than in 1921-22, for, a frightenedgovernment from May 1930 onwards adopted apolicy of senseless brutality even towardsabsolutely peaceful Satyagrahis, Apart from lifeand limb, the meagre property of the poor wasvery much at stake, for non-payment of landrevenue or chaukidari tax was met by wholesaleconfiscation of household goods, implements andeven land.

• Fifthly, large scale participation of women andteenagers was another significant feature of thecivil disobedience movement. The CivilDisobedience movement, in fact, marked a majorstep forward in the emancipation of Indianwomen.

• Sixthly, the movement of 1930-34 obtained a betterresponse from business groups and large sectionsof the peasantry than the movement of 1921-22.

• And finally, organizationally the Congress wasnow much stronger in most parts of the countrythan in 1921-22 when it had just taken the firststep on the road towards becoming a mass party.

Yet it would be a considerable over simplificationto present the Civil Disobedience Movement as anunqualified advance in every respect over the Non-

cooperation Movement. To begin with, the stirringHindu-Muslim unity of 1919-22 was obviously a thingof the past in 1930s. For, between the two movementsstood not only the breakdown of the Nehru Reportnegotiations but a decade of intense communalorganization and fratricidal strife. Outside the NorthWest Frontier Province and a few isolated pocketslike Delhi, Muslim participation remained lowthroughout the civil disobedience years. Further,unlike the Non-cooperation Movement, the CivilDisobedience Movement did not coincide with anymajor labour upsurge. Another difference betweenthe two movements was that under the influence ofthe Civil Disobedience Movement, there was anevident decline in the older and more purelyintelligentsia forms of protest like lawyers giving uptheir practice and students and teachers leavingofficial institutions to start national schools andcolleges.

COMMUNAL AWARD

• After the failure of the Second Round Tableconference, Ramsay McDonald announced the'Communal Award' on August 16, 1932.According to the Award, the right of separateelectorate was not only given to the Muslims ofIndia but also to all the minority communities inthe country.

• The Award also declared untouchables as aminority and thus the Hindu depressed classeswere given a number of special seats, to be filledfrom special depressed class electorates in the areawhere their voters were concentrated.

• Under the Communal Award, the principle ofweightage was also maintained with somemodifications in the Muslim minority provinces.Principle of weightage was also applied forEuropeans in Bengal and Assam, Sikhs in thePunjab and North West Frontier Province, andHindus in Sindh and North West FrontierProvince.

• Though the Muslims constituted almost 56 percent of the total population of Punjab, they weregiven 86 out of 175 seats in the Punjab Assembly.The Muslim majority of 54.8 per cent in Punjabwas thus reduced to a minority. The formulafavoured the Sikhs of Punjab and the Europeansof Bengal the most.

• The Award was not popular with any Indianparty. Muslims were not happy with theCommunal Award, as it has reduced theirmajority in Punjab and Bengal to a minority. Yet


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

they were prepared to accept it.

• On the other hand, the Hindus refused to acceptthe awards and decided to launch a campaignagainst it. For them it was not possible to acceptthe 'untouchables' as a minority. They organizedthe Allahabad Unity Conference in which theydemanded for the replacement of separateelectorates by joint electorates. Many nationalistMuslims and Sikhs also participated in theconference.

• The Congress also rejected the Award in toto.Gandhi protested against the declaration ofuntouchables as a minority and undertook a fastunto death. He also held meetings with theuntouchable leadership for the first time and tryto convince them that they were very much partof the mainstream Hindu society.

• He managed to sign the Poona Pact with Dr. B.R. Ambedker, the leader of untouchables, in whichthe Congress met many of the untouchables'demands.

POONA PACT

• Poona Pact (1932) is the popular name of anagreement between the Untouchables (calledDepressed Classes) of India led by Dr. B. R.Ambedkar and the Hindus of India, that tookplace on 24 September 1932 at Yerawada Jail inPune.

• The text uses the term "Depressed Classes" todenote Untouchables who were later calledScheduled Castes under the Government of IndiaAct 1935, and the later Indian Constitution of 1950.The Untouchables are now popularly known asDalits.

• Major highlights of the Pact are as follows:

1. There shall be seats reserved for the DepressedClasses out of general electorate seats in theprovincial legislatures as follows: - Madras 30;Bombay with Sindh 25; Punjab 8; Bihar and Orissa18; Central Provinces 20; Assam 7; Bengal 30;United Provinces 20. Total 148. These figures arebased on the Prime Minister's (British) decision;

2. Election to these seats shall be by joint electoratessubject;

3. The representation of the Depressed Classes inthe Central Legislature shall likewise be on theprinciple of joint electorates and reserved seatsby the method of primary election in the mannerprovided for in clause above for theirrepresentation in the provincial legislatures;

4. In the Central Legislature, 18 per cent of the seatsallotted to the general electorate for British Indiain the said legislature shall be reserved for theDepressed Classes; and

5. In every province, out of the educational grant,an adequate sum shall be ear-marked forproviding educational facilities to the membersof Depressed Classes.

GANDHIJI'S EPIC FAST

• In September 1932, Gandhiji declared a fast untodeath, to undo the provisions of the CommunalAward of Ramsay McDonald, the then BritishPrime Minister, providing for the scheme ofseparate representation for the depressed classes,since that would cut across Hinduism.

• In May, 1933 Gandhiji undertook another fast notagainst the Government but "for purification ofmyself and my associates and for greater vigilanceand watchfulness in connection with the Harijancause."

• The President of the Congress, in consultationwith Gandhiji, announced the suspension of theCivil Disobedience movement for 6 weeks. TheGovernment continued its course of repression.Gandhiji, who was later released, decided todevote his time to Harijan work.

• The struggle was finally suspended by the AllIndia Congress Committee who were allowed tomeet at Patna and decided to call off the CivilDisobedience unconditionally, except for theprovision that Gandhiji alone, when he thoughtit necessary, could offer Civil Disobedience.

• Gandhiji decided to start an individual CivilDisobedience movement, as from 1 August 1933,but he was arrested the previous night. He wasreleased after a couple of days but was orderedto reside at Poona.

• Gandhi disobeyed this order, was re-arrested andsentenced to one year's imprisonment. There uponhundreds of Congressmen followed Gandhiji toprison. This movement continued till the earlypart of April, 1934.

• Throughout this period, the governmentcontinued to pursue a policy of severe repressionwhich included imprisonment, police firing,beating in lock-up, shooting of detainees, atrocityon women, blockading of villages, and evenlooting and pillage.

• During the Civil Disobedience movement of 1930-31, more than 60,000 persons were imprisoned


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

and during the Second Civil Disobediencemovement of 1932-34 the number of persons whocourted arrest were, about 66,000.

• The programme or the boycott of British goodswhich was part of the movements led to asubstantial fall in the import of British goods intoIndia. Further, the Civil Disobedience Movementroused the Indian people in general, includingvillagers and women folk. Women rarely cameout of the seclusion of their homes in order totake part in the struggle for freedom.

• This not only gave an impetus to the freedommovement, but also helped in bringing out anothersocial revolution: the emancipation of women.

• When the Civil Disobedience movement came toan end in April, 1934, Gandhiji appealed toCongressmen to devote themselves to nation-building activities: promotion of Hindu-Muslimunity, removal of untouchability, and spread ofhand-spinning.

GANDHI-IRWIN PACT AND FIRST ROUND TABLECONFERENCE (Nov. 1930-Jan. 1931)

• While the Civil Disobedience Movementcontinued vigorously in spite of untold repression,efforts were made for a compromise and afterseveral attempts of Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru andMr. M.R. Jayakar, an agreement was reached after15 clays' strenuous discussions between theViceroy and Mahatma Gandhi.

• This agreement, better known as the Gandhi-IrwinPact, was signed on 5 March, 1931. Under theagreement, the Government was to makeconcession take steps for the participation of therepresentatives of Congress in the Second RoundTable Conference, and the Congress on its part,had to withdraw the Civil DisobedienceMovement.

• Meanwhile, a Round Table Conference had metin London early 1931. The intention seemed tohave been, to set off the stage, before the worldof "representative gathering" of Indians trying foran agreed plan for the future government of theircountry.

• It was not Indians, but the Viceroy and his officialswho chose these representatives. What theyactually did was to carefully assemble all thediverse elements, every creed, every party, everyracial minority, every interest in this subcontinent.

• The spirit in which the Gandhi-Irwin Pact wassigned did not last long. In spite of protests fromall quarters, the Government carried out the

execution of Sardar Bhagat Singh, Sukh Dev andRaj Guru on 23rd March 1931. On 18 April 1931,Lord Irwin was succeeded by Lord Willington.The new Viceroy had no intention to abide by theterms of the Pact.

SECOND ROUND-TABLE CONFERENCE(September-December 1931)

• In the meantime, however, the Congress WorkingCommittee passed a resolution that MahatmaGandhi should represent the Congress at theSecond Round Table Conference to be convenedlater in1931 in London. Mahatma Gandhi didattend the Conference as the sole representativeof the Congress.

• As was expected, the communal question and thedifferences among the Indian people loomed largein this conference and all efforts to solve it byconsent proved unsuccessful. Gandhiji put up avaliant fight and some of the speeches hedelivered were most striking.

• Apparently the Government's scheme at theRound Table Conference was only a scheme forIndians sharing power with the bureaucracy andnot one designed to achieve responsibleGovernment.

• Gandhiji returned empty-handed from the RoundTable Conference. The condition on which theCongress had agreed to participate, abandonmentof stark repression, was also being broken.Jawaharlal Nehru and T.A.K. Sherwani had beenarrested and put in jail again.

• In the North West Frontier Province Khan AbdulGhaffar Khan and Dr. Khan Saheb were alsoarrested. Special ordinances had been enforcedin the United Provinces, the North West FrontierProvince and in Bengal.

THIRD ROUND TABLE CONFERENCE

(November-December 1932)

• From September 1931 until March 1933, underthe supervision of Samuel Hoare, the proposedreforms took the form reflected in the Governmentof India Act, 1935.

• Most of the main political figures of India werenot present for this conference. In this conference,Chaudhary Rahmat Ali, a college student, coinedthe name PAKISTAN. He took the P from Punjab,the A from Afghanistan, the KI from Kashmir,the S from Sindh and the TAN from Balochistan.In this Conference M.A.Jinnah was not present.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The failure of the Cripps Mission left no meetingground between the Congress and the government.The government was not prepared to part with itspower, while the congress insisted on the immediatetransfer of power to the Indians because it believedthat an effective resistance against the Japaneseaggression could be organized only by a populargovernment. Gandhi, who was not prepared to opposethe government by a mass movement so far, was nowconvinced of the necessity of starting a massmovement again and, hence, changed his mind. SomeCongressmen were not convinced of his argument tostart a mass movement with a view to force the Britishto hand over power to India during the course ofwar, but all submitted before him and those who didnot, like C. Rajagopalachari and Bhulabhai Desai,resigned from the Congress (July 1942). The CongressWorking Committee met at Wartha in July anddemanded the immediate withdrawal of the Britishform India. The All India Congress Committee ratifiedthis 'Quit India' resolution at its meeting at Bombayon 8th August, 1942.

Major Causes

The roots of the Revolt of 1942 can be found incertain national as well as international developments.The first and the foremost cause was the new popularmood of August 1942 caused by the rout of the Britishby an Asian power, viz., Japan. The victory of Japanand subsequent events shattered the white prestigeon the one hand and on the other, revealed the grossracism of the rulers of India once again. While thedefeat of the British made the Indians believe thatBritish rule was ending, the way the British caredabout the safety of their own people in South EastAsia leaving the Indian immigrants there to their ownfate caused great amount of anti-white fury amongall the Indians. The British in Malaya, Singapore andBurma commandered all forms of transport in theirignominious flight and left the Indian immigrantsthere to find their own way. The result was acompound of anti-white fury and an expectation thatBritish rule was ending. It is probably not accidentalthat east U.P., and west and north Bihar, the region

where the 'August Rebellion' (Revolt of 1942) attainedits maximum popular intensity, was also traditionalone of the principle catchment areas for Indianmigrant labour going to South East Asia and otherparts of the world.

Gandhi: In Militant Mood

This new popular mood of August 1942 wascertainly sensed by Gandhi and his own statementsbefore launching the Quit India movement are proofof this fact. That is why, the summer of 1942 foundGandhi in a strange and uniquely militant mood.'Leave India to God or to anarchy', he repeatedlyurged the British. 'This orderly disciplined anarchyshould go and, if as a result there is completelawlessness, I would risk it'. Though the need for non-violence was always reiterated, the famous "QuitIndia" resolution followed up its call for mass struggleon non-violent lines under Gandhi's leadership withthe significant rider that if the Congress leadershipwas removed by arrest, every Indian, who desiredfreedom and strives for it, must be his own guide.Gandhi also declared in his passionate 'Do or Die'speech that every Indian should consider himself tobe a free man, and also that mere jail-going wouldnot do. 'If a general strike becomes a dire necessity,I shall not flinch', was yet another mostuncharacteristic remark made by Gandhi in aninterview on 6th August, 1942. It may be noted thatGandhi was, for once, prepared to countenancepolitical strikes precisely at a time when thecommunists were bound to keep aloof form them invery sharp contrast to his attitude in previous of left-led labour militancy in 1928-29 or the late 1930's andearly 1940's.

How was Quit India Movement Organized?

Three broad phases can be distinguished in theQuit India Movement or the Revolt of 1942. The firstphase (from 9th to 15th August 1942) was massiveand violent but quickly suppressed. It waspredominantly urban and included hartals, strikes andclashes with police and army in most cities. Bombay,as so often before, was the main storm centre during

QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT1414141414


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

this phase. Calcutta also witnessed many hartals.There were violent dashes with heavy casualties inDelhi and, in Patna, control over the city was virtuallylost for two days after a famous confrontation in frontof the Secretariat on 11th August. The violence ofDelhi was largely due to 'mill hands on strike', andstrikes by mill-workers were also reported inLucknow, Kanpur, Bombay, Nagpur and Ahmedabad.The Tata Steel Plant was totally closed down for 13days in a strike in which the sole labour slogan wasthat they would not resume work until a nationalgovernment had been formed. At Ahmedabad, thetextile strike which began during this period lastedfor 3 months, and a nationalist chronicle laterdescribed the city as the "Stalingrad of India". Theurban middle class was extremely prominent in thisfirst phase spearheaded by students.

From the beginning of the second phase (from15th August to 30th September 1942), the focus shiftedto the countryside, with militant students fanning outform centers like Banaras, Patna and Cuttack,destroying communications on a massive scale andleading a veritable peasants' rebellion against whiteauthority strongly reminiscent in some ways of theRevolt of 1857. Northern and western Bihar andeastern U.P., Midnapur in Bengal, and pockets inMaharastra, Karnataka and Orissa were the majorcenters of this second phase which saw the installationof a number of local-national governments, which,however, were usually short-lived.

Weakened by the brutal repression (no less than57 army battalions were used), the movement, fromabout the beginning of October 1942, entered itslongest but also the least formidable phase, i.e., thethird and final phase. This phase was characterizedby terrorist activity by educated youth directed againstcommunications, police and army installationsoccasionally rising to the level of guerrilla war, suchas the one along the north Bihar-Nepal border led byJayaprakash Narayana. Part-time peasant squadsengaged in farming by day and sabotage activities bynight and, in some pockets, secret parallel 'NationalGovernment' functioned most notably at Tamluk inMidnapur, Satara in Maharastra and Talcher in Orissa.Extremely impressive and heroic by any standards,such activities, however, were no longer a threat eitherto the British rule or to the war plans of the Allies.

Response of Different Classes

An examination of the social composition of themovement reveals the role of different social groupsand classes in it. Unlike in the Civil Disobediencedays, students, belonging to the middle class, were

very much in the forefront in 1942, whether in urbanclashes as organizers of sabotage, or inspirers of thepeasant rebellions. What made the August movementsformidable however, was a massive upsurge of thepeasantry in certain areas. But as the one availableattempt at statistical analysis of the "crowd" in theeast U.P. and west Bihar regions indicates, the Revoltof 1942 was essentially an upsurge of peasant, smallholders, and hence far from being a movement ofhabitual 'criminals' or rootless 'hooligans'.

The role of the labourers was somewhat shortlived. The mill element (participation by mill workers)in general was dropping out by August 14-15. Theindustrial belts of Calcutta and Bombay were largelyquiet, probably because of the communist oppositionto the movement. Labour participation in themovement was, however, considerable in some centerslike Jamshedpur, Ahmedabad, Ahmadnagar andPoona, where there had been little communist activityand where Gandhian influences had contributed tocordial relations between labour and capital.

No detailed study has been made so far of theextent of business participation but it seems to havebeen considerable at least in the city of Bombay.Stories are, in fact, current about considerable covertupper-class and even Indian high official support tosecret nationalist activities in to set up a fairly effectiveillegal apparatus, including even a secret radio stationunder Usha Mehta for three months in Bombay.

Impact of the Movement

The British realized that it would be wiser to tryfor negotiated settlement rather than risk anotherconfrontation as massive and violent as the Revolt of1942. It is true that by the end of 1942 the British hadcome out victorious in their immediate totalconfrontation with Indian nationalism and theremaining two years of the war in the country. Yet,the victory was ambiguous and with severallimitations and was possible only because warconditions had allowed really ruthless use of force.

Negotiations Became Necessity: The British werenot prepared to risk such a confrontation again andthat the decision in 1945 to try for a negotiatedsettlement was not just a gift of the new labourgovernment is indicated by the attitude of LordWavell. In a letter to Churchill dated 24th October1944, Wavell pointed out that it would be impossibleto hold India by force after the war, given the likelystate of world opinion and British popular or evenarmy attitudes, as well as the economic exhaustion ofBritain. Hence, he felt, that it would be wise to startnegotiations. Churchill's pig-headedness delayed the


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

process somewhat, but this was precisely what theBritish were able to persuade the Congress leadershipto do after 1945. Thus, it is amply clear that thedecision of negotiated transfer of power taken in 1945was not just a gift of the new labour government;rather, it was primarily the result of the aboverealization.

Benefits to Rightists: Imprisonment and defeatparadoxically brought certain benefits to the Congressleaders. Isolation in jail helped them to avoid takinga clear public stand on the anti-Japanese war issue,something which, otherwise, would have become veryticklish indeed for a few months in 1944 when SubhasChandra Bose's Indian National Army appeared onthe borders of Assam at a time when, on a worldscale, the Allies were clearly winning the war. Muchmore important was the fact that the glamour of jailserved to wipe out the unimpressive record of theCongress ministries in office, thereby restoring thepopularity of the organization among the masses.Rightist Congress leaders, who throughout the 1930'shad urged more and more cooperation with the Britishand pursued increasingly conservative polices asminister, could not sit back in the halo of patrioticself-sacrifice, as much as the Socialists who had donemost of the actual fighting in 1942, while the

Communists were rated in the eyes of a big section ofnationalist public opinion as collaborators and traitors.Thus, if the British ultimately came to realize thewisdom of a negotiated transfer of power form theQuit India experience, the 1942 Revolt and itsaftermath also strengthened forces preferring acompromise on the nationalist side by giving a newprestige to the rightist Congressmen.

Weakening of the Left: The Revolt of 1942weakened the left alternative in two ways. Brutalrepression exhausted, at least temporarily, manypeasant bases built up through years of Gandhianconstructive work or radical Kissan Sabha activity. Itis significant that the countryside of Bihar, U. P.,Maharashtra, Karnataka and Orissa played little orno part in the anti-imperialist upsurge of 1945-46,while most of the rural Gandhians of Midnapur andHooghly found themselves largely pushed aside inthe Bengal Congress politics of the post-war and postindependence years. In the second place, the left wasnow divided as never before. The searing memory of1942, with its charges and counter-charges of'treachery' and its 'fifth-columnist' activity, erected awall between the socialists and followers of Bose onone side and the Communists on the other, whichhad not been entirely overcome even after a generation.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

While the Second World War dragged on, theIndian national movement had come to a stand stillwithin the country. However, it found a newexpression outside country's frontiers in the form ofIndian National Army, founded by Captain MohanSingh, and the Indian Independence League,organized by Rash Behari Bose in June 1942, both ofwhich were taken over by Subhash Chandra Bose in1943.

Formation of INA

The formation of the Indian National Army waspartly due to the disillusionment of some of thenationalists with Gandhian principles and methodsof working. Particularly after the failure of the CivilDisobedience and the Quit India movements, theradical elements headed by Subhas Chandra Bosecame to believe that armed resistance was thelegitimate mean of achieving freedom. The oldrevolutionary terrorists, who believed that violencecan only be met with violence, but were lying lowdue to domination of the Indian political scene byGandhi, now began to feel that India could winfreedom only by armed struggle and, if need be, withsome foreign help. Besides, the outbreak of SecondWorld War was seen by these people as a greatopportunity for India to win freedom. Subhas ChandraBose drew three conclusions from the war:(a) Britain would lose the war and the British Empire

would break down.(b) In spite of being in a precarious position, the

British would not hand over power to the Indianpeople and the latter would have to fight for theirfreedom.

(c) India would win her Independence if she playher part in the war against Britain and collaboratewith those powers that were fighting the British.On the basis of these conclusions, he asked the

Indian people not to be hampered by anyphilosophical notions, like Gandhian 'Non-violence'or any sentimentalism like Nehru's 'Anti-Axis' foreignpolicy. Moreover, the grand success of the Japaneseagainst the British in South East Asia caused great

excitement among the people of Indian origin livingin that region. And the Japanese initiative inorganizing an Indian army with the help of theprisoners-of-war and the non-resident Indians gave aconcrete shape to their excitement.

The Japanese in the meantime had attackedMalaya and defeated the British army. Captain MohanSingh, an officer in the British army who hadsurrendered to the Japanese, was persuaded toorganize an army, named the Indian National Army(INA or Azad Hind Fauj), from the prisoners-of-war.This Japanese initiative in organizing the INA had itsown selfish motive, i.e., to have local collaborators inorder to carry out their plan of Greater Asia withJapan at the top.

Leadership of S. C. Bose

The success of Japan in South-East Asia raisedgreat hopes which led to the formation of IndianIndependence League by Rash Behari Bose an oldrevolutionary who was then residing in Japan. Heconvened a conference in Tokyo in March, 1942, whichdecided to form the League and raise an army ofIndian Liberation, which was already done by MohanSingh with the active support of the Japanese. Asecond conference was held at Bangkok in June, 1942,for confirming these resolutions. It was finally decidedto establish the Indian Independence League and toinvite Subhas Chandra Bose to accept its president-ship. Captain Mohan Singh also attended both theTokyo and Bangkok conferences and was chosen asa member of the Council of Action (the executiveorgan of the League) and also as the Commander-in-Chief of the INA, which was now brought under thedirect control of the League.

A number of resolutions were passed by theBangkok Conference. Some of them required theacceptance of the Japanese. Obviously, the Leaguecould exercise its authority only if the Japaneseapproved of it. Unfortunately, the Japanese armycommanders did not express their acceptance of eitherthe resolutions or of the Council of Action, which ledto trouble. So the League, Council of Action and the

INDIANNATIONAL ARMY1515151515


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

INA remained in a state of suspense for the time being.The main reason for this Japanese attitude was - atthat stage, Japan was not very serious aboutrecognizing the independence of India. It encouragedMohan Singh to organize the INA and Rash BehariBose to form the League only with the motive ofsecuring local collaborators in their plan to implementthe concept of Greater Asia. But these people wentbeyond this limited role, and passed some resolutionand created the Council of Action, the acceptance ofwhich by the Japanese would have amounted to thevirtual recognition of Indian Independence.

German support

When the war broke out in Europe, Subhas C.Bose undertook a tour of the country and addressed

hundreds of meeting, openly denouncing Britishimperialism and advising Indians not to help theBritish war efforts. This led to his imprisonmentwithout trial in July, 1940, though the governmentreleased him in November, 1940, he was still keptunder house-arrest, however, in January, 1941, hemanaged to escape from the house arrest and, afteran adventurous journey, arrived in Kabul and thenproceeded to Berlin via Moscow in March 1941. TheGerman foreign office welcomed him and gave himfacilities to broadcast from Berlin to India his anti-British views. When the Germans attacked Russia inJune, 1941, believing in their victory, he proposed toorganize an Indian army which could follow theGerman Army to Central Asia and thence operateagainst the British forces on the North-Westernfrontier. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

NAVAL MUTINY OF 1946

One of the most heroic and largely forgottenepisodes in Indian freedom struggle was the NavalMutiny in Bombay from 18-25 February, 1946. Thismutiny in the Royal Indian Navy (RIN) was theoutcome of various factors. There was a great amountof discontent among the Indians serving in the RoyalIndian Navy due to the continued racialdiscrimination in every aspect of their service suchas recruitment, promotion, payment, food and otherbenefits. Besides, the Indians in the RIN were notimmune to the influence of the INA trials and thepost war popular upsurge in India. After the war,the men who served in the INA (Indian NationalArmy) were put on trial. They were charged withtreason against the British Crown. As a result, therewas a wave of nationalist protest and massivedemonstration was held all over the country. Notonly the Congress but also almost the entire politicalleadership of the country was opposed to the trialsand expressed themselves emphatically in favour ofreleasing the INA prisoners alongwith other politicalprisoners. This aspect of the Mutiny undoubtedlyproves its nationalist character. One more nationalistaspect of the mutiny was the demand of themutineers for the withdrawal of Indian troops fromIndonesia which was also fighting for Independenceat that time.

Further, the wartime expansion of the RIN hadbrought in men from all parts of the country,weakening the old military traditions of recruitmentfrom politically undeveloped 'martial races'. As aresult, certain nationalist elements could infiltrate intothe armed forces, including the navy. Finally, theIndian men in the RIN came into contact with worlddevelopments during their services abroad. Theweakened position on Great Britain after World WarII made them realize that Indians too could achievefreedom if the Indians put more pressure on theBritish.

Course of Mutiny

On 18th February 1946, ratings in the SignalsTraining Establishment, Talwar (a ship), went on a

hunger strike against bad food and racist insults. Nextday, the strike spread to Castle and Fort Barracks onshore and 22 ships in Bombay harbour. And thetricolor was raised on the mastheads of the rebel fleet.A Naval Central Committee headed by M.S. Khanwas elected and demands were formulated forcombined issues of better food and equal pay for bothwhite and Indian sailors. They raised nationalistpolitical slogans and demanded release of INA officersand other political prisoners and withdrawal of Indiantroops from Indonesia. The men, however, hesitatedfatally on the border line of peaceful strike anddetermined mutiny, finally obeying orders to returnto their respective ships and barracks on the afternoonof 20th February, only to find themselves surroundedby army guards. Next day, actual fighting started atCastle Barracks when ratings tried to breakout of theirencirclement, with the ships providing artillerysupport, while Admiral Godfrey flew in bombers andthreatened to destroy the Navy. The same afternoonwas a remarkable scene of fraternization, with crowdsbringing food for ratings in Gateway of India andshopkeepers inviting them to take whatever theyneeded. By 22nd February, the strikes had spread tonaval bases all over the country as well as to someships on sea. At Karachi, the 'Hindustan', a ship,surrendered and Muslim students and workersdemonstrated their support through violent clasheswith the police and the army. However, the mutineersfinally surrendered on 23rd February 1946 due to theirhopeless position and also due to the assurance givenby the nationalist leaders like Patel and Jinnah thatthe national parties would prevent any victimization,a promise which was soon forgotten.

Attitude of leadership

Congress leadership like Gandhi and Patel werestrongly against the Mutiny. Gandhi condemned it asa bad and unbecoming example for India, and advisedthe mutineers to peacefully resign their jobs if theyhad grievances. Patel, though gave an assurance tothe ratings that the national parties would preventany victimization, quietly went back on the assurance

1616161616


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

saying that discipline in the army could not betampered with. Even Nehru, who supported theMutiny initially, felt the necessity of curbing the wildoutburst of violence. The leaders of the Muslim Leaguetoo adopted an attitude similar to that of theCongressmen. In fact, it was one of the very fewoccasions when the League headed by Jinnahcooperated with Patel and other Congress leaders inpersuading the ratings to surrender unconditionally.

But the leaders of the CPI and the CongressSocialist Party gave full support to the Mutiny andeven called for a general strike by the workers inBombay in support of the Mutiny. Despite Congressand League opposition, 3 lakh workers downedtheir tools in Bombay on 22nd February. Aruna AsafAli, a Congress leader said: 'It simply does not liein the mouth of Congressmen who were themselves

going to the legislatures, to ask to give up theirJobs.

Significance

It broke down the 'Iron wall' between the armyand the people for a common cause, a fact which wasconceded later on by Nehru. It also demonstrated thepatriotism of the Indian soldiers for the second time,the first time being the INA. In the process, it madethe British realize their precarious position in India.Finally, it set a second example of communal harmonybetween Hindus and Muslims; the first example wasset by the INA. But unfortunately the RIN ratings ofFebruary 1946, in sharp contrast to the men of theINA, have never been given the status of nationalheroes, even though their action involved muchgreater risk in some ways than those of the INA.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Alongwith the rise of nationalism, communalismtoo made its appearance around the end of the 19thcentury and posed the biggest threat to the unity ofthe Indian people and the national movement.• Communalism is the belief that because a group

of people follow a particular religion they have,as a result, common, that is, social, political andeconomic interests. In case of India, it means thatHindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians formdifferent and district communities; that all thefollowers of a religion share not only acommonality of religious interests but alsocommon secular interests.

• The British adopted different policies to counterand contain the rapidly growing nationalistmovement. They encouraged pro-Englishindividuals like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and RajaSiva Prasad to start an anti-Congress movement.

• Later, they fanned the Hindu-Muslim communalrivalry, first among the educated Indians and thenamong the common people through theintroduction of communal electorates. They evenexploited the controversy of Hindi and Urdu andthe cow-protection movement.

• Relentless efforts were made to create a split inthe nationalist ranks by adopting a more friendlyapproach towards the more conservative ormoderate sections.

• In the 1890's, efforts were made to separate theradicals of yesterday like Justice Ranade andothers from leaders such as Dadabhai Naoroji whowere considered as 'moderates'. Similarly, in thefirst two decades of the 20th century moderateswere sought to be played against extremists.

• The British also succeeded in turning thetraditional feudal classes like princes andzamindars against the new intelligentsia and thecommon people. Princes were won over by thecreation of the Chamber of Princes in 1921.Zamindars were already won over by theintroduction of the Permanent Settlement.

• Attempts were also made to turn one caste againstanother even among the Hindus. For example,the Communal Award of 1932 attempted to treat

Harijans as a separate political entity.• The British also followed the policy of apparent

concession or conciliation, on the one hand andruthless repression on the other against thegrowth of nationalism. The policy was relentlesslypursued throughout the freedom struggle andknew no bounds particularly during the Anti-partition, Non-Cooperation, Civil Disobedienceand Quit India Movement.

• The British authorities felt that the spread ofmodern education had been a major cause of thegrowth of nationalism. So, they deliberatelyfollowed a policy of joining hands with thesocially and intellectually reactionary forces inorder to prevent the spread of modern ideas.

• Plans were now set afoot to impose greatergovernment control over education and to changeits modern liberal character into a conservativeand reactionary one. Modern secular educationwas sought to be replaced by a system based onreligious and moral training.

• Partonage in Government Services used toFoster Communalism. In the absence of anyavenues of gainful employment in trade andindustry, the British Indian Government remainedthe biggest employer to which the educated youthhopefully looked for their means of livelihood.This enormous patronage—in higher andsubordinate services—was cleverly used by therulers to promote rivalry and discord amongdifferent sections of society. Our nationalistleaders were fully aware of the mischievouscharacter of this bait, but the hunger—rathercompulsion—for loaves and fishes blinded themto its dangerous potentialities. Jawaharlal Nehruexplained then, "This enormous partongae wasexercised to strengthen the British hold on thecountry, to crush discordant and disagreeableelements, and to promote rivalry and discordamongst various groups anxiously lookingforward to employment in goverment service. Itled to demoralization and conflict and thegovernment could play one group against theother." � � �

BRITISH POLICY OFDIVIDE AND RULE1717171717


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The origin of the idea of a separate state forMuslims can be traced back to Muhammad Iqbal'sreference to the need for a 'North West Indian MuslimState' in his presidential address to the Muslim Leaguein 1930, but the context of the speech makes it clearthat the great Urdu poet and patriot was reallyvisualizing not partition but reorganization of Muslim-majority areas in N.W. India into an autonomous unitwithin a single Indian Federation.

Germination of Pakistan

Choudhary Rahmat Ali's group of Punjabi Muslimstudents in Cambridge have a much better claim tobe regarded as the original proponents of the idea. Ina pamphlet, written in 1933, Rahmat Ali demanded aseparate national status for a new entity for which hecoined the name 'PAKISTAN'- 'P' for Punjab, 'A' forAfghan Province or the North-West Frontier Province,'K' for Kashmir, 'S' for Sindh , and 'TAN' forBaluchistan. No one took this demand for separatestate for Muslims very seriously at that time. But from1937 there was a marked change in the attitude of theLeague towards the idea of a separate state forMuslims. This was mainly due to two reasons. Firstly,the federal clauses of the Act of 1935 showed signs ofa strong and Hindu dominated central government.Secondly, Jinnah and the Muslim League as a wholegreatly resented the refusal of the Congress in 1937 toform coalition ministries with the League in theprovinces. The Aligarh scheme of Zafrul HassanHussain Qadri suggested four independent states ofPakistan, Bengal, Hyderabad and Hindustan. ThePunjab Unionist Sikandar Hayat Khan suggested akind of 3-tier structure with autonomous provinceslegislatures, together constituting a loose confederationwith the center having charge only over matters likedefense, external affairs, customs and currency as ifin anticipation of the cabinet mission plan of 1946.There was considerable British encouragement behindthis sudden search of alternatives. As per Khali-al-quzaman, the Secretary of states, Zetland, had given

a sympathetic hearing on 20th march, 1939 toredefinition of Rahmat Ali's scheme, suggesting twoMuslim Federations, one in the North-West and theother in the East (covering Bengal and Assam).

League-Congress Relations

The League celebrated the resignation of theCongress Ministries in 1939 as 'Deliverance Day',because the Congress Ministries, according to theLeague, carried out a number of acts detrimental toMuslim interests during their rule between 1937 and1939. The famous resolution of 23rd March, 1940,passed by the Lahore session of the Muslim Leaguedemanded that geographically contiguous units aredemarcated into regions which should be constituted,with such territorial re-adjustments as may benecessary, that the areas in which the Muslims arenumerically in a majority as in the north-western andeastern zones of India should be grouped to constituteindependent states, in which constituent units shallbe autonomous and sovereign. The remarkably clumsywording left ample (and probably deliberate) scopefor vagueness, ambiguity and equivocation. Neither'Pakistan' not 'Partition' were explicitly mentioned.Though some Indian and British Newspapers beganto use the name 'Pakistan' for the proposed new statesin 1940, the League officially adopted this name onlyin 1943. The stress on the sovereignty of the unitsbecame very important after partition for theyprovided the theoretical basis for the Awami Leagueagitation (started under Fazlul Haq) against a Punjab-dominated unitary conception of Pakistan whicheventually led to the breakaway of Bangladesh.

What was the CR Formula?

The British made a settlement between the MuslimLeague and the Congress a precondition for the grantof Independence to India. A few congressmen alsofelt it necessary. C. Rajagoalachari was one of thosewho realized it in 1944 and, therefore, evolved a

PARTITION OF INDIA1818181818


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

formula, called the 'C.R. Formula' to bring about asettlement between the League and the Congress. Themain proposals of the formula were the following:

• The Muslim League should cooperate with theCongress in the formation of provisional InterimGovernment for the transitional period.

• After the close of the war, a commission shall beappointed to demarcate the boundaries of theMuslim dominated districts in the North-Westand East of India. The people of these districtsshall decide by plebiscite, the issue of separationfrom India.

• In the event of separation, mutual agreementsshall be entered into between the twogovernments for jointly safeguarding defense,commerce, and communications and for otheressential purposes.

This formula became the basis for the Gandhi-Jinnah Talks held in 1944 to reach a settlement on theconstitutional problem. Though Jinnah rejected thewhole formula saying that the kind of Pakistan it wasoffering was a maimed, mutilated and moth-eatenone, the main reason behind his refusals was that hewas vehemently opposed to the idea of conducting aplebiscite.

Essence of the Wavell Plan

After the failure of the Gandhi-Jinnah Talks basedas the C.R. Formula, Lord Wavell, the Viceroy wentto England in March 1945 to consult Churchillregarding the political deadlock in India. The generalelections were due in Britain and the Conservativeparty desired to justify that it was, like the Labourparty, interested in resolving the deadlock in India.Hence, a new plan was offered to the Indians. Thisplan, called 'Wavell Plan' was announced on 14th June1945. It was offered as an interim agreement. Themain features of the Plan were:

• To form an interim government at the center withequal representation to Hindus and Muslims.

• All portfolios except that of defense were to betransferred to the Indians.

• Only the Governor-General and the commander-in-chief were to remain free from the control ofthe Indian ministers.

• The Interim government consisting of all Indianministers would work under the framework ofthe Act of 1935 till a new constitution was framed.

• The Governor-General would however retain theright to veto the advice of his newly constituteexecutive council.

A conference was called at Simla to discuss theplan. All Indian leaders representing the Congress,the Muslim League, the Sikhs, Scheduled Castes,European's and the Unionist Party of Punjab werecalled to attend the conference, but the talks brokedown primarily because the unreasonable attitude ofthe League. Jinnah wanted that the League aloneshould choose the Muslim members of the executivecouncil. But the Congress naturally did not acceptthis stand of Jinnah, so the only result of thisConference was the strengthening of Jinnah as LordWavell practically gave him the power of Veto.

Cabinet Mission Plan

The British government headed by the Labourparty was eager to solve the Indian problem and sent,in March 1946, a Cabinet Mission to India to negotiatewith the Indian leaders the terms for the transfer ofpower to Indians. It proposed a two-tiered federalplan which was expected to maintain national unitywhile conceding the largest measure of regionalautonomy. There was to be a federation of theprovinces and the states, with the center controllingdefense, foreign affairs, and communications. At thesame time, individual provinces could form regionalunions to which they could surrender by mutualagreement some of their powers. Both the NationalCongress and the Muslim League accepted this plan.But the two could not agree on the plan for an interimgovernment which would convene a constituentassembly to frame a constitution for a free, federalIndia. The two put differing interpretations on theCabinet Mission plan to which they had agreed earlier.Finally, in September 1946, an interim cabinet headedby Jawaharlal Nehru was formed by the Congress.The Muslim League decided to boycott theConstituent Assembly. The League launched the'Direct Action Day' on 16th August 1946 to protestagainst the formation of interim government by theCongress, and even after joining the interimGovernment, it pursued a policy of disrupting thefunctioning of the government.

Mountbatten Plan

The British government finally tried to put anend to the Constitutional deadlock by announcing that


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

the power be transferred to India before the end ofJune, 1948, irrespective of whether the Indian politicalparties agreed among themselves or not. LordMountbatten was appointed as the Viceroy in March,1947. He resolved to execute the transfer of power atthe earliest possible moment and worked out acompromise plan after long discussions with theleaders of the Congress and the League. According tothis 'Mountbatten Plan', India was to be free but notunited. The main contents of the plan were:

(1) Muslim majority provinces would be permittedto form a separate state and set up a separateConstituent Assembly for framing a constitutionfor their state.

(2) Provinces of the Punjab and Bengal would bepartitioned.

(3) Question of North-West Frontier Province and theSylhet district of Assam was to be decided by aplebiscite.

(4) A bill to be introduced in the British Parliament atonce to give effect to these proposals.

Thus, the country was to be partitioned. Thenationalist leaders agreed to the partition of India notbecause they accepted Jinnah's two-nation theory, butbecause they wanted to stop the widespreadcommunal riots. The country was still ruled byforeigners who did little to check the riots but insteadencouraged these riots by their policies, perhapshoping to play the two newly independent statesagainst each other. ��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1858

• After the revolt of 1857, the administration of theBritish East India Company was over, the BritishIndia territories were taken over by the BritishCrown, and an Act called, "The Act for the betterGovernment of India, 1858" was passed.

• With the enactment of the Government of IndiaAct, 1958, India was to be governed by theSecretary of the State for India assisted by acouncil of 15 members. The Secretary of Statewould directly be responsible to the BritishParliament.

• The Governor-General received the title ofViceroy. Lord Canning was the first Viceroy ofIndia.

• The Government of India Act, 1858, made theprovision for the appointment to the covenantedcivil services through the open competitiveexamination.

THE INDIAN COUNCILS ACT, 1861

• The Viceroy's legislative council was enlarged andfrom now onwards it was known as ImperialLegislative Council.

• A fifth member was added to the Viceroysexecutive council.

• The portfolio system (based on Lord Canning'sRules of Business) was introduced, in which eachmember of the Viceroy's executive council wasput in charge of a department.

• In Bombay, Bengal and Madras provinces, thelegislative councils were established.

• The Indian Councils Act, 1861, empowered theGovernor-General to issue ordinances which werenot to remain in force for more than six months.

Morley - Minto Reforms

• To placate the moderate nationalists, Britishgovernment announced constitutional concessionsthrough the Indian Councils Act of 1909 whichare known as the Morley-Minto Reform of 1909.

• Popularly known as the Minto-Morley Reforms,they took their name after their official sponsors,Minto the Governor-General and John Morley,Secretary of State for India.

• In 1908, the British Parliament appointed a RoyalCommission on Decentralisation to inquire intorelations between the Government of India andthe provinces and suggest ways and means tosimplify and improve them.

• More specifically, it was asked to suggest 'howthe system of government could be better adaptedboth to meet the requirements and promote thewelfare of the different provinces'.

• Later in the year, on the basis of itsrecommendations a Bill was introduced inParliament which, in May 1909 emerged as thenew scheme of constitutional reform.

INDIAN COUNCILS ACT, 1909

• Its authors claimed that the chief merit of the Actlay in its provision to further enlarge thelegislative councils and at the same time, to makethem more representative and effective. This wassought to be done under two main heads -Constitutional and Functional.

• Constitutionally, the councils were now bigger,their numbers doubled in some cases and morethan doubled in others.

• Thus, whereas the Indian Council Act of1892 had authorized only a maximum of 16additional members, that figure was now raisedto 60.

• In much the same manner, the number ofadditional members for the Presidencies ofMadras, Bombay and Bengal were raised from 20to 50.

• The proportion of official to non-official membersin the Governor-General's Council wassubstantially reduced. The new figures were 36to 32. Of the latter, 27 were to be elected and 5nominated. In this way, the Council continued tohave the official majority.

IMPORTANTLEGISLATIONS1919191919


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• This was a deliberate policy. In provinces, therewas to be a non-official majority for the first time.

• In Bengal there was even an elected majority,outnumbering both the official as well asnominated non-official blocs - 28 to 20 and 4respectively.

• The Morley-Minto Reforms increased the numberof elected members in the Imperial LegislativeCouncil and the provincial councils.

• But most of the elected members were electedindirectly by the provincial councils in the caseof the Imperial council and by municipalcommittees and district boards in the case ofprovincial councils.

• Some of the elected seats were reserved forlandlords and British capitalists in India. Forinstance, of the 68 members of the ImperialLegislative Council, 36 were officials and 5 werenominated non-officials.

• Of the 27 elected members, 6 were to representthe big landlords and 2 British capitalists.

• Moreover, the reformed councils still enjoyed noreal power, being merely advisory bodies.

Critical Appraisal of the Act:

The real purpose of the Reforms of 1909 was toconfuse the moderate nationalists, to divide thenationalist ranks, and to check the growth of unityamong Indians.

The Reforms also introduced the system ofseparate electorates under which all Muslims weregrouped in separate constituency from which Muslimsalone could be elected. This was done in the name ofprotecting the Muslims minority. But in reality thiswas a part of the policy of dividing Hindus andMuslims and thus maintaining British supremacy inIndia.

This nation was unscientific because religionscannot be the basis of political and economic interestsor of political groupings.

What is even more important, this system provedextremely harmful in practice. It checked the progressof India's unification which had been a continuoushistorical process. It became a potent factor in thegrowth of communalism - both Muslim and Hindu -in the country.

The separate electorates thus introduces forMuslims were later viewed by the Simon Commissionas a cardinal problem and ground of controversy atevery revision of the Indian electoral system.

Instead of removing the educational and economic

backwardness of the middle class Muslims and thusintegrating them into the mainstream of Indiannationalism, the system of separated electoratestended to perpetuate their isolation from thedeveloping nationalist movement. It encouragedseparatist tendencies.

It prevented people from concentrating oneconomic and political problems which were commonto all Indians, Hindu or Muslim.

Apart from their constitution, the functions of thecouncils also underwent a change. They could now,for instance, discuss the budget before it was finallysettled, propose resolutions on it and divide uponthose resolutions. The budget apart, members coulddiscuss matters of public importance throughresolutions and divisions. Additionally, the right toask questions was enlarged and supplementariesallowed.

It may be noted that the resolutions were in thenature of recommendations and were not bindingon the government.

A much trumpeted change was the appointmentof an Indian to the Executive Council of the Governor-General; Indians were also appointed to the councilsin Madras and Bombay. Satyendra Prasanna Sinha,later Lord Sinha, was the first Law Member. TwoIndians were appointed to the Council of the Secretaryof State in London.

In Madras and Bombay, the Executive Councilswere enlarged from 2 to 4. Such Councils were alsoto be formed in provinces ruled by LieutenantGovernors. An executive council was thus constitutedin Bengal (1909), Bihar, Orissa (1912) and the UnitedProvinces (1915).

The moderate nationalists did not fully supportthe Morley-Minto Reforms. They soon realized thatthe Reforms had not really granted much. But theydecided to cooperate with the government in workingthe reforms. This cooperation with the governmentand their opposition to the programme of the militantnationalism proved very costly to them. Theygradually lost the respect and support of the publicand were reduced to a small political group.

In 1911, the Government also announced theannulment of the Partition of Bengal. Western andEastern Bengals were to be reunited while a newprovince consisting of Bihar and Orissa was to becreated. At the same time the seat of the CentralGovernment was shifted from Calcutta to Delhi.

MONTAGUE'S DECLARATION

• In August 1917, the new Liberal Secretary of State


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

for India, Edwin Montagu, announced the Britishaim of "increasing association of Indians in everybranch of the administration, and the gradualdevelopment of self-governing institutions, witha view to the progressive realization of responsiblegovernment in India as an integral part of theBritish Empire".

• Although the plan envisioned limited self-government at first only in the provinces - withIndia emphatically within the British Empire - itrepresented the first British proposal for any formof representative government in a non-whitecolony.

• Earlier, at the onset of World War I, thereassignment of most of the British army in Indiato Europe and Mesopotamia, had led the previousViceroy, Lord Harding, to worry about the "risksinvolved in denuding India of troops."Revolutionary violence had already been aconcern in British India; consequently, in 1915, tostrengthen its powers during what it saw was atime of increased vulnerability, the Governmentof India passed the Defence of India Act.

• This Act allowed British Govt. to intern politicallydangerous dissidents without due process, andadded to the power it already had - under the1910 Press Act - both to imprison journalistswithout trial and to censor the press.

• Now, as constitutional reform began to bediscussed in earnest, the British began to considerhow new moderate Indians could be brought intothe fold of constitutional politics and,simultaneously, how the hand of establishedconstitutionalists could be strengthened.

• However, since the Government of India wantedto ensure against any sabotage of the reformprocess by extremists, and since its reform planwas devised during a time when extremistviolence had ebbed as a result of increasedgovernmental control, it also began to considerhow some of its war-time powers could beextended into peace time.

MONTAGUE-CHELMSFORD REFORMS

• The Montague-Chelmsford Reforms were reformsintroduced by the British Government in India tointroduce self-governing institutions gradually toIndia. The reforms take their name from EdwinSamuel Montague, the Secretary of State for Indiaduring the latter parts of World War I and LordChelmsford, Viceroy of India between 1916 and 1921.

• The reforms were outlined in the Montagu-Chelmsford Report prepared in 1918 and formedthe basis of the Government of India Act 1919.Indian nationalists considered that the reformsdid not go far enough while British conservativeswere critical of them.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1919

• The Government of India Act 1919 was passedby the Parliament of the United Kingdom toexpand participation of the natives in thegovernment of India. The Act embodied thereforms recommended in the report of theSecretary of State for India, Sir Edwin Montague,and the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford. The Actcovered ten years, from 1919 to 1929.

• The Act provided a dual form of government (a"dyarchy") for the major provinces. In each suchprovince, control of some areas of government(the 'transferred list') were given to a Governmentof ministers answerable to the Provincial Council.The 'transferred list' included Health andEducation. The Provincial Councils were enlarged.

• At the same time, all other areas of government(the 'reserved list') remained under the control ofthe Viceroy. The 'reserved list' included Defence(the military), Foreign Affairs, andCommunications.

• The Imperial Council was enlarged and reformed.It became a bicameral legislature for all India.The lower house was the Legislative Assembly of144 members, of which 93 were elected and 41were nominated. The upper house was theCouncil of States consisting of 34 elected and 26nominated members.

• This structure allowed Britain to use the PrincelyStates (who were directly represented in theCouncil of States) to offset the growing power ofthe native political parties.

• The Act also provided for a High Commissionerwho resided in London, representing India inGreat Britain.

• The Indian National Congress was unhappy atthese reforms and termed them as 'disappointing.'A special session was held in Mumbai underHasan Imam and the reforms were condemned.However, leaders such as Surendranath Banerjeewere inclined to accept the reforms, so they leftthe Congress and formed the Indian LiberalFederation, which played a minor role insubsequent affairs.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT 1935

• The Government of India Act 1935 was the lastpre-independence constitutional legislation of theBritish Raj. The significant aspects of the Act were:

(i) It granted Indian provinces autonomy and endedthe dyarchy introduced by the Government ofIndia Act 1919.

(ii) It provided for establishment of an All IndiaFederation.

(iii) Direct elections are introduced for the first time.The right to vote was increased from seven millionto thirty-five million.

(iv) Sind was separated from Bombay, Orissa wasseparated from Bihar and Burma was separatedfrom India.

(v) Provincial assemblies were to include moreelected Indian representatives, who in turn couldlead majorities and form governments. ButGovernors retained discretionary powersregarding summoning of legislatures, givingassents to bills and administering certain specialregions (mostly tribal).

(vi) The federal part of the Act was never introduceddue to strong opposition from the princely staterulers. In 1937 the first set of elections under thisAct were held.

Indian Independence Act 1947

• The 3rd June plan was given effect by the IndianIndependence Act 1947. This bill was introducedin the British Parliament on 4 July, 1947, and on18th July, got the royal assent. India had won herfreedom but the price was partition.

• The dominion of Pakistan was inaugurated inKarachi on 14th August, 1947. India became freeon 15th August, 1947. Lord Mountbatten wassworn in as Governor General. He swore inJawaharlal Nehru as the first Prime Minister offree India. Jinnah became the Governor Generalof Pakistan.

• The June 3rd plan said nothing about princelystates.

• Atlee had announced in his speech of 20thFebruary 1947 that Britain would not hand overpower and obligations under paramountcy to anysuccessor government. In theory, this meant thatthe states would become sovereign entities whenthe British left India.

• The India Independence Act 1947 said that Britishparamountcy over the Indian states was to lapseon 15th August 1947, they were allowed to joineither India or Pakistan.

��


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

General Survey

The 19th century saw India make a late entryinto the modern age from medieval times. Theactivities of missionaries and the policies of Britishgovernment resulted in the growth of socio-religiousreform movements to safeguard Hindu religion fromthe Christian onslaught and to put an end to the socialevils eating into the vitals of Indian culture andcivilization. These movements were generally linkedwith religious beliefs and practices. The ideas andactivities of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar ChandraVidya Sagar, Vivekananda, Swami DayanandaSaraswati, Veeresaligam Panthulu and many otherwere directed at the regeneration of Indian society.

Caste intolerance was a common malady ragingall over the country. Illiteracy was prevalenteverywhere. Amongst the educated also, the majoritywere conservative in outlook. Women's status was atthe lowest ebb; female infanticide and polygamy werecommon practices. To liberate the masses fromignorance, few liberal men undertook the mammothtask of reforming the Indian society. They were mainlywestern educated intellectuals belonging to upper andmiddle classes in the initial stages of reformmovement. On the religious front, however, fewleaders, like Dayananda, opposed tooth and nail theinfluence of western culture.

Almost all the leaders gave importance toeducation in their efforts to reform the society.Abolition of sati, widow remarriage, property rightsfor women and similar reforms were taken up withzeal. There were a few organizations like Arya Samajand Theosophical Society which gave primeimportance to revivalism than to reformation. Thishad a negative impact on the society and the reformmovement as well. Vivekananda's contribution liesmainly in the sphere of elevating Hinduism tounprecedented levels in the West. His voice did agreat deal to swell feelings of national pride. SayyidAhmed Khan was the pioneer of reform movementin the Muslim community. He helped the Muslims toget modern education and turn British sympathies

towards his community.It is to be noted that the reformers, with the

sole exception of Tilak, depended on the colonialpower to introduce social and religious reforms.Moreover, all the important reform movements of the19th century were religious than secular in nature.Their political and economic ideas were never radicaland fell within the natural economic principles of theday. There were several differences among thereformers regarding the approach and methods of themovement. The spirit of nationalism which emergedfrom the Cultural Revolution highlighted the necessityof fight for reforms.

Ram Mohan Roy's Brahmo Samaj

Raja Ram Mohan Roy was one of the greatestsocial and religious reformers of the 19th century. Hewas a brilliant product of the impact of westerneducation. He was the first modern man in India. Therange of his inquiries even as a child could not besatisfied within a narrow sphere. Hinduism, as heencountered it, seemed resistant to change, decadentin its idolatrous and superstitious practices. He wasinitially exposed to wider influences through a studyof Persian. This education deepened his maturingconvictions about the need for religious reform. Heargued that the Hindu idolatry destroyed the textureof society more than any other pagan worship.

In areas of social concern, however, Roy held acommon cause with Evangelicals and Utilitarians.Chief among these were the promotion of Englisheducation and the abolition of 'Sati'. Roy's researcheson this subject provided a valuable premise forBeatnik's Minute of December 4, 1829, abolishing sati.He organized the Atmiya Sabha to discuss social andreligious issues of significance. He bitterly opposedworship of idols, rigidity of caste, and prevalence ofmeaningless religious rituals. He started the BrahmoSamaj in 1828 to take up reforms connected with child-marriage, widow remarriage, polygamy and otherissues. He sought to create a model of simple, theisticworship. Although Roy supported discriminating

REGENERATION,REFORM AND

RENAISSANCE IN INDIA2020202020


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

study of the ancient sources of Indian tradition, hedefinitely stood with the Anglicists against theOrientalists on education generally. He assisted DavidHare in the establishment of the Hindu College. Heopposed the opening of a Sanskrit College in Calcuttaas a retrogressive move. Roy's support for Duff andothers, who had little regard for the culture andtraditions of India, was because of the tools ofmodernity which they could offer to India. He wishedIndia to become a scientifically advanced country. Hepublished a number of articles on scientific subjectsand general knowledge for young students. He wasan ardent supporter of independent press. Being achampion of human liberty, Roy regarded freedomof the press as an essential privilege of a civilizedsociety. He was a forerunner of Tagore in believingin free cooperation between nations. He was the firstlandlord to feel that the Permanent Settlement hadmade the peasants poorer. The alternatives hesuggested for rectifying the mistake were thoroughlylogical according to some modern economists. Hedemanded the protection of civil and political rights.He condemned the free trade policies of the colonialpower. He believed that the introduction of moderncapitalism and industry in the country would end thesuffering of Indian masses. His activeness likeopposing caste system, demanding Indianisation ofthe superior services and judicial quality betweenIndian and Europeans represented the symbol ofnational consciousness, though in embryonic stage.He touched every aspect of human life. He was apioneer in making a sincere effort to inspire theintelligentsia to organize a reform movement for socialprogress which meant an allround regeneration.

Who All Contributed to Brahmoism?

Roy's close associate Dwarakanath Tagoresupported all these progressive reforms. DwarakanathTagore's conviction as a humanist was reinforced byhis experience as a pioneering progressive businessentrepreneur who perceived the benefits of theeconomic revolution ushered in by the advent of theBritish. He recognized the need for emulating the skill,techniques and the organization of British businessand the application of steam, if his country was tocompete successfully with foreign enterprise. He knewthat this would be hardly possible withoutmodernizing reforms of a society inhibited by casteand other disabilities and superstitions. Thus, althoughDwarakanath was pioneer entrepreneur sponsoringindustry, he realized the relevance of social reformsand educational progress. Without his generouscontributions, Roy might not have been able to takeup a number of reform issues simultaneously.

Roy's legacy in the Brahmo Samaj languished tillDebendranath Tagore assumed its leadership in 1840s,but he was more immediately succeeded in reformmeasures by followers of Young Bengal Movement.Despite their feeling that Roy was too timid, this groupcontinued some of its reform measures, such asfreedom of the press, to a more successful conclusion.This group was led and inspired by H.V. Derozio,who worked as teacher in the Hindu College from1826 to 1831. They advocated better treatment ofIndian labours in British colonies, trial by jury,protection of the peasants from zamindars, andindianization of higher services. However, they failedto reach and mobilize the masses. Their radicalpostures were untimely and, in fact, brought negativereaction among the public. But it can be said that theyoung band of reformers were the first to catch andreflect the dawn of Renaissance.

Social reform interests did not, however, thriveunder the leadership of Debendranath Tagore. Thechief mantle passed in this sphere to Pandit IshwarChandra Vidyasagar, the Bengali educationist andchampion of women's rights. More than any otherIndian reformer, Vidyasagar relied on the utilitarianprinciple of reason. His career as a reformer wascoexistent with his role as an educationist, takingprominent shape when he became General Secretaryof a women's school founded by Bethune. Educationwas clearly a primary vehicle for women'sachievement of their full measure of human dignityin India. As champion of that cause, Vidyasagar andother saw that the earlier abolition of 'sati' had savedmarried women from a compulsive death, but thatmore must be done to grant them the possibility of afruitful entrance into life. Besides education,Vidyasagar worked tirelessly in other areas ofwomen's rights such as widow's right to inherit, etc.He explained that widow remarriage was permittedby Hindu Shastras. His efforts bore fruit in 1856 whenthe Legislative Council passed the Hindu WidowRemarriage Act. There was a striking differencebetween Vidyasagar and other reformers. Mostreformers of his time had positive learning to take upreligious reforms simultaneously with social reforms.But Vidyasagar had no religious fervor.

Reform interests in the Brahmo Samaj were againrevived when Keshab Chandra Sen joined it in 1857.He encouraged inter-caste marriages and wassuccessful in this sphere. His differences withDebendranath Tagore regarding this aspect led to thesplitting of Brahmo Samaj. Keshab's group came tobe known as the Adi Brahmo Samaj. Politically Keshabwas not anti-British in temper. Instead, he proclaimedloyalty to the British as an article and creed of his


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Church. In addition, Keshab felt free to cooperate withBritish rulers in initiating reform measures. At hisurging, the British passed the Native Marriage Act in1872, authorizing unorthodox marriages betweenpersons declaring themselves neither Hindu norMuslim nor Christian. A new schism in the BrahmoSamaj developed again in 1878 which weakened thereformist zeal of the Samaj.

Keshab's contemporary, Bankimchandra Chatterji,attempted to reach the masses with the publication ofa moral biography of Krishna. He provided a strongdefense against missionary attacks on Krishna'scharacter. Religious renewal was also linked withnationalism for him, so that worshiping Indian becamethe underlying theme of devotion to the variousgoddesses. His writings such as the Ananad Math,voiced this as did his stirring poem, Bande Mataram,which was to become the national song of India. Healso criticized harshly the caste system, especially thekulin Brahmins.

Reform Movement in Western India

The Prarthana Samaj in the west grew as a resultof Keshab's missionary activities. But from itsinception it seemed to exhibit less of a spirit ofadolescent rebellion than the parent organization, withperhaps less of the characteristic Bengali emotionalvolatility. It voiced more judicious and moderate tonegenerally in the Bombay Presidency. Reformist zealtook a back seat, with greater concern to preservehistoric ties to the ancestral faith dominating the scene.A greater feeling for national, as against regional,issues was also to emerge through the activities ofmen such as Ranade, Tilak and Gokhale. Ranade andTilak, the early leaders differed markedly in theirstrategies to social reform. Besides, Tilak's politicalobjectives were more radical than those of Ranadeand were linked closely to his religious ideas. Ranadefounded both the Indian National Congress and theSocial Conference, which he hoped might furtherpolitical and reform interest together. Tilak opposedthe social reformers on two counts, both of whichhad some credibility. First, he felt that the reformersdid not consistently practice the new life style whichthey sought to impose on the larger society. Heopposed governmental interference in initiatingreforms. His second objection was his feeling thatactivities in social reform were an admission ofweakness. Rigorously anti-western, Tilak felt that thisamounted to hand-in-glove collaboration. He wasmore concerned with religious rejuvenation than socialreform. He used religious sentiments to drive out theBritish.

Social Reformer of South India

The reform efforts in south India are bestrepresented by the movement initiated by KandukuriVeeresalingam. He was influenced by the prevailingsocial conditions and also by the Brahmo Samajmovement in Bengal. He evinced, like other reformerof the 19th century, a keen interest in the spread ofscientific knowledge and the growth of rationalthinking. Being a great literary figure, he made use ofliterature to spread reform ideas among his people.Literature to him was the means to an end. He pleadedfor the spread of mass education in vernaculars inorder to free the minds of people from the shackles oftradition and bring about regeneration society. Beingmoderate in politics, he extolled the virtues of Britishrule and believed in the instrumentality of British ruleof the transformation of Indian society.

What was the Contribution of Theosophists?

The Theosophical Society owes much of itspopularity to Mrs. Annie Besant who was its movingspirit for nearly forty years since her arrival in Indiain 1893. She was wholly identified with the revival ofHinduism and not at all with reform. But her earlycareer as a revivalist was by no means solely negativein character. Through her efforts, for instance, theSanskrit tradition received a vital transfusion, and hermost noted contribution to the Indian scene at largelay in the field of education. She was responsible forthe foundation of Banaras Hindu University. Thesociety can claim other educational initiatives fromthe late 19th century. Among them, the schools whichOlcott began for the 'untouchable' boys in 1894 arenoteworthy. Thus, while the movement's activitieswere largely in the direction of defense of thetraditional societal structures, it was not blind toIndia's problems. Besant strived for communalharmony and she was mainly responsible for theLucknow Pact signed between the Congress andMuslim league. She aspired to get India a dominionstatus within the British Empire.

Arya Samaj

Dyananda Saraswati pinned his faith on theinfallibility of the Vedas. His motto 'back to the Vedas'infused a new confidence in Hindus about their pastglory. He condemned the caste system, childmarriages and various other maladies which wereeating into the vitals of Hindu society. In his opinion,the destiny of India lay in the revival of the Vedicreligion. He carried on a ceaseless propaganda againstsuperstitions, idol-worship and the caste system. Hefounded a vigorous organization, known as the Arya


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

Samaj in 1875 at Bombay. It believed in the 'Unity ofGod' and regarded the Vedas as divine revelations tomankind. His ideas and philosophy are contained inhis work - 'Sathyarth Prakash'. He started the"Shuddhi" movement to bring back to Hinduism thoseHindus who had been converted to Christianity orIslam. He taught and preached his ideas invernaculars. He and his followers fought vigorouslyagainst untouchability and the rigidities of hereditarycaste system. He also opposed idolatry, ritualism,priesthood and the evils accompanied by it. The AryaSamajists worked for women's upliftment andcontributed to the spread of education among them.It is said that while its reformist work brought peopletogether, its religious work resulted in dividing thegrowing national unity among Hindus, Muslims,Parsis, Sikhs and Christians.

Contribution of Ramakrishna & Vivekananda

Ramakrishna, a simple priest at the temple of Kaliat Dakshineswar near Calcutta, emerged as a greatreligious reformer in the 19th century. He believedthat all the religions of the world were alike and theirultimate mission was the realization of God. Headopted different modes of worship usually practicedby various religions. He wished to bring about asynthesis between divergent faiths. Vivekananda wasthe greatest disciple of Ramakrishna, who carried themessage of his mentor farther and tried to put it in aform that would suit the needs of contemporaryIndian society. He advocated the oneness of allreligions and appealed to the people to shed allnarrowness in religious matters. He lashed out at thecaste system and decried Hindu rituals, ceremoniesand superstitions, and asked the people to imbibe thespirit of liberty, equality, and free-thinking. Heproceeded to the West to spread his ideas and tosecure material help for his people. His participationin the Parliament of World Religions, held at Chicagoin 1894, launched him into fame. In his extensive toursabroad, he declared the supremacy of Hindu religionand culture which was based on spiritualism overwestern culture which was basically materialistic. Hispreaching on the larger issues of universal religionattracted many followers, and caused his founding ofthe West Vedanta Society in New York City in 1895.He received wide support in India and the impacthe made on Indian psyche was of tremendousmagnitude. India's collective national ego obviouslyreceived a heavy infusion to counter the increasingweight of negative assessment growing out of hersubject status and comparative materialbackwardness. Now she had some thing tocommunicate, a cultural product which the western

nations were eager to receive. Under his guidanceand inspiration, the Ramakrishna Mission adopted acomprehensive programme of social service. It startedschools, colleges, hospitals and has always been inthe forefront in rendering humanitarian services tothe people afflicted by flood and famine. He opinedthat India would be immortal if she persists in hersearch for God. But if she goes in for politics andsocial conflict, she would die. His contribution to Indiawas invaluable for it had ignited a spirit of religiousnationalism which was to influence many otherpersons and movements. His voice did a great dealto swell feelings of national pride.

What was the Role of Muslim Reformers?

British rule posed serious problems for the IslamicCommunity in India, which it deals with in a varietyof ways. Cooperation was inhibited on theologicalgrounds and Muslims began to lose ground in publicservice, education, etc. Under these circumstances,Sayyid Ahmed Khan became the spokesman of reformmovement among Muslims. He realized that the onlyway for Muslims to survive was to follow the road ofmodernity and it lay in cooperation with the British.He demonstrated so convincingly that Islam was notinherently antagonistic to reform in consonance withthe modern scientific spirit. His opponents in the'Ulema' were no less formidable than those Roy facedamong the leaders of Hindu orthodoxy. For Sayyid,the only way that Muslims could resume their rightfulplace and advance culturally and economically wasthrough English education and this was pivotalplatform in his reform movements. Aligarh College,which he founded in 1875, became a primaryexpression of this interest and the acknowledgedcentre, subsequently, of Muslim modernism. Hisenergies were primarily channeled into providing forwomen's education and the giving up of 'purdah'(veil). Politically, he was opposed to the CongressNationalist movement, he felt, would ultimately resultin the departure of the British; majority rule whichwould follow would be Hindu rule and this wouldbe much more destructive than the British Raj forMuslims. Thus, although he did not give credence tothe possibility of the separate nations, his policies wereto contribute to the partition of India. While Muslimshad suffered greatly in the immediate aftermath ofthe Revolt of 1857, with Sayyid's leadership therebegan to be fostered, before the century's end, whathad been termed as the powerful myth of the loyalMuslim.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

The Government of East India Company and lateron the British crown government showed little interestin the education of its subjects. Whatever efforts weremade by the British in the education were basicallyto action of their own objectives of getting Englisheducated clerks in India at lower salaries. Here is achronicle of British efforts towards the developmentof education in British India:• Warren Hastings set up the Calcutta Madrasa in

1781.• In 1791, Jonathan Duncan opened a Sanskrit

College at Benaras.• In 1800, Lord Wellesley founded Fort Williams

College at Calcutta with the objective of teachingIndian languages and culture to the British EastIndia Company's factors.

• The Charter Act of 1813, recognized for the firsttime the British East India governmentsresponsibility of educating the people, hence, itprovided for an annual expeditions of one lakhof rupees.

• David Hare founded Calcutta Hindu College in1817.

• In 1835, it was declared that the medium ofinstruction at higher level would only be English.

• Lord Macaulay propounded his famousInfiltration Theory.

• Lord Macaulay did not accept the worthiness ofEastern Literature and said that "a single shelf ofa good European library was worth the wholenative literature of India and Arabia".

Wood's Dispatch on Education, 1854

• Charles Woods Dispatch is called that MagnaCarta of education in British East India.

• Charles Woods formulated a comprehensivedocument on education in British India fromprimary level to the higher level. Woods Dispatchalso decided that what would be the medium ofinstruction at primary level, secondary level andat college level.

• The aim of government's educational policy wasthe teaching of masters education.

• For higher education of instruction, English wasadopted and for primary education, Vernacularlanguages were accepted as medium.

• Vernacular Primary Schools, Anglo-VernacularHigh Schools and affiliated colleges were set up.

• Grants-in-aid system encouraged the privateenterprise in education.

• The importance of women education wasrecognized and it was given priority.

• Training to the teachers was emphasized, thusTeachers Training Programmes were set up.

• The importance of technical education wasrecognized.

• The Roorkee University was set up.• In 1857, universities at Calcutta, Bombay and

Madras were set up.

Hunter Commission 1882-83

• It was one member commission appointed byViceroy Lord Ripon to review Education Policyof the Government. The Hunter Commissionstressed that the Government should pay specialattention for the extension and improvement ofprimary education.

• It also stressed on secondary, commercial andtechnical education.

• The Hunter Commission also made recommen-dation for special efforts for womeneducation.

• It emphasized to encourage private enterprise ineducation.

• Punjab University was set up in 1882• Allahabad University was set up in 1887.

Indian Universities Act, 1904

• The Indian Universities Act 1904, was passed andenacted in the viceroyalty of Lord Curzon.

DEVELOPMENT OFEDUCATION INBRITISH INDIA

2121212121


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

• This Act was passed on the recommendation ofSir Thomas Raleigh Commission on Educationappointed by Lord Curzon in 1901, at theconclusion of Shimla Education Conference.

• Gurudas Banerjee was the only Indian memberin the Raleigh Commission.

• The provisions of Indian University Act, 1904provided that the fellows of the universities wereto be nominated by the government.

• The Act provided veto power to the governmentin the matter of universities.

• The Act increased universities' control overprivate colleges.

• The number of Fellows were fixed.• The Act empowered Governor General-in-council

to define the territorial limits of a university ordivide the affiliation of colleges to universities.

Resolution on Education Policy, 21st February,1913

• In 1906, the progressive state of Barodaintroduced compulsory primary educationthroughout its territories.

• During 1910-13, Gopal Krishna Gokhale refusedto recognize the Principle of CompulsoryEducation but accepted the policy of the removalof illiteracy.

The Sadler University Commission, 1917-19

• The Sadler Commission was set up basically tolook into the functions of Calcutta University.

• Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee and Ziauddin Ahmadwere two India members in the Commission.

• Sadler Commission gave recommendation for the

improvement in higher education.• Sadler Commission recommended that after

intermediate level there should be 3 years degreecourse.

• The Commission emphasized on womeneducation.

• Sadler Commission recommended that facilitiesfor teachers' training are to be increased.

• Sadler Commission recommended that theuniversities should have the campus which hasto provide residential and boarding facilities tothe students.

The Hartog Committee 1929

• The Hartog Committee emphasized the nationalimportance of primary education.

• It recommended the Policy of Consolidation andimprovement.

• Improvement of university management wasstressed.

Wardha Scheme of Basic Education, 1937

• In 1937, Mahatma Gandhi published a series ofarticles in his paper 'The Harijan' in which heproposed a scheme of education called BasicEducation Scheme, better known as the WardhaScheme.

• The main principle of Basic Education is - learningthrough activity.

• The Zakir Hussain Committee worked out thedetails of the scheme and prepared detailedsyllabi for a number of courses and madesuggestions conforming training of teachers,supervision, examination and administration.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

WHAT LED TO TRADE UNIONISM IN INDIA?

Under the British rule, the rise of modernindustries in India created a working class. The Indianworking class or the proletariat was primarilyconstituted of impoverished peasants and ruinedartisans who were left with the other means oflivelihood. The insufficient and lopsided developmentof industries in India was, on the other hand,responsible for the relatively late beginning andstunted growth of trade union movement. Since therewas not much demand for labour, being hired in largenumbers, there did not exist any question ofconcentration of labour, being hired in large numbers,there did not exist any question of concentration oflabour in specific areas as at present. This renderedthe labour incapable of any collective action to furthertheir common interests. Besides, the Indian workingclass was illiterate and culturally backward. Therefore,it developed national and class consciousness muchlater than the intelligentsia and the bourgeoisie.However, from 1918 onwards we find a steady growthin the trade union movement in India.

WHY WERE TRADE UNIONS FORMED?

Trade unions have been defined as 'allorganizations of employees including those of salariedand professional workers, as well as those of manualearners which are known to include among theirfunctions that of negotiating with employers with theobjective of regulating conditions of labour. So theobjectives of trade union movement in modern timesmay be stated as follows:(a) Defending or improving the wages and conditions

of labour.(b) Raising the status of the worker as a citizen of

industry and of society.(c) Extending the area of social control of the nation's

economic life and participating in that control.We can distinguish three principal methods of

regulation that the trade unions usually adopt. Firstly,the doctrine of the vested interests relies on the powerof trade unions to impose restrictions on the number

of prospective entrants to those fields where theconditions of labour are especially favourable. Theywant a stringently restricted supply of labour in orderto enjoy the benefits of monopolistic condition.Secondly, the doctrine of supply and demand whichrelies on the method of collective bargaining impliesthat collective action on the part of labour will lead tothe attainment of the objectives of the trade unions.When this method is employed, strikes may ultimatelybe resorted to enforce the trade union demand.Thirdly, the doctrine of living wage means that thestate lays down a national minimum below whichany industry will not be permitted to operate.

To begin with, the Indian workers had to workunder intolerable working conditions in the industries,factories, mines and plantations. They were paid verylow wages, and the working conditions wereunhygienic and hazardous. They were practicallytreated as serfs.

The industrialists, both Indian and foreign, as wellas the colonial government were unwilling to improvethe condition of the workers. The industrialists werenot prepared to look after the welfare of the workersand were only interested in making maximum profitfor themselves. The colonial government too was notwell deposed to do anything substantial for thewelfare of the workers and whatever laws it passedwere directed against the Indian industrialists so thatthey would not pose a serious threat to Britishindustrialists in India as well as those at home.

The outbreak of World War I had resulted inshortage of shipping facilities and, consequently, theimports of India were restricted while there was ahuge demand from the allies as well as the neutralcountries of Indian products. There was anunprecedented boom in Indian trade and industry.While the prices of essential commodities and serviceswere increasing at a fast rate, the wages could notcatch up with the rising cost of living. This made theworkers to agitate. But the employers failed tounderstand the changing circumstances.

At this juncture, proper guidance and leadershipwas provided by some of the nationalist leaders who

TRADE UNIONMOVEMENT IN INDIA

2222222222


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

wanted to enlist the support of the workers for thestruggle of independence by fighting for the cause ofthe workers.

The Russian Revolution, 1917 and establishmentof the USSR held out the prospect of a new socialorder to the workers. The influence of theseinternational events and the rise of communist partiesin India itself which started taking active interest inthe grievances of the workers were thus responsiblefor the rise and growth of trade union movement.

Finally, the establishment of the InternationalLabour Organization (ILO) after World War I for theprotection and preservation of the interests ofthe workers and its tripartite constitution also helpedthe growth of labour associations in India.

WHAT WAS THE FIRST STAGE?

The First Stage (1875-1918) itself can be dividedinto two periods. During the first period, from 1875-1891, the main objective was the regulation of womenand child labour in the Indian factories. The secondperiod stretching from 1891-1918 concentrated on theamelioration of conditions of the Indian emigrants tovarious foreign countries and British colonies. Butduring the whole of the first stage (1875-1918), notrade unions were organized and no concrete stepswere taken except that some enlightened leadersconvened meetings to submit memorandum andrepresentations before the government -appointmentcommissions and committees.

But, the industrialization, which started in Indiafrom the second half of the 19th Century, resulted insome attendant evils, for instance, the employment ofwomen and children, long and excessive hours ofwork, undermining of morality, lack of education,poor housing and excessively high death rate. Due tothe growing menace of all these evils of the factorysystem, the First Factory Commission was appointedin Bombay in 1875 and the First Factories Act waspassed in 1881. But this act proved to be an inadequatemeasure. Its provisions for women labourers causedgreat disappointment among the workers in general.

So, another Factory Commission was appointedin 1884. Mr. Lokhande organized a conference ofworkers in Bombay and drew up a memorandum tobe presented to the Factory Commission. This wasthe beginning of trade unionism in India. Thememorandum included demands for a weekly rest,half an hour recess, compensation for disablement,payment of wages not later than 15th of every monthand limitation of hours of work from 6 A.M. to 6P.M. But the Second Factory Act (1891) which waspassed on the recommendations of the second Factory

Commission was another great disappointmentbecause it provided only a few improvements like aweekly holiday, fixation of working hours for onlywomen and children, but the hours of work for menwere still left unregulated.

WHAT WAS THE SECOND STAGE?

During the Second stage (1918 to 1924), however,a good number of trade unions were organized. TheMadras Labour Union (1918) was the first trade unionto be formed. It's President Mr. B.P. Wadia, an activemember of the Home Rule Movement, took pains todevelop it. Many unions were organized in otherplaces. In 1920, the All India Trade Union Congress(AITUC) was organized and 64 trade unions with atotal membership of about 1,40,000 were affiliated toit. While the interests of workers of different industrieswere looked after by the concerned unions, the AITUClooked after the interests of labour in general. Itrepresented the labour before the government onmatters such was labour policy and legislation. Thus,the AITUC, though primarily meant to sendrepresentatives to the International LabourOrganization, Conferences and Sessions, gave somestatus to the labour movement and provided a forumfor discussion and debates on labour problems.

The rise of trade unions was accompanied by alarge number of strikes. The demands of the workerswere increase in wages, grant of bonus, rise allowance,reduction on working hours and that were set upduring this period had become stable and permanentlabour organizations. Most of these organizationswere, in fact, more or less ad hoc bodies formed whendemands were to be formulated or where strikes wereto be organised. They ceased to function as soon asthe strikes ended. This, however, did not retard thedevelopment of trade unionism in India. Though allthe trade unions did not survive, trade unionism did.

Another important feature of trade unionism inIndia during this period was its inability to makemuch headway in the established manufacturingindustries like mining, textile, jute, etc. But it wasstrong and stable among "white collared employees."In India trade unionism developed among thesepeople simultaneously if not earlier than amongworkers. In other countries the clerical andgovernment employees organized trade unions muchlater than the workers.

HOW WAS THE THIRD STAGE?

During the Third Stage (1924-34), the influenceof communist ideology was clearly seen at work.Communists had begun to infiltrate into the trade


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

unions as early as 1920. Their infiltration had broughtabout a change in the pattern of strikes. Harsh andimpolite language and brutal methods were quitecommonly used. The non-strikers were occasionallycoerced and intimidated and the outbreak of violencewas never completely ruled out. However, most ofthe strikes failed to yield results. Hence there wasdiscontentment among the workers. The number oftrade unions and their membership declinedgradually.

Trade unionism during this stage received a set-back due to the ideological conflicts among the tradeunionists. Radical elements with an intention to usethe trade union movement to further their politicalmotives toed the line of the fraternal political body ofMoscow. On the contrary, the moderates in tradeunions desired to keep the movement away from theCommunists. Consequently the struggle to captureand strengthen their respective positions in the AITUCbegan widening the gulf between the Congress andthe Communist followers. This ultimately weakenedthe power of collective bargaining. The AITUC turnedout to be a house divided and this was reflected inthe failure of major strikes at Kanpur, Bombay andother places. This chaos enabled the employers toexploit the situation

The ideological differences led to the division ofthe AITUC in 1929 when the moderate faction left itand formed a new organization, viz. Indian TradeUnion Federation (ITUF). A further split occurred inthe AITUC and a section formed the 'Red Tuc'. Allthese developments occurred when the country wasunder the impact of economic depression and the civildisobedience movement.

HOW WAS THE FOURTH STAGE?

In the Fourth Stage (1935-39), union activities wererevived and there was also an increase in strikes. Therewere some reasons for the revival of the unionactivities during this period. The provincial Congressministries, which had come into existence with theGovernment of India Act of 1935, had adopted apolicy of keeping industrial peace not by suppressingthe labour organizations and denying their demands,but by prescribing minimum standards of living andgeneral rights of citizenship. Besides, the Act of 1935provided for the election of labour representativesthrough labour or trade union constituencies.Moreover, a change in attitude of the employer alsoencouraged the growth of trade unionism. It had beensuggested by the ILO that the employers should notbe hostile but friendly towards the trade unions.

Unity moves were also initiated which resulted

in the merger of Indian Trade Union Federation (ITUF)with the National Trades Union Federation (NTUF),the merger of the red TUC with AITUC, and finallythe affiliation of NTU with AITUC in 1938.

HOW WAS THE FIFTH STAGE?

The fifth stage (1939-45) corresponds with the warperiod. World War II indirectly offered unprecedentedprotection to Indian industries. The supply of foreigngoods was denied to the Indian market partly becausethere was shortage of shipping facilities and partlybecause peace-time industries in India and abroadswitched over to the war production. As a resultIndian industries stepped up their activity. Industrialproduction in India increased and established newrecords.

However, prices rose sharply and inflationprevailed on account of the continuous purchase byGreat Britain in India against sterling securities. Therewas rapid increase in profits but not in the wages. Inconsequence trade union activity mounted up andthere was a rise in the number of trade unions as wellas their membership.

Strikes were, however, very few and, whereverthey were, they brought concessions to workers. Thedecline in the number of strikes was due to certainfactor:(a) The Communist leaders who supported war did

not favour strikes;(b) The government of India, under the Defence of

India Rules, assumed powers to prevent strikesand refer any dispute for adjudication and enforcethe rules.

(c) The attitude of the employers was hostile;(d) Other sections of trade unions did not have the

right type of leaders to guide the movement andto formulate the grievances of the workers.On the whole, the importance given to trade

unions was enhanced. A permanent tripartitecollaboration machinery was formed consisting ofgovernment representatives, labour union leaders andemployers. And under the National Service Ordinanceof 1940, the rights of the workers were protected whileit was made clear that it was their duty to work whencalled upon to do so. Likewise, the Essential ServicesMaintenance Ordinance of 1941 prohibited theemployers from dismissing the workers without validreasons.

HOW WAS THE SIXTH STAGE?

The Sixth Stage (1945-47), which was the post-


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

war period, was also marked by a further growth intrade unionism, since the end of the War broughtmaterial benefits to the workers. The rise in pricesand the cost of living showed no signs of abatementin the post-war period. Inflation, speculation and blackmarketing caused great suffering to the workers whoraised their voice. The political developments in thecountry during this period also promoted the growthof trade unionism. Every political party wanted tosecure a foot-hold in the labour movement. Moreover,the attitude of the government was also helpful inthis regard. Both the Central and State governments,far from suppressing the labour movement, realisedthat labour has to play a valuable role in the changedcircumstances. So the trade Union Act was amendedin 1947 to secure compulsory recognition of tradeunions by the employers provided they fulfilledcertain requirements. Above all, after the war thenumber of workers employed in permanent industrieshad increased greatly which increased the strength ofthe workers.

Another important feature of the trade unionmovement during this period was the increase inthe number of women members of the trade unions.Due to this, their position in trade unions as wellas society rose considerably.

A large number of smaller unions came to beorganized. But these small and local unions could notcarry out effective implementations of awards andagreements, while the employers organizationsbecame powerful and centrally organized thisnecessitated the formation of new inter-state andregional organizations among the workers.

As a result, the strikes increased in number.Bombay and West Bengal, followed by Madras andUttar Pradesh, were the leading states so for as theindustrial disputes were concerned. The governmentof Independent India was greatly worried becausethe rising unrest caused a decline in the industrialproduction. The need of the hour was increased anduninterrupted production. Therefore, in December,1946, an Industries Truce Conference was held andattended by the representative of both central andstate governments, workers and employees. Thisconciliated the workers who accepted the principle ofcompulsory conciliation and arbitration by thegovernment, and the industrial Disputes Act of 1947which provided for appointment of the conciliationmachinery was passed.

WHAT WAS ITS IMPACT?

The impact of the rise and growth of trade unionmovement in India can be easily assessed fromthe above discussion. The working conditions of theworkers, which were highly intolerable before thebirth of trade union movement, were considerablyimproved by the enactment of a number of laws indifferent phases. Additionally, due to the rise of tradeunion, the working class as such became quiteconscious of their rights as well as duties. Above all,the workers under their leaders gave full support tonationalist leaders in their struggle for freedom. Thus,the trade union movement, besides improving thecondition of the workers, made considerablecontribution to the freedom struggle.

� � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YWHY WERE PEASANT MOVEMENTS STARTED?

The rise of peasant movements was essentiallydue to the exploitative nature of the colonial rule ofthe British in India. The agrarian policy of the Britishhad adverse effects on the position of the peasants.To begin with, the Permanent Settlement, firstintroduced in Bengal and Bihar and later in someother parts of India, converted Zamindars and revenuecollectors into landlords, thereby reducing the statusof the peasants to that of mere tenants and deprivingthem of many of their rights.

The Ryotwari Settlement, introduced in Bombayand Madras presidencies, too suffered from a numberof defects such as the exorbitant rate of land revenuefixed by the government, the right of the governmentto enhance land revenue at will, the forceful collectionof land revenue by the government even inunfavorable seasons, etc. Thus, what the RyotwariSettlement did was to replace a large number ofZamindars by one gaint Zamindar in the state.

The above defects in the revenue administrationled to the impoverishment of the peasants who werehenceforth forced to borrow money at high rates ofinterest from the moneylenders for various purposes.And this further worsened his economic positions and,finally, he was deprived of his land by the money-lenders. Thus on the one hand, the lands of theunprotected proprietors began to be concentrated inthe hands of the few money-lenders, and on the otherhand, the large masses of the peasantry began to rolldown the social ladder first as tenants at-will andthen as agricultural labourers. In this process, thepolitical influence and the power of the BritishGovernment played a major role as the protagonistsof the money lenders.

Further, the British government was alsoresponsible for the stagnation and deterioration ofagriculture since it completely neglected the peasantand agriculture and gave step-motherly treatment topublic works and agricultural improvement.

WHAT WERE THEIR PHASES?

Historically, the peasant movements in pre-independence India can broadly be grouped in thefollowing three distinct phases: The first phase wascharacterized by the absence of proper leadership,the second phase witnessed the rise of well-organisedpeasant movements in which the Congress Party,under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, took activepart and the third phase was marked by theemergence of the class conscious peasantorganizations. Its distinct feature was that, during thisperiod, peasant movements were led by people whogave priority of Kisan problems in the struggle fornational liberation.

FIRST PHASE (1858-1917)

WHAT WAS THE ROLE OF PEASANTS IN THEFIRST PHASE?

The tyranny of zamindars alongwith theexorbitant rates of British land revenue led to a seriesof spontaneous peasant uprising in different parts ofthe country during this period. The periodicrecurrence of famines coupled with economicdepression during the last decade of the 19th centuryfurther aggravated the situation in rural areas andconsequently led to numerous peasant revolts.

One of the powerful peasant movements of thisperiod was the Indigo Agitation of Bengal (1859-1860).The foreign indigo planters compelled the peasantsto cultivate indigo and subjected them to untoldoppression. The anger against the oppression burstout in 1859. A large number of peasants refused tocultivate indigo and stoutly resisted physical brutalityand violence of the planters. The new intelligentsia ofBengal rose to the occasion and organized a powerfulcampaign in support of the rebellious peasants. Thegovernment was forced to appoint a commission andsome of the worst abuses of the system wereremoved.

PEASANT MOVEMENTSIN MODERN INDIA

2323232323


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

HOW WERE THE ISSUES RESOLVED?

In the 1870's, again agricultural unrest broke out,this time in East Bengal. The zamindars of Bengal,notorious for their oppression, freely took recourse toejection, harassment, illegal seizure of property,arbitrary increase of rent and use of force. The Bengalpeasants organized themselves in unions and attackedzamindars and their agents. The peasant resistancewas suppressed only after the government intervenedand took energetic steps to put it down. However,this agitation served as a warning to the Britishgovernment and and enquiry committee wasappointed and the first statute, the Bengal TenancyAct of 1885, was passed, conferring permanency oftenure upon some classes of tenants.

The next agitation took place between 1875-76 inMaharashtra, particularly in Poona and Ahmedabaddistricts, and was popularly known as the DeccanRiots. In these areas, the Ryotwari Settlement was invogue, but the government revenue demand was sohigh that the peasants found it impossible to meet itwithout borrowing form the moneylender atexorbitant interest. As a result, more and more landbegan passing into the hands of the moneylenders.The peasants lost their patience by the end of 1874.At first, they organized a social boycott of themoneylenders which soon transformed itself intoagrarian riots. Everywhere the peasants tookpossession of the debt bonds and other documentsand set them on fire. The police failed to meet thefury of the peasant resistance, which was finallysuppressed with the help of the army. However, theBritish government took its cue from this try of themasses and hurriedly passed the Deccan AgriculturistsRelief Act where by no peasant of Maharashtra culdbe sent to the Civil Debtors Jail for failure to repaydebts.

A similar uprising took place in Punjab between1890-1900 against the growing alienation of peasant'slands to the money lenders of towns. The Sikh, Muslimand Hindu peasants who had till the recent pastenjoyed an independent Sikh state could not breaksuperiority of the moneylenders conferred upon themby the British Civil laws. No wonder the murders orassaults on money lenders began to increase ratheralarmingly. The British government therefore wasforced to pass the Punjab Land Alienation Act in 1902-1903 prohibiting the transferring of land from thepeasants and probihiting the transferring of mortgagesof more than 20 years.

WHAT WAS THEIR NATURE?

All the above peasant uprisings were thespontaneous and instinctive response of the peasants

to the large scale dispossession and intolerableoppression. Their anger was often directed againstthe immediate source of their miserly Indigo planterthe zamindar or the moneylender. Later, when thegovernment suppressed them in the name of law andorder, they resisted the government too. The fourmajor fights put up by the peasants after 1858,however, resulted in some concessions from thegovernment. The British government granted theseconcessions; least the masses should become politicallyconscious as a result of their struggles or fall into thehands of politicians. There were neither politicalorganizations nor class organizations at that timeeither to stimulate, engineer and develop peasant'srisings, or to exploit the spontaneous uprising ofpeasants with a view to strengthen any politicalmovement for freedom.

WHAT WAS THE ATTITUDE OF CONGRESSTOWARDS THEM?

The Indian National Congress, though it cameinto existence in the late 19th century, took cognizanceof the peasant problems only during its extremistphase (1905-1919). And even during the extremistphase, it did not lay as much stress on the needs ofthe peasants as it did on the needs of the industrialists.The Congress leaders continued to press for theestablishment of permanent settlement of landrevenue, the abolition of sales tax and excise revenue.However, as the congress were pre-occupied withtheir fight for protection of the Indian industries andin securing state assistance to the Indian industrialists,they could not do anything more than formallyreiterate these demands on behalf to the agriculturists.Even in this regard, for some reason not easilyexplicable, they kept themselves scrupulously silentabout the fate of the crores of zamindari tenants inU.P., Orissa, Bihar, Assam and Madras. Lord Curzon'sdeclaration that it was the Brithish government whichhad done a lot to protect tenants from the oppressionof Zamindars remained unchallenged andunanswered probably because of the then leadershipof the Congress was so overwhelmingly zamindariand capitalistic in its class context.

SECOND PHASE (1917-1923)

WHAT WAS THE SECOND PHASE OF THEPEASANT MOVEMENT?

The awakening of the peasantry during this phaseowed its development and success to the leadershipof Mahatma Gandhi. The Indian National Congressinfact, experienced a metamorphosis with theappearance of Mahatma Gandhi on the Indian political


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

scene. The sphere of influence of the Congress, whichwas restricted to the middle-class intelligentsia, wasnow extended, and it came to assume a masscharacter.

HOW WERE THE ENDS ACHIEVED?

The peasants of Bihar staged the famousChamparan struggle (1917-1918) against the indigoplanters, many of whom were Europeans and whowere persecuting the local peasants to grow indigoagainst their will under the threat of paying highertaxes and collecting several illegal exactions. Gandhiinitiated the moral and original method ofconducting a systematic and authoritative enquiryinto the real nature and degree of the sufferings ofthe peasants at the hands of the planters.

Thousands of suffering peasants flocked aroundGandhi and Rajendra Prasad and detailed theirwoes. But the British government prohibited themfrom pushing their enquires. On their refusal toobey the prohibitory order, there arose a crisis, inwhich the arrest of Gandhi and subsequent releasewere followed by the appointment of an enquirycommittee with Gandhi as one of its members.Eventually the government accepted therecommendation of the committee. An enactmentbased on use report relieved peasants from thespecial impost laid on them by the Indigo planters.But just as the earlier Congress agitation led byR.C. Dutta against temporary settlement did notembrace the exploitation of the peasants byZamindars, this agitation led by the Gandhi inChamparan did not lead up to any fight againstthe main causes for the terrible poverty andsuffering of Chamaparan peasants namely theexcessive rents and exorbitant incidence of debts.It may be because of Gandhi's habit of concentratingupon one thing at a time which latter on came to beconsidered as one of his political virtues. But it doesstrike one as rather significant that both he andRajendra Prasad had remained scrupulously silentregarding the ravages of the zamindari system andthe extreme need for liberating peasants from itsclutches. Anyhow, the Champaran Satyagraha hadthe excellent result of awakening not only the Biharpeasantry but also the general public of India tothe tremendous revolutionary potentialities latentin the bosom of our peasantry.

Soon the Khaira drought and the consequentfailure of crops claimed the attention of Gandhi.Miseries of the peasants were further aggravatedwhen the government insisted upon the paymentof land revenue despite the inability of the peasant

to pay. The government, therefore, suspendedrevenue collection for the time being. Even hereGandhi did not complicate his campaign by tryingto tackle the other problems of the peasants such astheir independence, alienation of lands, etc.

These two campaigns succeeded in establishingGandhi as the pioneer of peasant satyagraha andto some extent in awakening the peasants to theuse of satyagraha for achieving their purposes. It istrue that the great majority of the peasantry wasstill unaware of politics and was therefore notpolitically affected by these triumphs. But they didopen the eyes of a growing number of the peasantsto mass action.

But the ultimate task was left to the greatnation-wide Non-cooperation Movement, whichsucceeded in drawing, in one effort, millions ofpeasants into its orbit. It shook our peasants fromtheir age-old political slumber and dragged themalmost against their traditions into the whirlpool ofour national political life. For the first time, theywere told, to their great satisfaction and wonderthat it was legitimate for them to refuse to pay landrevenue, the payment of which they had come tolook upon almost as a religious duty. To them, inthe early days of the national movement when theybecame politically conscious for the first time as aresult of direct action, swaraj meant freedom fromall tax burdens and, especially, the abolition of landrevenue.

Therefore, when Gandhi commenced hispreparation for his open conspiracy of Non-paymentof taxes, campaign, the peasants of India opened theireyes and began to spontaneously refuse or delay thepayment of land revenue. Throughout India, millionsof peasants, believing that the end of the British Rajwas within sight, abstained from paving their rentsand began to watch political developments with batedbreath. But Gandhi suddenly withdrew the wholenon-cooperation movement and thus left millions ofthe peasants as well as the country in mid -air.

The consequences of the withdrawal of themovement were quite tragict to the peasantry. Theycame to be penalized in innumerable ways by theirzamindars, who not so long ago had been so terror-stricken and who were only too glad to wreakvengeance upon those peasants who had the temerityto hope for a better future. With the imprisonment ofmany congressmen whose association with thepeasantry was very intimate, the peasants found veryfew people to tend for them and almost none to leadthem in their struggles against the enraged -Britishgovernment and its more cruel allies the zamindars.


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

WHAT WAS ITS OUTCOME?

The introduction of national politics into the lifeof the peasants since 1917 by Gandhi and hisfollowers, working through the Indian NationalCongress had great impact. First of all, the peasantswere taken by surprise: they had to absorb thepolitical thought of the day. They were not providedwith any political machinery in the shape of a self-confident, self-conscious and local autonomous Kisanorganization to stand up for them and to constantlyguide them. Instead as soon as Gandhi withdrewhis Non-cooperation Movement and abandoned allaggressive political action, the local Congresscommittees went limp and congressmen becamedevoid of any initiative or leadership. Indeed,Congress had fought shy of having anything moreto do with Mappilas or Koyas or Punjab Kisans orothers and congressmen instantly dropped all Kisanwork.

In many cases, the peasants' struggle wasexploited either by communalist or religiousmaniacs who had little respect for the concept ofNon-violence. Consequently, the peasants weredefenseless against their bad leadership, denied asthey had been of any political training,organizational ability or knowledge of the effectsand consequences of agitation work which couldbe gained only through their active participation intheir class of political organizations. Naturally, therewas too much exhibition of violence at the fag endof the Kisan struggles of these hectic days of 1920-1923 and it frightened away the Congressmen andthus denied them of any active sympathetic, day today support and guidance of the Congress, whichthey then needed more than at any other time.

And in 1928, the Andhra Provincial RyotsAssociation was organized by the regional peasantleaders under the presidentship of B.V. Ratnam. In1929 the Andhra Ryots Provincial Association metunder the presidentship of N.G. Ranga and supportedthe stand taken by the Congress in regard to politicsand concerned itself mostly with land revenue,agricultural indebtendness, unemployment andinternal social reforms, but did not try to tackle theZamindari- Ryot problem. That problem was takenup by the Andhra Pradesh Zamindari RyotsConference, organized by Mr. R.M. Sharma with thecooperation of some of the peasant leaders. But eventhis conference demanded only a radical revision ofthe Estates Land Act so as to minimize the sufferingsof tenants. The peasant workers were not yet preparedto demand the abolition of the zamindari system, sounprepared was the political world to grapple withsuch problems at that time.

Its is impossible to over estimate the shockingeffect the triumph of Bardoli Satyagraha of 1828-1829had upon the peasantry, who protested against theunjust enhancement of land revenue sought to beimposed upon them by the Bombay government. Thiswas led by Sardar Vallabhai Patel. But the chief factorwhich ultimately won for them was their ownlimitless sacrifices, discipline and determination. Atlast, the Bombay government had to yield to thedemand of peasants to appoint an impartial EnquiryCommittee. The Committee gave the award mostlyin favour of peasants. This well-advertised triumphof Bardoli peasants raised their hopes of being able tosuccessfully rise against the government.

The Civil Disobedience Movement, the steep fallin prices of the agricultural commodities due to theeconomic depression and the consequent pressurebrought to bear upon them by moneylenders andlandlords, and the heroic struggles and achievementsof Bardoli peasants in 1828-1829 and again in 1901-31, had all prepared the field for the spread of bolderideas among the peasantry.

The first Kisan Congress held at Lucknow in 1935led to the formation of the All India Kisan Sabha. Theprogramme of the Sabha reflected the aspirations andneeds of the entire peasantry in agrarian India. Theall India Kisan Sabha was composed of radical pettybourgeois individuals, within and outside the IndianNational Congress. It was also supported andstrengthened by the Congress Socialist Party and, lateron, by the Communist Party of India. The Sabhalaunched some significant struggles in different partsof the country. In Andhra Pradesh, it launched ananti settlement movement against zamindari zulum.Swami Sahajanand, one of the eminent leaders andpioneers of the All India Kisan Sabha, led a heroicmovement for the abolition of zamindari in Bihar. Apowerful struggle was initiated against the oppressiveforest laws in South India. Similarly, in Uttar Pradeshand other parts of India, agitations were launchedagainst the tyranny of zamindars. It also carried onwide educative and propaganda work among theIndian peasants and attempted to harmonize theirefforts. Thus, it provided a common platform for theIndians to express their grievances and put up jointdemands.

WHAT WAS CONGRESS'S REACTION?

The growth of peasant movements exercisedconsiderable pressure on the Indian National congress.Despite this, the Karachi congress charter did nottouch even the fringe of the peasant problem. But thepolitical pressure of the Kisan Sabha succeeded in theFaizpur Congress and paved the way for the


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

formulation of the Congress agrarian programme.However, the Congress could not, under the pressureof the native bourgeoisies, grant any radicalconcessions to the peasant demands, at the cost ofjeopardizing the interest of zamindars. This was amplydemonstrated in the short period that they were inoffice before independence.

THIRD PHASE (1923-1947)

WHAT WERE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THETHIRD PHASE?

The Congress policy of safeguarding the interestof zamindars and landlords led to emergence ofindependent class organizations of Kisans in ruralIndia. Radical sections in the peasant movementsincreasingly realized that the Congress wasconcerned of the interest of the capitalists andlandlords. They felt that, to protect the interests ofthe Kisans, their own class organizations andleadership had to be evolved. Consequently, theKisan organizations came into existence in differentparts of the country.

It was in 1923 July-December, that N.G. Ranga,the famous peasant leader, had begun to organize'Ryots Association' (or Kisan Sabhas as they latercame to be known all over India) and AgriculturalLabour Unions in Andhra. He met withinstantaneous success in Guntur district with Ryots(peasants) since they were all disillusioned with thegovernment which inflicted heavy penal rates ofassessment for their having dared to support theCongress in the Nor-Cooperation Movement.Between 1924- 1926, these associations succeded inspreding themselves to West Godavari and Krishnadistrict sand also in spreading and popularizing theidea of independent class organizations of peasants.

HOW WERE THEY SORTED OUT?

In 1926-1927, some peasant leaders began toorganise Kisan Sabhas in Bengal, Uttar Pradesh andPunjab on more or less idealstic lines with arevolutionary programme. As they were too oftermistaken for communist organizations by the localgovernment which were only too arxious to nip inthe bud everthing that savoured of revolutionarytemper. They were shunned before they could take,deep roots Somehow, the Bihar and U.P., Kisan Sabhasmanaged to keep their existence until 1928 when theypresented their memoranda to the all partiesConference presided over by Motilal Nehru. TheseKisan Sabhas favoured universal franchise, completeindependence and fundamental rights.

In Bihar, the Congress-zamindar agreementprevented the Ministry from adopting any radical

measures in the interest of the peasants. Similarly, inCentral provinces and Bombay, the CongressMinistries refused to entertain any such proposals.The enactment of the ambiguous land legislations bythe Bengal Ministry resulted in widespread evictionof the tenants. Thus, the disappointing performanceof the Congress ministries worsened the plight of thepeasants and the resultant growing unrest led to aseries of uprisings in different parts of the country.

WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME?

The massive agitation launched by Bihar Kisansagainst the failure of the Congress Ministry, anti-settlement campaign in U.P., debt relief struggle inBengal, the Koya revolt, the Bhil disturbances inMayurabhanj are instances of heroic peasant struggles.This, in turn, led to a chain of Kisan revolts in theIndian States against feudal brutalities during 1937-46. The Mysore and Travancore struggles forresponsible government, the Orissa agitation againstprincess, the Jaipur, Udaipur and Gwalior revoltsagainst local zammindars are some of the gloriousevents in the history of the Indian peasant movements.

However, it should be noted that during thisphase too the all India Kisan Sabha with its roots inthe upper section of the peasantry could not developany effective struggle for the problems of the marginalfarmers and agricultural labourers. Moreover, due tothe absence of a clear perspective, the Kisan SabhaMovements at time took even communal turns.

In 1942, Indian peasants responded to theCongress call of civil Disobedience Movement mostheroically. In U.P., Bihar, Maharashtra and Tamilnadu,they formed parallel governments. The outstandingachievement was in Midnapur in Bengal where foryears the British rulers were unable to regain theircontrol. It may not be an exaggeration to say that ifthe peasant movements had received proper guidancefrom a mature leadership such as Mao's in China,Indian history would perhaps have taken a differentcourse.

Thus, the position of the Indian peasants did notimprove much by the time India was grantedindependence. But, certainly they were betterorganized by that time, and also came to realize thatunless they fought for their causes, the government(either the British or even the Indian) would not meettheir demands and redress their grievances. Apartform better organization, the peasants in differentparts of the country did succeed in securingsome concession, however minor, from thegovernment. Above all, the various agrarian reformsundertaken by the Indian government afterindependence were mainly due to the pressure exertedon it by the now awakened and better organizedpeasantry. � � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

WHAT WERE THEY?

While the British territories in India were diretlyruled by the British authorities, the rest of the countrywas made up of a large number of princely states,referred to by the Britishers as. Native States. Thesestates varied from very large to very small in areaand population and were scattered all over the countryinterspersing the British Indian areas. These areas wereruled indirectly by the British through the princesthemselves. The condition of the people in the princelystates was much worse than that of those in the Britishgoverned territories. Though, both the peoples wereexploited to the maximum extent by their rulers, thepeople in the British governed areas benefitedindirectly from the process of modernisationparticularly in the fields of education, transport,communication, industrialization etc. But the princesopposed the process of modernization, in their states,since it would threaten the very basis of theirexistence. The British also did not press formodernization of the princely states since they didnot want to incur the displeasure of the princes, whomthey, in fact, wanted to use as a bulwark against risingNationalism.

WHY WERE THEY STARTED?

The grievances of different sections of these stateswas an important factor. To begin with, the conditionof the peasants was pathetic due to the feudal natureof the economy and society. While the peasantry wastaxed heavily and oppressed in several ways such asforced labour, there were no incentives to them fromthe state i.e. the prince. The bulk of the state revenuesinstead of being spent on public works like irrigationalcanals, were spent on the luxuries of the princes andtheir hangers-on.

The position of the artisans and handicraftsmenin these states was not enviable either. There wasgradual decline of Indian handicrafts and small scaleindustries in the 18th and 19th centuries due to the

flooding of Indian markets by the machine-madegoods of the west. This decline of Indian handicraftswas not followed by the rise of big industries in theprincely states. As a result, all these people were notonly deprived of their former income, but were alsodenied of new employment.

The middle class too had their grievances againstthe prevailing economic, political and social conditionsin these states. The system of education in these stateswas quite retarded and outdated, and hence theydemanded the introduction of modern education.Freedom of the press and other civil rights werecompletely absent. So, the grant of these civil rightswas one of their demands. Since there was norepresentative body of the people, they demandedthe introduction of some form of representativegovernment in these states.

Further, the people of these princely states werenot immune to the influene of the nationalistmovements in British India. The example of the peopleof British India in organizing themselves into theNational Congress immensely impressed them. Thesuccess of the National Congress, though limited insecuring concessions to the people of British India,naturally made the people of the princey states relyon the need for organizing themselves first at locallevel and then at all India level if they were to gettheir grievances redressed. They were alsogreathy attracted by the call for "Poorna Swaraj"(complete independence) given by the NationalCongress. To them, Poorna Swaraj meantfreedom not only from their immediate rulers, theprinces, but also from their indirect rulers, the British,who were in fact responsible for their plight to a greatextent.

The rise of the States people's movements wasalso due to certain policies and activities of the British.The British aggravated the conditions of the peopleof the princely states first through the policy of divideand rule. Throughout history, a corrupt and decadentruler was checked to some extent by the challenge of

THE STATESPEOPLE'S MOVEMENTS

2424242424


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

internal revolt or external aggression. But the Britishthrough certain provisions of their Subsidiary alliancesystem freed the princes from both these dangers.Hence, the princes felt free to indulge in grossmisgovernment. And later, the British, in pursuanceof their divide and rule policy, began to use the princesto prevent the growth of national unity and to counterthe rising national movement. The princes, in turn,depended for their self-preservation from popularrevolt on the protection by the British power andadopted a hostile attitude to the national movement.The british in fact carried out various measures inorder to strengthen the position of the princes. Whenpartial responsible government was established in theprovinces in the form of Dyarchy in 1919, the Chamberof Princes was created to enable the native rules tomeet and discuss, under the guidance of the British,matters of common interest. Again, when thefederal scheme was proposed at the centre by the Actof 1935, the native states were given undue weightagein their representation to both houses of thecentral legislature. It was proposed that the nativestates would get two-fifth of the seats in the UpperHouse and 1/3rd of the seats in the lowerhouse. Above all, the reperesentatives of the stateswere to be nominated by the rulers of the respectivestates.

HOW WERE THEY ORGANISED?

The roots of the States people's movements canbe traced to the numerous spontaneous local peasantoutbreaks against excessive taxation in several princelystates like Mewar, Kashmir, Travancore, Mysore,Hyderabad, etc., from the beginning of the 20thcentury. But all these struggles met with violentrepression at the hands of the princes, who wereactively supported by the British. Apart fromviolent repression, lack of proper organization andgood leadership were also responsible for the failureof these peasant outbreaks. Thus, peasant radicalismseems to have preceded urban nationalism,which began only in the 1920s in most of the princelystates.

Urban nationalism, in the form of urban middleclass Praja-Parishads with nationalistic ideas, hadstarted emerging in the princely states, the first ofthem in Baroda in 1917, followed by the one in theKathiawar region in 1921, the proximity to Gujrat (thestronghold of National Congress) going important inboth cases. In most of the princely states, subjects

(later renamed People's) Conferences began to meetannually from 1923 onwards but were as yet a verytame affair.

Alongwith the appointment of the SimonCommission, the British government also appointed theHarcourt Butler Indian States Committee to recommendmeasures for the establishment of a better relationshipbetween the states and the central government,nationalists among the States people, such as BalwantRai Mehta and Manilal Kothari of Kathiawar and G.R.Abhyankar of the Deccan, convened an all-India StatesPeople's Conference in December 1927, which, thoughbased on West Indian initiative, was attended by 700delegates from all over India. The AISPC's aim was toinfluence the governments of the states to intiate thenecessary reforms in the administration by the force ofcollective opinion of the people and the states and toemphasise popular representation and self-governmentby the elective principle in all states. The conferencealso wanted the distinction between public revenue andthe private income of the ruler clearly recognized. Thiswas necessary to end the exploitation of public moneyfor personal expenditure. The conference also pleadedfor the separation of the judiciary and the executive sothat autocratic fiats would stand abolished. Finally, theAISPC urged the estabshment of constitutional relationsbetween British India and the Indian states, and aneffective voice for the State's people in this relationship.This it was felt would hasten the attainment of Swarajby the whole of India.

Almost from the time the first conference wascalled in 1927, the AISPC became a permanentpolitical body. It was consistently anti-feudal, but notas clearly anti-imperialist as the National Congress.This was to a great extent explained by the fact thatas far as the States people were concerned, the feudalsystem was the more direct exploiter. And one of theimmediate results of the setting up of the AISPC wasthat the struggles of the peoples of the different statesceased to be isolated: local incidents had acquired anall-India identity.

As a direct consequence of their stand that thestates should be treated as integral parts of the wholeof India, the AISPC had requested the Britishgovernment to agree to the people of the states beingrepresented at the First Round Table Conference. Therequest was not acceded to. The AISPC then presenteda memorandum to the Congress advocating an all-India federal constitution in which all fundamentalrights and priveleges which the Karachi Congress had


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

called for in British India would be accorded to thepeople of the states as well. The anti-feudal movement,thus, came to be democratized and aligned to thenational movement.

In many of the states, particularly in Rajkot,Jaipur, Kashmir, Hyderabad and Travancore,significant movements were launched demanding thatthe democratic principle should be recognized andthe government and administration reorganized. Theprinces replied with ruthless repression. Some of themtried to stem the tide of popular revolt by inflamingcommunal passions. The Nizam of Hyderabad, forexample, tried to brand the popular movement asanti-Muslim. Similarly, the Maharaja of Kashmir triedto make out that the popular movement was anti-Hindu. In Travancore, it was suggested that theChristians and the Church were behind the agitationand that it was intended to overthrow the HinduMaharaja.

The AISPC had, remained till 1939, a verymoderate and elitist body, confined to drawingpetitions and issuing pamphlets. Though it hadbecome more active under its Secretary, BalwantraiMehta, it continued essentially to be an occasionalgathering of middle-class politicians, concerned onlywith questions of civil rights and responsiblegovernments, and seldom raising specific peasant ortribal issues. But 1936 marked the beginning of a clearchange. The fifth session of the AISPC realized theneed for mass contacts in place of mere petitions, andthe session for first time drew up a programme ofagrarian demands such as a 1/3rd cut in land revenue,scaling down of debts, and an equiry into otherpeasant grievances.

WHAT WAS THE ATTITUDE OF CONGRESS?

Though the Congress Party in its Nagpur Sessionin 1920 called on the princes to grant at once fullresponsible government in their states, the Congressresolutions at the same time made it clear that, whilepeople in the states could become individual membersof the Congress, they could not use the membershipto interfere in the internal affairs of individual states.If they wished to do so, it would have to be in theirown individual capacity and not in the name of theIndian National Congress. The Congress felt thatpolitical activities in each state should be organizedand controlled by the local Praja Madal or StatesPeople's Conference.

And as late as 1934, Gandhiji reiterated the 1920non-intervention stand. He argued that any movementstarted externally could not be successful, and thatthe people of the states should learn self-reliance.However, he too supported the Congress resolutionof 1920 that the princes should accord fundamentalrights to their subjects.

It was only in 1938 at its Haripur Session that theCongress included the independence of the princelystates as well in its goal of Poorna Swaraj or completeindependence. But, at the same time, it insisted thatfor the present the Congress could only give its normalsupport and sympathy to the state people'smovements, which should not be conducted in thename of Congress. However, the Congress at itsTripura Session (1939) decided that the organizationshould involve itself closely with the movements inthe princely states. As if to emphasise the commonnational aims of the political struggles in India and inthe States, Jawaharlal Nehru became the President ofthe All India States People's Conference in 1939.

WHAT WAS THEIR ROLE IN THE INTEGRATIONOF INDIA?

With the impending lapse of British paramountcy,the question of the future of the princely states becamea vital one. The more ambitious rulers or their diwanswere dreaming of an independence which could keepthem as auto cratic as before, and such hopes receivedconsiderable encouragement from the British IndianGovernment till Mountabatten enforced a morerealistic policy. Meanwhile a new upsurge of the statespeopl's movement had begun in 1946-47 demandingeverywhere political rights and elective representationin the constitutent assembly. The congress criticizedthe Cabinet Mission plan for not providing for electedmembers from the states. Nehru presided over theUdaipur and Gwalior Sessions of the All India StatesPeople's Conference, 1945 and 47 respectively, anddeclared at Gwalior that states refusing to join theConstitutent Assembly would be treated as hostile.But verbal threats and speeches apart, the Congressleadership, or more precisely Sardar Patel, tackledthe situation very clearly, using popular movementsas a lever to extract concessions from princes hadbeen brought to heel as in Hyderabad.

Thus the Eastern States Union formed byrecalcitrant princes crumbled in December 1947 inthe face of powerful Praja Mandal agitations in Orissa


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

states like Nilgiri, Dhenkanal and Talcher. Junagadhin Kathiawar whose Muslim ruler tried to joinPakistan was brought to heel by a combination ofpopular agitation with Indian police action. TheCongress, exceptionally strong in Mysore since thelate 1930's launched a fairly uninhibited Mysore Chaloagitation on its own in September 1947, which forcedsubstantial changes in democratic direction byOctober. V.P.Menon, who became the Secretary to the

new state department persuaded the TravancoreDewan to give up his dream of continued personalpower by pointing to the communist menace, whilethe Telengana armed struggle weakened the Nizamand also provided one important reason for policeaction i.e. the military intervention. Thus it can besaid that the unification of India was made possiblenot only by the efforts of Sardar Patel but also by thepotential presence of mass pressures. � � �


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

YWHAT LED TO THE RISE OF THE LEFT WING?

The post Non-cooperation movement periodwitnessed another development of great significancein the history of the Nationalist Movement in India.Various left-wing groups began to rise and grow bothwithin the Indian National Congress and outside itwhich ultimately led to the rise of independenteconomic and political organizations of theworking class in India. Infact, several factors wereresponsible.

Firstly, the radical sections among the Indiannationalists, including some Congressmen such asJawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose, werenot satisfied with the ideals and attitudes of MahatmaGandhi regarding political affairs in India. The suddenrecall and failure of the Non-cooperation Movementfurther convinced them of the futility of the efforts ofGandhi for the attainment of freedom. Though only afew Congressmen openly criticized Gandhi for thesudden withdrawal, many of them resented thedecision in the heart of their hearts. However, almostall the radical nationalists outside the fold of theCongress did not feel inhibited to criticize Gandhi forthe sudden withdrawal of the movement which wasrapidly picking up. These redical nationalists werealso not impressed by the objectives and means of theSwarajist (members of the newly formed Swaraj Party)who wanted to enter the legislative Councils, obstructtheir work according to official plans, expose theirweaknesses, and thus use them to rouse publicenthusiasm. The agrarian and labour policies of theCongress, which at that time was being dominatedby the right wing consisting of zamindars andcapitalists, also caused disppointment among theradials both within and without the Congress. Therise and growth of independent peasants andworkers organizations was, in fact, partly due to the

very moderate stand taken by the Congress towardsthe genuine grievances of the peasants and theworkers.

In addition, a growing number of youngmenbegan to be gradually attracted towards thephilosophy and ideology of Marxism and Socialismwhich preached economic equality, emancipation ofthe downtrodden and class war. Though not all ofthem were convinced of the violent struggle or classwar between the haves and have nots, many of themseriously thought that national independence shouldbe pursued with the ultimate object of establishing asocialist society or at least socialistic pattern of societyin India. Added to this, the steady progress of theSoviet Union also raised many hopes in them. TheSocialists formed parties of workers and peasants indifferent parts of India. These parties, of course,supported the cause of national movement, but atthe same time, emphasized the political andeconomic demands of the workers and the peasantsand organized them on class lines for their classdemands.

Finally, the adverse effects of the worldDepression of 1929-32 gave a further boost to thegrowth of the left both within and outside theCongress party. The workers and peasants, whoseconditions were worsened by the Depression, askedfor better working conditions, while the governmentand the employers were in no mood, and, infact, inno position to do so. While the economy of thecapitalist countries was in bad shape due to theDepression, the successful ompletion of the first twoFive Year Plans by the Soviet Union naturallyattracted further converts to Socialism not only inIndia but in the whole world. Thus, the Socialistmovement, along with the left movement, gainedmomentum in the 1930's and after.

RISE AND GROWTH OFLEFT WING WITHIN

THE CONGRESS

2525252525


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

LEFT-WING IN THE CONGRESS

HOW DID THE LEFTISTS COME TO THEFOREFRONT IN THE CONGRESS?

The Socialist movement in India, however, didnot pursue a common idealogy. A section of the IndianSocialists remained within the Indian NationalCongress and formed its left wing. This left-wingwithin the Congress consisted of a small minority andwas led by Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash ChandraBose. In May 1933, when Gandhi suspended the CivilDisobedience Movement, Subhash Chandra Bose andVithalbhai Patel issued a statement from Europerepudiating his leadership. More significant, asrepresenting an ideological alternative wasJawaharlal's intellectual radicalisation in prison. Hisletters to his daughter, later published as Glimpses ofWorld History (1934) , and the autobiography writtenin jail in 1934-35, mark the height of Nehru's interestin and partial commitment to Marxiam Socialist ideas.Out of jail for a brief period between July, 1933 andFebruary 1934, Nehru made clear his theoreticaldifferences with Gandhi in letters and articlespublished as 'Whither India' repeatedly emphasizingthe need to combine nationalist objectives with radicalsocial and economic programmes. The election ofNehru as president of the Congress in 1929 and 1937and that of Bose in 1938 and 1939 reflected the left-wing attitude of the Congress.

WHAT WAS ITS OUTCOME?

The aim of the left wing within the Congress wasto remove the sufferings of the poor and thedowntrodden sections of the Indian society, thoughnot through violent means, but through graduallegislative process. But they could not succeed fullyin achieving their objective mainly due to thedomination of the Congress by the right-wing. Nehrudrew back from any total breach with Gandhi andthe Congress since he saw no reason why he shouldwalk out of the Congress, leaving the field clear tothe social reactionaries'. And opposition of Gandhiand his supporters compelled Bose to resign from thepresidentship of the Congress in 1939. So he and manyof his left - wing within the Congress towards thesocialist movement in India remained inegligible.However, it was due to the efforts of this left-wingthat Congress agreed to declare the achievement of asocialist pattern of society as its goal afterindependence.

CONGRESS SOCIALISM

WHAT LED TO ITS RISE?

Outside the Congress, the Socialist tendency ledto the foundation of the Congress Socialist Party (1934)under the leadership of Acharya Nerendra Dev andJai Prakash Narayan, and the growth of theCommunist party from 1920's itself. The founders andthe supporters of the Congress Socialist Party (CSP)consisted of mainly those congressmen who brokeaway from the National Congress in order to establisha socialist order by non-violent means. The idealogyof its founders ranged from vague and mixed upradical nationalism to fairly firm advocacy of MarxianScientific Socialism which Nerendra Dev distinguishedsharply from mere 'social reformism'.

WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME?

The Congress socialist Party's quick advance inprovinces like Uttar Pradesh was purely illusionary.Much of the support was purely opportunistic, comingfrom groups with factional quarrels with theestablished Congress leaderhip at various levels, andmost of the party's founding-fathers were to haveextremely chequered and by no menas consistentlyleftist political careers in the future.

Yet the Congres Socialist party propaganda didhelp considerably in stimulating thinking in Congressranks and leadership on questions like radical agrarianreform, problems of industrial labour, the future ofprincely states, etc.

COMMUNIST MOVEMENT

WHAT WAS ITS ORIGIN?

Despite repeated allegations of British officials andsome scholars that the whole Communist movementin India was no more than a foreign conspiracyorganized from Moscow, it really sprang from rootswithin the national movement itself, as disillusionedrevolutionaries, Non-cooperators, Khilafatists, andlabour and peasant activists sought new roads topolitical and social emancipation. Its founder was thefamous Yugantar revolutionary, Naren Bhattacharya(later known as M.N. Roy), who came into contactwith Bolshevik Mikhail Borodin in Mexico in 1919,and went to Russia in the summer of 1920 to attendthe second Congress of the Comunist International(Comintern). Here he embarked upon a celebrated


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

and significant controversy with Lenin in decidingthe strategy of Communists in the colonial world.Lenin urged the necessity of a broad support to thepredominantly bourgeois-led national movements inthe colonies and semi-coeonies. Roy with theenthusiasm and sectarianism of a new convert arguedthat the Indian masses were already disillusioned withbourgeois-nationalist leaders like Gandhi and weremoving towards revolution independently of thebourgeois-nationalist movement. The attitude towardsthe 'national bourgeoisie' and the nationalistmainstream in general would remain the basic issuein Communist controversies in India and else wheretill independence and even after it.

HOW WAS IT ORGANISED IN THE FIRST STAGE?

The rise and growth of the Communists in Indiacan be seen in five stages, the first stage convering1920 to 1928. In October 1920, M.N. Roy, AbaniMukherji (another ex-terrorist convert) and someMujahirs (Khilafat enthusiasts who had joined theHijrat in 1920 and crossed over through Afghanistaninto Soviet territory) like Mohammad Ali andMohammed Shafiq founded a Communist party ofIndia in Tashkent, together with a political cum-military school. When hopes of penetrating Indiathrough Afghanistan faded away in early 1921, someof the new Indian recruits joined the CommunistUniversity of Toilers of the East at Moscow. Royhimself shifted his headquarters to Berlin in 1922. Bythe end of 1922, through emissaries like Nalini Guptaand Shaukat Usmani, Roy had been able to establishsome tenuous and often-interecpted secret links withembryonic communist groups which had emerged.The Non-cooperation and Khilafat experience inBombay (S.A. Dange), and Lahore (Gulam Hussain),Left nationalist journals like 'Atmasakti' and'Dhumketu' in Calcutta and 'Navayuga' in Guntur hadstarted publishing eulogistic articles on Lenin andRussia, while from 1922 Dange was bringing out theweekly 'Socialist' from Bombay, first definitelycommunist journal to be published in India.

The veritable British panic in the face ofemergence of a few tiny communist groups in Indiafar exceeded the real immediate significance of suchactivities and be explained only by the world-wideruling class fear inspired by 1917 Russian revolutions.Mujahirs trying to re-enter India were tried in a seriesof five Peshawar Conspiracy cases between 1922 and1927 and in May 1924 Muzaffar Ahmmad, S.A. Dange,

Shaukat Usmania and Nalini Gupta were jailed inthe Kanpur Conspiracy Case. The setback caused bysuch repress measures, however, proved onlytemporary. An open Indian Communist Conferencewas held in Kanpur in December, 1925. Thoughfloated by rather diverse groups, the skeletonorganization set up by this conference was soon takenover by the determined Communists, and the unitedCPI in 1959 acknowledged the 1925 meeting to havemarked the formal foundation of the party. Of muchgreater practical significance, however, was theembodiment, in a number of organizations set upbetween 1925 and 1927 of the idea of a broad frontworkers and peasants party to serve as a legal cover.As a result, four workers and peasants parties wereset up in Bombay, Bengal, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh.But these associations could achieve nothing till somecommunists arrived in India from Britain. One ofthem, Philip Spratt arrived in India in December, 1925,and infused new life in the Communist party of India.He, with the financial assistance from Moscowincreased the number of unions, conducted strikesand used all other possible methods of propaganda.His efforts resulted in success and number ofCommunist members reached a high figure.

During this period, that is till 1928, the IndianCommunists on the whole tried to work within thenationalist mainstream even while sharply criticizingCongress leadership for its many compromises withimperialism. They felt that the Congress should beopposed only on well defined, specific issues, for,otherwise, they might enable their opponents to theend of 1928, they had followed a unity-cum-strugglepolicy with regard to the Congress, criticizing itslimitations but striving nevertheless to build an anti-imperialist united front.

WHAT WERE ITS ACTIVITIES IN THE SECONDSTAGE?

The Second stage (1929-34) began with theadoption of a new ultra-leftist policy by IndianCommunists according to the directions provided bythe Sixth Comintern Congress held in December 1928.They began to keep aloof from the nationalistmainstream in a highly sectarian manner, and severedall relations with the bourgeois elements. Theylaunched an all-out attack on the Congress and itsleaders, including Nehru, leading to its isolation inthe Indian political scene. Thus, the communists wereweakened during this period not just by repression


CHR

CHR

CHR

CHR

CHRONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

ONIC

LE

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS

IAS AAAAACADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

CADEM

Y

(which was important enough, since they were stillno more than a handful) but by this major change intheir strategy.

The only success of the CPI during this periodwas the capture of the leadership of the All IndiaTrade Union Congress. The party however, broughtthe wrath of the Government on it when it gave a callfor a general strike by all textile workers on April 3,1934. The strike succeeded but the government tookits revenge. The party along with a dozen trade unionsunder its control was declared illegal. The party hadno other alternative except to go underground.

WHAT HAPPENED IN THE THIRD STAGE?

The Third stage (1934-1940) began with theadoption by the Communists of the policy ofinfiltration into the Indian National Congress,Congress Socialist Party, the Forward Bloc anddifferent students organizations. They gained largesuccess. The Congress Socialist Party under theleadership of Jayaprakash Narayan and the leftConsolidation Committee under the leadership ofSubhash Chardra Bose welcomed them. TheCommunists took full advantage of this, placed theirmembers in influential positions in these organizationsand even succeeded in getting into the CongressWorking Committee. But their game could notcontinue for very long, and they were thrown out ofboth the Forward Block and the Congress SocialistParty in 1940, while the left-wing within the Congresswas forced to submit to the majority opinion of theright-wing by the end of 1939.

WHAT HAPPENED IN THE FOURTH STAGE?

During the fourth stage (1941-1947) the WorldWar II created another problem for the CPI. WhenGermany invaded Russia and Russia joined the campof the Allies, it asked the Indian Communists tosupport the British Indian Government. Since theyagreed for it in December 1971, the party was declaredlegal by the Government. The Government, in turn,

secured its loyalty so much so that when the Congressstarted the Quit India Movement on 1942, theCommunists acted as spies and stooges of theGovernment. That again brought down the image ofthe party among the Indians. The party, therefore,failed to win a single seat at the general elections tothe Central Legislative Assembly in 1945. That wasthe reason which compelled the party to seek thegoodwill of Jawaharlal Nehru and the Congress partyafter Independence. Yet, it was the only party whichpopularized genuine socialism and communism inIndia prior to Indian Indpendence.

WHY DID COMMUNISM FAIL THEN?

To begin with, the Communists lacked good andmature leadership which could make a properassessment of the Indian conditions and rally themasses. Due to this, they blindly followed the dictatesof the Comintern and in the process lost the sympathyof the Indian masses. This was quite evident in 1930(Civil Disobedience Movement) and in 1942 (QuitIndia Movement).

Further, the Communists were also weakened bythe internal rivalries, which led to the establishmentof splinter groups. The ultra-leftism of 1929-34 led toa multiplicity of totally hostile groups and generalisolation from the nationalist mainstream. Thingswere further complicated by the efforts of theComintern dissidents, M.N. Roy and SoumendranathTagore, to start the groups of their own.

Finally, the failure of the Communists was alsodue to the repression by the British Governmentwhich was terribly scared of the 'Red Menace' rightfrom the Russian Revolution of 1917. The arrest ofmany communist leaders in several conspiracy casessuch as the Peshawar Case (1922-27), Kanpur Case(1924) and Meerut Case (1929) definitely createdmany setbacks for the Communist movement. Andthe final ban on the CPI between 1934-41 also createdproblems for the communists.

� � �

modern india · the revolt of 1857 15 5. rise and growth of indian national movement 22 6. early...

Documents