द इण्डियन स्ट्रगल / भारतीय स्वाधीनता संग्राम (नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस - ऐतिहासिक विश्लेषण)

174 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE would, however, be only for a period of ten years. For Bengal and Punjab, the Committee decided to have no reservation at all. The Hindus, who are in a minority in these two provinces, did not demand any reservation, as being against the principle of nationalism—and the Com- mittee considered it unfair and unreasonable that there should be a reservation of seats for the majority community —namely, the Moslems. As for the Sikhs, they were prepared to forego reservation of seats for their community if the other two communities did so—and if they did not, then the Sikhs demanded representation in excess of their numbers. Besides the question of principle which appealed to the Nehru Committee, practical considerations also showed that the best solution of the Bengal and Punjab problem would be not to have any reservation there. In Bengal, under the existing Constitution, the Moslems have 40 per cent. of the elected seats and the Hindus 60 per cent.—while the Moslem population is about 54 per cent. and the Hindu population about 46 per cent. In Punjab under the existing Constitution, the Moslems have 50 per cent. of the elected seats, the Hindus 31 per cent. and the Sikhs 19 per cent., while in population the Moslems are 55 per cent., the Hindus 34 per cent. and the Sikhs 11 per cent. The Hindu-Moslem-Sikh representation now in vogue is based on the 'Congress League Scheme' which was adopted as a compromise between the Indian National Congress and the All-India Moslem League at Lucknow in 1916. In proportion to their popula- tion, the Moslem representation in Bengal and Punjab was reduced under the 'Congress League Scheme,' because in the other provinces the Moslems got representation far in excess of their numbers and the adjustment of Hindu-Moslem interests was made on an All-India basis. Moslem representa- tion as provided under the Congress League Scheme was no longer acceptable to the Moslems of Bengal and Punjab. At the same time the Nehru Committee found it well-nigh impossible to fix another proportion which would be accept- able to the parties concerned. Therefore, from the practical point of view also, the Committee found it advisable to decide on non-reservation of seats in Bengal and Punjab.

THE BAROMETER RISES 175 While the Nehru Committee was engaged in threshing out the principles of the new Constitution, interesting events were taking place elsewhere. In May 1928, I was called upon to preside over the Maharashtra Provincial Conference at Poona. The enthusiasm I met with there was striking. In my speech I advocated some new lines of activity for Congress- men which I had decided on during my prolonged incar- ceration in Burma. For instance, I urged that the Congress should directly take up the task of organising labour and that youths and students should start organisations of their own for looking after their own interests and also for serving their country. I also urged separate political organisations for women, in addition to their participation in the Congress organisations. From Poona I went to Bombay and found that the youths there had already founded the Bombay Presidency Youth League and were preparing to take the initiative in national service at a time when the Congress Committee was not giving the lead expected of it. The month of June found a no-tax campaign in full swing in the Bardoli sub-division in Gujerat where in 1922 the Mahatma had sounded the order of retreat. A 20 per cent. increase in land revenue assessment had been ordered by the Govern- ment and the peasants under the leadership of Mr. Vallabhbhai Patel (the younger of the Patel brothers) refused to pay and resorted to Satyagraha. The usual police repression followed, including the confiscation of property and land. A heroic non-violent battle was waged by the peasantry of Bardoli for several months and ultimately the Government had to yield. The whole of Bombay Presidency—and particularly Bombay city—rallied to the support of the Bardoli peasants and women took an active part in the movement. The Bardoli campaign was the precursor of the larger fight that Bombay was to wage in 1930. Out of this campaign Mr. Vallabhbhai Patel emerged with a great reputation. Prior to this he was of course known as one of the sincerest and staunchest lieutenants of the Mahatma but the Bardoli victory brought him into the front rank of India's leaders. In appreciation of his heroic service, the Mahatma gave him the title of 'Sardar' (meaning Leader) by which he is now generally called.

176 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE At the time of the All-Parties Conference in Lucknow in August, a new development took place. While the settlement of the communal question made by the Nehru Committee was welcome to the younger Nationalists, the recommendation regarding a dominion form of government, coming as it did after the Madras Congress resolution on independence, was quite unacceptable to them. Their intention, therefore, was to oppose the adoption of the Report at the All-Parties Conference at Lucknow. Such a step would have given great satisfaction and delight to the enemies of the Congress, would have weakened the forces working for national unity and would have increased the prestige of the Simon Commission instead of destroying it. A private meeting of members of the Congress Left Wing was therefore held at Lucknow to decide our course of action and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and I suggested that instead of dividing the House and thereby wrecking the All-Parties Conference, we should content our- selves by voicing our protest at the Conference and then proceed to organise an Independence League in order to carry on an active propaganda in the country in favour of independence. This suggestion was accepted by the meet- ing of Left-Wingers and following it, Pandit J. L. Nehru and I made our position clear at the All-Parties Conference on the question of independence, but refrained from dividing the House. After the Conference, we started organising branches of the Independence League all over the country and in November, at a meeting held at Delhi, the Indepen- dence League was formally inaugurated. The ‘Independence Movement’ started at Lucknow was contemporaneous with another movement—viz., the Students’ Movement. When the boycott of the Simon Commission was launched in February, students all over Bengal and parti- cularly in Calcutta, took an active part in it. Disciplinary action was taken against many of them by the College authori- ties and the students then began to feel the want of an organi- sation of their own for fighting for their interests. Out of this experience the Students’ Movement in Bengal was born.¹ ¹ Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and the writer were among the few public men who encouraged the students at the time to organise themselves.

THE BAROMETER RISES 177 The first All-Bengal Conference of students was held in August in Calcutta and was presided over by Pandit Jawa- harlal Nehru. After the Conference, students' organisations were started all over Bengal and somewhat later, similar organisations were started in other provinces as well. The unrest in the student world was accompanied by unrest in the labour world as well. The year before, there had been a strike at Kharagpore not far from Calcutta, among the railway workers. In 1928 a strike broke out in the Tata Iron and Steel Works¹ at Jamshedpur, about 170 miles south-west of Calcutta, in which 18,000 workers were involved. The strike dragged on for some months. Ultimately a settlement was arrived at between the workers and the management, which was extremely favourable to the former. Even more important than the Tata Strike was the Textile Strike in Bombay in which at least 60,000 workers were involved. This strike was in the first stages a phenomenal success and caused serious embarrassment not only to the mill-owners but to the Government as well. Following this, there was a strike in the workshop of the East India Railway at Lillooah near Calcutta in which 10,000 workers were involved, in the Tinplate Company at Jamshedpur in which 4,000 workers were involved, in the Oil and Petrol Works at Budge-Budge about twenty miles from Calcutta, in which 6,000 workers were involved, and last but not least, in the Jute Mills in and near Calcutta, in which about 200,000 workers were involved. The Bombay textile strike deserves special mention because it was under the leadership of a compact disciplined party who were alleged to hold com- munistic ideas and some of whom at least declared themselves later at the Meerut Conspiracy Case Trial to be avowed Communists. Most of the above strikes were conducted by the more militant section in the Trade Union Congress and they were therefore gaining in importance from day to day. ¹ Owing to pressure from the workers the writer took up the leadership of the strike when it was about to collapse. The strike was then revived and strengthened and it led to an honourable settlement. Unfortunately differences broke out among the workers after the settlement and this had disastrous consequences. The Tata strike served for the writer as an initiation into the workers' movement, with which he has been intim- ately connected ever since. M

178 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Towards the end of the year, when the Trade Union Congress met at Jharia in the mining area, it was found that the Left Wing had considerably increased their numbers and among them, the Communists were a compact and well-disciplined group. A new move was taken at this Congress in as much as the Trade Union Congress was affiliated to the League against Imperialism.¹ December was as usual a month of congresses and con- ferences. The most important among them were the All- India Youth Congress (which was going to hold its first session), the All-Parties Convention and the Indian National Congress. The Youth Congress was presided over by Mr. K. F. Nariman, the Parsi leader from Bombay, who had grown extremely popular with the Congress Left Wing. A lawyer by profession, he was at first a Swarajist member of the Bombay Legislative Council where he distinguished himself as an able fighter. He, however, came into prominence through his attempt to expose publicly the colossal waste of money which had resulted from the Back Bay Reclamation Scheme of the Bombay Government. He had to face a defamation suit in a court of law because of the allegations he made, but he came out of it with flying colours. Mr. Nariman, since he came into prominence, continued to uphold and give expression to extremist views until he was made a member of the Congress Working Committee at the instance of the Mahatma. The Youth Congress was important in as much as it indicated the emergence of a new factor in the public life of the country and gave expression to a mentality somewhat different from that which prevailed within the precincts of the National Congress.² The All-Parties Convention held in Calcutta during the ¹ The League against Imperialism was at first declared to be a non- Communist body and the Indian National Congress as well as the All- India Trade Union Congress were affiliated to it. Later on when the League became virtually a Communist body, the National Congress and the Trade Union Congress ceased to affiliate themselves any longer. ² In his speech as the Chairman of the Reception Committee the writer advocated activism, as opposed to the passivism which was being preached from Sabarmati Ashrama of the Mahatma and Pondicherry Ashrama of Sri Aurobindo Ghosh. He also pleaded for modernisation of the material side of life. The speech caused resentment among the followers of the Mahatma and of Sri Aurobindo Ghosh.

THE BAROMETER RISES 179 Congress week had unfortunate consequences. All those who did not have a hand in drafting the Nehru Report now made a dead set against it. Mr. M. A. Jinnah, who a year earlier had advocated a progressive nationalist point of view at the Moslem League Conference in Calcutta, now came forward with his famous 'fourteen points' in order to amend the communal settlement embodied in the Nehru Report. He demanded, among other things, one-third of the elected seats in both Houses of the Indian Legislature for Moslems, reservation of seats for Moslems in Bengal and Punjab on a population basis, vesting of residuary powers in the provinces, etc. This attitude served to make Mr. Jinnah popular with his reactionary co-religionists but undermined the value and importance of the Nehru Report. Following the Moslems, the Sikhs also made extreme demands, while the represen- tatives of the Hindu Mahasabha refused to make any further concessions beyond what had been already embodied in the Nehru Report and they even criticised adversely the conces- sions made by the Nehru Committee to the Moslem demands. It was difficult to get the support of the Moslem League for the Nehru Report, because of the parties within that body, based largely on personal considerations. For instance, the group led by the late Sir Mohammed Shafi took up a non possumus attitude on the communal question and on the political question, advocated co-operation with the Simon Commission. The Nationalist bloc stood for whole-hearted acceptance of the Nehru Report and for complete boycott of the Simon Commission. The group led by Mr. Jinnah had a reactionary attitude on the communal question but advocated the boycott of the Simon Commission. A meeting of the Moslem League was summoned at Delhi in March 1929, to consider the question and there was a clash between the warring sections, so that the meeting ended in pande- monium. In December 1927, when the Madras Congress decided in favour of convening an All-Parties Conference, it appeared as if the decision was a right one. This feeling was confirmed when the Nehru Committee was able to produce a unanimous report and the All-Parties Conference at Lucknow in August

180 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE 1928, adopted it. But subsequent experience has shown that it was a mistake for the Congress to take this step, as it was a mistake for the Congress to participate in a Round Table Conference in which other people were present who had no right to be there. The responsibility for producing a con- stitution belongs solely and exclusively to the party that fights for freedom. A report drafted by an All-Parties Committee can have value only if it is ratified by all parties in the country. But such ratification is never possible in a country which has been under foreign rule for some time. In such a country, there are bound to be parties which are under the thumb of the Government and these parties can always hold up the ratification of a document like the Nehru Report. Moreover, what is the value of such ratification when the other parties are not going to fight for freedom? The party that fights, should not, therefore, look up to any other party to produce the constitution for which it alone is fighting. The most important conference of the year was the annual session of the Indian National Congress held in Calcutta and presided over by Pandit Motilal Nehru. The attendance at the Calcutta session was the largest since the inception of the Congress and all arrangements were made on a colossal scale. Within the Congress there were two groups—the older group who would be content if they had a Dominion form of Government and who were therefore in favour of accepting the Nehru Report in toto and the Left Wing who adhered to the resolution of independence passed at the Madras Congress and wanted to accept the Nehru Report only on the basis of complete national independence. At a meeting of the All- India Congress Committee held at Delhi in November, a compromise had been arrived at between the two groups, at the instance of Pandit Motilal Nehru. ‘At the Calcutta session of the Congress, however, the Mahatma refused to accept the Delhi formula on the ground that it was self-contradictory and the breach between the two groups was thus opened once again. Attempts for a compromise were made by the Mahatma and Pandit Motilal Nehru but the maximum concession which they could make, fell short of the minimum demand of the Left Wingers. Though the Left Wing leaders were

THE BAROMETER RISES 181 inclined to avoid an open split, the rank and file of the Left Wing would not think of a compromise. Thus the main resolution of the Congress moved by Mahatma Gandhi was opposed by the entire Left Wing, who supported the amend- ment moved by the writer. The Mahatma's resolution stated that 'subject to the exigencies of the political situation, the 'Congress will adopt the Nehru constitution in its entirety, if it is accepted by the British Parliament on or before December 31st, 1929; but in the event of its non-acceptance by that date, or its earlier rejection, the Congress will organise non- violent non-co-operation by advising the country to refuse taxation 'and in such other manner as may be decided upon.' An amendment to the effect that the Congress would be content with nothing short of independence, which implied severance of the British connection, was moved by the writer and was supported, among others, by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. The amendment was lost by 973 votes to 1350—but the vote could hardly be called a free one, as the followers of the Mahatma made it a question of confidence and gave out that if the Mahatma was defeated, he would retire from the Congress. Many people therefore voted for his resolution not out of conviction, but because they did not want to be a party to forcing the Mahatma out of the Congress. Never- theless, the voting showed that the Left Wing was strong and influential. The Calcutta Congress, coming after the Madras Congress, was in the nature of an anti-climax. The President-elect on the day of his arrival was given an ovation which would excite the envy of kings and dictators, but when he left, there was disappointment writ large on every face. There was tremendous enthusiasm all over the country at the time and every one had expected the Congress to act boldly. But while the country was ready, the leaders were not. The Mahatma, unfortunately for his countrymen, did not see light. Hence the temporising resolution of the Calcutta Congress which only served to kill precious time. Only madness or folly could have led one to hope that the mighty British Government would concede even Dominion Home Rule without a struggle. During the sittings of the Congress

182 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE a procession of 10,000 workers visited the Congress pandal to demonstrate their solidarity with the struggle for national freedom and to appeal to the Congress to take up the cause of the starving workers. But all these signs of upheaval made no impression on the leaders. The decision that should have been made soon after the appointment of the Simon Com- mission—and certainly not later than the Calcutta Congress —was not made till the Lahore Congress in December 1929. But by then the situation was to deteriorate.

CHAPTER IX SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL (1929) THE net result of the Calcutta Congress, as we have seen, was to put the clock back. But a far-sighted politician like the Mahatma could read the signs of the times. The Left Wing opposition at the Calcutta Congress had indeed been formidable and if his leadership was to be retained, he would have to deal with the opposition in a diplomatic manner. The tactics employed by the Mahatma during the next twelve months were indeed superb. As we shall presently see, he took the wind out of the sails of the Extremists,¹ by himself advocating independence at the next Congress and divided the ranks of the opposition by winning over some of the Left Wing leaders. The Left Wing opposition had become a menace to all sections among the older leaders; to the Swara- jists as much as to the 'No-Changers,' and the Calcutta Con- gress had found the Swarajist Pandit Motilal Nehru standing side by side with the 'No-Changer' Mahatma Gandhi, in order to fight the common danger. This temporary alliance was further strengthened during the ensuing months and with the help of a section of the Left-Wing leaders, it became possible for the Mahatma to regain his hold on the Congress machinery and his prestige in the country, which had been badly shaken by the proceedings of the Calcutta Congress. No one can seriously maintain that a shrewd politician like the Mahatma really expected the Government to climb down and to concede Dominion Home Rule without a fight, merely as a result of a written ultimatum delivered by the Congress. Therefore, one would be entitled to hold that at the Calcutta Congress, the Mahatma was merely playing for time, because ¹ He began this propaganda soon after the Calcutta Congress by stating publicly that if by December 31st, 1929, the Government did not concede Dominion Status to India, he would become an 'Independencewallah' on January 1st, 1930. This time-limit of one year was reminiscent of his promise of Swaraj within one year in 1921. 183

184 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE he was personally unprepared to launch a fight in the imme- diate future. As a matter of fact, even at the Lahore Congress in December 1929, the Mahatma had no plans for launching an anti-Government campaign of any sort—though he moved the resolution on independence, which was un- animously adopted by the Congress. Not till February 1930, after much searching of heart, did he make up his mind to start a civil-disobedience movement in the country, beginning with the campaign for the manufacture of salt. But though the Congress did not give a bold and intelligent lead to the country during the whole of 1929, the unrest did not abate in any way. On the contrary, the forces making for revolution began to grow stronger and stronger, while owing to lack of co-ordination, much dissipation of energy resulted. Besides the main current of the Congress movement, three other lines of activity were clearly visible at this time. There was an undercurrent of revolutionary activity with a certain amount of following in northern India—an unrest in the labour world which extended to every part of the country and an awakening among the middle-class youths which was manifest everywhere. The visible expression of the revolutionary movement was afforded by two incidents which occurred at Lahore and at Delhi. At Lahore an Inspector of Police, Mr. Saunders, a Britisher, was assassinated. It was reported that the revolu- tionaries believed that Mr. Saunders was responsible for the attack on Lala Lajpat Rai at the time of the anti-Simon demonstration in Lahore in 1928, which ultimately resulted in his death and that his assassination was an act of reprisal. The other incident was the throwing of a bomb in the Assembly at Delhi during a sitting and two young men, Sardar Bhagat Singh and Mr. Batukeshwar Dutt, were arrested in connection therewith. After these overt acts, there was a round-up of a large number of young men from all over the country and an All-India conspiracy case was started at Lahore about the middle of 1929. For some reason or other, the Lahore conspiracy case excited not only public interest but public sympathy as well. The reasons probably were that prior to his arrest, Sardar Bhagat Singh was known to be the leader of the youth movement (called the Naujawan

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 185 Bharat Sabha) in the Punjab, and the fearless and defiant attitude adopted by him and his comrades, after their arrest and during their trial, made a deep impression on the public. Moreover, Sardar Bhagat Singh came from a well-known patriotic family—being a nephew of Sardar Ajit Singh, who had been deported to Burma in 1909 along with Lala Lajpat Rai. The Naujawan Bharat Sabha was first started as a thorough-going nationalist movement, in order to fight com- munalism and religious fanaticism in the Punjab. If the official allegations are to be believed, the Sabha developed into a revolutionary organisation and some members of the Sabha also went in for terrorist activities. Whatever the truth or otherwise of the allegations may be, there is no doubt that the Sabha developed a frankly Socialistic tendency. And incidentally it may be remarked that all youth organisations in the Punjab have a strong Socialist bent. In March 1931, when a session of the All-India Naujawan Bharat Sabha was held at Karachi, members of the Punjab Naujawan Bharat Sabha openly declared that they were against terrorism and that they believed in mass action on Socialist lines. Soon after their arrest, the Lahore Conspiracy Case prisoners, headed by Sardar Bhagat Singh, made a demand that they should be accorded better treatment than ordinary criminals on the ground that they were political prisoners and under trial, who should be deemed to be innocent until they were actually convicted. After trying the usual constitutional methods, when they found that no remedy was forthcoming, they resorted to hunger-strike. Among the prisoners was a young man from Calcutta Mr. Jatindra Nath Das, who was at first rather averse to hunger-strike because he regarded it as a dangerous game to play. The enthusiasm of the rest forced him to join the strike but before doing so, he warned them that come what may, he would not turn back until their demands were fully conceded. There was an intense agitation throughout the country over the hunger-strike and there was a public demand that the Government should remedy their just grievances and thereby save their lives. When the condition of the prisoners grew serious, the Government made half-hearted attempts at compromise. For instance,

186 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE they offered better treatment to the hunger-strikers on medical grounds. But their demand was not merely for better treatment for themselves, but for all prisoners similarly circumstanced and on the ground that they were political prisoners. To this demand the Government would not yield and so the strike went on. Besides an intensive Press agitation, meetings and demonstrations were held all over the country demanding humane treatment for political prisoners. In connection with a demonstration of this kind in Calcutta, a number of prominent Congressmen, including the writer, were arrested in September and sent up for trial for sedition. As the days rolled by, one by one the hunger-strikers dropped off but young Jatin was invincible. He never hesitated, never faltered for one small second—but marched straight on towards death and freedom. Every heart in the country melted but the heart of the bureaucracy did not. So Jatin died on September 13th. But he died the death of a martyr. After his death the whole country gave him an ovation which few men in the recent history of India have received. As his dead body was removed from Lahore to Calcutta for cremation, people assembled in their thousands and tens of thousands at every station to pay their homage. His martyrdom acted as a profound inspiration to the youth of India and everywhere youth and student organisations began to grow up. Among the many messages that were received on the occasion was one which touched the heart of every Indian. It was a message from the family of Terence McSwiney, the Lord Mayor of Cork, who had died a martyr under similar conditions in Ireland. The message ran thus: ‘Family of Terence McSwiney have heard with grief and pride of the death of Jatin Das. Freedom will come.’ Jatin Das was twenty-five at the time of his death. While a student he had joined the non-co-operation movement in 1921 and had spent several years in prison. After a break of many years he had resumed his studies again at a Calcutta College. At the time of the Calcutta Congress in 1928 and after, he had taken a leading part in organising and training volunteers and in the Bengal Volunteer Corps, of which the writer was the Chief Officer or G.O.C., he held the rank of

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 187 Major. The Bengal Volunteer Corps came into existence at the time of the Calcutta Congress. For the Congress and the National Exhibition connected with it, a large body of volun- teers had been necessary and the writer had been entrusted by the Congress authorities with the organisation and training of the Corps. Though the Corps was a peaceful and unarmed body, military discipline and training in military drill was imparted to the volunteers and they were also given a semi- military uniform. After the Congress was over, the Volunteer Corps was maintained and branches were opened all over the province. In this arduous work, Jatin had played an important rôle. The officers and rank and file of the Volunteer Corps therefore took a leading part in the funeral demonstrations. In this connection the attitude of the Mahatma was inexplicable. Evidently the martyrdom of Jatin Das which had stirred the heart of the country did not make any impres- sion on him. The pages of Young India ordinarily filled with observations on all political events and also on topics like health, diet, etc., had nothing to say about the incident. A follower of the Mahatma who was also a close friend of the deceased, wrote to him inquiring as to why he had said nothing about the event. The Mahatma replied to the effect that he had purposely refrained from commenting, because if he had done so, he would have been forced to write something unfavourable. The news of the self-immolation of Jatin Das was received in Delhi when the Assembly was in session. For a moment it looked as if the heart of the Government throbbed. But the throbbing was a momentary phenomenon. What emotion was roused at the time was soon drowned in official diplomacy and duplicity. The Government promised to take up the question of the treatment of political prisoners but after a great deal of deliberation and delay, when the public excite- ment had somewhat abated, they finally produced their proposals. It was then found that the remedy suggested was worse than the disease. At the outset the Government refused to class anyone as a political prisoner—so that the principal demand of the Lahore hunger-strikers was turned down. The Government proposed instead that prisoners

188 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE would in future be put into either of three classes—A, B and C or Divisions I, II, and III respectively. C class prisoners would be treated exactly like ordinary criminals; B class prisoners would be treated slightly better than C class in the matter of food, letters, interviews and other facilities —while A class prisoners would be treated somewhat better than B class. The distinction at the time of classification would be made according to the social status of the prisoner. When these rules were applied in practice, it was found that at least 95 per cent. of the political prisoners were classed as C; about 3 or 4 per cent. were classed as B and less than 1 per cent. as A. The effect of the new rules therefore was to give somewhat better treatment to a microscopic minority in order to break the solidarity of the political prisoners. The principle of 'divide and rule' was thus extended to the domain of prison administration. The only welcome feature in the new rule was that it abolished in theory the classification of certain prisoners as 'European,' who used to get better food, clothing and accommodation than Indians of the highest rank. In practice, however, the writer has personally seen that in many provinces, e.g., Bengal, Central Provinces and Madras, the facilities previously enjoyed by 'European' prisoners are still being continued. And in the Madras Penitentiary, where the writer was confined for two months in 1932, he even found the placard 'European Ward' in front of the ward occupied by 'European' prisoners and on his objecting to it, the placard was removed. In this connection it should be admitted that when the new rules were drafted, the Assembly members, including the Swarajists, did not put up the opposition expected of them. And some members like Mr. Jinnah, who had no experience of prison life, even thought that the new rules would prove to be a blessing. As has been already remarked, the years 1928 and 1929 witnessed an unprecedented awakening among the youths.¹ ¹ This was followed immediately by a similar awakening among women. In Bengal the Deshbandhu had started in 1921 the 'Nari Karma Mandir' for training women for national service. After his death this institution ceased to exist. In 1928 when the writer resumed his public activities, a political organisation for women was started under the name of the 'Mahila Rashtriya Sangha' in Calcutta, which was followed by many other organisations all over the country.

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 189 The halting attitude of the Congress at Calcutta and the stale tactics of the Swarajists in the Legislatures roused the youths to a sense of their duty. The success of the first session of the Youth Congress at Calcutta served as an inspiration and a further impetus came from the undying example set by Jatindra Nath Das through his martyrdom. Throughout 1929, youth and student organisations grew up all over Bengal, as branches of the Provincial Youth Association and Provincial Students' Association. Besides the political con- ferences held in different districts of Bengal from time to time, separate conferences for youths and for students began to be held from now onwards. In other provinces too, the same phenomena were visible. In Poona, the Maharashtra Youth Conference was held and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru presided over it. In Ahmedabad, the Bombay Presidency Youth Conference met in October 1929, and was presided over by Mrs. Kamaladevi Chattopadhyaya, sister-in-law of Mrs. Sarojini Naidu, who within a short time had become a popular figure among the youths. In September, the first session of the Punjab Students' Conference was held in Lahore and was presided over by the writer. Following this, the Central Provinces Youth Conference was held in November at Nagpur and the Berar Students' Conference at Amraoti in December, both being presided over by the writer. In the Madras Presidency, too, similar conferences were held. At the end of the year, at Lahore, during the Congress week, an All-India Congress of Students was held and was presided over by Pandit Madan Mohon Malaviya, the Vice-Chancellor of the Benares Hindu University. The awakening among the youths was contemporaneous with a widespread unrest in the labour world and there were strikes all over the country. But the strike which unnerved the Government most was the textile strike which com- menced in 1928 in Bombay, because it was conducted by a compact party of well-educated men and women following communistic ideas.. The employers and the Government made common cause in their efforts to break the strike and a large number of rowdy blacklegs were imported from outside for the purpose. When the strike showed signs of weakening,

190 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE the Government struck hard. A round-up of trade union leaders holding advanced ideas was made simultaneously all over India in March, 1929, and thirty-one of them were brought to Meerut, near Delhi, for trial in connection with an All-India Communist Conspiracy Case. They were brought to Meerut of all places for trial, probably because Meerut being a small town, there would be no public demon- stration there and also because trial by jury does not obtain there. There were three Englishmen among them and probably because of this, the case roused great interest and sympathy among British Labour circles of all shades of opinion. The trial dragged on for nearly four years and during this period, bail was refused to the accused, though repeatedly asked for. The prosecution case was that the accused had conspired to deprive the King of the sovereignty of India and with the help of the Communist International had endeavoured to set up a government on the Soviet model. On January 16th, 1933, judgment was delivered. Three of the accused were acquitted and the rest (excluding one who had died during the course of the trial) were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment—from three years' imprisonment to transportation for life. The Meerut arrests were made when the Conservative Party was in power but in June, as a result of the General Election, the Labour Party came into office with Captain Wedgwood-Benn as the Secretary of State for India. It was expected that the Labour Party would do something for the Meerut prisoners but actually nothing was done. Neverthe- less, another move was taken by the Labour Cabinet in order to placate Indian Labour circles. As the Labour counterpart of the Simon Commission, a Royal Commission on Labour was appointed, with Mr. Whitley as the Chairman. The Com- mission was to report on labour conditions in India and the possible lines of amelioration. Having gathered experience from the boycott of the Simon Commission, the Labour Government offered two seats to Indian trade-union leaders —to Mr. N. M. Joshi (Bombay) and Mr. Chamanlal (Lahore). Both of them who belonged to the Right Wing of the Labour Movement accepted the offer and that decision at once

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 191 created a split among Indian trade-unionists. When the Congress met at Nagpur in November with Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru as the President, it was found that the majority were for the boycott of the Labour Commission (called the Whitley Commission). Several factors accounted for this. Boycott was then in the air. Moreover, the Labour Cabinet having failed to do anything for the Meerut prisoners, it was felt that a Commission appointed by them would be of no benefit to India. Thirdly, the sweeping arrests made in March last all over India had created sympathy in trade union circles for the Left Wingers. When the boycott resolution was carried, there were shouts of 'Down with Chamanlal,' 'Down with Joshi,' etc., and placards were also displayed to that effect. These demonstrations against Mr. Joshi who had done so much for the Indian Labour Movement and may be justly regarded as one of the fathers of that movement—greatly offended the Right Wingers who walked out of the Congress. Thereafter, they set up an organisation of their own under the name of the 'All-India Trade Union Federation.' The reason generally given for the secession was that the Trade Union Congress had affiliated itself to the League against Imperialism and the Pan-Pacific Trade Union Secretariat—both of which were Communist organisations. But the real reason was the boycott of the Whitley Commis- sion, which if given effect to, would have entailed the resigna- tion of Messrs. Joshi and Chamanlal from that body. As for the affiliation to the League against Imperialism, it should be noted that it was done at the Jharia session of the Trade Union Congress in 1928—but at that time the Right-Wing Trade-Unionists were able to swallow the resolution because they were still strong enough to keep the Secretariat in their hands. As a matter of fact, the Right-Wingers were defeated over the question of the Whitley Commission, not because the Communists were in a majority but because the Centre Party who were not Communists, sided with them on that question. Consequently, if the Right-Wingers had not seceded from the Trade Union Congress at Nagpur, they would still have played an important rôle: But they would have to suffer one disadvantage—which probably they were

192 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE not prepared to do—namely, to forgo the annual trip to Geneva on the occasion of the International Labour Con- ference. The Trade Union Congress passed a resolution boycotting the International Labour Conference at Geneva because the Conference had been of little help to the Indian workers and the Indian representatives to that Conference were appointed by the Government of India and not by the All-India Trade Union Congress. This resolution, like the one boycotting the Whitley Commission, was unacceptable to the Right-Wingers and proved to be the proverbial last straw. It would have been in the fitness of things if a political campaign had been launched in 1929. It would have then synchronised with a movement in other spheres as well. But that was not to be. So there was only marking time in political circles. In Bengal, the Congress Party was able to turn out the Ministers repeatedly. Disgusted with the Party's tactics, the Governor dissolved the Legislative Council in May and ordered a fresh election at once. The result was that the Congress Party came back with added strength and the Nationalist Moslems regained some of the seats they had lost at the last election. Just before the election, judgment was delivered in a suit brought against the Nationalist paper, Forward, by the East Indian Railway¹ for defamation for publishing reports damaging to the Company about a railway accident near Calcutta. The court gave exemplary damages to the tune of Rs. 150,000 (Rs. 13½=£1 approximately), and it was expected that this would force the paper to close down. However, the next day Forward ceased to appear, but in its place another daily paper called Liberty was born. The Congress Party did not therefore have to suffer any inconvenience for want of an organ. In June, the Labour Party came into power and Lord Irwin, the Viceroy, was invited to London for consultation, where he remained for some months. While he was there, a sudden change came over the Mahatma. At a meeting of the Congress Working Committee in July, a resolution was passed calling ¹ The East Indian Railway is a state-owned Railway and the most important Railway in India.

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 193 upon Congressmen to resign their seats in the Legislatures. No notice was given to the Congress Parties in the different Legislatures, nor was their opinion invited and the most surprising thing was the acquiescence of Pandit Motilal Nehru, who had been leading the Congress Party in the Assembly. The Pandit had in the month of May encouraged the Bengal Congress Party to fight the elections and had especially enjoined on them to recapture some of the Moslem seats. When a meeting of the All-India Congress Committee¹ was held at Allahabad the same month, a strenuous opposition was put forward by the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta and the writer, both of whom were members of the Congress Working Committee. As a result of this opposition and also of the dissatisfaction expressed by the Congress Parties in the different Legislatures, the resolution regarding resignation from the Legislatures was rescinded and the whole matter was adjourned till the Lahore Congress in December. Up till now it is a puzzle to many as to what happened between May and July to make Pandit Motilal Nehru change his front. Was he suddenly disappointed at the work put in by the Congress Parties in the Legislatures? Was he faced with a revolt or a faction in his own Party in the Assembly and therefore wanted to dissolve it? Or did he want to put up a united front against the Left-Wingers who were growing more powerful, and for that reason wanted to placate the Mahatma by agreeing to his pet theory of Council-boycott? In any case, there is no doubt that without the support of Pandit Motilal Nehru, the Mahatma would never have forced his views on the Congress. And one has to remark with great regret that Pandit Motilal Nehru who was the only man who could influence the Mahatma either way at that time, did a positive disservice to his country by actively supporting the Mahatma in his policy of reviving the boycott of the Legislatures. The harmful effect of this boycott became more and more evident in the years to come. To say the least, it was tactically a great blunder to boycott the Legis- ¹ The All-India Congress Committee is a body of about 350 members representing the different provinces of India. Every year it elects an Executive of 15 members, called the Working Committee. N