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

INTRODUCTION 21 people at large were completely disarmed. By the eighties of the last century the political depression was over and the public began to raise their head once again. This time the policy and the tactics of the liberty-loving and progressive Indians were quite different from those of 1857. An armed revolution being out of the question, constitutional agitation was substituted in its place. Thus in 1885, the Indian National Congress was founded for striving for self-govern- ment for India by constitutional means. The agitation con- ducted by the Indian National Congress made the Govern- ment of India feel that a further political advance was neces- sary. So in 1892 another Act was passed called the Indian Councils Act of 1892. Under this Act the Legislative Councils were given the right to put questions and to discuss the Budget, though voting on the Budget was not allowed. Further, provision was made in the Legislatures for a non- official element to be appointed by the Government. The Governor-General's Legislative Council was also increased by sixteen members. With the dawn of the present century there was a national awakening in India on a large scale and Bengal, which had suffered longest from the British yoke, was the pioneer in the new movement. In 1905 the Viceroy, Lord Curzon, ordered the partition of that province. The official reason given for this action was one of administrative exigency—but the people felt that the object was to cripple the new renais- sance in Bengal. A stormy agitation against the partition was set in motion in Bengal and this was accompanied by a powerful movement all over the country, in the course of which attempts were made to boycott British goods as a retaliatory measure against the Government. The pressure of these events forced the Government to make another meagre concession to popular clamour and so the Morley- Minto Reforms followed. Lord Morley was then the Secretary of State for India and Lord Minto the Viceroy of India. The Morley-Minto scheme of reforms was first announced in December 1906, and was finally passed into law as the Indian Councils Act of 1909. As a result of official inspiration, a few months before the announcement was made, a depu-

22 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE tation of Mohammedan leaders led by the Aga Khan waited on the Viceroy on October 1st, 1906. In connection with the impending reforms they demanded that the Mohammedan community should have a certain number of seats reserved for them and that these seats should be voted for, not by the general body of Indian voters, but only by Mohammedan voters. This demand by the Mohammedan leaders of what is known in India as 'separate electorate' was granted in the Indian Councils Act of 1909. This Act provided for enlarged legislative councils both in the provinces as well as at the centre. Additional powers were given to the members in the matter of putting supplementary questions, moving resolu- tions, discussing the budget, etc. The method of election was however indirect and the Act was therefore regarded by many Indians¹ as a retrograde measure in some respects, as compared with the Indian Councils Act of 1892. The constituencies were very small, the largest of them having only 650 voters. After the introduction of the Morley-Minto Reforms, an Indian was for the first time appointed as member of the Viceroy's Executive Council and Sir (later Lord) S. P. Sinha was the first recipient of this honour. This was followed by the visit to India of King George V who was crowned at Delhi as Emperor—following the ancient Indian precedent. It was the Viceroy, Lord Hardinge, who was largely respon- sible for this arrangement, as also for the transfer of the Capital of India from Calcutta to Delhi. Lord Hardinge had a wonderful historic sense and he thought that by these measures British rule would be more firmly installed in India. Others, like Lord Curzon, the former Viceroy, were opposed to these innovations and they felt on the contrary that Delhi had been the grave of many empires. However, the visit of the King-Emperor in December 1911, and the annulment of the partition helped to assuage public feelings and anti- Government agitation subsided to a large extent. Within the Indian National Congress a split had occurred in 1907 leading to the expulsion of the 'Nationalists' (or 'Extremists') from that body. Moreover, many of the leaders of the Congress ¹ This seems to be the view expressed by Sir Surendranath Bannerji in his book A Nation in Making, pp. 123-25.

INTRODUCTION 23 Left Wing disappeared from the political arena for the time being—through imprisonment, as in the case of Lokamanya B. G. Tilak of Poona, or voluntary exile, as in the case of Sri Aurobindo Ghosh of Bengal. Things were therefore quiet till the Great War broke out, when the revolutionary party which had been born during the first decade of this century became very active. During the Great War, public opinion in India demanded an announcement from the British Government regarding the policy of British rule in India. This demand was made all the more because Britain gave out that she was fighting for the freedom of small nations and of suppressed nationalities. To placate Indian opinion an announcement was made on August 20th, 1917, by Mr. E. S. Montagu, Secretary of State for India, that the policy of His Majesty's Government was that of 'the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive realisation of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire.' In order to follow up this announcement, Mr. Montagu visited India and a joint report was made by the Secretary of State for India and the then Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, on the question of the Indian constitutional reforms. The reforms proposed in the Montagu-Chelmsford report, were embodied in the Government of India Act, 1919. The most important innovation made in this Act was the system of government, called dyarchy. In the provinces the govern- ment was to be composed of two sections, called 'transferred' and 'reserved.' The transferred departments like Education, Agriculture, Excise and Local Self-Government were to be administered by ministers who must be elected members of the Legislative Council and who would be removable by a vote of that council. The reserved departments like Police, Justice and Finance were to be administered by members of the Governor's Executive Council, who would be appointed by His Majesty's Government and who would be independent of the vote of the Legislative Council. The Governor's Cabinet was thus to be composed of ministers administering 'transferred' departments and of members of the Executive

24 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Council, administering 'reserved' departments. In the Central Government there was to be no dyarchy. All the departments would be administered by members of the Executive Council of the. Governor-General, who would be appointed by His Majesty's Government and who would be independent of the vote of the Central Legislatures—the Lower House, called the Indian Legislative Assembly and the Upper House, called the Council of State. The Central Legislatures were to be composed only of representatives from British India and the Indian States ruled by Indian Princes were to be independent of the Central Government with regard to their internal administration, subject to the provisions of the treaties made between them and the British Government. The inadequacy of these reforms, the atrocities committed by the armed forces of the Crown in the Punjab in 1919 and the attempt of the Allied Powers to dismember Turkey—set in motion a powerful movement in India in 1920 under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. But in spite of the unprecedented awakening in the country no further political advance was made by the British Government. The Government of India Act, 1919, contained a provision for the appointment of a Royal Commission, ten years later, that is in 1929, with the object of determining what further advance, if any, should be made in the direction of self-government. In accordance with this provision a Royal Commission was appointed in 1927 under the chairmanship of Sir John Simon. The Commission reported in 1930. Thereafter a Round Table Conference of British and Indian representatives, nominated by the British Government, was convened for threshing out the details of the New Constitution. After three sessions of the Round Table Conference, the Government came forward with their own proposals regarding the new Constitution. These proposals were published in March, 1933, in a White Paper. The White Paper was duly placed for consideration before a Joint Committee of both Houses of the British Parliament.¹ ¹ The Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee has been published on November 22nd, 1934. Even the meagre proposals of the White Paper have been further whittled down by the Joint Committee.

§ III. THE NEW AWAKENING IN INDIA In considering the political conquest of India by such a small country as England the first point that strikes one is as to how such a feat could be at all possible. But if one knew the Indian temperament and Indian traditions, it would not be difficult to understand. The Indian people had never any feeling against the foreigner. This mentality had been developed partly through the philosophical outlook of the people as a whole and partly through the largeness of the country which made it possible to welcome as many people as could come into the country. In the past, India had been invaded by new tribes and peoples over and over again. But though they came as foreigners they soon settled down and made India their home. The feeling of strangeness dis- appeared and the foreigners became a part of the body- politic. On the whole, there was no intercommunal friction for any length of time after foreigners came in. An under- standing would be soon effected and the foreigners would become members of the great Indian family. Thus it was that when the European races—Portuguese, Dutch, French and English—first arrived in India they did not excite any suspicion or hostility or animosity. It was not a new phenomenon in the history of India—at least so the people thought. The fact that the majority of the foreigners were either peaceful missionaries or traders further served to disarm opposition. They were given facilities and even allowed to acquire territory for carrying on their peaceful avocation. Even when the foreigners took part in any political strife, they were always careful to side with a section of the people so that they would never get the entire people against them. In this respect the diplomacy of the British was by far the best. The question crops up here as to why a sec- tion of the Indian people sought the help of the foreigners in their own internal disputes. The reply to that has been given already above. As contrasted with India, neighbouring countries like Afghanistan, Tibet and Nepal, have still

26 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE remained comparatively independent, because people in these countries have been always suspicious of and hostile towards foreigners. Besides their diplomacy there was one other factor which accounted for the success of the Europeans. That was their superior military skill. Unfortunately for India, though up to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries she kept abreast of the modern world in her knowledge of the science and art of warfare, during the eighteenth and nine- teenth centuries she was no longer up to date. Her geogra- phical position had kept her isolated from modern Europe. The wars of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in Europe had effected a considerable improvement in the science and art of fighting and this knowledge was at the disposal of the European races, when they went over to the East. The first physical conflict between Indians and Europeans showed that the former were at a disadvantage in the matter of military skill. It is significant that before the British conquest of India, the Indian rulers had Europeans in their service in the army as well as in the navy and many of them occupied high positions. The first important success of the British in India happened in Bengal. The ruler was a young man, Sirajudowla, who was still in his twenties. Nevertheless, it must be said to his credit that he was the only man in the province who realised what a great menace the British were and he was determined to try his level best to throw them out of the country. If only he had had as much diplomacy as he had patriotism, he might have been able to alter the course of Indian history. In order to overthrow him, the English won over to their side the influential Mir Jaffar, by giving him a promise of the throne, and their combined forces were more than a match for Sirajudowla. It did not however take Mir Jaffar long to realise that he had been used as a tool by the British and that what they were really aiming at was political mastery for themselves. Sirajudowla was overthrown in 1757 but many decades were to pass before they could extend their supremacy to different parts of the country. In the meantime the rest of India, which was still independent, hardly realised the danger of British conquest. Being practically the first portion of

INTRODUCTION 27 India to come under British rule—the consolidation of British power naturally began first in Bengal. The over- throw of the old regime was naturally followed by a period of disorder and it took the British several years to put things in order. By the end of the eighteenth century, order had been established and the government then had to face the question of building up their administration on a sound and permanent basis. In order to administer a big country the Government had naturally to educate on their own lines a new class of people who would be able to work as their agents. The British commercial houses also wanted Indians educated and trained on British lines. In the meantime British mis- sionaries had been active in trying to impart their culture and their religion to the Indian people. Out of these different sources there arose a consciousness on the part of the Britisher of a cultural or civilising mission in India. It was this which produced the first revolt among the Indians. As long as the Britishers were merely trading, no one thought of them since they were petty traders. As long as they were merely ruling, people did not care, for Indians had in the past gone through many political vicissitudes and a change in government had never meant a change in their daily life— because no government in the past had interfered with local self-government. Out of the consciousness of a civilising mission there came the attempt on the part of Britain to ‘anglicise’ every sphere of the life of the Indian people. The missionaries became very active in propagating their religion and educational institutions on the British model were founded by them, as well as by the state, in different parts of Bengal. The entire educational system was built up on the British model and English was made the medium of instruction, not only in the university but also in the secondary schools. In art and architecture also, British models were imposed on the country. In fact in inaugurating the new educational system, the Government deliberately stated that their object was to train up a nation who would be English in everything, except in race. In the new schools, students began to think, to talk, to dress and to eat as Englishmen would. The new generation turned out by these schools was

28 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE quite different from the old. They were no longer Indians in their equipment but English. Faced with the menace of being swallowed up by a new religion and a new culture, the soul of the people revolted. The first visible embodiment of this revolt was Raja Ram Mohon Roy and the movement of which he was the father was the Brahmo Samaj movement. Ram Mohon Roy stood out as the apostle of a religious revival. He urged a return to the original principles of Vedantism and for a total rejection of all the religions and social impurities that had crept into Hinduism in later times. He also advocated an all-round regeneration of the social and national life and the acceptance of all that is useful and beneficial in the modern life of Europe. Raja Ram Mohon Roy therefore stands out against the dawn of the new awakening in India as the prophet of the new age. The Raja was succeeded by Devendranath Tagore, father of the poet, Rabindranath Tagore, as the head of the Brahmo Samaj. In appreciation of the pure life that he lived, which reminded one of the Rishis or saints of old, Devendranath Tagore was given the title of Maharshi (a great saint) by the people. His successor was Keshav Chandra Sen, one of the most prominent Indian personalities in the latter half of the nineteenth century. During the earlier portion of his life, Keshav Chandra Sen seemed to be inspired more by the sayings and teachings of Christ and in his public life he laid great emphasis on social reform. So vigorous was his per- sonality and so enthusiastic was he in giving effect to his ideas that a split took place in the Brahmo Samaj. The older generation who were less radical, called themselves the Adi or original Brahmo Samaj. Among the rest of the members a further split took place. The followers of Keshav Chandra Sen called themselves the Naba Bidhan, or the New Dis- pensation, while the rest called themselves the Sadharan (or general body) Brahmo Samaj. All branches of the Brahmo Samaj had however some principles in common. They all took their stand on the original doctrines of the Vedanta philosophy. They all condemned the use of images in religious worship and they all advocated the abolition of caste in society. The Brahmo Samaj movement spread all over India and in

INTRODUCTION 29' some places it was known by a different name—for instance, in Bombay Presidency it was known as the Prarthana Samaj. The Brahmo Samaj had considerable influence on the new generation of English-educated Indians and even those who did not become converts to the Brahmo Samaj accepted the spirit of reform and progress for which it stood. But the ultra-modern, ideas of the Samaj caused a revulsion of feeling among the old-fashioned Pandits, who attempted to. justify all that there was in Hindu religion and in Hindu society. But this reactionary movement could not make any appeal to the new generation of youths. About this time, in the eighties of the last century, two prominent religious personalities appeared before the public who were destined to have a great influence on the future course of the new awakening. They were Ramkrishna Paramahansa, the saint, and his disciple Swami Vivekananada. Ramkrishna, the master, was brought up in the orthodox Hindu fashion, but his disciple was a young man educated at the university who was an agnostic before he met the former. Ramkrishna preached the gospel of the unity of all religions and urged the cessation of inter-religious strife. He emphasised the necessity of renunciation, celibacy and asceticism in order to live a truly spiritual life. As against the Brāhmo Samaj, he advocated the necessity of symbolism in religious worship and condemned the ultra-modern imitative tendency of the Samaj. Before he died, he charged his disciple with the task of propagating his religious teachings in India and abroad and of bringing about an awakening among his countrymen. Swami Vivekananda therefore founded the Ramkrishna Mission, an order of monks, to live and preach the Hindu religion in its purest form in India and abroad, especially in America and he took an active part in inspiring every form of healthy national activity. With him religion was the inspirer of nationalism. He tried to infuse into the new generation a sense of pride in India's past, of faith in India's future and a spirit of self-confidence and self-respect. Though the Swami never gave any political message, everyone who came into contact with him or his writings developed a spirit of patriotism and a political mentality. So far at least as

30 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Bengal is concerned, Swami Vivekananda may be regarded as the spiritual father of the modern nationalist movement. He died very young in 1902, but since his death his influence has been even greater. About the time that Ramkrishna Parama- hansa flourished in Bengal, another prominent religious personality flourished in North-Western India. He was Swami Dayananda Saraswati, the founder of the Arya Samaj. The Arya Samaj movement had the largest following in the Punjab and the United Provinces. Like the Brahmo Samaj it advocated a return to the early Hindu scriptures and it condemned all latter-day accretions and impurities. Like the Brahmo Samaj it also advocated the abolition of the caste-system which did not exist in the oldest times. In short, according to Swami Dayananda Saraswati, people were to go back to the pure Arya religion and live the life of the Aryas of old. His characteristic slogan was: 'Back to the Vedas.' Both the Brahmo Samaj and the Arya Samaj attempted proselytisation but the Ramkrishna Mission never made any such attempt, for Ramkrishna was against 'the creation of a new sect. But while the Brahmo Samaj was influenced to some extent,by Western culture and Christianity, the Arya Samaj derived all its inspiration from indigenous sources. None of the three societies had any political mission, nevertheless, whoever came under their influence rapidly developed a sense of self-respect and a spirit of patriotism. The Brahmo Samaj was founded in 1828. By that time British rule in India had spread through a large portion of the country and people had begun to realise slowly that the new invaders were different from the old. They had come not merely to make money or to preach religion, but to con- quer and to rule—and unlike the invaders of old they were not going to make India their home but were going to rule as foreigners. The realisation of this national menace quickly roused the masses to a sense of the danger that threatened them. Thus occurred the revolution of 1857. It was by no means merely a revolt of the troops—a sepoy mutiny—as English historians are wont to say—but a real national revolution. It was a revolution in which both Hindus and Mohammedans joined and they all fought under the flag of

INTRODUCTION 31 a Mohammedan. At that moment it looked as if the English would be thrown out of the country. But through sheer luck they won by the skin of their teeth. The failure of the revolution was due among other causes to lack of support from some quarters, viz., the Sikhs of the Punjab and to hostility on the part of the Gurkhas of Nepal. When the revolution was crushed, a reign of terror followed and the country was disarmed from end to end. The reaction lasted for a long time and no one dared to raise his head during that period. By the eighties of the last century a change set in. People began to recover their courage and armed with the knowledge of the modern world, they began to devise new means of coping with the foreigners. Thus in 1885 was born the Indian National Congress, the object of which was not to organise another revolution but to fight for Home Rule along constitutional lines. The renaissance in Western India, unlike that in Northern India, appeared more in the form of a movement for educa- tional and social reform than as a religious movement. The father of this awakening was Justice M. G. Ranade who, later on, found a worthy disciple in Mr. G. K. Gokhale. In 1884, Mr. B. G. Tilak, Mr. G. G. Agarkar and Mr. V. S. Apte founded the Deccan Education Society. Soon after, Mr. Gokhale joined the Society. Later on there arose differences between Lokamanya Tilak and Mr. Gokhale. The former was not interested in social reform like the latter and he belonged to the 'extremist' school of politics, while the latter was one of the outstanding 'moderate' leaders. In 1905, Mr. Gokhale founded the Servants of India Society, the object of which was to train 'national missionaries for the service of India and to promote by all constitutional means the true interests of the India people.' Among the different measures adopted by Lokamanya Tilak to rouse the people was the revival of the Ganapati festival—which was a religious festival given a national interpretation by him—and the Shivaji festival held every year on the birthday anniversary of Shivaji, the great hero of Maharashtra. In South India the Theosophical Society founded at Adyar near Madras in 1886 by Madame Blavatsky and Col.

32 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Olcott, played an important rôle in social and public life. Mrs. Besant joined the society in India in 1893 and became the President in 1907, which office she continued to hold till her death in 1933. Mrs. Besant became the great champion of Hinduism against all attacks. Even the errors and abuses of Hinduism she would explain away, rather than attack. Thereby she helped to bring back into the hearts of the people faith in their own culture and civilisation which had been badly shaken as a result of the impact of the West. The large following which she managed to gather round herself through her religious and educational work, was of great value and strength to her when in 1916-17 she took an active part in politics and carried on a raging and tearing campaign for demanding Home Rule for India. By the beginning of the present century, the foreign government was able to strike its roots deeper into the soil of India. The political administration was no longer a centralised government with autonomy in the branches as in former times. It was a highly-complicated system with its rami- fications in every town and village of the country and with a bureaucracy ruling with a firm hand under orders from the centre. People began to feel for the first time in their history what foreign rule really meant. The beginning of the twen- tieth century found the Boers of South Africa fighting against the British for their freedom, the newly-awakened Japanese fighting the Russians for their existence and safety and the Russian masses fighting the all-powerful Tsar for their bread and their liberty. About this time the pride and the haughtiness of the rulers reached its limit and signs of serious political unrest appeared in Bengal and in order to nip it in the bud, the then Viceroy, Lord Curzon, ordered the dis- memberment of the province. This was the signal for a country-wide revolt and people everywhere began to feel that constitutional agitation was not enough. The partition of Bengal was taken as a challenge by the people and as a reply, for the first time in British Indian history, a movement was launched for the boycott of British goods. The political agitation gave a strong impetus to the growth of national art, national literature and national industry. Simultaneously,

INTRODUCTION 33 institutions were started where national education could be imparted and young men could be trained as scientists and engineers for organising new industries. The Government naturally did not like the new movement and steps were taken to put it down. As a reply to official repression, young men took to the bomb and revolver and the first explosion took-place in 1907. This was the beginning of the revolu- tionary movement of the twentieth century and in order to suppress it, the Government issued a notification in 1909, declaring as illegal many of the institutions for imparting physical training to the youths in Bengal. Simultaneously with the appearance of the revolutionary movement, there was a split within the ranks of the Indian National Congress. The Left-Wing leaders, Lokamanya Tilak of Poona and Sri Aurobindo Ghosh and Mr. B. C. Pal of Bengal, wanted to adopt the boycott of British goods as a part of the Congress plan, and they were not content with the goal of self-govern- ment within the British Empire. The Right-Wing leaders, Sir Pherozhah Mehta of Bombay, Mr. G. K. Gokhale of Poona and Mr. (later on Sir) Surendranath Bannerji of Bengal, stood for a more moderate policy. Lala Lajpat Rai of the Punjab occupied a middle position in this fight. An open rupture took place in the Surat Congress in 1907 when the Left Wing (also called 'Nationalists' or 'Extremists') were defeated and the Congress organisation passed into the hands of the Right Wing (also called 'Moderates' or 'Liberals'). Not long after this, Lokamanya Tilak was sentenced to six years' imprisonment for sedition, Sri Auro- bindo Ghosh was forced into exile, while Mr. B. C. Pal gave up extremist politics. Driven out of the Congress, persecuted by the Government and deprived of their leaders, the Left Wingers (or the Extremists) had a bad time up to 1915 and the Moderates were the masters of the show. The Morley- Minto Reforms of 1909 which were welcomed by the Moderates and condemned by the Extremists, served as a temporary sop to the political agitators. With the outbreak of the Great War and the return of Lokamanya Tilak from imprisonment, there was a decided improvement in the political situation from the Indian point of view. In 1916 C

34 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE at the Lucknow session of the Indian National Congress, a compromise was effected between the two wings of the Congress and once again Extremists and Moderates appeared on the same platform. A further compromise was effected between the Congress and the All-India Moslem League at Lucknow. The upshot of this rapprochement was that the Congress and the Moslem League put forward the same demand for self-government and agreed about the representation to be given to Moslems in the legislatures under the reformed constitution, on the basis of 'separate electorate.' About this time a new factor appeared in Indian politics in the person of Mr. M. K. Gandhi, who had returned to India from South Africa in December 1914, after winning laurels for himself in the passive-resistance movement against the South African Government. After the Lucknow Congress, an intensive campaign was started by Lokamanya Tilak, Mrs. Annie Besant and Mr. M. A. Jinnah for demanding Home Rule for India. Mrs. Besant was interned by the Government in this connection in 1917, but was released some months later, owing to the pressure of public agitation. The Extre- mists wanted to make Mrs. Besant the President of the next session of the Indian National Congress in Calcutta, but the Moderates were opposed to it. At the eleventh hour an agreement was reached and Mrs. Besant became President with the support of both parties. That was however the last Congress attended by the Moderates, for, the next year, they broke away and formed a separate organisation of their own, called the All-India Liberal Federation. In 1917, a statement was made by the Secretary of State for India, Mr. Montagu on the behalf of the British Government to the effect that the progressive realisation of responsible govern- ment was the goal of British rule in India. Soon after this Mr. Montagu came to India and together with the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, made a report on the coming reforms, called the Montagu-Chelmsford report. This report was considered by a special session of the Congress held at Bom- bay, presided over by the late Mr. Hassan Imam, a dis- tinguished advocate of Patna and ex-Judge of the High Court and was rejected by the Congress as unacceptable.

INTRODUCTION 35 On the basis of the Montagu-Chelmsford report, a new constitution was drawn up and passed by the British Govern- ment, called the Government of India Act, 1919. This constitution was regarded as inadequate and unsatisfactory by nationalist opinion in India. While attempts were made on the one hand to put India on the road to self-government, the Government of India forged fresh fetters for the people. A new Act was passed by the Government in the teeth of popu- lar opposition, whereby people could be imprisoned without trial on political grounds for an indefinite period. A country- wide agitation was raised against this Act and it was led by Mahatma Gandhi. In the attempt to suppress the agitation in the Punjab, terrible massacres were committed by the troops in Amritsar under General Dyer. The Amritsar massacre caused an unparalleled indignation not only in India but. also among all fair-minded people in England. After the Amritsar incident, two enquiry committees were appointed, one by the Congress and the other by the Govern- ment. Both the committees strongly condemned the action of the military, though the Congress Enquiry Committee went much further in its condemnation. But the steps taken by the Government to compensate the sufferers and to punish the wrong-doers were extremely inadequate. The Amritsar Congress in December 1919, had decided to work the new constitution in spite of its unsatisfactory character, but when the attitude of the Government towards the Amritsar massacre was made known, there was a revulsion of popular feeling. Meanwhile the attempt of the Allied Powers to dismember Turkey, produced discontent and resentment among the Indian Moslems who turned against the Government. In defence of the Sultan of Turkey who was also the 'Khalifa' or head of the Islamic Church, a movement was started by the Indian Moslems under the name of the Khilafat move- ment. At this stage an alliance was struck between the Khilafat leaders and Mr. Gandhi, the Congress leader. In September 1920, a special session of the Congress was held in Calcutta to determine the attitude of the Congress towards the reforms and particularly towards the elections to be held that year under the new Constitution. At the instance of

36 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Mr. Gandhi, the Congress decided to adopt a policy of non- co-operation towards the new constitution. Three factors accounted for this decision—the atrocities in the Punjab, the attitude of Great Britain towards Turkey, and the inadequacy of the new constitutional reforms. Lord Irwin, the ex-Viceroy of India, holds the view that every great step in England and in the Dominions towards the development of responsible government has been accom- panied at a greater or lesser interval by a corresponding advance in India. As examples he has mentioned that the Charter Act of 1833, the Indian Councils Act of 1861, the Indian Councils Act of 1892 and the Indian Councils Act of 1909, have followed popular movements in England or in other parts of the British Empire. There is considerable force in what Lord Irwin says. But one should go further and say that the Indian movement is organically connected with the world movement for liberty. In India, as elsewhere, the beginning of the nineteenth century was an important landmark. The revolution of 1857 followed in the wake of world revolution of 1848. The birth of the Indian National Congress took place at a time, when there was a similar upheaval in other parts of the world. The movement of 1905 closely followed the Boer War in South Africa and was contemporaneous with the Russian revolution of 1905. The attempted revolution during the Great War was a phenomenon visible all over the world, at about the same time. Last but not least, the movement of 1920-21 was contemporaneous with the Sinn Fein Revolution in Ireland, with the fight of the Turks for their independence, and it closely followed revolutions which brought freedom to countries like Poland and Czechoslovakia. There is no doubt therefore, that the awakening in India is organically connected with the upheaval all over the world during the last and the present century.

INTRODUCTION 37 § IV. ORGANISATIONS, PARTIES AND PERSONALITIES To understand properly a narrative about the Indian struggle for freedom, it is necessary to have some idea of the different organisations, parties and personalities in India. The most important party or organisation in India is the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885. It has its branches all over India. There is a central committee for the whole country called the All-India Congress Committee, which consists of about 350 members. This committee elects an executive committee for the year, called the Working Committee. Each province has a Provincial Congress Com- mittee and under this committee there are district, sub- divisional (or tahsil or taluka), union and village Congress Committees. The different Congress Committees are all formed on the elective principle. The aim of the Congress is the ‘attainment of complete independence by all peaceful and legitimate means.’ The leader¹ of the Congress is Mahatma Gandhi—who is the virtual dictator. The Working Com- mittee since 1929 has been elected according to his dictation and no one can find a place on that committee who is not thoroughly submissive to him and his policy. Within the Congress there is a strong Left Wing who hold radical views on social and economic questions, i.e., questions relating to caste, to landlord versus peasant and to capital versus labour. This group also advocate a more vigorous and activist policy for the achievement of political freedom. On all such problems, Mahatma Gandhi holds a more com- promising position. A few years ago the prominent members of the Left Wing were Mr. Srinivasa Iyengar, ex-Advocate- General of Madras and ex-President of the Congress, Pandit Jarvaharlal Nehru of Allahabad, formerly an advocate by profession and son of the late Pandit Motilal Nehru, Dr. Mohammed Alam, an outstanding Moslem leader of Lahore and an advocate, and Mr. K. F. Nariman of Bombay, a Parsi ¹ The President of the Congress is not the real leader. Whoever presides at a plenary session of the Congress continues as Congress President till the next session. The Congress President is elected as a result of nomination by the different Provincial Congress Committees

38 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE gentleman and an advocate by profession, Dr. S. Kitchlew, a Moslem nationalist leader of Lahore, also an advocate and the present writer. But since 1930, Mr. Srinivasa Iyengar has retired from the Congress and with the exception of Dr. Kitchlew and the writer,¹ the others have been won over by the Mahatma. Nevertheless, even without many prominent leaders the Left Wing is fairly strong. The position of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in this connection is an interesting one. His ideas and views are of a radical nature and he calls himself a full-blooded socialist—but in practice he is a loyal follower of the Mahatma. It would probably be correct to say that while his brain is with the Left Wingers, his heart is with Mahatma Gandhi. Among the other leaders, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan (popularly called the Frontier Gandhi), a Moslem leader of the Frontier Province, is at present exceedingly popular, but it is too early to describe his exact political complexion. Mr. P. D. Tandon, and other Congress leaders of the United Provinces, are followers of Pandit J. L. Nehru, though they are inclined towards the Left Wing. The Central Provinces leaders, Seth Govindh Das and Pandit Dwarka Prasad Misra, are also inclined towards the Left Wing. Among those who played a prominent part in the National Movement prior to 1920, Lokamanya Tilak of Poona, Mr. B. C. Pal of Calcutta, Sir S. N. Banerjea of Calcutta, Mr. G. K. Gokhale of Poona and Sir Pherozhah Mehta of Bombay, are dead. The first two belonged to the Left Wing, while the rest belonged to the Right Wing. Of those who played an important part since 1920, the following leaders are now dead: Lala Lajpat Rai of Lahore, Deshbandhu C. R. Das of Calcutta, Pandit Motilal Nehru of Allahabad, Mr. J. M. Sengupta of Calcutta and Mr. Vithalbhai Patel of Bombay. Among the prominent leaders who retired from the Congress, but who are still alive, are Sri Aurobindo Ghosh of Calcutta who has been living a religious life in French Pondicherry since 1909, and Mr. Srinivasa Iyengar of Madras who retired from active politics in 1930. ¹ Swami Govindanand of Karachi has also consistently taken up a Left-wing position.

INTRODUCTION 39 Since May 1934, many of the Left-Wingers have combined to form an All-India Congress Socialist Party. This party has so far. found the largest support in the United Provinces and Bombay—but support is also forthcoming from all over the country. It is too early to say, how this party will grow in future, because many of those who may play an important rôle are either in prison or out of India at the moment. At present a reshuffling of parties is going on and a realignment in politics will shortly take place. Within the Indian National Congress there is an important and influential Moslem group and this group has its repre- sentatives in the Congress Cabinet—that is, the Working Committee. In this group are Moulana¹ Abul Kalam Azad of Calcutta, Dr. M. A. Ansari of Delhi, and Dr. Mohammed Alam of Lahore.² Among the Hindu leaders of the Congress there are some who are more inclined towards the Hindu Mahasabha—for instance Pandit Madan Mohon Malaviya of Benares and Mr. M. S. Aney of Berar. Before 1918, the Congress had two groups—the Extre- . mists (or Nationalists) and the Moderates (or Liberals). In 1907, the Extremists were driven out of the Congress, but in 1916 at the Lucknow Congress, a rapprochement was effected. In 1918, the Moderates being outnumbered by the Extremists, seceded from the Congress and started the All- India Liberal Federation. The present leaders of the Liberal Party are Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru of Allahabad, Sir Chimanlal Setalvad and Sir Pheroze Sethna of Bombay, the Right Hon. V. Srinivasa Sastri and Sir Sivaswami Iyer of Madras, Mr. Chintamani of Allahabad, and Mr. J. N. Basu of Calcutta. Among the present-day Congress leaders who are loyal supporters of the Mahatma, are Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel of Gujerat, Dr. M. A. Ansari of Delhi, Mr. Rajendra Prasad of Patna, Dr. Mohammed Alam and Sardar Sardul Singh of Lahore, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru of Allahabad, Mr. Raja- ¹ Moulana implies a learned Moslem divine, just as Pandit implies a learned Brahmin. But the word Pandit is used loosely in some parts of India, as Kashmir, in reference to all Brahmins, regardless of their learning. ² Mr. Sherwani of Allahabad, Mr. Asaf Ali of Delhi and Mr. Khali- quzzaman of Lucknow also belong to this group. The first two have been elected to the Assembly in the elections of November, 1934.

40 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE : gopalachari of Madras, Mrs. Sarojini Naidu, the celebrated poetess, Moulana Abul Kalam Azad of Calcutta, Mr. Abhyan- kar of Nagpur, Mr. Jairamdas Daulatram of Karachi and Dr. B. C. Roy of Calcutta. Among them Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's popularity is, by general consent, the highest. Besides the above political parties comprising members of all communities, there are communal organisations whose avowed object is to secure the loaves and fishes for members of their own community. Among the Moslems, the All-India Moslem League is the most important organisation, having been started as early as 1906. During 1920 and 1924, the Moslem League was eclipsed by the All-India Khilafat Committee. But after the abolition of the Khalifate in 1924, the Khilafat movement in India collapsed, and the Moslem League regained its former importance. Besides the Moslem League, there are other organisations of recent growth, like the All-India Moslem Conference. The prominent com- munal Moslem leaders are the Aga Khan, Mr. M. A. Jinnah (who was a Congress leader up to 1920), Sir Mohammed Ikbal of Lahore. Sir Mohammed Yakub of the United Provinces and Mr. Shafi Daudi of Patna. Moulana Shaukat Ali, once a prominent Congress and Khilafat leader, has, on several occasions, identified himself with the com- munal Mohammedans. Sir Abdur Rahim occupies a position between the communal leaders on the one side and the Nationalist Moslem leaders on the other. As a counterblast to the All-India Moslem League, the Hindu Mahasabha has come into existence for the avowed object of protecting the rights of the Hindus. It has influential support in some parts of India. Among the prominent leaders are Mr. Ramananda Chatterji of Calcutta (Editor of the Modern Review). Dr. B. S. Moonje of Nagpur, Bhai Par- manand of Lahore, Mr. N. C. Kelkar of Poona. Pandit Madan Mohon Malaviya, though intimately connected with the Congress also plays an important part in the Hindu Mahasabha. Besides the Moslem League and the Hindu Mahasabha there are other communal parties. For instance, the Anglo-Indians, the Indian Christians, the Sikhs (of the Punjab) and the depressed classes among the Hindus have