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

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

194 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE latures when the new Constitution was under consideration, especially when it had been demonstrated the year before, that because of the presence of Congressmen in the Assembly, that body had been able to repudiate the Simon Commission. The writer was among the few men who fought against the proposed boycott till the very last—but with the support of Pandit Motilal Nehru and subsequently of the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta, the Mahatma could easily carry the Congress with him and even Bengal could not put up an undivided opposi- tion, as had been possible at the Allahabad meeting of the All-India Congress Committee in July, before the breach between the late Mr. Sengupta and the writer took place. In August, a special meeting of the All-India Congress Committee was called to decide who should preside over the ensuing Congress. In accordance with the Congress Con- stitution, the vast majority of the Provincial Congress Com- mittee had nominated Mahatma Gandhi, but he declined to accept the nomination. The general feeling in Congress circles was that the honour should go to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. But the Mahatma decided to back the candidature of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. For the Mahatma the choice was a prudent one, but for the Congress Left Wing it proved to be unfortunate, because that event marked the beginning of a political rapprochement between the Mahatma and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and a consequent alienation between the latter and the Congress Left Wing. Since 1920, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru had been a close adherent of the policy advocated by the Mahatma and his personal relations with the latter had been always friendly. Nevertheless, since his return from Europe in December 1927, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru began to call himself a Socialist and give expression to views hostile towards Mahatma Gandhi and the older leaders and to ally himself in his public activities with the Left-Wing opposition within the Congress. But for his strenuous advocacy, it would not have been possible for the Independence League to attain the importance that it did. Therefore, for the Mahatma it was essential that he should win over Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru if he wanted to beat down the Left-Wing opposition and regain his former undisputed

: SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 195 supremacy over the Congress. The Left-Wingers did not like the idea that one of their most outstanding spokesmen should accept the Presidentship of the Lahore Congress, because it was clear that that Congress would be dominated by the Mahatma and the President would be a mere dummy. They were of opinion that a Left-Wing leader should accept the Presidentship only when he was in a position to have his programme adopted by the Congress. But the Mahatma took a clever step in supporting the candidature of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and his election as President opened a new chapter in his public career. Since then, Pandit J. L. Nehru has been a consistent and unfailing supporter of the Mahatma. ' In the meantime the Simon Commission had been busy with its own work and on October 16th, 1929, after some sort of pre-arrangement, Sir John Simon wrote to the Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, asking for an extension of the terms of reference in order to enable him to examine the methods whereby the future relations between the Indian states and the British Indian provinces could be readjusted. He also suggested that after the publication of the Commis- sion's Report, a conference should be arranged between the representatives of His Majesty's Government and represen- tatives of British India and the States. To both these sug- gestions the Cabinet agreed. The same month Lord Irwin returned to India and soon after his arrival, he issued a statement on October 31st, 1929, saying that he had been 'authorised by His Majesty's Government to state clearly that in their judgment, it is implicit in the Declaration of 1917 that the natural issue of India's constitutional progress, as there contemplated, is the attainment of Dominion Status.' He further stated that a Round Table Conference would be held in London after the publication of the report of the Simon Commission as had been suggested by Sir John Simon himself. The situation created by this new attitude on the part of the British Cabinet and the Viceroy did not remain un- noticed or unutilised. In the absence of Deshbandhu Das, there was at least one other personality who could seize the opportunity at once and, fortunately for him, he then occupied

196 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE

a strategic position as an intermediary between the Viceroy and the people's representatives. That man was Mr. Vithal- bhai Patel who, though a veteran Congressman, had been elected to the Presidential chair of the Assembly in 1925. President Patel had had a remarkable public career. An advocate by profession, he had made politics his first love. Through thick and thin, he had been with the Congress for a long period and at times he had been the General Secretary of the All-India Congress Committee. In that capacity he had been a member of the Congress deputation which visited England before the Reforms of 1919. He was a close student of Constitutional Law and an expert in parliamentary pro- cedure and especially in obstructive tactics. People used to say of him: 'Give Vithalbhai the most perfect constitution in the world and he will tear it to pieces.' So great was his success as a President, that in 1927 he was re-elected un- opposed, following the procedure in the British House of Commons. Without causing undue annoyance to the Govern- ment, he was able to conduct the affairs of the Assembly in a manner which would do credit to any popular President. In 1929 when a bomb was thrown in the Assembly, the Government wanted to use the opportunity for taking over the entire control of the guards in the Assembly premises and it was a tough fight that the President had to wage in order to thwart the Government. He had also to fight hard in order to bring under his control the Secretariat of the Assembly, that was formerly under the Government of India. But in all these fights he conducted himself with such tact and adhered so scrupulously to Constitutional procedure, that he was able to win the respect of the Viceroy, Lord Irwin. Mr. Vithalbhai Patel persuaded the Viceroy that he should personally meet the Congress leaders, Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Motilal Nehru, and attempt an understanding with them. To this the Viceroy agreed and the interview took place in December. But before that, he had to prepare the ground by arranging for a gesture to be made on behalf of the leaders as a reply. Thus there met at Delhi in November the conference of leaders of all parties. The Conference by an overwhelming majority decided to issue a manifesto.

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 197 appreciating the sincerity underlying the Viceroy's pro- nouncement and tendering co-operation to His Majesty's Government in their effort to evolve a Dominion Constitution 'for India. The signatories further hoped that the Round Table Conference proposed 'not to discuss when Dominion Status is to be established but to frame a scheme of Dominion Constitution for India.' They also urged that the Round Table Conference should be preceded by a general amnesty. The manifesto was signed by Mahatma Gandhi, Messrs. Nehru (father and son), Pandit M. M. Malaviya, Dr. Ansari, Dr. Moonje, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the Right Hon. V. S. Sastri, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, Mrs. Besant, Mrs. Naidu and others. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru did not at first agree with the other leaders and intended issuing a contrary manifesto together with the writer. But towards the end of the meeting, Mahatma Gandhi prevailed upon him to sign the leaders' manifesto on the ground that he was the President-elect of the Lahore Congress, and the manifesto would lose much of its value if his signature did not appear on it. Thereafter Dr. S. Kitchlew (Lahore), Mr. Abdul Bari (Patna) and the writer issued a separate manifesto opposing the acceptance of Dominion Status and also the idea of participating in the so-called Round Table Conference. The manifesto pointed out that in a real Round Table Conference only the belligerent parties should be represented and the Indian representatives should be selected not by the British Government as had been intended, but by the Indian people. It also warned the Indian people that the Viceroy's pronouncement was a trap laid by the British Government. It was reminiscent of a similar move made by the British Government some years ago in the case of Ireland when the Prime Minister, Mr. Lloyd George, suggested that an Irish Convention consist- ing of all parties should be held for framing a Constitution for Ireland—but the Sinn Fein Party were clever enough to. see through the game and boycott the convention. The leaders' manifesto drew public attention and a large measure of public support as well. The contrary manifesto, however, was welcomed only by Left-Wing Congressmen and by the youth in general.

198 'THE INDIAN STRUGGLE The same month—in November—the annual meeting of the Bengal Congress Committee was held for electing office- bearers, etc. At that meeting it was found that two groups had formed within the Committee, one following the leader- ship of the late Mr. Sengupta and the other of the writer. There was a keen contest and the latter party ultimately won by a narrow margin. This was the beginning of the Bengal dispute and the split in the Congress Committee led to a split among the youths and students as well. The breach had begun at the time of the Calcutta Congress when the late Mr. Sengupta supported the Mahatma and wanted the writer to do so. Since then a separate party had grown up in Bengal under the leadership of the late Mr. Sengupta which stood for unquestioning obedience to the Mahatma and his policy. The majority party in Bengal did not bind itself to the Mahatma in that way and in its outlook and programme, it was allied with the Left-Wing opposition to the Mahatma in the Congress. The Congress leaders, Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Motilal Nehru were to meet the Viceroy in December. On the eve of that interview an unfortunate event took place. There was an attempt to wreck the Viceroy's train, but fortunately nothing serious happened and Lord Irwin had a providential escape. The longed-for interview took place but it proved abortive. The Congress leaders wanted an assurance from the British Government, or at least from the Viceroy, that Dominion Status would be granted to India, but that assurance was not forthcoming. They had therefore to leave the Viceroy disappointed and come to the Lahore Congress with empty hands.¹ The general atmosphere in the country was in favour of an extremist policy. Throughout the year there had been unrest. In Punjab, following the arrest of Sardar Bhagat Singh and his comrades, the Naujawan Bharat Sabha had done a lot of propaganda on their behalf. The self- immolation of Jatin Das had further electrified the atmosphere. ¹ It is generally believed that neither the British Government nor Lord Irwin could give any assurance to Mahatma Gandhi because of the opposition raised in England by Mr. Churchill, Lord Birkenhead, Lord Reading and others, soon after the Viceregal pronouncement of October 31st, 1929.

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 199 On the other hand, the leaders who had cried halt at the Calcutta Congress had not been able to achieve anything. The Mahatma had further compromised himself by making statements to the effect that if there was no response from the Government by December 31st, 1929, he would be an 'independencewallah' on January 1st, 1930. His orthodox followers like himself, had all along been advocates of Dominion Home Rule and they did not like to depart from that attitude. But the Mahatma felt that in the atmosphere then prevailing in the country, a resolution on independence would be carried in spite of his opposition and it was therefore much better for him to move it. The Congress met under the Presidentship of Pandit J. L. Nehru at Lahore. As had been anticipated, the President was a figurehead and the entire proceedings were dominated by Mahatma Gandhi, who by advocating independence, was able to win over some of the Left-Wing elements as well. The Madras Congress in 1927, though it passed a resolution on independence, had not altered the goal as defined in the Congress Constitution, and this was done at Lahore. There was considerable excitement over a clause in the resolution moved by the Mahatma, which congratulated the Viceroy on his providential escape when his train was bombed. The feeling in the Congress was that that clause was uncalled for in a political resolution, but the Mahatma insisted on retaining it, probably because he wanted to placate Lord Irwin and prepare the ground for a rapprochement in future. Be that as it may, the Mahatma made it a question of confidence and by a narrow margin, he won. Next came the question of the plan of campaign for the coming year. Here the Mahatma was quite unprepared. A resolution was passed by the Congress calling upon Congressmen to resign their seats in the Legislatures and thereby the victory of the Swarajists in 1923 was avenged in 1929. As for the positive part of his plan, the Working Committee adopted a resolution, at the instance of the Mahatma, recommending that autonomous boards, like the All-India Spinners' Association, should be organised for carrying on propaganda for the removal of untouchability, for the promotion of temperance and sup-

200 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE pression of the drink and drug traffic, etc. The question was therefore raised by everyone as to what work would be left for Congressmen and for Congress organisations in the country. When the resolution regarding the constitution of autonomous boards came up before the Subjects Committee, there was considerable opposition, the feeling being that that work should be done by the Congress organisations and not by ad hoc bodies as proposed by the Mahatma. The resolution was thereupon defeated. On behalf of the Left Wing, a resolution was moved, by the writer, to the effect that the Congress should aim at setting up a parallel Government in the country and to that end, should take in hand the task of organising the workers, peasants and youths. This resolu- tion was also defeated, with the result that though the Con- gress accepted the goal of complete independence as its objective, no plan was laid down for reaching that goal—nor was any programme of work adopted for the coming year. A more ridiculous state of affairs could not be imagined, but, in public affairs, we are sometimes inclined to lose not only our sense of reality but our common sense as well. When the time came for electing the Working Committee for the coming year, the Mahatma came forward with a list of fifteen names, from which the names of Mr. Srinivasa Iyengar, the writer, and other Left-Wingers had been deliberately omitted. There was a strong feeling in the All-India Congress Com- mittee that at least the names of Mr. Iyengar and the writer should be retained. But the Mahatma would not listen. He said openly that he wanted a committee that would be completely of one mind and he wanted his list to be passed in its entirety. Once again it became a question of confidence in the Mahatma and as the House did not want to repudiate him, it had no option but to give in to his demand. Altogether the Lahore Congress was a great victory for the Mahatma. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, one of the most prominent spokesmen of the Left Wing, was won over by him and the others were excluded from the Working Com- mittee. The Mahatma could henceforward proceed with his own plans without fear of opposition within his Cabinet, and whenever any opposition was raised outside his Cabinet, he

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 201 could always coerce the public by threatening to retire from the Congress or to fast unto death. From his personal point of view, it was the cleverest move. With a subservient Cabinet, it was possible for him to conclude the pact with Lord Irwin in March, 1931, to have himself appointed as the sole repre- sentative to the Round Table Conference, to conclude the Poona Agreement in September 1932—and do other acts which have done considerable disservice to the public cause. For the general public, unacquainted with the intricacies of politics or with the differences in the inner councils of the Congress, the Lahore Congress was a great inspiration. After the midnight of December 31st, the President of the Congress came out to hoist the flag of independence. In spite of the biting cold of a Lahore winter, there was a mammoth gathering and as the flag went up, a thrill went through the vast audience. When the Congress was dissolved, there was a light on the horizon and the members of the great Assembly departed with a new hope and with the torch of a new message.

CHAPTER X STORMY 1930 WITH the dawn of the new year there was hope and con- fidence in every heart. People anxiously looked to the Working Committee for instructions as to what they were required to do for the early attainment of independence. The Mahatma sensed the atmosphere correctly and he stated: ‘Civil disobedience alone can save the country from impend- ing lawlessness and secret crime, since there is a party of violence in the country which will not listen to speeches, resolutions or conferences, but believes only in direct action.’ He therefore resolved to place himself at the head of the national struggle in order to keep it within the limits of non- violence. Early in January the first order went out. January 26th should be observed all over India as the day of indepen- dence. On that day a manifesto, prepared by the Mahatma and adopted by the Working Committee of the Congress, was to be read from every platform and accepted by the people. The manifesto which is set forth below, was at once a declaration of independence and a pledge of loyalty to the Indian National Congress and to the sacred fight for India’s liberty. ‘We believe that it is the inalienable right of the Indian people as of any other people, to have freedom and to enjoy the fruits of their toil and have the necessities of life so that they may have full opportunities of growth. We believe also that if any Government deprives the people of these rights and oppresses them, the people have a further right to alter it or to abolish it. The British Government in India has not only deprived the Indian people of their freedom but has based itself on the exploitation of the masses, and has ruined India economically, politically, culturally and spiritually. We believe therefore that India 202

STORMY 1930 203 must sever the British connection and attain Purna Swaraj or complete independence. 'India has been ruined economically. The revenue derived from our people is out of all proportion to our income. Our average income is seven pice (less than two- pence) per day, and of the heavy taxes we pay, 20 per cent. are raised from the land revenue derived from the peasantry, and 3 per cent. from the Salt Tax which falls most heavily on the poor. 'Village industries, such as hand-spinning, have been destroyed, leaving the peasantry idle for at least four months in the year, and dulling their intellect for want of handicrafts; and nothing has been substituted, as in other countries, for the crafts thus destroyed. 'Customs and currency have been so manipulated as to heap further burdens on the peasantry. The British manu- factured goods constitute the bulk of our imports. Customs duties betray clear partiality for British manufactures, and revenue from them is used not to lessen the burden on the masses but for sustaining a highly-extravagant adminis- tration. Still more arbitrary has been the manipulation of the exchange ratio, which has resulted in millions being drained away from the country. 'Politically, India's status has never been so reduced as under the British regime. No reforms have given real political power to the people. The tallest of us have to bend before foreign authority. The rights of free expres- sion of opinion and free association have been denied to us, and many of our countrymen are compelled to live in exile abroad and cannot return to their homes. All adminis- trative talent is killed, and the masses have to be satisfied with petty village offices and clerkships. 'Culturally, the system of education has torn us from our moorings and our training has made us hug the very chains that bind us. 'Spiritually, compulsory disarmament has made us unmanly, and the presence of an alien army of occupation, employed with deadly effect to crush in us the spirit of resistance, has made us think that we cannot look after ourselves or put up a defence against foreign aggression, or even defend our homes and families from the attacks of thieves, robbers and miscreants.

204 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE ‘We hold it to be a crime against man and God to submit any longer to a rule that has caused this fourfold disaster to our country. We recognise, however, that the most effective way of gaining our freedom is not through violence. We will therefore prepare ourselves by with- drawing, so far as we can, all voluntary association from the British Government, and will prepare for civil disobedience, including non-payment of taxes. We are convinced that if we can but withdraw our voluntary help and stop payment of taxes without doing violence even under provocation, the end of this inhuman rule is assured. We therefore hereby solemnly resolve to carry out the Congress instruc- tions issued from time to time for the purpose of establish- ing Purna Swaraj.’ The reports from different parts of the country showed that the Independence Day celebrations were a great success. Unprecedented enthusiasm was exhibited everywhere and the Mahatma felt that he could go ahead with a dynamic pro- gramme. But just at this moment the practical politician in him asserted itself. While starting the civil disobedience campaign he wanted to leave the door open for a compromise and he realised that the independence resolution of the Congress might prove to be a stumbling-block. He also felt that some of his wealthy supporters—the Indian capitalists —were alarmed at the resolutions of the Lahore Congress. Some sort of explaining away was therefore necessary, parti- cularly in view of the fact that the word ‘independence’ implied severance of the British connection. On January 30th he issued a statement in his paper, Young India, saying that he would be content with the ‘substance of independence’ and he mentioned eleven points to explain what he meant ‘by that expression. At the same time he virtually gave up the use of the word ‘independence’ and substituted in its place the more elastic expression, ‘substance of indepen- dence,’ or another expression especially coined by him— namely, ‘Purna Swaraj,’ which he could interpret in his own way. The eleven points enunciated by him had a re- assuring effect on all circles that had been alarmed by the idea of independence and they paved the way for lengthy negoti-

STORMY 1930 205 ations in the months to follow. The eleven points were as follows:

1. Total prohibition.
2. Reduction of the ratio (of the rupee to the pound sterling) from 1s. 6d. to 1s. 4d.
3. Reduction of the land revenue to at least 50 per cent. and making it subject to legislative control.
4. Abolition of the Salt Tax.
5. Reduction of the military expenditure to at least 50 per cent. to begin with.
6. Reduction of the salaries of the higher grade services to one half or less so as to suit the reduced revenue.
7. Protective tariff on foreign cloth.
8. The passage of the Coastal Traffic Reservation Bill (reserving to Indian ships the coastal traffic of India).
9. Discharge of all political prisoners save those con- demned for murder, or the attempt thereat, by the ordinary judicial tribunal; withdrawal of all political prosecutions; abrogation of Section 124a (Indian Penal Code), the Regulations of 1818 and the like; and permission to all the Indian exiles to return.
10. Abolition of the C.I.D. (Criminal Investigation Department), or its popular control.
11. Issue of licences to use fire-arms for self-defence, subject to popular control. By the beginning of February, the situation was favourable for the Mahatma. The Working Committee had vested him with dictatorial powers for conducting the civil disobedience campaign. Besides the warm response given by the country on Independence Day, the members of the different Legis- latures belonging to the Congress Party had submitted their resignations out of deference to the mandate of the Lahore Congress. A large section of the Moslems was of course opposed to the idea of Satyagraha and civil disobedience, and the Ali brothers openly appealed to their co-religionists not to heed the Congress appeal. Nevertheless, the Nationalist Moslems, who were by no means negligible, were whole- heartedly with the Congress and the North-West Frontier Province, a predominantly Moslem province, was going to

206 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE give solid support to the coming campaign. After much searching of heart, on February 27th, the Mahatma announced his plan of campaign. The next few moves taken by him will stand out for all time as some of the most brilliant achievements of his leadership and they reveal the height to which his statesmanship can ascend in times of crises. Writ- ing in Young India on February 27th, 1930, he said: 'This time on my arrest, there is to be no mute passive non-violence, but non-violence of the most active type should be set in motion so that not a single believer in non- violence as an article of faith for the purpose of achieving India's goal, should find himself free or alive at the end of the effort. . . . So far as I am concerned, my intention is to start the movement only through the inmates of the Ashrama (meaning—his own Ashrama) and those who have submitted to its discipline and assimilated the spirit of its methods.' Referring to the possibility of a suspension of civil dis- obedience in the event of an outbreak of violence, as in 1922, the Mahatma wrote: 'Whilst, therefore, every effort imaginable and possible should be made to restrain the forces of violence, civil disobedience once begun this time cannot be stopped and must not be stopped so long as there is a single civil resister left free or alive.' The last statement helped to reassure all those people who had taken strong exception to the Bardoli retreat in 1922 following the manifestation of mob violence at Chauri Chaura. The Mahatma further announced his intention of defying the Salt Law along with seventy-eight of his chosen followers —the members of his Ashrama. He would commence a march from Ahmedabad to the sea-coast—his pilgrimage to the sea—on March 12th and after arriving there, would launch the civil-disobedience campaign. That would be the signal for the whole country to take up the movement. The Mahatma decided to start this particular campaign, because it would appeal to the country as a whole, and especially to the poor. From time immemorial the people had been accustomed to manufacture salt from sea-water or from the soil. That right had been taken away from the people by the British Government. Now the Salt Law as adminis-

STORMY 1930 207 tered is doubly iniquitous. It prohibits the people from utilising the salt which has been given by nature and forces them to import it from abroad. Moreover, the imposition of the Salt Tax serves to enhance the price of the salt which even the poorest of the poor has to buy. Explaining this point to the Viceroy in a letter dated March 2nd, he wrote: ‘If you cannot see your way to deal with these evils and my letter makes no appeal to your heart, then on the twelfth day of this month I shall proceed with such co-workers of the Ashrama as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the Salt Laws. I regard this (Salt) Tax to be the most iniquitous of all from the poor man’s standpoint. As the independence movement is essentially for the poorest in the land, the beginning will be made with this evil. The wonder is that we have submitted to the cruel (salt) monopoly for so long.’ In the same letter which was a lengthy document, the Mahatma tried to explain to the Viceroy, why he was being forced to resort to civil disobedience. Making it clear that ‘the letter was not intended as a threat but was a simple and sacred duty peremptory on a civil-resister, the Mahatma wrote: ‘In common with many of my countrymen I had hugged the fond hope that the proposed Round Table Conference might furnish a solution. But when you said plainly that you could not give any assurance that you or the British Cabinet would pledge yourselves to support a scheme of full dominion status, the Round Table Conference could not possibly furnish the solution for which vocal India is consciously, and the dumb millions are unconsciously, thirsting. Needless to say there never was any question of Parliament’s verdict being anticipated. Instances are not wanting, of the British Cabinet, in anticipation of the Parliamentary verdict, having pledged itself to a particular policy. ‘The Delhi interview having miscarried, there was no option for Pandit Motilal Nehru and myself but to take steps to carry out the solemn resolution of the Congress arrived at in Calcutta at its session in 1928.’ In order to keep the door open for a compromise, in spite of the launching of the civil-disobedience campaign, the Mahatma continued: ‘But the resolution of independence should cause no alarm if the word Dominion

208 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE Status mentioned in your announcement had been used in its accepted sense. For has it not been admitted by responsible British statesmen that Dominion Status is virtual indepen- dence?'' To this letter—or ultimatum—of Mahatma Gandhi, the Viceroy sent a brief reply regretting that Mr. Gandhi intended to contravene the law. So, true to his announced programme, the Mahatma commenced his three weeks' march to Dandi, the sea-coast village, where the disobedience of the Salt Law was to begin. At that time the Government were sceptical about the effect that the march would produce and they were not inclined to take him seriously. The Anglo-Indian papers began to write taunting articles and the Statesman of Calcutta in a leading article wrote to the effect that the Mahatma could go on boiling sea-water till Dominion Status was attained. This scepticism was also shared by a section of Congressmen. Nevertheless, the march to Dandi was an event of historical importance which will rank on the same level with Napoleon's march to Paris on his return from Elba or Mussolini's march to Rome when he wanted to seize political power. Fortunately for the Mahatma, he had a wonderfully good Press within India and outside. In India, for days and days every detail connected with the march found the widest publicity. The march on foot enabled him to rouse the entire countryside through which he passed and it also gave him time to work up the feelings of the country as a whole. If, on the other hand, he had taken the train to Dandi from Ahmedabad, arriving there the next day, he would neither have been able to rouse the people of Gujerat, nor would he have had enough time to work up the entire nation. While the Mahatma was marching from village to village, an intense propaganda was carried on in the neigh- bourhood asking the people to give up service under the Crown and to prepare for the non-payment of taxes, which would be started before long. At every step the Mahatma received an unexpectedly warm welcome and that made the Government realise that the coming campaign would be a' much more serious affair than they had thought at first. On April 6th, after a purificatory bath in the sea, the

STORMY 1930 209 Mahatma started civil disobedience by appropriating pieces of salt lying on the beach. Almost simultaneously, illegal salt manufacture was begun all over the country. Where natural conditions precluded any such campaign, disobedience of other laws was attempted. In Calcutta, for instance, the Mayor, the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta started disobedience of the Law of Sedition by openly reading seditious literature in a public meeting. Boycott of foreign cloth was begun on an extensive scale and along with that, another campaign grew up for the boycott of British goods of all sorts. There was also an intensive campaign for the boycott of liquor and of intoxicating drugs. To enforce the boycott, picketing by Congress volunteers was organised all over India. A few weeks after the march began, the Mahatma addressed a special appeal to the women of India (Young India, April 10th, 1930). Therein he said: 'The impatience of some sisters to join the good fight is to me a healthy sign. . . . In this non-violent warfare, their contribution should be much greater than men's. To call women the weaker sex is a libel. . . . If by strength is meant moral power, then woman is immeasurably man's superior.' Proceeding, the Mahatma appealed to them to take up the picketing of liquor shops and foreign-cloth shops. The prohibition of intoxicating drugs and drinks would reduce the Government revenue by 250 millions of rupees (Rs. 13½=£1 roughly)—while the boycott of foreign cloth would stop an annual drain of nearly 600 millions of rupees. He further appealed to women to devote their spare hours to spinning with a view to stimulating the production of Khadi. In conclusion he said: 'But there is no excitement and adventure in the liquor and foreign-cloth picketing, some sisters may retort. Well, if they will put their whole heart into this agitation, they will find more than enough excitement and adventure. Before they have done with the agitation, they might even find themselves in prison. It is not improbable that they may be insulted and even injured bodily. To suffer such insult and injury would be their pride. Such suffering if it comes to them, will hasten the end.' The appeal was transmitted all over the country and it had a magic effect. Even the women of the most orthodox and o

210 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE aristocratic families were moved.¹ Everywhere women came out in their thousands to carry out the Congress mandate. Not only the Government but the people of the country as well, were taken by surprise at the manifestation. Temperance workers like Miss Mary Campbell,² who had worked for forty years in India, were amazed at the phenomenon. Well might foreign observers like Mr. H. N. Brailsford and Mr. George Slocombe say that if the civil-disobedience campaign had accomplished nothing else but the emancipation of the women of India, it would have fully justified itself. The energy and enthusiasm of the women stirred the men to greater effort and sacrifice. Within three weeks of the commencement of the campaign, the Government resolved to strike. On April 27th, the first emergency ordinance was promulgated called the Press Ordinance, which brought the papers under the full control of the officials. Most of the Nationalist papers ceased publication for a long period as a protest. Other ordinances followed, aiming at the suppression of the different activities of the Congress. Congress organisa- tions were declared unlawful all over the country and an ordinance was issued, enabling the Government to confiscate the property belonging to them. The result of these ordinances was that the Congress could no longer function openly and many of its activities, like raising funds, recruiting volunteers, etc., had to be conducted in an underground manner. Nevertheless, the activities of the Congress instead of being paralysed by the ordinances, were further stimulated. As meetings and processions were banned everywhere, they con- tinued to be held in defiance of the official ban. Newspapers, bulletins, leaflets were printed and distributed by Congress agencies in spite of official prohibition. In some places as in Bombay, Congress propaganda was conducted by means of the radio and the police were not able to find out from where the messages were being transmitted. ¹ E.g., Women belonging to the family of such an orthodox and highly respected Brahmin as Pandit Madan Mohon Malaviya went to prison without fear or hesitation. ² Manchester Guardian of June 22nd, 1931, contains her description of the awakening among the women in Delhi where alone 1,600 women were imprisoned.

STORMY 1930 211 Faced by a non-violent rebellion, the Government first proceeded to make arrests. But that was of no avail. Accord- ing to official figures,¹ more than sixty thousand civil resisters were cast in prison. Special prisons had to be improvised at short notice but these were filled up in no time. Besides the activities described above, which were more or less common to the whole of India, there were special activities in certain provinces. For instance, in the Central Provinces and a part of the Bombay Presidency, disobedience of forest laws was started and people began to cut down timber at will. In Gujerat, the United Provinces and certain districts of Bengal, particularly Midnapore District, non-payment of taxes and of land revenue was launched. In the North-West Frontier Province, thanks to the efforts of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, better known as the Frontier Gandhi, an intensive anti-Government movement was on foot, including the non-payment of taxes. In spite of the warlike traditions of the people there, the movement was entirely non-violent. The Frontier Gandhi had organised a corps of volunteers dressed in red uniform who were called 'Khodai-Khidmad- gar' or 'Servants of God.' The red-shirt volunteers were an eye-sore to the Government, because their campaign was affecting the loyalty of the people who had formerly contri- buted some of the finest regiments to the Indian Army. Moreover, because of the strategic position of the Frontier Province, a political movement in that part of the country was exceedingly unwelcome to the Government. As soon as the Government realised the serious proportions which the campaign had assumed, they became entirely ruthless and brutal in their attempts at suppression. It is not possible to describe the atrocities committed by the forces of the Crown—including both the police and the military—in this connection. It is difficult to say which province suffered most, for each province had its tale of woe. In Bengal, the ¹ The official figures are an underestimate. The writer knows from personal experience that many people were sentenced on charges like stealing, exercising intimidation, rioting, etc., though they were. full- fledged Satyagrahis. As the Satyagrahis did not take any part in the Court proceedings, these charges were never challenged. The official figures are based on the returns for purely political offences.