During his
official
career in India, Mr.
Cambridge History of India - v4 - Indian Empire
719 (#759) ############################################
FACTORS HELPING NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS 719
sums
more than what was due to them. It is rightly pointed out that
the first 6,000 miles of railways cost more than £100 millions or
£16,000 a mile. To quote W. N. Massey, “Enormous
were lavished and the contractors had no motive for economy.
All the money came from the English capitalist and so long as
he was guaranteed 5 per cent on the revenues of India, it was
immaterial for him whether the funds he lent were thrown into
the Hooghly or converted into bricks or mortar. " L. H. Jenks
points out that the expenses which increased the public debt of
India were “the cost of the Mutiny, the price of the transfer of
Company's rights to the Crown, the expenses of simultaneous
wars in China and Abyssinia, every governmental item in London
that remotely related to India down to the fees of the char-wo-
man in the India Office and the expenses of ships that sailed but
did not participate in hostilities and the cost of the Indian regi-
ments for 6 months' training at home before they sailed. . . . The
Sultan of Turkey visited London in 1868 in state and his offi-
cial ball was arranged at the India Office and the Bill was charged
to India. A lunatic asylum in Ealing, gifts to members of a Zan-
zibar Mission, the Consular and diplomatic establishments of
Great Britain in China or in Persia, part of the permanent ex-
penses of the Mediterranean feet and the entire cost of a line
of telegraph from England to India had been charged to the
Indian treasury. ” (The Migration of British Capital, pp. 223-
24). The net result of all these factors was that there was great
misery in India. There was a lot of resentment and unrest.
There were frequent famines in the country. There were
many as 24 famines during the second half of the 19th century
and it is estimated that more than 28 millions died. The ex-
port of foodgrains from India to Great Britain during the years
of famine added to the bitterness among the people. No wonder,
Mr. Blunt, a British journalist touring India in 1882, observed
that when Lord Lytton left India, India was on the verge of a
revolution.
Before the outbreak of the Mutiny in 1857, there were many
Englishmen who honestly believed and worked for the good of
India. However, during the Mutiny days a lot of blood was shed
on both sides. The Europeans wreaked their vegeance on the
helpless and innocent Indians after the Mutiny. It was this po-
licy of oppression and repression which added to the discontent
of the country. The Indians were completely excluded from the
legislatures in the country and also from the key-posts in the ad-
ministration. Zacharias says: “The blight of distrust had be-
gun to fall upon England's relations with India; these people had
as
## p. 720 (#760) ############################################
720
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
common
mutinied once and committed dreadful atrocities-how could one
trust them not to plan further sedition? ” Another writer points
out that "the old sympathy with India changed to a feeling of
repugnance—the old spirit of content with life and work in
India, the old inclination to regard things in an Indian rather than
an English light, gave place to a reluctance to stay in India longer
than needs must, and a disposition to judge things by an empha-
tically English standard. " Garrat observes : "The English killed
their prisoners without trial and in a manner held by all Indians
to be the height of barbarity. They massacred thousands of the
civil population. General Neil gave orders to his lieutenants that
certain villages were marked out for destruction and all the men
inhabiting them were slaughtered and the indiscriminate burning
of their inhabitants occurred wherever our English armies mov-
ed. "
The English language played a very important part in the
growth of nationalism in the country. It acted as the lingua
franca of the intelligentsia of India. Without the
medium of the English language, it would have been out of the
question for the Madrasis, Bengalees and the Punjabis to sit at
one table and discuss the common problems facing the country.
The English language also made the Indians inheritors of a great
literature which was full of great ideas and ideals. Tagore says:
“We had come to know England through her glorious literature,
which had brought new inspiration into our young lives. The
English authors, whose books and poems we studied, were full of
love for humanity, justice, and freedom. This great literary tra-
dition had come down to us from the revolutionary period. We
felt its power in Wordsworth's sonnets about human liberty. We
glorified in it even in the immature production of Shelley writ-
ten in the enthusiasm of his youth when he declared against the
tyranny of priestcraft and preached the overthrow of all despot-
isms through the power of suffering bravely endured. All this
fired our youthful imaginations. We believed with all our simple
faith that even if we rebelled against foreign rule, we should
have the sympathy of the West. We felt that England was on
our side in wishing to gain our freedom” Sardar K. M. Panikkar
has pointed out in Asia and Western Dominance that the intro-
duction of the English language helped the cause of unity in
the country and without it India would have been split into as
many different units as there are languages in India and would
have repeated the pattern of Europe with its conglomeration of
mutually hostile units within the same Christian community (p.
332).
## p. 721 (#761) ############################################
ILBERT BILL CONTROVERSY
721
The ground was ready and the acts of omission and commis-
sion in the time of Lord Lytton accelerated the nationalist move-
ment. The period from 1876 to 1884 has been called the seed-
time of Indian nationalism. Lord Lytton held his famous Delhi
Durbar in 1877 at a time when the people of South India were
suffering terribly from the descruction brought about by famine.
They wondered at the callousness of Lytton. An appropriate
comment was made in these words : “Nero was fiddling while
Rome was burning. ” The second Afghan War cost the Indian
treasury a lot. No wonder, the Indians criticised Lytton merci-
lessly. In order to gag the Indian public opinion, Lytton passed
the notorious Vernacular Press Act in 1878. The discriminatory
provisions of this Act were universally condemned by the people
belonging to all walks of life. Sir Erskine Perry points out that
the Act was "a retrogarde and ill-conceived measure injurious to
the future progress of India. ” It was called the Gagging Act.
Lytton passed the Arms Act in 1878 which made an invidious
distinction between the Indians and the Europeans. While the
Europeans were allowed to keep arms freely, the Indians could not
do so without a licence. In the words of Surendra Nath Baner-
jee, the Arms Act “imposed upon was a badge of racial infer-
iority. ” Such a measure was derogatory to the self-respect of the
people of India. Lord Lytton removed the import duty on cot-
ton manufactures with a view to help the British manufacturers
and this was resented by the Indians. It is true that Lord Ripon
tried to remove some of the grievances of India, but before he
could do so, the Ilbert Bill controversy came to the fore.
The Ilbert Bill was a simple measure whose object was to put
the Indian judges on the same footing as the European judges in
dealing with all cases in Bengal Presidency. The necessity of this
bill arose as the Indians who had joined the judicial service were
rising in the ranks and that involved the possible trial of Euro-
peans by an Indian judge without a jury. This was considered
to be too much by the Europeans. A strong agitation was
brought into existence by the Europeans who were not prepared
to be tried by an Indian judge. Lord Ripon became the target
of the agitation. He was boycotted by the European community.
He was threatened to be kidnapped to England. Ultimately a
compromise was arrived at which suited the Europeans. How-
ever, this set a wrong precedent. The flag of racialism was hoist-
ed by the Europeans. The Indians realised that they could not
expect any justice or fairplay from the Englishmen when their
own interests were involved. Surendranath Banerjee observes:
“No self-respecting Indian could sit idle under the fierce light of
## p. 722 (#762) ############################################
722
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
that revelation. It was a call to high patriotic duty to those who
understood its significance. ” Before the effect of the Ilbert bill
controvery was over, the Indians had already organised themselves
into the Indian National Conference which was the forerunner of
the Indian National Congress founded in 1885.
Before dealing with the foundation and work of the Indian
National Congress, it seems desirable to refer to political organi-
zations before 1885. In 1837, the Bengal Zamindary Associa-
tion (later on known as the Bengal Landholders' Society) was set
up. Its main object was to resist encroachments on the rights of
the landlords on account of the policy of the Bengal Government
to give a certain measure of protection to the cultivators. About
the same time, a few English radicals started in London the Bri-
tish India Society. Its object was to create an interest in the
conditions of India and “to fix the eyes of the entire nation on
the extent. . . . and the claims of British India. ” George Thomp-
son, one of the prominent members of the British India Society,
came to Calcutta in 1842 and set up in 1843 the Bengal British
India Society. The object of the new Society was the gradual
advancement of the public welfare by peaceful means.
How-
ever, the members of the Society professed complete loyalty to the
British Crown. Out of the two, the Bengal Landlords' Society
and the Bengal British India Society, the former was more im-
portant than the latter. In 1851, these two societies were amal-
gamated into the British Indian Association. In spite of the fact
that Kristo Das Pal, the Secretary of the British India Association,
was a liberal, this Association was dominated by the landlords
and the progressive Bengalees had no place in it. Its subscrip-
tion was kept high and hence all could not join it.
On 26 August, 1852, the principal Hindus, Parsees, Moham-
medans, Portuguese and Jews of Bombay met to consider "the
desirableness of forming an association with a view to ascertaining
the wants of the people of this country and the measures calcu-
lated to advance their welfare and of representing the same to
the authorities in India or in England. ” On that occasion,
Dadabhai Naoroji observed: "Many ask what this Association
means to do when it is well known that under our present gov-
ernment we enjoy an amount of liberty and prosperity rarely
known to the inhabitants of india under any native sovereign.
In reply to this it is said we ought to demand redress for our grie-
vances. But what are those grievances ? They may be many
or none, yet nobody here is at this moment prepared to give a
decided reply; when we see that our Government is often ready to
assist us in everything calculated to benefit us, we had better, than
## p. 723 (#763) ############################################
THE BOMBAY ASSOCIATION
723
merely complain and grumble, point out in a becoming manner
what our real wants are. We are subject to the English govern-
ment, whose principal officers being drawn from England do not,
except after a long residence and experience, become fully ac-
quainted with our wants and customs. Though they may always
be anxious to do good to us, they are often led, by their imper-
fect acquaintance with the country, to adopt measures calculated
to do more harm than good, while we, on the other hand, have
no means of preventing such occurrences. The most we can do
is complain through the medium of the paper. In time all is hush-
ed up and the people carry with them the impression that Gov-
ernment has been unkind to them in not attending to their com-
plaint. We have, therefore, to consider what we ought to do to
secure our own good, and at the same time keep up a good un-
derstanding between us and Government. "
On the same occasion, the Chairman of the Bombay Associa-
tion, Mr. Juggonathjee Sunkersett stated : “Now as the British
Government acknowledge their
their duty to be to effect whatever
good they can for the benefit of this country, it is clear that their
object and our object are one and the same. We are not in op-
position to Government nor can Government be opposed to our
objects, if it be shown that the good of the country is what we
seek. The Government has the power to do much good and
we have many a proof that they have the will also. I need not
go far for these proofs. Witness this noble Institution which
they so generously support and in which so many, who are now
present, have received a most excellent education. . . . I might also
refer to the recent appointment of so many Natives to the highly
responsible situations of Deputy Collectors and Magistrates. The
Government are willing, I am sure, to do what good they can.
When they are correctly informed they will always be ready to
act to the advantage of the people over whom they rule; but they
are not in possession of full and correct information un all sub-
jects connected with the welfare of the people. Besides their offi-
cial sources of information Government will be glad to have other
channels of information on which they can rely. An Associa-
tion like the one now established will doubtless be listened to with
attention in respect to all matters which concern the wants and
wishes of the people, which of course natives have better means of
knowing than gentlemen whose time is engaged in the duties of
their official situations. "
Within a few months of the formation of the Bombay Associa-
tion, it submitted a petition to the British Parliament. Another
petition was submitted a year later. In these petitions, the
## p. 724 (#764) ############################################
724
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
>
Bombay Association criticised the existing machinery of the East
India Company in India and asked for a system which was “less
cumbersome, less exclusive, less secret, more directly responsible
and infinitely more efficient and more acceptable to the govern-
ed. ” The blessings of the British rule were recognised but those
were "attributed to the British character rather than to the plan
of Government. . . . which is but little suited to the present state
of India. ” The dual authority of the Court of Directors and the
Board of Control was described as an anachronism. The autho-
rity exercised by the Calcutta authorities over the Governments
of Bombay and Madras was criticised. The administration was
condemned as being unduly expensive. The attitude of the Eng-
lish officials was described as “despotic. ” It was contended
that "the European local officers scattered over the country at
great distances from one another, and having large districts to
attend to, far beyond their powers of supervision, and dependent
to a very great degree on their subordinates, are compelled to dis-
pose of the greater part of their business in a very imperfect man-
ner; and their statements to Government—whether emanating
from persons who it is known may be trusted or from those in
whose accuracy Government are aware no confidence can be plac-
ed—are on system accepted as equally trustworthy and the offi-
cial vindication of the acts of government founded thereon. The
necessary result of this system is that Government is one of first
impressions. " It was alleged that as the work of the Govern-
ment was done in secrecy, it tended "to engender and perpetuate
amongst the young servants of Government an illiberal and des-
potic tone; to give full scope to the prejudices, the ignorance, and
the self-sufficiency of all; to discourage progress; to discounten-
ance all schemes of improvement emanating from independent and
disinterested sources, and not within the views of the officers to
whose department they are referred; and to cramp all agriculture
or commercial energy-all individual enterprise. The Associa-
tion protested against the "exorbitant salaries of many highly
paid officers whose duties are so trifling or involve comparatively
so little labour or responsibility that they might with advantage
be amalgamated with other offices or remunerated in a manner
commensurate with the nature of the duties to be performed. "
The foreign character of the administration was criticised and it
was contended that “the time has arrived when the natives of
India are entitled to a much larger share than they have hitherto
had in the administration of the affairs of their country and that
the Councils of the Local Governments should, in matters of gen-
eral policy and legislation, be opened, so as to admit of respect-
## p. 725 (#765) ############################################
THE BOMBAY ASSOCIATION
725
able and intelligent natives taking a part in the discussion of mat-
ters of general interest to the country, as suggested by Lords
Ellenborough, Elphinstone and others. ' It was contended that
there was absolutely no substance in the contention that the In-
dians were not fit to hold positions of trust and responsibility. It
was pointed out that “the decisions of the native judges were in
every respects superior to those of the Europeans. It was also
pointed out that the declaration in the Charter Act of 1833 that
no native of India shall be disqualified from office by reason only
of his religion, place of birth, descent or colour, had remained a
dead letter and nothing had been done to put the same into prac-
tice. It was also urged that the executive Government should
.
always include “some persons trained and experienced in public
offices of England who can bring to the consideration of public
affairs a more extended knowledge and wider view than are to be
expected from those European gentlemen who have passed all
their days from boyhood in the bad systems of this country and
know no other by which to compare and improve them. ”
It is true that the petitions submitted by the Bombay Associa-
tion did not have much effect immediately but they undoubtedly
created a lot of stir in London. The result was that an India Re-
form Society with John Bright as one of its associates, was set up
to put forward the point of view of the Indians.
During his visit to London, Dadabhai Nauroji addressed many
meetings of the newly formed East India Association. He was
able to convince the English people that the educated Indians
were not satisfied at all. He put a lot of emphasis on the exclu-
sion of Indians from the higher services. To quote him, “Either
the educated natives should have proper fields for their talents
and education open to them in the various departments in the
administration of the country, or the rulers must make up their
minds and candidly avow it, to rule the country with a rod of
iron. ” On his return to India in 1869, Dadabhai Nauroji dec-
lared that the goal of all patriotic Indians was the attainment of a
Parliament in India. He also urged the Indians to set up in Eng-
land an organisation to “fight the last and greatest battle of repre-
sentation. "
In 1868, Sisir Kumar Ghosh started the 'Amrita Bazar Patrika'.
Through the instrumentability of this newspaper and even other-
wise, he attacked all forms of governmental restrictions on civil
liberties and the economic exploitation of India by Great Britain.
He called upon the Government to solve the problem. of unem-
ployment among the educated classes. He demanded that "the
Indian Nation” be given a democratic, representative government,
## p. 726 (#766) ############################################
726
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
men
specifically a Parliament on the lines of the British Parliament.
In 1875, he founded the India League as a focal point for the dis-
trict bodies after failing to persuade the British Indian Associa-
tion to lower its annual subscription from Rs. 50. He fixed the
annual subscription of the India League at Rs. 5 which was well
within the means of the educated middle classes of Bengal. The
India League was the first political body in India which set up
links with political groups outside Bengal. Sisir Kumar Ghosh
went to Bombay to create unity between the political organisations
of the two Presidencies. While in Bombay, he found that Ganesh
Vasudeo Joshi had already founded in 1870 the Poona Sarva-
janik Sabha which counted among its members
like
Ranade, Gokhale and Tilak later on. The members of this Sabha
were elected by the caste groups and other interests. It is true
that the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha was a major centre of Western
Indian political activity for a few decades but it never assumed
an all-India role.
In 1876, the Indian Association was set up by Surendranath
Banerjea. It became the centie of an all-India movement based
on the conception of a united India derived from the inspiration
of Mazzini. It was an organisation of the educated middle classes
with a view to creating public opinion by direct appeals to the
people. In 1877, the maximum age limit for the Civil Service
Examination was lowered from 21 to 19. It was rightly consi-
dered to be a deliberate attempt to blast the prospects of Indian
candidates from the Indian Civil Service. The Indian Associa-
tion organised a national protest against this measure.
public meeting was
held at Calcutta. Surendranath Banerjea
also went on a tour of India and with the object of creating a
strong public opinion against the measure addressed meetings at
Agra, Lahore, Amritsar, Meerut, Ambala, Delhi, Kanpur, Luck-
now, Banaras and Aligarh. The object of those meetings has been
described by Banerjea in these words: “The agitation was the
means; the raising of the maximum
of the maximum limit of age for the open
competitive examination and the holding of simultaneous exami-
nations were among the ends; but the underlying conception and
the true aim and purpose of the Civil Service agitation was the
awakening of a spirit of unity and solidarity among the people
of India. ” The tour of Mr. Banerjee was a great success.
To
quote Sir Henry Cotton, “The idea of any Bengalee influence in
the Punjab would have been a conception incredible to
Lord
Lawrence. . . . Yet it is the case that during the past year the tour
of a Bengalee lecturer lecturing in English in Upper India, assumed
the character of a triumphal progress; and at the present moment
A big
## p. 727 (#767) ############################################
FOUNDATION OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 727
the name of Surendranath Banerjea excites as much enthusiasm
among the rising generation of Multan as in Dacca. ”
In 1883, an incident occurred in Calcutta which aroused indig-
nation amongst the orthodox Hindus everywhere. It was alleged
that a certain British High Court judge insisted on the produc-
tion in court of a stone idol for identification. That was contrary
to the prevailing practice and it was condemned by Surendranath
Banerjea who asked: “What are we to think of a judge who is
so ignorant of the feelings of the people and so disrespectful of
their most cherished convictions as to drag into court and then to
inspect, an object of worship which only Brahmans are allowed to
approach, after purifying themselves according to the forms of
their religion? ” Surendranath Banerjea was tried for contempt of
court and put in jail. That further added to excitement and re-
sentment. After his release, there was a large scale popular de-
monstration.
The Calcutta National Conferences of 1883 and 1885 and
the National Fund campaign showed a rapid advance towards an
all-India ideal. However, as the Bengalees dominated these orga-
nisations, they failed to appeal to the country as a whole. That
is the reason why by and by the Indian Association ard the Na-
tional Conference were ultimately eclipsed by the Indian National
Congress.
The initiative for the foundation of the Indian National Con-
gress came from Mr. A. O. Hume who was a retired British civi-
lian.
During his official career in India, Mr. Hume had formed
strong views in favour of an early attainment of self-government
by India. When he retired in 1882, he began to evolve a definite
scheme for creating a united public opinion in the country. On
March 1, 1883, he issued a circular letter to the graduates of the
Calcutta University in which the following passage occurs: “Con-
stituting as you do a large body of the most highly educated
Indians, you should, in the natural order of things, constitute also
the most important source of all mental, moral, social and poli-
tical progress in India. Whether in the individual or the nation,
all vital progress must spring from within and it is to you, her most
cultured, enlightened minds, her most favoured sons that your
country must look for initiative. In vain, many aliens like my-
self love India and her children, as well as the most loving of
these; in vain may they, for her and their good, give time and
trouble, money and thought; in vain may they struggle and sac-
rifice; they may assist with advice and suggestions; they may place
their experience, abilities and knowledge at the disposal of the
workers, but they lack the essential of nationality, and the real
## p. 728 (#768) ############################################
728
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
work must ever be done by the people of the country themselves. ”
He proposed that a beginning should be made with a body of 50
founders who were to act as a mustard seed of future growth. “If
only 50 men, good and true, can be found to join as founders, the
thing can be established and the future development would be
comparatively easy. "
He further added: “As I said before, you are the salt of the
land. And if amongst even you, the elite, fifty men cannot be
found with sufficient power of self-sacrifice, sufficient love for and
pride in their country, sufficient genuine and unselfish heartfelt
patriotism to take the initiative, and if needs be, devote the rest
of their lives to the Cause—then there is no hope for India. Her
sons must and will remain mere humble and helpless instruments
in the hands of foreign rulers, for 'they would be free, themselves
must strike the blow'. And if even the leaders of thought are
all either such poor creatures, or so selfishly wedded to personal
concerns, that they dare not or will not strike a blow for their
country's sake, then justly and rightly are they kept down and
trampled on, for they deserve nothing better. Every nation se-
cures precisely as good a government as it merits. If you, the
picked men, the most highly educated of the nation, cannot, scorn-
ing personal ease and selfish objects, make a resolute struggle to
secure greater freedom for yourselves and your country, a more
impartial administration, a larger share in the management of
your own affairs, then we your friends are wrong, and our adver-
saries right; then are Lord Ripon's noble aspirations for your good
fruitless and visionary; then, at present, at any rate, all hopes of
progress are at an end, and India truly neither lacks nor deserves
any better government than she now enjoys. Only, if this be so,
let us hear no more fractious, peevish complaints that you
kept in leading strings, and treated like children, for you will have
proved yourselves such. Men know how to act. Let there
no
more complaints of Englishmen being preferred to you in all im-
portant offices, for if you lack that public spirit, that highest form
of altruistic devotion that leads men to subordinate private ease
to the public weal, that true patriotism that has made Englishmen
what they are—then rightly are these preferred to you, and rightly
and inevitably have they become your rulers. And rulers and task-
masters they must continue, let the yoke gall your shoulders never
so sorely, until you realise and stand prepared to act upon the
eternal truth that, whether in the case of individuals or nations,
self-sacrifice and unselfishness are the only unfailing guides to
freedom and happiness. ”
The appeal did not fall on deaf ears. The required number
are
9
## p. 729 (#769) ############################################
MOTIVES OF HUME
729
as
of persons did come forward from all parts of India and the first
meeting of the Indian National Union which was subsequently
renamed Indian National Congress was arranged to be held at
Poona in December 1885. However, its venue had to be shifted
to Bombay. The original proposal was to request Lord Reay,
Governor of Bombay, to be the President of the first session of the
Indian National Congress. However, the idea was dropped
Lord Dufferin advised the Governor against the acceptance
of
the offer as the very idea of the head of the Executive Govern-
ment of a province associating himself with such a movement
was "absurd. " Mr. W. C. Bonnerjea, a leading barrister of
Calcutta and a very safe and loyal person, was elected the first Pre-
sident. A large number of delegates came from different parts
of the country and the most important among them were Phe-
rozeshah Mehta, Dadabhai Naoroji, K. T. Telang, Dinshaw
Wacha, etc. The meeting was truly a national gathering consist-
ing of leading men from all parts of India. In his presidential
address, Mr. Bonnerjea laid down the following as the objects
of the Congress :
1. “The promotion of
of personal intimacy and friendship
amongst all the more earnest workers in our country's cause in the
various parts of the Empire.
2. “The eradication by direct friendly personal intercourse of
all possible race, creed or provincial prejudices amongst all lov-
ers of the country, and the fuller development and consolida-
tion of those sentiments of national unity that took their origin
in our beloved Lord Ripon's ever memorable reign.
3. “The authoritative record of the matured opinions of the
educated classes in India on some of the more important and
pressing of the social questions of the day.
4. “The determination of the methods by which during the
next twelve months it is desirable for native politicians to labour
in public interest. ”
There has been a lot of controversy regarding the real motives
of Mr. Hume in founding the Indian National Congress. Mr.
W. C. Bonnerjea was the first to propound the thesis that the
Indian National Congress as an all India political organization
owed its origin to the scheming brain of Lord Dufferin. The
latter called for Mr. A. 0. Hume and convinced him that his
proposal to set up an all-India organisation to reform social evils
of Indian society was not going to achieve much and it was de-
sirable to set up an all-India political organisation which could
point out to the Government the defects of the administration
and also suggest how the same could be removed. The view of
## p. 730 (#770) ############################################
730
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
Dufferin was that the proposed organisation should do the same
work in India as was being done by His Majesty's Opposition
in England. Mr. Hume discussed this proposal with the Indian
politicians and they decided to work it out. The view of Mr.
Bonnerjea is supported by Mr. Wedderburn, the biographer of
Mr. Hume. This view was also supported by Lala Lajpatrai
in “Young India. ” The view of Lala Lajpatrai was that Dufferin
and Hume worked out the plan of an “innocuous and loyal"
political organisation to serve as a "safety valve” for the escape
of the mounting dangers that beset the British Empire. The
view of Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya in “History of the Indian Na-
tional Congress" is that Lord Dufferin and Mr. Hume worked in
unison and evolved a plan of a political organisation.
It is undoubtedly true that Mr. Hume had inherited liberal
tendencies and his sentimental heart leapt for the general good
of humanity. However, his liberalism was limited in so far as
India was concerned, to the provision of a clean and sympathetic
administration coupled with some sort of independent representa-
tion for the Indians in the Legislative Councils. He attacked the
oppressive, heartless and race-conscious bureaucracy in India.
He brought to the notice of Lord Dufferin cases of official exces-
ses against the people. Hume had great faith in the good sense
of Lord Dufferin and urged him from time to time to play the
hero and become the benefactor of India. In a letter dated 28
June, 1886, he urged Lord Dufferin “to act directly and ener-
getically on our behalf, leaving Lord Kimberley (Secretary of
State for India) and any one else to like it or lump it. You are
big enough to do-that is what cuts me to the heart. --that God
should, as it were, have brought the one man who could do it-
into the one position in which it can be done and yet you won't
act. ” Mr. Hume wanted Lord Dufferin to appoint a Commission
atonce to consider and report on a definite scheme for the introduc-
tion of a representative element into the legislative councils. He
exhorted Lord Dufferin in these words: “Your first duty is to the
people of India whom God has committed to your charge; ranks,
talents, reputation have been conferred on you by the Almighty to
enable you to perform that duty effectively, unfettered by official
traditions and party policy. ” However, Lord Dufferin was not
prepared to become a hero like Lord Ripon. As a matter of fact,
he was a critic of Ripon's policy, which, according to him, consist-
ed in “extensive speechyfying" and "Midlothianizing” of India.
Mr. Hume was a true well-wisher of British imperialism and
wanted it to continue in India. He was fully aware of the mount-
ing discontentment in the country. That was the reason why he
## p. 731 (#771) ############################################
SESSIONS OF THE CONGRESS
731
asked Lord Dufferin to grant political concessions before it was
too late. On 13 August, 1886, Mr. Hume wrote to Lord Dufferin:
“I only want you, Dear Lord Dufferin, to understand—to think
for yourself—you who have read and realised history-what all
this means—what it must come to, unless you and some one bestir
themselves to disinfect the insalubrious streams of the administration
by turning into them the purer element of independent indigenous
representation. . . . Perhaps you feel the whole thing as fully as my-
self, but you seem to me not to realise the danger--the absolute
necessity of opening early, before the great pressure comes on new
and greatly improved safety valves. ” Mr. Hume did not join the
Indian National Conference organised by Surendranath Banerjee as
the latter had very advanced political views. The organisation set up
by Mr. Hume consisted of moderate and loyal Indians alone. That is
the reason why the first offer was made to the Governor of Bombay
to become the President. Mr. W. C. Bonnerjea, who was actually
selected the first President, was the model of a loyal Indian and
he ridiculed all sorts of political agitation. It goes without saying
that Mr. Hume was loyal to the British Crown. As a matter of
fact, his association with the Indian National Congress was res-
ponsible for the loyalty of the Congress to the British Crown for a
long time. It is well known that at the Calcutta session of the
Congress, Dadabhai Naoroji praised the blessings of the British rule
in India and he was cheered by the members of the audience. Mr.
Hume moved a resolution for three cheers for Her Most Gracious
Majesty, the Queen Empress and a further resolution for the long
life of the Queen. Mr. Hume advised his colleagues in the Indian
National Congress to look upon Lord Dufferin not as an enemy
but as a friend and well-wisher. To quote him, “If in action a
neutral, Dufferin was at least a passive friend desirous of the wel-
fare of the people and enlargement of their liberties. ” This view
was not shared by his colleagues and that is why there were some-
times differences between them. The contention of his colleagues
was that Dufferin was not a true man and Mr. Hume behaved
towards him like a child. In spite of this, his colleagues advised
Mr. Hume to continue his friendly relations with Lord Dufferin
lest he should maliciously thwart their organisation. Lord Duffe-
rin also maintained an attitude of indifference towards the Indian
National Congress.
The second meeting of the Indian National Congress was held
in 1886 at Calcutta. Lord Dufferin invited the members of the
Congress as “distinguished visitors” to a garden party at the Gov-
ernment House. A similar welcome was given by the Governor
of Madras in 1887. However, a change took place in the attitude
## p. 732 (#772) ############################################
732
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
of the Government. After the Madras Session in 1887, an aggres-
sive propaganda was started among the masses. Hume published
a pamphlet entitled "An Old Man's Hope” in which he appealed
to the people of England in these words: “Ah Men! well fed and
happy! Do you at all realize the dull misery of these countless
myriads? From their births to their deaths, how many rays of sun-
shine think you chequer their ‘gloom-shrouded paths’? Toil, Toil,
Toil; hunger, hunger, hunger; sickness, suffering, sorrow; these
alas, alas, alas are the key-notes of their short and sad existence. '
Hume made arrangements in England for propaganda in the
press in favour of India. He was also able to enlist the support of
a few members of the British Parliament. In April 1888, he made
a vigorous speech at Allahabad in which he advocated propaganda
among the masses of India in the same way as the Anti-Corn Law
League had done in England. That was not liked by the British
bureaucracy in India and it was suggested that the Indian National
Congress be suppressed and Hume be deported to England. In
October 1888, Sir A. Colvin, Lieutenant-Governor of the North-
Western Provinces, addressed a letter to Hume covering 20 printed
pages and warned him of the consequences of his action. Hume's
reply covered 60 pages. On account of the attitude of bureau-
cracy, it became difficult to hold the session at Allahabad in Decem-
ber 1888, but Sir Luchmesher Singh, Maharajadhiraj of Dar-
bhanga, came to its rescue by purchasing the property known as
Lowther Castle where the session was held.
was held. Andrew Yule, a
European magnate of Calcutta, presided over the Allahabad Ses-
sion. The next session was held at Bombay in December 1889
under the presidentship of Sir William Wedderburn. It was at-
tended by Charles Bradlaugh, a member of the British Parliament.
Bradlaugh spoke in such a loud and clear voice that he was heard
not only in every corner of the pandal but also by the people out-
side. He declared: “For whom should I work if not for the people?
Born of the people, trusted by the people, I will die for the people. ”
Dadabhai Naoroji, a member of the British House of Commons,
was elected the President of the Lahore Session of the Congress held
in December, 1893. His travel from Bombay to Lahore presented
the spectacle of a procession. Citizens of the various places on the
way presented him addresses. At the Sikh Golden Temple of
Amritsar, he was given a robe of honour. Dadabhai brought the
following message from the Irish members of the British Parlia-
ment: “Don't forget to tell your colleagues at the Congress that
every one of the Ireland's Home Rule members in Parliament is at
your back in the cause of the Indian people. ” The next session
was held at Madras in 1894 under the presidentship of Alfred
## p. 733 (#773) ############################################
CALCUTTA SESSION OF THE CONGRESS
733
Webb, an Irish member of the British Parliament. The next ses-
sion at Poona was presided over by Surendra Nath Banerjee in 1895.
The President had such a memory that without looking at the
printed address, he was able to repeat orally, word for word, the
whole of his address for two hours. Gokhale presided over the
Banaras session in 1905.
The next session was held at Calcutta in 1906 under the Presi-
dentship of Dadabhai Naoroji. On that occasion, Dadabhai un-
furled the flag of Swaraj for India and the following four resolu-
tions on self-government, boycott movement, Swadeshi and national
education were passed by the Congress:
(1) Resolved that this Congress is of opinion that the system of
Government obtaining in the Self-Governing British Colonies should
be extended to India and that, as steps leading to it, it urges that
the following reforms should be immediately carried out:
(a) All examinations held in England only should be simul-
taneously held in India and in England, and that all
higher appointments which are made in India should be
by competitive examination only.
(b) The adequate representation of Indians in the Councils
of the Governors of Madras and Bombay.
(c) The expansion of the Supreme and Provincial Legislative
Councils, allowing a larger and truly effective representa-
tion of the people and a large control over the financial
and executive adminisiration of the country.
(d) The powers of local and municipal bodies should be ex-
tended and official control over them should not be more
than what is exercised by the Local Government Board in
England over similar bodies.
(2) Resolved that having regard to the fact that the people of
this country have little or no voice in its administration, and their
representations to the Government do not receive due consideration,
this Congress is of opinion that the boycott movement inaugurated
in Bengal by way of protest against the partition of that Province
was and is, legitimate.
(3) Resolved that this Congress accords its most cordial sup-
port to the Swadeshi movement and calls upon the people of the
country to labour for its success, by making earnest and sustained
efforts to promote the growth of indigenous industries, and to sti-
mulate the production of indigenous articles by giving them prefer-
ence over imported commodities, even at some sacrifice.
(4) Resolved that in the opinion of this Congress the time has
arrived for the people all over the country earnestly to take up the
question of national education for both boys and girls and organize
## p. 734 (#774) ############################################
734
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
a system of education, literary, scientific and technical, suited to
the requirements of the country on National lines and under
National control.
The next session was to be held at Nagpur but the venue was
shifted to Surat on account of the unfavourable atmosphere at
Nagpur. Tilak was opposed to the policy of the Congress at that
time. He did not want the Congress to go back on its resolution
of 1906 at the instance of the Moderates. On December 23, 1907,
he declared at Surat: “We have not come to cause a split in the
Congress; we did not want to hold a separate Congress; we want
to see that the Congress does not go back. We solemnly say that
we want to see the Congress moving with the times. But the people
who brought the Congress to Surat, although Nagpur was willing
to have it, are going to drag the Congress back. They have no
moral courage. They are against the word boycott though they
are for Swadeshi. When you profess to accept Swadeshi, you must
boycott Videshi (foreign) goods: without boycott Swadeshi can-
not flourish. The fight is between two principles: (1) earnest-
ly doing what is right, and (2) doing it but not displeasing the
Government. I belong to the party which is prepared to do
what it thinks right whether the Government is pleased or dis-
pleased. We are against the policy of mendicancy. Many young
gentlemen in Bengal have gladly suffered for this attitude. No
one has any authority to make the Congress recede from its ideal.
We do not come here to embarrass the Moderates; but we are
determined not to allow the Congress to retrograde. If they
are not prepared to brave the dangers, let them be quiet, but they
should not ask us to retrograde. We have come here to fight out
constitutionally; we will behave as gentlemen even if our oppo-
nents do not do so. Our opponents create rowdyism when they
fear defeat. We are fighting against foreign autocracy. Why
should we allow this home autocracy? The Congress is an organ-
isation of all people and the voice of the people should predomi-
The policy of the Moderates is destructive. I don't want
you to follow it; we want to progress. '
All attempts on the part of Tilak and his colleagues failed to
bring about a compromise between the Moderates and the Extrem-
ists before the open session of the Congress. Although the agenda
of the Congress session was not distributed among the delegates,
Tilak happened to get a copy of the draft of the proposed constitu-
tion as prepared by Gokhale. A perusal of the draft showed that
there was clearly a change in the objective of the Congress different
from the one declared at Calcutta in 1906. This was too much
for Tilak. He pointed out that the proposed constitution was a
nate.
## p. 735 (#775) ############################################
SURAT CONGRESS
735
>
direct attempt to tamper with the ideal of self-government on the
lines of self-governing colonies and to exclude the Extremists from
the Congress by making the acceptance of the new creed a condi-
tion precedent for Congress membership. He declared that if he
and his colleagues were assured that no sliding back of the Con-
gress would be attempted, opposition to the election of the Presi-
dent would be withdrawn. He agreed to a Joint Committee repre-
senting the points of view of the two sides to settle the question in
dispute. However, the Moderates were not willing to compromise.
They were determined to have things in their own way. The
reaction of the Extremists was: “The retrogression of the Congress
was a serious step not to be decided upon only by a bare accidental
majority of any party, either in the Subjects Committees or in the
whole Congress (as at present constituted) simply because its ses-
sion happens to be held in a particular place or province, in a
particular year; and the usual unanimous acceptance of the Presi-
dent would have, under such exceptional circumstances, greatly
weakened the point and force of the opposition.
When the Congress met on December 27, 1907, the atmosphere
was surcharged and there were all kinds of rumours.
The name
of Dr. Rash Behari Ghosh was proposed for the Presidentship. When
Surendra Nath Banerjee got up to second the proposition, attempts
were made to shout him down and pandemonium prevailed in the
Pandal. The meeting had to be adjourned. The next day, Dr.
Ghosh was elected the President, but when he got up to deliver his
presidential address, Tilak ascended the platform, stood in front of
the President and demanded that he be allowed to address the
audience. He refused to submit to the ruling of the chair that he
could not be allowed to address at that stage.
FACTORS HELPING NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS 719
sums
more than what was due to them. It is rightly pointed out that
the first 6,000 miles of railways cost more than £100 millions or
£16,000 a mile. To quote W. N. Massey, “Enormous
were lavished and the contractors had no motive for economy.
All the money came from the English capitalist and so long as
he was guaranteed 5 per cent on the revenues of India, it was
immaterial for him whether the funds he lent were thrown into
the Hooghly or converted into bricks or mortar. " L. H. Jenks
points out that the expenses which increased the public debt of
India were “the cost of the Mutiny, the price of the transfer of
Company's rights to the Crown, the expenses of simultaneous
wars in China and Abyssinia, every governmental item in London
that remotely related to India down to the fees of the char-wo-
man in the India Office and the expenses of ships that sailed but
did not participate in hostilities and the cost of the Indian regi-
ments for 6 months' training at home before they sailed. . . . The
Sultan of Turkey visited London in 1868 in state and his offi-
cial ball was arranged at the India Office and the Bill was charged
to India. A lunatic asylum in Ealing, gifts to members of a Zan-
zibar Mission, the Consular and diplomatic establishments of
Great Britain in China or in Persia, part of the permanent ex-
penses of the Mediterranean feet and the entire cost of a line
of telegraph from England to India had been charged to the
Indian treasury. ” (The Migration of British Capital, pp. 223-
24). The net result of all these factors was that there was great
misery in India. There was a lot of resentment and unrest.
There were frequent famines in the country. There were
many as 24 famines during the second half of the 19th century
and it is estimated that more than 28 millions died. The ex-
port of foodgrains from India to Great Britain during the years
of famine added to the bitterness among the people. No wonder,
Mr. Blunt, a British journalist touring India in 1882, observed
that when Lord Lytton left India, India was on the verge of a
revolution.
Before the outbreak of the Mutiny in 1857, there were many
Englishmen who honestly believed and worked for the good of
India. However, during the Mutiny days a lot of blood was shed
on both sides. The Europeans wreaked their vegeance on the
helpless and innocent Indians after the Mutiny. It was this po-
licy of oppression and repression which added to the discontent
of the country. The Indians were completely excluded from the
legislatures in the country and also from the key-posts in the ad-
ministration. Zacharias says: “The blight of distrust had be-
gun to fall upon England's relations with India; these people had
as
## p. 720 (#760) ############################################
720
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
common
mutinied once and committed dreadful atrocities-how could one
trust them not to plan further sedition? ” Another writer points
out that "the old sympathy with India changed to a feeling of
repugnance—the old spirit of content with life and work in
India, the old inclination to regard things in an Indian rather than
an English light, gave place to a reluctance to stay in India longer
than needs must, and a disposition to judge things by an empha-
tically English standard. " Garrat observes : "The English killed
their prisoners without trial and in a manner held by all Indians
to be the height of barbarity. They massacred thousands of the
civil population. General Neil gave orders to his lieutenants that
certain villages were marked out for destruction and all the men
inhabiting them were slaughtered and the indiscriminate burning
of their inhabitants occurred wherever our English armies mov-
ed. "
The English language played a very important part in the
growth of nationalism in the country. It acted as the lingua
franca of the intelligentsia of India. Without the
medium of the English language, it would have been out of the
question for the Madrasis, Bengalees and the Punjabis to sit at
one table and discuss the common problems facing the country.
The English language also made the Indians inheritors of a great
literature which was full of great ideas and ideals. Tagore says:
“We had come to know England through her glorious literature,
which had brought new inspiration into our young lives. The
English authors, whose books and poems we studied, were full of
love for humanity, justice, and freedom. This great literary tra-
dition had come down to us from the revolutionary period. We
felt its power in Wordsworth's sonnets about human liberty. We
glorified in it even in the immature production of Shelley writ-
ten in the enthusiasm of his youth when he declared against the
tyranny of priestcraft and preached the overthrow of all despot-
isms through the power of suffering bravely endured. All this
fired our youthful imaginations. We believed with all our simple
faith that even if we rebelled against foreign rule, we should
have the sympathy of the West. We felt that England was on
our side in wishing to gain our freedom” Sardar K. M. Panikkar
has pointed out in Asia and Western Dominance that the intro-
duction of the English language helped the cause of unity in
the country and without it India would have been split into as
many different units as there are languages in India and would
have repeated the pattern of Europe with its conglomeration of
mutually hostile units within the same Christian community (p.
332).
## p. 721 (#761) ############################################
ILBERT BILL CONTROVERSY
721
The ground was ready and the acts of omission and commis-
sion in the time of Lord Lytton accelerated the nationalist move-
ment. The period from 1876 to 1884 has been called the seed-
time of Indian nationalism. Lord Lytton held his famous Delhi
Durbar in 1877 at a time when the people of South India were
suffering terribly from the descruction brought about by famine.
They wondered at the callousness of Lytton. An appropriate
comment was made in these words : “Nero was fiddling while
Rome was burning. ” The second Afghan War cost the Indian
treasury a lot. No wonder, the Indians criticised Lytton merci-
lessly. In order to gag the Indian public opinion, Lytton passed
the notorious Vernacular Press Act in 1878. The discriminatory
provisions of this Act were universally condemned by the people
belonging to all walks of life. Sir Erskine Perry points out that
the Act was "a retrogarde and ill-conceived measure injurious to
the future progress of India. ” It was called the Gagging Act.
Lytton passed the Arms Act in 1878 which made an invidious
distinction between the Indians and the Europeans. While the
Europeans were allowed to keep arms freely, the Indians could not
do so without a licence. In the words of Surendra Nath Baner-
jee, the Arms Act “imposed upon was a badge of racial infer-
iority. ” Such a measure was derogatory to the self-respect of the
people of India. Lord Lytton removed the import duty on cot-
ton manufactures with a view to help the British manufacturers
and this was resented by the Indians. It is true that Lord Ripon
tried to remove some of the grievances of India, but before he
could do so, the Ilbert Bill controversy came to the fore.
The Ilbert Bill was a simple measure whose object was to put
the Indian judges on the same footing as the European judges in
dealing with all cases in Bengal Presidency. The necessity of this
bill arose as the Indians who had joined the judicial service were
rising in the ranks and that involved the possible trial of Euro-
peans by an Indian judge without a jury. This was considered
to be too much by the Europeans. A strong agitation was
brought into existence by the Europeans who were not prepared
to be tried by an Indian judge. Lord Ripon became the target
of the agitation. He was boycotted by the European community.
He was threatened to be kidnapped to England. Ultimately a
compromise was arrived at which suited the Europeans. How-
ever, this set a wrong precedent. The flag of racialism was hoist-
ed by the Europeans. The Indians realised that they could not
expect any justice or fairplay from the Englishmen when their
own interests were involved. Surendranath Banerjee observes:
“No self-respecting Indian could sit idle under the fierce light of
## p. 722 (#762) ############################################
722
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
that revelation. It was a call to high patriotic duty to those who
understood its significance. ” Before the effect of the Ilbert bill
controvery was over, the Indians had already organised themselves
into the Indian National Conference which was the forerunner of
the Indian National Congress founded in 1885.
Before dealing with the foundation and work of the Indian
National Congress, it seems desirable to refer to political organi-
zations before 1885. In 1837, the Bengal Zamindary Associa-
tion (later on known as the Bengal Landholders' Society) was set
up. Its main object was to resist encroachments on the rights of
the landlords on account of the policy of the Bengal Government
to give a certain measure of protection to the cultivators. About
the same time, a few English radicals started in London the Bri-
tish India Society. Its object was to create an interest in the
conditions of India and “to fix the eyes of the entire nation on
the extent. . . . and the claims of British India. ” George Thomp-
son, one of the prominent members of the British India Society,
came to Calcutta in 1842 and set up in 1843 the Bengal British
India Society. The object of the new Society was the gradual
advancement of the public welfare by peaceful means.
How-
ever, the members of the Society professed complete loyalty to the
British Crown. Out of the two, the Bengal Landlords' Society
and the Bengal British India Society, the former was more im-
portant than the latter. In 1851, these two societies were amal-
gamated into the British Indian Association. In spite of the fact
that Kristo Das Pal, the Secretary of the British India Association,
was a liberal, this Association was dominated by the landlords
and the progressive Bengalees had no place in it. Its subscrip-
tion was kept high and hence all could not join it.
On 26 August, 1852, the principal Hindus, Parsees, Moham-
medans, Portuguese and Jews of Bombay met to consider "the
desirableness of forming an association with a view to ascertaining
the wants of the people of this country and the measures calcu-
lated to advance their welfare and of representing the same to
the authorities in India or in England. ” On that occasion,
Dadabhai Naoroji observed: "Many ask what this Association
means to do when it is well known that under our present gov-
ernment we enjoy an amount of liberty and prosperity rarely
known to the inhabitants of india under any native sovereign.
In reply to this it is said we ought to demand redress for our grie-
vances. But what are those grievances ? They may be many
or none, yet nobody here is at this moment prepared to give a
decided reply; when we see that our Government is often ready to
assist us in everything calculated to benefit us, we had better, than
## p. 723 (#763) ############################################
THE BOMBAY ASSOCIATION
723
merely complain and grumble, point out in a becoming manner
what our real wants are. We are subject to the English govern-
ment, whose principal officers being drawn from England do not,
except after a long residence and experience, become fully ac-
quainted with our wants and customs. Though they may always
be anxious to do good to us, they are often led, by their imper-
fect acquaintance with the country, to adopt measures calculated
to do more harm than good, while we, on the other hand, have
no means of preventing such occurrences. The most we can do
is complain through the medium of the paper. In time all is hush-
ed up and the people carry with them the impression that Gov-
ernment has been unkind to them in not attending to their com-
plaint. We have, therefore, to consider what we ought to do to
secure our own good, and at the same time keep up a good un-
derstanding between us and Government. "
On the same occasion, the Chairman of the Bombay Associa-
tion, Mr. Juggonathjee Sunkersett stated : “Now as the British
Government acknowledge their
their duty to be to effect whatever
good they can for the benefit of this country, it is clear that their
object and our object are one and the same. We are not in op-
position to Government nor can Government be opposed to our
objects, if it be shown that the good of the country is what we
seek. The Government has the power to do much good and
we have many a proof that they have the will also. I need not
go far for these proofs. Witness this noble Institution which
they so generously support and in which so many, who are now
present, have received a most excellent education. . . . I might also
refer to the recent appointment of so many Natives to the highly
responsible situations of Deputy Collectors and Magistrates. The
Government are willing, I am sure, to do what good they can.
When they are correctly informed they will always be ready to
act to the advantage of the people over whom they rule; but they
are not in possession of full and correct information un all sub-
jects connected with the welfare of the people. Besides their offi-
cial sources of information Government will be glad to have other
channels of information on which they can rely. An Associa-
tion like the one now established will doubtless be listened to with
attention in respect to all matters which concern the wants and
wishes of the people, which of course natives have better means of
knowing than gentlemen whose time is engaged in the duties of
their official situations. "
Within a few months of the formation of the Bombay Associa-
tion, it submitted a petition to the British Parliament. Another
petition was submitted a year later. In these petitions, the
## p. 724 (#764) ############################################
724
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
>
Bombay Association criticised the existing machinery of the East
India Company in India and asked for a system which was “less
cumbersome, less exclusive, less secret, more directly responsible
and infinitely more efficient and more acceptable to the govern-
ed. ” The blessings of the British rule were recognised but those
were "attributed to the British character rather than to the plan
of Government. . . . which is but little suited to the present state
of India. ” The dual authority of the Court of Directors and the
Board of Control was described as an anachronism. The autho-
rity exercised by the Calcutta authorities over the Governments
of Bombay and Madras was criticised. The administration was
condemned as being unduly expensive. The attitude of the Eng-
lish officials was described as “despotic. ” It was contended
that "the European local officers scattered over the country at
great distances from one another, and having large districts to
attend to, far beyond their powers of supervision, and dependent
to a very great degree on their subordinates, are compelled to dis-
pose of the greater part of their business in a very imperfect man-
ner; and their statements to Government—whether emanating
from persons who it is known may be trusted or from those in
whose accuracy Government are aware no confidence can be plac-
ed—are on system accepted as equally trustworthy and the offi-
cial vindication of the acts of government founded thereon. The
necessary result of this system is that Government is one of first
impressions. " It was alleged that as the work of the Govern-
ment was done in secrecy, it tended "to engender and perpetuate
amongst the young servants of Government an illiberal and des-
potic tone; to give full scope to the prejudices, the ignorance, and
the self-sufficiency of all; to discourage progress; to discounten-
ance all schemes of improvement emanating from independent and
disinterested sources, and not within the views of the officers to
whose department they are referred; and to cramp all agriculture
or commercial energy-all individual enterprise. The Associa-
tion protested against the "exorbitant salaries of many highly
paid officers whose duties are so trifling or involve comparatively
so little labour or responsibility that they might with advantage
be amalgamated with other offices or remunerated in a manner
commensurate with the nature of the duties to be performed. "
The foreign character of the administration was criticised and it
was contended that “the time has arrived when the natives of
India are entitled to a much larger share than they have hitherto
had in the administration of the affairs of their country and that
the Councils of the Local Governments should, in matters of gen-
eral policy and legislation, be opened, so as to admit of respect-
## p. 725 (#765) ############################################
THE BOMBAY ASSOCIATION
725
able and intelligent natives taking a part in the discussion of mat-
ters of general interest to the country, as suggested by Lords
Ellenborough, Elphinstone and others. ' It was contended that
there was absolutely no substance in the contention that the In-
dians were not fit to hold positions of trust and responsibility. It
was pointed out that “the decisions of the native judges were in
every respects superior to those of the Europeans. It was also
pointed out that the declaration in the Charter Act of 1833 that
no native of India shall be disqualified from office by reason only
of his religion, place of birth, descent or colour, had remained a
dead letter and nothing had been done to put the same into prac-
tice. It was also urged that the executive Government should
.
always include “some persons trained and experienced in public
offices of England who can bring to the consideration of public
affairs a more extended knowledge and wider view than are to be
expected from those European gentlemen who have passed all
their days from boyhood in the bad systems of this country and
know no other by which to compare and improve them. ”
It is true that the petitions submitted by the Bombay Associa-
tion did not have much effect immediately but they undoubtedly
created a lot of stir in London. The result was that an India Re-
form Society with John Bright as one of its associates, was set up
to put forward the point of view of the Indians.
During his visit to London, Dadabhai Nauroji addressed many
meetings of the newly formed East India Association. He was
able to convince the English people that the educated Indians
were not satisfied at all. He put a lot of emphasis on the exclu-
sion of Indians from the higher services. To quote him, “Either
the educated natives should have proper fields for their talents
and education open to them in the various departments in the
administration of the country, or the rulers must make up their
minds and candidly avow it, to rule the country with a rod of
iron. ” On his return to India in 1869, Dadabhai Nauroji dec-
lared that the goal of all patriotic Indians was the attainment of a
Parliament in India. He also urged the Indians to set up in Eng-
land an organisation to “fight the last and greatest battle of repre-
sentation. "
In 1868, Sisir Kumar Ghosh started the 'Amrita Bazar Patrika'.
Through the instrumentability of this newspaper and even other-
wise, he attacked all forms of governmental restrictions on civil
liberties and the economic exploitation of India by Great Britain.
He called upon the Government to solve the problem. of unem-
ployment among the educated classes. He demanded that "the
Indian Nation” be given a democratic, representative government,
## p. 726 (#766) ############################################
726
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
men
specifically a Parliament on the lines of the British Parliament.
In 1875, he founded the India League as a focal point for the dis-
trict bodies after failing to persuade the British Indian Associa-
tion to lower its annual subscription from Rs. 50. He fixed the
annual subscription of the India League at Rs. 5 which was well
within the means of the educated middle classes of Bengal. The
India League was the first political body in India which set up
links with political groups outside Bengal. Sisir Kumar Ghosh
went to Bombay to create unity between the political organisations
of the two Presidencies. While in Bombay, he found that Ganesh
Vasudeo Joshi had already founded in 1870 the Poona Sarva-
janik Sabha which counted among its members
like
Ranade, Gokhale and Tilak later on. The members of this Sabha
were elected by the caste groups and other interests. It is true
that the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha was a major centre of Western
Indian political activity for a few decades but it never assumed
an all-India role.
In 1876, the Indian Association was set up by Surendranath
Banerjea. It became the centie of an all-India movement based
on the conception of a united India derived from the inspiration
of Mazzini. It was an organisation of the educated middle classes
with a view to creating public opinion by direct appeals to the
people. In 1877, the maximum age limit for the Civil Service
Examination was lowered from 21 to 19. It was rightly consi-
dered to be a deliberate attempt to blast the prospects of Indian
candidates from the Indian Civil Service. The Indian Associa-
tion organised a national protest against this measure.
public meeting was
held at Calcutta. Surendranath Banerjea
also went on a tour of India and with the object of creating a
strong public opinion against the measure addressed meetings at
Agra, Lahore, Amritsar, Meerut, Ambala, Delhi, Kanpur, Luck-
now, Banaras and Aligarh. The object of those meetings has been
described by Banerjea in these words: “The agitation was the
means; the raising of the maximum
of the maximum limit of age for the open
competitive examination and the holding of simultaneous exami-
nations were among the ends; but the underlying conception and
the true aim and purpose of the Civil Service agitation was the
awakening of a spirit of unity and solidarity among the people
of India. ” The tour of Mr. Banerjee was a great success.
To
quote Sir Henry Cotton, “The idea of any Bengalee influence in
the Punjab would have been a conception incredible to
Lord
Lawrence. . . . Yet it is the case that during the past year the tour
of a Bengalee lecturer lecturing in English in Upper India, assumed
the character of a triumphal progress; and at the present moment
A big
## p. 727 (#767) ############################################
FOUNDATION OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS 727
the name of Surendranath Banerjea excites as much enthusiasm
among the rising generation of Multan as in Dacca. ”
In 1883, an incident occurred in Calcutta which aroused indig-
nation amongst the orthodox Hindus everywhere. It was alleged
that a certain British High Court judge insisted on the produc-
tion in court of a stone idol for identification. That was contrary
to the prevailing practice and it was condemned by Surendranath
Banerjea who asked: “What are we to think of a judge who is
so ignorant of the feelings of the people and so disrespectful of
their most cherished convictions as to drag into court and then to
inspect, an object of worship which only Brahmans are allowed to
approach, after purifying themselves according to the forms of
their religion? ” Surendranath Banerjea was tried for contempt of
court and put in jail. That further added to excitement and re-
sentment. After his release, there was a large scale popular de-
monstration.
The Calcutta National Conferences of 1883 and 1885 and
the National Fund campaign showed a rapid advance towards an
all-India ideal. However, as the Bengalees dominated these orga-
nisations, they failed to appeal to the country as a whole. That
is the reason why by and by the Indian Association ard the Na-
tional Conference were ultimately eclipsed by the Indian National
Congress.
The initiative for the foundation of the Indian National Con-
gress came from Mr. A. O. Hume who was a retired British civi-
lian.
During his official career in India, Mr. Hume had formed
strong views in favour of an early attainment of self-government
by India. When he retired in 1882, he began to evolve a definite
scheme for creating a united public opinion in the country. On
March 1, 1883, he issued a circular letter to the graduates of the
Calcutta University in which the following passage occurs: “Con-
stituting as you do a large body of the most highly educated
Indians, you should, in the natural order of things, constitute also
the most important source of all mental, moral, social and poli-
tical progress in India. Whether in the individual or the nation,
all vital progress must spring from within and it is to you, her most
cultured, enlightened minds, her most favoured sons that your
country must look for initiative. In vain, many aliens like my-
self love India and her children, as well as the most loving of
these; in vain may they, for her and their good, give time and
trouble, money and thought; in vain may they struggle and sac-
rifice; they may assist with advice and suggestions; they may place
their experience, abilities and knowledge at the disposal of the
workers, but they lack the essential of nationality, and the real
## p. 728 (#768) ############################################
728
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
work must ever be done by the people of the country themselves. ”
He proposed that a beginning should be made with a body of 50
founders who were to act as a mustard seed of future growth. “If
only 50 men, good and true, can be found to join as founders, the
thing can be established and the future development would be
comparatively easy. "
He further added: “As I said before, you are the salt of the
land. And if amongst even you, the elite, fifty men cannot be
found with sufficient power of self-sacrifice, sufficient love for and
pride in their country, sufficient genuine and unselfish heartfelt
patriotism to take the initiative, and if needs be, devote the rest
of their lives to the Cause—then there is no hope for India. Her
sons must and will remain mere humble and helpless instruments
in the hands of foreign rulers, for 'they would be free, themselves
must strike the blow'. And if even the leaders of thought are
all either such poor creatures, or so selfishly wedded to personal
concerns, that they dare not or will not strike a blow for their
country's sake, then justly and rightly are they kept down and
trampled on, for they deserve nothing better. Every nation se-
cures precisely as good a government as it merits. If you, the
picked men, the most highly educated of the nation, cannot, scorn-
ing personal ease and selfish objects, make a resolute struggle to
secure greater freedom for yourselves and your country, a more
impartial administration, a larger share in the management of
your own affairs, then we your friends are wrong, and our adver-
saries right; then are Lord Ripon's noble aspirations for your good
fruitless and visionary; then, at present, at any rate, all hopes of
progress are at an end, and India truly neither lacks nor deserves
any better government than she now enjoys. Only, if this be so,
let us hear no more fractious, peevish complaints that you
kept in leading strings, and treated like children, for you will have
proved yourselves such. Men know how to act. Let there
no
more complaints of Englishmen being preferred to you in all im-
portant offices, for if you lack that public spirit, that highest form
of altruistic devotion that leads men to subordinate private ease
to the public weal, that true patriotism that has made Englishmen
what they are—then rightly are these preferred to you, and rightly
and inevitably have they become your rulers. And rulers and task-
masters they must continue, let the yoke gall your shoulders never
so sorely, until you realise and stand prepared to act upon the
eternal truth that, whether in the case of individuals or nations,
self-sacrifice and unselfishness are the only unfailing guides to
freedom and happiness. ”
The appeal did not fall on deaf ears. The required number
are
9
## p. 729 (#769) ############################################
MOTIVES OF HUME
729
as
of persons did come forward from all parts of India and the first
meeting of the Indian National Union which was subsequently
renamed Indian National Congress was arranged to be held at
Poona in December 1885. However, its venue had to be shifted
to Bombay. The original proposal was to request Lord Reay,
Governor of Bombay, to be the President of the first session of the
Indian National Congress. However, the idea was dropped
Lord Dufferin advised the Governor against the acceptance
of
the offer as the very idea of the head of the Executive Govern-
ment of a province associating himself with such a movement
was "absurd. " Mr. W. C. Bonnerjea, a leading barrister of
Calcutta and a very safe and loyal person, was elected the first Pre-
sident. A large number of delegates came from different parts
of the country and the most important among them were Phe-
rozeshah Mehta, Dadabhai Naoroji, K. T. Telang, Dinshaw
Wacha, etc. The meeting was truly a national gathering consist-
ing of leading men from all parts of India. In his presidential
address, Mr. Bonnerjea laid down the following as the objects
of the Congress :
1. “The promotion of
of personal intimacy and friendship
amongst all the more earnest workers in our country's cause in the
various parts of the Empire.
2. “The eradication by direct friendly personal intercourse of
all possible race, creed or provincial prejudices amongst all lov-
ers of the country, and the fuller development and consolida-
tion of those sentiments of national unity that took their origin
in our beloved Lord Ripon's ever memorable reign.
3. “The authoritative record of the matured opinions of the
educated classes in India on some of the more important and
pressing of the social questions of the day.
4. “The determination of the methods by which during the
next twelve months it is desirable for native politicians to labour
in public interest. ”
There has been a lot of controversy regarding the real motives
of Mr. Hume in founding the Indian National Congress. Mr.
W. C. Bonnerjea was the first to propound the thesis that the
Indian National Congress as an all India political organization
owed its origin to the scheming brain of Lord Dufferin. The
latter called for Mr. A. 0. Hume and convinced him that his
proposal to set up an all-India organisation to reform social evils
of Indian society was not going to achieve much and it was de-
sirable to set up an all-India political organisation which could
point out to the Government the defects of the administration
and also suggest how the same could be removed. The view of
## p. 730 (#770) ############################################
730
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
Dufferin was that the proposed organisation should do the same
work in India as was being done by His Majesty's Opposition
in England. Mr. Hume discussed this proposal with the Indian
politicians and they decided to work it out. The view of Mr.
Bonnerjea is supported by Mr. Wedderburn, the biographer of
Mr. Hume. This view was also supported by Lala Lajpatrai
in “Young India. ” The view of Lala Lajpatrai was that Dufferin
and Hume worked out the plan of an “innocuous and loyal"
political organisation to serve as a "safety valve” for the escape
of the mounting dangers that beset the British Empire. The
view of Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya in “History of the Indian Na-
tional Congress" is that Lord Dufferin and Mr. Hume worked in
unison and evolved a plan of a political organisation.
It is undoubtedly true that Mr. Hume had inherited liberal
tendencies and his sentimental heart leapt for the general good
of humanity. However, his liberalism was limited in so far as
India was concerned, to the provision of a clean and sympathetic
administration coupled with some sort of independent representa-
tion for the Indians in the Legislative Councils. He attacked the
oppressive, heartless and race-conscious bureaucracy in India.
He brought to the notice of Lord Dufferin cases of official exces-
ses against the people. Hume had great faith in the good sense
of Lord Dufferin and urged him from time to time to play the
hero and become the benefactor of India. In a letter dated 28
June, 1886, he urged Lord Dufferin “to act directly and ener-
getically on our behalf, leaving Lord Kimberley (Secretary of
State for India) and any one else to like it or lump it. You are
big enough to do-that is what cuts me to the heart. --that God
should, as it were, have brought the one man who could do it-
into the one position in which it can be done and yet you won't
act. ” Mr. Hume wanted Lord Dufferin to appoint a Commission
atonce to consider and report on a definite scheme for the introduc-
tion of a representative element into the legislative councils. He
exhorted Lord Dufferin in these words: “Your first duty is to the
people of India whom God has committed to your charge; ranks,
talents, reputation have been conferred on you by the Almighty to
enable you to perform that duty effectively, unfettered by official
traditions and party policy. ” However, Lord Dufferin was not
prepared to become a hero like Lord Ripon. As a matter of fact,
he was a critic of Ripon's policy, which, according to him, consist-
ed in “extensive speechyfying" and "Midlothianizing” of India.
Mr. Hume was a true well-wisher of British imperialism and
wanted it to continue in India. He was fully aware of the mount-
ing discontentment in the country. That was the reason why he
## p. 731 (#771) ############################################
SESSIONS OF THE CONGRESS
731
asked Lord Dufferin to grant political concessions before it was
too late. On 13 August, 1886, Mr. Hume wrote to Lord Dufferin:
“I only want you, Dear Lord Dufferin, to understand—to think
for yourself—you who have read and realised history-what all
this means—what it must come to, unless you and some one bestir
themselves to disinfect the insalubrious streams of the administration
by turning into them the purer element of independent indigenous
representation. . . . Perhaps you feel the whole thing as fully as my-
self, but you seem to me not to realise the danger--the absolute
necessity of opening early, before the great pressure comes on new
and greatly improved safety valves. ” Mr. Hume did not join the
Indian National Conference organised by Surendranath Banerjee as
the latter had very advanced political views. The organisation set up
by Mr. Hume consisted of moderate and loyal Indians alone. That is
the reason why the first offer was made to the Governor of Bombay
to become the President. Mr. W. C. Bonnerjea, who was actually
selected the first President, was the model of a loyal Indian and
he ridiculed all sorts of political agitation. It goes without saying
that Mr. Hume was loyal to the British Crown. As a matter of
fact, his association with the Indian National Congress was res-
ponsible for the loyalty of the Congress to the British Crown for a
long time. It is well known that at the Calcutta session of the
Congress, Dadabhai Naoroji praised the blessings of the British rule
in India and he was cheered by the members of the audience. Mr.
Hume moved a resolution for three cheers for Her Most Gracious
Majesty, the Queen Empress and a further resolution for the long
life of the Queen. Mr. Hume advised his colleagues in the Indian
National Congress to look upon Lord Dufferin not as an enemy
but as a friend and well-wisher. To quote him, “If in action a
neutral, Dufferin was at least a passive friend desirous of the wel-
fare of the people and enlargement of their liberties. ” This view
was not shared by his colleagues and that is why there were some-
times differences between them. The contention of his colleagues
was that Dufferin was not a true man and Mr. Hume behaved
towards him like a child. In spite of this, his colleagues advised
Mr. Hume to continue his friendly relations with Lord Dufferin
lest he should maliciously thwart their organisation. Lord Duffe-
rin also maintained an attitude of indifference towards the Indian
National Congress.
The second meeting of the Indian National Congress was held
in 1886 at Calcutta. Lord Dufferin invited the members of the
Congress as “distinguished visitors” to a garden party at the Gov-
ernment House. A similar welcome was given by the Governor
of Madras in 1887. However, a change took place in the attitude
## p. 732 (#772) ############################################
732
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
of the Government. After the Madras Session in 1887, an aggres-
sive propaganda was started among the masses. Hume published
a pamphlet entitled "An Old Man's Hope” in which he appealed
to the people of England in these words: “Ah Men! well fed and
happy! Do you at all realize the dull misery of these countless
myriads? From their births to their deaths, how many rays of sun-
shine think you chequer their ‘gloom-shrouded paths’? Toil, Toil,
Toil; hunger, hunger, hunger; sickness, suffering, sorrow; these
alas, alas, alas are the key-notes of their short and sad existence. '
Hume made arrangements in England for propaganda in the
press in favour of India. He was also able to enlist the support of
a few members of the British Parliament. In April 1888, he made
a vigorous speech at Allahabad in which he advocated propaganda
among the masses of India in the same way as the Anti-Corn Law
League had done in England. That was not liked by the British
bureaucracy in India and it was suggested that the Indian National
Congress be suppressed and Hume be deported to England. In
October 1888, Sir A. Colvin, Lieutenant-Governor of the North-
Western Provinces, addressed a letter to Hume covering 20 printed
pages and warned him of the consequences of his action. Hume's
reply covered 60 pages. On account of the attitude of bureau-
cracy, it became difficult to hold the session at Allahabad in Decem-
ber 1888, but Sir Luchmesher Singh, Maharajadhiraj of Dar-
bhanga, came to its rescue by purchasing the property known as
Lowther Castle where the session was held.
was held. Andrew Yule, a
European magnate of Calcutta, presided over the Allahabad Ses-
sion. The next session was held at Bombay in December 1889
under the presidentship of Sir William Wedderburn. It was at-
tended by Charles Bradlaugh, a member of the British Parliament.
Bradlaugh spoke in such a loud and clear voice that he was heard
not only in every corner of the pandal but also by the people out-
side. He declared: “For whom should I work if not for the people?
Born of the people, trusted by the people, I will die for the people. ”
Dadabhai Naoroji, a member of the British House of Commons,
was elected the President of the Lahore Session of the Congress held
in December, 1893. His travel from Bombay to Lahore presented
the spectacle of a procession. Citizens of the various places on the
way presented him addresses. At the Sikh Golden Temple of
Amritsar, he was given a robe of honour. Dadabhai brought the
following message from the Irish members of the British Parlia-
ment: “Don't forget to tell your colleagues at the Congress that
every one of the Ireland's Home Rule members in Parliament is at
your back in the cause of the Indian people. ” The next session
was held at Madras in 1894 under the presidentship of Alfred
## p. 733 (#773) ############################################
CALCUTTA SESSION OF THE CONGRESS
733
Webb, an Irish member of the British Parliament. The next ses-
sion at Poona was presided over by Surendra Nath Banerjee in 1895.
The President had such a memory that without looking at the
printed address, he was able to repeat orally, word for word, the
whole of his address for two hours. Gokhale presided over the
Banaras session in 1905.
The next session was held at Calcutta in 1906 under the Presi-
dentship of Dadabhai Naoroji. On that occasion, Dadabhai un-
furled the flag of Swaraj for India and the following four resolu-
tions on self-government, boycott movement, Swadeshi and national
education were passed by the Congress:
(1) Resolved that this Congress is of opinion that the system of
Government obtaining in the Self-Governing British Colonies should
be extended to India and that, as steps leading to it, it urges that
the following reforms should be immediately carried out:
(a) All examinations held in England only should be simul-
taneously held in India and in England, and that all
higher appointments which are made in India should be
by competitive examination only.
(b) The adequate representation of Indians in the Councils
of the Governors of Madras and Bombay.
(c) The expansion of the Supreme and Provincial Legislative
Councils, allowing a larger and truly effective representa-
tion of the people and a large control over the financial
and executive adminisiration of the country.
(d) The powers of local and municipal bodies should be ex-
tended and official control over them should not be more
than what is exercised by the Local Government Board in
England over similar bodies.
(2) Resolved that having regard to the fact that the people of
this country have little or no voice in its administration, and their
representations to the Government do not receive due consideration,
this Congress is of opinion that the boycott movement inaugurated
in Bengal by way of protest against the partition of that Province
was and is, legitimate.
(3) Resolved that this Congress accords its most cordial sup-
port to the Swadeshi movement and calls upon the people of the
country to labour for its success, by making earnest and sustained
efforts to promote the growth of indigenous industries, and to sti-
mulate the production of indigenous articles by giving them prefer-
ence over imported commodities, even at some sacrifice.
(4) Resolved that in the opinion of this Congress the time has
arrived for the people all over the country earnestly to take up the
question of national education for both boys and girls and organize
## p. 734 (#774) ############################################
734
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
a system of education, literary, scientific and technical, suited to
the requirements of the country on National lines and under
National control.
The next session was to be held at Nagpur but the venue was
shifted to Surat on account of the unfavourable atmosphere at
Nagpur. Tilak was opposed to the policy of the Congress at that
time. He did not want the Congress to go back on its resolution
of 1906 at the instance of the Moderates. On December 23, 1907,
he declared at Surat: “We have not come to cause a split in the
Congress; we did not want to hold a separate Congress; we want
to see that the Congress does not go back. We solemnly say that
we want to see the Congress moving with the times. But the people
who brought the Congress to Surat, although Nagpur was willing
to have it, are going to drag the Congress back. They have no
moral courage. They are against the word boycott though they
are for Swadeshi. When you profess to accept Swadeshi, you must
boycott Videshi (foreign) goods: without boycott Swadeshi can-
not flourish. The fight is between two principles: (1) earnest-
ly doing what is right, and (2) doing it but not displeasing the
Government. I belong to the party which is prepared to do
what it thinks right whether the Government is pleased or dis-
pleased. We are against the policy of mendicancy. Many young
gentlemen in Bengal have gladly suffered for this attitude. No
one has any authority to make the Congress recede from its ideal.
We do not come here to embarrass the Moderates; but we are
determined not to allow the Congress to retrograde. If they
are not prepared to brave the dangers, let them be quiet, but they
should not ask us to retrograde. We have come here to fight out
constitutionally; we will behave as gentlemen even if our oppo-
nents do not do so. Our opponents create rowdyism when they
fear defeat. We are fighting against foreign autocracy. Why
should we allow this home autocracy? The Congress is an organ-
isation of all people and the voice of the people should predomi-
The policy of the Moderates is destructive. I don't want
you to follow it; we want to progress. '
All attempts on the part of Tilak and his colleagues failed to
bring about a compromise between the Moderates and the Extrem-
ists before the open session of the Congress. Although the agenda
of the Congress session was not distributed among the delegates,
Tilak happened to get a copy of the draft of the proposed constitu-
tion as prepared by Gokhale. A perusal of the draft showed that
there was clearly a change in the objective of the Congress different
from the one declared at Calcutta in 1906. This was too much
for Tilak. He pointed out that the proposed constitution was a
nate.
## p. 735 (#775) ############################################
SURAT CONGRESS
735
>
direct attempt to tamper with the ideal of self-government on the
lines of self-governing colonies and to exclude the Extremists from
the Congress by making the acceptance of the new creed a condi-
tion precedent for Congress membership. He declared that if he
and his colleagues were assured that no sliding back of the Con-
gress would be attempted, opposition to the election of the Presi-
dent would be withdrawn. He agreed to a Joint Committee repre-
senting the points of view of the two sides to settle the question in
dispute. However, the Moderates were not willing to compromise.
They were determined to have things in their own way. The
reaction of the Extremists was: “The retrogression of the Congress
was a serious step not to be decided upon only by a bare accidental
majority of any party, either in the Subjects Committees or in the
whole Congress (as at present constituted) simply because its ses-
sion happens to be held in a particular place or province, in a
particular year; and the usual unanimous acceptance of the Presi-
dent would have, under such exceptional circumstances, greatly
weakened the point and force of the opposition.
When the Congress met on December 27, 1907, the atmosphere
was surcharged and there were all kinds of rumours.
The name
of Dr. Rash Behari Ghosh was proposed for the Presidentship. When
Surendra Nath Banerjee got up to second the proposition, attempts
were made to shout him down and pandemonium prevailed in the
Pandal. The meeting had to be adjourned. The next day, Dr.
Ghosh was elected the President, but when he got up to deliver his
presidential address, Tilak ascended the platform, stood in front of
the President and demanded that he be allowed to address the
audience. He refused to submit to the ruling of the chair that he
could not be allowed to address at that stage.
