It was felt that if a European nation could
be defeated by an Asiatic power, it was also possible for the Indians
to drive away the Englishmen from their country.
be defeated by an Asiatic power, it was also possible for the Indians
to drive away the Englishmen from their country.
Cambridge History of India - v4 - Indian Empire
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dent would be withdrawn.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. While this tussle was
going on, the rank and file of the Extremists created trouble and
there were clashes. All efforts to persuade Tilak failed. He stood
with folded arms and refused to go to his seat unless he was bodily
removed. Some persons from Nagpur and Poona rushed to the
platform with Lathies in their hands. A shoe was hurled from the
audience and it struck Pherozeshah Mehta. Pandemonium pre-
vailed. Chairs were thrown at the dais and sticks were freely used.
The session had to be suspended.
On December 28, 1907, a convention of the Moderates was held
in the Congress Pandal from which the Extremists were excluded,
although some of them were ready and willing to sign the necessary
declaration. Those who did not wish to go back from 'he position
taken at the Calcutta Congress met at a separate place to consider
what steps were to be taken to continue the work of the Congress.
It was in this way that the Surat session of the Congress ended.
## p. 736 (#776) ############################################
736
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
After the Surat fiasco, it was clear that the Moderates were not
prepared to yield to the Extremists. They knew that once the
plant of extremism was planted, it was bound to grow. They were
not prepared for any compromise. Tilak was ridiculed, abused
and called a traitor. The Moderate press wrote such things as the
following: "Tilak has been feeding the flames which have burnt the
Congress to ashes. He is not a patriot, but a traitor to the country,
and has blackened himself. May God save us from such patriots.
In spite of the attacks from the Moderates, Tilak was prepared to
accommodate them. He wrote thus in the Kesari: “It is a mistake
to suppose that a difference of opinion as to ultimate ideals should
prevent Indians from cooperating with one another, for gaining a
common end. We see that Radicals, Socialists, Democrats and
others, though labouring for widely different ideals, are able to
cooperate with one another in Parliament for advancing the interests
of their country as a whole. With this example before our eyes,
does it not betake a lack of liberality to insist that the representa-
tives of a certain school of Indian politicians should alone be admit-
ted to the National Congress. The duty that lies before our
politicians is not to seek to eradicate all differences of opinion but
to secure the cooperation of men holding divergent views for the
accomplishment of common ends. Whatever our difference may
be about the ideals, we Moderates and Extremists should unite in
carrying on the work of the National Congress. The rise of a new
Party necessarily produces friction with the old but it is the duty
of the wise men not to make much of this friction but to carry on
national work in cooperation with the new Party. ”
In 1908, a change was made in the constitution of the Indian
National Congress. Under the new constitution, delegates to the
Congress were to be elected only by the Congress Committees and
Associations affiliated to the Congress and not by other bodies or
public meetings. The result was that the Extremists were exclud-
ed from the Congress and Tilak and his followers remained outside
till 1915 when a compromise was brought about.
RISE OF EXTREMISM
Many factors were responsible for the rise of extremism in the
Congress. The Indian Councils Act, 1892 did not satisfy the as-
pirations of even the Moderates. It was contended that the policy
of appeals and prayers had brought forth no result. The Govern,
ment of India considered that policy as a sign of weakness. To
quote Tilak, “Political rights will have to be fought for. The
Moderates think that these can be won by persuasion. We think
## p. 737 (#777) ############################################
RISE OF EXTREMISM
737
that they can only be obtained by strong pressure. ” The constant
economic drain on the resources of the country due to foreign
domination added to the discontentment in the country. The writ-
ings of men like Dinshaw Wacha, R. C. Dutt and Dadabhai
Naoroji proved that the impoverishment of the people of India was
largely due to the deliberate policy of the British Government. The
policy of the Government of India sacrificed the industries of India
in the interests of British manufacturers. There seemed to be no
prospects for Indian industries.
Another cause was the discontent created by the outbreak of
famine in 1897. If affected about 20 million people and 70,000
square miles of Indian territory. The attitude of the Government
of India was rather unhappy. While the people were in the grip
of famine, the Government was busy in celebrating the Jubilee
Celebrations of Queen Victoria. The money which was required
for the relief of the people was being wasted on needless celebra-
tions. This was interpreted as an attitude of callousness on the
part of the Government.
The outbreak of the Bubonic Plague in Bombay Presidency also
added to the discontentment among the people. It is true that the
Government of India adopted certain measures to check the spread
of the disease but the methods adopted by it were unfortunate. No
consideration was shown for the sentiments of the people. Mr.
Rand, the Plague Commissioner of Poona, was most ruthless in
his operations. To quote Ram Gopal, “Rand moved with a regu-
lar army of coolies and Policemen at his heels, pulled down infest-
ed dwellings, had the inmates forcibly removed to segregation
camps. At many places beddings and clothes were burnt with the
object of destroying plague germs. This would have been tolerat-
ed had the denuded people been provided germ-free clothes but
this was not done. Similarly, essential articles of life were des-
troyed, leaving the owners thereof weeping and destitute. Rand
entered any part of the house, even the kitchen or the room where
the family idols were kept. Locks were freely picked to see if any
plague cases were concealed in the closed houses. Armed Indian
Police and European soldiers, with revolvers in their hands, rushed
into the women's apartments. From the unlocked houses, house-
hold effects were sometimes removed, never to be returned. Huts
were burnt down. Some soldiers employed in such parties broke
open the cash boxes and safes of shopkeepers. Others believed that
sewing machines could not in any way be disinfected and must be
burnt. Another party thought it necessary to burn glass chande-
liers, which they found in a house where a case had occurred. The
whole proceedings resembled the sacking of a conquered town by
## p. 738 (#778) ############################################
738
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
the enemy. ” (Lokmanya Tilak, p. 137). Such a state of affairs
could not be tolerated by the people and no wonder the plague
policy of the Government was attacked vigorously by the critics of
the Government, particularly Tilak. The resentment was so great
that Mr. Rand and one of his associates were shot dead when they
were returning from the Government House from Bombay after
taking part in the Jubilee Celebrations of Queen Victoria.
Another cause was the revival of Hinduism. Swami Viveka-
nanda attended in 1893 the Parliament of Religions at Chicago
and explained to his audience the greatness of Hindu religion. The
Swami had faith in the spiritual mission of India and it was felt
that the same was not possible without the independence of the
country. Aurobindo Ghosh declared: “Independence is the goal
of life and Hinduism alone will fulfil this aspiration of ours. ” Tilak
was also the product of Hindu revival and, no wonder, he put great
emphasis on the Hindu festivals and the consolidation of the Hindus
for the emancipation of India. The Theosophical Society also
made its contribution in this direction. Sir Valentine Chirol says:
“The advent of the Theosophists headed by Madame Blavatski,
Col. Olkott and Mrs. Besant gave a fresh impetus to the revival
and certainly no Hindu has so much organised and consolidated
the movement as Mrs. Besant, who in her Central Hindu College
at Banaras and her Theosophical Institution at Adyar near Madras
has openly proclaimed the superiority of the whole Hindu system
to the vaunted civilisation of the West. Is it surprising that the
Hindus should turn their heads back upon our civilisation when
a European of highly intellectual power and with an extraordinary
gift of eloquence, comes and tells them that it is they who possess
and have from all times possessed the key to supreme wisdom, that
their gods, their philosophy, their morality, are on a higher plane
of thought than the West has ever reached? "
The exclusion of the intelligentsia of India from all the big jobs
in the country created bitterness. The anti-Indian policy of Lord
Curzon added to the discontentment. The view of Lord Curzon
was that “the highest ranks of civil employment must, as a general
rule, be held by Englishmen. ” He emphasised that it was only the
Englishmen who by their birth and training were fit to rule India,
and not the Indians. According to him, Providence had selected
the Englishmen to rule over India and to give freedom to India
was against the will of God. Such a theory of divine right to rule
could not be palatable to the Indians who were learning to demand
the right to govern themselves. Lord Curzon was a bureaucrat par
excellence and he put the greatest emphasis on efficiency. He had
no sympathy with the aspirations of the people of India. As a
## p. 739 (#779) ############################################
PARTITION OF BENGAL
739
matter of fact, he ignored them altogether. He acted unmindful
of the reactions of the people. He regarded the administration as
a machine and acted only in the interests of the efficiency of the
machine, although the people were adversely affected by the
machine. His reign was full of “missions, omissions and commis-
sions. ” In 1899, he passed the famous Calcutta Corporation Act
which completely officialised the Calcutta Corporation. The total
number of the members of the Calcutta Corporation was reduced
from 75 to 50. The 25 members who were eliminated were those
persons who were the representatives of the people of Calcutta.
The result of this measure was that there was a European majority
in the Corporation. No wonder, the measure was vehemently con-
demned. In 1904 was passed the Indian Universities Act. This
law reduced the size of the Syridicates, Senates and Faculties with
a view to giving prominence to the Europeans. The result of this
law was that the Indian Universities became the most officialised
universities in the world. They were practically left with no auto-
nomy. In 1904 was also passed the famous Official Secrets Act.
The definition of the term "sedition" was widened. The Official
Secrets Acts of 1889 and 1898 related to the disclosure of only mili-
tary secrets. The Act of 1904 covered also the official secrets relat-
ing to the civil affairs and newspaper criticism which were likely
to bring the government into suspicion or contempt.
On 16 October 1905, Lord Curzon partitioned Bengal into two
parts. His real object was to create a Muslim majority province
although he put forward the plea of administrative convenience.
While the Muslims and the Englishmen in India welcomed the
partition, all the nationalist elements in the country opposed it.
Lord Curzon personally went on a tour of Bengal and even address-
ed public meetings with a view to convert the people to accept the
formula of partition. Although he was not convinced of the logic
of opposition, he was satisfied as to the intensity of hatred against
partition. It is rightly pointed out that he came back from his
tour a sadder if not a wiser man.
The partition of Bengal aroused a very strong spirit of resistance.
Under the guidance of leaders like S. N. Banerjee, B. C. Pal, A. K.
Datta and Aurovindo Ghosh, the agitation against partition spread
like wild fire all over Bengal and even outside. Even a moderate
like Gokhale observed thus in 1905: “The tremendous upheaval
of popular feeling which has taken place in Bengal in consequence
of the partition will constitute a landmark in the history of our
national progress. . . . . . A wave of true national consciousness has
swept over the province. . . . . . Bengals heroic stand against the
oppression of a harsh and uncontrolled bureaucracy has astonished
## p. 740 (#780) ############################################
740
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
and gratified all India and her sufferings have not been endured in
vain, when they have helped to draw closer all parts of the coun-
try in sympathy and aspiration. ”
The people of Bengal openly defied the Government and adopt-
ed all kinds of measures to put pressure upon the Government to
cancel the partition. Some of those measures were the boycott of
British goods, the use of Swadeshi goods and the spread of National
Education. In its session held in 1906, the Indian National Con-
gress also approved of these measures. Even a resolution was pass-
ed in 1906 that the goal of the Indian National Congress was the
establishment in India of “the system of Government obtaining
in the self-governing British colonies” or Swaraj. The agitation
was carried on with all the vehemence. The partition was inter-
preted by the intelligentsia of Bengal as a subtle attack upon the
growing solidarity of Bengali nationalism. It is rightly said that
the idea of the severance of the oldest and most populous and
wealthy portion of the province and the division of its people into
two arbitrary sections gave profound shock to the Bengali race.
The partition agitation proved that the people would not put up
with injustice and would not take rest until the wrong was undone.
The people learned the lesson of self-reliance. The Swadeshi move-
ment was to do miracles in the long run. To quote A. K. Datta,
“I verily believe that the Swadeshi movement will ultimately usher
in the day when the Indians will be recognised as a nation. . .
the barometer of national feeling, I trust, prognosticates fair
weather in future and the dispersion of clouds of ages by an out-
burst of self-reliant patriotism. "
The agitation was so much persistent that ultimately it was
cancelled in 1911. This action of the Government was welcomed
by all the nationalists in the country. To quote Raja Peary Mohan
Mukerjee, 'The boon which has been conferred upon the people
of Bengal by the reunion of our divided province and by its eleva-
tion to the status of a Presidency Government has stirred the hearts
of our people and has filled them with the deepest of gratitude. ”
Babu Ambica Charan Mazumdar observed: "What repressive laws,
proscriptions, prosecutions and deportations have failed to achieve
in six years, the kindly touch of the royal prerogative has accom-
plished in one minute. ” The view of Mrs. Annie Besant was: “In
closing the gulf between the two Bengals, the monarch has closed
a gulf that yawned between two races and Lord Hardinge has won
for himself a fame which will endure. " The observation of Sir
Mancherjee Bhownaggree was: "The modification of tne partition
scheme is certainly a wise act of statesmanship, and will go far to
assuage the irritation caused by a policy whose object was believed
## p. 741 (#781) ############################################
METHODS OF EXTREMISTS
741
by many to be the creation of disunion among the population of
Bengal. ” It goes without saying that the event of partition of
Bengal is a landmark in the nationalist movement in the country.
It released forces which helped the cause of national consciousness.
The treatment of the Indians in British colonies was another
source of discontentment. Particularly in South Africa, the Indians
were regarded as pariahs. Meaningless restrictions were imposed
on their movements. They could not walk on footpaths, or travel
in first class railway carriages, or travel without passes or go out
after 9 p. m. It was felt tha: the humiliating treatment of the
Indians was due to the slavery of India and the only way to end
that tyranny was the independence of India. Certain international
events also had their repercussions on India. In the Russ-Japanese
War of 1904-5, Japan defeated Russia. This was interpreted as
a symbol of the rise of the East. The Indians could take inspira-
tion from that event.
It was felt that if a European nation could
be defeated by an Asiatic power, it was also possible for the Indians
to drive away the Englishmen from their country. A similar infer-
ence was drawn from the defeat of Italy by Abyssinia in the battle
of Adowa in 1896.
The methods of extremists were boycott, Swadeshi and national
education. Boycott was directed primarily against the foreign
goods but it also included the boycott of Government services,
honours and titles. Both boycott and Swadeshi movements had
great success. The Englishman of Calcutta wrote thus: “It is
absolutely true that Calcutta warehouses are full of fabrics that
cannot be sold. Many Marwari firms have been absolutely ruined,
and a number of the biggest European houses have had either to
close down their piece-goods branch, or to put up with a very
small business. In boycott, the enemies of Raj have found a most
effective weapon for injuring British interests in the country. ”
About the methods of the extremists, Lala Lajpat Rai wrote thus:
"We desire to turn our faces away from the Government Houses
and turn them to the huts of the people. We want to stop our
mouth so far as an appeal to the Government is concerned and
open our mouth with a new appeal to the masses of our people.
This is the psychology, this is the ethics, this is the spiritual signi-
ficance of the boycott movement. ” The same writer declared thus:
“An Englishman hates or dislikes nothing like beggary. I think a
beggar deserves to be hated. Therefore, it is our duty to English-
man that we are no longer beggars. ” The same view was expressed
"
by Tilak in these words: “Our motto is self-reliance and not mendi-
Desai points out that “Extremist leaders revive the
memory of the Vedic past of the Hindus, the great phase of the
cancy. ”
## p. 742 (#782) ############################################
742
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
reigns of Asoka and Chandragupta, the heroic deeds of Rana Pratap
and Shivaji, the epic patriotism of Laxmi Bai, the queen of Jhansi
and leaders of 1857. ” The worship of Durga, Kali, Bhawani and
other Hindu gods and goddesses was revived and it was believed
that they alone could give inspiration that was necessary for the
emancipation of the country.
B. C. Pal spoke of so organising the forces of the nation as to
"compel the submission to our will of any power that may set itself
against us. ” Again, “If the Government were to come and tell me
today, 'Take Swaraj', I would say "Thank you' for the gift but I
will not have that which I cannot acquire by my own hands. ” Re-
garding the boycott movement, B. C. Pal addressed his audiences
in these words: “You may get a High Court judgeship here, a
membership of the Legislative Council there, possibly an executive
membership of the Council. Do you want a larger number of
Indians in the Civil Service? The whole Civil Service might be
Indian; but the Civil Servants have to carry out orders. The sup-
planting of Europeans by Indian agencies will not make for self-
government in this country. They say, 'Can you boycott all the
Government offices? ' Who ever said we want? What we can do is
this. We can make the Government impossible without entirely
making it impossible for them to find people to serve them. The
administration may be made impossible in a variety of ways.
In his whirlwind tour of the country, Tilak declared that the
Moderates could not deliver the goods and the people should look
up to the Extremists for the liberation of their country. The repeti-
tion of resolutions full of prayers to the Government could not
bring any results. The remedy was not petitions but bcycott. To
quote him, “We are not armed and there is no necessity for arms
either. We have a strong weapon, a political weapon in boycott.
.
The whole of this administration which is carried on by a handful
of Englishmen is carried on with our assistance. We are in sub-
ordinate service. We are clerks and willing instruments of our
own oppression in the hands of an alien Government and the Gov-
ernment is ruling over us not by its innate strength but by keeping
us in ignorance and blindness to the perception of this fact. Every
Englishman knows that they are a mere handful in this country
and it is the business of every one of them to fool you into believing
that you are weak and they are strong. What the New Party
wants you to do is to realise the fact that your future rests entirely
in your hands. "
After the Surat session, Tilak had no rest. Singlehanded, he
started a many-sided struggle and spread the fire of patriotism in
every nook and corner of the Bombay Presidency. He went on
## p. 743 (#783) ############################################
TILAK
743
tours and collected a lot of money for the various national causes.
He asked his audiences to work for Swaraj and get ready for suffer-
ings which alone could bring Swaraj. In one of his meetings, he
declared: “We are at present clamouring for Swaraj and therefore
the Shivaji festival is the most fitting one for us to celebrate. If
Shivaji was able to establish Swarajya two centuries ago, we too
may expect to achieve it some day. Swarajya belongs to us by
birthright. The Moderates can be compared to Shivaji's father
Shahji who always used to advise his son not to take up arms
against the mighty Mohammedan monarchs of the Deccan. But
Shivaji, who can be compared to the Extremists of the present day,
gave a new turn to events. We are masters of our fortunes and
can govern them if we only make up our minds to do so. Swarajya
is not far off from us. It will come to us the moment we learn to
stand on our legs. ” His slogan at the meetings was: “Swarajya is
my birthright; I will have it. ” As was to be expected, the Govern-
ment of India regarded the growth of Extremism with apprehension
and danger. No stone was left unturned to suppress the advocates
of Extremism. They were arrested and imprisoned. Sections
124-A and 153-A were added to the Indian Penal Code to deal with
the situation. By another law, the authorities were authorised to
ban political organisations suspected of subversive tendencies and
to conduct the summary trials of the political offenders. Two laws
were passed in 1908 and 1910 to crush the Indian press. In 1907,
Lord Minto promulgated the Regulation of Meetings Ordinance
which curtailed the right of the people to hold public meetings.
Between the passing of the Indian Councils Act of 1999 and the
starting of the Home Rule Movement by Tilak and Mrs. Annie
Besant, there was not much of bitterness between the Congress on
the one hand and the Government of India on the other. There
were many factors responsible for this change. The Extremists
were out of the political field and the Moderates were incharge of
the Congress. Lord Hardinge followed a sympathetic policy to-
wards the Congress. He expressed his feelings of sympathy for
the national aspirations of the people of India. He wept with
them in the matter of the treatinent of the Indians in Scuth Africa.
It was during his regime that the partition of Bengal was cancelled.
The result was that the Congress adopted a policy of conciliation.
With regard to the visit of George V to India and the holding of
the Delhi Durbar in 1911, Shri Ambika Charan Mazumdar dec-
lared: "Every heart is beating in unison with reverence and devo-
tion to the British Crown, overflowing with revived confidence in
and gratitude towards British statesmanship. Some of us never
faltered—not even in the darkest days of our trials and tribula-
## p. 744 (#784) ############################################
744
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
tions—in our hope, in our conviction and in our faith in the ulti-
mate triumph and vindication of British justice. ” We are told
that when the Governor of Madras visited the Pandal of the Con-
gress, the whole House cheered the Governor and a resolution was
passed expressing the loyalty of the Congress to the British throne.
In his speech delivered at Poona in July 1909, Gokhale asked for
loyal cooperation with the British Government in India for two
reasons: "One that, considering the difficulties of the position,
Britain had done very well in India; the other that there was no
alternative to British rule and could be none for a long time. . . .
They could proceed in two directions: first, towards an obliteration
of distinctions, on the ground of race, between individual Indians
and individual Englishmen and secondly, by way of advanced to-
wards the form of government enjoyed in other parts of the
Empire. The latter is an ideal for which the Indian people have
to qualify themselves, for the whole question turns on character
and capacity and they must realise that their main difficulty lies
with themselves. ” In October of the same year, he addressed
the students at Bombay in these words : "The active participa-
tion of students in political agitation really tends t. ) lower the
dignity and the responsible character of public life and impair its
true effectiveness. ” Tilak was out of Indian politics from 1908
to 1914 on account of his long imprisonment in the Mandlay jail
in Burma. During his absence, the politics of the country was
dull. The Moderates were happy that their opponent was in jail.
However, things changed after the release of Tilak in 1914. Tilak
was not in a mood to precipitate matters. He was willing to have
a compromise with the Moderates. It is true that when
Gokhale started negotiations with Tilak for a compromise, Pheroze-
shah Mehta disapproved of them and the result was that the ne-
gotiations broke down. Pherozeshah Mehta decided to have the
next session of the Congress at Bombay so that he may be able to
maintain his hold over the Congress. Sir Satyendra Sinha who
later on became Lord Sinha, was selected as the President of the
Bombay session but unfortunately Pherozeshah Mehta died a few
weeks before the Congress session. Gokhale also died. On
account of their old age, Dinshaw Wacha and Chondravarkar
were not active. S. N. Banerjee was not in tune with the new
surroundings. Madan Mohan Malaviya was not in a position
to lead the Congress on the Moderate lines.
The speech of Sir Satyendra Sinha, the Congress President at
the Bombay session in 1915, came as a shock to the progressive
elements in India. He is said to have observed thus: “Even if
the English nation were willing to make us an immediate free
## p. 745 (#785) ############################################
HOME RULE MOVEMENT
745
gift of full self-government, I take leave to doubt whether the
boon would be worth having as such, for it is a commonplace of
politics that nations like individuals must grow into Freedom
and nothing is so baneful in political institutions as prematurity;
nor must we forget that India free can never be ancient India res-
tored. ” The right of the Extremists to enter the Congress was
admitted at the Bombay session of the Congress and the constitu-
tion of the Congress was suitably amended. Although Tilak
was not present at the Bombay session, enough of heat was created
by the Home Rule Proposals of Mrs. Annie Besant. Her speeches
and writings in 1915 had given a rude shock to the Mode-
rates. The Bombay session was the announcement of the ascen-
dancy of the politicians of the Extremist School and the decline
of the influence of the Moderates. The citadel of the Moderates
was successfully attacked. The adoption of the resolution
self-government was interpreted as having converted the Con-
gress into an Extremist league. The ground was prepared for
Tilak and his colleagues.
on
HOME RULE MOVEMENT
:
Mrs. . Annie Besant and Tilak started the Home Rule Move-
ment in 1916. There was Jothing original or revolutionary
about this movement. Annie Besant was not the enemy of the
British Empire. She merely wanted to awaken the people of
India out of their slumber. She declared : "I am an Indian
Tom Tom, waking up all the sleepers so that they make wake
and work for their motherland. ” Her plan was “to disentangle
the nationalist Extremists from the compromising alliance with
the revolutionaries, to reconcile them to a position with the
Empire and to bring them with the Moderates into line in the
united Congress. ” She herself wrote thus : "In political reform,
we aim at the building up of complete self-government from vil-
lage councils, through District and Municipal Boards and Pro-
vincial Legislative Assemblies to a National Parliament, equal in
its powers to the Legislative bodies of the Self-Governing Colo-
nies, by whatever name they may be called, also at the direct
representation of India to the Imperial Parliament when that
body shall contain representatives of the self-Governing States of
the Empire. ”
Mrs. Annie Besant made it clear that home rule was the birth-
right of the people of India and they were not prepared to take
it as a reward for their services for the British Empire and their
loyalty to the British Crown. She wrote thus: “India does not
## p. 746 (#786) ############################################
746
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
chaffer with the blood of her sons and the proud tears of her
daughters in exchange for so much liberty, so much right. India
claims the right, as a Nation, to justice among the peoples of
the Empire. India asked for this before the War, India asked
for it during the War; India will ask for it after the War, but not
as reward but as a right does she ask for it. "
The Home Rule Movement reached its high watermark in
1917. It was in that year that the Government of India took
strong action against the leaders of the movement. Mrs. Annie
Besant was interned. There was a lot of agitation for her re-
lease. Tilak threatened to start passive resistance. The atmos-
phere of the country was surcharged with enthusiasm. It was at
this time that the Secretary of State for India made in August,
1917 his historic declaration which promised responsible govern-
ment to the people by stages. By slow degrees, the Home Rule
Movement died out. Mrs. Annie Besant was elected the Presi-
dent of the Congress in 1917. The Secretary of State for India
visited this country in 1917. He went on tours of the country
and met the representatives of the people. The joint Report
was published in 1918 and the Government of India Act was
passed in 1919.
TERRORIST AND REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS
Terrorism was one of the phases of militant nationalism al-
though it differed radically from the political Extremists repre-
sented by Tilak. The revolutionaries did not believe in the me-
thods of appeal, persuasion and peaceful struggle. They were
convinced that without violence it was impossible to uproot an
imperialism imposed and maintained by brute force. The re-
actionary and repressive policy of the British Government exas-
perated them. They believed in violent action with a view to de-
moralise the administration and its Indian collaborators. They
had no scruples to resort to armed raids and dacoities to help their
movement.
The earliest storm centre of revolutionary nationalism was
Maharashtra and the name of Vasudeo Balwant Phadake stands
foremost in that connection. Shri Vasudeo was born in 1845.
He was profoundly influenced by the ideas of Ranade. He was bitter
against Englishmen who were drawing fat salaries as the expense
of the starving Indians. When famine broke out in Poona in 1876,
the Government, instead of organising relief work, levied heavier
taxes from the people. Vasudeo resigned his government job and
undertook a tour of Maharashtra. He went from place to place
## p. 747 (#787) ############################################
TERRORIST AND REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS 747
to organise the people against the Government. He started col-
lecting arms and ammunition to turn out the English from the
country and for that purpose he had no hestitation in plundering
the money-lenders. For some time, he created a reign of terror in
the seven districts of Maharashtra. The Government announced
a reward for his arrest and he was captured by Major Daniel on
July 20, 1879. He was put up for trial, convicted and sentenced
to life imprisonment. His conviction was upheld by the High
Court and he was sent to Aden Jail. In October 1880, he made
an attempt to escape but he was pursued and caught after 17
miles of pursuit. He died in February 1883. He made the fol-
lowing statement at the time of his conviction by the Sessions
Court: “The Indian people are today standing on the threshold of
death. The British bureaucracy and the Government machinery
has so ground down the common masses that have been already
harassed by famines and food scarcities. We, the sons of Bharat,
. , ,
are made the object of intense hatred and contempt. Wherever
you cast your glance, you witness only such sights, hear such
words, as no Hindu or Muslim whose necks have been straight so
long with self-respect can do anything but bend his head in shame.
Death would have been more honourable for us all than this dis-
graceful slavery. Had I but succeeded in my design, I would
have accomplished a great task. It was my ambition to establish
a Republic of free India. I have always preached in my lectures
that our bliss lies in killing the British people. I told my audience
a number of times that if they did not help me in this task, then
the British rulers will destroy them root and branch. Oh citizens
of India! Why should I not suffer like the great sage Dadheechi?
If by my sacrifice and told surrender, I can help your resurrection
from slavery, why should I not make effort? Accept this my last
bow. "
Damodar Chapekar was another hero of the same type.
Although he was essentially a soldier, he took up the profession of
Kirtan as the Brahmins were not eligible for recruitment in the
army. He began to hate British administration in India. On
one occasion, he observed thus: "Mere recalling the mighty deeds
of Shivaji will not deliver the goods. If we want freedom, we
shall have to plunge in action like our idols—Shivaji and Baji Rao.
My young frends! The time has come to sharpen our swords in
order to behead the enemies. Let us take a pledge to fight till
the last breath and die bravely but not without tainting the earth
red with English blood. Be not idle; be not a lifeless burden
on the country. Be up and doing; be a hero in the strife. Is it
not shameful that we call our country Hindustan (the land of
## p. 748 (#788) ############################################
748
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
the Hindus) but let it be ruled over by the Englishmen? ” When
Mr. Rand the Plague Commissioner of Poona and Mr. Ayerst
were coming back from the Government House, they were shot
dead by Damodar Chapekar. The result was that he and a few
others were hanged by the Government.
It appears that Mr. Shyamji Krishna Varma was connected
with the murder of Rand but he managed to escape to London.
He was a Sanskrit scholar and he had been the Dewan of Udai-
pur and Junagarh States. He delivered a few lectures at the
Oxford University and he impressed every one by his learning. He
took to business and earned a lot of money. He started a monthly
journal entitled “The Indian Sociologist. ” With the help of Rana,
six lecturerships of Rs. 1,000 each and three travelling scholar-
ships for Rs. 2,000 each were offered to Indian students to go
abroad for training themselves as national missionaries.
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. While this tussle was
going on, the rank and file of the Extremists created trouble and
there were clashes. All efforts to persuade Tilak failed. He stood
with folded arms and refused to go to his seat unless he was bodily
removed. Some persons from Nagpur and Poona rushed to the
platform with Lathies in their hands. A shoe was hurled from the
audience and it struck Pherozeshah Mehta. Pandemonium pre-
vailed. Chairs were thrown at the dais and sticks were freely used.
The session had to be suspended.
On December 28, 1907, a convention of the Moderates was held
in the Congress Pandal from which the Extremists were excluded,
although some of them were ready and willing to sign the necessary
declaration. Those who did not wish to go back from 'he position
taken at the Calcutta Congress met at a separate place to consider
what steps were to be taken to continue the work of the Congress.
It was in this way that the Surat session of the Congress ended.
## p. 736 (#776) ############################################
736
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
After the Surat fiasco, it was clear that the Moderates were not
prepared to yield to the Extremists. They knew that once the
plant of extremism was planted, it was bound to grow. They were
not prepared for any compromise. Tilak was ridiculed, abused
and called a traitor. The Moderate press wrote such things as the
following: "Tilak has been feeding the flames which have burnt the
Congress to ashes. He is not a patriot, but a traitor to the country,
and has blackened himself. May God save us from such patriots.
In spite of the attacks from the Moderates, Tilak was prepared to
accommodate them. He wrote thus in the Kesari: “It is a mistake
to suppose that a difference of opinion as to ultimate ideals should
prevent Indians from cooperating with one another, for gaining a
common end. We see that Radicals, Socialists, Democrats and
others, though labouring for widely different ideals, are able to
cooperate with one another in Parliament for advancing the interests
of their country as a whole. With this example before our eyes,
does it not betake a lack of liberality to insist that the representa-
tives of a certain school of Indian politicians should alone be admit-
ted to the National Congress. The duty that lies before our
politicians is not to seek to eradicate all differences of opinion but
to secure the cooperation of men holding divergent views for the
accomplishment of common ends. Whatever our difference may
be about the ideals, we Moderates and Extremists should unite in
carrying on the work of the National Congress. The rise of a new
Party necessarily produces friction with the old but it is the duty
of the wise men not to make much of this friction but to carry on
national work in cooperation with the new Party. ”
In 1908, a change was made in the constitution of the Indian
National Congress. Under the new constitution, delegates to the
Congress were to be elected only by the Congress Committees and
Associations affiliated to the Congress and not by other bodies or
public meetings. The result was that the Extremists were exclud-
ed from the Congress and Tilak and his followers remained outside
till 1915 when a compromise was brought about.
RISE OF EXTREMISM
Many factors were responsible for the rise of extremism in the
Congress. The Indian Councils Act, 1892 did not satisfy the as-
pirations of even the Moderates. It was contended that the policy
of appeals and prayers had brought forth no result. The Govern,
ment of India considered that policy as a sign of weakness. To
quote Tilak, “Political rights will have to be fought for. The
Moderates think that these can be won by persuasion. We think
## p. 737 (#777) ############################################
RISE OF EXTREMISM
737
that they can only be obtained by strong pressure. ” The constant
economic drain on the resources of the country due to foreign
domination added to the discontentment in the country. The writ-
ings of men like Dinshaw Wacha, R. C. Dutt and Dadabhai
Naoroji proved that the impoverishment of the people of India was
largely due to the deliberate policy of the British Government. The
policy of the Government of India sacrificed the industries of India
in the interests of British manufacturers. There seemed to be no
prospects for Indian industries.
Another cause was the discontent created by the outbreak of
famine in 1897. If affected about 20 million people and 70,000
square miles of Indian territory. The attitude of the Government
of India was rather unhappy. While the people were in the grip
of famine, the Government was busy in celebrating the Jubilee
Celebrations of Queen Victoria. The money which was required
for the relief of the people was being wasted on needless celebra-
tions. This was interpreted as an attitude of callousness on the
part of the Government.
The outbreak of the Bubonic Plague in Bombay Presidency also
added to the discontentment among the people. It is true that the
Government of India adopted certain measures to check the spread
of the disease but the methods adopted by it were unfortunate. No
consideration was shown for the sentiments of the people. Mr.
Rand, the Plague Commissioner of Poona, was most ruthless in
his operations. To quote Ram Gopal, “Rand moved with a regu-
lar army of coolies and Policemen at his heels, pulled down infest-
ed dwellings, had the inmates forcibly removed to segregation
camps. At many places beddings and clothes were burnt with the
object of destroying plague germs. This would have been tolerat-
ed had the denuded people been provided germ-free clothes but
this was not done. Similarly, essential articles of life were des-
troyed, leaving the owners thereof weeping and destitute. Rand
entered any part of the house, even the kitchen or the room where
the family idols were kept. Locks were freely picked to see if any
plague cases were concealed in the closed houses. Armed Indian
Police and European soldiers, with revolvers in their hands, rushed
into the women's apartments. From the unlocked houses, house-
hold effects were sometimes removed, never to be returned. Huts
were burnt down. Some soldiers employed in such parties broke
open the cash boxes and safes of shopkeepers. Others believed that
sewing machines could not in any way be disinfected and must be
burnt. Another party thought it necessary to burn glass chande-
liers, which they found in a house where a case had occurred. The
whole proceedings resembled the sacking of a conquered town by
## p. 738 (#778) ############################################
738
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
the enemy. ” (Lokmanya Tilak, p. 137). Such a state of affairs
could not be tolerated by the people and no wonder the plague
policy of the Government was attacked vigorously by the critics of
the Government, particularly Tilak. The resentment was so great
that Mr. Rand and one of his associates were shot dead when they
were returning from the Government House from Bombay after
taking part in the Jubilee Celebrations of Queen Victoria.
Another cause was the revival of Hinduism. Swami Viveka-
nanda attended in 1893 the Parliament of Religions at Chicago
and explained to his audience the greatness of Hindu religion. The
Swami had faith in the spiritual mission of India and it was felt
that the same was not possible without the independence of the
country. Aurobindo Ghosh declared: “Independence is the goal
of life and Hinduism alone will fulfil this aspiration of ours. ” Tilak
was also the product of Hindu revival and, no wonder, he put great
emphasis on the Hindu festivals and the consolidation of the Hindus
for the emancipation of India. The Theosophical Society also
made its contribution in this direction. Sir Valentine Chirol says:
“The advent of the Theosophists headed by Madame Blavatski,
Col. Olkott and Mrs. Besant gave a fresh impetus to the revival
and certainly no Hindu has so much organised and consolidated
the movement as Mrs. Besant, who in her Central Hindu College
at Banaras and her Theosophical Institution at Adyar near Madras
has openly proclaimed the superiority of the whole Hindu system
to the vaunted civilisation of the West. Is it surprising that the
Hindus should turn their heads back upon our civilisation when
a European of highly intellectual power and with an extraordinary
gift of eloquence, comes and tells them that it is they who possess
and have from all times possessed the key to supreme wisdom, that
their gods, their philosophy, their morality, are on a higher plane
of thought than the West has ever reached? "
The exclusion of the intelligentsia of India from all the big jobs
in the country created bitterness. The anti-Indian policy of Lord
Curzon added to the discontentment. The view of Lord Curzon
was that “the highest ranks of civil employment must, as a general
rule, be held by Englishmen. ” He emphasised that it was only the
Englishmen who by their birth and training were fit to rule India,
and not the Indians. According to him, Providence had selected
the Englishmen to rule over India and to give freedom to India
was against the will of God. Such a theory of divine right to rule
could not be palatable to the Indians who were learning to demand
the right to govern themselves. Lord Curzon was a bureaucrat par
excellence and he put the greatest emphasis on efficiency. He had
no sympathy with the aspirations of the people of India. As a
## p. 739 (#779) ############################################
PARTITION OF BENGAL
739
matter of fact, he ignored them altogether. He acted unmindful
of the reactions of the people. He regarded the administration as
a machine and acted only in the interests of the efficiency of the
machine, although the people were adversely affected by the
machine. His reign was full of “missions, omissions and commis-
sions. ” In 1899, he passed the famous Calcutta Corporation Act
which completely officialised the Calcutta Corporation. The total
number of the members of the Calcutta Corporation was reduced
from 75 to 50. The 25 members who were eliminated were those
persons who were the representatives of the people of Calcutta.
The result of this measure was that there was a European majority
in the Corporation. No wonder, the measure was vehemently con-
demned. In 1904 was passed the Indian Universities Act. This
law reduced the size of the Syridicates, Senates and Faculties with
a view to giving prominence to the Europeans. The result of this
law was that the Indian Universities became the most officialised
universities in the world. They were practically left with no auto-
nomy. In 1904 was also passed the famous Official Secrets Act.
The definition of the term "sedition" was widened. The Official
Secrets Acts of 1889 and 1898 related to the disclosure of only mili-
tary secrets. The Act of 1904 covered also the official secrets relat-
ing to the civil affairs and newspaper criticism which were likely
to bring the government into suspicion or contempt.
On 16 October 1905, Lord Curzon partitioned Bengal into two
parts. His real object was to create a Muslim majority province
although he put forward the plea of administrative convenience.
While the Muslims and the Englishmen in India welcomed the
partition, all the nationalist elements in the country opposed it.
Lord Curzon personally went on a tour of Bengal and even address-
ed public meetings with a view to convert the people to accept the
formula of partition. Although he was not convinced of the logic
of opposition, he was satisfied as to the intensity of hatred against
partition. It is rightly pointed out that he came back from his
tour a sadder if not a wiser man.
The partition of Bengal aroused a very strong spirit of resistance.
Under the guidance of leaders like S. N. Banerjee, B. C. Pal, A. K.
Datta and Aurovindo Ghosh, the agitation against partition spread
like wild fire all over Bengal and even outside. Even a moderate
like Gokhale observed thus in 1905: “The tremendous upheaval
of popular feeling which has taken place in Bengal in consequence
of the partition will constitute a landmark in the history of our
national progress. . . . . . A wave of true national consciousness has
swept over the province. . . . . . Bengals heroic stand against the
oppression of a harsh and uncontrolled bureaucracy has astonished
## p. 740 (#780) ############################################
740
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
and gratified all India and her sufferings have not been endured in
vain, when they have helped to draw closer all parts of the coun-
try in sympathy and aspiration. ”
The people of Bengal openly defied the Government and adopt-
ed all kinds of measures to put pressure upon the Government to
cancel the partition. Some of those measures were the boycott of
British goods, the use of Swadeshi goods and the spread of National
Education. In its session held in 1906, the Indian National Con-
gress also approved of these measures. Even a resolution was pass-
ed in 1906 that the goal of the Indian National Congress was the
establishment in India of “the system of Government obtaining
in the self-governing British colonies” or Swaraj. The agitation
was carried on with all the vehemence. The partition was inter-
preted by the intelligentsia of Bengal as a subtle attack upon the
growing solidarity of Bengali nationalism. It is rightly said that
the idea of the severance of the oldest and most populous and
wealthy portion of the province and the division of its people into
two arbitrary sections gave profound shock to the Bengali race.
The partition agitation proved that the people would not put up
with injustice and would not take rest until the wrong was undone.
The people learned the lesson of self-reliance. The Swadeshi move-
ment was to do miracles in the long run. To quote A. K. Datta,
“I verily believe that the Swadeshi movement will ultimately usher
in the day when the Indians will be recognised as a nation. . .
the barometer of national feeling, I trust, prognosticates fair
weather in future and the dispersion of clouds of ages by an out-
burst of self-reliant patriotism. "
The agitation was so much persistent that ultimately it was
cancelled in 1911. This action of the Government was welcomed
by all the nationalists in the country. To quote Raja Peary Mohan
Mukerjee, 'The boon which has been conferred upon the people
of Bengal by the reunion of our divided province and by its eleva-
tion to the status of a Presidency Government has stirred the hearts
of our people and has filled them with the deepest of gratitude. ”
Babu Ambica Charan Mazumdar observed: "What repressive laws,
proscriptions, prosecutions and deportations have failed to achieve
in six years, the kindly touch of the royal prerogative has accom-
plished in one minute. ” The view of Mrs. Annie Besant was: “In
closing the gulf between the two Bengals, the monarch has closed
a gulf that yawned between two races and Lord Hardinge has won
for himself a fame which will endure. " The observation of Sir
Mancherjee Bhownaggree was: "The modification of tne partition
scheme is certainly a wise act of statesmanship, and will go far to
assuage the irritation caused by a policy whose object was believed
## p. 741 (#781) ############################################
METHODS OF EXTREMISTS
741
by many to be the creation of disunion among the population of
Bengal. ” It goes without saying that the event of partition of
Bengal is a landmark in the nationalist movement in the country.
It released forces which helped the cause of national consciousness.
The treatment of the Indians in British colonies was another
source of discontentment. Particularly in South Africa, the Indians
were regarded as pariahs. Meaningless restrictions were imposed
on their movements. They could not walk on footpaths, or travel
in first class railway carriages, or travel without passes or go out
after 9 p. m. It was felt tha: the humiliating treatment of the
Indians was due to the slavery of India and the only way to end
that tyranny was the independence of India. Certain international
events also had their repercussions on India. In the Russ-Japanese
War of 1904-5, Japan defeated Russia. This was interpreted as
a symbol of the rise of the East. The Indians could take inspira-
tion from that event.
It was felt that if a European nation could
be defeated by an Asiatic power, it was also possible for the Indians
to drive away the Englishmen from their country. A similar infer-
ence was drawn from the defeat of Italy by Abyssinia in the battle
of Adowa in 1896.
The methods of extremists were boycott, Swadeshi and national
education. Boycott was directed primarily against the foreign
goods but it also included the boycott of Government services,
honours and titles. Both boycott and Swadeshi movements had
great success. The Englishman of Calcutta wrote thus: “It is
absolutely true that Calcutta warehouses are full of fabrics that
cannot be sold. Many Marwari firms have been absolutely ruined,
and a number of the biggest European houses have had either to
close down their piece-goods branch, or to put up with a very
small business. In boycott, the enemies of Raj have found a most
effective weapon for injuring British interests in the country. ”
About the methods of the extremists, Lala Lajpat Rai wrote thus:
"We desire to turn our faces away from the Government Houses
and turn them to the huts of the people. We want to stop our
mouth so far as an appeal to the Government is concerned and
open our mouth with a new appeal to the masses of our people.
This is the psychology, this is the ethics, this is the spiritual signi-
ficance of the boycott movement. ” The same writer declared thus:
“An Englishman hates or dislikes nothing like beggary. I think a
beggar deserves to be hated. Therefore, it is our duty to English-
man that we are no longer beggars. ” The same view was expressed
"
by Tilak in these words: “Our motto is self-reliance and not mendi-
Desai points out that “Extremist leaders revive the
memory of the Vedic past of the Hindus, the great phase of the
cancy. ”
## p. 742 (#782) ############################################
742
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
reigns of Asoka and Chandragupta, the heroic deeds of Rana Pratap
and Shivaji, the epic patriotism of Laxmi Bai, the queen of Jhansi
and leaders of 1857. ” The worship of Durga, Kali, Bhawani and
other Hindu gods and goddesses was revived and it was believed
that they alone could give inspiration that was necessary for the
emancipation of the country.
B. C. Pal spoke of so organising the forces of the nation as to
"compel the submission to our will of any power that may set itself
against us. ” Again, “If the Government were to come and tell me
today, 'Take Swaraj', I would say "Thank you' for the gift but I
will not have that which I cannot acquire by my own hands. ” Re-
garding the boycott movement, B. C. Pal addressed his audiences
in these words: “You may get a High Court judgeship here, a
membership of the Legislative Council there, possibly an executive
membership of the Council. Do you want a larger number of
Indians in the Civil Service? The whole Civil Service might be
Indian; but the Civil Servants have to carry out orders. The sup-
planting of Europeans by Indian agencies will not make for self-
government in this country. They say, 'Can you boycott all the
Government offices? ' Who ever said we want? What we can do is
this. We can make the Government impossible without entirely
making it impossible for them to find people to serve them. The
administration may be made impossible in a variety of ways.
In his whirlwind tour of the country, Tilak declared that the
Moderates could not deliver the goods and the people should look
up to the Extremists for the liberation of their country. The repeti-
tion of resolutions full of prayers to the Government could not
bring any results. The remedy was not petitions but bcycott. To
quote him, “We are not armed and there is no necessity for arms
either. We have a strong weapon, a political weapon in boycott.
.
The whole of this administration which is carried on by a handful
of Englishmen is carried on with our assistance. We are in sub-
ordinate service. We are clerks and willing instruments of our
own oppression in the hands of an alien Government and the Gov-
ernment is ruling over us not by its innate strength but by keeping
us in ignorance and blindness to the perception of this fact. Every
Englishman knows that they are a mere handful in this country
and it is the business of every one of them to fool you into believing
that you are weak and they are strong. What the New Party
wants you to do is to realise the fact that your future rests entirely
in your hands. "
After the Surat session, Tilak had no rest. Singlehanded, he
started a many-sided struggle and spread the fire of patriotism in
every nook and corner of the Bombay Presidency. He went on
## p. 743 (#783) ############################################
TILAK
743
tours and collected a lot of money for the various national causes.
He asked his audiences to work for Swaraj and get ready for suffer-
ings which alone could bring Swaraj. In one of his meetings, he
declared: “We are at present clamouring for Swaraj and therefore
the Shivaji festival is the most fitting one for us to celebrate. If
Shivaji was able to establish Swarajya two centuries ago, we too
may expect to achieve it some day. Swarajya belongs to us by
birthright. The Moderates can be compared to Shivaji's father
Shahji who always used to advise his son not to take up arms
against the mighty Mohammedan monarchs of the Deccan. But
Shivaji, who can be compared to the Extremists of the present day,
gave a new turn to events. We are masters of our fortunes and
can govern them if we only make up our minds to do so. Swarajya
is not far off from us. It will come to us the moment we learn to
stand on our legs. ” His slogan at the meetings was: “Swarajya is
my birthright; I will have it. ” As was to be expected, the Govern-
ment of India regarded the growth of Extremism with apprehension
and danger. No stone was left unturned to suppress the advocates
of Extremism. They were arrested and imprisoned. Sections
124-A and 153-A were added to the Indian Penal Code to deal with
the situation. By another law, the authorities were authorised to
ban political organisations suspected of subversive tendencies and
to conduct the summary trials of the political offenders. Two laws
were passed in 1908 and 1910 to crush the Indian press. In 1907,
Lord Minto promulgated the Regulation of Meetings Ordinance
which curtailed the right of the people to hold public meetings.
Between the passing of the Indian Councils Act of 1999 and the
starting of the Home Rule Movement by Tilak and Mrs. Annie
Besant, there was not much of bitterness between the Congress on
the one hand and the Government of India on the other. There
were many factors responsible for this change. The Extremists
were out of the political field and the Moderates were incharge of
the Congress. Lord Hardinge followed a sympathetic policy to-
wards the Congress. He expressed his feelings of sympathy for
the national aspirations of the people of India. He wept with
them in the matter of the treatinent of the Indians in Scuth Africa.
It was during his regime that the partition of Bengal was cancelled.
The result was that the Congress adopted a policy of conciliation.
With regard to the visit of George V to India and the holding of
the Delhi Durbar in 1911, Shri Ambika Charan Mazumdar dec-
lared: "Every heart is beating in unison with reverence and devo-
tion to the British Crown, overflowing with revived confidence in
and gratitude towards British statesmanship. Some of us never
faltered—not even in the darkest days of our trials and tribula-
## p. 744 (#784) ############################################
744
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
tions—in our hope, in our conviction and in our faith in the ulti-
mate triumph and vindication of British justice. ” We are told
that when the Governor of Madras visited the Pandal of the Con-
gress, the whole House cheered the Governor and a resolution was
passed expressing the loyalty of the Congress to the British throne.
In his speech delivered at Poona in July 1909, Gokhale asked for
loyal cooperation with the British Government in India for two
reasons: "One that, considering the difficulties of the position,
Britain had done very well in India; the other that there was no
alternative to British rule and could be none for a long time. . . .
They could proceed in two directions: first, towards an obliteration
of distinctions, on the ground of race, between individual Indians
and individual Englishmen and secondly, by way of advanced to-
wards the form of government enjoyed in other parts of the
Empire. The latter is an ideal for which the Indian people have
to qualify themselves, for the whole question turns on character
and capacity and they must realise that their main difficulty lies
with themselves. ” In October of the same year, he addressed
the students at Bombay in these words : "The active participa-
tion of students in political agitation really tends t. ) lower the
dignity and the responsible character of public life and impair its
true effectiveness. ” Tilak was out of Indian politics from 1908
to 1914 on account of his long imprisonment in the Mandlay jail
in Burma. During his absence, the politics of the country was
dull. The Moderates were happy that their opponent was in jail.
However, things changed after the release of Tilak in 1914. Tilak
was not in a mood to precipitate matters. He was willing to have
a compromise with the Moderates. It is true that when
Gokhale started negotiations with Tilak for a compromise, Pheroze-
shah Mehta disapproved of them and the result was that the ne-
gotiations broke down. Pherozeshah Mehta decided to have the
next session of the Congress at Bombay so that he may be able to
maintain his hold over the Congress. Sir Satyendra Sinha who
later on became Lord Sinha, was selected as the President of the
Bombay session but unfortunately Pherozeshah Mehta died a few
weeks before the Congress session. Gokhale also died. On
account of their old age, Dinshaw Wacha and Chondravarkar
were not active. S. N. Banerjee was not in tune with the new
surroundings. Madan Mohan Malaviya was not in a position
to lead the Congress on the Moderate lines.
The speech of Sir Satyendra Sinha, the Congress President at
the Bombay session in 1915, came as a shock to the progressive
elements in India. He is said to have observed thus: “Even if
the English nation were willing to make us an immediate free
## p. 745 (#785) ############################################
HOME RULE MOVEMENT
745
gift of full self-government, I take leave to doubt whether the
boon would be worth having as such, for it is a commonplace of
politics that nations like individuals must grow into Freedom
and nothing is so baneful in political institutions as prematurity;
nor must we forget that India free can never be ancient India res-
tored. ” The right of the Extremists to enter the Congress was
admitted at the Bombay session of the Congress and the constitu-
tion of the Congress was suitably amended. Although Tilak
was not present at the Bombay session, enough of heat was created
by the Home Rule Proposals of Mrs. Annie Besant. Her speeches
and writings in 1915 had given a rude shock to the Mode-
rates. The Bombay session was the announcement of the ascen-
dancy of the politicians of the Extremist School and the decline
of the influence of the Moderates. The citadel of the Moderates
was successfully attacked. The adoption of the resolution
self-government was interpreted as having converted the Con-
gress into an Extremist league. The ground was prepared for
Tilak and his colleagues.
on
HOME RULE MOVEMENT
:
Mrs. . Annie Besant and Tilak started the Home Rule Move-
ment in 1916. There was Jothing original or revolutionary
about this movement. Annie Besant was not the enemy of the
British Empire. She merely wanted to awaken the people of
India out of their slumber. She declared : "I am an Indian
Tom Tom, waking up all the sleepers so that they make wake
and work for their motherland. ” Her plan was “to disentangle
the nationalist Extremists from the compromising alliance with
the revolutionaries, to reconcile them to a position with the
Empire and to bring them with the Moderates into line in the
united Congress. ” She herself wrote thus : "In political reform,
we aim at the building up of complete self-government from vil-
lage councils, through District and Municipal Boards and Pro-
vincial Legislative Assemblies to a National Parliament, equal in
its powers to the Legislative bodies of the Self-Governing Colo-
nies, by whatever name they may be called, also at the direct
representation of India to the Imperial Parliament when that
body shall contain representatives of the self-Governing States of
the Empire. ”
Mrs. Annie Besant made it clear that home rule was the birth-
right of the people of India and they were not prepared to take
it as a reward for their services for the British Empire and their
loyalty to the British Crown. She wrote thus: “India does not
## p. 746 (#786) ############################################
746
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
chaffer with the blood of her sons and the proud tears of her
daughters in exchange for so much liberty, so much right. India
claims the right, as a Nation, to justice among the peoples of
the Empire. India asked for this before the War, India asked
for it during the War; India will ask for it after the War, but not
as reward but as a right does she ask for it. "
The Home Rule Movement reached its high watermark in
1917. It was in that year that the Government of India took
strong action against the leaders of the movement. Mrs. Annie
Besant was interned. There was a lot of agitation for her re-
lease. Tilak threatened to start passive resistance. The atmos-
phere of the country was surcharged with enthusiasm. It was at
this time that the Secretary of State for India made in August,
1917 his historic declaration which promised responsible govern-
ment to the people by stages. By slow degrees, the Home Rule
Movement died out. Mrs. Annie Besant was elected the Presi-
dent of the Congress in 1917. The Secretary of State for India
visited this country in 1917. He went on tours of the country
and met the representatives of the people. The joint Report
was published in 1918 and the Government of India Act was
passed in 1919.
TERRORIST AND REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS
Terrorism was one of the phases of militant nationalism al-
though it differed radically from the political Extremists repre-
sented by Tilak. The revolutionaries did not believe in the me-
thods of appeal, persuasion and peaceful struggle. They were
convinced that without violence it was impossible to uproot an
imperialism imposed and maintained by brute force. The re-
actionary and repressive policy of the British Government exas-
perated them. They believed in violent action with a view to de-
moralise the administration and its Indian collaborators. They
had no scruples to resort to armed raids and dacoities to help their
movement.
The earliest storm centre of revolutionary nationalism was
Maharashtra and the name of Vasudeo Balwant Phadake stands
foremost in that connection. Shri Vasudeo was born in 1845.
He was profoundly influenced by the ideas of Ranade. He was bitter
against Englishmen who were drawing fat salaries as the expense
of the starving Indians. When famine broke out in Poona in 1876,
the Government, instead of organising relief work, levied heavier
taxes from the people. Vasudeo resigned his government job and
undertook a tour of Maharashtra. He went from place to place
## p. 747 (#787) ############################################
TERRORIST AND REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS 747
to organise the people against the Government. He started col-
lecting arms and ammunition to turn out the English from the
country and for that purpose he had no hestitation in plundering
the money-lenders. For some time, he created a reign of terror in
the seven districts of Maharashtra. The Government announced
a reward for his arrest and he was captured by Major Daniel on
July 20, 1879. He was put up for trial, convicted and sentenced
to life imprisonment. His conviction was upheld by the High
Court and he was sent to Aden Jail. In October 1880, he made
an attempt to escape but he was pursued and caught after 17
miles of pursuit. He died in February 1883. He made the fol-
lowing statement at the time of his conviction by the Sessions
Court: “The Indian people are today standing on the threshold of
death. The British bureaucracy and the Government machinery
has so ground down the common masses that have been already
harassed by famines and food scarcities. We, the sons of Bharat,
. , ,
are made the object of intense hatred and contempt. Wherever
you cast your glance, you witness only such sights, hear such
words, as no Hindu or Muslim whose necks have been straight so
long with self-respect can do anything but bend his head in shame.
Death would have been more honourable for us all than this dis-
graceful slavery. Had I but succeeded in my design, I would
have accomplished a great task. It was my ambition to establish
a Republic of free India. I have always preached in my lectures
that our bliss lies in killing the British people. I told my audience
a number of times that if they did not help me in this task, then
the British rulers will destroy them root and branch. Oh citizens
of India! Why should I not suffer like the great sage Dadheechi?
If by my sacrifice and told surrender, I can help your resurrection
from slavery, why should I not make effort? Accept this my last
bow. "
Damodar Chapekar was another hero of the same type.
Although he was essentially a soldier, he took up the profession of
Kirtan as the Brahmins were not eligible for recruitment in the
army. He began to hate British administration in India. On
one occasion, he observed thus: "Mere recalling the mighty deeds
of Shivaji will not deliver the goods. If we want freedom, we
shall have to plunge in action like our idols—Shivaji and Baji Rao.
My young frends! The time has come to sharpen our swords in
order to behead the enemies. Let us take a pledge to fight till
the last breath and die bravely but not without tainting the earth
red with English blood. Be not idle; be not a lifeless burden
on the country. Be up and doing; be a hero in the strife. Is it
not shameful that we call our country Hindustan (the land of
## p. 748 (#788) ############################################
748
THE NATIONALIST MOVEMENT IN INDIA
the Hindus) but let it be ruled over by the Englishmen? ” When
Mr. Rand the Plague Commissioner of Poona and Mr. Ayerst
were coming back from the Government House, they were shot
dead by Damodar Chapekar. The result was that he and a few
others were hanged by the Government.
It appears that Mr. Shyamji Krishna Varma was connected
with the murder of Rand but he managed to escape to London.
He was a Sanskrit scholar and he had been the Dewan of Udai-
pur and Junagarh States. He delivered a few lectures at the
Oxford University and he impressed every one by his learning. He
took to business and earned a lot of money. He started a monthly
journal entitled “The Indian Sociologist. ” With the help of Rana,
six lecturerships of Rs. 1,000 each and three travelling scholar-
ships for Rs. 2,000 each were offered to Indian students to go
abroad for training themselves as national missionaries.
