Sketch of the Non-co-operation Movement

by Rajendra Prasad

 

PREFATORY NOTE

With the incarceration of Mahatma Gandhi, his writings in Young India have passed beyond the pale of polemical politics and entered the realm of the “classic” literature. Far more than their practical value to India, at present or hereafter, is their value to the world at large, embodying in them a philosophy of life and practical conduct elaborated by the experience of the life time of a soul which will undoubtedly rank in history as that of one of the world’s greatest of men.

A few isolated articles are all that have so far been published in book form and the need for a systematic collection of all the articles, numbering hundreds, and their presentation in a carefully edited form, is the justification for this publication. The task of editing has not been easy. To have arranged the articles in a wholly chronological order would perhaps have been preferred by the few close followers of Young India who till recently have been comparatively few. On the other hand, the by far more numerous lay readers who pay serious and systematic attention to the writings for the first time—and their number is bound to grow—prefer, as experience proves, a logical arrangement. A wholly logical arrangement would, however, have required an amount of editing which would have been incompatible with the publisher’s desire not to tamper with the original in any way. The result is a compromise whereby while the articles are sorted and grouped under ten sections, so as to facilitate the study of particular subjects, they are, within these sections, arranged exactly as they appeared in Young India.^[1] In all cases, where to have given the whole article would only have been unduly burdening the book, the articles have been carefully summarised and given as footnotes in appropriate places. As far as possible, even observations by the way, though on topics of but momentary interest, have, wherever they are in the nature of valuable obiter dicta, been also included. All endeavour has thus been made to give in this one volume the valuable writings of Mahatmaji and others in Young India from the date of its first publication in Ahmedabad, 1919 to the date of his imprisonment in 1922. Throughout, the writings have been approached as an earnest and reverent student in search solely of Truth would have done, so that the collection might be a reliable account of the Mahatmaji’s views to all who desire seriously to study them.

The task has involved a considerable amount of labour and money and but for the fact that Mahatma Gandhi accepts no royalty or honorarium for his writings, it would have been altogether impossible to price the book so cheap.

II

A BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

That Mahatma Gandhi’s life was, as stated above, rich in experiences will be easily realised from the all too brief biographical note which is given below:

Born at Porbandar on 2nd October, 1869; son of Karamchand Gandhi, Prime Minister first of Probandar and then of Rajkot; educated at Kathia war High School, London University and the Inner Temple; married to Kasturibhai 1881, having been betrothed at the age of 8; Advocate, Bombay High Court, 1891; visits South Africa, 1893; enrolled as Advocate, Supreme Court in spite of White opposition; founded Natal Indian Congress, 1894; agitation in India on behalf of South African Indians, 1895; mobbed almost to death under the lead of Attorney-General Escombe on landing in S. Africa on return and saved by the heroism of the wife of the Police Superintendent; led the Indian Ambulance Corps in the Boer War, 1899, whose services were well appreciated in S. Africa as well as in England; returns to India to ręcoup health, 1901; attends the Calcutta Congress under the presidentship of Mr. Wacha; called to Natal to place the Indian case before Mr. Chamberlaim appointed to consider the question; helps Transvaal Indians in the same manner, though right of leading the deputation was refused by the White authorities; enrolled as Attorney of the Supreme Court of Transvaal; founds the Transvaal British Indian Association and becomes its Hony. Secretary and legal adviser; founds also the Indian Opinion; also the Phoenix settlement, 1904, under the influence of Ruskin and the experience of the conflict between Capital and Labour in S. Africa; anti-plague work in Johannesburg in 1904; led the Stretcher Bearer Corps in the Native Revolt in 1906; anti-Asiatic Law Agitation, 1906; Passive Resistance struggle; arrest and imprisonment; Gandhi-Smuts compromise; nearly killed by his own followers who thought the compromise was a betrayal of Indian interests; General Smuts’s repudiation of the compromise; the recommencement of the struggle; arrest and imprisonment; Indian Home Rule written, 1908; visit to England, 1909; 1911 settlement; Gokhale’s visit to S. Africa; repudiation of promise to repeal the £3 poll tax, 1913; recommencement of the great Passive Resistance struggle; its success; visit to England, 1914; raises Ambulance Corps in London, 1914; return to India, 1915; other recent incidents referred to in the statement before the Court (See p. 1049) ; arrest and imprisonment.

III

A NOTE ON “YOUNG INDIA”

A few words about the journal Young India will, we think, be also of interest to the readers. The history of Young India has a piquant interest. It was started originally by Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas, a young Bombay politician, who, wavering between the lead of Mr· Gandhi and that of Mrs. Besant, ultimately accepted that of the latter and became one of the most uncompromising opponents of the Non-co-operation Movement. It then came into the hands of a syndicate of whom Mr. Shankerlal Banker was a member. When Mr. Horniman was deported and the Bombay Chronicle was put under censorship, public life in Bombay needed the services of Mahatmaji. Young India was, therefore, put under his charge. After the Bombay Chronicle got back its freedom, Mahatmaji found it necessary to shift it to Ahmedabad (see p. 1) for reason mentioned on p. 2 and take over complete charge of the paper. He stopped all advertisments through Young India and determined to carry it on only so long as it paid its way without them. The High Court of Bombay once tried to extort an apology from the Mahatmaji, which it was impossible for him to tender.^[2] The High Court, therefore, prudently let him off with a reprimand ‘behind his back’ as the Mahratta put it.

Young India increased in its popularity as the Non-co-operation movement developed in its intensity. At first it failed to get even the minimum 2,500 which Mahatmaji wanted to keep it going, but subsequently its circulation rose till when Mahatmaji was arrested its weekly sale was about 40,000.

On the arrest and convicition of Mahatmaji and Mr. Banker, the paper was put in the hands of that young and faithful Mussalman Mr. Shuaib Qureshi. The Government soon prosecuted a second time all the workers connected with the paper and they were sent to jail for practically a year and a half. Professors Desai and Bhansali and the never tiring Swami Anandan of Young India and Nava Jivan were thus safely lodged in the Sabarmati jail along with Mr. Shuaib Qureshi.

The paper is now being conducted by Mr. C. Rajagopalachar of Salem, Madras, and Mahatmaji’s son, Ramadas Gandhi, has taken upon himself the responsibility of publisher, printer and keeper of the press.

A BRIEF SKETCH OF THE NON-CO-OPERATION MOVEMENT

India and the War.—To understand the significance and causes of the Non-co-operation Movement one has to go back beyond the incidents which immediately led to its adoption by the Khilafat Conference and the Indian National Congress. When the Great European War broke out between England and Germany in August 1914, India rose as one man to help the British Government. Those very people, the educated classes, who had been regarded as opponents of the Government on account of their inauguration of and participation in all political movements of the country were the first to realise the significance of the German menace and to throw in the whole weight of their influence on the side of the Government. The country as a whole helped the Empire in its time of need by offering her sons to fight its battle and also by making monetary contributions. Her services were recognised and spoken of in most eulogistic terms not only by the Viceroy and other officials in this country but also by the Prime Ministers and other statesmen in England. The war aims which were declared to be nothing less than making the world safe for democracy, the protection of weak nationalities, and the conferment of the boon of self-determination on all peoples naturally roused great hopes in the minds of the people of India who began to see in the world-devastating war a chance of their deliverance from the humiliating position of a subject people and a hope of the elevation of their country to the status of an equal partner in the British Commonwealth.

The Montagu-Chelmsford Report.—In this hope they were encouraged by a declaration by the Secretary of State for India (Mr. E. S. Montagu) in August 1917 which, while promising full responsible government to India within the British Empire by a gradual transference of power to popular control and a larger association of Indians in the administration of the country, reserved to the British Parliament the right of determining the pace of progress towards full responsible government. It was followed in the cold weather of 1917-18 by a visit of Mr. Montagu to India for consulting Indian public opinion regarding the reforms proposed to be introduced as the first step in fulfilment of the promise made in the declaration of August 1917. After a tour through the country and after interviewing a large number of persons and receiving numerous deputations, Mr. Montagu and the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, issued their report on constitutional Reform on the 8th July 1918.

The Delhi War Conference.—Early in 1918 the war had been passing through a phase most threatening to the Allies and the big German offensive was in full progress . To secure greater support and a further concentration of effort; the Prime Minister (Mr. Lloyd George), on the 2nd of April , 1918 , sent a message to India reminding her of “the intention of the rulers of Germany to establish a tyranny, not only over Europe, but over Asia as well” and asking “every lover of freedom and law” to play his part in preventing “the menace spreading to the East and gradually engulfing the world” and hoping that India “will add to the laurels it has already won” and “be the bulwark which will save Asia from the tide of oppression and disorder which it is the object of the enemy to achieve.” The Viceroy in reply assured him on behalf of the people of India of the “fullest effort and the fullest sacrifice to safeguard the soil of the motherland against all attempts of a cruel and unscrupulous enemy and to secure the final triumph of those ideals of justice and honour for which the British Empire stands.” This was followed by a War Conference at Delhi on April 27th, 1918, at which the King Emperor’s message declared that “the need of the Empire is India’s opportunity” and a series of similar Provincial Conferences.

Mahatma Gandhi joined the War Conference at Delhi and supported the resolution about loyalty. As a result, contributions in men and money increased on a large scale and recruitment went up. Some idea of the contribution of India to the success of the allies may be gathered from the following facts culled from official acknowledgments. India made a total combatant contribution of 9,85,000 men of whom 5,52,000 were sent overseas and of whom no less than 7,91,000 were enlisted during the War. Of non-combats India contributed 4,72,000 of whom 3,91,000 were sent overseas and no less than 4,27,000 were enrolled during the war. The total contribution of Indian personnel was thus 14,57,000 of whom 9,43,000 served overseas and no less than 1,06,594 suffered casualities. The number of animals sent was 1,75,000. During the war 1,855 miles of railway track, 229 locomotives, and 5,989 vehicles were sent out and 940 crafts of various descriptions for service on rivers and on seas were made available for war service. It is difficult to estimate accurately the contributions in money, but roughly they amounted in all to no less than 130 million pounds or nearly 200 crores.

The Rowlatt Acts Report and After.—While India was making such immense sacrifices for the sake of the Empire believing in the King Emperor’s words that “the need of the Empire was India’s opportunity,” there were not signs wanting to the keen observer that the righteous war aims so pompously advertised were after all intended to secure the support of India in the war and would go the way of other similar declarations of British Policy in India in the past. The internment of Mrs. Besant gave a rude shock to the country at large and the internment and maltreatment of a large number of persons supposed to be dangerous, under the Defence of India Act without any trial awakened the country to a sense of the mistake it had committed in giving its tacit consent to the passing of that Act and the prostitution of its provisions to secure political purposes as distinguished from protection of the country from the enemy’s designs. On the top of it all came the Report of a Committee appointed under the Presidentship of Sir Sidney Rowlatt to report on the growth of revolutionary movement in the country and to suggest remedies.

The report was published on the 19th July, 1918 and recommended practically the perpetuation of the provisions of the Defence of India Act, taking away trials by juries and assessors in cases of seditious crimes, taking a way, the preliminary proceedings of commitment on the one hand and the right of appeal after conviction on the other, authorising trials in camera and admission of evidence not subjected to cross-examination and not recorded by the trial court under certain circumstances and, above all reserving to the Executive the right and power not only to restrict the liberty of the individual by demanding securities with or without sureties, by restricting his residence or requiring notification of change of residence and demanding abstention from certain acts, such as engaging in journalism, distributing leaflets, attending meetings, etc., but also to deprive him of it by arresting and confining him. The abuses to which similar pro visions of the Defence of India Act and the rules promulgated under powers conferred by it had been put showed the country what these proposals meant and they naturally created consternation in the country and when armistice was declared in the autumn of 1918, India was seething with discontent at what she rightly considered to be a betrayal of her after the time of “the need of the Empire” had passed away. Suspicion was naturally roused that the promised Reforms would be postponed and the ordinary rights of the citizen to enjoy freedom of movement and sanctity of home and home life taken away on the pretext of the existence of a revolutionary conspiracy in the country. When at last on the 6th of February, 1919, the Rowlatt Bills, embodying the recommendations of the Rowlatt Committee, were introduced by Sir William Vincent into the Imperial Legislative Council at Delhi, the whole country rose like one man against this most unwarranted encroachment on the ordinary rights of free citizens. It was the beginning of an agitation throughout the country the like of which had never before been witnessed. Innumerable meetings were held in all parts of the vast peninsula, and in the Council itself not a single Indian was found to support its drastic provisions even with a silent vote. But all this was of no avail and the Government with the help of official votes passed one of the Bills into an Act in the third week of March, 1919.

The Hartal and the Disturbunces.—The result of forcing the Act was some members of the Imperial Legislative Council resigned their seats in protest against this high-handed action of the Government, and when Mahatma Gandhi declared his intention of leading a Satyagraha campaign, he only voiced the feeling of India smarting under an insult and humiliation which was as undeserved of India as it was unbecoming and ungrateful of the British Government to offer. The Satyagraha pledge^[3] which began to be signed in large numbers required the signatory to affirm that they would refuse civilly to obey those laws and such other laws as the Committee to be appointed later on might think fit and further that “in this struggle we will faithfully follow the truth and refrain from violence to life, person, or property.” On the 23rd of March, Mahatma Gandhi issued his manifesto fixing the 6th of April for the observance of an All-India Hartal and as a day of fasting, prayer and penance. Under some mistake, the Hartal was observed at Delhi on the 30th March. And, as a result of a quarrel between some demonstrator on the one hand and the stall keeper at the Railway Station on the other, a riot ensued. Military police and a small military force were brought out, and some people were shot. In other parts of the country, the Hartal on the 6th April passed off quietly without any untoward incident. It was a first demonstration in which all, rich and poor, high and low, educated or uneducated, village folks and town people took part. The people of India seemed to have broken their slumber of centuries and to have awakened to a sense of their hidden power. In one word, they re-discovered their soul.

Mahatma Gandhi was proceeding to Delhi on the 8th of April to relieve the sufferings of the people and to apply a healing balm to their lacerated hearts. He was however served with an order not to enter the Punjab or Delhi and on his refusal to obey the order he was arrested and turned back from a way side Railway Station by a special train to Bombay. The news created consternation throughout the length and breadth of the country and nowhere more than in the province of the Punjab where on account of the reactionary regime of Sir Michael O’Dwyer, people were already exasperated. To add fuel to the fire, under the order of Sir Michael O’Dwyer, on the 10th of April, two popular leaders of Amritsar, Drs. Kitchlew and Satyapal, were deported. Feeling was running very high when a large body of men proceeding towards the house of the Deputy Commissioner to make a representation for the release of the leaders was fired at and on its way back broke out in a serious riot burning and looting banks, the Post Office and some other Government offices, murdering some Europeans and assaulting two ladies. Quite was however soon restored but the atmosphere was surcharged with panic.

Jallianwalla Massacre.—General Dyer arrived at Amritsar on the night of the 11th and occupied the town. There was no incident either on the 11th or on the 12th. On the 13th a meeting was advertised to be held at a vacant space known as Jallianwalla Bagh. General Dyer prohibited any gathering of men on pain of death and hearing that a meeting was going to be held at Jallianwalla proceeded to the spot with his troops and machine guns. The place was full of men, women and children as it was an important Hindu festival day. Within 30 seconds of his arrival, he opened fire which continued for 10 minutes directing it where the crowd was thickest. The fire continued till ammunition was exhausted. Some 5 to 6 hundred people were killed outright and three times the number wounded. The place being surrounded on all sides by high walls no one could escape. There was no warning given before firing and no care taken of the dead and wounded after it. Subsequently, Martial Law was declared in Amritsar, Lahore, Gujrat, and Llyalpur districts and what may be fitly described as a reign of terror followed. Large numbers of people were arrested and tried under Martial Law. Even respectable people were arrested. Some were flogged, others made to crawl on their bellies and unutterable horror committed including bombing of unarmed crowds from aeroplanes.^[4]

The news of Mahatma Gandhi’s arrest led to riots at Ahmedabad and other places also. But Martial Law was not continued there for more than a few days.

The Indemnity Act and the Hunter Committee.—The news of these horrors in the Punjab did not go abroad as a strict censorship was maintained. In course of time, however, when some months later, Martial Law was withdrawn, the news began to leak out and caused deep and widespread indignation throughout the country. A Committee of Enquiry was demanded and was ultimately appointed by the Government with Lord Hunter as its President. But before the Committee began its labours, the Government of India passed an Indemnity Act for the protection of its officers. There was a great deal of opposition to it in the Council, but Mahatma Gandhi, true to his principle of non-retaliation, supported the bill. When the Hunter Committee began to record evidence, disclosures of facts and incidents of the most harrowing nature were made. The Congress Committee had appointed a sub-committee to lead evidence before the Hunter Committee. But on account of the refusal of the President to secure the temporary release of those Punjab leaders who were undergoing sentences, even for a short period, to enable them to collect the necessary evidence, the Congress Sub-Committee decided not to lead any evidence at all but to hold an independent enquiry and published its report on the 26th March, 1920, making recommendations which were regarded as much too lenient by the people. On the other hand, the report of the Hunter Committee was not unanimous, the Indian members appending a note of dissent differing from their European colleagues and holding that the promulgation of Martial law in the Punjab was not justified. The recommendations of the Committee as also the orders of the Government failed to satisfy Indian opinion and led, immediately, along with another matter to be presently mentioned, to the inauguration of the Non-co-operation Movement.

The Khilafat Question.—The other question which had greatly exercised the mind of the Indian people was the question of the Khilafat. When war broke out between England and Turkey, Indian Mussalmans found them selves on the horns of a dilemma. Should they help the Turks and the Sultan who stood as the representative and Defender of their faith, or should they support the British power under which they had been living for more than a century? They decided to throw in their lot with the British in the hope and faith that their religious places would be kept under Muslim control and they would be able to secure for their Turkish co-religionists terms of peace which would be favourable to them. Their faith was based on declarations made by the Viceroy in India and the Prime Minister of England (Mr. Lloyd George) in which the former had pledged immunity of the holy places in Arabia, Mesopotamia and of Jeddah, and the latter had assured the Muslims “Nor are we fighting to deprive Turkey of its capital or of the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in race.”

When the war came to an end and rumours about the severe nature of the terms proposed to Turkey got abroad, Mussalmans became naturally alarmed and representation began to be made to the authorities, insisting on the fulfilment of the pledge so unequivocally given by the Prime Minister. The First All-India Khilafat Conference met at Delhi on Nov. 23, 1919, which thanked Mahatma Gandhi and other Hindus for their deep interest in the Khilafat question, enjoined upon Indian Mussalmans to refrain from participating in Victory celebrations, and in the event of a satisfactory settlement of the Turkish question not taking place, to progressively withhold all co-operation from the British Government and to boycott British goods. And lastly, it decided to send a deputation to England with the object of acquainting the British ministers and others with the true sentiments of the Mussalmans regarding the Turkish settlement and the Khilafat question. The second Khilafat conference met at Amritsar in the Congress week. It affirmed the resolution regarding the deputation to England and America, resolved further to send a deputation to the Viceroy and another deputation to Turkey and reiterating the Moslem demands and directed the Central Khilafat Committee to collect funds. A representation signed by the Aga Khan, Syed Ameer Ali and a number of other gentlemen, Indian and European, was submitted to the Premier in December, 1919. The Khilafat question came further to the forefront in December, 1919, when Maulana Shaukat Ali and Mahammad Ali were released from their internment.

The Khilafat Deputations.—A deputation headed by Dr. Ansari accordingly waited on the Viceroy on January 19, 1920. The reply which the Viceroy gave to the deputation was disappointing to a degree, and the Muslim leaders issued a statement recording their firm conviction that “should the peace terms result unfavourably to Muslim religion and sentiments, they would place an undue strain upon Muslim loyalty” and demanding that “Arabia as delimited by Muslim authority and the Holy places of Islam must remain under the control of the Khalif”, and that the pledge given by Mr. Lloyd George should be fulfilled. The third Khilafat Conference met at Bombay in February, 1920, and expressed its confidence in the deputation going to England and issued a very important manifesto, laying down the Muslim demands and declaring that “any reduction of the claim would not only be a violation of the deepest religious feelings of the Muhammadans, but also a flagrant violation of the solemn declarations and pledges made or given by responsible statesmen, representing Allied and Associated Powers and given at a time when they were desirous of enlisting the support of Muslim people and soldiery, and warning them against the consequence of a wrong decision, particularly when not only the Mussalmans but also the entire Hindu population were joining them in their demand.”

Their Failure.—The deputation which was headed by Maulana Muhammad Ali was received by Mr. Fisher on behalf of the Secretary of State for India, and it also waited upon the Prime Minister. It further requested permission to place its views before the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference but was refused. While the deputation was still in Europe, the proposed terms of peace with Turkey were made public on 14th May, 1920, and in India, they were accompanied with a message from the Viceroy to the Muslims of India, explaining those terms. The message recognised that the terms were such as must cause pain to the Muhamadans of India, but asked the Muslims of India to brace themselves to bear with patience and resignation the misfortunes of their Turkish co-religionists. The publication of the proposed peace terms caused the deepest indignation, and synchronising as it did with the publication of the Hunter Committee’s report, the whole country was ablaze. The Khilafat Committee met at Bombay to deliberate upon Mahatma Gandhi’s Non-co-operation project and adopted it on the 28th May, 1920, as the only means now left to the Muslims. On the 30th May, the All-India Congress Committee met at Benares to discuss the Hunter Report and the Turkish Peace terms, and after a long debate decided to hold a special session of the Congress to consider the question of Non-co-operation.

Non-co-operation Adopted.—On the 30th of June, there was a joint Hindu-Muslim Conference at Allahabad regarding the Khilafat question, and Non-co-operation was unanimously adopted to be resorted to after a month’s notice to the Viceroy. Numerous meetings of all parties were held in the different parts of the country, strongly condemning the Hunter Report and demanding justice regarding the Punjab and the Khilafat. On the 22nd of June, a message signed by numerous Muhammadan leaders was submitted to the Viceroy, asking him to secure revision of the Turkish Peace terms and, in the event of the British Cabinet failing to comply with the Muslim wishes, to make common cause with the Indian Mussalmans. It further warned him that, if he failed to adopt the suggestion, they would be obliged from the 1st August following to withdraw co-operation from the Government and to ask other Mussalmans and Hindus to do likewise. Mahatma Gandhi also addressed a letter to the Viceroy in which he explained his connection with the Khilafat question. He told him how he had noticed the growing anxiety of the Mussalmans and their distrust of British intention and how he had advised them not to give a way to despair. He proceeded: “The terms violate ministerial pledges and utterly disregard Mussalman sentiment. I consider that as a staunch Hindu wishing to live on terms of the closest friendship with my Mussalman countrymen, I should be an unworthy son of India if I did not stand by them in their hour of trial… The report of the majority of the Hunter Committee and your Excellency’s despatch thereon have aggravated the distrust. In these circumstances, the only course open to one like me is either in despair to sever all connection with British rule, or if I still retain the faith in the inherent superiority of British Constitution to all others at present in vogue, to adopt such means as will rectify the wrong done and thus restore confidence. I have not lost faith in such superiority and I am not without hope somehow or other, justice will yet be rendered if we show requisite capacity for suffering. It is then because I believe in British constitution that I have advised my Muslim friends to withdraw their support from your Excellency’s Government, and the Hindus to join them.”

The 31st of August was celebrated as a Khilafat day. A general hartal was declared and the Non-co-operation resolution began to be given effect to. Mahatma Gandhi, returning his medal in pursuance of the Non-co-operation resolution, wrote to the Viceroy: “Events have happened during the past month which have confirmed me in the opinion that the Imperial Government have acted in the Khilafat matter in an unscrupulous, immoral, and unjust manner and have been moving from wrong to wrong to defend their immorality. I can retain neither respect, nor affection for such Government. The attitude of the Imperial and your Excellency’s Government on the Punjab question has given me additional cause for great dissatisfaction. Your Excellency’s light hearted treatment of official crime, your exoneration of Sir Michael O’Dwyer, Mr. Montagu’s despatch and, above all, the shameful ignorance of the Punjab events and callous disregard of the feelings of Indians, betrayed by the House of Lords, have filled me with the gravest misgivings regarding the future of the Empire, have estranged me completely from the present Government and have disabled me from tendering, as I have hitherto wholeheartedly tendered, my loyal co-operation.” The feeling in India became worse and worse, as the Government persisted more and more in its determination to I disregard Muslim sentiments and as the House of Lords, in England, and the Anglo-Indians, residing in India, began more and more to support General Dyer who had perpetrated the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. The Europeans in India went so far as to open a Dyer appreciation fund and raised a large amount to be presented to him. Associations of Europeans and Ango-Indian papers vied with each other in extolling General Dyer’s services.

The Calcutta Special Congress.—Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Shaukat Ali toured through a great part of the country before the special session of the Congress which met at Calcutta, early in September, under the presidentship of Lala Lajpat Rai. After a long discussion, the Congress adopted the Non-co-operation resolution by a large majority. The resolution recited that, in view of the fact that in the matter of the Khilafat, Indian and Imperial Governments had signally failed in their duty towards the Mussalmans in India, that the Prime Minister had deliberately broken his pledged words and, further, in view of the fact that in the matter of the events of April, 1919, both the said Governments had grossly neglected or failed to protect the innocent people of the Punjab, punish officers guilty of unsoldierly and barbarous behaviour towords them, and had exonerated Sir Michael O’Dwyer and that the debate in the House of Lords betrayed a woeful lack of sympathy with the people of India and showed virtual support of the systematic terrorism and frightfulness adopted in the Punjab, the Congress was of opinion that there can be no contentment in India without redress of the two aforementioned wrongs, and the only effectual means to vindicate National honour and to prevent similar wrongs in future is the establishment of Swarajya.

The Congress was further of opinion that there was no course left open for the people of India, but to approve of and adopt the policy of progressive Non violent Non-co-operation, until the said wrongs are righted and Swarajya is established. It accordingly advised: (a) surrender of titles and honorary offices and resignations from nominated seats in local bodies, (b) Refusal to attend Government levies, Darbars, etc., (c) Gradual withdrawal of children from schools and colleges owned, aided or controlled by Government, and the establishment of national schools and colleges in their place, (d) Gradual boycott of British Courts by lawyers and litigants, and establishment of private arbitration courts for the settlement of private disputes, (e) Refusal on the part of military, clerical and labouring classes to offer themselves as recruits for service in Mesopotamia, (f) Withdrawal by candidates of their candidature from the Reformed Councils and refusal on the part of the voters to vote for any candidate, and (g) Boycott of foreign goods. The Congress further advised adoption of Swadeshi in piece-goods on a vast scale and, to meet the requirements of the nation which could not be met by Indian Mills alone, it advised manufacture on a large scale by means of reviving hand spinning in every home and hand weaving on the part of millions of weavers who had abandoned their ancient and honorable calling for want of encouragement.

Mr. Bipin Chandra Pal’s amendment which asked for a mission to be sent to the Prime Minister to lay before him a statement of Indian grievances, coupled with a demand for immediate autonomy, and in case of his refusal to receive this mission or to replace the Act of 1919 by a measure granting full autonomy to India, for the adoption of a policy of active Non-co-operation and, in the meantime, advising the consideration of Mahatma Gandhi’s programme and the adoption of measures as preparatory to actual putting into practice of that programme, was, as stated above, thrown out in the Congress by a large majority.

The Non-co-operation Campaign.—The adoption of the Non-co-operation resolution by the Congress gave a great fillip to the Non-co-operation movement. To give effect to the Resolution of the Special Congress, a Sub-committee had been appointed in Calcutta to draft instructions. The report of the Sub-committee was considered by a meeting of the All-India Congress Committee on the 2nd October, and detailed instructions were issued. But some doubt was still entertained that at the annual sessions at Nagpur in December, the Congress would rescind the Non-co-operation resolution, passed at Calcutta. Mahatma Gandhi toured through the country amidst scenes of wild enthusiasm.

Mahatma Gandhi, accompanied by Maulana Mohammad Ali who returned from Europe in the first week of October, visited Aligarh on the 12th of October, and with this visit commenced that campaign against Government controlled educational institutions which became more and more intense for the following four or five months . An attempt was made to nationalise the M. A. O. College and a letter was addressed by some of the Non-co-operation leaders who were also trustees of the college to the other trustees, urging upon them the necessity of nationalising the institution. The trustees met on the 17th of October, 1920. Mahatma Gandhi also addressed a letter to them. They, however, decided to carry on the institution on the old lines, and a National Muslim University was inaugurated with Maulana Mohammad Ali as its Principal, under the presidentship of Sheik-ul Hind Maulana Mohammad-ul-Hassan Sahib on the 29th of October. Mahatma Gandhi’s visit to the Punjab created similar stir among students and there were whole sale strikes and demand for nationalisation of the Lahore College, the Khalsa College and other educational institutions. On the 15th of November, the Gujrat National College was opened by Mahatma Gandhi and he was also appointed Chancellor of the Vidyapitha inaugurated there. Mr. Gidwani was appointed Principal of the College which started with 500 students. There was a strike at Benares among the students of the Hindu University. Early in December, Mahatma Gandhi visited Bihar and advised the opening of a National College which was done at Patna on the 5th of January, 1921. Tilak Mahavidyalaya was opened at Poona on the 11th of December.

The Nagpur Congress.—Things were going on in this way, when the Congress met again in its annual session at Nagpur under the presidentship of Mr. Vijiaraghavachariar. It changed its creed into the “attainment of Swarajya by the people of India by peaceful and legitimate means” and reaffirmed the resolution of Non-violent Non-co-operation, passed in Calcutta. It declared that the entire or any part of the scheme of Non-violent Non-co-operation with the renunciation of voluntary association with the present Government at one end and the refusal to pay taxes on the other should be put in force at a time to be determined by either the Indian National Congress or the All-India Congress Committee and that, in the meanwhile, to prepare the country for it effective steps should continue to be taken in that behalf by calling upon the guardians and parents of children under the age of 16 years and upon students of the age of 16 or over to withdraw them from Government-controlled educational institutions; by calling upon lawyers to make greater efforts to suspend their practice and to devote their attention to national service, including the boycott of law courts by fellow lawyers and litigants; by carrying out gradual boycott of foreign trade relations by encouraging hand spinning and hand weaving and generally calling upon every section and every man and woman in the country to make the utmost contribution of self-sacrifice; and, lastly, by organizing a committee in each village or group of villages with a Provincial Central Organization and a band of national workers to be called Indian National Service to be financed out of funds, called the All-India Tilak Memorial Swarajya Fund. The Congress further asked persons who had got themselves elected to the new Councils in spite of the deliberate abstention from the polls of an over-whelming majority of their constituents, to resign their seats and in the event of their failure to do so, it advised the people to studiously refrain from asking for any political service from such Councillors. The Congress recognized the growing friendliness between the police and soldiers and the people, and appealed to all people in Government employment, pending the call of the Nation for the resignation of their services, to help the national cause by importing greater kindliness and stricter honesty in their dealings with the people and fearlessly and openly to attend all popular gatherings, while refraining from taking any active part therein and more especially by openly rendering financial assistance to the National movement. The Congress laid special emphasis on Non-violence being an integral part of the Non-co-operation resolution and called upon public association to advance Hindu-Muslim unity and to settle all disputes between Brahmins and non-Brahmins, wherever they might be existing . It further called upon Hindus to rid Hinduism of the reproach of untouchability and respectfully urged the religious heads to help the growing desire to reform Hinduism in the matter of its treatment of the suppressed classes. The resolution was passed unanimously.

Thus closed the first phases of the Non - co - operation movement amidst scenes of great joy at the discovery of a means which the despairing people clasped with all their fervour as the only means of their delivery from the wrongs, oppression and humiliation to which they had been subjected for a series of years and which had culminated in the indescribable scene of the Punjab and the unspeakable betrayal of the Khilafat cause. The nation determined to win its way to Swarajya by suffering and, to-day, after twenty months have elapsed since that momentous decision was arrived at Nagpur, it may truly be said that the Nation has not flinched from any sacrifices which have been demanded of it by the course of events which will be presently described.

Progress of the Movement.—The months that followed were months of strenuous work. Never before in the history of India, since its connection with Britain, had popular indignation and popular enthusiasm been greater. Never before during this long period had the country secured the loving and unguiding services of so many of her sons. Never before had the faith of the people in themselves and in the country’s ability to solve its own difficulties burned brighter.

As a result of the decision of the Congress, hundreds of lawyers throughout the country suspended practice in the law courts and began to devote themselves to the service of the country. Panchayats began to be organised and litigants began to avoid law courts. There was a great fall in the revenue from stamps number of suits, instituted in the law courts. In regard to the educational programme, it may be safely asserted that thousands of college and school students withdrew themselves or were withdrawn from Government-controlled institutions by their guardians. Many a school became absolutely deserted. Mahatma Gandhi’s appeal to the finer instincts of the youth of the country to devote themselves to its service and to shun the institutions which had been created and maintained to kill all manliness in them was responded to with enthusiasm. Nor was the work confined merely to boycott. National Universities, National Colleges, and National schools of all grades were started in different parts of the country. We have already referred to the student movement in the U. P., the Punjab, and the Bombay Presidency. Bengal was not behind hand and Calcutta witnessed one of those thrilling scenes which have not been few in the course of the last year and a half. About the middle of January, on an appeal by Desabandhu C. R. Das, thousands of students left their colleges and examinations. Mahatma Gandhi visited Calcutta and opened the National College on the 4th of February. He also visited Patna for a second time and formally opened the National College and inaugurated the Behar Vidyapith. Thus in the course of less than four months, the National Muslim University of Aligarh, the Gujrat Vidyapith, the Behar Vidyapith, the Benares Vidyapith, the Bengal National University, the Tilak Maharastra Vidyapith and a large number of national schools of all grades with thousands of students on the rolls were started in all parts of the country as a result of the great impetus given to National Education.

In the matter of the organisation of Swadeshi, the result achieved in popularising spinning wheels and the use of khaddar (hand spun and hand woven cloth) has been marvellous. In homes which had altogether forgotten even the name of charkha (spinning wheel) its musical hum can now be heard. It has invaded even the parlour of the rich, while it has given a source of livelihood to lakhs of poor women in the country. Resignation of titles were few, but after all the title holders form a class from whom from the nature of their position much was not to be expected. But there can be no doubt that nothing had lowered these titles in the estimation of the people so much as this movement. One thing which was not mentioned in the Congress resolution was spontaneously taken up by the people. People started a campaign against the evils of drink and a most marvellous progress was visible in all parts of the country, resulting in a great loss to the Government from Excise Revenue. Under the reformed constitution elections had, in the meantime, taken place, and His Royal Highness, the Duke of Connaught, landed at Madras on 8th January and opened the Legislative Council there on the 12th. Under the Congress resolution, Mahatma Gandhi had advised a boycott of the Duke’s visit, not by away of offering an insult to His Royal Highness, but as an expression of protest against the persistent refusal of the Government to listen to people’s demands. Wherever the Duke went, the masses as a body and amongst the middle classes also most of those who were not directly concerned or connected with the Government observed hartals. His Royal Highness, after opening some of the Provincial Legislative Councils and the new Legislature at Delhi, left the country.

Non-violence.—Mahatma Gandhi had insisted on Non violence as an essential feature of the movement and it was this insistence which had kept the people in spite of the great upheaval and the great indignation from committing acts of violence. Some incidents, however, occurred which, though not directly due to the N. C. O. movement, were, nevertheless, attributed to the stir and the a wakening created by it. One of the earliest of these was the great agrarian movement in U. P. which had its origin in the agrarian trouble between landlords and tenants, on account of the latter’s refusal to pay illegal and oppressive cesses. Large bodies of men collected at various place and several riots took place in several places. The police dispersed the mob by opening fire in some of these places, and it took more than a month to restore quiet. Another movement which having an independent origin was deeply affected by the N. C. O. movement has been the Akali movement of the Sikhs. Starting as a purely religious movement for the reform of the Sikh Gurdwaras, it has been more and more drawn into adopting the principles of the Non-co-operation movement by the conduct of the Government. In February occurred what is known as the Nankana tragedy in which nearly two hundred Sikhs lost their lives amidst scenes of indescribable horror. The news created great indignation among Sikhs and others in all parts of the country and Mahatma Gandhi had to visit the Punjab early in March.

The Reaction of the Government to the Movement.—The Government had watched the growth of the movement. It first tried to pooh-pooh it. In August 1920, Lord Chelmsford had described it as “the most foolish of all foolish schemes”. Subsequently the Government of India issued a communique on the 6th November 1920, stating that the Government had refrained from instituting criminal proceedings, because the promoters of the movement had advocated simultaneously with Non-co-operation, abstention from violence and that “they had instructed local Government to take action against those persons only who in furtherance of the movement had gone beyond the limits originally set by its organisers and had by speech or writing incited the public to violence or had attempted to tamper with the loyalty of the army or the police.” This restriction was, however, not observed in practice and from the beginning of March onwards, the country passed through a tide of repression, culminating in the months of November and December in the suppression of volunteer organisations, the promulgation of the Seditious Meetings Act and the arrest and the incarceration of thousands of Indians. The first acts of repression were in connection with the anti-drink campaign. A large number of volunteers were sent to jail for alleged offences in connection with the picketing of liquor shops. Others were dealt with under secs. 107 and 108 of the Cr. P. C. and on their refusal to furnish security for good behaviour were sent to jail. Sec. 144 Cr. P. C. has been used with great effect, but with very doubtful legality in prohibiting public meetings and gagging individuals. The province of Behar was the first to witness repression on an extensive scale which was inaugurated with a circular, issued by the Government giving local officers a carte blanche in regard to any steps they might think necessary to counteract the movement which was described as revolutionary and anarchical. The Government of the Punjab and the U. P. were not slow to follow in their efforts to combat the movement and the Seditious Meetings Act and the provision of the ordinary law were freely resorted to, even where there was no justification for their use. One notable incident which deserves mention was the prohibition of N. C. O. meetings in the Malabar district and the subsequent arrest and imprisonment of Mr. Yakub Hassan and others, the former one of the most respected among the Mussalman leaders, for disobeying the prohibition order.

The Bezwada Programme.—It was at a time when the Congress propaganda was making such rapid progress and the country passing through the first spell of repression that the All-India Congress Committee met at Bezwada in the last week of March 1921, and chalked out a programme of work for the following three months. It required that, before the 30th of June 1921, the Congress should raise one crore of rupees for the Tilak Swarajya Fund, enrol one crore of members for the Congress and see 20 lakhs of spinning wheels working in the country. On account of policy of repression started by the Government which was held by the Committee to be totally unwarranted by the situation in the country, there was a desire expressed by many of the members that Civil Disobedience should be resorted to. The Committee however held that the country was not yet sufficiently disciplined, organised or ripe for the immediate taking up of Civil Disobedience, and it advised all those upon whom orders might be served voluntarily to conform to them, trusting that new workers would take the place of those disabled by the Government and that the people at large; instead of becoming frightened or disheartened, would continue their work of quite organisation and construction. The following months witnessed tremendous efforts by the thousands of workers spread all over the country and engaged in organising it to fulfil the programme sketched out at Bezwada, and when the 30th of June was reached, Mahatma Gandhi could safely declare that the nation had collected the requisite sum, and although the number of members enrolled and charkhas was not accurately known, there was no doubt that the programme in this respect also had been nearly if not altogether fulfilled. Mabatma Gandhi himself had been as unremitting in his labours as ever, carrying the gospel of Non-co-operation and Non-violence from district to district wherever he went. Thousands of men and women assembled to have a glimpse of the great hero. Railway lines and stations were lined by thousands of spectators who showered their love in the shape of flowers and money wherever the train carrying the Mahatma happened to pass by them.

Malegaon and other Disturbances.—While the country was engaged in this constructive work, there occurred a riot at Malegaon in the Nasik district resulting in the death of several policemen and also some of the mob and acts of incendiarism. There was also a disturbance at Giridih in Behar in which, however, there was no loss of life. Early in May 1921, there was labour trouble in the tea province of Assam on account of low wages and a great exodus of about 12,000, coolies from tea gardens amidst scenes of great destitution and suffering. There was an attack on these coolies at Chandpur where they had congregated in large numbers by Gurkhas who had been drafted there by the Government. The news of this outrage caused great indignation in the country and led to a sympathetic strike among the Railway and steamer employees in Eastern Bengal which created a complete deadlock for nearly two months.

Gandhi-Reading Interview.—Another event which requires mention is the interview between Mahatma Gandhi and Lord Reading which extended over several hours and led to a great deal of speculation about its subject matter. Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya and Lala Lajpat Rai also had similar interviews. The details of the interview have never been published, but one incident was the publication of an apology by the Ali Brothers for the “unnecessary heat” of some of the passages of their speeches which had been construed by some as having a tendency to incite to violence. They further gave an assurance that, so long as they were associated with the movement of Non-co-operation, they would not directly or indirectly advocate violence. The Government of India on the 30th May, issued a communique stating that they had suspended action against the Ali Brothers on account of their undertaking and apology. Lord Reading in a speech at the Chelmsford Club referred to this incident as a result of the interviews which he had with Mahatma Gandhi. The subject excited comment amongst friends and foes alike. The Non-co-operators saw in it a lapse from the high ideal of Non-co-operation while opponents tried to discredit the brave brothers by reading in it an attempt to save their skins by offering an undertaking. It was not until Mahatma Gandhi had obtained the publication of an account of the interview^[5] with the Viceroy’s consent from which it was made clear that the Mahatma had agreed to secure an apology from the Ali Brothers for certain passages in their speeches calculated to incite to violence and that it was after the promise had been given that the proposal to institute criminal proceedings were mentioned by the Viceroy that the controversy came to a close.

The Karachi Khilafat Conference.—On the 8th of July, the All-India Khilafat conference opened at Karachi with Maulana Mohamed Ali in the chair. The proceedings of the conference formed later on the subject matter of the prosecution of the Ali Brothers, Dr. Kitchlew, Jagat Guru Shankaracharya of Shardapeeth, Maulana Nisar Ahmed, Pir Gulam Mujadid and Maulvi Hussain Ahmed. While reiterating the Muslim demands, the Conference also passed a resolution declaring it “unlawful for any faithful Mussalman to serve from that day in the army or help or acquiesce in their recruitment.” It also declared that, if the British Government fought the Angora Government, the Muslims of India would start Civil Disobedience and establish their complete independence and hoist the flag of the Indian Republic at the Ahmedabad session of the Indian National Congress.

The A. I. C. C. Meeting at Bombay.—On July 28 the All India Congress Committee met again at Bombay. It was the first All-India Congress Committee elected under the new constitution adopted at the Nagpur Congress. The appearance of the members all clad in white Khadi was in keeping with the ideals of plain living held up before the country by the simple life of the Mahatma. The Committee passed a resolution declaring that it is the duty of every one, in terms and in virtue of the Non-co-operation Resolution passed by the Special Congress and reaffirmed at Nagpur, to refrain from participating in or assisting any welcome to H. R. H. The Prince of Wales. While tendering this advice, the Committee placed “on record its opinion that India bears no sort of ill-feeling against the person of H. R. H. and that the advice, is tendered because the Committee regards the proposed visit as a political move calculated to give strength and support to a system of government that has resulted in breach of faith with the Mussalmans and atrocious injustice to the people of India, and the system that is designed to keep India as long as possible from her birthright of Swaraj.” The 2nd resolution, after congratulating the nation on carrying out the Bezwada programme, asked it to concentrate its attention upon attaining complete boycott of foreign cloth by the 30th of September and manufacture of Khaddar by stimulating hand-spinning and hand-weaving and advised all persons belonging to the Congress to discard the use of foreign cloth from the first of August and all Congress organisations to collect foreign cloth from consumers for destruction or use outside India. It also invited Indian mill agents to support the national effort by regulating the price of their manufactures so as to bring them within the reach of the poorest and the importers of foreign cloth and yarn to co-operate with the nation by stopping foreign orders and by disposing of their stock as far as possible outside India. The 3rd resolution noted with satisfaction the growth of public opinion and the campaign against the use and sale of intoxicating liquors or drugs by peaceful picketing and warned the Government that in case of continued improper interference with peaceful picketing it would advise its continuance in disregard of such orders. It appealed to local Boards or Municipalities to follow the lead of the Thana District Board by passing resolutions on picketing and it invited keepers of liquor and drug shops to discontinue them. The 4th resolution deplored the excesses at Malegaon and in Aligarh even though under great provocation and advised Congress organisations to inculcate. Non violence as an essential part of Non-co-operation and congratulated the people upon their exercising complete self-restraint not withstanding, grave provocation by local authorities in Dharwar, Matiari, Guntur and other places. It congratulated the families of those who had lost their lives by the unprovoked fire of the authorities at several places and also those brave and innocent citizens who had been wounded or were suffering imprisonment. The resolution, while taking note of Government repression and of the reasonable desire of the workers to take up Civil Disobedience, held that Civil Disobedience should be postponed till after the completion of the Swadeshi programme which it regarded as a test of the measure of influence attained by the Congress and a guarantee of the stability of non-violent atmosphere. It, however, authorised the Working Committee to sanction Civil Disobedience in any place or the province.

The Arrest of the Muslim Leaders.—The 31st July witnessed the burning of a huge pile of foreign-cloth at 25 Bombay by Mahatma Gandhi. The following day was the death anniversary of the great Lokamanya Tilak and was celebrated all over the country. Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Mahomed Ali started on a tour through Behar, Assam and Madras. It was in the month of August that the Moplah out-break which was not suppressed for several months broke out. The Mahatma and Maulana Mahomed Ali were going from Calcutta to Malabar to pacify the rioters, but they were not allowed and Maulana Mahomed Ali was arrested in the train at Waltair on the 14th September, 1921, under a warrant of the District Magistrate of Vizagapatam to show cause why he should not be bound over to keep the peace under sec. 107 or 108 Cr. P. C. On the 17th, he was however rearrested under a warrant from Karachi and taken by special train. Maulana Shaukat Ali was arrested at Bombay, Dr. Kitchlew at Simla, and Pir Gulam Mujadid in Sindh, while Maulana Nisar Ahmed, Hassan Ahmed and Shree Shankaracharya were also brought under arrest. It became known that the arrests had been made on account of the resolution passed at the Karachi Khilafat Conference regarding the duties of Muslims not to serve the army which had been based on a Fatwa given by five hundred of the most respected Moslem Divines. On the 21st September, the Central Khilafat Committee and the Jamiat-ul-Ulema met at Delhi under the presidency of Hakim Ajmal Khan and resolved to reprint the Fatwa for distribution and to repeat the Karachi resolution. Hundreds of meetings began to be held all over the country where the Karachi resolution was repeated, word by word, by each member of the audience. On the 4th of October, Mahatma Gandhi and about 50 other prominent Congressmen issued a manifesto asserting the right of every citizen to express his opinion regarding the propriety or otherwise of individuals joining or remaining in the Civil or Military service of the Government. It further proceeded to state it as their opinion that it was contrary to national dignity for an Indian to serve as a civilian and more specially as a soldier under a system of government which had brought about India’s economic, moral and political degradation and which had used the soldiery and the police for repressing national aspiration at home and for crushing the liberty of other nations, who had done no harm to India, abroad. It also expressed its opinion that it was the duty of every Indian soldier and civilian to sever his connection with the Government and find some other means of livelihood.

Their Trial and After.—The trial of the Ali brothers and others was held at Karachi and ended in the acquittal of Shree Shankaracharya on all the charges and the conviction and sentence of the other accused persons to two years rigorous imprisonment. The stand taken by the accused was that Muslims were forbidden by their religion from serving a state which had put itself in opposition to their religious injunction and it was the duty of every Mussalman to preach to his co-religionists to refrain from serving the Government. They were therefore bound by their religious creed to preach it, any secular or temporal laws to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Working Committee of the Congress met at Bombay on the 5th October and practically affirmed the manifesto issued on the previous evening and advised a voluntary hartal on the day of landing of H. R. H. the Prince of Wales and a boycott of all public welcome during his visit to the different cities of India.

The A. I. C. C. Meeting at Delhi.—On the 4th of November, the All-India Congress Committee met at Delhi and endorsed the resolution of the Working Committee regarding the duty of Government servants whether civilians or soldiers. It passed another resolution authorising every province on its own resaponsibility to undertake Civil Disobedience including non-payment of taxes subject to the conditions that, in case of individual Civil Disobedience, the individual must know hand-spinning, must have fulfilled the part of the programme applicable to him, must be a believer in the unity of communities and in Non-violence as absolutely essential and if a Hindu must show by personal conduct that he regards untouchability as a blot upon nationalism. In the case of mass Civil Disobedience, it required the vast majority of the population of the area embarking upon Civil Disobedience to have adopted full Swadeshi and to believe in and practice all other items of Non-co-operation. It further laid down that civil resisters and their families should not expect to be supported out of public funds and it authorised the Working Committee to relax the condition in suitable cases.

The Prince’s Visit and the Hartal.—On the 17th of November, 1921, H. R. H. the Prince of Wales landed in Bombay where he was received by Princes, officials, Europeans, Eurasians, Parsis and other rich persons. On the other hand, the middle and lower classes boycotted the welcome. Mobs got out of hand and began to molest visitors to the reception. From small beginnings the riots assumed large proportions; mobs burnt tramcars, smashed liquor shops and even molested some Parsi ladies. Mahatma Gandhi who happened to be in Bombay holding a meeting in another part of the town rushed to the scene of occurrence to quieten the mob. He was deeply affected by the events and he determined to fast till the riots ceased. The riots lasted for several days and several persons were wounded and killed. The Mahatma declared that he had come deliberately to the conclusion that mass Civil Disobedience could not be started then as the atmosphere for it was absent and the cult of Non-violence had not been sufficiently imbibed by the masses. The hartal however in all the other cities and even in villages was not marred by any such incidents. No shops were opened, no vehicles for hire plied and even some public offices had to be closed on account of the inability of the officers to attend for want of conveyance.

Its Success and Results.—The success of the hartal produced great panic among all classes of Europeans and the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and the European Association of Calcutta pressed the Government to take immediate action. The Government of Lord Reading which had brought out the Prince in spite of the protests and warnings of the people felt sorely disappointed at the turn events had taken and decided to secure a welcome for the Prince at the point of the bayonet. On 19th November, the Government of Bengal declared the Khilafat and Congress Volunteer Corps and other similar bodies unlawful under sec. 16 of the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, which had been passed to suppress anarchical bodies and secret societies. The Non-co-operation leaders, on the other hand, issued a manifesto declaring that volunteer organisations had not interfered with the maintenance of law and order and as a challenge to the Government notification enrolled themselves as members of the volunteer corps. A long list of such civil resisters was published and an appeal was made to observe the 24th of December as a day of complete hartal, on the occasion of the Prince’s visit. Similar notifications declaring volunteer organisations unlawful were issued in the provinces of Delhi, the Punjab, the U. P., Assam and Bihar and Orissa and the challenge was similarly accepted by the people. In many places, the Seditious Meetings Act was also applied. The Working Committee of the Congress met at Bombay on the 22nd and 23rd and directed all Provincial Congress Committees to appoint Volunteer Boards in their respective Provinces for controlling and bringing under an uniform discipline all existing volunteer corps and gave them draft instructions for giving effect to it. It also suggested the form of a pledge to be signed by volunteers in which Non-violence was insisted upon and a promise made to observe instructions of superiors and to run all risks in the performance of their duties.

The Attack on Elementary Rights.—In the 1st week of December commenced what is known as the period of repression. Pandit Motilal Nehru, Mr. C. R. Das, Lala Lajpat Rai, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Mr. S. E. Stokes to mention some of the leaders only, and a large number of volunteers began to be arrested for violating the terms of the notification. Thousands of volunteers in different parts of the country offered themselves for arrest and were arrested and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. There was a great flutter even in Moderate circles and their recognised leaders and association sent protests to the Government. Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya took a deputation to the Viceroy urging upon him the desirability of facing the situation and calling a Round Table Conference of the representatives of the people to make practical suggestions and recommendations to meet it. The deputation asked for a withdrawal of the notification under the Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Seditious Meetings Act and the release of the persons imprisoned under them. The Viceroy, however, was unable to accede to the request and repression went on. The Prince, in the midst of this after visiting various places where he had met with no popular welcome, arrived at Calcutta on the 24th December, which observed a complete hartal on the occasion. The Congress, the Khilafat, and the Muslim League also met at Ahmedabad in the same week.

The Ahmedabad Congress.—On account of the incarceration of Mr. C. R. Das who was the president-elect of the Congress, Hakim Ajmal Khan was elected to preside. The proceedings of the Congress did not last long and there was practically only one resolution passed by it. The Congress, after re-affirming the Non-co-operation resolution passed at its previous sessions, called upon all, in view of the repressive policy of the Government, to quietly and without any demonstration offer themselves for arrest by belonging to the Volunteer organisations and it further advised the holding of Committee meetings and even of public meetings under certain restrictions in spite of prohibitions. It declared that Civil Disobedience is the only civilised and effective substitute for armed rebellion^[6] and advised Congress workers and others to organise individual and mass Civil Disobedience when the mass of the people have been sufficiently trained in the methods of non-violence. It called upon all students and the staff of national institutions to join the national volunteer corps. And, in view of the impending arrest of a large number of workers, the Congress, while requiring the ordinary machinery to remain in tact and to be utilised in the ordinary manner whenever feasible, appointed Mahatma Gandhi as the sole executive authority of the Congress and invested him with the full authority of the All-India Congress Committee and also with the power to appoint a successor in emergency, save that Mahatma Gandhi or any of his successors could not conclude any terms of peace with the Government without the previous sanction of the All-India Congress Committee to be finally satified by the Congress and that he could not change the creed. A resolution moved by Maulana Hasrat Mohani for a change in the creed of the Congress, so as to make complete independence the goal of the Congress, was thrown out by a large majority.

Intensive Repression.—In the following months, the repression policy of the Government was given full play and thousands of volunteers were sent to jail. Many of the leaders in several of the Provinces were also imprisoned and are still in jail. The history of these months is a history of unbridled arrests and incarcera- tions on the one hand and a brave and undaunted acceptance of the challenge on the other. It can be truly asserted that the country had given an account of itself which is one to be proud of and even though the fruits of the sacrifice of 25,000 men and women are not yet visible, the sacrifice cannot have gone in vain.

Civil Disobedience and Chauri Chaura.—In the month of February, serious riots took place at a place called Chauri Chaura in the district of Gorakhpur and Mahatma Gandhi who had proceeded to Bardoli to lead a campaign of mass Civil Disobedience and had gone so far as to issue his message to the Viceroy^[7] and Government intimating the initiation of mass Civil Disobedience had to suspend the campaign as a consequence. On the 11th of February the Working Committee of the Congress met at Bardoli and suspended Civil Disobedience and called upon all Congress organisations to concentrate their efforts on creating an atmosphere of non-violence and further strengthening the Congress organisations by improving the panchayats and national educational institutions established under it, by enrolling members for the Congress, by stimulating the use of spinning wheels and production of khaddar, by the raising of the suppressed classes by removing untouchability and by collecting money for the Tilak Swarajya Fund to carry on the Congress work. Mahatma Gandhi observed a five day’s fast as a penance for the Chauri Chaura tragedy. The All-India Congress Committee met at Delhi on the 24th of February and practically affirmed the Bardoli resolutions of the Working Committee. With the Delhi session of the All-India Congress Committee, practically suspending Civil Disobedience, differences in the ranks of Non-co-operators began to manifest themselves. The Maharashtra Party moved what was a vote of censure on the Working Committee for the Bardoli resolutions and suggested a revision of the programme, but it was lost in the All-India Congress Committee. Many workers were dissatisfied with the suspension of Civil Disobedience and the constructive programme which chalked out a course of quiet and unostentatious work of organisation and consolidations of the national resources was, regarded by many as throwing a wet blanket on the fire and fervour of the people.

The Mahatma’s Arrest and After.—It was while things were moving on in this way that the Government had Mahatma Gandhi arrested on the 10th of March, tried for sedition and sentenced to six years imprisonment. With the removal of Mahatma Gandhi from the scene of his labours where he had led the millions of India’s masses, India has been deprived of the guidance of a world leader. The Congress Committees have been trying to carry on the constructive programme laid down at Bardoli. When the All-India Congress Committee met at Lucknow on the 7th of June, great dissatisfaction with the present programme and an earnest desire to resort to Civil Disobedience was expressed by many members. The Committee, however, ultimately appealed to the country to concentrate its efforts upon carrying out the constructive programme and asked the President to appoint a Committee to report on the situation in the country as regards its preparedness for Civil Disobedience at its next meeting. The Civil Disobedience Enquiry Committee appointed in terms of this resolution has been touring the country and is expected to issue its report in a few days to be considered by the All-India Congress Committee.

Here closes a narrative of events. The reader will find the principles, the faith and the inspiration of the N. C. O. movement and the Non-co-operators in the words of its originator in the pages of Young India reprinted hereinafter for the behoof of the growing number of persons desirous of imbibing the true spirit from its fountain source.

Conclusion.—Looking back at the history of the last 2 years one finds that the country as a whole has been roused more than ever before during the period of its occupation by Britain. Within a few months of the Nagpur Congress, there was hardly a village or hamlet to which the message of Swaraj had not been carried. The feeling of helplessness and despair gave place to one of buoyant hope and faith in the destiny of the country. People have for once realised their strength and feel that strong as the Government may appear with its armaments, it cannot but fall at the feet of a nation determined to be free and determined to suffer for attaining that freedom. They know that all their troubles and humiliations are of their own making, and the moment they are united and organised enough they can bring the Government to its knees. To this end , unity between Hindus, Mussalmans, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians, Jew and other races and communities of the country is regarded as the first and most important step. To this end a perfect organisation of Panchayats linking village to village, District to District, Province to Province and all these into one whole, is looked upon as a sine qua non of success in this momentous struggle. To this end also the production and propagation of Khaddar to free the nation from economical thraldom in respect of one of the necessaries of life is calculated to lead. And last, though not least, to this end, too, is directed the effort to purge society of social evils, such as drinking and litigiousness, and of the sin of untouchability which condemns a vast proportion of the population to a position worse than that of lower animals. The movement is essentially a movement intended and expected to strengthen and purify the Indian people. It relies more and more upon the moral strength and superiority of the peoples of India—a strength and superiority born of the purity of their aims and purity of their methods—than upon naked brute force which is inherently weak. Therefore it is that it has made an irresistible appeal to India. May her efforts to relieve herself from the present position of bondage, humiliation and dishonour without recourse to arms be successful and thus pave the way for the freedom of a world sick with a state of things in which Justice, Truth, Honour and the divine, virtue of Charity count for nothing before the imperious demands of Imperialism and Capitalism.

31st August, 1922.

Rajendra Prasad.

1. The American Federalist which in importance and some other respects bears a close analogy to the Young India articles almost follows this arrangement.
2. See p. 55.
3. See Appendix.
4. For further details, See the Congress (the Punjab) Enquiry Report.
5. See p. 1107.
6. Even political reactionaries should approve of this course if it becomes inevitable, “The Indian community… are struggling for the maintenance of a right and the removal of a degradation. Can we as Englishmen find fault with them for that? The only method, of protest, except that of violence and disorder, which is open to them, who have neither votes nor representation, is that of passive resistance. Can we find fault with them for that? Let him who blames them say what he would do in similar circumstances. Is there one of us who, out of respect for the law, would submit meekly and without protest to deprivation of rights and social degradation?” Lord Ampthill in his introduction to Doke’s Life of Gandhi.
7. See p. 966.