But if the gallantry of the native soldiers who obtained recognition stirs within us a pride in having such fellow-subjects. . . . indeed, nothing could exceed their magnificent self-devotion to their comrades in that deadly pass. . . The truth is that the Indians are earning the right to be regarded as worthy fellow-subjects in more ways than one. The battle-field has always formed the short cut to an honourable equality among races. But the Indians are also proving their title to our respect by the slower and more difficult methods of civil life. There was a greater experiment made in the constitutional government of dependencies than the expansion of the Indian Legislative Council on a partially elective basis three years ago. . . Many of the discussions have been most helpful, and so far as Bengal is concerned—the province in which the elective system seemed fraught with the greatest difficulty—the experiment, after a severe trial, has proved a success.
This, as is well known, is from the pen of a historian[30] and Indian officer who has served in India for 30 years. Disfranchisement by itself may seem to some to be very insignificant. But its consequences to the Indian community are too dreadful to contemplate. Its corresponding advantages to the European Colonists, I am convinced, are nil, unless there be anything gratifying in degrading or keeping under degradation a race or nation. There is no question of “the white man or the yellow man ruling”, and I hope to be able to show, on a future occasion, that the fears entertained on that score are entirely groundless.
There are passages in Mr. Francis’s letter which would, perhaps, show that he must have left India very long ago. There are very few posts more responsible than that of a civil commissioner, and yet the Secretary of State for India only recently thought it prudent to appoint an Indian to that post. Mr. Francis knows what jurisdiction a Chief Justice in India enjoys, and an Indian has occupied that position both in Bengal and Madras. Those who wish to bind the two races— the British and the Indian—with “the silken cord of love” will not find it difficult to notice innumerable points of contact between the two. Even the three religions of the two, in spite of their apparent antagonism, have much in common, and would not form a bad unity in trinity.
I am, etc.,
M. K. GANDHI
The Natal Mercury, 23-9-1895
- 29↑ Controverting Gandhiji's plea for granting the franchise to Indians in South Africa, Mr. Marston T. Francis, who had lived several years in India, wrote in The Natal Mercury, 6-9-1895, that though Indians in India could vote at municipal elections and become members of the Legislative Council, things were so constituted that they could never outvote the European members or arrogate to themselves supreme authority. The chairman of a municipality, he said, was always a covenanted officer of the Indian Civil Service, and the Commissioner of the Division, the Governor, the Viceroy, the Secretary of State for India, and ultimately the British Parliament could impose checks on the municipalities and legislative bodies of India.
- 30↑ Sir. W. W. Hunter
