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

SIGNS OF COMING UPHEAVAL 193
upon Congressmen to resign their seats in the Legislatures.
No notice was given to the Congress Parties in the different
Legislatures, nor was their opinion invited and the most
surprising thing was the acquiescence of Pandit Motilal
Nehru, who had been leading the Congress Party in the
Assembly. The Pandit had in the month of May encouraged
the Bengal Congress Party to fight the elections and had
especially enjoined on them to recapture some of the Moslem
seats. When a meeting of the All-India Congress Committee¹
was held at Allahabad the same month, a strenuous opposition
was put forward by the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta and the
writer, both of whom were members of the Congress Working
Committee. As a result of this opposition and also of the
dissatisfaction expressed by the Congress Parties in the
different Legislatures, the resolution regarding resignation
from the Legislatures was rescinded and the whole matter
was adjourned till the Lahore Congress in December. Up
till now it is a puzzle to many as to what happened between
May and July to make Pandit Motilal Nehru change his front.
Was he suddenly disappointed at the work put in by the
Congress Parties in the Legislatures? Was he faced with a
revolt or a faction in his own Party in the Assembly and
therefore wanted to dissolve it? Or did he want to put up a
united front against the Left-Wingers who were growing
more powerful, and for that reason wanted to placate the
Mahatma by agreeing to his pet theory of Council-boycott?
In any case, there is no doubt that without the support of
Pandit Motilal Nehru, the Mahatma would never have forced
his views on the Congress. And one has to remark with great
regret that Pandit Motilal Nehru who was the only man
who could influence the Mahatma either way at that time,
did a positive disservice to his country by actively supporting
the Mahatma in his policy of reviving the boycott of the
Legislatures. The harmful effect of this boycott became
more and more evident in the years to come. To say the
least, it was tactically a great blunder to boycott the Legis-
¹ The All-India Congress Committee is a body of about 350 members
representing the different provinces of India. Every year it elects an
Executive of 15 members, called the Working Committee.
N

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

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

196 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

212 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
Midnapore District suffered most and the sufferings of the
people gave birth to a terrorist movement for organising
reprisals against officials. Parts of the United Provinces
where the no-rent campaign was very strong, also suffered
badly. In Gujerat, when the sufferings of the peasantry be-
came unbearable, they left their homes and migrated to the
neighbouring state of Baroda. Indiscriminate and brutal use
of force, attack on women and wanton destruction of property
—constituted some of the features of the 'illegal' measures
adopted by agents of the Crown towards a people who had,
on the whole, remained strictly non-violent. The usual
method of attacking Satyagrahis and unarmed citizens,
including women, was with the help of powerful sticks,
which being iron-shod or covered with leather, could split
human skulls with ease.¹ Attacks were made on helpless
Satyagrahi prisoners as well.² Where these were not sufficient
for striking terror, shooting was occasionally resorted to. In
most provinces such shooting incidents occurred occasionally,
but the most diabolical incident took place at Peshawar (the
capital of the North-West Frontier Province) on April 23rd,
where the number of people shot and killed on one day,
went up to several hundred. The facts are roughly these.
There was a peaceful demonstration following the arrest of
some local leaders. The authorities lost their heads and sent
some armoured cars to disperse the crowd that was by that
time moving homewards. The armoured cars, full of soldiers,
rushed full tilt into the crowd without warning from behind,
killing three people on the spot and wounding a large number.
¹ In most provinces the Congress agencies had to set up hospitals and
to organise Ambulance Services for taking care of the injured Satyagrahis.
The finest and most well-equipped hospitals were in Bombay City where
the number of injured Satyagrahis was the largest of all the Indian cities.
² Such an attack was made in the Alipore Central Jail in Calcutta in
April 1930. Among those who were attacked were the late Mr. Sengupta,
then Mayor of Calcutta, Mr. Kiron Sankar Roy, Secretary Bengal Congress
Committee, Prof. N. C. Bannerji, Mr. S. R. Bakshi, Editor of Liberty,
the writer and a large number of fellow-prisoners. The writer, who was
in the front rank, was, during the course of the attack thrown down
and rendered unconscious for more than one hour. The public demanded
an inquiry which the Government refused. At the end, Government
appointed a Medical Board consisting of Dr. B. C. Roy and Lt.-Col. Denham-
White who examined the injured prisoners and issued a report on their
physical condition.