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

58 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
the Congress on a country-wide basis. The smallest unit
would be the Village Congress Committee. Several such
Committees would combine to form a Union Congress Com-
mittee. Then there would be formed in succession—sub-
divisional (also called Taluka or Tahsil), district, provincial
and All-India Congress Committees. The All-India Congress
Committee would be a body of about 350 members consisting
of representatives from the different provinces. This
Committee would elect a Working Committee of 15 members
which would be the Supreme Executive of the Congress for
the whole country. Further, the provinces were re-organised
on a linguistic basis. For instance, the Madras Presidency
was divided into Andhra, which is Telegu-speaking and
Tamil-Nadu, which is Tamil-speaking. The basis of the new
Congress Constitution was of a democratic and parliamentary
character. Besides setting up a new Constitution, the Nagpur
Congress laid down a definite plan of work for the coming
year.
Regarding the means to be followed by the Congress for
attaining Swaraj, a change was made in the Constitution.
Hitherto the Congress had been tied down to ‘constitutional’
means, but in future the Congress could adopt ‘all peaceful
and legitimate’ means. This change had to be made in
order to enable the Congress to resort to non-co-operation,
which could be regarded as unconstitutional. Regarding
both the goal and the means, the decision of the Nagpur
Congress represented the golden mean between the views of
the Right-Wingers like Pandit Malaviya and Mr. Jinnah and
the youthful Left-Wingers who swamped the Congress for
the first time in 1920. The latter desired the goal of the
Congress to be complete independence to be attained by all
possible means. It was Mr. Gandhi, however, who by virtue
of his tremendous influence and popularity was able to keep
the Left-Wingers at bay. The Constitution that was adopted
at Nagpur and which holds good even to-day, was practically
his own draft. A year before, at Amritsar, he had been author-
ised by the Congress to revise the existing Constitution of that
body.
Among the other resolutions adopted were those relating

THE CLOUDS GATHER 59
to the revival of hand-spinning and hand-weaving, removing
of untouchability¹ among the Hindus and the collection of a
fund of ten million rupees in memory of the late Lokamanya
Tilak. (The idea of bringing back into use the ancient
spinning-wheel in order to produce cloth as a cottage industry
had struck Mr. Gandhi a year before). While the above resolu-
tions were all of a useful or beneficial character, there was
one resolution which must be regarded as a great blunder.
That was the decision to wind up the British Branch of the
Indian National Congress and stop publication of its organ,
the paper India. With the carrying into effect of this resolu-
tion, the only centre of propaganda which the Congress had
outside India was shut down.
The Nagpur Congress, like the Calcutta Congress, was a
great triumph for Mr. Gandhi. It was his Constitution and
his plan of work that was adopted there. The gathering was
an unprecedented one, twenty thousand people attending the
Congress. Public enthusiasm was at a very high pitch and
among the distinguished visitors were two Labour members
of the British Parliament, Mr. Ben Spoor and Col. Wedgwood.
The Nagpur Congress was an important landmark in the
history of the Indian Nationalist Movement. It stood for a
complete break with the Moderates, but it did not represent
a complete victory for the Extremists. The latter as we shall
see subsequently, would have to work for many years before
they could bring the Congress round to their point of view.
Considered objectively, the plan which Mr. Gandhi placed
before the Congress and the country was not something
altogether new in the recent history of India. The fight
which the people of Bengal had waged against the Govern-
ment as a protest against the partition of their province in
1905 by the then Viceroy, Lord Curzon, had many features
in common with the war of non-violent non-co-operation
started in 1920 under the leadership of Mr. Gandhi. In 1905,
Bengal had resorted to the boycott of British goods and of
state-owned educational institutions and there had simul-
taneously been a revival of national industries and a growth of
national schools and colleges, free from state interference of
¹ This is explained later on.

60 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
every kind. Moreover, leaders like Mr. B. C. Pal had refused
to give evidence before British law courts on the ground that
they refused to recognise their jurisdiction. Sri Arabindo
Ghosh, the leader of the Extremist section of the Nationalist
Movement in Bengal in those days had compared this policy
with the policy of the Irish Sinn Fein Party. Several decades
earlier, the country had witnessed another movement which
could also be regarded as a precursor of Mr. Gandhi's non-
co-operation. Before scientists in Europe learnt to produce
synthetic indigo, Bengal was an important supplier of indigo.
The indigo plantations in those days were owned by Britishers
and these foreign landlords were oppressive and brutal in
their behaviour towards the tenants. When their brutality
became unbearable, the tenants in Jessore and Nadia took the
law into their own hands. They refused to pay rent, stopped
cultivating indigo and made it impossible for the British
landlords to live there and terrorise them. (A graphic
description of these incidents can be found in the book
Nil-darpan of the well-known Bengali writer, Dinabandhu
Mitra.) Thus the people had already learnt to rid themselves
of oppression through their own exertions, where they found
that the Government neglected its duty.
It is a well-known fact that Mr. Gandhi had in his earlier
life been considerably influenced by the teachings of Jesus
Christ and the ideas of Leo Tolstoy. It cannot therefore be
claimed that he was altogether original in his ideas or novel
in his practice. But his real merit was a twofold one. He
translated the teachings of Christ and the ideas of Tolstoy
and Thoreau into actual practice and demonstrated that it
was possible to fight for liberty without resorting to violence.
Secondly, he used 'non-co-operation' not for remedying local
grievances, but for winning national freedom and he well-nigh
demonstrated that it was possible to paralyse the civil adminis-
tration of a foreign Government thereby and bring the Govern-
ment to its knees. A happy combination of factors helped to
bring Mr. Gandhi to the forefront in 1920. The attempted
revolution during the Great War had failed and the Revolu-
tionary Party had been crushed. There was consequently no
possibility of another revolution in 1920. Nevertheless, the

THE CLOUDS GATHER 61
country wanted a bold and vigorous policy on the part of
the Congress and the only alternative was a movement like
the one which Mr. Gandhi started. Secondly, the death of
Lokamanya Tilak on the eve of the Calcutta Congress removed
from the field the only possible rival of Mr. Gandhi. Thirdly,
as a result of his long and careful preparation, Mr. Gandhi
was fully prepared to assume the undisputed leadership of
the Indian National Congress in 1920. Through ascetic
discipline he had equipped himself for a life of suffering and
during the period of his apprenticeship in Indian politics,
from 1914 to 1920, he had been able to gather round him a
band of loyal and trusted followers. Fourthly, he had
acquired experience in the use of the weapon of 'Satyagraha.'
Though his movement against the Rowlatt Bills in 1919 had
proved to be abortive, he had won considerable success in
South Africa. Before 1919 he had occasion, moreover, to
make use of Satyagraha five times in India with very good
results. Last but not least, he had gathered round his head
a halo of saintliness which was of inestimable value to him
in a country where the people revere the saint more than the
millionaire or the Governor.
In spite of the democratic constitution of the Indian
National Congress, at Nagpur, Mr. Gandhi emerged as the
virtual Dictator of the Congress. He was, moreover, spon-
taneously acclaimed by the people as Mahatma (meaning
literally a high-souled man or a saint). That was the highest
tribute that the Indian people could give him.
Throughout the year 1919, lightning and thunder had
raged in the political sky of India—but towards the end of
the year the clouds lifted and the Amritsar Congress seemed
to herald an era of peace and quiet. But the promise of
Amritsar was not fulfilled. Once again the clouds began to
gather and towards the end of 1920 the sky was dark and
threatening. With the new year came whirlwind and storm.
And the man who was destined to ride the whirlwind and
direct the storm was Mahatma Gandhi.

CHAPTER II
THE STORM BREAKS (1921)
THE defection of the Moderates from the Congress was res-
ponsible for lowering to some extent the intellectual level of
that body. But this loss was more than compensated by the
rallying of the masses round the Congress banner. Moreover,
Mahatma Gandhi did get as his trusted colleagues some
veteran Congressmen whose reputation stood high in the
country and who now renounced their professional work in
order to give their whole time to the Congress. Mr. C. R.
Das,¹ the leader of the Calcutta Bar, who had already made a
name in Indian politics as also in Bengali literature, gave up
his princely income and plunged into the Non-co-operation
Campaign. From Allahabad came Pandit Motilal Nehru, the
leader of the Allahabad Bar, who also gave up his professional
work. He was joined by his son—Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru—
also an advocate by profession, who was destined to make a
name for himself in the days to come. From the Punjab,
Lala Lajpat Rai, the uncrowned king of that province who
had been a lawyer in his earlier life, came forward to join
the Mahatma. From the Bombay Presidency, the Mahatma
got the support of the Patel brothers, Mr. Vithalbhai and
Mr. Vallabhbhai, both advocates by profession—and also
Mr. N. C. Kelkar of Poona, who was the successor of the
late Lokamanya Tilak in Maharashtra (the southern and
eastern portion of Bombay Presidency). The leaders of the
Central Provinces who joined the Mahatma were Dr. Moonje,
an eye-physician and Mr. Abhyankar, an advocate. The leader
of Bihar was Mr. Rajendra Prasad, who renounced a fat
income and a most promising career at the Patna Bar in
order to work for the Congress. From the Tamil-speaking
¹ So great was the popularity of Mr. C. R. Das at the time that he was
spontaneously given the title of ‘Deshbandhu’ by the people. ‘Deshbandhu’
means literally ‘friend of the country’.
62

. THE STORM BREAKS 63
portion of Madras Presidency came Mr. Rajagopalachari, Mr.
A. Rangaswami Iyengar and Mr. Satyamurti, and from the
Telegu-speaking portion Mr. Prakasam, all lawyers by pro-
fession. On the supreme executive of the Congress there also
sat the Ali brothers—Moulana Mohammed and Moulana
Shaukat Ali—Moulana Abul Kalam Azad, one of the most
learned of the Moslem divines and Dr. Ansari of Delhi—all of
whom represented the new awakening among the Indian
Moslems. Thus it will be seen that it was a very good team
that Mahatma Gandhi was able to collect at the outset of his
campaign.
Among those who gave up their professional work in
response to the appeal of the Congress, the lawyers played a
most important part. The example of lawyer-princes like
Deshbandhu Das and Pandit Motilal Nehru was followed by
lesser lights among the lawyer-fraternity throughout India
and as a result, the Congress ranks were replenished by a
large number of whole-time workers of standing and influence.
The appeal of the Congress for boycott of law-courts met with
a fair measure of success. While a large number of lawyers
gave up their practice for good, there was, on the other
hand, an intensive campaign to dissuade litigants from
approaching British law-courts and persuade them to settle
their disputes by arbitration. As a matter of fact, arbitration-
boards under the control of the Congress, came into
existence all over the country and owing to their efforts the
Government revenue from litigation was considerably reduced.
Along with the boycott of law-courts, a campaign was started
for promoting temperance and stopping the use of intoxicants
of all kinds: The success of this campaign was remarkable
throughout India and in many provinces the excise revenue
(that is, the revenue from the trade in liquor and other
intoxicants) was reduced to one-third of what it formerly
was. In some provinces, as in Bihar, the Government felt
obliged to conduct a campaign for popularising the use of
liquor and other intoxicants in order to increase their revenue.
The temperance movement was exceedingly popular among
the masses and it fulfilled a moral as well as an economic
purpose, while it caused considerable embarrassment to the

64 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
Government. This movement was accompanied by a cam-
paign for the removal of untouchability. In certain parts of
India, especially in the south, some castes like sweepers,
scavengers, etc., had been treated as untouchables. That is
to say, the other castes would not dine with them, would
not take food or drink served by them and in some places,
would not allow them to enter the temples. This custom
was a factor working against the solidarity of the Indian
people and from the moral and human standpoint, was
quite unjustifiable. It was therefore but natural that when
the Congress resolved to launch a campaign for winning
political freedom for India, it should also seek to emanci-
pate the masses from the shackles of social bondage of every
kind
In order to afford some measure of economic relief to the
masses, the Congress advocated the boycott of foreign cloth
and the revival of hand-spinning and hand-weaving on a
large scale. The idea of boycotting foreign cloth was not a
new one—since the cry of boycott of British cloth had been
first raised in Bengal as early as 1905. The revival of hand-
weaving was also not a new proposal, since the Indian hand-
loom industry had held its own against the competition of
foreign and Indian mills. But the idea of reviving hand-
spinning, which had practically gone out of use, was a novel
and a daring one. It was difficult at first to find the men or
women who could teach others to spin. The Mahatma,
who was himself a good spinner arranged to turn out batches
of men and women who themselves could spin and teach
spinning. Within a short time thousands of men and women
were sent out all over the country, including the remotest
villages, to teach the villagers how to spin. It was also difficult
at first to get or buy spinning-wheels. They had to be manu-
factured in the cities and sent out to the villages, till the
village carpenters learned how to make them once again.
The cloth woven in hand-looms out of hand-spun yarn was
called 'Khadi' or 'Khaddar' and was more coarse than
mill-made cloth. As the production of this cloth began to
increase, it automatically became the uniform of all Congress-
men in India. They were required to set an example to the

THE STORM BREAKS 65
people by voluntarily wearing coarse ‘Khadi’ and discarding
fine mill-made cloth.
To undertake the above work, both men and money were
required. The Mahatma therefore appealed to the nation
for ten million members for the Congress and a fund of ten
million rupees (13½ rupees = one pound approximately).
The response to this appeal proved to be most encouraging
but in order to go round collecting money and enlisting
members, an initial band of workers was necessary. This
band of workers had to be supplied by the student com-
munity and the year 1921 therefore opened with an extensive
campaign for the boycott of schools and colleges. Students
responded to the appeal in large numbers and the response
was the greatest in Bengal where the imagination of the
youths had been stirred by the colossal sacrifice made by
Deshbandhu C. R. Das. It was these student-workers who
carried the message of the Congress to all corners of the
country, who collected funds, enlisted members, held meet-
ings and demonstrations, preached temperance, established
arbitration-boards, taught spinning and weaving and en-
couraged the revival of home industries. Without them, all
the influence of Mahatma Gandhi would not have carried the
country very far.
There has been much criticism of the policy of withdrawing
students from educational institutions in 1921. Nevertheless,
if one dispassionately reviews the situation in the country in
1920-21, the conclusion will be irresistible that the Congress
had no option in the matter, if it desired its resolutions to be
translated into action. It should also be stated that though
originally the Congress did not take in hand the task of
establishing ‘national’ institutions, later on such institutions
were started all over the country. Those students who had
withdrawn from state-owned or state-controlled institutions
in a spirit of non-co-operation but who desired to continue
their studies under more salutary conditions, could join the
newly-started national institutions and continue their studies.
Such institutions were started in Bombay, Ahmedabad (in
Bombay Presidency), Poona (in Bombay Presidency), Nagpur
(in Central Provinces), Benares (in the United Provinces),
E

66 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
Patna (in Bihar), Calcutta and Dacca (in Bengal). Some of
these were for literary education, while others were for
technical or medical education—but spinning was compulsory
in all of them. In many places there were separate institutions
for girls. Many of these institutions still exist and some of
them are in a flourishing condition. Besides these educa-
tional institutions, another set of institutions spontaneously
grew up all over India. These were called ‘Ashramas.’ Built
on the model of the hermitages of old, they were homes for
the whole-time political workers. New recruits were also
trained there and the local office of the Congress would often
be housed in the same premises. The Ashramas also served
sometimes as centres for spinning and weaving. From these
centres, raw cotton and yarn would be distributed among the
spinners and weavers and would be received back as yarn
and cloth respectively. In many Ashramas there would also
be a reading-room and a library for the use of the Congress
workers and of the local public.
In the programme of progressive non-co-operation adopted
at Nagpur in December, 1920, there was, besides the triple
boycott, an item regarding the renunciation of titles conferred
by—and resignation of all posts held under—the Government.
A comparatively large number of men gave up their titles
but an insignificant number resigned their jobs and among
the latter was myself. I had passed the Indian Civil Service
in England in 1920, but finding that it would be impossible
to serve both masters at the same time—namely the British
Government and my country—I resigned my post in May
1921, and hurried back to India with a view to taking my
place in the national struggle that was then in full swing. I
reached Bombay on July 16th and the same afternoon I
obtained an interview with Mahatma Gandhi. My object
in seeking the interview was to get from the leader of the
campaign I was about to join, a clear conception of his plan
of action. During the last few years I had made some study
of the methods and tactics employed by revolutionary leaders
in other parts of the world and in the light of that knowledge
I wanted to understand the Mahatma’s mind and purpose.
I remember vividly the scene of that afternoon. On arriving

THE STORM BREAKS 67
at Mani Bhuvan, the usual residence of the Mahatma in
Bombay, I was ushered into a room covered with Indian
carpets. Almost in the centre, facing the door, sat the
Mahatma surrounded by some of his closest followers. All
were clad in home-made Khadi. As I entered the room, I
felt somewhat out of place in my foreign costume and could
not help apologising for it. The Mahatma received me with
his characteristic hearty smile and soon put me at ease
and the conversation started at once. I desired to obtain a
clear understanding of the details—the successive stages—of
his plan, leading on step by step to the ultimate seizure of
power from the foreign bureaucracy. To that end I began to
heap question upon question and the Mahatma replied with
his habitual patience. There were three points which needed
elucidation. Firstly, how were the different activities con-
ducted by the Congress going to culminate in the last stage
of the campaign, namely, the non-payment of taxes? Secondly,
how could mere non-payment of taxes or civil disobedience
force the Government to retire from the field and leave us
with our freedom? Thirdly, how could the Mahatma promise
‘Swaraj’ (that is, Home Rule) within one year—as he had
been doing ever since the Nagpur Congress? His reply to the
first question satisfied me. The response to his appeal for
ten million members and ten million rupees having been
found to be satisfactory, he had proceeded to the next item
in his plan—namely, the boycott of foreign cloth and the
propagation of home-made Khadi. During the next few
months, his efforts would be concentrated on the Khadi
campaign. And he expected that the Government would
take the initiative in attacking the Congress, the moment it
realised that the peaceful constructive activities of the Congress
were proving to be successful. When the Government did
so, the time would come for disobeying governmental decrees
and marching to prison. The prisons would before long be
filled to overflowing and then would come the last stage of
the campaign—namely, the non-payment of taxes.
The Mahatma’s replies to the other two questions were
not convincing. I asked him if he expected that the boycott
movement would create so much distress in Lancashire that

68 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
pressure would be brought to bear on Parliament and the
Cabinet to make peace with India. But the Mahatma gave
me to understand that he did not consider that to be the
means whereby the Government would be forced to come to
terms with the Congress. What his real expectation was, I
was unable to understand. Either he. did not want to give
out all his secrets prematurely or he did not have a clear
conception of the tactics whereby the hands of the Govern-
ment could be forced.¹ Altogether, his reply to the second
question was disappointing and his reply to the third was
no better. What was to him a question of faith—namely, that
Swaraj would be won within one year—was by no means
clear to me and personally speaking, I was prepared to work
for a much longer period. However, I had no other course
but to feel thankful for what I had been able to learn after
an hour's conversation. But though I tried to persuade myself
at the time there must have been a lack of understanding on
my part, my reason told me clearly, again and again, that
there was a deplorable lack of clarity in the plan which the
Mahatma had formulated and that he himself did not have
a clear idea of the successive stages of the campaign which
would bring India to her cherished goal of freedom.
Depressed and disappointed as I was, what was I to do?
The Mahatma advised me to report myself to Deshbandhu
C. R. Das on reaching Calcutta. I had already written to the
latter from Cambridge that I had resigned the Indian Civil
Service and had decided to join the political movement.
Stories had reached us in England that he had given up his
princely career at the Bar and was going to devote his whole
time to political work, while making a gift of his entire
property to the nation. In my eagerness to meet this great
man, I overcame the somewhat depressing effect of my
interview with Mahatma Gandhi and I left Bombay with the
same excitement and the same enthusiasm with which I had
landed there. On reaching Calcutta, I went straight to the
house of Deshbandhu Das. Once again I was disappointed.
¹Looking back on the incident to-day, it strikes me that possibly the
Mahatma expected a 'change of heart' on the part of the British Govern-
ment, leading to an acceptance of India's national demands.

·THE STORM BREAKS 69
He was out on a long tour in the interior of the province and
I had no option but to wait for his return. When I heard
that he was back, I called again. He was out at the time
but I was received with great kindness and cordiality by his
wife, Srijukta Basanti Debi. Before long he arrived on the
scene. I can still picture before my mind's eye his massive
figure as he approached me. He was not the same Mr. Das
whom I had once approached for advice when he was one of
the leaders of the Calcutta Bar and I a student, expelled
from the University for political reasons. He was not the
same Mr. Das who was earning thousands in a day and
spending thousands in an hour. Though his house was no
longer a palace, he was however the same Mr. Das, who
had always been a friend of youth, could understand
their aspirations and sympathise with their sorrows. During
the course of our conversation I began to feel that here was
a man who knew what he was about—who could give all
that he had and who could demand from others all they
could give—a man to whom youthfulness was not a short-
coming but a virtue. By the time our conversation came to
an end my mind was made up. I felt that I had found a
leader and I meant to follow him.
On settling down in Calcutta I proceeded to take stock of
the situation in the country and particularly in the province
of Bengal. Throughout the country there was unparalleled
enthusiasm. The 'triple boycott' had been fairly successful.
Though the legislatures were not empty, no Congressmen
had gone there. The lawyers had on the whole made a good
response and the student community had come out of the
ordeal with flying colours.¹ The appeal for Congress members
and for funds had borne good fruit and feeling highly en-
couraged at the state of affairs, the Mahatma had launched
in July a campaign for the boycott of foreign cloth and the
revival of spinning and weaving. On the anniversary of the
death of Lokamanya Tilak, August 1st, 1934, there were huge
bonfires of foreign cloth all over the country. A symbolic
meaning was also given by the Congress leaders to these
¹ The people had taken up enthusiastically the propaganda for the re-
moval of untouchability and for the stoppage of the drink and drug traffic.

70 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
bonfires which were to burn to ashes all the dross, all the
dirt and all the weakness that was in the country. The
whole-hearted support of the Moslem community and the
novelty of the method of non-co-operation brought more
strength to the movement, while the slogan of 'Swaraj within
one year' drew into the field many people who would have
been appalled by the prospect of a long period of suffering.
In Bengal two important events took place—the Assam-
Bengal Railway Strike and the no-tax campaign in Midnapore
District. The railway strike paralysed completely all rail and
steamer traffic in East Bengal and Assam. The strike was
conducted under the leadership of the Bengal Congress
Committee and in the earlier stages it was so successful
that it made the people conscious of the power that they
could wield if only they could combine against the authorities.
As a timely settlement was not made, the strike dragged on
for a long period and it ultimately collapsed, bringing disaster
in its train. It was in connection with this strike that Mr.
J. M. Sengupta first came into prominence before the public
eye. The other event of importance was the no-tax campaign
in Midnapore District. In 1919 at the instance of Sir S. P.
Sinha (afterwards Lord Sinha), a member of the Execu-
tive Council of the Governor of Bengal, an Act had been
passed purporting to introduce a measure of Self-Government
for the villages—whereby union-boards would be established
for every group of villages in the province. There had been
considerable criticism of this measure mainly on two grounds
—firstly, the power that should be transferred to the villagers
was still retained in the hands of the district officials (for
instance, the power to appoint and dismiss village policemen)
and secondly, the establishment of union-boards entailed
additional taxation in return for which no advantages would
accrue. The Act provided that it was open to the Provincial
Government to introduce it in any district or withdraw it
therefrom. Under the leadership of Mr. B. N. Sasmal, an
advocate, the people of Midnapore started an agitation for the
withdrawal of the Act from their district and to strengthen
their demand, they refused to pay the taxes imposed by
the newly-established union-boards. The usual repressive

THE STORM BREAKS 71
measures were taken to force the new Act on the district.
Forcible seizure of property, harassment and prosecution
of the villagers, intimidation by military police and by
soldiers—all were tried but without success. The orgy of
repression continued throughout the year 1921, but the Act
had ultimately to be withdrawn in 1922. The success of this
no-tax campaign gave considerable strength and self-con-
fidence to the people of Midnapore and popularity to their
leader, Mr. B. N. Sasmal.
It is necessary to interrupt our narrative here and to refer
to the attitude adopted by the authorities in 1921. At first,
the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, did not take Mahatma Gandhi
seriously. In January, the Duke of Connaught, uncle of the
present King, visited India with the object of inaugurating
the new legislatures. His visit was boycotted by the Indian
National Congress and there were boycott demonstrations
wherever the Duke went. These demonstrations annoyed
the Government of India and their attitude of indifferent
neutrality began to change slowly. In April, Lord Chelmsford
was succeeded by Lord Reading, the brilliant ex-Lord Chief
Justice of England. Soon after his arrival, in the month of
May, an interview was arranged between him and Mahatma
Gandhi. At this interview, Lord Reading gave an assurance
to the Mahatma that he would not interfere with the work of
the Congress as long as there was no resort to violence. He
further stated that in a speech of his, Moulana Mohammed
Ali, the right-hand man of the Mahatma, had made an appeal
for resorting to violence and that the Government were
thinking of prosecuting him. The Mahatma promised to see
to it that the Moulana gave a public assurance that he would
eschew violence in every way and this promise was duly
carried out. Though there was nothing wrong or humiliating
in the whole affair, to the public eye it appeared as if both
the Mahatma and the Moulana had been outmanœuvred by
the astute Viceroy. Though the contemplated prosecution
of Moulana Mohammed Ali was dropped after this interview,
he and other Moslem leaders were arrested in September
for their participation in the Khalifat Conference at Karachi
in August and were sentenced to two years' 'rigorous im-

72 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
prisonment.' At this Conference, a resolution was passed
calling upon all Moslems to give up service under the Govern-
ment, whether in a civil or in a military capacity and this
constituted a breach of the law. After the conviction of the
Ali brothers and their associates, Mahatma Gandhi came
forward to take up the challenge. The same resolution was
signed and published by forty-six Congress leaders, and it
was repeated from a thousand platforms all over India.
But the Government did not make a single arrest and took
no notice of this defiance on the part of the Congress. In
September, the Indian Legislative Assembly—the Central
Parliament set up under the New Constitution—passed a
resolution urging an examination and revision of the con-
stitution earlier than 1929. No immediate reply to this came
from the side of the Government but the following year, the
Secretary of State for India, Lord Peel, in a dispatch on the
subject dated November 3rd, 1922, stated that it was too
early to contemplate a revision of the constitution.
From the above narrative it might appear as if throughout
1921 Mahatma Gandhi was riding on the crest of a wave and
had no obstacles to encounter. This impression is not alto-
gether correct. No doubt there was a tremendous volume of
mass opinion on his side—but so far as the intelligentsia were
concerned, there were certain elements opposed to him. In
the first place, the Indian Liberals were everywhere arrayed
against him and in most provinces, they had accepted office
as Ministers. This co-operation on the part of the Liberals
was the direct result of the efforts of Mr. Montagu, the
Secretary of State for India and as long as he remained in
office—that is, till March 1922—they were enthusiastically
in support of the Constitution. After his resignation from
the British Cabinet, reaction set in and Liberal leaders
began to feel that it was becoming increasingly difficult for
them to continue their co-operation. In April 1922, Sir Tej
Bahadur Sapru resigned from the Executive Council of the
Viceroy and in May 1923, Mr. Chintamani, Liberal leader of
the United Provinces, resigned the office of Minister of
Education in that province. Gradually the Liberals all turned
against the Government and by 1927 the change was so great

THE STORM BREAKS 73
that when the Simon Commission was appointed, Congress-
men and Liberals could preach boycott from the same
platform.
Closely allied with the Indian Liberals in mentality and
outlook were the University authorities who had been hard
hit by the Congress policy of boycott of educational institu-
tions. Though their influence had been drowned for the
time being by the rising tide of non-co-operation, they
continued to exert what influence they still possessed against
the Congress. In this effort they had the support of no less
a personality than India's illustrious poet, Dr. Rabindranath
Tagore. The poet arrived in Bombay from Europe about the
middle of July. As a matter of fact, I travelled in the same
boat with him. During our voyage, I had occasion to discuss
with him the new policy of non-co-operation adopted by the
Congress. He was by no means hostile to the idea. He was
only anxious that there should be more of constructive
activity, so that ultimately a state within the state could be
built up, entirely on the co-operation and support of the people.
What he suggested was analogous to the constructive side of
the Irish Sinn Fein movement and was completely in accord
with my views. But immediately after his arrival in India, he
was surrounded by a group of people who were opposed to the
Non-co-operation Movement and who began to point out to
him only the shortcomings of that movement—as well as the
personal views of the Mahatma on modern science and
modern medicine, which had no connection with the political
programme of the Congress. Under the impression that the
non-co-operation movement was aiming at a break with
Western science, culture and civilisation, the poet delivered
a forceful address in Calcutta under the caption 'Unity of
Culture' and roundly condemned any attempt to isolate
India from the culture and civilisation of the rest of the
world and deprecated the boycott of educational institutions.
Congress circles could not take this assault lying down but
it was impossible to find a literary man of the same standing
as the poet to reply to his attack. However, the premier
novelist of Bengal, Sarat Chandra Chatterji, ventured to give
a reply in an address on 'The Conflict of Cultures.' The

74 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
burden of his address was that though culture had a universal
basis, each country had its own specific culture which was
the creation of its national genius. India had to preserve
and develop her own culture and if in doing so, she had to
boycott the educational institutions which were under
British influence, there was nothing objectionable in it. An
attack from the poet was exceedingly unwelcome to the
Mahatma, particularly because they had been great friends ever
since the latter's return to India from South Africa. The
Mahatma had therefore to pay several visits to the poet in
order to pacify him. With the lapse of time the poet's opposi-
tion was completely disarmed and he became one of the
staunchest supporters of the Mahatma in his subsequent
campaigns.
While opposition to the Mahatma's policy of non-co-
operation came from the intellectuals, opposition to his cult
of non-violence came from another quarter—namely, the
Revolutionary Party. During the Great War, thousands of
revolutionaries had been imprisoned and most of them were
subsequently released as a result of the amnesty declared in
1919. Many of them did not approve of the doctrine of
non-retaliation which they apprehended would demoralise
the people and weaken their power of resistance. There was
a possibility that the ex-revolutionaries as a class would go
against the Congress owing to ideological differences. As a
matter of fact, a section of them had already started propa-
ganda in Bengal against the Non-co-operation Movement.
Strangely enough, funds had been provided by the British
Mercantile Community under the name of the Citizens'
Protection League. The money was distributed through the
medium of an Indian advocate who did not disclose the source
of the funds. Deshbandhu C. R. Das was anxious to disarm
the hostility of the ex-revolutionaries and if possible, to win
their active support for the Congress Campaign. He therefore
arranged a conference in September between them and the
Mahatma, at which he also was present. The ex-revolu-
tionaries had a heart-to-heart talk with the Mahatma and he
and the Deshbandhu tried to convince them that non-violent
non-co-operation, instead of weakening or demoralising the

THE STORM BREAKS 75
people, would strengthen their power of effective resistance.
The upshot of the conference was that all those present
promised to give a full chance to the Congress to strive for
Swaraj and promised to do nothing to hamper its work, while
many of them agreed to join the Congress organisation as
loyal and active members.
The conference between the Mahatma and the ex-revolu-
tionaries took place behind closed doors in September 1921,
when he and other members of the Congress Working Com-
mittee were staying as guests of Deshbandhu C. R. Das.
This was the first occasion when I had an opportunity of
coming into personal contact with the prominent leaders
of the Congress. Besides the Deshbandhu, the outstanding
personalities then were Pandit Motilal Nehru, Lala Lajpat
Rai and Moulana Mohammed Ali. It is difficult to say how
far the Mahatma would have succeeded in 1921 without their
active support. To realise the importance of Lalaji and Desh-
bandhu one has only to visualise the political situation in the
Punjab and in Bengal in their absence. And in 1921, Nehru
Junior (Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru) was not so well known or
experienced that he could have replaced his father. Besides
the influence which the first three leaders had in their own
provinces—their importance was also due to the fact that
they were the three outstanding intellectual stalwarts of the
Congress. Many of the blunders committed by the Mahatma
as a political leader could have been avoided if they had been
in a position to advise him. Since the death of these three
giants, the leadership of the Congress has fallen to a low
intellectual level. The Congress Working Committee to-day
is undoubtedly composed of some of the finest men of India
—men who have character and courage, patriotism and
sacrifice. But most of them have been chosen primarily
because of their 'blind' loyalty to the Mahatma—and there
are few among them who have the capacity to think for
themselves or the desire to speak out against the Mahatma
when he is likely to take a wrong step. In the circumstances,
the Congress Cabinet of to-day is a one-man show.
In 1921, besides the above three leaders, the Ali brothers
(Moulana Mohammed and Moulana Shaukat Ali) had a

76 THE INDIAN STRUGGLE
unique position among the public. This was due partly to
their own activities and their suffering during the Great
War—partly to the new awakening among the Moslems—but
largely to the propaganda conducted in their favour by the
Mahatma. The Mahatma associated himself so closely with
them that they came to be looked upon as the right and the
left hand of the Mahatma. In their company the Mahatma
toured the country and one clearly remembers that in those
days whenever there was a popular shout of 'Victory to
Mahatma Gandhi' (Mahatma Gandhi Ki Jai), it would be
accompanied by a shout of 'Victory to the Ali brothers' (Ali
Bhai-o-Ki Jai). Though after some years the Ali brothers
parted company with the Mahatma, I do not think one could
find fault with the latter for his intimate association with
them. The real mistake in my opinion did not lie in con-
necting the Khilafat issue with the other national issues,
but in allowing the Khilafat Committee to be set up as an
independent organisation throughout the country, quite apart
from the Indian National Congress. The result of this was
that when later on Ghazi Mustafa Kemal Pasha, as the
leader of New Turkey, forced the Sultan to abdicate and
abolished the office of Khalifa altogether, the Khilafat question
lost all meaning and significance and the majority of the
members of the Khilafat organisations were absorbed by
sectarian, reactionary and pro-British Moslem organisations.
If no separate Khilafat Committees had been organised and
all Khilafatist Moslems had been persuaded to join the ranks
of the Indian National Congress, they would probably have
been absorbed by the latter when the Khilafat issue became
a dead one.
After the middle of the year, the political situation began
to grow tense. Neither the Government nor the Congress
knew at the time when the storm would break, but signs of
the coming clash began to appear in different parts of the
country. Throughout all these episodes the public took the
offensive and the Government played a defensive rôle
Reference has already been made to the no-tax campaign in
Midnapore District in Bengal and to the defiant conduct of
the Congress leaders after the incarceration of the Ali

THE STORM BREAKS 77
brothers in September, following the Khilafat Conference
at Karachi. Two other incidents are worth mentioning—the
‘Akali’ movement in the Punjab and the Moplah rebellion in
Malabar in the south. The Akalis were a section among the
Sikhs analogous to the Puritans among the Christians. They
wanted primarily to reform the administration of the Sikh
shrines or Gurudwaras. These shrines were mostly very rich
and were administered by a set of ‘Mohants,’ who though
required to act merely as trustees living an ascetic and abste-
mious life, generally lived a thoroughly disreputable life at the
public expense. The Akalis wanted to dispossess these
Mohants and bring the shrines under the administration of
popular committees. As always happens in an enslaved
country, the Government rallied to the support of the vested
interests—the Mohants. Thus a movement directed against
the Mohants soon developed into a movement against the
Government. The tactics of the Akalis were in keeping with
the Congress policy of non-violent non-co-operation and
consisted in sending ‘Jathas’ or groups of men and women
to take possession of the shrines. They were arrested and
put into prison or mercilessly beaten and forcibly dispersed.
This movement went on for a year till in November 1922 the
Government came to its senses and introduced legislation in
the Punjab Legislative Council to concede what the Akalis
had demanded from the beginning. The Moplahs of Malabar
were a section of the Moslem community. Their rising was
directed against the local Hindus; nevertheless it was also an
attack on the Government and as such, caused them con-
siderable anxiety and embarrassment. It has significance
also because it was the first incident to loosen Hindu-Moslem
unity.
In spite of these isolated phenomena of revolt, till November
1921 there was no sign of a country-wide conflict, far less of
the Swaraj promised ‘within one year.’ Congress circles were
therefore getting uneasy and depressed, when the Govern-
ment came to the rescue. An announcement was made that
the Prince of Wales would visit India and that he would
land in Bombay on November 17th. The motive behind
the visit was, of course, to assuage public feeling and rally