2.

Events leading to Non-Cooperation Movement

(i) Champaran Satyagraha

In 1916 Rajkumar Shukla met Gandhiji in Lucknow, and persuaded him to visit the peasants
of Champaran.Where the European planters have forced the peasants to grow indigo under
the Tinkathia system. Because of this exploitative policy the peasants of Champaran were
agitated. Gandhiji after a careful survey of the situation agreed to lead the movement. But
he was refused entry into the district by the District Magistrate and was tried for defiance.
Gandhiji pleaded guilty but justified it on the grounds that human authority must give in to
the higher authority of human conscience.

The Government was forced to appoint a Commission of inquiry to go into the issue of
indigo cultivator’s with-Gandhiji as one of its members.

The educated young congressmen like Rajendra Prasad, J.B. Kripalani and Braj Kishor babu
helped Gandhiji in this Satyagrah.[ Kripalani, 1970, 68-69 ]

Agitated masses followed Gandhiji and saw in him a divine virtue to which they responded
spontaneously. Rich peasants, in his name but without his knowledge indulged poor peasant
in to violence and the masses began to defy even the British might. However mahatma
never approved of this. In 1918 in the month of November, the Champaran agricultural act
was brought for legislation, and the Satyagrah reached to an end, but it achieved a limited
goal, as says Bandopadhyay in his book [Bandopadhyay, 2004 , 293] for, the struggle
continued between peasants and European planters and British raj.

(ii) Kheda Satyagraha

In 1917 in the district of Kheda of Gujarat peasant unrest was on the rise. A variety of
factors, such as destruction of crops by late rains, sudden rise in agricultural wages, high
rate of inflation and the outbreak of bubonic plague contributed to unusual hardship
particularly for the rich Patidar peasants. In a small town of Katella in the northern part of
the district, a no-revenue campaign was actually started by two local leaders, Mohanlal
Pandya and Shankarlal Parikh, with a demand for revenue remission. In Jan 1918 with the
help of Gujarat sabha the leaders of the campaign came in touch with Gandhiji. For Gandhiji
was involved in Ahmadabad mill workers movement, so the Satyagrah could not be initiated
till march22 1918. Even now the movement was a patchy campaign, as it affected only a
few villages; often the peasants capitulated to government pressure and often they crossed
the boundaries of Gandhi an politics of non-violence.

Soon the Bombay government gave in and partially accepted the demands of the
peasants, only to the extent that it would not confiscate the land of the agitated peasants.
In the month of June same year Gandhiji withdrew the Satyagraha. Although Mahatma
enjoyed the support of the masses in the villages but when he returned to appeal for the
recruitment in the army to fight for the British in the world war. They rejected the appeal
by the Mahatma.[Bandopadhyay ,2004, 294]

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 5

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

(iii)Ahmadabad Mill Workers and Gandhiji

In early 1918 in Ahmadabad Gandhiji led the textile worker movement against mill
owners, who were not giving in the demands of the workers for a 50 percent increase in the
wages, however Gandhiji gave the call for the Satyagraha fasting which drew support from
all over India. This step brought the Indian mill workers united. This experiment of
Satyagraha proved fruitful for the striking workers and negotiations took place. The owners
decided to increase the pay by 35 percent, eventually bringing an end to the movement.

(iv)Rowlett Satyagraha

In early 1919 notorious Rowlett act was passed which vehemently agitated the minds of
Indian people. The act prepared by a committee under Justice S.A.T. Rowlett, to provide the
government with additional coercive power to deal with increasing revolutionary activities in
India from with in and abroad. The black bill suggested certain measures of arbitrary arrests
without trial and restrictions on the movement of persons suspected of anti-government
activities. Restrictions were also forced on Indian press. The Bills were introduced in the
central legislature in February 1919 against the unanimous opposition of all non-official
Indian members. Unprecedented powers with the authorities agitated the people from all
walks of life, young and the old, moderates and extremists, peasants and workers and
people from village and from cities all denounced the act, and called it a black law.

At this time Gandhiji decided to call for a Satyagraha against the Rowlett act. For the first
time a countrywide movement was lunched, colonial India was told how the act was
undemocratic and authoritarian in nature; as it was unjust, subversive of all principles of
liberty and justice and destructive of the elementary rights of the individual. First all India
Satyagraha hartal was decided on March 30 1919 [March 30 in Delhi and Bombay] and on
April 6. Although the notice was short but it received maximum support of the people. The
prayers, fasting and hartal was observed, people remained in doors. In Calcutta, a Meeting
held at the conclusion of the hartal was attended by one Hundred thousand people on April
6. [Ghosh , 1968 , 82] Gandhi himself had not expected so much success. On April 7 he
proceeded for North to Delhi and Punjab. And on the 8th April, he was arrested at Paliwal
station, brought back to Bombay and let off. [Ghosh , 1968 , 83] The news of his arrest
provoked reprehensible Acts of mob violence at Ahmadabad, Viramgam and other Places. He
rushed to Ahmadabad and helped restore the peace.

Overwhelmed by the total atmosphere of violence in Punjab, Gujarat and Bengal, Gandhi
withdrew the Satyagraha. As Satyagraha required strict adherence to non-violence even
under the severest provocation. Gandhi felt that people had not grasped the full meaning of
this message. They were not yet ready to use the new weapon of non-violence. He,
therefore, called off the movement and admitted that he had made "a Himalayan
miscalculation" inasmuch .he had overrated the patience of the people and their capacity for
disciplined action. [Kripalani , 1970, 86]

(v)Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 6

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

Punjab however was not calm, the situation there deteriorated rapidly. For reason unknown
to the people, Dr. Satyapal and Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlu were arrested in Amritsar and taken
away, and the police fired on the procession the people had taken out in protest against the
arrests. The infuriated masses also indulged in violent acts killing some Europeans.
[Kripalani , 1970, 83] although Martial Law was not formally in place, General Dyer took
command of Amritsar. He banned public meetings; but the prohibitory Notification was not
properly circulated. On the 13th April, a crowd of several thousand people, including small
children, gathered in an enclosed place called Jallianwala Bagh for Baisakhi celebration. On
hearing of this, General Dyer left for the place with a body of troops and armored cars
equipped with machine guns. But as the approaches to the Bagh were narrow, it was not
possible to take the armored cars inside it. On entering the Bagh,The General, without
giving any warning to the crowds to disperse, ordered his troops to open fire and the firing
continued until ammunition was exhausted. [[Kripalani , 1970, 83 84.] Hundreds of people
were killed and thousands were wounded. Not only this, curfew was imposed thus barring
the possibility of any help reaching there. Atrocities inflicted on the public without cease.
This brutal massacre and cruel repression constituted a shameful chapter in the history of
British rule in India. Sir Michael O'Dwyer, who was then Lt. Governor of the Punjab
supported the cruel measures adopted by General Dyer. It seemed, indeed, that the two
together had decided on teaching the people of the Punjab a lesson, and far from feeling
repentant, General Dyer was proud of what he had done.[ibid] an inquiry was commissioned
under MR. hunter which did submit for General Dyer’s early retirement. Stunned by the
brutality in Punjab Rabindranath Tagore renounced the knighthood conferred on him by the
British government.

(vi) Khilafat Question

Another development which stirred the minds of India and of Gandhiji was Khilafat question,
where in Muslims of India especially felt betrayed by the British policy .―Which arose in the
wake of the War.? In the War Turkey was against the English, and yet Indian Muslims
fought against their co-religionists, relying on a Pledge given by the British Government that
the powers of The Khalifa would not be curbed on the termination of the War. But that
pledge was not honored in the peace negotiations. Indian Muslims who interpreted this as
an affront to their religious sentiments started an agitation against the proposed restrictions
on the Khalifa's powers, and this came To be known as the Khilafat movement‖ [Ghosh ,
1968 ,88] Gandhiji extended his support to the cause led by Maulana Mohammed
Ali,Shaukat Ali, Abul Kalam Azad and Hakim Ajmal Khan were the leaders [Ghosh , 1968,
88]

It was in the month of November 1919 in a meeting in Delhi with Muslim leaders that
Gandhi for the first time spoke of the Non-Cooperation arguing If in case the British fail to
honor its own pledge. The Muslims may move forward with the idea of Non-Violent Non-Co-
operations. Khilafat conferences were held in Allahabad, Madras and many other places. In
these conferences the decision to launch progressive non-cooperation was reiterated.
[Kripalani, 1970 ,93]

2. Non-cooperation movement

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 7

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

Gandhi now pressed the Congress to adopt a similar plan of campaign on three issues:
Punjab wrong, Khilafat wrong and Swaraj. In an article in Young India he announced that
through this movement he would bring Swaraj in one year. He did not; however, -define
what this Swaraj would actually mean. [Bandopadhyay ,2004, 300] senior congress leaders
had their doubts that this mass movement might lead to violence as the people of India
were yet to be trained. However, the call for Non-Co-operation was receiving support from
hitherto unnoticed population, from tribes, and from backward regions.

From sep. 4th to 9 th 1920 a special session of congress was held in Calcutta, Lala Lajpath
Rai presided over the meeting. Here in Gandhiji moved the resolution. ―Calling upon the
country "to approve of and adopt the policy of progressive non-violent non-cooperation",
until the Khilafat wrongs were righted and Swaraj established.‖ [93] Though the resolution
met with opposition from the likes of Bepin Chandra Pal and C. R. Das, it was adopted by
the congress.

After long discussions the scheme was adopted calling for surrender of titles of
Indians, resignation from the nominated seats in local bodies, boycott of official functions,
boycott of Government and aided educational institutions by students, encouraging national
schools, boycott of law courts by lawyers and litigants. The Reformed Councils were also to
be boycotted. Further, people were asked to boycott foreign goods and actively promote
Swadeshi. (Promotion of indigenous goods.) Henceforth giving rise to charkha and Khadi etc.
at the same time striving for ―Swavlamban‖

By this time congress leadership had realized that activities of congress were not limited
only to small educated urban Indian elite, the issues and the policies of congress were read,
discussed and analyzed by the people throughout the nation. The voice of congress was not
related only to a small minority but it was a voice of the nation. In December 1920 in
Nagpur session Gandhiji reassured that Swaraj could be achieved in one year. If that did
not happen or if government resorted to repression, then a civil disobedience campaign was
to be launched, involving non-payment of taxes. The resolution also provided for a radical
restructuring of the Congress through the constitution of district and village level units to
transform the party into a true mass organization. [Bandopadhyay , 2004 300-301]

A new constitution of congress was also adopted in the same session, where some
important structural changes were announced. The formation of the 15-member working
committee to look after the day-to-day work of the organization, to set up an All India
Congress Committee (AICC) with 350 members, Re-organization of the Congress Provincial
Committees on a linguistic basis, the organization of the Congress to be built at village,
town, Tehsil and District levels, along with the provincial and national levels, and The
Congress was to launch a membership programme with a symbolic fee of only four Annas;
this was the first major attempt to reach out to the common man. ( Pradhan ,2008, 139 )
Apart from this, Congress also tried to change its creed and its goal. Its earlier goal of the
'attainment of self-government by constitutional means' was replaced by the 'attainment of
Swaraj by peaceful and legitimate means'. One obvious result of this new creed of the
Congress was that non-violent Satyagraha came to be accepted as the legitimate means

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 8

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

under the new dispensation of the Congress. [ Pradhan ,2008 , 139] it was also decided that
efforts will be made for Hindu-Muslim unity, promotion of national education, raising a
national fund, etc.

The movement which was a few months old by this time gained momentum and wave of
mass action in favor of Gandhiji and his appeal was felt across the nation. The Council
election was boycotted. Titles and honors were renounced; lawyers like Motilal Nehru, C R
Das, Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, C Rajagopalachari and others
left their legal practice. Schools and colleges were boycotted and several new educational
institutions opened with nationalistic feeling, thence promoting the idea of nationalism.
Prominent amongst these institutions were: Gujarat Vidyapeeth, Bihar Vidyapeeth, Kashi
Vidyapeeth National College Lahore and Jamia Millia Islamia. renowned nationalist leaders
joined these educational institutions as teacher, which includes Subhas Chandra Bose,
Acharya Narendra Dev, Rajendra Prasad, and Dr Sampurnanand in the summer of 1921
congress decided to boycott foreign clothes, not only this, AICC also affirmed that it would
boycott the coming visit of the prince of Wales. It was accepted in the Nagpur session that
civil disobedience and nonpayment of taxes will be incorporated at a later stage.

Khilafat movement was an integral constituent of the noncooperation movement. In July

1920 Ali was arrested as he opposed the British dictate to be a part of the British army. His
refusal was based on the argument that his religion does not allow him to do so. His arrest
led to widespread protests. [Pradhan , 2008 , 140]

i. Moplah Rebellion

August 1921 witnessed the Moplah uprising in Malabar, although it was unrest against the
British Raj to establish a Khilafat kingdom, but unfortunately it took a communal turn, in
the process a number of Hindus were killed and their properties were looted and seized.
Some forcible conversion of Hindus to Islam also took place. Soon repressive measures by
the government followed. A number of Mullahs were killed, and a large number of them
were wounded. Some Mullahs died due to asphyxiation in railway wagon.

Here we find that this uprising was against the Hindu land owners. And the agitation in fact
was to over throw a system which was hitherto economically and politically dominated by a
particular community. Though the appeal was for Khilafat, but the anger of the less
dominant community was against the long standing traditional political power. In short, the
agitation was purely local in nature. And did not follow the idea of the Khilafat movement,
which in association with Non-Co-operation movement was pursuing the restoration of
power of Khalif [The civil and religious leader of a Muslim state considered to be a
representative of Allah on earth] and Swaraj.

In November 1921 prince of Wales visited India, Black flags were shown to him. And
agitated crowd failed to control its anger against the British. They attacked some Christians
who were to welcome the Prince of Wales, when a nationwide strike was observed. Gandhiji
condemn these violent acts and fasted for two days. Violent activities like this prompted the

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 9

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

congress leadership to delay the civil disobedience movement; however, in November 1921
the provincial committees were authorized to decide on their own when to begin the civil
disobedience and no taxation movement.

Colonial masters, at this time resorted to full repressive measure, and declared Khilafat
and Non-Co-operation as unlawful. Leaders of both communities were arrested on large
scale. On this, the Congress met at Ahmadabad in December 1921 and it called up its
members to suspend all other activities and volunteer them for arrest. Mahatma Gandhi was
made its sole executive. British repression not only stirred the nation but Gandhiji also got
disturbed so much that on February first 1922, He intimated the viceroy that he intended to
launch a civil disobedience movement. It was decided that an experimental no revenue
campaign would be launched at Bardoli in Gujarat in February 1922. The venue was
carefully chosen, as it was a Ryotwari area, with no Zamindars and therefore no danger of a
no-revenue campaign snowballing into a no-rent campaign tearing apart the fragile coalition
of classes. [Bandopadhyay ,2004 , 302 ]

ii. Chauri Chaura episode and the withdrawal of the movement

In Gorakhpur district of Uttar Pradesh, on 4 February 1922 the villagers burned alive
twenty-two policemen in a small locality of Chauri Chaura in the local police station. Here
the local volunteers had gathered to protest against police oppression s and the sale and
high prices of certain articles. The police initially sought to deter them by firing in the air.
This was interpreted by the crowd as a sign of fear, as bullets were turning into water "by
the grace of Gandhiji". The crowd then marched towards the market, threw brickbats at the
police and when the latter opened real fire, they were chased into the Thana, which was
then set on fire. For the demonstrators the destruction of the Thana only meant the coming
of the Gandhi raj. But for Gandhiji, who could not forget the violence in Bombay and
communal killings in Kerala, it confirmed the absence of an environment of non-violence.
Non-cooperation movement was, thence, withdrawn on 11 February 1922. This was
followed by the Bardoli resolution, which emphasized the need for constructive work before
beginning any political agitation. [Bandopadhyay, 2004 ,303 ]

Gandhiji was criticized by his own party men, Motilal, Deshbandhu, Lajpath Rai, Subhash
Bose, M.N. Roy etc expressed their displeasure although accepted the decision for
withdrawing the movement when it had reached its peak. Gandhiji found it difficult to
explain to the congress, and faced the criticism for the withdrawal of the movement, but did
not budge from his decision. On March 10 1922 he was arrested by the government, and
was sentenced for 6 years.

3. Civil Disobedience movement

i. Simon Commission

“When a commission was wanted the British Government would not give it; but they would
impose upon the Indian people a commission which is not wanted, and when it is not
wanted.”
Dr. Pradhan quotes S. Srinivasa Iyengar in his book ―Raj to swaraj‖.

When on November 5 , 1927 Gandhiji came to Delhi having completed a journey to the
South India and Ceylon, The then viceroy Irwin handed him a memo announcing that ―a
Parliamentary Commission, headed by Sir John Simon, was to come to report on the
working of dyarchy in India and on future constitutional progress.‖ [Kriplani 1970,112] Gandhiji asked
the Viceroy ―if that was all for which he had been called from about 2000 km away. On Irwin's reply
in the affirmative, he said that a post-card could have served the purpose!‖ [Kriplani ,1970 ,112
]The commission consisted of 4 conservative, 2 laborites an
1 liberal. Sir John Simon [chairman], Clement Attlee, [future prime minister of Britain in
post-world war II era] Harry Levy –Lawson, Edward cadogan, Vernon Hartshorne, George
Lane –Fox and Donald Howard. It was an all-white commission. And no representative was
there to put the case of India. In fact, representative from India was not even considered.
The reaction of the people in general and the Congress in particular to this announcement
was not only adverse but also angry.

The fundamental resentment against the Commission was that it was an all-white
Commission. And the second objection, on which the Indian leadership was unhappy, was
non-representative Character of the commission. ―Stung by the deliberate insult
(compounded by Birkenhead's taunt that Indians were quite incapable of agreeing on any
workable political framework), liberal politicians like Sapru And Muslim leaders headed by
Jinnah joined hands with the Congress to formulate a Dominion Status Constitution—till
communal differences broke up the united front of such relatively moderate groups in late
1928.‖ [Sarkar,1983, 261-262] however, for a nationalist the arrival of the commission proved
a unifying factor for both communal groups in India. The middle of the third decade of the
20th century had shown intense communal tension and violence. INC took its well-known
stand that the people of India had a right to make their own constitution. This was a
consensual national viewpoint as evidenced by the passage of two resolutions (February
1924 and September 1925) by the Central Assembly, reiterating the same demand.
[Pradhan, 2008, 158] S Srinivasa Iyengar argued, ―Any enquiry to the fitness of the Indian people for
self-government was nothing but a direct affront to our national respect. All that was
needed, he further argued, was a direct negotiation between the people of India and the
British with a view to grant self-government to us.‖ [Pradhan, 2008, 158]

The commission did not receive any favorable response from the people of India. In fact, it
was boycotted by all corners of the society, and All political parties denounced the
parliamentary commission. On February 16 1928 lalaji in the central assembly proposed a
resolution where a complete lack of confidence in the commission was expressed. In its
madras session, in December 1927 INC took the strongest step by calling on the people of
India to boycott the Commission by organizing demonstrations against it on its arrival in
India. It further called upon all members of Indian legislatures, including the non-members,
not to associate with the Commission's work in any manner. [Pradhan, 2008, 158]

On February 3 1928 the Simon commission landed in India, the day marked by strikes, and
protests, and the slogons of ―go back simon‖ rocked the whole atmosphere. All the towns, villages and
hemlets held the demonstrations and black flags were shown to the commission members.
The Congress was determined not to meet the Commission, not to give evidence, not to
serve on any select committee nor to vote for their formulations. It was declared that
Indians were entitled to determine their own constitution and will form it. [As will be
discussed under Nehru Report] at the same time other political parties also decided to
boycott the commission. the Liberal Federation presided over by Sapru adopted a similar
resolution. The Muslim League also resolved to boycott the Commission and appointed a
committee to prepare a constitution For India in consultation with other parties. The Hindu
Mahasabha, and the Khilafat Conference also followed the same path.

The opposition was so strong that government resorted to lathe-charge and other violent
means. In lucknow Jawaharlal Nehru and Govind Vallab Pant were beaten up. Police opened

fire in madras killing a person.But the episode that shook the nation was the lathe-charge
by the police in Lahore on October 30 1928 where lalaji was leading a protest march; brutal
British forces did not even spared the man as old as lala lajpath Rai. Lalaji got injured and
died due to the injuries he received. Revolutionary youths of HSRA retaliated, Bhagat Singh
and his comrades attempted to kill Saunders [the man responsible for the killing of lion of
Punjab] in December 1928.

The commission was opposed in India, but it took the assignment seriously. After two visits,
from March 1928 to October 1928 and in April 1929, It toured various parts of the country.
Finally, in May 1930, it submitted its report, with following proposals. It recommended that
the experiment of diarchy was a failure and it should be replaced by the introduction of
provincial autonomy i.e. transference of all provincial subjects to the popular ministries. At
the same time, it ensured the special powers for the governors to take over the entire
administration in case of breakdown of constitutional mechanism. It recommended
enlargement of the provincial legislatures with a minimum of 200 and maximum of 250
members. It also wanted the percentage of voters in India to be increased from 3 percent
to 10 to 15 percent. Instead of appointment of a commission every ten years to review the
working of the constitutional provisions, the Commission recommended the enactment of a
new constitution for India which should be flexible enough to absorb the necessary changes
whenever necessary. It recommended separation of Sind from Bombay, Orissa from Bihar,
grant of a legislative council to North West Frontier Province, and separation of Burma from
British India as a separate colony. The report did not evoke much response both from
Indian and British sides. Not to speak of the dominion status, it did not even recommend
partial sharing of responsibility at the centre. Although provincial autonomy was
recommended yet it was circumscribed by the vast powers of the governor. National leaders
condemned the meager reforms suggested by the Commission. The report was equally
cold-shouldered by the British government. Even before the report of the Commission was
submitted, the viceroy , in consultation with the home government, announced on 31
October 1929 dominion status as the goal of Indian's political progress and holding of a
Round Table Conference consisting of the representatives from the Parliament, the Indian
states and British India.

The commission though was cold shouldered from all corners yet it had some positive
impacts for the people of India. 1:-the unity between two communal groups was
strengthened and 2:-the challenge of framing of a constitution was also positively accepted.
[The Nehru report]. However, Some portions of the report were adopted by the
Government of India Act 1935.

In December 1927 in its annual session, for the first time, congress decided to have a
Swaraj constitution. For this, a committee was formed to carry out consultations with other
political parties. Congress Working Committee called a meeting of different political parties
in Delhi in February 1928, where in it was decided that before moving to any further course
of action, more discussions and consultations are required to resolve the differences.

ii. Nehru report

The committee chaired by Motilal Nehru, took the responsibility, and presented the report in
[Nehru report] all parties’ convention in Calcutta. The Report was accepted by the
convention, but Jinnah who opposed the report on the issue of Hindu Muslim representation
and division of seats, could not get his proposals inserted in the report. In fact his
suggestions were put to voting where he failed to win support of the majority. Nehru report
was the first major Indian effort to draft a constitution, complete with lists of central and
provincial subjects, fundamental rights and universal adult suffrage, . The report, even
while demanding responsible government both at the Centre and in the provinces,
advocated dominion status and not complete independence much to the anguish of young
leaders like Jawaharlal and Sub hash Chandler Bose, Who pressed for the acceptance of
'Purina Swaraj' as the goal of the Congress. The older generation led by Motilal Nehru and
Gandhi felt that the dominion status which was accepted by all parties should not be
abandoned in haste. However, at the mediation of Gandhi, it was resolved that if the
dominion status was not accepted by the British government within a year, the Congress
would opt for complete independence. And fight to achieve it by civil disobedience. It is
worth mentioning that Report did not try to resolve the question of communalism. The
events moved so fast that Nehru report lost its significance by December 1929. Yet one
must remember that Nehru report was an important milestone in the history of India.

The year 1929 saw many important political events, strikes in factories and mills were everyday
affair, the great economic depression was jolting the great economies, communal activities on
both fronts were moving fast. And revolutionary programs were in full swing. In April 1929,
Bhagat Singh and Batukeswar Dutt threw bomb in the central legislative assembly and were
arrested. Bhagat Singh along with Sukhdev and Rajguru were later sentenced to death. Lord
Irwin was called to London for consultations ones the labour government came to power in may
1929. On his return the viceroy declared that a Round Table Conference would be held to discuss
the future course for India. However, the debates in British Parliament revealed that there was
no change in the policy of the government. Dominion status was the goal of India in the fullness
of time, not in the immediate future. In December 1929 a delegation under the leadership of
Gandhiji met the Viceroy to elucidate the position that the discussion in the round table
conference would proceed on the basis of full Dominion Status, the Viceroy was unable to give
the assurance and the talks broke down. [Pradhan ,2008, 169] This series of events finally led to
the Lahore session of congress in the end of December 1929, where congress adopted the
historic resolution of Purna Swaraj. It read 'This Congress, therefore, declares that the word
Swaraj in the article of the Congress constitution shall mean complete independence.' [Pradhan ,
2008, 169]

On 2 January 1930, the Congress Working Committee passed a resolution to observe 26

January as the Independence Day. On 9 January, Gandhiji observed in Young India;
"Granted a perfectly non-violent atmosphere and fulfilled constructive programme, I would
undertake to lead the mass civil disobedience struggle to a successful issue in the space of a
few months." [Anand , 2006 37] On 18 January, when Tagore visited the Sabarmati
Ashram, Gandhiji told him: "I am furiously thinking night and day I do not yet see any light
coming out of the surrounding darkness." [Anand, 2006, 37] Gandhiji's text of the pledge to
be taken on 26 January, 1939, included the following: "India has been ruined economically.

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 15

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

— — Our average income is seven pice, per day, and of the heavy taxes we pay, 20% are
raised from the land revenue and 3% from the salt tax, which falls most heavily on the
poor. — — Politically, India's status has never been so reduced - - Culturally, the system of
education has ---- made us hug the very chains that bind us. Spiritually, compulsory
disarmament has made us unmanly-- --.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."
[Anand,2006,37, 38]

iii. Salt Satyagraha

Before launching the Salt Satyagraha to initiate the civil disobedience, Gandhiji said, ―he would put
off civil disobedience, if Britain would grant the essence, if not the outward form, of self-
government.‖ [Anand, 2006, 38] this essence included eleven points: total prohibition,
restoration of the exchange rate, 50% reduction of land revenue, abolition of Salt Tax,
reduction of military expenditure by least 50%, reduction of civil service salaries by 50%, a
protective tariff against foreign cloth, release of political prisoners save those condemned for
murder, abolition of C. I. D, issue of fire-arms licences for self-defence, and enactment of
coastal reservation bill. [Anand ,2006, 38] Of these, The Salt Law became the core issue, as
Gandhiji wrote: "There is no article like salt, outside water, by taxing which the state can
reach the starving millions, the sick, the maimed and the utterly helpless." [Anand 2006 38]
The adamant British authorities refused the Gandhian plea. Gandhiji on this wrote, "On
bended knees I asked for bread and I have received stone instead." [Anand, 2006, 38] On
March 12th 1930, with 78 of his followers from the banks of river Sabarmati, Gandhiji began
the pilgrim for Swaraj; 240 miles of distance and 24 days. The divine march moved towards
a small village dandi on the coast of Gujarat in western India, with the sole objective of
breaking the salt law.( Under the regulations of the India Salt Act 1882). the government
enforced a monopoly on the collection or manufacture of salt, restricting its handling to
officially controlled salt depots and levying a tax of Rs 1-4-0 (46 cents) on each maund
[Dalton, 1998, 91].

On April 6 Gandhiji defied this monopoly and so broke the law by simply collecting natural
salt from the seashore. The broader object of the march was to spark a campaign of civil
disobedience against the Raj in order to attain independence. [Dalton 1998, 91] the salt
satyagraha thus began all over the country with the arrest of Mahatma on 5 may and
continued for one year until negotiations between Gandhiji and viceroy took place.

It seems necessary here to discuss why ―salt‖ Satyagraha? For Mahatma Salt was necessary for
all, be it poor or rich. ―.. GoKhale, Gandhi's mentor, roundly condemned the salt tax in
1902 before the Imperial Legislative council in Bombay. Gokhale dwelt on the "unquestioned
hardship"that the salt tax "imposes upon the poorest of the poor of our community.‖ Then he buttressed
his case by citing evidence from British officials who had themselves conceded as early as
1888 their "greatest reluctance" in imposing this particular tax. Gokhale quoted from none
other than Lord Cross, Secretary of State for India, 1886-1892, who had then expressed
"great regret" for placing this "burden on the poorest classes of the population, through the
taxation of a necessity of life."33 However sincere these officials were at the time, this was
precisely the language that Gandhi was to adopt as he began to

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 17

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

oppose the salt tax. In 1905, Gandhi wrote from South Africa that the tax should be
abolished immediately, and the demand is repeated, though not stressed, over the years..
In his blanket indictment of British rule in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi makes a special point of
commenting that "The salt-tax is not a small injustice."‖ [Dalton, 1998, 99-100] hence salt
became evermore precious for the people.

Ones the salt was picked up from the sea, Gandhi declared "Now that the technical or
ceremonial breach of the salt law has been committed, it is now open to any one who would
take the risk of prosecution under the salt law to manufacture salt. He called it the struggle
"of the right against might."‖ [anand2006 p.40] Men and the women, young and the elderly,
workers and the peasants, in villages and , towns and cities, people joined the call for the
Satyagraha from all walks of life. The movement had gathered momentum and Mahatma
further conveyed to the nation, ―"Let every village manufacture or fetch contraband salt, sisters
should picket liquor shops, opium dens and foreign-cloth dealers' shops. Young and old — —
should ply the tikli and spin — —. Foreign cloth should be burnt. Hindus should eschew
untouchability. Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, and Christians should all achieve heart unity.
— — let the students leave Govt. schools, and Govt. servants resign their service and
devote themselves to service of the people, and we shall find that Purna Swaraj will come
knocking at our doors."‖ [Anand ,2006, 40] He gave a particularly fighting programme to women:
―"To call women the weaker sex is libel; it is a man's injustice to woman. — — If by strength is
meant moral power, then woman is immeasurably man's superior. Has she not greater
intuition, is she not more self-sacrificing, has she not greater powers of endurance, greater
courage? If non-violence is the law of our being, the future is with woman. — — The
picketing of liquor shops and foreign cloths shops by men, — — in 1921 failed because
violence crept in. Let the women take up these two activities and they would contribute
more than men to national freedom." — ― [Anand ,2006,40]. British repressive policy could
not control the agitation which was non-violence directed towards violent means. Firing took
place in Calcutta and Madras. Kasturba Gandhi launched the mass campaign of picketing the
liquor shops from 17 April. In the north-west province, frontier Gandhi was arrested. In the
wake of increasing civil disobedience, Gandhiji was taken in to custody on May 5. Gandhiji's
arrest led to hartals and strikes all over India. ―Sholapur went under people's possession
for one week. Tanks, guns and aeroplanes were used by Government in the N.W.F.P. On 12
May, 1930. Abbas Tyabji and his followers, while starting for March on the Dharasana salt
works, were arrested. On 21 May, over 2000 volunteers, led by Sarojini Naidu and with
Manilal Gandhi in front, raided Dharasana salt depot. As observed by Miller "Not one of the
marchers even raised an arm to fend off the blows. — — I heard sickening whacks of the
clubs on unprotected skulls. the ground was quilted with bodies. — — The survivors without
breaking ranks, silently and doggedly, marched on until struck down.‖" Daring mass raids by
thousands took place on the salt depot at Wadala in Bombay, and on Sanikatta salt works in
Karnataka. George Slocombe, a
British journalist wrote: "The imprisoned Mahatma now incarnates the very soul of India.‖"
[Anand ,2006 , 41] The Congress Working Committee accelerated the boycott activities
such as boycott of foreign cloth, British banking, British insurance and shipping. In some
places, no tax campaigns were started. Liquor shops were picketed and appeals were made
to the Indian army and police to treat the non-cooperators as their bretherns. Before his
arrest, Gandhi had already called for boycott of foreign cloth and liquor shops and specially

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 18

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

asked women to actively participate in the movement. Traders' associations and commercial
bodies were themselves quite active in implementing the boycott. Consequently, there was
a remarkable fall in British cloth imports from 26 million yards in 1929 to 13.7 million yards
in 1930. Other British imports also suffered from May to August 1930 and the British Trade
Commissioner's office was flooded with panic reports and complaints from Imperial Tobacco,
Dunlop and other white firms. Similarly, liquor boycott also brought the government's
revenue from excise duties crashing down.in all, British government suffered heavy losses
due to this nonviolent civil disobedience.

After about six months of standoff, first Round table conference [RTC] was held in
November; where in Indian national congress [INC] was not a party. This led to the
realization that without INC no solution could be found. At the end of the RTC British PM
expressed that those who are engaged in civil disobedience should also come forward for
negotiations. On other hand, movement was also tiring, so some rethinking was going in the
minds of nationalist leaders.Pt. Malaviya T.B. Sapru and S. Shastri created the environment
for the talks to be held between Gandhiji and the viceroy, resulting in the release of the
congress leaders and withdrawal of the ban on the INC. [Pradhan ,2008, 175]. On March 5
1931 after long discussions, negotiations reached to a conclusion, the ‖Gandhi Irwin pact‖.
Consequently, the Civil Disobedience Movement was withdrawn as the Government agreed
to release political prisoners and restore the properties seized during the Satyagraha.

Many people on the side of the Government as well as that of the Congress were not happy
with the terms of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. More conservative elements on the side of the
government took it as surrender on the part of Lord Irwin, whereas more militant leaders
like Subhas Chandra Bose and others of the Congress also looked at it as an act of
surrender on the part of Mahatma Gandhi. However, the Pact was ratified both by the
Working Committee and the Karachi Congress. Mahatma agreed to participate in the Second
RTC which was to be held in London from 7 September 1931. [Pradhan ,2008 , 175]
although, the Civil Disobedience was called off but this first phase met with criticism.‖
Muslim members of the Congress, like Dr Ansari, were unhappy, as communal unity they thought
was an essential precondition for the success of a civil disobedience movement. Outside the
Congress, the Muslim Conference and the Muslim League condemned the movement as a devise
to establish Hindu Raj. Similarly, Sikh support also seemed to have shifted away from Congress.
Non-Congress Hindus, like the Hindu Mahasabha and the Justice Party in Madras declared their
opposition to civil disobedience. Business groups were apprehensive about the uncertain
possibilities of the Lahore resolution, while young Congressmen were pressing for more militant
action. Under the circumstances, the celebration of the "Independence Day" on 26 January 1930
evoked little enthusiasm, except in Punjab, UP, Delhi and Bombay.‖
[Bandopadhyay, 2004 , 317] the many reasons which could be posed for the withdrawal of
the movement few become worth mentioning, rich business houses got tired of the
movement, thus could offer a weak support. Important to remember that the weightiest
reason for withdrawal of the movement was appearance of radicalism and violence among
certain lower classes that refused to remain under the control of local Congress leaders. The
movement was moving in wayward directions—or going against the Gandhi and creed of
non-violence and was tearing apart the fragile unity of the political nation;

Institute of lifelong learning, University of Delhi 19

 Political Science {Bacculaureate with Honours Program}

hence, the compromise and withdrawal. But the negotiations with the government failed
and Gandhi returned empty-handed from the second Round Table Conference in London
held in September-December 1931. [Bandopadhyay, 2004, 321] the deadlock on some
questions like the minority issue not only that of Muslims, but all other minorities, such as
the depressed classes (untouchables), Anglo-Indians, Indian Christians and Europeans
demanded separate electorates, which Gandhi was adamant not to concede. Thus the
second RTC failed. He came back to India and his only option was a renewal of the battle.
[Bandopadhyay, 2004, 321]

iv. Civil Disobedience Second Phase

Gandhiji was unhappy by the attitude of the government and decided to resume the civil
Disobedience in January 1932. The Government took little time to declare the Congress as
an illegal body, and arrested senior leaders, including Pandit Nehru and Khan Abdul Ghaffar
Khan. In spite of the ruthless repression, the Civil Disobedience movement continued.
Anand discloses that amongst those who went to prison, ―A majority of them, besides Congress
leaders and activists, were the underprivileged. For instance in UP out of 2004 people
arrested (in early 1932), 1530 were peasants, workers and other illiterates.‖ [Anand ,2006
,53] In August 1932, while Gandhiji was still in jail, British Prime Minister, Ramsay
MacDonald, announced the Communal Award, providing separate electorates for Depressed
Classes (Untouchable, Harijans, or dalits). It reserved certain seats for Harijans and only
the Harijans electorate would elect their representatives. Gandhiji saw it as a ploy to further
divide the Indian society. He demanded that the number of seats reserved for Harijans be
increased but for each reserved seat electorate of all the castes should have the right to
elect their representative from among the Harijan candidates. He undertook fast unto death
against the Award giving separate electorates for Depressed Classes. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, a
valiant campaigner for the Depressed Classes, eventually accepted Gandhiji's position and
the Poona Pact was signed.[Anand, 2006 , 53] .The third Round Table Conference in
November-December 1932 was largely formal and unimportant, as only 46 out of 112
delegates attended the session. After this incident Gandhiji carried a nationwide campaign
to arouse people's conscience against 'untouchables'. In April 1934, he decided to withdraw
the Civil Disobedience movement and to redirect workers to constructive work. On June 25
some upper caste fundamentalists threw a bomb on his car. However, he survived. [Anand ,
2006 , 53]