initial commit of ebook 10366HEADmain

7 files changed, 31755 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/10366-0.txt b/10366-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..39845c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/10366-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,7700 @@
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***
+[Transcriber's Note: The inconsistent spelling of the original has been
+preserved in this etext.]
+
+FREEDOM'S BATTLE
+
+BEING A COMPREHENSIVE COLLECTION OF WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ON THE PRESENT
+SITUATION
+
+BY MAHATMA GANDHI
+
+Second Edition
+
+1922
+
+The Publishers express their indebtedness to the Editor and Publisher
+of the "Young India" for allowing the free use of the articles
+appeared in that journal under the name of Mahatma Gandhi, and also to
+Mr. C. Rajagopalachar for the valuable introduction and help rendered in
+bringing out the book.
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+I. INTRODUCTION
+
+II. THE KHILAFAT
+
+  Why I have joined the Khilafat Movement
+
+  The Turkish Treaty
+
+  Turkish Peace Terms
+
+  The Suzerainty over Arabia
+
+  Further Questions Answered
+
+  Mr. Candler's Open Letter
+
+  In process of keeping
+
+  Appeal to the Viceroy
+
+  The Premier's reply
+
+  The Muslim Representation
+
+  Criticism of the Manifesto
+
+  The Mahomedan Decision
+
+  Mr. Andrew's Difficulty
+
+  The Khilafat Agitation
+
+  Hijarat and its Meaning
+
+III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS
+
+  Political Freemasonry
+
+  The Duty of the Punjabec
+
+  General Dyer
+
+  The Punjab Sentences
+
+IV. SWARAJ
+
+  Swaraj in one year
+
+  British Rule an evil
+
+  A movement of purification
+
+  Why was India lost
+
+  Swaraj my ideal
+
+  On the wrong track
+
+  The Congress Constitution
+
+  Swaraj in nine months
+
+  The Attainment of Swaraj
+
+V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY
+
+  The Hindus and the Mahomedans
+
+  Hindu Mahomedan unity
+
+  Hindu Muslim unity
+
+VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+  Depressed Classes
+
+  Amelioration of the depressed classes
+
+  The Sin of Untouchability
+
+VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD
+
+  Indians abroad
+
+  Indians overseas
+
+  Pariahs of the Empire
+
+VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+  Non-co-operation
+
+  Mr. Montagu on the Khilafat Agitation
+
+  At the call of the country
+
+  Non-co-operation explained
+
+  Religious Authority for non-co-operation
+
+  The inwardness of non-co-operation
+
+  A missionary on non-co-operation
+
+  How to work non-co-operation
+
+  Speech at Madras
+
+      "     Trichinopoly
+
+      "     Calicut
+
+      "     Mangalore
+
+      "     Bexwada
+
+  The Congress
+
+  Who is disloyal
+
+  Crusade against non-co-operation
+
+  Speech at Muxafarbail
+
+  Ridicule replacing Repression
+
+  The Viceregal pronouncement
+
+  From Ridicule to--?
+
+  To every Englishman In India
+
+  One step enough for me
+
+  The need for humility
+
+  Some Questions Answered
+
+  Pledges broken
+
+  More Objections answered
+
+  Mr. Pennington's Objections Answered
+
+  Some doubts
+
+  Rejoinder
+
+  Two Englishmen Reply
+
+  Letter to the Viceroy--Renunciation of Medals
+
+  Letter to H.R.H. The Duke of Connaught
+
+  The Greatest thing
+
+  Mahatma Gandhi's Statement
+
+IX. WRITTEN STATEMENT
+
+Index
+
+
+
+
+
+I. INTRODUCTION
+
+After the great war it is difficult, to point out a single nation that
+is happy; but this has come out of the war, that there is not a single
+nation outside India, that is not either free or striving to be free.
+
+It is said that we, too, are on the road to freedom, that it is better
+to be on the certain though slow course of gradual unfoldment of freedom
+than to take the troubled and dangerous path of revolution whether
+peaceful or violent, and that the new Reforms are a half-way house
+to freedom.
+
+The new constitution granted to India keeps all the military forces,
+both in the direction and in the financial control, entirely outside the
+scope of responsibility to the people of India. What does this mean? It
+means that the revenues of India are spent away on what the nation does
+not want. But after the mid-Eastern complications and the fresh Asiatic
+additions to British Imperial spheres of action. This Indian military
+servitude is a clear danger to national interests.
+
+The new constitution gives no scope for retrenchment and therefore no
+scope for measures of social reform except by fresh taxation, the heavy
+burden of which on the poor will outweigh all the advantages of any
+reforms. It maintains all the existing foreign services, and the cost of
+the administrative machinery high as it already is, is further
+increased.
+
+The reformed constitution keeps all the fundamental liberties of person,
+property, press, and association completely under bureaucratic control.
+All those laws which give to the irresponsible officers of the Executive
+Government of India absolute powers to override the popular will, are
+still unrepealed. In spite of the tragic price paid in the Punjab for
+demonstrating the danger of unrestrained power in the hands of a foreign
+bureaucracy and the inhumanity of spirit by which tyranny in a panic
+will seek to save itself, we stand just where we were before, at the
+mercy of the Executive in respect of all our fundamental liberties.
+
+Not only is Despotism intact in the Law, but unparalleled crimes and
+cruelties against the people have been encouraged and even after
+boastful admissions and clearest proofs, left unpunished. The spirit of
+unrepentant cruelty has thus been allowed to permeate the whole
+administration.
+
+
+THE MUSSALMAN AGONY
+
+To understand our present condition it is not enough to realise the
+general political servitude. We should add to it the reality and the
+extent of the injury inflicted by Britain on Islam, and thereby on the
+Mussalmans of India. The articles of Islamic faith which it is necessary
+to understand in order to realise why Mussalman India, which was once so
+loyal is now so strongly moved to the contrary are easily set out and
+understood. Every religion should be interpreted by the professors of
+that religion. The sentiments and religious ideas of Muslims founded on
+the traditions of long generations cannot be altered now by logic or
+cosmopolitanism, as others understand it. Such an attempt is the more
+unreasonable when it is made not even as a bonafide and independent
+effort of proselytising logic or reason, but only to justify a treaty
+entered into for political and worldly purposes.
+
+The Khalifa is the authority that is entrusted with the duty of
+defending Islam. He is the successor to Muhammad and the agent of God on
+earth. According to Islamic tradition he must possess sufficient
+temporal power effectively to protect Islam against non-Islamic powers
+and he should be one elected or accepted by the Mussalman world.
+
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is the area bounded by the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea,
+the Persian Gulf, and the waters of the Tigris and the Euphrates. It is
+the sacred Home of Islam and the centre towards which Islam throughout
+the world turns in prayer. According to the religious injunctions of the
+Mussalmans, this entire area should always be under Muslim control, its
+scientific border being believed to be a protection for the integrity of
+Islamic life and faith. Every Mussalman throughout the world is enjoined
+to sacrifice his all, if necessary, for preserving the Jazirat-ul-Arab
+under complete Muslim control.
+
+The sacred places of Islam should be in the possession of the Khalifa.
+They should not merely be free for the entry of the Mussalmans of the
+world by the grace or the license of non-Muslim powers, but should be
+the possession and property of Islam in the fullest degree.
+
+It is a religions obligation, on every Mussalman to go forth and help
+the Khalifa in every possible way where his unaided efforts in the
+defence of the Khilifat have failed.
+
+The grievance of the Indian Mussalmans is that a government that
+pretends to protect and spread peace and happiness among them has no
+right to ignore or set aside these articles of their cherished faith.
+
+According to the Peace Treaty imposed on the nominal Government at
+Constantinople, the Khalifa far from having the temporal authority or
+power needed to protect Islam, is a prisoner in his own city. He is to
+have no real fighting force, army or navy, and the financial control
+over his own territories is vested in other Governments. His capital is
+cut off from the rest of his possessions by an intervening permanent
+military occupation. It is needless to say that under these conditions
+he is absolutely incapable of protecting Islam as the Mussulmans of the
+world understand it.
+
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is split up; a great part of it given to powerful
+non-Muslim Powers, the remnant left with petty chiefs dominated all
+round by non-Muslim Governments.
+
+The Holy places of Islam are all taken out of the Khalifa's kingdom,
+some left in the possession of minor Muslim chiefs of Arabia entirely
+dependent on European control, and some relegated to newly-formed
+non-Muslim states.
+
+In a word, the Mussalman's free choice of a Khalifa such as Islamic
+tradition defines is made an unreality.
+
+
+THE HINDU DHARMA
+
+The age of misunderstanding and mutual warfare among religions is gone.
+If India has a mission of its own to the world, it is to establish the
+unity and the truth of all religions. This unity is established by
+mutual help and understanding between the various religions. It has come
+as a rare privilege to the Hindus in the fulfilment of this mission of
+India to stand up in defence of Islam against the onslaught of the
+earth-greed of the military powers of the west.
+
+The Dharma of Hinduism in this respect is placed beyond all doubt by the
+Bhagavat Gita.
+
+Those who are the votaries of other Gods and worship them with
+faith--even they, O Kaunteya, worship me alone, though not as the
+Shastra requires--IX, 23.
+
+Whoever being devoted wishes in perfect faith to worship a particular
+form, of such a one I maintain the same faith unshaken,--VII 21.
+
+Hinduism will realise its fullest beauty when in the fulfilment of this
+cardinal tenet, its followers offer themselves as sacrifice for the
+protection of the faith of their brothers, the Mussalmans.
+
+If Hindus and Mussalmans attain the height of courage and sacrifice that
+is needed for this battle on behalf of Islam against the greed of the
+West, a victory will be won not alone for Islam, but for Christianity
+itself. Militarism has robbed the crucified God of his name and his very
+cross and the World has been mistaking it to be Christianity. After the
+battle of Islam is won, Islam and Hinduism together can emancipate
+Christianity itself from the lust for power and wealth which have
+strangled it now and the true Christianity of the Gospels will be
+established. This battle of non-cooperation with its suffering and
+peaceful withdrawal of service will once for all establish its
+superiority over the power of brute force and unlimited slaughter.
+
+What a glorious privilege it is to play our part in this history of the
+world, when Hinduism and Christianity will unite on behalf of Islam, and
+in that strife of mutual love and support each religion will attain its
+own truest shape and beauty.
+
+
+AN ENDURING TREATY
+
+Swaraj for India has two great problems, one internal and the other
+external. How can Hindus and Mussalmans so different from each other
+form a strong and united nation governing themselves peacefully? This
+was the question for years, and no one could believe that the two
+communities could suffer for each other till the miracle was actually
+worked. The Khilafat has solved the problem. By the magic of suffering,
+each has truly touched and captured the other's heart, and the Nation
+now is strong and united.
+
+Not internal strength and unity alone has the Khilafat brought to India.
+The great block in the way of Indian aspiration for full freedom was
+the problem of external defence. How is India, left to herself defend
+her frontiers against her Mussalman neighbours? None but emasculated
+nations would accept such difficulties and responsibilities as an answer
+to the demand for freedom. It is only a people whose mentality has been
+perverted that can soothe itself with the domination by one race from a
+distant country, as a preventative against the aggression of another, a
+permanent and natural neighbour. Instead of developing strength to
+protect ourselves against those near whom we are permanently placed, a
+feeling of incurable impotence has been generated. Two strong and brave
+nations can live side by side, strengthening each other through
+enforcing constant vigilance, and maintain in full vigour each its own
+national strength, unity, patriotism and resources. If a nation wishes
+to be respected by its neighbours it has to develop and enter into
+honourable treaties. These are the only natural conditions of national
+liberty; but not a surrender to distant military powers to save oneself
+from one's neighbours.
+
+The Khilafat has solved the problem of distrust of Asiatic neighbours
+out of our future. The Indian struggle for the freedom of Islam has
+brought about a more lasting _entente_ and a more binding treaty between
+the people of India and the people of the Mussalman states around it
+than all the ententes and treaties among the Governments of Europe. No
+wars of aggression are possible where the common people on the two sides
+have become grateful friends. The faith of the Mussulman is a better
+sanction than the seal of the European Diplomats and plenipotentiaries.
+Not only has this great friendship between India and the Mussulman
+States around it removed for all time the fear of Mussulman aggression
+from outside, but it has erected round India, a solid wall of defence
+against all aggression from beyond against all greed from Europe, Russia
+or elsewhere. No secret diplomacy could establish a better _entente_ or
+a stronger federation than what this open and non-governmental treaty
+between Islam and India has established. The Indian support of the
+Khilafat has, as if by a magic wand, converted what Was once the
+Pan-Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship and
+defence for India.
+
+
+THE BRITISH CONNECTION
+
+Every nation like every individual is born free. Absolute freedom is the
+birthright of every people. The only limitations are those which a
+people may place over themselves. The British connection is invaluable
+as long as it is a defence against any worse connection sought to be
+imposed by violence. But it is only a means to an end, not a mandate of
+Providence of Nature. The alliance of neighbours, born of suffering for
+each other's sake, for ends that purify those that suffer, is
+necessarily a more natural and more enduring bond than one that has
+resulted from pure greed on the one side and weakness on the other.
+Where such a natural and enduring alliance has been accomplished among
+Asiatic peoples and not only between the respective governments, it may
+truly be felt to be more valuable than the British connection itself,
+after that connection has denied freedom or equality, and even justice.
+
+
+THE ALTERNATIVE
+
+Is violence or total surrender the only choice open to any people to
+whom Freedom or Justice is denied? Violence at a time when the whole
+world has learnt from bitter experience the futility of violence is
+unworthy of a country whose ancient people's privilege, it was, to see
+this truth long ago.
+
+Violence may rid a nation of its foreign masters but will only enslave
+it from inside. No nation can really be free which is at the mercy of
+its army and its military heroes. If a people rely for freedom on its
+soldiers, the soldiers will rule the country, not the people. Till the
+recent awakening of the workers of Europe, this was the only freedom
+which the powers of Europe really enjoyed. True freedom can exist only
+when those who produce, not those who destroy or know only to live on
+other's labour, are the masters.
+
+Even were violence the true road to freedom, is violence possible to a
+nation which has been emasculated and deprived of all weapons, and the
+whole world is hopelessly in advance of all our possibilities in the
+manufacture and the wielding of weapons of destruction.
+
+Submission or withdrawal of co-operation is the real and only
+alternative before India. Submission to injustice puts on the tempting
+garb of peace and, gradual progress, but there is no surer way to death
+than submission to wrong.
+
+
+THE FIFTH UPAYA
+
+Our ancients classified the arts of conquest into four well-known
+_Upayas_. Sama, Dana, Uheda, and Danda. A fifth Upuya was recognised
+sometimes by our ancients, which they called _Upeshka_. It is this
+_Punchamopaya_ that is placed by Mahatma Gandhi before the people of
+India in the form of Non-cooperation as an alternative, besides
+violence, to surrender.
+
+Where in any case negotiations have failed and the enemy is neither
+corruptible nor incapable of being divided, and a resort to violence has
+failed or would certainly be futile the method of _Upeshka_ remains to
+be applied to the case. Indeed, when the very existence of the power we
+seek to defeat really depends on our continuous co-operation with it,
+and where our _Upeskha_ its very life, our _Upeskha_ or non-co-operation
+is the most natural and most effective expedient that we can employ to
+bend it to our will.
+
+No Englishman believes that his nation can rule or keep India for a day
+unless the people of India actively co-operate to maintain that rule.
+Whether the co-operation be given willingly or through ignorance,
+cupidity, habit or fear, the withdrawal of that co-operation means
+impossibility of foreign rule in India. Some of us may not realise this,
+but those who govern us have long ago known and are now keenly alive to
+this truth. The active assistance of the people of this country in the
+supply of the money, men, and knowledge of the languages, customs and
+laws of the land, is the main-spring of the continuous life of the
+foreign administration. Indeed the circumstances of British rule in this
+country are such that but for a double supply of co-operation on the
+part of the governed, it must have broken down long ago. Any system of
+race domination is unnatural, and can be kept up only by active
+coercion through a foreign-recruited public, service invested with large
+powers, however much it may be helped by the perversion of mentality
+shaping the education of the youth of the country. The foreign recruited
+service must necessarily be very highly paid. This creates a wrong
+standard for the Indian recruited officials also. Military expenditure
+has to cover not only the needs of defence against foreign aggression,
+but also the possibilities of internal unrest and rebellion. Police
+charges have to go beyond the prevention and deletion of ordinary crime,
+for though this would be the only expenditure over the police of a
+self-governing people where any nation governs another, a large chapter of
+artificial crime has to be added to the penal code, and the work of the
+police extended accordingly. The military and public organisations must
+also be such as not only to result in outside efficiency, but also at
+the same time guarantee internal impotency. This is to be achieved by
+the adjustment and careful admixture of officers and units from
+different races. All this can be and is maintained only by extra cost
+and extra-active co-operation on the part of the people. The slightest
+withdrawal of assistance must put such machinery out of gear. This is
+the basis of the programme of progressive non violent non-co-operation
+that has been adopted by the National Congress.
+
+
+SOME OBJECTIONS
+
+The powerful character of the measure, however, leads some to object to
+non-co-operation because of that very reason. Striking as it does at the
+very root of Government in India, they fear that non-co-operation must
+lead to anarchy, and that the remedy is worse than the disease. This is
+an objection arising out of insufficient allowance for human nature. It
+is assumed that the British people will allow their connection with
+India to cease rather than remedy the wrongs for which we seek justice.
+If this assumption be correct, no doubt it must lead to separation and
+possibly also anarchy for a time. If the operatives in a factory have
+grievances, negotiations having failed, a strike would on a similar
+argument be never admissible. Unyielding obstinacy being presumed, it
+must end in the closing down of the factory and break up of the men. But
+if in ninety-nine out of a hundred cases it is not the case that strikes
+end in this manner, it is more unlikely that, instead of righting the
+manifest wrongs that India complains about, the British people will
+value their Indian Dominion so low as to prefer to allow us to
+non-co-operate up to the point of separation. It would be a totally
+false reading of British character and British history. But if such
+wicked obstinacy be ultimately shown by a government, far be it from us
+to prefer peace at the price of abject surrender to wrong. There is no
+anarchy greater than the moral anarchy of surrender to unrepentant
+wrong. We may, however, be certain that if we show the strength and
+unity necessary for non-co-operation, long before we progress with it
+far, we shall have developed true order and true self-government wherein
+there is no place for anarchy.
+
+Another fear sometimes expressed that, if non-co-operation were to
+succeed, the British would have to go, leaving us unable to defend
+ourselves against foreign aggression. If we have the self-respect, the
+patriotism, the tenacious purpose, and the power of organisation that are
+necessary to drive the British out from their entrenched position, no
+lesser foreign power will dare after that, undertake the futile task of
+conquering or enslaving us.
+
+It is sometimes said that non-co-operation is negative and destructive
+of the advantages which a stable government has conferred on us. That
+non-co-operation is negative is merely a half-truth. Non-co-operation
+with the government means greater co-operation among ourselves, greater
+mutual dependence among the many different castes and classes of our
+country. Non-co-operation is not mere negation. It will lead to the
+recovery of the lost art of co-operation among ourselves. Long
+dependence on an outside government which by its interference
+suppressed or prevented the consequences of our differences has made us
+forget the duty of mutual trust and the art of friendly adjustment.
+Having allowed Government to do everything for us, we have gradually
+become incapable of doing anything for ourselves. Even if we had no
+grievance against this Government, non-co-operation with it for a time
+would be desirable so far as it would perforce lead us to trusting and
+working with one another and thereby strengthen the bonds of
+national unity.
+
+The most tragic consequence of dependence on the complex machinery of a
+foreign government is the atrophy of the communal sense. The direct
+touch with administrative cause and effect is lost. An outside protector
+performs all the necessary functions of the community in a mysterious
+manner, and communal duties are not realised by the people. The one
+reason addressed by those who deny to us the capacity for self-rule is
+the insufficient appreciation by the people of communal duties and
+discipline. It is only by actually refraining for a time from dependence
+on Government that we can regain self-reliance, learn first-hand the
+value of communal duties and build up true national co-operation.
+Non-co-operation is a practical and positive training in Swadharma, and
+Swadharma alone can lead up to Swaraj.
+
+The negative is the best and most impressive method of enforcing the
+value of the positive. Few outside government circles realise in the
+present police anything but tyranny and corruption. But if the units of
+the present police were withdrawn we would soon perforce set about
+organising a substitute, and most people would realise the true social
+value of a police force. Few realise in the present taxes anything but
+coercion and waste, but most people would soon see that a share of every
+man's income is due for common purposes and that there are many
+limitations to the economical management of public institutions; we
+would begin once again to contribute directly, build up and maintain
+national institutions in the place of those that now mysteriously spring
+up and live under Government orders.
+
+
+EMANCIPATION
+
+Freedom is a priceless thing. But it is a stable possession only when it
+is acquired by a nation's strenuous effort. What is not by chance or
+outward circumstance, or given by the generous impulse of a tyrant
+prince or people is not a reality. A nation will truly enjoy freedom
+only when in the process of winning or defending its freedom, it has
+been purified and consolidated through and through, until liberty has
+become a part of its very soul. Otherwise it would be but a change of
+the form of government, which might please the fancy of politicians, or
+satisfy the classes in power, but could never emancipate a people. An
+Act of Parliament can never create citizens in Hindustan. The strength,
+spirit, and happiness of a people who have fought and won their liberty
+cannot be got by Reform Acts. Effort and sacrifice are the necessary
+conditions of real stable emancipation. Liberty unacquired, merely found,
+will on the test fail like the Dead-Sea-apple or the magician's plenty.
+
+The war that the people of India have declared and which will purify and
+consolidate India, and forge for her a true and stable liberty is a war
+with the latest and most effective weapon. In this war, what has
+hitherto been in the world an undesirable but necessary incident in
+freedom's battles, the killing of innocent men, has been eliminated; and
+that which is the true essential for forging liberty, the
+self-purification and self-strengthening of men and women has been kept
+pure and unalloyed. It is for men, women and youth, every one of them
+that lives in and loves India, to do his bit in this battle, not waiting
+for others, not calculating the chances of his surviving the battle to
+enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice. Soldiers in the old-world wars did
+not insure their lives before going to the front. The privilege of youth
+in special is for country's sake to exercise their comparative freedom
+and give up the yearning for lives and careers built on the slavery of
+the people.
+
+That on which a foreign government truly rests whatever may be the
+illusions on their or our part is not the strength of its armed forces,
+but our own co-operation. Actual service on the part of one generation,
+and educational preparation for future service on the part of the next
+generation are the two main branches of this co-operation of slaves in
+the perpetuation of slavery. The boycott of government service and the
+law-courts is aimed at the first, the boycott of government controlled
+schools is to stop the second. If either the one or the other of these
+two branches of co-operation is withdrawn in sufficient measure, there
+will be an automatic and perfectly peaceful change from slavery
+to liberty.
+
+The beat preparation for any one who desires to take part in the great
+battle now going on is a silent study of the writings and speeches
+collected herein, and proposed to be completed in a supplementary volume
+to be soon issued.
+
+C. RAJAGOPALACHAR
+
+
+
+
+II. THE KHILAFAT
+
+
+WHY I HAVE JOINED THE KHILAFAT MOVEMENT
+
+An esteemed South African friend who is at present living in England has
+written to me a letter from which I make the following excerpts:--
+
+   "You will doubtless remember having met me in South Africa at the
+   time when the Rev. J.J. Doke was assisting you in your campaign there
+   and I subsequently returned to England deeply impressed with the
+   rightness of your attitude in that country. During the months before
+   war I wrote and lectured and spoke on your behalf in several places
+   which I do not regret. Since returning from military service,
+   however, I have noticed from the papers that you appear to be
+   adopting a more militant attitude... I notice a report in "The Times"
+   that you are assisting and countenancing a union between the Hindus
+   and Moslems with a view of embarrassing England and the Allied Powers
+   in the matter of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire or the
+   ejection of the Turkish Government from Constantinople. Knowing as I
+   do your sense of justice and your humane instincts I feel that I am
+   entitled, in view of the humble part that I have taken to promote
+   your interests on this side, to ask you whether this latter report is
+   correct. I cannot believe that you have wrongly countenanced a
+   movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul
+   Government above the interests of humanity, for if any country has
+   crippled these interests in the East it has surely been Turkey. I am
+   personally familiar with the conditions in Syria and Armenia and I
+   can only suppose that if the report, which "The Times" has published
+   is correct, you have thrown to one side, your moral responsibilities
+   and allied yourself with one of the prevailing anarchies. However,
+   until I hear that this is not your attitude I cannot prejudice my
+   mind. Perhaps you will do me the favour of sending me a reply."
+
+I have sent a reply to the writer. But as the views expressed in the
+quotation are likely to be shared by many of my English friends and as I
+do not wish, if I can possibly help it, to forfeit their friendship or
+their esteem I shall endeavour to state my position as clearly as I can
+on the Khilafat question. The letter shows what risk public men run
+through irresponsible journalism. I have not seen _The Times_ report,
+referred to by my friend. But it is evident that the report has made the
+writer to suspect my alliance with "the prevailing anarchies" and to
+think that I have "thrown to one side" my "moral responsibilities."
+
+It is just my sense of moral responsibilities which has made me take up
+the Khilafat question and to identify myself entirely with the
+Mahomedans. It is perfectly true that I am assisting and countenancing
+the union between Hindus and Muslims, but certainly not with "a view of
+embarrassing England and the Allied Powers in the matter of the
+dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire," it is contrary to my creed to
+embarrass governments or anybody else. This does not how ever mean that
+certain acts of mine may not result in embarrassment. But I should not
+hold myself responsible for having caused embarrassment when I resist
+the wrong of a wrong-doer by refusing assistance in his wrong-doing. On
+the Khilafat question I refuse to be party to a broken pledge. Mr. Lloyd
+George's solemn declaration is practically the whole of the case for
+Indian Mahomedans and when that case is fortified by scriptural
+authority it becomes unanswerable. Moreover, it is incorrect to say that
+I have "allied myself to one of the prevailing anarchies" or that I have
+wrongly countenanced the movement to place the cruel and unjust
+despotism of the Stamboul Government above the interests of humanity.
+In the whole of the Mahomedan demand there is no insistance on the
+retention of the so-called unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government;
+on the contrary the Mahomedans have accepted the principle of taking
+full guarantees from that Government for the protection of non-Muslim
+minorities. I do not know how far the condition of Armenia and Syria may
+be considered an 'anarchy' and how far the Turkish Government may be
+held responsible for it. I much suspect that the reports from these
+quarters are much exaggerated and that the European powers are
+themselves in a measure responsible for what misrule there may be in
+Armenia and Syria. But I am in no way interested in supporting Turkish
+or any other anarchy. The Allied Powers can easily prevent it by means
+other than that of ending Turkish rule or dismembering and weakening the
+Ottoman Empire. The Allied Powers are not dealing with a new situation.
+If Turkey was to be partitioned, the position should have been made
+clear at the commencement of the war. There would then have been no
+question of a broken pledge. As it is, no Indian Mahomedan has any
+regard for the promises of British Ministers. In his opinion, the cry
+against Turkey is that of Christianity _vs._ Islam with England as the
+louder in the cry. The latest cablegram from Mr. Mahomed Ali strengthens
+the impression, for he says that unlike as in England his deputation is
+receiving much support from the French Government and the people.
+
+Thus, if it is true, as I hold it is true that the Indian Mussalmans
+have a cause that is just and is supported by scriptural authority, then
+for the Hindus not to support them to the utmost would be a cowardly
+breach of brotherhood and they would forfeit all claim to consideration
+from their Mahomedan countrymen. As a public-server therefore, I would
+be unworthy of the position I claim, if I did not support Indian
+Mussalmans in their struggle to maintain the Khilafat in accordance with
+their religious belief. I believe that in supporting them I am rendering
+a service to the Empire, because by assisting my Mahomedan countrymen to
+give a disciplined expression to their sentiment it becomes possible to
+make the agitation thoroughly, orderly and even successful.
+
+
+THE TURKISH TREATY
+
+The Turkish treaty will be out on the 10th of May. It is stated to
+provide for the internationalisation of the Straits, the occupation of
+Gallipoli by the Allies, the maintenance of Allied contingents in
+Constantinople and the appointment of a Commission of Control over
+Turkish finances. The San Remo Conference has entrusted Britain with
+Mandates for Mesopotamia and Palestine and France with the Mandate for
+Syria. As regards Smyrna the accounts so far received inform that
+Turkish suzerainty over Smyrna will be indicated by the fact that the
+population will not be entitled to send delegates to the Greek
+Parliament but at the end of five years local Smyrna Parliament will
+have the right of voting in favour of union with Greece and in such an
+event Turkish suzerainty will cease. Turkish suzerainty will be confined
+to the area within the Chatalja lines. With regard to Emir Foisul's
+position there is no news except that the Mandates of Britain and France
+transform his military title into a civil title.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+We have given above the terms of the Turkish treaty as indicated in
+Router's messages. These reports are incomplete and all of them are not
+equally authenticated. But if these terms are true, they are a challenge
+to the Muslim demands. Turkish Sovereignty is confined to the Chatalja
+lines. This means that the Big Three of the Supreme Council have cut off
+Thrace from Turkish dominions. This is a distinct breach of the pledge
+given by one of these Three, _viz._, the Premier of the British Empire.
+To remain within the Chatalja lines and, we are afraid, as a dependent
+of the Allies, is for the Sultan a humiliating position inconsistent
+with the Koranic injunctions. Such a restricted position of the Turks is
+virtually a success of the bag and baggage school.
+
+It is not yet known how the Supreme Council disposed of the rich and
+renowned lands of Asia Minor. If Mr. Lloyd George's views recently
+expressed in this respect have received the Allies' sanction--it is
+probable--nothing less than a common control is expected. The decision
+in the case of Smyrna will be satisfying to none, though the Allies seem
+to have made by their arrangement a skillful attempt to please all the
+parties concerned. Mr. Lloyd George, in his reply to the Khilafat
+Deputation, had talked about the careful investigations by an impartial
+committee and had added; "The great majority of the population
+undoubtedly prefer Greek rule to Turkish rule, so I understand" But the
+decision postpones to carry out his understanding till a period of
+five years.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+When we come to the question of mandates, the Allied Powers' motives
+come out more distinctly. The Arabs' claim of independence was used as a
+difficulty against keeping Turkish Sovereignty. This was defended in the
+of self-determination and by pointing out parallels of Transylvania and
+other provinces. When the final moment came, the Allies have ventured to
+divide the spoils amongst themselves. Britain is given the mandate over
+Mesopotamia and Palestine and France has the mandate over Syria. The
+Arab delegation complains in their note lately issued expressing their
+disappointment at the Supreme Council's decision with regard to the
+Arab liberated countries, which, it declares, is contrary to the
+principle of self-determination.
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+So what little news has arrived about the Turkish treaty, is uniformly
+disquieting. The Moslems have found sufficient ground to honour Russia,
+more than the Allies. Russia has recognised the freedom of Khiva and
+Bokhara. The Moslem world, as H. M. the Amir of Afghanistan said in his
+speech, will feel grateful towards Russia in spite of all the rumours
+abroad about its anarchy and disorder, whereas the whole Moslem world
+will resent the action of the other European nations who have allied
+with each other to carry out a joint coercion and extinction of Turkey
+in the name of self-determination and partly in the guise of the
+interest of civilization.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+The terms of the Turkish treaty are not only a breach of the Premier's
+pledge, not only a sin against the principle of self-determination, but
+they also show a reckless indifference of the Allied Powers towards the
+Koranic injunctions. The terms point out that Mr. Lloyd George's
+misinformed ideas of Khilafat have prevailed in the Council. Like Mr.
+Lloyd George other statesmen also at San Remo have compared Caliphate
+with Popedom and ignored the Koronic idea of associating spiritual
+power with temporal power. These misguided statesmen were too much
+possessed by haughtiness and so they refused to receive any
+enlightenment on the question of Khilafat from the Deputation. They
+could have corrected themselves had they heard Mr. Mahomed Ali on this
+point. Speaking at the Essex Hall meeting Mr. Mahomed Ali distinguished
+between Popedom and Caliphate and clearly explained what Caliphate
+means. He said:
+
+   "Islam is supernational and not national, the basis of Islamic
+   sympathy is a common outlook on life and common culture.... And it
+   has two centres. The personal centre is the island of Arabia. The
+   Khalifa is the Commander of the Faithful and his orders must be
+   obeyed by all Muslims so long and so long only, as they are not at
+   variance with the Commandments of God and the Traditions of the
+   Prophet. But since there is no lacerating distinction between things
+   temporal and things spiritual, the Khalifa is something more than a
+   Pope and cannot be "Vaticanised." But he is also less than a Pope for
+   he is not infallible. If he persists in un-Islamic conduct we can
+   depose him. And we have deposed him more than once. But so long as he
+   orders only that which Islam demands we must support him. He and no
+   other ruler is the Defender of _our_ faith."
+
+These few words could have removed the mis-undertakings rooted in the
+minds of those that at San Remo, if they were in earnest for a just
+solution. But Mr. Mahomed Ali's deputation was not given any hearing by
+the Peace Conference. They were told that the Peace Conference had
+already heard the official delegation of India on this question. But the
+wrong notions the Allies still entertain about Caliphate are a
+sufficient indication of the effects of the work of this official
+delegation. The result of these wrong notions is the present settlement
+and this unjust settlement will unsettle the world. They know not
+what they do.
+
+
+TURKISH PEACE TERMS
+
+The question of question to-day is the Khilafat question, otherwise
+known as that of the Turkish peace terms. His Excellency the Viceroy
+deserves our thanks for receiving the joint deputation even at this late
+hour, especially when he was busy preparing to receive the head of the
+different provinces. His Excellency must be thanked for the unfailing
+courtesy with which he received the deputation and the courteous
+language in which his reply was couched. But mere courtesy, valuable as
+it is at all times, never so valuable as at this, is not enough at this
+critical moment. 'Sweet words butter no parsnips' is a proverb more
+applicable to-day than ever before. Behind the courtesy there was the
+determination to punish Turkey. Punishment of Turkey is a thing which
+Muslim sentiment cannot tolerate for a moment. Muslim soldiers are as
+responsible for the result of the war as any others. It was to appease
+them that Mr. Asquith said when Turkey decided to join the Central
+Powers that the British Government had no designs on Turkey and that His
+Majesty's Government would never think of punishing the Sultan for the
+misdeeds of the Turkish Committee. Examined by that standard the
+Viceregal reply is not only disappointing but it is a fall from truth
+and justice.
+
+What is this British Empire? It is as much Mahomedan and Hindu as it is
+Christian. Its religious neutrality is not a virtue, or if it is, it is
+a virtue of necessity. Such a mighty Empire could not be held together
+on any other terms. British ministers are therefore bound to protect
+Mahomedan interests as any other. Indeed as the Muslim rejoinder says,
+they are bound to make the cause their own. What is the use of His
+Excellency having presented the Muslim claim before the Conference? If
+the cause is lost the Mahomedans will be entitled to think that Britain
+did not do her duty by them. And the Viceregal reply confirms the view.
+When His Excellency says that Turkey must suffer for her having joined
+the Central Powers he but expresses the opinion of British ministers.
+We hope, therefore, with the framers of the Muslim rejoinder that His
+Majesty's ministers will mend the mistakes if any have been committed
+and secure a settlement that would satisfy Mahomedan sentiment.
+
+What does the sentiment demand? The preservation of the Khilafat with
+such guarantee as may be necessary for the protection of the interests
+of the non-Muslim races living under Turkish rule and the Khalif's
+control over Arabia and the Holy Places with such arrangement as may be
+required for guaranteeing Arab self-rule, should the Arabs desire it. It
+is hardly possible to state the claim more fairly than has been done. It
+is a claim backed by justice, by the declarations of British ministers
+and by the unanimous Hindu and Muslim opinion. It would be midsummer
+madness to reject or whittle down a claim so backed.
+
+
+THE SUZERAINTY OVER ARABIA
+
+   "As I told you in my last letter I think Mr. Gandhi has made a
+   serious mistake in the Kailafat business. The Indian Mahomedans base
+   their demand on the assertion that their religion requires the
+   Turkish rule over Arabia: but when they have against them in this
+   matter, the Arabs themselves, it is impossible to regard the theory
+   of the Indian Mahomedans as essential to Islam. After all if the
+   Arabs do not represent Islam, who does? It is as if the German Roman
+   Catholics made a demand in the name of Roman Catholicism with Rome
+   and the Italians making a contrary demand. But even if the religion
+   of the Indian Mahomedans did require that Turkish rule should be
+   imposed upon the Arabs against their will, one could not, now-a-days,
+   recognise as a really religious demand, one which required the
+   continued oppression of one people by another. When an assurance was
+   given at the beginning of the war to the Indian Mahomedans that the
+   Mahomedan religion would be respected, that could never have meant
+   that a temporal sovereignty which violated the principles of
+   self-determination would be upheld. We could not now stand by and see
+   the Turks re-conquer the Arabs (for the Arabs would certainly fight
+   against them) without grossly betraying the Arabs to whom we have
+   given pledges. It is not true that the Arab hostility to the Turks
+   was due simply to European suggestion. No doubt, during the war we
+   availed ourselves of the Arab hostility to the Turks to get another
+   ally, but the hostility had existed long before the war. The
+   Non-Turkish Mahomedan subjects of the Sultan in general wanted to get
+   rid of his rule. It is the Indian Mahomedans who have no experience
+   of that rule who want to impose it on others. As a matter of fact the
+   idea of any restoration of Turkish rule in Syria or Arabia, seems so
+   remote from all possibilities that to discuss it seems like
+   discussing a restoration of the Holy Roman Empire. I cannot conceive
+   what series of events could bring it about. The Indian Mahomedans
+   certainly could not march into Arabia themselves and conquer the
+   Arabs for the Sultan. And no amount of agitation and trouble in India
+   would ever induce England to put back Turkish rule in Arabia. In this
+   matter it is not English Imperialism which the Indian Mahomedans are
+   up against, but the mass of English Liberal and Humanitarian opinion,
+   the mass of the better opinion of England, which wants
+   self-determination to go forward in India. Supposing the Indian
+   Mahomedans could stir up an agitation so violent in India as to sever
+   the connection between India and the British Crown, still they would
+   not be any nearer to their purpose. For to-day they do have
+   considerable influence on British world-policy. Even if in this
+   matter of the Turkish question their influence has not been
+   sufficient to turn the scale against the very heavy weights on the
+   other side, it has weighed in the scale. But apart from the British
+   connection, Indian Mahomedans would have no influence at all outside
+   India. They would not count for more in world politics than the
+   Mahomedans of China. I think it is likely (apart from the pressure
+   of America on the other side. I should say certain) that the
+   influence of the Indian Mahomedans may at any rate avail to keep the
+   Sultan in Constantinople. But I doubt whether they will gain any
+   advantage by doing so. For a Turkey cut down to the Turkish parts of
+   Asia-Minor, Constantinople would be a very inconvenient capital. I
+   think its inconvenience would more than outweigh the sentimental
+   gratification of keeping up a phantom of the old Ottoman Empire. But
+   if the Indian Mahomedans want the Sultan to retain his place in
+   Constantinople I think the assurances given officially by the Viceroy
+   in India now binds us to insist on his remaining there and I think he
+   will remain there in spite of America."
+
+This is an extract, from the letter of an Englishman enjoying a position
+in Great Britain, to a friend in India. It is a typical letter, sober,
+honest, to the point and put in such graceful language that whilst it
+challenges you, it commands your respect by its very gracefulness. But
+it is just this attitude based upon insufficient or false information
+which has ruined many a cause in the British Isles. The superficiality,
+the one-sidedness the inaccuracy and often even dishonesty that have
+crept into modern journalism, continuously mislead honest men who want
+to see nothing but justice done. Then there are always interested
+groups whose business it is to serve their ends by means of faul or
+food. And the honest Englishman wishing to vote for justice but swayed
+by conflicting opinions and dominated by distorted versions, often ends
+by becoming an instrument of injustice.
+
+The writer of the letter quoted above has built up convincing argument
+on imaginary data. He has successfully shown that the Mahomedan case, as
+it has been presented to him, is a rotten case. In India, where it is
+not quite easy to distort facts about the Khilafat, English friends
+admit the utter justice of the Indian-Mahomedan claim. But they plead
+helplessness and tell us that the Government of India and Mr. Montagu
+have done all it was humanly possible for them to do. And if now the
+judgment goes against Islam, Indian Mahomedans should resign themselves
+to it. This extraordinary state of things would not be possible except
+under this modern rush and preoccupations of all responsible people.
+
+Let us for a moment examine the case as it has been imagined by the
+writer. He suggests that Indian Mahomedans want Turkish rule in Arabia
+in spite of the opposition of the Arabs themselves, and that, if the
+Arabs do not want Turkish rule, the writer argues, no false religions
+sentiment can be permitted to interfere with self-determination of the
+Arabs when India herself has been pleading for that very status. Now the
+fact is that the Mahomedans, as is known to everybody who has at all
+studied the case, have never asked for Turkish rule in Arabia in
+opposition to the Arabs. On the contrary, they have said that they have
+no intention of resisting Arabian self-government. All they ask for is
+Turkish suzerainty over Arabia which would guarantee complete self-rule
+for the Arabs. They want Khalif's control of the Holy Places of Islam.
+In other words they ask for nothing more than what was guaranteed by Mr.
+Lloyd George and on the strength of which guarantee Mahomedan soldiers
+split their blood on behalf of the Allied Powers. All the elaborate
+argument therefore and the cogent reasoning of the above extract fall to
+pieces based as they are upon a case that has never existed. I have
+thrown myself heart and soul into this question because British pledges
+abstract justice, and religious sentiment coincide. I can conceive the
+possibility of a blind and fanatical religious sentiment existing in
+opposition to pure justice. I should then resist the former and fight
+for the latter. Nor would I insist upon pledges given dishonestly to
+support an unjust cause as has happened with England in the case of the
+secret treaties. Resistance there becomes not only lawful but obligatory
+on the part of a nation that prides itself on its righteousness.
+
+It is unnecessary for me to examine the position imagined by the English
+friend, viz., how India would have fared had she been an independent
+power. It is unnecessary because Indian Mahomedans, and for that matter
+India, are fighting for a cause that is admittedly just; a cause in aid
+of which they are invoking the whole-hearted support of the British
+people. I would however venture to suggest that this is a cause in which
+mere sympathy will not suffice. It is a cause which demands support that
+is strong enough to bring about substantial justice.
+
+
+FURTHER QUESTIONS ANSWERED
+
+I have been overwhelmed with public criticism and private advice and
+even anonymous letters telling me exactly what I should do. Some are
+impatient that I do not advise immediate and extensive non-co-operation;
+others tell me what harm I am doing the country by throwing it knowingly
+in a tempest of violence on either side. It is difficult for me to deal
+with the whole of the criticism, but I would summarize some of the
+objections and endeavour to answer them to the best of my ability. These
+are in addition to those I have already answered:--
+
+(1) Turkish claim is immoral or unjust and how can I, a lover of truth
+and justice, support it? (2) Even if the claim be just in theory, the
+Turk is hopelessly incapable, weak and cruel. He does not deserve any
+assistance.
+
+(3) Even if Turkey deserves all that is claimed for her, why should I
+land India in an international struggle?
+
+(4) It is no part of the Indian Mahomedans' business to meddle in this
+affair. If they cherish any political ambition, they have tried, they
+have failed and they should now sit still. If it is a religious matter
+with them, it cannot appeal to the Hindu reason in the manner it is put
+and in any case Hindus ought not to identify themselves with Mahomedans
+in their religious quarrel with Christendom.
+
+(5) In no case should I advocate non-co-operation which in its extreme
+sense is nothing but a rebellion, no matter how peaceful it may be.
+
+(6) Moreover, my experience of last year must show me that it is beyond
+the capacity of any single human being to control the forces of violence
+that are lying dormant in the land.
+
+(7) Non-co-operation is futile because people will never respond in
+right earnest, and reaction that might afterwards set in will be worse
+than the state of hopefulness we are now in.
+
+(8) Non-co-operation will bring about cessation of all other activities,
+even working of the Reforms, thus set back the clock of progress. (9)
+However pure my motives may be, those of the Mussalmans are obviously
+revengeful.
+
+I shall now answer the objections in the order in which they are
+stated--
+
+(1) In my opinion the Turkish claim is not only not immoral and unjust,
+but it is highly equitable, if only because Turkey wants to retain what
+is her own. And the Mahomedan manifesto has definitely declared that
+whatever guarantees may be necessary to be taken for the protection of
+non-Muslim and non-Turkish races, should be taken so as to give the
+Christians theirs and the Arabs their self-government under the Turkish
+suzerainty.
+
+(2) I do not believe the Turk to be weak, incapable or cruel. He is
+certainly disorganised and probably without good generalship. He has
+been obliged to fight against heavy odds. The argument of weakness,
+incapacity and cruelty one often hears quoted in connection with those
+from whom power is sought to be taken away. About the alleged massacres
+a proper commission has been asked for, but never granted. And in any
+case security can be taken against oppression.
+
+(3) I have already stated that if I were not interested in the Indian
+Mahomedans, I would not interest myself in the welfare of the Turks any
+more than I am in that of the Austrians or the Poles. But I am bound as
+an Indian to share the sufferings and trial of fellow-Indians. If I deem
+the Mahomedan to be my brother. It is my duty to help him in his hour
+of peril to the best of my ability, if his cause commends itself to
+me as just.
+
+(4) The fourth refers to the extent Hindus should join hands with the
+Mahomedans. It is therefore a matter of feeling and opinion. It is
+expedient to suffer for my Mahomedan brother to the utmost in a just
+cause and I should therefore travel with him along the whole road so
+long as the means employed by him are as honourable as his end. I cannot
+regulate the Mahomedan feeling. I must accept his statement that the
+Khilafat is with him a religious question in the sense that it binds him
+to reach the goal even at the cost of his own life.
+
+(5) I do not consider non-co-operation to be a rebellion, because it is
+free from violence. In a larger sense all opposition to a Government
+measure is a rebellion. In that sense, rebellion in a just cause is a
+duty, the extent of opposition being determined by the measure of the
+injustice done and felt.
+
+(6) My experience of last year shows me that in spite of aberrations in
+some parts of India, the country was entirely under control that the
+influence of Satyagraha was profoundly for its good and that where
+violence did break out there were local causes that directly contributed
+to it. At the same time I admit that even the violence that did take
+place on the part of the people and the spirit of lawlessness that was
+undoubtedly shown in some parts should have remained under check. I have
+made ample acknowledgment of the miscalculation I then made. But all the
+painful experience that I then gained did not any way shake my belief in
+Satyagraha or in the possibility of that matchless force being utilised
+in India. Ample provision is being made this time to avoid the mistakes
+of the past. But I must refuse to be deterred from a clear course;
+because it may be attended by violence totally unintended and in spite
+of extraordinary efforts that are being made to prevent it. At the same
+time I must make my position clear. Nothing can possibly prevent a
+Satyagrahi from doing his duty because of the frown of the authorities.
+I would risk, if necessary, a million lives so long as they are
+voluntary sufferers and are innocent, spotless victims. It is the
+mistakes of the people that matter in a Satyagraha campaign. Mistakes,
+even insanity must be expected from the strong and the powerful, and the
+moment of victory has come when there is no retort to the mad fury of
+the powerful, but a voluntary, dignified and quiet submission but not
+submission to the will of the authority that has put itself in the
+wrong. The secret of success lies therefore in holding every English
+life and the life of every officer serving the Government as sacred as
+those of our own dear ones. All the wonderful experience I have gained
+now during nearly 40 years of conscious existence, has convinced me that
+there is no gift so precious as that of life. I make bold to say that
+the moment the Englishmen feel that although they are in India in a
+hopeless minority, their lives are protected against harm not because of
+the matchless weapons of destruction which are at their disposal, but
+because Indians refuse to take the lives even of those whom they may
+consider to be utterly in the wrong that moment will see a
+transformation in the English nature in its relation to India and that
+moment will also be the moment when all the destructive cutlery that is
+to be had in India will begin to rust. I know that this is a far-off
+vision. That cannot matter to me. It is enough for me to see the light
+and to act up to it, and it is more than enough when I gain companions
+in the onward march. I have claimed in private conversations with
+English friends that it is because of my incessant preaching of the
+gospel of non-violence and my having successfully demonstrated its
+practical utility that so far the forces of violence, which are
+undoubtedly in existence in connection with the Khilafat movement, have
+remained under complete control.
+
+(7) From a religious standpoint the seventh objection is hardly worth
+considering. If people do not respond to the movement of
+non-co-operation, it would be a pity, but that can be no reason for a
+reformer not to try. It would be to me a demonstration that the present
+position of hopefulness is not dependent on any inward strength or
+knowledge, but it is hope born of ignorance and superstition.
+
+(8) If non-co-operation is taken up in earnest, it must bring about a
+cessation of all other activities including the Reforms, but I decline
+to draw therefore the corollary that it will set back the clock of
+progress. On the contrary, I consider non-co-operation to be such a
+powerful and pure instrument, that if it is enforced in an earnest
+spirit, it will be like seeking first the Kingdom of God and everything
+else following as a matter of course. People will have then realised
+their true power. They would have learnt the value of discipline,
+self-control, joint action, non-violence, organisation and everything
+else that goes to make a nation great and good, and not merely great.
+
+(9) I do not know that I have a right to arrogate greater purity for
+myself than for our Mussalman brethren. But I do admit that they do not
+believe in my doctrine of non-violence to the full extent. For them it
+is a weapon of the weak, an expedient. They consider non-co-operation
+without violence to be the only thing open to them in the war of direct
+action. I know that if some of them could offer successful violence,
+they would do to-day. But they are convinced that humanly speaking it is
+an impossibility. For them, therefore, non-co-operation is a matter not
+merely of duty but also of revenge. Whereas I take up non-co-operation
+against the Government as I have actually taken it up in practice
+against members of my own family. I entertain very high regard for the
+British constitution, I have not only no enmity against Englishmen but I
+regard much in English character as worthy of my emulation. I count many
+as my friends. It is against my religion to regard any one as an enemy.
+I entertain similar sentiments with respect to Mahomedans. I find their
+cause to be just and pure. Although therefore their viewpoint is
+different from mine I do not hesitate to associate with them and invite
+them to give my method a trial, for, I believe that the use of a pure
+weapon even from a mistaken motive does not fail to produce some good,
+even as the telling of truth if only because for the time being it is
+the best policy, is at least so much to the good.
+
+
+MR. CANDLER'S OPEN LETTER
+
+Mr. Candler has favoured me with an open letter on this question of
+questions. The letter has already appeared in the Press. I can
+appreciate Mr. Candler's position as I would like him and other
+Englishmen to appreciate mine and that of hundreds of Hindus who feel as
+I do. Mr. Candler's letter is an attempt to show that Mr. Lloyd George's
+pledge is not in any way broken by the peace terms. I quite agree with
+him that Mr. Lloyd George's words ought not to be torn from their
+context to support the Mahomedan claim. These are Mr. Lloyd George's
+words as quoted in the recent Viceregal message: "Nor are we fighting to
+destroy Austria-Hungary or to deprive Turkey of its capital or of the
+rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly
+Turkish in race." Mr. Candler seems to read 'which', as if it meant 'if
+they,' whereas I give the pronoun its natural meaning, namely, that the
+Prime Minister knew in 1918, that the lands referred to by him were
+"predominantly Turkish in race." And if this is the meaning I venture to
+suggest that the pledge has been broken in a most barefaced manner, for
+there is practically nothing left to the Turk of 'the rich and renowned
+lands of Asia Minor and Thrace.'
+
+I have already my view of the retention of the Sultan in Constantinople.
+It is an insult to the intelligence of man to suggest that 'the
+maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the homeland of the Turkish race
+with its capital at Constantinople has been left unimpaired by the terms
+of peace. This is the other passage from the speech which I presume Mr.
+Candler wants me to read together with the one already quoted:--
+
+   "While we do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in
+   the home-land of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople,
+   the passage between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea being
+   inter-nationalised, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine are in
+   our judgment entitled to a recognition of their separate national
+   condition."
+
+Did that mean entire removal of Turkish influence, extinction of Turkish
+suzerainty and the introduction of European-Christian influence under
+the guise of Mandates? Have the Moslems of Arabia, Armenia, Mesopotamia,
+Syria and Palestine been committed, or is the new arrangement being
+superimposed upon them by Powers conscious of their own brute-strength
+rather than of justice of their action? I for one would nurse by every
+legitimate means the spirit of independence in the brave Arabs, but I
+shudder to think what will happen to them under the schemes of
+exploitation of their country by the greedy capitalists protected as
+they will be by the mandatory Powers. If the pledge is to be fulfilled,
+let these places have full self-government with suzerainty to be
+retained with Turkey as has been suggested by the _Times of India_. Let
+there be all the necessary guarantees taken from Turkey about the
+internal independence of the Arabs. But to remove that suzerainty, to
+deprive the Khalif of the wardenship of the Holy Places is to render
+Khilafat a mockery which no Mahomedan can possibly look upon with
+equanimity, I am not alone in my interpretation of the pledge. The Right
+Hon'ble Ameer Ali calls the peace terms a breach of faith. Mr. Charles
+Roberts reminds the British public that the Indian Mussalman sentiment
+regarding the Turkish Treaty is based upon the Prime Minister's pledge
+"regarding Thrace, Constantinople and Turkish lands in Asia Minor,
+repeated on February 26 last with deliberation by Mr. Lloyd George. Mr.
+Roberts holds that the pledge must be treated as a whole, not as binding
+only regarding Constantinople but also binding as regards Thrace and
+Asia Minor. He describes the pledge as binding upon the nation as a
+whole and its breach in any part as a gross breach of faith on the part
+of the British Empire. He demands that if there is an unanswerable reply
+to the charge of breach of faith it ought to be given and adds the Prime
+Minister may regard his own word lightly if he chooses, but he has no
+right to break a pledge given on behalf of the nation. He concludes that
+it is incredible that such pledge should not have been kept in the
+letter and in the spirit." He adds: "I have reason to believe that these
+views are fully shared by prominent members of the Cabinet."
+
+I wonder if Mr. Candler knows what is going on to-day in England. Mr.
+Pickthall writing in _New Age_ says: "No impartial international enquiry
+into the whole question of the Armenian massacres has been instituted in
+the ample time which has elapsed since the conclusion of armistice with
+Turkey. The Turkish Government has asked for such enquiry. But the
+Armenian organisations and the Armenian partisans refuse to hear of such
+a thing, declaring that the Bryce and Lepssens reports are quite
+sufficient to condemn the Turks. In other words the judgment should be
+given on the case for prosecution alone. The inter-allied commission
+which investigated the unfortunate events in Smyrna last year, made a
+report unfavourable to Greek claims. Therefore, that report has not been
+published here in England, though in other countries it has long been
+public property." He then goes on to show how money is being scattered
+by Armenian and Greek emissaries in order to popularise their cause and
+adds: "This conjunction of dense ignorance and cunning falsehood is
+fraught with instant danger to the British realm," and concludes: "A
+Government and people which prefer propaganda to fact as the ground of
+policy--and foreign policy at that--is self-condemned."
+
+I have reproduced the above extract in order to show that the present
+British policy has been affected by propaganda of an unscrupulous
+nature. Turkey which was dominant over two million square miles of
+Asia, Africa and Europe in the 17th century, under the terms of the
+treaty, says the _London Chronicle_, has dwindled down to little more
+than 1,000 square miles. It says, "All European Turkey could now be
+accommodated comfortably between the Landsend and the Tamar, Cornawal
+alone exceeding its total area and but for its alliance with Germany,
+Turkey could have been assured of retaining at least sixty thousand
+square miles of the Eastern Balkans." I do not know whether the
+_Chronicle_ view is generally shared. Is it by way of punishment that
+Turkey is to undergo such shrinkage, or is it because justice demands
+it? If Turkey had not made the mistake of joining Germany, would the
+principle of nationality have been still applied to Armenia, Arabia,
+Mesopotamia and Palestine?
+
+Let me now remind those who think with Mr. Candler that the promise was
+not made by Mr. Lloyd George to the people of India in anticipation of
+the supply of recruits continuing. In defending his own statement Mr.
+Lloyd George is reported to have said:
+
+   "The effect of the statement in India was that recruiting went up
+   appreciably from that very moment. They were not all Mahomedans but
+   there were many Mahomedans amongst them. Now we are told that was an
+   offer to Turkey. But they rejected it, and therefore we were
+   absolutely free. It was not. It is too often forgotten that we are
+   the greatest Mahomedan power in the world and one-fourth of the
+   population of the British Empire is Mahomedan. There have been no
+   more loyal adherents to the throne and no more effective and loyal
+   supporters of the Empire in its hour of trial. _We gave a solemn
+   pledge and they accepted it_. They are disturbed by the prospect of
+   our not abiding by it."
+
+Who shall interpret that pledge and how? How did the Government of India
+itself interpret it? Did it or did it not energetically support the
+claim for the control of the Holy Places of Islam vesting in the Khalif?
+Did the Government of India suggest that the whole of Jazirat-ul-Arab
+could be taken away consistently with that pledge from the sphere of
+influence of the Khalif, and given over to the Allies as mandatory
+Powers? Why does the Government of India sympathise with the Indian
+Mussalmans if the terms are all they should be? So much for the pledge.
+I would like to guard myself against being understood that I stand or
+fall absolutely by Mr. Lloyd George's declaration. I have advisedly used
+the adverb 'practically' in connection with it. It is an important
+qualification.'
+
+Mr. Candler seems to suggest that my goal is something more than merely
+attaining justice on the Khilafat. If so, he is right. Attainment of
+justice is undoubtedly the corner-stone, and if I found that I was wrong
+in my conception of justice on this question, I hope I shall have the
+courage immediately to retrace my steps. But by helping the Mahomedans
+of India at a critical moment in their history, I want to buy their
+friendship. Moreover, if I can carry the Mahomedans with me I hope to
+wean Great Britain from the downward path along which the Prime Minister
+seems to me to be taking her. I hope also to show to India and the
+Empire at large that given a certain amount of capacity for
+self-sacrifice, justice can be secured by peacefullest and cleanest
+means without sowing or increasing bitterness between English and
+Indians. For, whatever may be the temporary effect of my methods, I know
+enough of them to feel certain that they alone are immune from lasting
+bitterness. They are untainted with hatred, expedience or untruth.
+
+
+IN PROCESS OF KEEPING
+
+The writer of 'Current Topics' in the "Times of India" has attempted to
+challenge the statement made in my Khilafat article regarding
+ministerial pledges, and in doing so cites Mr. Asquith's Guild-Hall
+speech of November 10, 1914. When I wrote the articles, I had in mind
+Mr. Asquith's speech. I am sorry that he ever made that speech. For, in
+my humble opinion, it betrayed to say the least, a confusion of thought.
+Could he think of the Turkish people as apart from the Ottoman
+Government? And what is the meaning of the death-knell of Ottoman
+Dominion in Europe and Asia if it be not the death knell of Turkish
+people as a free and governing race? Is it, again, true historically
+that the Turkish rule has always been a blight that 'has withered some
+of the fairest regions of the earth?' And what is the meaning of his
+statement that followed, viz., "Nothing is further from our thoughts
+than to imitate or encourage a crusade against their belief?" If words
+have any meaning, the qualifications that Mr. Asquith introduced in his
+speech should have meant a scrupulous regard for Indian Muslim feeling.
+And if that be the meaning of his speech, without anything further to
+support me I would claim that even Mr. Asquith's assurance is in danger
+of being set at nought if the resolutions of the San Remo Conference are
+to be crystallised into action. But I base remarks on a considered
+speech made by Mr. Asquith's successor two years later when things had
+assumed a more threatening shape than in 1914 and when the need for
+Indian help was much greater than in 1914. His pledge would bear
+repetition till it is fulfilled. He said: "Nor are we fighting to
+deprive Turkey of its capital or of the rich and renowned lands of Asia
+Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in race. We do not
+challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the homelands of the
+Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople." If only every word of
+this pledge is fulfilled both in letter and in spirit, there would be
+little left for quarrelling about. In so far as Mr. Asquith's
+declaration can be considered hostile to the Indian Muslim claim, it its
+superseded by the later and more considered declaration of Mr. Lloyd
+George--a declaration made irrevocable by fulfilment of the
+consideration it expected, viz. the enlistment of the brave Mahomedan
+soldiery which fought in the very place which is now being partitioned
+in spite of the pledge. But the writer of 'Current Topics' says Mr.
+Lloyd George "is now in process of keeping his pledge" I hope he is
+right. But what has already happened gives little ground for any such
+hope. For, imprisonment or internment of the Khalif in his own capital
+will be not only a mockery of fulfilment but it would he adding injury
+to insult. Either the Turkish Empire is to be maintained in the
+homelands of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople or it
+is not. If it is, let the Indian Mahomedans feel the full glow of it or
+if the Empire is to be broken up, let the mask of hypocrisy be lifted
+and India see the truth in its nakedness. To join the Khilafat movement
+then means to join a movement to keep inviolate the pledge of a British
+minister. Surely, such a movement is worth much greater sacrifice than
+may be involved in non-co-operation.
+
+
+APPEAL TO THE VICEROY
+
+Your Excellency.
+
+As one who has enjoyed a certain measure of your Excellency's
+confidence, and as one who claims to be a devoted well-wisher of the
+British Empire, I owe it to your Excellency, and through your Excellency
+to His Majesty's Ministers, to explain my connection with and my conduct
+in the Khilafat question.
+
+At the very earliest stages of the war, even whilst I was in London
+organising the Indian Volunteer Ambulance Corps, I began to interest
+myself in the Khilafat question. I perceived how deeply moved the little
+Mussalman World in London was when Turkey decided to throw in her lot
+with Germany. On my arrival in India in the January of 1915, I found the
+same anxiousness and earnestness among the Mussalmans with whom I came
+in contact. Their anxiety became intense when the information about the
+Secret Treaties leaked out. Distrust of British intentions filled their
+minds, and despair took possession of them. Even at that moment I
+advised my Mussalman friends not to give way to despair, but to express
+their fear and their hopes in a disciplined manner. It will be admitted
+that the whole of Mussalman India has behaved in a singularly restrained
+manner during the past five years and that the leaders have been able to
+keep the turbulent sections of their community under complete control.
+
+The peace terms and your Excellency's defence of them have given the
+Mussalmans of India a shock from which it will be difficult for them to
+recover. The terms violate ministerial pledges and utterly disregard
+Mussalman sentiment. I consider that as a staunch Hindu wishing to live
+on terms of the closest friendship with my Mussalman countrymen. I
+should be an unworthy son of India if I did not stand by them in their
+hour of trial. In my humble opinion their cause is just. They claim that
+Turkey must be _punished_ if their sentiment is to be respected. Muslim
+soldiers did fight to inflict punishment on their own Khalifa or to
+deprive him of his territories. The Mussalman attitude has been
+consistent, throughout these five years.
+
+My duty to the Empire to which I owe my loyalty requires me to resist
+the cruel violence that has been done to the Mussalman sentiment. So far
+as I am aware, Mussulmans and Hindus have as a whole lost faith in
+British justice and honour. The report of the majority of the Hunter
+Committee, Your Excellency's despatch thereon and Mr. Montagu's reply
+have only aggravated the distrust.
+
+In these circumstances the only course open to one like me is either in
+despair to sever all connection with British rule, or, if I still
+retained faith in the inherent superiority of the British constitution
+to all others at present in vogue to adopt such means as will rectify
+the wrong done, and thus restore confidence. I have not lost faith in
+such superiority and I am not without hope that somehow or other justice
+will yet be rendered if we show the requisite capacity for suffering.
+Indeed, my conception of that constitution is that it helps only those
+who are ready to help themselves. I do not believe that it protects the
+weak. It gives free scope to the strong to maintain their strength and
+develop it. The weak under it go to the wall.
+
+It is, then, because I believe in the British constitution that I have
+advised my Mussalman friends to withdraw their support from your
+Excellency's Government and the Hindus to join them, should the peace
+terms not be revised in accordance with the solemn pledges of Ministers
+and the Muslim sentiment.
+
+Three courses were open to the Mahomedans in order to mark their
+emphatic disapproval of the utter injustice to which His Majesty's
+Ministers have become party, if they have not actually been the prime
+perpetrators of it. They are:--
+
+(1) To resort to violence,
+
+(2) To advise emigration on a wholesale scale,
+
+(3) Not to be party to the injustice by ceasing to co-operate with the
+Government.
+
+Your Excellency must be aware that there was a time when the boldest,
+though the most thoughtless among the Mussulmans favoured violence, and
+the "Hijrat" (emigration) has not yet ceased to be the battle-cry. I
+venture to claim that I have succeeded by patient reasoning in weaning
+the party of violence from its ways. I confess that I did not--I did not
+attempt to succeed in weaning them from violence on moral grounds, but
+purely on utilitarian grounds. The result, for the time being at any
+has, however, been to stop violence. The School of "Hijrat" has received
+a check, if it has not stopped its activity entirely. I hold that no
+repression could have prevented a violent eruption, if the people had
+not had presented to them a form of direct action involving considerable
+sacrifice and ensuring success if such direct action was largely taken
+up by the public. Non-co-operation was the only dignified and
+constitutional form of such direct action. For it is the right
+recognised from times immemorial of the subject to refuse to assist a
+ruler who misrules.
+
+At the same time I admit that non-co-operation practised by the mass of
+people is attended with grave risks. But, in a crisis such as has
+overtaken the Mussalmans of India, no step that is unattended with large
+risks, can possibly bring about the desired change. Not to run some
+risks now will be to court much greater risks if not virtual destruction
+of Law and Order.
+
+But there is yet an escape from non-co-operation. The Mussalman
+representation has requested your Excellency to lead the agitation
+yourself, as did your distinguished predecessor at the time of the South
+African trouble. But if you cannot see your way to do so, and
+non-co-operation becomes a dire necessity, I hope that your Excellency
+will give those who have accepted my advice and myself the credit for
+being actuated by nothing less than a stern sense of duty.
+
+I have the honour to remain,
+
+Your Excellency's faithful servant,
+
+(Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+
+Laburnam Road, Gamdevi, Bombay
+
+22nd June 1920
+
+
+THE PREMIER'S REPLY
+
+The English mail has brought us a full and official report of the
+Premier's speech which he recently made when he received the Khilafat
+deputation. Mr. Lloyd George's speech is more definite and therefore
+more disappointing than H.E. the Viceroy's reply to the deputation here.
+He draws quite unwarranted deductions from the same high principles on
+which he had based his own pledge only two years ago. He declares that
+Turkey must pay the penalty of defeat. This determination to punish
+Turkey does not become one whose immediate predecessor had, in order to
+appease Muslim soldiers, promised that the British Government had no
+designs on Turkey and that His Majesty's Government would never think of
+punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish Committee. Mr.
+Lloyd George has expressed his belief that the majority of the
+population of Turkey did not really want to quarrel with Great Britain
+and that their rulers misled the country. In spite of this conviction
+and in spite of Mr. Asquith's promise, he is out to punish Turkey and
+punish it in the name of justice.
+
+He expounds the principle of self-determination and justifies the scheme
+of depriving Turkey of its territories one after another. While
+justifying this scheme he does not exclude even Thrace and this strikes
+the reader most, because this very Thrace he had mentioned in his pledge
+as predominantly Turkish. Now we are told by him that both the Turkish
+census and the Greek census agree in pointing out the Mussulman
+population in Thrace is in a considerable minority! Mr. Yakub Hussain
+speaking at the Madras Khilafat conference has challenged the truth of
+this statement. The Prime Minister cites among others also the example
+of Smyrna where, he says, we had a most careful investigation by a very
+impartial committee in the whole of the question of Smyrna and it was
+found that considerable majority was non-Turkish.' Who will believe the
+one-sided "impartial committee's" investigations until it is disproved
+that thousands of Musselmans have been murdered and hundreds of
+thousands have been driven away from their hearths and homes? Strangely
+enough Mr. Lloyd George, believes in the necessity of fresh
+investigations by a purposely appointed committee in Smyrna as the most
+authenticated and up-to-date report, whereas he would not accept Mr.
+Mahomed Ali's proposal for an impartial commission in regard to Armenian
+massacre! Doubtful and one-sided facts and figures suffice for him even
+to conclude that the Turkish Government is incapable of protecting its
+subjects. And he proceeds to suggest foreign interference in ruling over
+Asia Minor in the interests of civilization. Here he cuts at the root of
+the Sultan's independence. This proposal of appropriating supervision is
+distinctly unlike the treatment meted out to other enemy powers.
+
+This detraction of the Sultan's suzerainty is only a corollary of the
+Premier's indifference towards the Muslim idea of the Caliphate. The
+premier's injustice in treating the Turkish question becomes graver when
+he thus lightly handles the Khilafat question. There had been occasions
+when the British have used to their advantage the Muslim idea of
+associating the Caliph's spiritual power with temporal power. Now this
+very association is treated as a controversial question by the great
+statesman.
+
+Will this raise the reputation of Great Britain or stain it? Can this be
+tolerated by those who fought against Turkey with full faith in British
+honesty? Mere receipts of gratitude cannot console the wounded
+Mussalmans. There lies the alternative for England to choose between two
+mandates--a mandate over some Turkish territories which is sure to lead
+to chaos all over the world and a mandate over the hearts of the
+Muhomedans which will redeem the pledged honour of Britain. The prime
+minister has an unwise choice. This narrow view registers the latest
+temperature of British diplomacy.
+
+
+THE MUSSULMAN REPRESENTATION
+
+Slowly but surely the Mussulmans are preparing for the battle before
+them. They have to fight against odds that are undoubtedly heavy but
+not half as heavy as the prophet had against him. How often did he not
+put his life in danger? But his faith in God was unquenchable. He went
+forward with a light heart, for God was on his side, for he represented
+truth. If his followers have half the prophet's faith and half his
+spirit of sacrifice, the odds will be presently even and will in little
+while turn against the despoilers of Turkey. Already the rapacity of the
+Allies is telling against themselves. France finds her task difficult.
+Greece cannot stomach her ill-gotten gains. And England finds
+Mesopotamia a tough job. The oil of Mosul may feed the fire she has so
+wantonly lighted and burn her fingers badly. The newspapers say the
+Arabs do not like the presence of the Indian soldiery in their midst. I
+do not wonder. They are a fierce and a brave people and do not
+understand why Indian soldiers should find themselves in Mesopotamia.
+Whatever the fate of non-co-operation, I wish that not a single Indian
+will offer his services for Mesopotamia whether for the civil or the
+military department. We must learn to think for ourselves and before
+entering upon any employment find out whether thereby we may not make
+ourselves instruments of injustice. Apart from the question of Khilafat
+and from the point of abstract justice the English have no right to hold
+Mesopotamia. It is no part of our loyalty to help the Imperial
+Government in what is in plain language daylight robbery. If therefore
+we seek civil or military employment in Mesopotamia we do so for the
+sake of earning a livelihood. It is our duty to see that the source is
+not tainted.
+
+It surprises me to find so many people shirking over the mention of
+non-co-operation. There is no instrument so clean, so harmless and yet
+so effective as non-co-operation. Judiciously hauled it need not produce
+any evil consequences. And its intensity will depend purely on the
+capacity of the people for sacrifice.
+
+The chief thing is to prepare the atmosphere of non-co-operation. "We
+are not going to co-operate with you in your injustice," is surely the
+right and the duty of every intelligent subject to say. Were it not for
+our utter servility, helplessness and want of confidence in ourselves,
+we would certainly grasp this clean weapon and make the most effective
+use of it. Even the most despotic government cannot stand except for the
+consent of the governed which consent is often forcibly procured by the
+despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear the despotic force his
+power is gone. But the British government is never and nowhere entirely
+or laid upon force. It does make an honest attempt to secure the
+goodwill of the governed. But it does not hesitate to adopt unscrupulous
+means to compel the consent of the governed. It has not gone beyond the
+'Honesty is the best policy' idea. It therefore bribes you into
+consenting its will by awarding titles, medals and ribbons, by giving
+you employment, by its superior financial ability to open for its
+employees avenues for enriching themselves and finally when these fail,
+it resorts to force. That is what Sir Michael O'Dwyer did and that is
+almost every British administrator will certainly do if he thought it
+necessary. If then we would not be greedy, if we would not run after
+titles and medals and honorary posts which do the country no good, half
+the battle is won.
+
+My advisers are never tired of telling me that even if the Turkish peace
+terms are revised it will not be due to non-co-operation. I venture to
+suggest to them that non-co-operation has a higher purpose than mere
+revision of the terms. If I cannot compel revision I must at least cease
+to support a government that becomes party to the usurpation. And if I
+succeed in pushing non-co-operation to the extreme limit, I do compel
+the Government to choose between India and the usurpation. I have faith
+enough in England to know that at that moment England will expel her
+present jaded ministers and put in others who will make a clean sweep of
+the terms in consultation with an awakened India, draft terms that will
+be honourable to her, to Turkey and acceptable to India. But I hear my
+critics say "India has not the strength of purpose and the capacity for
+the sacrifice to achieve such a noble end. They are partly right. India
+has not these qualities now, because we have not--shall we not evolve
+them and infect the nation with them? Is not the attempt worth making?
+Is my sacrifice too great to gain such a great purpose?"
+
+
+CRITICISM OF THE MUSLIM MANIFESTO
+
+The Khilafat representation addressed to the Viceroy and my letter on
+the same subject have been severely criticised by the Anglo-Indian
+press. _The Times of India_ which generally adopts an impartial attitude
+has taken strong exception to certain statements made in the Muslim
+manifesto and has devoted a paragraph of its article to an advance
+criticism of my suggestion that His Excellency should resign if the
+peace terms are not revised.
+
+_The Times of India_ excepts to the submission that the British Empire
+may not treat Turkey like a departed enemy. The signatories have, I
+think, supplied the best of reasons. They say "We respectfully submit
+that in the treatment of Turkey the British Government are bound to
+respect Indian Muslim sentiment in so far as it is neither unjust nor
+unreasonable." If the seven crore Mussulmans are partners in the Empire,
+I submit that their wish must be held to be all sufficient for
+refraining from punishing Turkey. It is beside the point to quote what
+Turkey did during the war. It has suffered for it. _The Times_ inquires
+wherein Turkey has been treated worse than the other Powers. I thought
+that the fact was self-evident. Neither Germany nor Austria and Hungary
+has been treated in the same way that Turkey has been. The whole of the
+Empire has been reduced to the retention of a portion of its capital, as
+it were, to mock the Sultan and that too has been done under terms so
+humiliating that no self-respecting person much less a reigning
+sovereign can possibly accept.
+
+_The Times_ has endeavoured to make capital out of the fact that the
+representation does not examine the reason for Turkey not joining the
+Allies. Well there was no mystery about it. The fact of Russia being one
+of the Allies was enough to warn Turkey against joining them. With
+Russia knocking at the gate at the time of the war it was not an easy
+matter for Turkey to join the Allies. But Turkey had cause to suspect
+Great Britain herself. She knew that England had done no friendly turn
+to her during the Bulgarian War. She was hardly well served at the time
+of the war with Italy. It was still no doubt a bad choice. With the
+Musssalmans of India awakened and ready to support her, her statesmen
+might have relied upon Britain not being allowed to damage Turkey if she
+had remained with the Allies. But this is all wisdom after event. Turkey
+made a bad choice and she was punished for it. To humiliate her now is
+to ignore the Indian Mussulman sentiment. Britain may not do it and
+retain the loyalty of the awakened Mussulmans of India.
+
+For "The Times" to say that the peace terms strictly follow the
+principle of self-determination is to throw dust in the eyes of its
+readers. Is it the principle of self-determination that has caused the
+cessation of Adrianople and Thrace to Greece? By what principle of
+self-determination has Smyrna been handed to Greece? Have the
+inhabitants of Thrace and Smyrna asked for Grecian tutelege?
+
+I decline to believe that the Arabs like the disposition that has been
+made of them. Who is the King of Hedjaj and who is Emir Feisul? Have the
+Arabs elected these kings and chiefs? Do the Arabs like the Mandate
+being taken by England? By the time the whole thing is finished, the
+very name self-determination will stink in one's nostrils. Already signs
+are not wanting to show that the Arabs, the Thracians and the Smyrnans
+are resenting their disposal. They may not like Turkish rule but they
+like the present arrangement less. They could have made their own
+honourable terms with Turkey but these self-determining people will now
+be held down by the 'matchless might' of the allied _i.e._, British
+forces. Britain had the straight course open to her of keeping the
+Turkish Empire intact and taking sufficient guarantees for good
+government. But her Prime Minister chose the crooked course of secret
+treaties, duplicity and hypocritical subterfuges.
+
+There is still a way out. Let her treat India as a real partner. Let her
+call the true representatives of the Mussalmans. Let them go to Arabia
+and the other parts of the Turkish Empire and let her devise a scheme
+that would not humiliate Turkey, that would satisfy the just Muslim
+sentiment and that will secure honest self-determination for the races
+composing that Empire. If it was Canada, Australia or South Africa that
+had to be placated, Mr. Lloyd George would not have dared to ignore
+them. They have the power to secede. India has not. Let him no more
+insult India by calling her a partner, if her feelings count for naught.
+I invite _The Times of India_ to reconsider its position and join an
+honourable agitation in which a high-souled people are seeking nothing
+but justice.
+
+I do with all deference still suggest that the least that Lord
+Chelmsford can do is to resign if the sacred feelings of India's sons
+are not to be consulted and respected by the Ministers. _The Times_ is
+over-taxing the constitution when it suggests that as a constitutional
+Viceroy it is not open to Lord Chelmsford to go against the decision of
+his Majesty's Ministers. It is certainly not open to a Viceroy to retain
+office and oppose ministerial decisions. But the constitution does allow
+a Viceroy to resign his high office when he is called upon to carry out
+decisions that are immoral as the peace terms are or like these terms
+are calculated to stir to their very depth the feelings of those whose
+affair he is administering for the time being.
+
+
+THE MAHOMEDAN DECISION
+
+The Khilafat meeting at Allahabad has unanimously reaffirmed the
+principle of non-co-operation and appointed an executive committee to
+lay down and enforce a detailed programme. This meeting was preceded by
+a joint Hindu-Mahomedan meeting at which Hindu leaders were invited to
+give their views. Mrs. Beasant, the Hon'ble Pandit Malaviyuji, the
+Hon'ble Dr. Sapru Motilal Nehru Chintamani and others were present at
+the meeting. It was a wise step on the part of the Khilafat Committee to
+invite Hindus representing all shades of thought to give them the
+benefit of their advice. Mrs. Besant and Dr. Sapru strongly dissuaded
+the Mahomedans present from the policy of non-co-operation. The other
+Hindu speakers made non-committal speeches. Whilst the other Hindu
+speakers approved of the principle of non-co-operation in theory, they
+saw many practical difficulties and they feared also complications
+arising from Mahomedans welcoming an Afghan invasion of India. The
+Mahomedan speakers gave the fullest and frankest assurances that they
+would fight to a man any invader who wanted to conquer India, but were
+equally frank in asserting that any invasion from without undertaken
+with a view to uphold the prestige of Islam and to vindicate justice
+would have their full sympathy if not their actual support. It is easy
+enough to understand and justify the Hindu caution. It is difficult to
+resist Mahomedan position. In my opinion, the best way to prevent India
+from becoming the battle ground between the forces of Islam and those of
+the English is for Hindus to make non-co-operation a complete and
+immediate success, and I have little doubt that if the Mahomedans remain
+true to their declared intention and are able to exercise
+self-restraint, and make sacrifices the Hindus will "play the game" and
+join them in the campaign of non-co-operation. I feel equally certain
+that the Hindus will not assist Mahomedans in promoting or bringing
+about an armed conflict between the British Government and their allies,
+and Afghanistan. British forces are too well organised to admit of any
+successful invasion of the Indian frontier. The only way, therefore, the
+Mahomedans can carry on an effective struggle on behalf of the honour of
+Islam is to take up non-co-operation in real earnest. It will not only
+be completely effective if it is adopted by the people on an extensive
+scale, but it will also provide full scope for individual conscience. If
+I cannot bear an injustice done by an individual or a corporation, and
+if I am directly or indirectly instrumental in upholding that individual
+or corporation, I must answer for it before my Maker, but I have done
+all it is humanly possible for me to do consistently with the moral code
+that refuses to injure even the wrong-doer, if I cease to support the
+injustice in the manner described above. In applying therefore such a
+great force there should be no haste, there should be no temper shown.
+Non-co-operation must be and remain absolutely a voluntary effort. The
+whole thing then depends upon Mahomedans themselves. If they will but
+help themselves Hindu help will come and the Government, great and
+mighty though it is, will have to bend before this irresistible force.
+No Government can possibly withstand the bloodless opposition of a whole
+nation.
+
+
+MR. ANDREWS' DIFFICULTY
+
+Mr. Andrews whose love for India is equalled only by his love for
+England and whose mission in life is to serve God, i.e., humanity
+through India, has contributed remarkable articles to the 'Bombay
+Chronicle' on the Khilafat movement. He has not spared England, France
+or Italy. He has shown how Turkey has been most unjustly dealt with and
+how the Prime Minister's pledge has been broken. He has devoted the last
+article to an examination of Mr. Mahomed Ali's letter to the Sultan and
+has come to the conclusion that Mr. Mahomed Ali's statement of claim is
+at variance with the claim set forth in the latest Khilafat
+representation to the Viceroy which he wholly approves.
+
+Mr. Andrews and I have discussed the question as fully as it was
+possible. He asked me publicly to define my own position more fully than
+I have done. His sole object in inviting discussion is to give strength
+to a cause which he holds as intrinsically just, and to gather round it
+the best opinion of Europe so that the allied powers and especially
+England may for very shame be obliged to revise the terms.
+
+I gladly respond to Mr. Andrew's invitation. I should clear the ground
+by stating that I reject any religious doctrine that does not appeal to
+reason and is in conflict with morality. I tolerate unreasonable
+religious sentiment when it is not immoral. I hold the Khilafat claim to
+be both just and reasonable and therefore it derives greater force
+because it has behind it the religious sentiment of the Mussalman world.
+
+In my opinion Mr. Mahomed Ali's statement is unexceptionable. It is no
+doubt clothed in diplomatic language. But I am not prepared to quarrel
+with the language so long as it is sound in substance.
+
+Mr. Andrews considers that Mr. Mahomed Ali's language goes to show that
+he would resist Armenian independence against the Armenians and the
+Arabian against the Arabs. I attach no such meaning to it. What he, the
+whole of Mussalmans and therefore I think also the Hindus resist is the
+shameless attempt of England and the other Powers under cover of
+self-determination to emasculate and dismember Turkey. If I understand
+the spirit of Islam properly, it is essentially republican in the truest
+sense of the term. Therefore if Armenia or Arabia desired independence
+of Turkey they should have it. In the case of Arabia, complete Arabian
+independence would mean transference of the Khilafat to an Arab
+chieftain. Arabia in that sense is a Mussulman trust, not purely
+Arabian. And the Arabs without ceasing to be Mussulman, could not hold
+Arabia against Muslim opinion. The Khalifa must be the custodian of the
+Holy places and therefore also the routes to them. He must be able to
+defend them against the whole world. And if an Arab chief arose who
+could better satisfy that test than the Sultan of Turkey, I have no
+doubt that he would be recognised as the Khalifa.
+
+I have thus discussed the question academically. The fact is that
+neither the Mussulmans nor the Hindus believe in the English Ministerial
+word. They do not believe that the Arabs or the Armenians want complete
+independence of Turkey. That they want self-government is beyond doubt.
+Nobody disputes that claim. But nobody has ever ascertained that either
+the Arabs or the Armenians desire to do away with all connection, even
+nominal, with Turkey.
+
+The solution of the question lies not in our academic discussion of the
+ideal position, it lies in an honest appointment of a mixed commission
+of absolutely independent Indian Mussulmans and Hindus and independent
+Europeans to investigate the real wish of the Armenians and the Arabs
+and then to come to a _modus vivendi_ where by the claims of the
+nationality and those of Islam may be adjusted and satisfied.
+
+It is common knowledge that Smyrna and Thrace including Adrianople have
+been dishonestly taken away from Turkey and that mandates have been
+unscrupulously established in Syria and Mesopotamia and a British
+nominee has been set up in Hedjaj under the protection of British guns.
+This is a position that is intolerable and unjust. Apart therefore from
+the questions of Armenia and Arabia, the dishonesty and hypocrisy that
+pollute the peace terms require to be instantaneously removed. It paves
+the way to an equitable solution of the question of Armenian and Arabian
+independence which in theory no one denies and which in practice may be
+easily guaranteed if only the wishes of the people concerned could with
+any degree of certainty be ascertained.
+
+
+THE KHILAFAT AGITATION
+
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I
+did not come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though
+I had not fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and
+that I could not plead 'not guilty' if I was charged under it. For I
+must admit that I can pretend to no 'affection' for the present
+Government.
+
+And my speeches are intended to create 'dis-affection' such that the
+people might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a
+Government that had forfeited all title to confidence, respect or
+support.
+
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government.
+The latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by
+the former. And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of
+terrorism and emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter.
+British ministers have broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded
+the feelings of the seventy million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men
+and women were insulted by the insolent officers of the Punjab
+Government. Their wrongs not only remain unrighted but the very officers
+who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain office
+under the Government.
+
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could
+command for co-operation with the Government and for response to the
+wishes expressed in the Royal Proclamation. I did so because I honestly
+believed that, a new era was about to begin, and that the old spirit of
+fear, distrust and consequent terrorism was about to give place to the
+new spirit of respect, trust and goodwill. I sincerely believed that the
+Mussulman sentiment would be placated and that the officers that had
+misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the Punjab would be at least
+dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to feel that a
+Government that had always been found quick (and mighty) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents' misdeeds. But to
+my amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present
+representatives of the Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous.
+They have no real regard for the wishes of the people of India and they
+count Indian honour as of little consequence.
+
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it
+is now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be
+witness to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right
+in threatening me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in
+endangering the existence of the Government. For that must be the result
+if my activity bears fruit. My only regret is that inasmuch as Mr.
+Montagu admits my past services, he might have perceived that there must
+be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a well-wisher like
+me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to insist on
+justice being done to the Mussalmans and to the Punjab than to threaten
+me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed I
+fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection
+towards an unjust Government I had rendered greater services to the
+Empire than I am already credited with.
+
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve my
+activity is clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of
+my liberty, should the Government of India deem it to be their duty to
+take it away. A citizen has no right to resist such restriction imposed
+in accordance with the laws of the State to which he belongs. Much less
+have those who sympathise with him. In my case there can be no question
+of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the Government to the extent of
+trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For my supporters,
+therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It means the
+beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to
+stop the progress of Non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+Non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest,
+the Government must imprison others or grant the people's wish in order
+to gain their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the
+people even under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore
+it is I or any one else who is arrested during the campaign, the first
+condition of success is that there must be no resentment shown against
+it. We cannot imperil the very existence of a Government and quarrel
+with its attempt to save itself by punishing those who place it in
+danger.
+
+
+HIJARAT AND ITS MEANING
+
+India is a continent. Its articulate thousands know what its
+inarticulate millions are doing or thinking. The Government and the
+educated Indians may think that the Khilafat movement is merely a
+passing phase. The millions of Mussalmans think otherwise. The flight of
+the Mussalmans is growing apace. The newspapers contain paragraphs in
+out of the way corners informing the readers that a special train
+containing a barrister with sixty women, forty children including twenty
+sucklings, all told 765, have left for Afghanistan. They were cheered
+_en route_. They were presented with cash, edibles and other things, and
+were joined by more Muhajarins on the way. No fanatical preaching by
+Shaukatali can make people break up and leave their homes for an unknown
+land. There must be an abiding faith in them. That it is better for them
+to leave a State which has no regard for their religious sentiment and
+face a beggar's life than to remain in it even though it may be in a
+princely manner. Nothing but pride of power can blind the Government of
+India to the scene that is being enacted before it.
+
+But there is yet another side to the movement. Here are the facts as
+stated in the following Government _Communique_ dated 10th July 1920:--
+
+   An unfortunate affair in connection with the Mahajarin occurred on
+   the 8th instant at Kacha Garhi between Peshawar and Jamrud. The
+   following are the facts as at present reported. Two members of a
+   party of the Mahajarins proceeding by train to Jamrud were detected
+   by the British military police travelling without tickets.
+   Altercation ensued at Islamia College Station, but the train
+   proceeded to Kacha Garhi. An attempt was made to evict these
+   Mahajarins, whereupon the military police were attacked by a crowd of
+   some forty Mahajarins and the British officer who intervened was
+   seriously wounded with a spade. A detachment of Indian troops at
+   Kacha Garhi thereupon fired two or three shots at the Mahajarin for
+   making murderous assault on the British officer. One Mahajarin was
+   killed and one wounded and three arrested. Both the military and the
+   police were injured. The body of the Mahajarin was despatched to
+   Peshawar and buried on the morning of the 9th. This incident has
+   caused considerable excitement in Peshawar City, and the Khilafat
+   Hijrat Committee are exercising restraining influence. Shops were
+   closed on the morning of the 9th. A full enquiry has been instituted.
+
+Now Peshawar to Jamrud is a matter of a few miles. It was clearly the
+duty of the military not to attempt to pull out the ticketless
+Mahajarins for the sake of a few annas. But they actually attempted
+force. Intervention by the rest of the party was a foregone conclusion.
+An altercation ensued. A British officer was attacked with a spade.
+Firing and a death of a Mahajarin was the result. Has British prestige
+been enhanced by the episode? Why have not the Government put tactful
+officers in charge at the frontier, whilst a great religious emigration
+is in progress? The action of the military will pass from tongue to
+tongue throughout India and the Mussalman world around, will not doubt
+be unconsciously and even consciously exaggerated in the passage and the
+feeling bitter as it already is will grow in bitterness. The
+_Communique_ says that the Government are making further inquiry. Let us
+hope that it will be full and that better arrangements will be made to
+prevent a repetition of what appears to have been a thoughtless act on
+the part of the military.
+
+And may I draw the attention of those who are opposing non-co-operation
+that unless they find out a substitute they should either join the
+non-co-operation movement or prepare to face a disorganised subterranean
+upheaval whose effect no one can foresee and whose spread it would be
+impossible to check or regulate?
+
+
+
+
+III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS
+
+
+POLITICAL FREEMASONRY
+
+Freemasonry is a secret brotherhood which has more by its secret and
+iron rules than by its service to humanity obtained a hold upon some of
+the best minds. Similarly there seems to be some secret code of conduct
+governing the official class in India before which the flower of the
+great British nation fall prostrate and unconsciously become instruments
+of injustice which as private individuals they would be ashamed of
+perpetrating. In no other way is it possible for one to understand the
+majority report of the Hunter Committee, the despatch of the Government
+of India, and the reply thereto of the Secretary of State for India. In
+spite of the energetic protests of a section of the Press to the
+personnel of the committee, it might be said that on the whole the
+public were prepared to trust it especially as it contained three Indian
+members who could fairly be claimed to be independent. The first rude
+shock to this confidence was delivered by the refusal of Lord Hunter's
+Committee to accept the very moderate and reasonable demand of the
+Congress Committee that the imprisoned Punjab leaders might be allowed
+to appear before it to instruct Counsel. Any doubt that might have been
+left in the mind of any person has been dispelled by the report of the
+majority of that committee. The result has justified the attitude of the
+Congress Committee. The evidence collected by it shows what lord
+Hunter's Committee purposely denied itself.
+
+The minority report stands out like an oasis in a desert. The Indian
+members deserve the congratulation of their countrymen for having dared
+to do their duty in the face of heavy odds. I wish that they had refused
+to associate themselves even in a modified manner with the condemnation
+of the civil disobedience form of Satyagraha. The defiant spirit of the
+Delhi mob on the 30th March 1919 can hardly be used for condemning a
+great spiritual movement which is admittedly and manifestly intended to
+restrain the violent tendencies of mobs and to replace criminal
+lawlessness by civil disobedience of authority, when it has forfeited
+all title to respect. On the 30th March civil disobedience had not even
+been started. Almost every great popular demonstration has been hitherto
+attended all the world over by a certain amount of lawlessness. The
+demonstration of 30th March and 6th April could have been held under any
+other aegis us under that of Satyagrah. I hold that without the advent
+of the spirit of civility and orderliness the disobedience would have
+taken a much more violent form than it did even at Delhi. It was only
+the wonderfully quick acceptance by the people of the principle of
+Satyagrah that effectively checked the spread of violence throughout the
+length and breadth of India. And even to-day it is not the memory of the
+black barbarity of General Dyer that is keeping the undoubted
+restlessness among the people from breaking forth into violence. The
+hold that Satyagrah has gained on the people--it may be even against
+their will--is curbing the forces of disorder and violence. But I must
+not detain the reader on a defence of Satyagrah against unjust attacks.
+If it has gained a foothold in India, it will survive much fiercer
+attacks than the one made by the majority of the Hunter Committee and
+somewhat supported by the minority. Had the majority report been
+defective only in this direction and correct in every other there would
+have been nothing but praise for it. After all Satyagrah is a new
+experiment in political field. And a hasty attributing to it of any
+popular disorder would have been pardonable.
+
+The universally pronounced adverse judgment upon the report and the
+despatches rests upon far more painful revelations. Look at the
+manifestly laboured defence of every official act of inhumanity except
+where condemnation could not be avoided through the impudent admissions
+made by the actors themselves; look at the special pleading introduced
+to defend General Dyer even against himself; look at the vain
+glorification of Sir Michael O'Dwyer although it was his spirit that
+actuated every act of criminality on the part of the subordinates; look
+at the deliberate refusal to examine his wild career before the events
+of April. His acts were an open book of which the committee ought to
+have taken judicial notices. Instead of accepting everything that the
+officials had to say, the Committee's obvious duty was to tax itself to
+find out the real cause of the disorders. It ought to have gone out of
+its way to search out the inwardness of the events. Instead of patiently
+going behind the hard crust of official documents, the Committee allowed
+itself to be guided with criminal laziness by mere official evidence.
+The report and the despatches, in my humble opinion, constitute an
+attempt to condone official lawlessness. The cautious and half-hearted
+condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer's massacre and the notorious
+crawling order only deepens the disappointment of the reader as he goes
+through page after page of thinly disguised official whitewash. I need,
+however, scarcely attempt any elaborate examination of the report or the
+despatches which have been so justly censured by the whole national
+press whether of the moderate or the extremist hue. The point to
+consider is how to break down this secret--be the secrecy over so
+unconscious--conspiracy to uphold official iniquity. A scandal of this
+magnitude cannot be tolerated by the nation, if it is to preserve its
+self-respect and become a free partner in the Empire. The All-India
+Congress Committee has resolved upon convening a special session of the
+Congress for the purpose of considering, among other things, the
+situation arising from the report. In my opinion the time has arrived
+when we must cease to rely upon mere petition to Parliament for
+effective action. Petitions will have value, when the nation has behind
+it the power to enforce its will. What power then have we? When we are
+firmly of opinion that grave wrong has been done us and when after an
+appeal to the highest authority we fail to secure redress, there must be
+some power available to us for undoing the wrong. It is true that in the
+vast majority of cases it is the duty of a subject to submit to wrongs
+on failure of the usual procedure, so long as they do not affect his
+vital being. But every nation and every individual has the right and it
+is their duty, to rise against an intolerable wrong. I do not believe in
+armed risings. They are a remedy worse than the disease sought to be
+cured. They are a token of the spirit of revenge and impatience and
+anger. The method of violence cannot do good in the long run. Witness
+the effect of the armed rising of the allied powers against Germany.
+Have they not become even like the Germans, as the latter have been
+depicted to us by them?
+
+We have a better method. Unlike that of violence it certainly involves
+the exercise of restraint and patience: but it requires also
+resoluteness of will. This method is to refuse to be party to the wrong.
+No tyrant has ever yet succeeded in his purpose without carrying the
+victim with him, it may be, as it often is, by force. Most people choose
+rather to yield to the will of the tyrant than to suffer for the
+consequences of resistance. Hence does terrorism form part of the
+stock-in-trade of the tyrant. But we have instances in history where
+terrorism has failed to impose the terrorist's will upon his victim.
+India has the choice before her now. If then the acts of the Punjab
+Government be an insufferable wrong, if the report of Lord Hunter's
+Committee and the two despatches be a greater wrong by reason of their
+grievous condonation of those acts, it is clear that we must refuse to
+submit to this official violence. Appeal the Parliament by all means, if
+necessary, but if the Parliament fails us and if we are worthy to call
+ourselves a nation, we must refuse to uphold the Government by
+withdrawing co-operation from it.
+
+
+THE DUTY OF THE PUNJABEE
+
+The Allahabad _Leader_ deserves to be congratulated for publishing the
+correspondence on Mr. Bosworth Smith who was one of the Martial Law
+officers against whom the complaints about persistent and continuous
+ill-treatment were among the bitterest. It appears from the
+correspondence that Mr. Bosworth Smith has received promotion instead of
+dismissal. Sometime before Martial Law Mr. Smith appears to have been
+degraded. "He has since been restored," says the _Leader_ correspondent,
+"to his position of a Deputy Commissioner of the second grade from which
+he was degraded and also been invested with power under section 30 of
+the Criminal Procedure Code. Since his arrival, the poor Indian
+population of the town of Amhala Cantonment has been living under a
+regime of horror and tyranny." The correspondent adds: "I use both these
+words deliberately for conveying precisely what they mean." I cull a few
+passage from this illuminating letter to illustrate the meaning of
+horror and tyranny. "In private complaints he never takes the statement
+of the complainant. It is taken down by the reader when the court rises
+and got signed by the magistrate the following day. Whether the report
+received (upon such complaints) is favourable to the complainant or
+unfavourable to him, it is never ready by the magistrate, and
+complaints are dismissed without proper trial. This is the fate of
+private complaints. Now as regards police chellans. Pleaders for the
+accused are not allowed to interview under trial prisoners in police
+custody. They are not allowed to cross-examine prosecution witnesses....
+Prosecution witnesses are examined with leading questions.... Thus a
+whole prosecution story is put into the mouth of police, witnesses for
+the defence though called in are not allowed to be examined by the
+defence counsel.... The accused is silenced if he picks up courage to
+say anything in defence.... Any Cantonment servant can write down the
+name of any citizen of the Cantonment on a chit of paper and ask him to
+appear the next day in court. This is a summons.... If any one does not
+appear in court who is thus ordered, criminal warrants of arrest are
+issued against him." There is much more of this style in the letter
+which is worth producing, but I have given enough to illustrate the
+writer's meaning. Let me turn for a while to this official's record
+during Martial Law. He is the official who tried people in batches and
+convicted them after a farcical trial. Witnesses have deposed to his
+having assembled people, having asked them to give false evidence,
+having removed women's veils, called them 'flies, bitches, she-asses'
+and having spat upon them. He it was who subjected the innocent pleaders
+of Shokhupura indescribable persecution. Mr. Andrews personally
+investigated complaints against this official and came to the conclusion
+that no official had behaved worse than Mr. Smith. He gathered the
+people of Shokhupura, humiliated them in a variety of ways, called them
+'suvarlog,' 'gandi mukkhi.' His evidence before the Hunter Commission
+betrays his total disregard for truth and this is the officer who, if
+the correspondent in question has given correct facts, has been
+promoted. The question however is why, he is at all in Government
+service and why he has not been tried for assaulting and abusing
+innocent men and women.
+
+I notice a desire for the impeachment of General Dyer and Sir Michael
+O'Dwyer. I will not stop to examine whether the course is feasible. I
+was sorry to find Mr. Shastriar joining this cry for the prosecution of
+General Dyer. If the English people will willingly do so, I would
+welcome such prosecution as a sign of their strong disapproval of the
+Jallianwalla Bagh atrocity, but I would certainly not spend a single
+farthing in a vain pursuit after the conviction of this man. Surely the
+public has received sufficient experience of the English mind.
+Practically the whole English Press has joined the conspiracy to screen
+these offenders against humanity. I would not be party to make heroes of
+them by joining the cry for prosecution private or public. If I can only
+persuade India to insist upon their complete dismissal, I should be
+satisfied. But more than the dismissal, of Sir Michael O'Dwyer and
+General Dyer, is necessary the peremptory dismissal, if not a trial, of
+Colonel O'Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram and others mentioned
+in the Congress Sub-Committee's Report. Bad as General Dyer is I
+consider Mr. Smith to be infinitely worse and his crimes to be far more
+serious than the massacre of Jallianwalla Bugh. General Dyer sincerely
+believed that it was a soldierly act to terrorise people by shooting
+them. But Mr. Smith was wantonly cruel, vulgar and debased. If all the
+facts that have been deposed to against him are true, there is not a
+spark of humanity about him. Unlike General Dyer he lacks the courage to
+confirm what he has done and he wriggles when challenged. This officer
+remains free to inflict himself upon people who have done no wrong to
+him, and who is permitted to disgrace the rule he represents for the
+time being.
+
+What is the Punjab doing? Is it not the duty of the Punjabis not to rest
+until they have secured the dismissal of Mr. Smith and the like? The
+Punjab leaders have been discharged in vain if they will not utilise the
+liberty they have received, in order to purge the administration of
+Messrs. Bosworth Smith and Company. I am sure that if they will only
+begin a determined agitation they will have the whole India by their
+side. I venture to suggest to them that the best way to qualify for
+sending General Dyer to the gallows is to perform the easier and the
+more urgent duty of arresting the mischief still continued by the
+officials against whom they have assisted in collecting
+overwhelming evidence.
+
+
+GENERAL DYER
+
+The Army Council has found General Dyer guilty of error of judgment and
+advised that he should not receive any office under the Crown. Mr.
+Montagu has been unsparing in his criticism of General Dyer's conduct.
+And yet somehow or other I cannot help feeling that General Dyer is by
+no means the worst offender. His brutality is unmistakable. His abject
+and unsoldier-like cowardice is apparent in every line of his amazing
+defence before the Army Council. He has called an unarmed crowd of men
+and children--mostly holiday-makers--'a rebel army.' He believes himself
+to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot down like
+rabbits men who were penned in an inclosure. Such a man is unworthy of
+being considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran
+no risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and without warning.
+This is not an 'error of judgement.' It is paralysis of it in the face
+of fancied danger. It is proof of criminal incapacity and
+heartlessness. But the fury that has been spent upon General Dyer is, I
+am sure, largely misdirected. No doubt the shooting was 'frightful,' the
+loss of innocent life deplorable. But the slow torture, degradation and
+emasculation that followed was much worse, more calculated, malicious
+and soul-killing, and the actors who performed the deeds deserve greater
+condemnation that General Dyer for the Jallianwalla Bagh massacre. The
+latter merely destroyed a few bodies but the others tried to kill the
+soul of a nation. Who ever talks of Col. Frank Johnson who was by far
+the worst offender? He terrorised guiltless Lahore, and by his merciless
+orders set the tone to the whole of the Martial Law officers. But what I
+am concerned with is not even Col. Johnson. The first business of the
+people of the Punjab and of India is to rid the service of Col O'Brien,
+Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram and Mr. Malik Khan. They are still
+retained in the service. Their guilt is as much proved as that of
+General Dyer. We shall have failed in our duty if the condemnation
+pronounced upon General Dyer produces a sense of satisfaction and the
+obvious duty of purging the administration in the Punjab is neglected.
+That task will not be performed by platform rhetoric or resolutions
+merely. Stern action is required on out part if we are to make any
+headway with ourselves and make any impression upon the officials that
+they are not to consider themselves as masters of the people but as
+their trusties and servants who cannot hold office if they misbehave
+themselves and prove unworthy of the trust reposed in them.
+
+
+THE PUNJAB SENTENCES
+
+The commissioners appointed by the Congress Punjab Sub Committee have in
+their report accused His Excellency the Viceroy of criminal want of
+imagination. His Excellency's refusal to commute two death sentences out
+of five is a fine illustration of the accusation. The rejection of the
+appeal by the Privy Council no more proves the guilt of the condemned
+than their innocence would have been proved by quashing the proceedings
+before the Martial Law Tribunal. Moreover, these cases clearly come
+under the Royal Proclamation in accordance with its interpretation by
+the Punjab Government. The murders in Amritsar were not due to any
+private quarrel between the murderers and their victims. The offence
+grave, though it was, was purely political and committed under
+excitement. More than full reparation has been taken for the murders and
+arson. In the circumstances commonsense dictates reduction of the death
+sentences. The popular belief favours the view that the condemned men
+are innocent and have not had a fair trial. The execution has been so
+long delayed that hanging at this stage would give a rude shock to
+Indian society. Any Viceroy with imagination would have at once
+announced commutation of the death sentences--not so Lord Chelmsford. In
+his estimation, evidently, the demands of justice will not be satisfied
+if at least some of the condemned men are not hanged. Public feeling
+with him counts for nothing. We shall still hope that, either the
+Viceroy or Mr. Montagu will commute the death sentences.
+
+But if the Government will grievously err, if they carry out the
+sentences, the people will equally err if they give way to anger or
+grief over the hanging if it has unfortunately to take plane. Before we
+become a nation possessing an effective voice in the councils of
+nations, we must be prepared to contemplate with equanimity, not a
+thousand murders of innocent men and women but many thousands before we
+attain a status in the world that, shall not be surpassed by any nation.
+We hope therefore that all concerned will take rather than lose heart
+and treat hanging as an ordinary affair of life.
+
+[Since the above was in type, we have received cruel news. At last H.E.
+the Viceroy has mercilessly given the rude shock to Indian society. It
+is now for the latter to take heart in spite of the unkindest
+cut.--Ed. Y.I.]
+
+
+
+
+IV. SWARAJ
+
+
+SWARAJ IN ONE YEAR
+
+Much laughter has been indulged in at my expense for having told the
+Congress audience at Calcutta that if there was sufficient response to
+my programme of non-co-operation Swaraj would be attained in one year.
+Some have ignored my condition and laughed because of the impossibility
+of getting Swaraj anyhow within one year. Others have spelt the 'if' in
+capitals and suggested that if 'ifs' were permissible in argument, any
+absurdity could be proved to be a possibility. My proposition however is
+based on a mathematical calculation. And I venture to say that true
+Swaraj is a practical impossibility without due fulfilment of my
+conditions. Swaraj means a state such that we can maintain our separate
+existence without the presence of the English. If it is to be a
+partnership, it must be partnership at will. There can be no Swaraj
+without our feeling and being the equals of Englishmen. To-day we feel
+that we are dependent upon them for our internal and external security,
+for an armed peace between the Hindus and the Mussulmans, for our
+education and for the supply of daily wants, nay, even for the
+settlement of our religious squabbles. The Rajahs are dependent upon the
+British for their powers and the millionaires for their millions. The
+British know our helplessness and Sir Thomas Holland cracks jokes quite
+legitimately at the expense of non-co-operationists. To get Swaraj then
+is to get rid of our helplessness. The problem is no doubt stupendous
+even as it is for the fabled lion who having been brought up in the
+company of goats found it impossible to feel that he was a lion. As
+Tolstoy used to put it, mankind often laboured under hypnotism. Under
+its spell continuously we feel the feeling of helplessness. The British
+themselves cannot be expected to help us out of it. On the contrary,
+they din into our ears that we shall be fit to govern ourselves only by
+slow educative processes. The "Times" suggested that if we boycott the
+councils we shall lose the opportunity of a training in Swaraj. I have
+no doubt that there are many who believe what the "Times" says. It even
+resorts to a falsehood. It audaciously says that Lord Milner's Mission
+listened to the Egyptians only when they were ready to lift the boycott
+of the Egyptian Council. For me the only training in Swaraj we need is
+the ability to defend ourselves against the whole world and to live our
+natural life in perfect freedom even though it may be full of defects.
+Good Government is no substitute for self-Government. The Afghans have a
+bad Government but it is self-Government. I envy them. The Japanese
+learnt the art through a sea of blood. And if we to-day had the power to
+drive out the English by superior brute force, we would be counted their
+superiors, and in spite of our inexperience in debating at the Council
+table or in holding executive offices, we would be held fit to govern
+ourselves. For brute force is the only test the west has hitherto
+recognised. The Germans were defeated not because they were necessarily
+in the wrong, but because the allied Powers were found to possess
+greater brute strength. In the end therefore India must either learn the
+art of war which the British will not teach her or, she must follow her
+own way of discipline and self-sacrifice through non-co-operation. It is
+as amazing as it is humiliating that less than one hundred-thousand
+white men should be able to rule three hundred and fifteen million
+Indians. They do so somewhat undoubtedly by force, but more by securing
+our co-operation in a thousand ways and making us more and more helpless
+and dependent on them as time goes forward. Let us not mistake reformed
+councils, more lawcourts and even governorships for real freedom or
+power. They are but subtler methods of emasculation. The British cannot
+rule us by mere force. And so they resort to all means, honourable and
+dishonourable, in order to retain their hold on India. They want India's
+billions and they want India's man power for their imperialistic greed.
+If we refuse to supply them with men and money, we achieve our goal,
+namely, Swaraj, equality, manliness.
+
+The cup of our humiliation was filled during the closing scenes in the
+Viceregal Council. Mr. Shustri could not move his resolution on the
+Punjab. The Indian victims of Jullianwala received Rs. 1,250, the
+English victims of mob-frenzy received lakhs. The officials who were
+guilty of crimes against those whose servants they were, were
+reprimanded. And the councillors were satisfied. If India were powerful,
+India would not have stood this addition of insult, to her injury.
+
+I do not blame the British. If we were weak in numbers as they are, we
+too would perhaps have resorted to the same methods as they are now
+employing. Terrorism and deception are weapons not of the strong but of
+the weak. The British are weak in numbers we are weak in spite of our
+numbers. The result is that each is dragging the other down. It is
+common experience that Englishmen lose in character after residence in
+India and that Indians lose in courage and manliness by contact with
+Englishmen. This process of weakening is good neither for us, two
+nations, nor for the world.
+
+But if we Indians take care of ourselves the English and the rest of
+the world would take care of themselves. Our contributions to the
+world's progress must therefore consist in setting our own house
+in order.
+
+Training in arms for the present is out of the question. I go a step
+further and believe that India has a better mission for the world. It is
+within her to show that she can achieve her destiny by pure
+self-sacrifice, i.e., self-purification. This can be done only by
+non-co-operation. And non-co-operation is possible only when those who
+commenced to co-operate being the process of withdrawal. If we can but
+free ourselves from the threefold _maya_ of Government-controlled
+schools, Government law-courts and legislative councils, and truly
+control our own education regulate our disputes and be indifferent to
+their legislation, we are ready to govern ourselves and we are only then
+ready to ask the government servants, whether civil or military, to
+resign, and the tax-payers to suspend payment of taxes.
+
+And is it such an impracticable proposition to expect parents to
+withdraw their children from schools and colleges and establish their
+own institutions or to ask lawyers to suspend their practice and devote
+their whole time attention to national service against payment where
+necessary, of their maintenance, or to ask candidates for councils not
+to enter councils and lend their passive or active assistance to the
+legislative machinery through which all control is exercised. The
+movement of non-co-operation is nothing but an attempt to isolate the
+brute force of the British from all the trappings under which it is
+hidden and to show that brute force by itself cannot for one single
+moment hold India.
+
+But I frankly confess that, until the three conditions mentioned by me
+are fulfilled, there is no Swaraj. We may not go on taking our college
+degrees, taking thousands of rupees monthly from clients for cases which
+can be finished in five minutes and taking the keenest delight in
+wasting national time on the council floor and still expect to gain
+national self-respect.
+
+The last though not the least important part of the Maya still remains
+to be considered. That is Swadeshi. Had we not abandoned Swadeshi, we
+need not have been in the present fallen state. If we would get rid of
+the economic slavery, we must manufacture our own cloth and at the
+present moment only by hand-spinning and hand weaving.
+
+All this means discipline, self-denial, self-sacrifice, organising
+ability, confidence and courage. If we show this in one year among the
+classes that to-day count, and make public opinion, we certainly gain
+Swaraj within one year. If I am told that even we who lead have not
+these qualities in us, there certainly will never be Swaraj for India,
+but then we shall have no right to blame the English for what they are
+doing. Our salvation and its time are solely dependent upon us.
+
+
+BRITISH RULE--AN EVIL
+
+The _Interpreter_ is however more to the point in asking, "Does Mr.
+Gandhi hold without hesitation or reserve that British rule in India is
+altogether an evil and that the people of India are to be taught so to
+regard it? He must hold it to be so evil that the wrongs it does
+outweigh the benefit it confers, for only so is non-co-operation to be
+justified at the bar of conscience or of Christ." My answer is
+emphatically in the affirmative. So long as I believed that the sum
+total of the energy of the British Empire was good, I clung to it
+despite what I used to regard as temporary aberrations. I am not sorry
+for having done so. But having my eyes opened, it would be sin for me to
+associate myself with the Empire unless it purges itself of its evil
+character. I write this with sorrow and I should be pleased if I
+discovered that I was in error and that my present attitude was a
+reaction. The continuous financial drain, the emasculation of the Punjab
+and the betrayal of the Muslim sentiment constitute, in my humble
+opinion, a threefold robbery of India. 'The blessings of _pax
+Britanica_' I reckon, therefore, to be a curse. We would have at least
+remained like the other nations brave men and women, instead of feeling
+as we do so utterly helpless, if we had no British Rule imposing on us
+an armed peace. 'The blessing' of roads and railways is a return no
+self-respecting nation would accept for its degradation. 'The blessing'
+of education is proving one of the greatest obstacles in our progress
+towards freedom.
+
+
+A MOVEMENT OF PURIFICATION
+
+The fact is that non-co-operation by reason of its non-violence has
+become a religious and purifying movement. It is daily bringing strength
+to the nation, showing it its weak spots and the remedy for removing
+them. It is a movement of self-reliance. It is the mightiest force for
+revolutionising opinion and stimulating thought. It is a movement of
+self-imposed suffering and therefore possesses automatic checks against
+extravagance or impatience. The capacity of the nation for suffering
+regulates its advance towards freedom. It isolates the force of evil by
+refraining from participation in it, in any shape or form.
+
+
+WHY WAS INDIA LOST?
+
+[A dialog between the Reader and Editor,--_Indian Home Rule_].
+
+Reader: You have said much about civilisation--enough to make me ponder
+over it. I do not know what I should adopt and what I should avoid from
+the nations of Europe. but one question comes to my lips immediately. If
+civilisation is a disease, and if it has attacked England why has she
+been able to take India, and why is she able to retain it?
+
+Editor: Your question is not very difficult to answer, and we shall
+presently be able to examine the true nature of Swaraj; for I am aware
+that I have still to answer that question. I will, however, take up your
+previous question. The English have not taken India; we have given it to
+them. They are not in India because of their strength, but because we
+keep them. Let us now see whether these positions can be sustained. They
+came to our country originally for the purpose of trade. Recall the
+Company Bahadur. Who made it Bahadur? They had not the slightest
+intention at the time of establishing a kingdom. Who assisted the
+Company's officers? Who was tempted at the sight of their silver? Who
+bought their goods? History testifies that we did all this. In order to
+become rich all at once, we welcomed the Company's officers with open
+arms. We assisted them. If I am in the habit of drinking Bhang, and a
+seller thereof sells it to me, am I to blame him or myself? By blaming
+the seller shall I be able to avoid the habit? And, if a particular
+retailer is driven away will not another take his place? A true servant
+of India will have to go to the root of the matter. If an excess of food
+has caused me indigestion I will certainly not avoid it by blaming
+water. He is a true physician who probes the cause of disease and, if
+you pose as a physician for the disease of India, you will have to find
+out its true cause.
+
+Reader: You are right. Now, I think you will not have to argue much with
+me to drive your conclusions home. I am impatient to know your further
+views. We are now on a most interesting topic. I shall, therefore,
+endeavour to follow your thought, and stop you when I am in doubt.
+
+Editor: I am afraid that, in spite of your enthusiasm, as we proceed
+further we shall have differences of opinion. Nevertheless, I shall
+argue only when you will stop me. We have already seen that the English
+merchants were able to get a footing in India because we encouraged
+them. When our princes fought among themselves, they sought the
+assistance of Company Bahadar. That corporation was versed alike in
+commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality. Its object
+was to increase its commerce and to make money. It accepted our
+assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the
+latter it employed an army which was utilised by us also. Is it not then
+useless to blame the English for what we did at that time? The Hindus
+and the Mahomedans were at daggers drawn. This, too, gave the Company
+its opportunity, and thus we created the circumstances that gave the
+Company its control over India. Hence it is truer to say that we gave
+India to the English than that India was lost.
+
+Reader: Will you now tell me how they are able to retain India?
+
+Editor: The causes that gave them India enable them to retain it. Some
+Englishmen state that they took, and they hold, India by the sword. Both
+these statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding
+India. We alone keep them. Napoleon is said to have described the
+English as a nation of shop keepers. It is a fitting description. They
+hold whatever dominions they have for the sake of their commerce. Their
+army and their navy are intended to protect it. When the Transvaal
+offered no such attractions, the late Mr. Gladstone discovered that it
+was no right for the English to hold it. When it became a paying
+proposition, resistance led to war. Mr. Chamberlain soon discovered that
+England enjoyed a suzerainty over the Transvaal. It is related that some
+one asked the late President Kruger whether there was gold in the moon?
+He replied that it was highly unlikely, because, if there were, the
+English would have annexed it. Many problems can be solved by
+remembering that money is their God. Then it follows that we keep the
+English in India for our base self-interest. We like their commerce,
+they please us by their subtle methods, and get what they want from us.
+To blame them for this is to perpetuate their power. We further
+strengthen their hold by quarrelling amongst ourselves. If you accept
+the above statements, it is proved that the English entered India for
+the purposes of trade. They remain in it for the same purpose, and we
+help them to do so. Their arms and ammunition are perfectly useless. In
+this connection, I remind you that it is the British flag which is
+waving in Japan, and not the Japanese. The English have a treaty with
+Japan for the sake of their commerce and you will see that, if they can
+manage it, their commerce will greatly expand in that country. They
+wish to convert the whole word into a vast market for their goods. That
+they cannot do so is true, but the blame will not be theirs. They will
+leave no stone unturned to reach the goal.
+
+
+SWARAJ MY IDEAL
+
+The following is a fairly full report of Mr. Gandhi's important speech
+at Calcutta on the 13th December 1920:--
+
+The very fact, that so many of you cannot understand Hindi which is
+bound to be the National medium of expression throughout Hindustan in
+gatherings of Indians belonging to different parts of the land, shows
+the depth of the degradation to which we have sunk, and points to the
+supreme necessity of the non-co-operation movement which is intended to
+lift us out of that condition. This Government has been instrumental in
+degrading this great nation in various ways, and it is impossible to be
+free from it without co-operation amongst ourselves which is in turn
+impossible without a national medium of expression.
+
+But I am not here to day to plead for the medium. I am to plead for the
+acceptance by the country of the programme of non-violent, progressive
+non-co-operation. Now all the words that I have used here are absolutely
+necessary and the two adjectives 'progressive' and 'non-violent' are
+integral part of a whole. With me non-violence is part of my religion, a
+matter of creed. But with the great number of Mussalmans non-violence is
+a policy, with thousand, if not millions of Hindus, it is equally a
+matter of policy. But whether it is a creed or a policy, it is utterly
+impossible for you to finish the programme for the enfranchisement of
+the millions of India, without recognising the necessity and the value
+of non-violence. Violence may for a moment avail to secure a certain
+measure of success but it could not in the long run achieve any
+appreciable result. On the other hand all violence would prove
+destructive to the honour and self-respect of the nation. The blue books
+issued by the Government of India show that inasmuch as we have used
+violence, military expenditure has gone up, not proportionately but in
+geometrical progression. The bonds of our slavery have been forged all
+the stronger for our having offered violence. And the whole history of
+British rule in India is a demonstration of the fact that we have never
+been able to offer successful violence. Whilst therefore I say that
+rather than have the yoke of a Government that has so emasculated us, I
+would welcome violence. I would urge with all the emphasis that I can
+command that India will never be able to regain her own by methods
+of violence.
+
+Lord Ronaldshay who has done me the honour of reading my booklet on Home
+Rule has warned my countrymen against engaging themselves in a struggle
+for a Swaraj such as is described in that booklet. Now though I do not
+want to withdraw a single word of it, I would say to you on this
+occasion that I do not ask India to follow out to-day the methods
+prescribed in my booklet. If they could do that they would have Home
+Rule not in a year but in a day, and India by realising that ideal wants
+to acquire an ascendancy over the rest of the world. But it must remain
+a day dream more or less for the time being. What I am doing to-day is
+that I am giving the country a pardonable programme not the abolition of
+law courts, posts, telegraphs and of railways but for the attainment of
+Parliamentary Swarja. I am telling you to do that so long as we do not
+isolate ourselves from this Government, we are co-operating with it
+through schools, law courts and councils, through service civil and
+military and payment of taxes and foreign trade.
+
+The moment this fact is realised and non-co-operation is effected, this
+Government must totter to pieces. If I know that the masses were
+prepared for the whole programme at once, I would not delay in putting
+it at once to work. It is not possible at the present moment, to prevent
+the masses from bursting out into wrath against those who come to
+execute the law, it is not possible, that the military would lay down
+their arms without the slightest violence. If that were possible to-day,
+I would propose all the stages of non-co-operation to be worked
+simultaneously. But we have not secured that control over the masses, we
+have uselessly frittered away precious years of the nation's life in
+mastering a language which we need least for winning our liberty; we
+have frittered away all those years in learning liberty from Milton and
+Shakespeare, in deriving inspiration from the pages of Mill, whilst
+liberty could be learnt at our doors. We have thus succeeded in
+isolating ourselves from the masses: we have been westernised. We have
+failed these 35 years to utilise our education in order to permeate the
+masses. We have sat upon the pedestal and from there delivered harangues
+to them in a language they do not understand and we see to-day that we
+are unable to conduct large gatherings in a disciplined manner. And
+discipline is the essence of success. Here is therefore one reason why I
+have introduced the word 'progressive' in the non-co-operation
+Resolution. Without any impertinence I may say that I understand the
+mass mind better than any one amongst the educated Indians. I contend
+that the masses are not ready for suspension of payment of taxes. They
+have not yet learnt sufficient self-control. If I was sure of
+non-violence on their part I would ask them to suspend payment to-day
+and not waste a single moment of the nations time. With me the liberty
+of India has become a passion. Liberty of Islam is as dear to me. I
+would not therefore delay a moment if I found that the whole of the
+programme could be enforced at once.
+
+It grieves me to miss the faces of dear and revered leaders in this
+assembly. We miss here the trumpet voice of Surendranath Banorji, who
+has rendered inestimable service to the country. And though we stand as
+poles asunder to-day, though we may have sharp differences with him, we
+must express them with becoming restraint. I do not ask you to give up a
+single iota of principle. I urge non-violence in language and in deed.
+If non-violence is essential in our dealings with Government, it is more
+essential in our dealings with our leaders. And it grieves me deeply to
+hear of recent instances of violence reported to have been used in East
+Bongal against our own people. I was pained to hear that the ears of a
+man who had voted at the recent elections had been cut, and night soil
+had been thrown into the bed of a man who had stood as a candidate.
+Non-co-operation is never going to succeed in this way. It will not
+succeed unless we create an atmosphere of perfect freedom, unless we
+prize our opponents liberty as much as our own. The liberty of faith,
+conscience, thought and action which we claim for ourselves must be
+conceded equally to others. Non co-operation is a process of
+purification and we must continually try to touch the hearts of those
+who differ from us, their minds, and their emotions, but never their
+bodies. Discipline and restraint are the cardinal principles of our
+conduct and I warn you against any sort of tyrannical social ostracism.
+I was deeply grieved therefore to hear of the insult offered to a dead
+body in Delhi and feel that if it was the action of non-co-operators
+they have disgraced themselves and their creed. I repeat we cannot
+deliver our land through violence.
+
+It was not a joke when I said on the congress platform that Swaraj could
+be established in one year if there was sufficient response from the
+nation. Three months of this year are gone. If we are true to our salt,
+true to our nation, true to the songs we sing, if we are true to the
+Bhagwad Gita and the Koran, we would finish the programme in the
+remaining nine months and deliver Islam the Punjab and India.
+
+I have proposed a limited programme workable within one year, having a
+special regard to the educated classes. We seem to be labouring under
+the illusion that we cannot possibly live without Councils, law courts
+and schools provided by the Government. The moment we are disillusioned
+we have Swaraj. It is demoralising both for Government and the governed
+that a hundred thousand pilgrims should dictate terms to a nation
+composed of three hundred millions. And how is it they can thus dictate
+terms. It is because we have been divided and they have ruled. I have
+never forgotten Humes' frank confession that the British Government was
+sustained by the policy of "Divide and Rule." Therefore it is that I
+have laid stress upon Hindu Muslim Unity as one of the important
+essentials for the success of Non-co-operation. But, it should be no lip
+unity, nor bunia unity it should be a unity broad based on a recognition
+of the heart. If we want to save Hinduism, I say for Gods sake, do not
+seek to bargain with the Mussalmans. I have been going about with
+Maulana Shaukat Ali all these months, but I have not so much as
+whispered anything about the protection of the cow. My alliance with the
+Ali Brothers is one of honour. I feel that I am on my honour, the whole
+of Hinduism is on its honour, and if it will not be found wanting, it
+will do its duty towards the Mussalmans of India. Any bargaining would
+be degrading to us. Light brings light not darkness, and nobility done
+with a noble purpose will be twice rewarded. It will be God alone who
+can protect the cow. Ask me not to-day--'what about the cow,' ask me
+after Islam is vindicated through India. Ask the Rajas what they do to
+entertain their English guests. Do they not provide beef and champagne
+for their guests. Persuade them first to stop cow killing and then think
+of bargaining with Mussalmans. And how are we Hindus behaving ourselves
+towards the cow and her progeny! Do we treat her as our religion
+requires us? Not till we have set our own house in order and saved the
+cow from the Englishmen have we the right to plead on her behalf with
+the Mussalmans. And the best way of saving the cow from them is to give
+them unconditional help in their hour of trouble.
+
+Similarly what do we owe the Punjab? The whole of India was made to
+crawl on her belly in as much as a single Punjabi was made to crawl in
+that dirty lane in Amritsar, the whole womanhood of India was unveiled
+in as much as the innocent woman of Manianwalla were unveiled by an
+insolent office; and Indian childhood was dishonoured in that, that
+school children of tender age were made to walk four times a day to
+stated places within the martial area in the Punjab and to salute the
+Union Jack, through the effect of which order two children, seven years
+old died of sunstroke having been made to wait in the noonday sun. In my
+opinion it is a sin to attend the schools and colleges conducted under
+the aegis of this Government so long as it has not purged itself of
+these crimes by proper repentance. We may not with any sense of
+self-respect plead before the courts of the Government when we remember
+that it was through the Punjab Courts that innocent men were sentenced
+to be imprisoned and hanged. We become participators in the crime of the
+Government by voluntarily helping it or being helped by it.
+
+The women of India have intuitively understood the spiritual nature of
+the struggle. Thousands have attended to listen to the message of
+non-violent non-co-operation and have given me their precious ornaments
+for the purpose of advancing the cause of Swaraj. Is it any wonder if I
+believe the possibility of gaining Swaraj within a year after all these
+wonderful demonstrations? I would be guilty of want of faith in God if I
+under-rated the significance of the response from the women of India. I
+hope that the students will do their duty. The country certainly expects
+the lawyers who have hitherto led public agitation to recognise the new
+awakening.
+
+I have used strong language but I have done so with the greatest
+deliberation, I am not actuated by any feeling of revenge. I do not
+consider Englishmen as my enemy. I recognise the worth of many. I enjoy
+the privilege of having many English friends, but I am a determined
+enemy of the English rule as is conducted at present and if the
+power--tapasya--of one man could destroy it, I would certainly destroy
+it, if it could not be mended. An Empire that stands for injustice and
+breach of faith does not deserve to stand if its custodians will not
+repent and non-co-operation has been devised in order to enable the
+nation to compel justice.
+
+I hope that Bengal will take her proper place in this movement of
+self-purification. Bengal began Swadeshi and national education when the
+rest of India was sleeping. I hope that Bengal will come to the front
+in this movement for gaining Swaraj and gaining justice for the Khilafat
+and the Punjab through purification and self-sacrifice.
+
+
+ON THE WRONG TRACK
+
+Lord Ronaldshay has been doing me the favour of reading my booklet on
+Indian Home Rule which is a translation of Hind Swaraj. His Lordship
+told his audience that if Swaraj meant what I had described it to be in
+the booklet, the Bengalis would have none of it. I am sorry that Swaraj
+of the Congress resolution does not mean the Swaraj depicted in the
+booklet; Swaraj according to the Congress means Swaraj that the people
+of India want, not what the British Government may condescend to give.
+In so far as I can see, Swaraj will be a Parliament chosen by the people
+with the fullest power over the finance, the police, the military, the
+navy, the courts, and the educational institutions.
+
+I am free to confess that the Swaraj I expect to gain within one year,
+if India responds will be such Swaraj as will make practically
+impossible the repetition of the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs, and
+will enable the nation to do good or evil as it chooses, and not he
+'good' at the dictation of an irresponsible, insolent, and godless
+bureaucracy. Under that Swaraj the nation will have the power to impose
+a heavy protective tariff on such foreign goods as are capable of being
+manufactured in India, as also the power to refuse to send a single
+soldier outside India for the purpose of enslaving the surrounding or
+remote nationalities. The Swaraj that I dream of will be a possibility
+only, when the nation is free to make its choice both of good and evil.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+I adhere to all I have said in that booklet and I would certainly
+recommend it to the reader. Government over self is the truest Swaraj,
+it is synonymous with _moksha_ or salvation, and I have seen nothing to
+alter the view that doctors, lawyers, and railways are no help, and are
+often a hindrance, to the one thing worth striving after. But I know
+that association, a satanic activity, such as the Government is engaged
+in, makes even an effort for such freedom a practical impossibility. I
+cannot tender allegiance to God and Satan at the same time.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+The surest sign of the satanic nature of the present system is that even
+a nobleman of the type of Lord Ronaldshay is obliged to put us off the
+track. He will not deal with the one thing needful. Why is he silent
+about the Punjab? Why does he evade the Khilafat? Can ointments soothe
+a patient who is suffering from corroding consumption? Does his lordship
+not see that it is not the inadequacy of the reforms that has set India
+aflame but that it is the infliction of the two wrongs and the wicked
+attempt to make us forget them? Does he not see that a complete change
+of heart is required before reconciliation?
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+But it has become the fashion nowadays to ascribe hatred to
+non-co-operationism. And I regret to find that even Col. Wedgewood has
+fallen into the trap. I make bold to say that the only way to remove
+hatred is to give it disciplined vent. No man can--I cannot--perform the
+impossible task of removing hatred so long as contempt and despise for
+the feelings of India are sedulously nursed. It is a mockery to ask
+India not to hate when in the same breath India's most sacred feelings
+are contemptuously brushed aside. India feels weak and helpless and so
+expresses her helplessness by hating the tyrant who despises her and
+makes her crawl on the belly, lifts the veils of her innocent women and
+compels her tender children to acknowledge his power by saluting his
+flag four times a day. The gospel of Non-co-operation addresses itself
+to the task of making the people strong and self-reliant. It is an
+attempt to transform hatred into pity. A strong and self-reliant India
+will cease to hate Bosworth Smiths and Frank Johnsons, for she will have
+the power to punish them and therefore the power also to pity and
+forgive them. To-day she can neither punish nor forgive, and therefore
+helplessly nurses hatred. If the Mussalmans were strong, they would not
+hate the English but would fight and wrest from them the dearest
+possessions of Islam. I know that the Ali Brothers who live only for the
+honour and the prestige of Islam, and are prepared any moment to die for
+it, will to-day make friends with the latter Englishmen, if they were to
+do justice to the Khilafat which it is in their power to do.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+I am positively certain that there is no personal element in this fight.
+Both the Hindus and the Mahomedans would to-day invoke blessings on the
+English if they would but give proof positive of their goodness,
+faithfulness, and loyalty to India. Non-co-operation then is a godsend;
+it will purify and strengthen India; and a strong India will be a
+strength to the world as an Indian weak and helpless is a curse to
+mankind. Indian soldiers have involuntarily helped to destroy Turkey and
+are now destroying the flower of the Arabian nation. I cannot recall a
+single campaign in which the Indian soldier has been employed by the
+British Government for the good of mankind. And yet, (Oh! the shame of
+it!) Indian Maharajas are never tired of priding themselves on the loyal
+help they have rendered the English! Could degradation sink any lower?
+
+
+THE CONGRESS CONSTITUTION
+
+The belated report of the Congress Constitution Committee has now been
+published for general information and opinion has been invited from all
+public bodies in order to assist the deliberations of the All India
+Congress Committee. It is a pity that, small though the Constitution
+Committee was, all the members never met at any one time in spite of
+efforts, to have a meeting of them all. It is perhaps no body's fault
+that all the members could not meet. At the same time the draft report
+has passed through the searching examination of all but one member and
+the report represents the mature deliberations of four out of the five
+members. It must be stated at the same time that it does not pretend to
+be the unanimous opinion of the members. Rather than present a
+dissenting minute, a workable scheme has been brought out leaving each
+member free to press his own views on to several matters in which they
+are not quite unanimous. The most important part of the constitution,
+however, is the alteration of the creed. So far as I am aware there is
+no fundamental difference of opinion between the members. In my opinion
+the altered creed represents the exact feeling of the country at the
+present moment.
+
+I know that the proposed alteration has been subjected to hostile
+criticism in several newspapers of note. But the extraordinary situation
+that faces the country is that popular opinion is far in advance of
+several newspapers which have hitherto commanded influence and have
+undoubtedly moulded public opinion. The fact is that the formation of
+opinion to-day is by no means confined to the educated classes, but the
+masses have taken it upon themselves not only to formulate opinion but
+to enforce it. It would be a mistake to belittle or ignore this opinion,
+or to ascribe it to a temporary upheaval. It would be equally a mistake
+to suppose that this awakening amongst the masses is due either to the
+activity of the Ali Brothers or myself. For the time being we have the
+ear of the masses because we voice their sentiments. The masses are by
+no means so foolish or unintelligent as we sometimes imagine. They often
+perceive things with their intuition, which we ourselves fail to see
+with our intellect. But whilst the masses know what they want, they
+often do not know how to express their wants and, less often, how to get
+what they want. Herein comes the use of leadership, and disastrous
+results can easily follow a bad, hasty, or what is worse, selfish lead.
+
+The first part of the proposed creed expresses the present desire of
+the nation, and the second shows the way that desire can be fulfilled.
+In my humble opinion the Congress creed with the proposed alteration is
+but an extension of the original. And so long as no break with the
+British connection is attempted, it is strictly within even the existing
+article that defines the Congress creed. The extension lies in the
+contemplated possibility of a break with the British connection. In my
+humble opinion, if India is to make unhampered progress, we must make it
+clear to the British people that whilst we desire to retain the British
+connection, if we can rise to our full height with it we are determined
+to dispense with, and even to get rid of that connection, if that is
+necessary for full national development. I hold that it is not only
+derogatory to national dignity but it actually impedes national progress
+superstitiously to believe that our progress towards our goal is
+impossible without British connection. It is this superstition which
+makes some of the best of us tolerate the Punjab wrong and the Khilafat
+insult. This blind adherence to that connection makes us feel helpless.
+The proposed alteration in the creed enables us to rid ourselves of our
+helpless condition. I personally hold that it is perfectly
+constitutional openly to strive after independence, but lest there may
+be dispute as to the constitutional character of any movement for
+complete independence, the doubtful and highly technical adjective
+"constitutional" has been removed from the altered creed in the draft.
+Surely it should be enough to ensure that the methods for achieving our
+end are legitimate, honourable, and peaceful, I believe that this was
+the reasoning that guided my colleagues in accepting the proposed creed.
+In any case, such was certainly my view of the whole alteration. There
+is no desire on my part to adopt any means that are subversive of law
+and order. I know, however, that I am treading on delicate ground when I
+write about law and order for, to some of our distinguished leaders even
+my present methods appear to be lawless and conducive to disorder. But
+even they will perhaps grant that the retention of the word
+'constitutional' cannot protect the country against methods such as I am
+employing. It gives rise, no doubt, to a luminous legal discussion, but
+any such discussion is fruitless when the nation means business. The
+other important alteration refers to the limitation of the number of
+delegates. I believe that the advantages of such a limitation are
+obvious. We are fast reaching a time when without any such limitation
+the Congress will become an unwieldy body. It is difficult even to have
+an unlimited number of visitors; it is impossible to transact national
+business if we have an unlimited number of delegates.
+
+The next important alteration is about the election of the members of
+the All-India Congress Committee, making that committee practically the
+Subjects Committee, and the redistribution of India for the purposes of
+the Congress on a linguistic basis. It is not necessary to comment on
+these alterations, but I wish to add that if the Congress accepts the
+principle of limiting the number of delegates it would be advisable to
+introduce the principle of proportional representation. That would
+enable all parties who wish to be represented at the Congress.
+
+I observe that _the Servant of India_ sees an inconsistency between my
+implied acceptance of the British Committee, so far as the published
+draft constitution is concerned, and my recent article in _Young India_
+on that Committee and the newspaper _India_. But it is well known that
+for several years I have held my present views about the existence of
+that body. It would have been irrelevant for me, perhaps, to suggest to
+my colleagues the extinction of that committee. It was not our function
+to report on the usefulness or otherwise of the Committee. We were
+commissioned only for preparing a new constitution. Moreover I knew that
+my colleagues were not averse to the existence of the British Committee.
+And the drawing up of a new constitution enabled me to show that where
+there was no question of principle I was desirous of agreeing quickly
+with my opponents in opinions. But I propose certainly to press for
+abolition of the committee as it is at present continued, and the
+stopping of its organ _India_.
+
+
+SWARAJ IN NINE MONTHS
+
+Asked by the _Times_ representative as to his impressions formed as a
+result of his activities during the last three months, Mr. Gandhi
+said:--"My own impression of these three months' extensive experience is
+that this movement of non-co-operation has come to stay, and it is most
+decidedly a purifying movement, in spite of isolated instances of
+rowdyism, as for instance at Mrs. Besant's meeting in Bombay, at some
+places in Delhi, Bengal, and even in Gujarat. The people are
+assimilating day after day the spirit of non-violence, not necessarily
+as a creed, but as an inevitable policy. I expect most startling
+results, more startling than, say, the discoveries of Sir J.C. Bose, or
+the acceptance by the people of non-violence. If the Government could be
+assured beyond any possibility of doubt that no violence would ever be
+offered by us the Government would from that moment alter its character,
+unconsciously and involuntarily, but nonetheless surely on that
+account."
+
+"Alter its character,--in what, direction?" asked the _Times_
+representative.
+
+"Certainly in the direction which we ask it should move--that being in
+the direction of Government becoming responsive to every call of
+the nation."
+
+"Will you kindly explain further?" asked the representative.
+
+"By that I mean," said Mr. Gandhi, "people will be able by asserting
+themselves through fixed determination and self-sacrifice to gain the
+redress of the Khilafat wrong, the Punjab wrong, and attain the Swaraj
+of their choice."
+
+"But what is your Swaraj, and where does the Government come in
+there--the Government which, you say will alter its character
+unconsciously?"
+
+"My Swaraj," said Mr. Gandhi, "is the Parliamentary Government of India
+in the modern sense of the term for the time being, and that Government
+would be secured to us either through the friendly offices of the
+British people or without them."
+
+"What do you mean by the phrase, 'without them!'" questioned the
+interviewer.
+
+"This movement," continued Mr. Gandhi, "is an endeavour to purge the
+present Government of selfishness and greed which determine almost every
+one of their activities. Suppose that we have made it impossible by
+disassociation from them to feed their greed. They might not wish to
+remain in India, as happened in the case of Somaliland, where the moment
+its administration ceased to be a paying proposition they evacuated it."
+
+"How do you think," queried the representative, "in practice this will
+work out?"
+
+"What I have sketched before you," said Mr. Gandhi, "is the final
+possibility. What I expect is that nothing of that kind will happen. In
+so far as I understand the British people I will recognise the force of
+public opinion when it has become real and patent. Then, and only then,
+will they realise the hideous injustice which in their name the Imperial
+ministers and their representatives in India have perpetrated. They will
+therefore remedy the two wrongs in accordance with the wishes of the
+people, and they will also offer a constitution exactly in accordance
+with the wishes of the people of India, as represented by their
+chosen leaders.
+
+"Supposing that the British Government wish to retire because India is
+not a paying concern, what do you think will then be the position
+of India?"
+
+Mr. Gandhi answered: "At that stage surely it is easy to understand that
+India will then have evolved either outstanding spiritual height or the
+ability to offer violence, against violence. She will have evolved an
+organising ability of a high order, and will therefore be in every way
+able to cope with any emergency that might arise." "In other words,"
+observed the _Times_ representative, "you expect the moment of the
+British evacuation, if such a contingency arises, will coincide with the
+moment of India's preparedness and ability and conditions favourable for
+India to take over the Indian administration as a going concern and work
+it for the benefit and advancement of the Nation?"
+
+Mr. Gandhi answered the question with an emphatic affirmative. "My
+experience during the last months fills me with the hope," continued Mr.
+Gandhi, "that within the nine months that remain of the year in which I
+have expected Swaraj for India we shall redress the two wrongs and we
+shall see Swaraj established in accordance with the wishes of the people
+of India."
+
+"Where will the present Government be at the end of the nine months?"
+Asked the _Times_ representative.
+
+Mr. Gandhi, with a significant smile, said: "The lion will then lie with
+the lamb."
+
+_Young India, December, 1920._
+
+
+THE ATTAINMENT OF SWARAJ
+
+Mr. Gandhi in moving his resolution on the creed before the Congress,
+said, "The resolution which I have the honour to move is as follows: The
+object of the Indian National Congress is the attainment of Swarajya by
+the people of India by all legitimate and peaceful means."
+
+There are only two kinds of objections, so far as I understand, that
+will be advanced from this platform. One is that we may not to-day think
+of dissolving the British connection. What I say is that it is
+derogatory to national dignity to think of permanence of British
+connection at any cost. We are labouring under a grievous wrong, which
+it is the personal duty of every Indian to get redressed. This British
+Government not only refused to redress the wrong, but it refuses to
+acknowledge _its_ mistake and so long as it retains its attitude, it is
+not possible for us to say all that we want to be or all that we want to
+get, retaining British connection. No matter what difficulties be in our
+path, we must make the clearest possible declaration to the world and to
+the whole of India, that we may not possibly have British connection, if
+the British people will not do this elementary justice. I do not, for
+one moment, suggest that we want to end at the British connection at all
+costs, unconditionally. If the British connection is for the advancement
+of India, we do not want to destroy it. But if it is inconsistent with
+our national self respect, then it is our bounden duty to destroy it.
+There is room in this resolution for both--those who believe that, by
+retaining British connection, we can purify ourselves and purify British
+people, and those who have no belief. As for instance, take the extreme
+case of Mr. Andrews. He says all hope for India is gone for keeping the
+British connection. He says there must be complete severance--complete
+independence. There is room enough in this creed for a man like Mr.
+Andrews also. Take another illustration, a man like myself or my brother
+Shaukat Ali. There is certainly no room for us, if we have eternally to
+subscribe to the doctrine, whether these wrongs are redressed or not, we
+shall have to evolve ourselves within the British Empire; there is no
+room for me in that creed. Therefore this creed is elastic enough to
+take in both shades of opinions and the British people will have to
+beware that, if they do not want to do justice, it will be the bounden
+duty of every Indian to destroy the Empire.
+
+I want just now to wind up my remarks with a personal appeal, drawing
+your attention to an object lesson that was presented in the Bengal
+camp yesterday. If you want Swaraj, you have got a demonstration of how
+to get Swaraj. There was a little bit of skirmish, a little bit of
+squabble, and a little bit of difference in the Bengal camp, as there
+will always be differences so long as the world lasts. I have known
+differences between husband and wife, because I am still a husband; I
+have noticed differences between parents and children, because I am
+still a father of four boys, and they are all strong enough to destroy
+their father so far as bodily struggle is concerned; I possess that
+varied experience of husband and parent; I know that we shall always
+have squabbles, we shall always have differences but the lesson that I
+want to draw your attention to is that I had the honour and privilege of
+addressing both the parties. They gave me their undivided attention and
+what is more they showed their attachment, their affection and their
+fellowship for me by accepting the humble advice that I had the honour
+of tendering to them, and I told them I am not here to distribute
+justice that can be awarded only through our worthy president. But I ask
+you not to go to the president, you need not worry him. If you are
+strong, if you are brave, if you are intent upon getting Swaraj, and if
+you really want to revise the creed, then you will bottle up your rage,
+you will bottle up all the feelings of injustice that may rankle in
+your hearts and forget these things here under this very roof and I told
+them to forget their differences, to forgot the wrongs. I don't want to
+tell you or go into the history of that incident. Probably most of you
+know. I simply want to invite your attention to the fact. I don't say
+they have settled up their differences. I hope they have but I do know
+that they undertook to forget the differences. They undertook not to
+worry the President, they undertook not to make any demonstration here
+or in the Subjects Committee. All honour to those who listened to
+that advice.
+
+I only wanted my Bengali friends and all the other friends who have come
+to this great assembly with a fixed determination to seek nothing but
+the settlement of their country, to seek nothing but the advancement of
+their respective rights, to seek nothing but the conservation of the
+national honour. I appeal to every one of you to copy the example set by
+those who felt aggrieved and who felt that their heads were broken. I
+know, before we have done with this great battle on which we have
+embarked at the special sessions of the Congress, we have to go
+probably, possibly through a sea of blood, but let it not be said of us
+or any one of us that we are guilty of shedding blood, but let it be
+said by generations yet to be born that we suffered, that we shed not
+somebody's blood but our own, and so I have no hesitation in saying that
+I do not want to show much sympathy for those who had their heads
+broken or who were said to be even in danger of losing their lives. What
+does it matter? It is much better to die at the hands, at least, of our
+own countrymen. What is there to revenge ourselves about or upon. So I
+ask everyone of you that if at any time there is blood-boiling within
+you against some fellow countrymen of yours, even though he may be in
+the employ of Government, though he may be in the Secret Service, you
+will take care not to be offended and not to return blow for blow.
+Understand that the very moment you return the blow from the detective,
+your cause is lost. This is your non-violent campaign. And so I ask
+everyone of you not to retaliate but to bottle up all your rage, to
+dismiss your rage from you and you will rise graver men. I am here to
+congratulate those who have restrained themselves from going to the
+President and bringing the dispute before him.
+
+Therefore I appeal to those who feel aggrieved to feel that they have
+done the right thing in forgetting it and if they have not forgotten I
+ask them to try to forget the thing; and that is the object lesson to
+which I wanted to draw your attention if you want to carry this
+resolution. Do not carry this resolution only by an acclamation for this
+resolution, but I want you to accompany the carrying out of this
+resolution with a faith and resolve which nothing on earth can move.
+That you are intent upon getting Swaraj at the earliest possible moment
+and that you are intent upon getting Swaraj by means that are
+legitimate, that are honourable and by means that are non-violent, that
+are peaceful, you have resolved upon, so far you can say to-day. We
+cannot give battle to this Government by means of steel, but we can give
+battle by exercising, what I have so often called, "soul force" and soul
+force is not the prerogative of one man of a Sanyasi or even a so-called
+saint. Soul force is the prerogative of every human being, female or
+male and therefore I ask my countrymen, if they want to accept this
+resolution, to accept it with that firm determination and to understand
+that it is inaugurated under such good and favourable auspices as I have
+described to you.
+
+In my humble opinion, the Congress will have done the rightest thing, if
+it unanimously adopts this resolution. May God grant that you will pass
+this resolution unanimously, may God grant that you will also have the
+courage and the ability to carry out the resolution and that within one
+year.
+
+
+
+
+V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY
+
+
+[A dialogue between Editor and reader on the Hindu-Moslem Unity--_Indian
+Home Rule_.]
+
+
+THE HINDUS AND THE MAHOMEDANS.
+
+EDITOR: Your last question is a serious one, and yet, on careful
+consideration, it will be found to be easy of solution. The question
+arises because of the presence of the railways of the lawyers, and of
+the doctors. We shall presently examine the last two. We have already
+considered the railways. I should, however, like to add that man is so
+made by nature as to require him to restrict his movements as far as his
+hands and feet will take him. If we did not rush about from place to
+place by means of railways such other maddening conveniences, much of
+the confusion that arises would be obviated. Our difficulties are of our
+own creation. God set a limit to a man's locomotive ambition in the
+construction of his body. Man immediately proceeded to discover means of
+overriding the limit. God gifted man with intellect that he might know
+his Maker. Man abused it, so that he might forget his Maker. I am so
+constructed that I can only serve my immediate neighbours, but, in my
+conceit, I pretend to have discovered that I must with my body serve
+every individual in the Universe. In thus attempting the impossible, man
+comes in contact with different natures, different religions, and is
+utterly confounded. According to this reasoning, it must be apparent to
+you that railways are a most dangerous institution. Man has therefore
+gone further away from his Maker.
+
+READER: But I am impatient to hear your answer to my question. Has the
+introduction of Mahomedanism not unmade the nation?
+
+EDITOR: India cannot cease to be one nation because people belonging to
+different religions live in it. The introduction of foreigners does not
+necessarily destroy the nation, they merge in it. A country is one
+nation only when such a condition obtains in it. That country must have
+a faculty for assimilation. India has ever been such a country. In
+reality, there are as many religions as there are individuals, but those
+who are conscious of the spirit of nationality do not interfere with one
+another's religion. If they do, they are not fit to be considered a
+nation. If the Hindus believe that India should be peopled only by
+Hindus, they are living in dreamland. The Hindus, the Mahomedans, the
+Parsees and the Christians who have made India their country are fellow
+countrymen, and they will have to live in unity if only for their own
+interest. In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion
+synonymous terms: nor has it ever been so in India.
+
+READER: But what about the inborn enmity between Hindus and Mahomedans?
+
+EDITOR: That phrase has been invented by our mutual enemy. When the
+Hindus and Mahomedans fought against one another, they certainly spoke
+in that strain. They have long since ceased to fight. How, then, can
+there be any inborn enmity? Pray remember this, too, that we did not
+cease to fight only after British occupation. The Hindus flourished
+under Moslem sovereigns, and Moslems under the Hindu. Each party
+recognised that mutual fighting was suicidal, and that neither party
+would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both parties, therefore,
+decided to live in peace. With the English advent the quarrels
+recommenced.
+
+The proverbs you have quoted were coined when both were fighting; to
+quote them now is obviously harmful. Should we not remember that many
+Hindus and Mahomedans own the same ancestors, and the same blood runs
+through their veins? Do people become enemies because they change their
+religion? Is the God of the Mahomedan different from the God of the
+Hindu? Religions are different roads converging to the same point. What
+does it matter that we take different roads, so long as we reach the
+same goal? Wherein is the cause for quarrelling?
+
+Moreover, there are deadly proverbs as between the followers of Shiva
+and those of Vishnu, yet nobody suggests that these two do not belong to
+the same nation. It is said that the Vedic religion is different from
+Jainism, but the followers of the respective faiths are not different
+nations. The fact is that we have become enslaved, and, therefore,
+quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided by a third party. There
+are Hindu iconoclasts as there are Mahomedan. The more we advance in
+true knowledge, the better we shall understand that we need not be at
+war with those whose religion we may not follow.
+
+READER: Now I would like to know your views about cow protection.
+
+EDITOR: I myself respect the cow, that is, I look upon her with
+affectionate reverence. The cow is the protector of India, because, it
+being an agricultural country, is dependent on the cow's progeny. She is
+a most useful animal in hundreds of ways. Our Mahomedan brethren will
+admit this.
+
+But, just as I respect the cow so do I respect my fellow-men. A man is
+just as useful as a cow, no matter whether he be a Mahomedan or a Hindu.
+Am I, then to fight with or kill a Mahomedan in order to save a cow? In
+doing so, I would become an enemy as well of the cow as of the
+Mahomedan. Therefore, the only method I know of protecting the cow is
+that I should approach my Mahomedan brother and urge him for the sake of
+the country to join me in protecting her. If he would not listen to me,
+I should let the cow go for the simple reason that the matter is beyond
+my ability. If I were over full of pity for the cow, I should sacrifice
+my life to save her, but not take my brother's. This, I hold, is the law
+of our religion.
+
+When men become obstinate, it is a difficult thing. If I pull one way,
+my Moslem brother will pull another. If I put on a superior air, he will
+return the compliment. If I bow to him gently, he will do it much, more
+so, and if he does not, I shall not be considered to have done wrong in
+having bowed. When the Hindus became insistent, the killing of cows
+increased. In my opinion, cow protection societies may be considered cow
+killing societies. It is a disgrace to us that we should need such
+societies. When we forgot how to protect cows, I suppose we needed such
+societies.
+
+What am I to do when a blood-brother is on the point of killing a cow?
+Am I to kill him, or to fall down at his feet and implore him? If you
+admit that I should adopt the latter course I must do the same to my
+Moslem brother. Who protects the cow from destruction by Hindus when
+they cruelly ill-treat her? Whoever reasons with the Hindus when they
+mercilessly belabour the progeny of the cow with their sticks? But this
+has not prevented us from remaining one nation.
+
+Lastly, if it be true that the Hindus believe in the doctrine of
+non-killing, and the Mahomedans do not, what, I pray, is the duty of the
+former? It is not written that a follower of the religion of Ahimsa
+(non-killing) may kill a fellow-man. For him the way is straight. In
+order to save one being, he may not kill another. He can only
+plead--therein lies his sole duty.
+
+But does every Hindu believe in Ahimsa? Going to the root of the matter,
+not one man really practises such a religion, because we do destroy
+life. We are said to follow that religion because we want to obtain
+freedom from liability to kill any kind of life. Generally speaking, we
+may observe that many Hindus partake of meat and are not, therefore,
+followers of Ahimsa. It is, therefore, preposterous to suggest that the
+two cannot live together amicably because the Hindus believe in Ahimsa
+and the Mahomedans do not.
+
+These thoughts are put into our minds by selfish and false religious
+teachers. The English put the finishing touch. They have a habit of
+writing history; they pretend to study the manners and customs of all
+peoples, God has given us a limited mental capacity, but they usurp the
+function of the Godhead and indulge in novel experiments. They write
+about their own researches in most laudatory terms and hypnotise us into
+believing them. We in our ignorance, then fall at their feet.
+
+Those who do not wish to misunderstand things may read up the Koran, and
+will find therein hundreds of passages acceptable to the Hindus; and the
+Bhagavad Gita contains passages to which not a Mahomedan can take
+exception. Am I to dislike a Mahomedan because there are passages in the
+Koran I do not understand or like? It takes two to make a quarrel. If I
+do not want to quarrel with a Mahomedan, the latter will be powerless to
+foist a quarrel on me, and, similarly, I should be powerless if a
+Mahomedan refuses his assistance to quarrel with me. An arm striking the
+air will become disjointed. If everyone will try to understand the core
+of his own religion and adhere to it, and will not allow false teachers
+to dictate to him, there will be no room left for quarrelling.
+
+READER: But, will the English ever allow the two bodies to join hands?
+
+EDITOR: This question arises out of your timidity. It betrays our
+shallowness. If two brothers want to live in peace, is it possible for a
+third party to separate them? If they were to listen to evil counsels,
+we would consider them to be foolish. Similarly, we Hindus and
+Mahomedans would have to blame our folly rather than the English, if we
+allowed them to put asunder. A clay pot would break through impact; if
+not with one stone, thou with another. The way to save the pot is not to
+keep it away from the danger point, but to bake it so that no stone
+would break it. We have then to make our hearts of perfectly baked clay.
+Then we shall be steeled against all danger. This can be easily done by
+the Hindus. They are superior in numbers, they pretend that they are
+more educated, they are, therefore, better able to shield themselves
+from attack on their amicable relations with the Mahomedans.
+
+There is a mutual distrust between the two communities. The Mahomedans,
+therefore, ask for certain concessions from Lord Morley. Why should the
+Hindus oppose this? If the Hindus desisted, the English would notice it,
+the Mahomedans would gradually begin to trust the Hindus, and
+brotherliness would be the outcome. We should be ashamed to take our
+quarrels to the English. Everyone can find out for himself that the
+Hindus can lose nothing be desisting. The man who has inspired
+confidence in another has never lost anything in this world.
+
+I do not suggest that the Hindus and the Mahomedans will never fight.
+Two brothers living together often do so. We shall sometimes have our
+heads broken. Such a thing ought not to be necessary, but all men are
+not equi-minded. When people are in a rage, they do many foolish things.
+These we have to put up with. But, when we do quarrel, we certainly do
+not want to engage counsel and to resort to English or any law-courts.
+Two men fight; both have their heads broken, or one only. How shall a
+third party distribute justice amongst them? Those who fight may expect
+to be injured.
+
+
+HINDU-MAHOMEDAN UNITY
+
+Mr. Candler some time ago asked me in an imaginary interview whether if
+I was sincere in my professions of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. I would eat
+and drink with a Mahomedean and give my daughter in marriage to a
+Mahomedan. This question has been asked again by some friends in another
+form. Is it necessary for Hindu Mahomedan Unity that there should he
+interdining and intermarrying? The questioners say that if the two are
+necessary, real unity can never take place because crores of _Sanatanis_
+would never reconcile themselves to interdining, much less to
+intermarriage.
+
+I am one of those who do not consider caste to be a harmful institution.
+In its origin caste was a wholesome custom and promoted national
+well-being. In my opinion the idea that interdining or intermarrying is
+necessary for national growth, is a superstition borrowed from the West.
+Eating is a process just as vital as the other sanitary necessities of
+life. And if mankind had not, much to its harm, made of eating a fetish
+and indulgence we would have performed the operation of eating in
+private even as one performs the other necessary functions of life in
+private. Indeed the highest culture in Hinduism regards eating in that
+light and there are thousands of Hindus still living who will not eat
+their food in the presence of anybody. I can recall the names of several
+cultured men and women who ate their food in entire privacy but who
+never had any illwill against anybody and who lived on the friendliest
+terms with all.
+
+Intermarriage is a still more difficult question. If brothers and
+sisters can live on the friendliest footing without ever thinking of
+marrying each other, I can see no difficulty in my daughter regarding
+every Mahomedan brother and _vice versa_. I hold strong views on
+religion and on marriage. The greater the restraint we exercise with
+regard to our appetites whether about eating or marrying, the better we
+become from a religious standpoint. I should despair of ever cultivating
+amicable relations with the world, if I had to recognise the right or
+the propriety of any young man offering his hand in marriage to my
+daughter or to regard it as necessary for me to dine with anybody and
+everybody. I claim that I am living on terms of friendliness with the
+whole world. I have never quarrelled with a single Mahomedan or
+Christian but for years I have taken nothing but fruit in Mahomedan or
+Christian households. I would most certainly decline to eat food cooked
+from the same plate with my son or to drink water out of a cup which his
+lips have touched and which has not been washed. But the restraint or
+the exclusiveness exercised in these matters by me has never affected
+the closest companionship with the Mahomedan or the Christian friends
+or my sons.
+
+But interdining and intermarriage have never been a bar to disunion,
+quarrels and worse. The Pandavas and the Kauravas flew at one another's
+throats without compunction although they interdined and intermarried.
+The bitterness between the English and the Germans has not yet died out.
+
+The fact is that intermarriage and interdining are not necessary factors
+in friendship and unity though they are often emblems thereof. But
+insistence on either the one or the other can easily become and is
+to-day a bar to Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. If we make ourselves believe that
+Hindus and Mahomedans cannot be one unless they interdine or intermarry,
+we would be creating an artificial barrier between us which it might be
+almost impossible to remove. And it would seriously interfere with the
+flowing unity between Hindus and Mahomedans if, for example, Mahomedan
+youths consider it lawful to court Hindu girls. The Hindu parents will
+not, even if they suspected any such thing, freely admit Mahomedans to
+their homes as they have begun to do now. In my opinion it is necessary
+for Hindu and Mahomedan young men to recognise this limitation.
+
+I hold it to be utterly impossible for Hindus and Mahomedans to
+intermarry and yet retain intact each other's religion. And the true
+beauty of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity lies in each remaining true to his own
+religion and yet being true to each other. For, we are thinking of
+Hindus and Mahomedans even of the most orthodox type being able to
+regard one another as natural friends instead of regarding one another
+as natural enemies as they have done hitherto.
+
+What then does the Hindu-Mahomedan Unity consist in and how can it be
+best promoted? The answer is simple. It consists in our having a common
+purpose, a common goal and common sorrows. It is best promoted by
+co-operating to reach the common goal, by sharing one another's sorrow
+and by mutual toleration. A common goal we have. We wish this great
+country of ours to be greater and self-governing.[4] We have enough
+sorrows to share and to-day seeing that the Mahomedans are deeply
+touched on the question of Khilafat and their case is just, nothing can
+be so powerful for winning Mahomedans friendship for the Hindu as to
+give his whole-hearted support to the Mahomedan claim. No amount of
+drinking out of the same cup or dining out of the same bowl can bind the
+two as this help in the Khilafat question.
+
+And mutual toleration is a necessity for all time and for all races. We
+cannot live in peace if the Hindu will not tolerate the Mahomedan form
+of worship of God and his manners and customs or if the mahomedans will
+be impatient of Hindu idolatory, cow-worship. It is not necessary for
+toleration that I must approve of what I tolerate. I heartily dislike
+drinking, meat eating and smoking, but I tolerate all these in Hindus,
+Mahomedans and Christians even as I expect them to tolerate my
+abstinence from all these, although they may dislike it. All the
+quarrels between the Hindus and the Mahomedans have arisen from each
+wanting to _force_ the other his view.
+
+
+HINDU-MUSLIM UNITY
+
+There can be no doubt that successful non-co-operation depends as much
+on Hindu-Muslim Unity as on non-violence. Greatest strain will be put
+upon both in the course of the struggle and if it survives that strain,
+victory is a certainty.
+
+A severe strain was put upon it in Agra and it has been stated that when
+either party went to the authorities they were referred to Maulana
+Shaukat Ali and me. Fortunately there was a far better man at hand.
+Hakimji Ajmal khan is a devout Muslim who commands the confidence and
+the respect of both the parties. He with his band of workers hastened to
+Agra, settled the dispute and the parties became friends as they were
+never before. An incident occurred nearer Delhi and the same influence
+worked successfully to avoid what might have become an explosion.
+
+But Hakimji Ajmal khan cannot be everywhere appearing at the exact hour
+as an angel of peace. Nor can Maulana Shankat Ali or I go everywhere.
+And yet perfect peace must be observed between the two communities in
+spite of attempts to divide them.
+
+Why was there any appeal made to the authorities at all at Agra? If we
+are to work out non-co-operation with any degree of success we must be
+able to dispense with the protection of the Government when we quarrel
+among ourselves. The whole scheme of non-co-operation must break to
+pieces, if our final reliance is to be upon British intervention for the
+adjustment of our quarrels or the punishment of the guilty ones. In
+every village and hamlet there must be at least one Hindu and one
+Muslim, whose primary business must be to prevent quarrels between the
+two. Some times however, even blood-brothers come to blows. In the
+initial stages we are bound to do so here and there. Unfortunately we
+who are public workers have made little attempt to understand and
+influence the masses and least of all the most turbulent among them.
+During the process of insinuating ourselves in the estimation of the
+masses and until we have gained control over the unruly, there are bound
+to be exhibitions of hasty temper now and then. We must learn at such
+times to do without an appeal to the Government. Hakimji Ajmal Khan has
+shown us how to do it.
+
+The union that we want is not a patched up thing but a union of hearts
+based upon a definite recognition of the indubitable proposition that
+Swaraj for India must be an impossible dream without an indissoluble
+union between the Hindus and the Muslims of India. It must not be a mere
+truce. It cannot be based upon mutual fear. It must be a partnership
+between equals each respecting the religion of the other.
+
+I would frankly despair of reaching such union if there was anything in
+the holy Quran enjoining upon the followers of Islam to treat Hindus as
+their natural enemies or if there was anything in Hinduism to warrant a
+belief in the eternal enmity between the two.
+
+We would ill learn our history if we conclude that because we have
+quarrelled in the past, we are destined so to continue unless some such
+strong power like the British keep us by force of arms from flying at
+each other's throats. But I am convinced that there is no warrant in
+Islam or Hinduism for any such belief. True it is that interested
+fanatical priests in both religions have set the one against the other.
+It is equally true that Muslim rulers like Christian rulers have used
+the sword for the propagation of their respective faiths. But in spite
+of many dark things of the modern times, the world's opinion to-day will
+as little tolerate forcible conversions as it will tolerate forcible
+slavery. That probably is the most effective contribution of the
+scientific spirit of the age. That spirit has revolutionised many a
+false notion about Christianity as it has about Islam. I do not know a
+single writer on Islam who defends the use of force in the proselytising
+process. The influences exerted in our times are far more subtle than
+that of the sword.
+
+
+I believe that in the midst of all the bloodshed, chicane and fraud
+being resorted to on a colossal scale in the west, the whole humanity is
+silently but surely making progress towards a better age. And India by
+finding true independence and self-expression through an imperishable
+Hindu-Muslim unity and through non-violent means, i.e., unadulterated
+self sacrifice can point a way out of the prevailing darkness.
+
+
+
+
+VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+
+DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+Vivekanand used to call the Panchamas 'suppressed classes.' There is no
+doubt that Vivekanand's is a more accurate adjective. We have suppressed
+them and have consequently become ourselves depressed. That we have
+become the 'Pariahs of the Empire' is, in Gokhale's language, the
+retributive justice meted out to us by a just God. A correspondent
+indignantly asks me in a pathetic letter reproduced elsewhere, what I am
+doing for them. I have given the letter with the correspondent's own
+heading. Should not we the Hindus wash our bloodstained hands before we
+ask the English to wash theirs? This is a proper question reasonably
+put. And if a member of a slave nation could deliver the suppressed
+classes from their slavery without freeing myself from my own, I would
+do so to day. But it is an impossible task. A slave has not the freedom
+even to do the right thing. It is a right for me to prohibit the
+importation of foreign goods, but I have no power to bring it about. It
+was right for Maulana Mahomed Ali to go to Turkey and to tell the Turks
+personally that India was with them in their righteous struggle. He was
+not free to do so. If I had a truly national legislative I would answer
+Hindu insolence by creating special and better wells for the exclusive
+use of suppressed classes and by erecting better and more numerous
+schools for them, so that there would be not a single member of the
+suppressed classes left without a school to teach their children. But I
+must wait for that better day.
+
+Meanwhile are the depressed classes to be loft to their own resources?
+Nothing of the sort. In my own humble manner I have done and am doing
+all I can for my Panchama brother.
+
+There are three courses open to those downtrodden members of the nation.
+For their impatience they may call in the assistance of the slave owning
+Government. They will get it but they will fall from the frying pan into
+the fire. To-day they are slaves of slaves. By seeking Government aid,
+they will be used for suppressing their kith and kin. Instead of being
+sinned against, they will themselves be the sinners. The Mussalmans
+tried it and failed. They found that they were worse off than before.
+The Sikhs did it unwittingly and failed. To-day there is no more
+discontented community in India than the Sikhs. Government aid is
+therefore no solution.
+
+The second is rejection of Hinduism and wholesale conversion to Islam or
+Christianity. And if a change of religion could be justified for worldly
+betterment, I would advise it without hesitation. But religion is a
+matter of the heart. No physical inconvenience can warrant abandonment
+of one's own religion. If the inhuman treatment of the Panchamas were a
+part of Hinduism, its rejection would be a paramount duty both for them
+and for those like me who would not make a fetish even of religion and
+condone every evil in its sacred name. But, I believe that
+untouchability is no part of Hinduism. It is rather its excrescence to
+be removed by every effort. And there is quite an army of Hindu
+reformers who have set their heart upon ridding Hinduism of this blot.
+Conversion, therefore, I hold, is no remedy whatsoever.
+
+Then there remains, finally, self-help and self-dependence, with such
+aid as the non-Panchama Hindus will render of their own motion, not as a
+matter of patronage but as a matter of duty. And herein comes the use of
+non-co-operation. My correspondent was correctly informed by Mr.
+Rajagopaluchari and Mr. Hanumantarao that I would favour well-regulated
+non-co-operation for this acknowledged evil. But non-co-operation means
+independence of outside help, it means effort from within. It would not
+be non-co-operation to insist on visiting prohibited areas. That may be
+civil disobedience if it is peacefully carried out. But I have found to
+my cost that civil disobedience requires far greater preliminary
+training and self-control. All can non-co-operate, but few only can
+offer civil disobedience. Therefore, by way of protest against Hinduism,
+the Panchamas can certainly stop all contact and connection with the
+other Hindus so long as special grievances are maintained. But this
+means organised intelligent effort. And so far as I can see, there is no
+leader among the Panchamas who can lead them to victory through
+non-co-operation.
+
+The better way, therefore, perhaps, is for the Panchamas heartily to
+join the great national movement that is now going on for throwing off
+the slavery of the present Government. It is easy enough for the
+Panchama friends to see that non-co-operation against this evil
+government presupposes co-operation between the different sections
+forming the Indian nation. The Hindus must realise that if they wish to
+offer successful non-co-operation against the Government, they must make
+common cause with the Panchamas, even as they have made common cause
+with the Mussalmans. Non-co-operation with it is free from violence, is
+essentially a movement of intensive self-purification. That process has
+commenced and whether the Panchamas deliberately take part in it or
+not, the rest of the Hindus dare not neglect them without hampering
+their own progress. Hence though the Panchama problem is as dear to me
+as life itself, I rest satisfied with the exclusive attention to
+national non-co-operation. I feel sure that the greater includes
+the less.
+
+Closely allied to this question is the non-Brahmin question. I wish I
+had studied it more closely than I have been able to. A quotation from
+my speech delivered at a private meeting in Madras has been torn from
+its context and misused to further the antagonism between the so-called
+Brahmins and the so-called non-Brahmins. I do not wish to retract a word
+of what I said at that meeting, I was appealing to those who are
+accepted as Brahmins. I told them that in my opinion the treatment of
+non-Brahmins by the Brahmins was as satanic as the treatment of us by
+the British. I added that the non-Brahmins should be placated without
+any ado or bargaining. But my remarks were never intended to encourage
+the powerful non-Brahmins of Maharashira or Madras, or the mischievous
+element among them, to overawe the so-called Brahmins. I use the word
+'so-called' advisedly. For the Brahmins who have freed themselves from
+the thraldom of superstitious orthodoxy have not only no quarrel with
+non-Brahmins as such, but are in every way eager to advance
+non-Brahmins wherever they are weak. No lover of his country can
+possibly achieve its general advance if he dared to neglect the least of
+his countrymen. Those non-Brahmins therefore who are coqueting with the
+Government are selling themselves and the nation to which they belong.
+By all means let those who have faith in the Government help to sustain
+it, but let no Indian worthy of his birth cut off his nose to spite
+the face.
+
+
+AMELIORATION OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+The resolution of the Senate of the Gujarat National University in
+regard to Mr. Andrews' question about the admission of children of the
+'depressed' classes to the schools affiliated to that University is
+reported to have raised a flutter in Ahmedabad. Not only has the flutter
+given satisfaction to a 'Times of India' correspondent, but the occasion
+has led to the discovery by him of another defect in the constitution of
+the Senate in that it does not contain a single Muslim member. The
+discovery, however, I may inform the reader, is no proof of the want of
+national character of the University. The Hindu-Muslim unity is no mere
+lip expression. It requires no artificial proofs. The simple reason why
+there is no Mussalman representative on the Senate is that no higher
+educated Mussalman, able to give his time, has been found to take
+sufficient interest in the national education movement. I merely refer
+to this matter to show that we must reckon with attempts to discredit
+the movement even misinterpretation of motives. That is a difficulty
+from without and easier to deal with.
+
+The 'depressed' classes difficulty is internal and therefore far more
+serious because it may give rise to a split and weaken the cause--no
+cause can survive internal difficulties if they are indefinitely
+multiplied. Yet there can be no surrender in the matter of principles
+for the avoidance of splits. You cannot promote a cause when you are
+undermining it by surrendering its vital parts. The depressed classes
+problem is a vital part of the cause. _Swaraj_ is as inconceivable
+without full reparation to the 'depressed' classes as it is impossible
+without real Hindu-Muslim unity. In my opinion we have become 'pariahs
+of the Empire' because we have created 'pariahs' in our midst. The slave
+owner is always more hurt than the slave. We shall be unfit to gain
+Swaraj so long as we would keep in bondage a fifth of the population of
+Hindustan. Have we not made the 'pariah' crawl on his belly? Have we not
+segregated him? And if it is religion so to treat the 'pariah.' It is
+the religion of the white race to segregate us. And if it is no argument
+for the white races to say that we are satisfied with the badge of our
+inferiority, it is less for us to say that the 'pariah' is satisfied
+with his. Our slavery is complete when we begin to hug it.
+
+The Gujarat Senate therefore counted the cost when it refused to bend
+before the storm. This non-co-operation is a process of
+self-purification. We may not cling to putrid customs and claim the pure
+boon of _Swaraj_. Untouchability I hold is a custom, not an integral
+part of Hinduism. The world advanced in thought, though it is still
+barbarous in action. And no religion can stand that which is not based
+on fundamental truths. Any glorification of error will destroy a
+religion as surely as disregard of a disease is bound to destroy a body.
+
+This government of ours is an unscrupulous corporation. It has ruled by
+dividing Mussalmans from Hindus. It is quite capable of taking advantage
+of the internal weaknesses of Hinduism. It will set the 'depressed'
+classes against the rest of the Hindus, non-Brahmins against Brahmins.
+The Gujarat Senate resolution does not end the trouble. It merely points
+out the difficulty. The trouble will end only when the masses and
+classes of Hindus have rid themselves of the sin of untouchability. A
+Hindu lover of Swaraj will as assiduously work for the amelioration of
+the lot of the 'depressed' classes as he works for Hindu-Muslim unity.
+We must treat them as our brothers and give them the same rights that we
+claim for ourselves.
+
+
+THE SIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY
+
+It is worthy of note that the subjects Committee accepted without any
+opposition the clause regarding the sin of untouchability. It is well
+that the National assembly passed the resolution stating that the
+removal of this blot on Hinduism was necessary for the attainment of
+Swaraj. The Devil succeeds only by receiving help from his fellows. He
+always takes advantage of the weakest spots in our natures in order to
+gain mastery over us. Even so does the Government retain its control
+over us through our weaknesses or vices. And if we would render
+ourselves proof against its machination, we must remove our weaknesses.
+It is for that reason that I have called non-co-operation a process of
+purification. As soon as that process is completed, this government must
+fall to pieces for want of the necessary environment, just as mosquitos
+cease to haunt a place whose cess-pools are filled up and dried.
+
+Has not a just Nemesis overtaken us for the crime of untouchability?
+Have we not reaped as we have sown? Have we not practised Dwyerism and
+O'Dwyerism on our own kith and kin? We have segregated the 'pariah' and
+we are in turn segregated in the British Colonies. We deny him the use
+of public wells; we throw the leavings of our plates at him. His very
+shadow pollutes us. Indeed there is no charge that the 'pariah' cannot
+fling in our faces and which we do not fling in the faces of Englishmen.
+
+How is this blot on Hinduism to be removed? 'Do unto others as you would
+that others should do unto you.' I have often told English officials
+that, if they are friends and servants of India, they should come down
+from their pedestal, cease to be patrons, demonstrate by their loving
+deeds that they are in every respect our friends, and believe us to be
+equals in the same sense they believe fellow Englishmen to be their
+equals. After the experiences of the Punjab and the Khilafat, I have
+gone a step further and asked them to repent and to change their hearts.
+Even so is it necessary for us Hindus to repent of the wrong we have
+done, to alter our behaviour towards those whom we have 'suppressed' by
+a system as devilish as we believe the English system of the Government
+of India to be. We must not throw a few miserable schools at them; we
+must not adopt the air of superiority towards them. We must treat them
+as our blood brothers as they are in fact. We must return to them the
+inheritance of which we have robbed them. And this must not be the act
+of a few English-knowing reformers merely, but it must be a conscious
+voluntary effort on the part of the masses. We may not wait till
+eternity for this much belated reformation. We must aim at bringing it
+about within this year of grace, probation, preparation and _tapasya_.
+It is a reform not to follow _Swaraj_ but to precede it.
+
+Untouchability is not a sanction of religion, it is a devise of Satan.
+The devil has always quoted scriptures. But scriptures cannot transcend
+reason and truth. They are intended to purify reason and illuminate
+truth. I am not going to burn a spotless horse because the Vedas are
+reported to have advised, tolerated, or sanctioned the sacrifice. For me
+the Vedas are divine and unwritten. 'The letter killeth.' It is the
+spirit that giveth the light. And the spirit of the Vedas is purity,
+truth, innocence, chastity, humility, simplicity, forgiveness,
+godliness, and all that makes a man or woman noble and brave. There is
+neither nobility nor bravery in treating the great and uncomplaining
+scavengers of the nation as worse than dogs to be despised and spat
+upon. Would that God gave us the strength and the wisdom to become
+voluntary scavengers of the nation as the 'suppressed' classes are
+forced to be. There are Augean stables enough and to spare for us to
+clean.
+
+
+
+
+VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD
+
+
+INDIANS ABROAD
+
+The prejudice against Indian settlers outside India is showing itself in
+a variety of ways: Under the impudent suggestion of sedition the Fiji
+Government has deported Mr. Manilal Doctor who with his brave and
+cultured wife has been rendering assistance to the poor indentured
+Indians of Fiji in a variety of ways. The whole trouble has arisen over
+the strike of the labourers in Fiji. Indentures have been canceled, but
+the spirit of slavery is by no means dead. We do not know the genesis of
+the strike; we do not know that the strikers have done no wrong. But we
+do know what is behind when a charge of sedition is brought against the
+strikers and their friends. The readers must remember that the
+Government that has scented sedition in the recent upheaval in Fiji is
+the Government that had the hardihood to libel Mr. Andrew's character.
+What can be the meaning of sedition in connection with the Fiji strikers
+and Mr. Manilal Doctor? Did they and he want to seize the reins of
+Government? Did they want any power in that country? They struck for
+elementary freedom. And it is a prostitution of terms to use the word
+sedition in such connection. The strikers may have been overhasty. Mr.
+Manilal Doctor may have misled them. If his advice bordered on the
+criminal he should have been tried. The information in our possession
+goes to show that he has been strictly constitutional. Our point,
+however, is that it is an abuse of power for the Fiji Government to have
+deported Mr. Manilal Doctor without a trial. It is wrong in principle to
+deprive a person of his liberty on mere suspicion and without giving him
+an opportunity of clearing his character. Mr. Manilal Doctor, be it
+remembered, has for years past made Fiji his home. He has, we believe,
+bought property there. He has children born in Fiji. Have the children
+no rights? Has the wife none? May a promising career be ruined at the
+bidding of a lawless Government? Has Mr. Manilal Doctor been compensated
+for the losses he must sustain? We trust that the Government of India
+which has endeavoured to protect the rights of Indian settlers abroad
+will take up the question of Mr. Doctor's deportation.
+
+Nor is Fiji the only place where the spirit of lawlessness among the
+powerful has come to the surface. Indians of (the late) German East
+Africa find themselves in a worse position than heretofore. They state
+that even their property is not safe. They have to pay all kinds of dues
+on passports. They are hampered in their trade. They are not able even
+to send money orders.
+
+In British East Africa the cloud is perhaps the thickest. The European
+settlers there are doing their utmost to deprive the Indian settlers of
+practically every right they have hitherto possessed. An attempt is
+being made to compass their ruin both by legislative enactment and
+administrative action.
+
+In South Africa every Indian who has anything to do with that part of
+the British Dominions is watching with bated breath the progress of
+commission that is now sitting.
+
+The Government of India have no easy job in protecting the interests of
+Indian settlers in these various parts of His Majesty's dominions. They
+will be able to do so only by following the firmest and the most
+consistent policy. Justice is admittedly on the side of the Indian
+settlers. But they are the weak party. A strong agitation in India
+followed by strong action by the Government of India can alone save the
+situation.
+
+
+INDIANS OVERSEAS
+
+The meeting held at the Excelsior Theatre in Bombay to pass resolutions
+regarding East Africa and Fiji, and presided over by Sir Narayan
+Chandavarkar, was an impressive gathering. The Theatre was filled to
+overflowing. Mr. Andrews' speech made clear what is needed. Both the
+political and the civil rights of Indians of East Africa are at stake.
+Mr. Anantani, himself an East African settler, showed in a forceful
+speech that the Indians were the pioneer settlers. An Indian sailor
+named Kano directed the celebrated Vasco De Gama to India. He added amid
+applause that Stanley's expedition for the search and relief of Dr.
+Livingstone was also fitted out by Indians. Indian workmen had built the
+Uganda Railway at much peril to their lives. An Indian contractor had
+taken the contract. Indian artisans had supplied the skill. And now
+their countrymen were in danger of being debarred from its use.
+
+The uplands of East Africa have been declared a Colony and the lowlands
+a Protectorate. There is a sinister significance attached to the
+declaration. The Colonial system gives the Europeans larger powers. It
+will tax all the resources of the Government of India to prevent the
+healthy uplands from becoming a whiteman's preserve and the Indians
+from being relegated to the swampy lowlands.
+
+The question of franchise will soon become a burning one. It will be
+suicidal to divide the electorate or to appoint Indians by nomination.
+There must be one general electoral roll applying the same
+qualifications to all the voters. This principle, as Mr. Andrews
+reminded the meeting, had worked well at the Cape.
+
+The second part of the East African resolution shows the condition of
+our countrymen in the late German East Africa. Indian soldiers fought
+there and now the position of Indians is worse than under German rule.
+H.H. the Agakhan suggested that German East Africa should be
+administered from India. Sir Theodore Morison would have couped up all
+Indians in German East Africa. The result was that both the proposals
+went by the board and the expected has happened. The greed of the
+English speculator has prevailed and he is trying to squeeze out the
+Indian. What will the Government of India protect? Has it the will to do
+so? Is not India itself being exploited? Mr. Jehangir Petit recalled the
+late Mr. Gokhale's views that we were not to expect a full satisfaction
+regarding the status of our countrymen across the seas until we had put
+our own house in order. Helots in our own country, how could we do
+better outside? Mr. Petit wants systematic and severe retaliation. In
+my opinion, retaliation is a double-edged weapon. It does not fail to
+hurt the user if it also hurts the party against whom it is used. And
+who is to give effect to retaliation? It is too much to expect an
+English Government to adopt effective retaliation against their own
+people. They will expostulate, they will remonstrate, but they will not
+go to war with their own Colonies. For the logical outcome of
+retaliation must mean war, if retaliation will not answer.
+
+Let us face the facts frankly. The problem is difficult alike for
+Englishmen and for us. The Englishmen and Indians do not agree in the
+Colonies. The Englishmen do not want us where they can live. Their
+civilisation is different from ours. The two cannot coalesce until there
+is mutual respect. The Englishman considers himself to belong to the
+ruling race. The Indian struggles to think that he does not belong to
+the subject race and in the very act of thinking admits his subjection.
+We must then attain equality at home before we can make any real
+impression abroad.
+
+This is not to say that we must not strive to do better abroad whilst we
+are ill at ease in our own home. We must preserve, we must help our
+countrymen who have settled outside India. Only if we recognise the true
+situation, we and our countrymen abroad will learn to be patient and
+know that our chief energy must be concentrated on a betterment of our
+position at home. If we can raise our status here to that of equal
+partners not in name but in reality so that every Indian might feel it,
+all else must follow as a matter of course.
+
+
+PARIAHS OF THE EMPIRE
+
+The memorable Conference at Gujrat in its resolution on the status of
+Indians abroad has given it as its opinion that even this question may
+become one more reason for non-co-operation. And so it may. Nowhere has
+there been such open defiance of every canon of justice and propriety as
+in the shameless decision of confiscation of Indian rights in the Kenia
+Colony announced by its Governor. This decision has been supported by
+Lord Milnor and Mr. Montagu. And his Indian colleagues are satisfied
+with the decision. Indians, who have made East Africa, who out-number
+the English, are deprived practically of the right of representation on
+the Council. They are to be segregated in parts not habitable by the
+English. They are to have neither the political nor the material
+comfort. They are to become 'Pariahs' in a country made by their own
+labour, wealth and intelligence. The Viceroy is pleased to say that he
+does not like the outlook and is considering the steps to be taken to
+vindicate the justice. He is not met with a new situation. The Indians
+of East Africa had warned him of the impending doom. And if His
+Excellency has not yet found the means of ensuring redress, he is not
+likely to do it in future. I would respectfully ask his Indian
+colleagues whether they can stand this robbery of their
+countrymen rights.
+
+In South Africa the situation is not less disquieting. My misgivings
+seem to be proving true, and repatriation is more likely to prove
+compulsory than voluntary. It is a response to the anti-Asiatic
+agitation, not a measure of relief for indigent Indians. It looks very
+like a trap laid for the unwary Indian. The Union Government appears to
+be taking an unlawful advantage of a section of a relieving law designed
+for a purpose totally different from the one now intended.
+
+As for Fiji, the crime against humanity is evidently to be hushed up. I
+do hope that unless an inquiry is to be made into the Fiji Martial Law
+doings, no Indian member will undertake to go to Fiji. The Government of
+India appear to have given an undertaking to send Indian labour to Fiji
+provided the commission that was to proceed there in order to
+investigate the condition on the spot returns with a favourable report.
+
+For British Guiana I observe from the papers received from that
+quarter, that the mission that came here is already declaring that
+Indian labour will be forthcoming from India. There seems to me to be no
+real prospect for Indian enterprise in that part of the world. We are
+not wanted in any part of the British Dominion except as Pariahs to do
+the scavenging for the European settlers.
+
+The situation is clear. We are Pariahs in our own home. We get only what
+Government intend to give, not what we demand and have a right to. We
+may get the crumbs, never the loaf. I have seen large and tempting
+crumbs from a lavish table. And I have seen the eyes of our Pariahs--the
+shame of Hinduism--brightening to see those heavy crumbs filling their
+baskets. But the superior Hindu, who is filling the basket from a safe
+distance, knows that they are unfit for his own consumption. And so we
+in our turn may receive even Governorships which the real rulers no
+longer require or which they cannot retain with safety for their
+material interest--the political and material hold on India. It is time
+we realised our true status.
+
+
+
+
+VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+A writer in the "Times of India," the Editor of that wonderful daily and
+Mrs. Besant have all in their own manner condemned non-co-operation
+conceived in connection with the Khilafat movement. All the three
+writings naturally discuss many side issues which I shall omit for the
+time being. I propose to answer two serious objections raised by the
+writers. The sobriety with which they are stated entitles them to a
+greater consideration than if they had been given in violent language.
+In non-co-operation, the writers think, it would be difficult if not
+impossible to avoid violence. Indeed violence, the "Times of India"
+editorial says, has already commenced in that ostracism has been
+resorted to in Calcutta and Delhi. Now I fear that ostracism to a
+certain extent is impossible to avoid. I remember in South Africa in the
+initial stages of the passive resistance campaign those who had fallen
+away were ostracised. Ostracism is violent or peaceful in according to
+the manner in which it is practised. A congregation may well refuse to
+recite prayers after a priest who prizes his title above his honour. But
+the ostracism will become violent if the individual life of a person is
+made unbearable by insults innuendoes or abuse. The real danger of
+violence lies in the people resorting to non-co-operation becoming
+impatient and revengeful. This may happen, if, for instance, payment of
+taxes is suddenly withdrawn or if pressure is put upon soldiers to lay
+down their arms. I however do not fear any evil consequences, for the
+simple reason that every responsible Mahomedan understands that
+non-co-operation to be successful must be totally unattended with
+violence. The other objection raised is that those who may give up their
+service may have to starve. That is just a possibility but a remote one,
+for the committee will certainly make due provision for those who may
+suddenly find themselves out of employment. I propose however to examine
+the whole of the difficult question much more fully in a future issue
+and hope to show that if Indian-Mahomedan feeling is to be respected,
+there is nothing left but non-co-operation if the decision arrived at
+is adverse.
+
+
+MR. MONTAGU ON THE KHILAFAT AGITATION
+
+Mr. Montagu does not like the Khilafat agitation that is daily gathering
+force. In answer to questions put in the House of Commons, he is
+reported to have said that whilst he acknowledged that I had rendered
+distinguished services to the country in the past, he could not look
+upon my present attitude with equanimity and that it was not to be
+expected that I could now be treated as leniently as I was during the
+Rowlatt Act agitation. He added that he had every confidence in the
+central and the local Governments, that they were carefully watching the
+movement and that they had full power to deal with the situation.
+
+This statement of Mr. Montagu has been regarded in some quarters as a
+threat. It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the
+Government of India to re-establish the reign of terror if they chose.
+It is certainly inconsistent with his desire to base the Government on
+the goodwill of the people. At the same time if the Hunter Committee's
+finding be true and if I was the cause of the disturbances last year, I
+was undoubtedly treated with exceptional leniency, I admit too that my
+activity this year is fraught with greater peril to the Empire as it is
+being conducted to-day than was last year's activity. Non-co-operation
+in itself is more harmless than civil disobedience, but in its effect it
+is far more dangerous for the Government than civil disobedience.
+Non-co-operation is intended so far to paralyse the Government, as to
+compel justice from it. If it is carried to the extreme point, it can
+bring the Government to a standstill.
+
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I
+did not come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though
+I had not fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and
+that I could not plead 'not guilty' if I was charged under it. For I
+must admit that I can pretend to no 'affection' for the present
+Government. And my speeches are intended to create 'disaffection' such
+that the people might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a
+Government that had forfeited all title to confidence, respect
+or support.
+
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government.
+The latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by
+the former. And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of
+terrorism and emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter.
+British ministers have broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded
+the feelings of the seventy million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men
+and women were insulted by the insolent officers of the Punjab
+Government. Their wrongs not only unrighted but the very officers who so
+cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain office under the
+Government.
+
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could
+command for co-operation with the Government and for response to the
+wishes expressed in the Royal Proclamation; I did so because I honestly
+believed that a new era was about to begin, and that the old spirit of
+fear, distrust and consequent terrorism was about to give place to the
+new spirit of respect, trust and good-will. I sincerely believed that
+the Mussalman sentiment would be placated and that the officers that had
+misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the Punjab would be at least
+dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to feel that a
+Government that had always been found quick (and rightly) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents' misdeeds. But to
+my amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present
+representatives of the Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous.
+They have no real regard for the wishes of the people of India and they
+count Indian honour as of little consequence.
+
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it
+is now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be
+a witness to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly
+right in threatening me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in
+endangering the existence of the Government. For that must be the result
+if my activity bears fruit. My only regret is that inasmuch as Mr.
+Montagu admits my past services, he might have perceived that there
+must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a well-wisher
+like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussulmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated.
+Indeed I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting
+disaffection towards an unjust Government I have rendered greater
+services to the Empire than I am already credited with.
+
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve of my
+activity is clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of
+my liberty, should the Government of India deem it to be their duty to
+take it away. A citizen has no right to resist such restriction imposed
+in accordance with the laws of the State to which he belongs. Much less
+have those who sympathize with him. In my case there can be no question
+of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the Government to the extent of
+trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For my supporters,
+therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It means the
+beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to
+stop the progress of non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest,
+the Government must imprison others or grant the people's wish in order
+to gain their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the
+people even under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore
+it is I or any one else who is arrested during the campaign, the first
+condition of success is that there must be no resentment shown against
+it. We cannot imperil the very existence of a Government and quarrel
+with its attempt to save itself by punishing those who place it
+in danger.
+
+
+AT THE CALL OF THE COUNTRY
+
+Dr. Sapru delivered before the Khilafat Conference at Allahabad an
+impassioned address sympathising with the Mussulmans in their trouble
+but dissuaded them from embarking on non-co-operation. He was frankly
+unable to suggest a substitute but was emphatically of opinion that
+whether there was a substitute or not non-co-operation was a remedy
+worse than the disease. He said further that Mussulmans will be taking
+upon their shoulders, a serious responsibility, if whilst they appealed
+to the ignorant masses to join them, they could not appeal to the Indian
+judges to resign and if they did they would not succeed.
+
+I acknowledge the force of Dr. Sapru's last argument. At the back of
+Dr. Sapru's mind is the fear that non-co-operation by the ignorant
+people would lead to distress and chaos and would do no good. In my
+opinion any non-co-operation is bound to do some good. Even the
+Viceragal door-keeper saying, 'Please Sir, I can serve the Government no
+longer because it has hurt my national honour' and resigning is a step
+mightier and more effective than the mightiest speech declaiming against
+the Government for its injustice.
+
+Nevertheless it would be wrong to appeal to the door-keeper until one
+has appealed to the highest in the land. And as I propose, if the
+necessity arose, to ask the door-keepers of the Government to dissociate
+themselves from an unjust Government I propose now to address, an appeal
+to the Judges and the Executive Councillors to join the protest that is
+rising from all over India against the double wrong done to India, on
+the Khilafat and the Punjab question. In both, national honour
+is involved.
+
+I take it that these gentlemen have entered upon their high offices not
+for the sake of emolument, nor I hope for the sake of fame, but for the
+sake of serving their country. It was not for money, for they were
+earning more than they do now. It must not be for fame, for they cannot
+buy fame at the cost of national honour. The only consideration, that
+can at the present moment keep them in office must be service of the
+country.
+
+When the people have faith in the government, when it represents the
+popular will, the judges and the executive officials possibly serve the
+country. But when that government does not represent the will of the
+people, when it supports dishonesty and terrorism, the judges and the
+executive officials by retaining office become instrument of dishonesty
+and terrorism. And the least therefore that these holders of high
+offices can do is to cease to become agents of a dishonest and
+terrorising government.
+
+For the judges, the objection will be raised that they are above
+politics, and so they are and should be. But the doctrine is true only
+in so far as the government is on the whole for the benefit of the
+people and at least represents the will of the majority. Not to take
+part in politics means not to take sides. But when a whole country has
+one mind, one will, when a whole country has been denied justice, it is
+no longer a question of party politics, it is a matter of life and
+death. It then becomes the duty of every citizen to refuse to serve a
+government which misbehaves and flouts national wish. The judges are at
+that moment bound to follow the nation if they are ultimately
+its servants.
+
+There remains another argument to be examined. It applies to both the
+judges and the members of the executive. It will be urged that my appeal
+could only be meant for the Indians and what good can it do by Indians
+renouncing offices which have been won for the nation by hard struggle.
+I wish that I could make an effective appeal to the English as well as
+the Indians. But I confess that I have written with the mental
+reservation that the appeal is addressed only to the Indians. I must
+therefore examine the argument just stated. Whilst it is true that these
+offices have been secured after a prolonged struggle, they are of use
+not because of the struggle, but because they are intended to serve the
+nation. The moment they cease to possess that quality, they become
+useless and as in the present case harmful, no matter how hard-earned
+and therefore valuable they may have been at the outset.
+
+I would submit too to our distinguished countrymen who occupy high
+offices that their giving up will bring the struggle to a speedy end and
+would probably obviate the danger attendant upon the masses being called
+upon to signify their disapproval by withdrawing co-operation. If the
+titleholders gave up their titles, if the holders of honorary offices
+gave up their appointment and if the high officials gave up their posts,
+and the would-be councillors boycotted the councils, the Government
+would quickly come to its senses and give effect to the people's will.
+For the alternative before the Government then would be nothing but
+despotic rule pure and simple. That would probably mean military
+dictatorship. The world's opinion has advanced so far that Britain dare
+not contemplate such dictatorship with equanimity. The taking of the
+steps suggested by me will constitute the peacefullest revolution the
+world has ever seen. Once the infallibility of non-co-operation is
+realised, there is an end to all bloodshed and violence in any shape
+or form.
+
+Undoubtedly a cause must be grave to warrant the drastic method of
+national non-co-operation. I do say that the affront such as has been
+put upon Islam cannot be repeated for a century. Islam must rise now or
+'be fallen' if not for ever, certainly for a century. And I cannot
+imagine a graver wrong than the massacre of Jallianwalla and the
+barbarity that followed it, the whitewash by the Hunter Committee, the
+dispatch of the Government of India, Mr. Montagu's letter upholding the
+Viceroy and the then Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab, the refusal to
+remove officials who made of the lives of the Punjabis 'a hell' during
+the Martial Law period. These act constitute a complete series of
+continuing wrongs against India which if India has any sense of honour,
+she must right at the sacrifice of all the material wealth she
+possesses. If she does not, she will have bartered her soul for a 'mess
+of pottage.'
+
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION EXPLAINED
+
+   A representative of Madras Mail called on Mr. M.K. Gandhi at his
+   temporary residence in the Pursewalkam High road for an interview on
+   the subject of non-co-operation. Mr. Gandhi, who has come to Madras
+   on a tour to some of the principal Muslim centres in Southern India,
+   was busy with a number of workers discussing his programme; but he
+   expressed his readiness to answer questions on the chief topic which
+   is agitating Muslims and Hindus.
+
+"After your experience of the Satyagraha agitation last year, Mr.
+Gandhi, are you still hopeful and convinced of the wisdom of advising
+non-co-operation?"--"Certainly."
+
+"How do you consider conditions have altered since the Satyagraha
+movement of last year?"--"I consider that people are better disciplined
+now than they were before. In this I include even the masses who I have
+had opportunities of seeing in large numbers in various parts of
+the country."
+
+"And you are satisfied that the masses understand the spirit of
+Satyagraha?"--"Yes."
+
+"And that is why you are pressing on with the programme of
+non-co-operation?"--"Yes. Moreover, the danger that attended the civil
+disobedience part of Satyagraha does not apply to non-co-operation,
+because in non-co-operation we are not taking up civil disobedience of
+laws as a mass movement. The result hitherto has been most encouraging.
+For instance, people in Sindh and Delhi in spite of the irritating
+restrictions upon their liberty by the authorities have carried out the
+Committee's instructions in regard to the Seditious Meetings
+Proclamation and to the prohibition of posting placards on the walls
+which we hold to be inoffensive but which the authorities consider to be
+offensive."
+
+"What is the pressure which you expect to bring to bear on the
+authorities if co-operation is withdrawn?"--"I believe, and everybody
+must grant, that no Government can exist for a single moment without the
+co-operation of the people, willing or forced, and if people suddenly
+withdraw their co-operation in every detail, the Government will come to
+a stand-still."
+
+"But is there not a big 'If' in it?"--"Certainly there is."
+
+"And how do you propose to succeed against the big 'If'?"--"In my plan
+of campaign expediency has no room. If the Khilafat movement has really
+permeated the masses and the classes, there must be adequate response
+from the people."
+
+"But are you not begging the question?"--"I am not begging the question,
+because so far as the data before me go, I believe that the Muslims
+keenly feel the Khilafat grievance. It remains to be seen whether their
+feeling is intense enough to evoke in them the measure of sacrifice
+adequate for successful non-co-operation."
+
+"That is, your survey of the conditions, you think, justifies your
+advising non-co-operation in the full conviction that you have behind
+you the support of the vast masses of the Mussalman population?"--"Yes."
+
+"This non-co-operation, you are satisfied, will extend to complete
+severance of co-operation with the Government?"--No; nor is it at the
+present moment my desire that it should. I am simply practising
+non-co-operation to the extent that is necessary to make the Government
+realise the depth of popular feeling in the matter and the
+dissatisfaction with the Government that all that could be done has not
+been done either by the Government of India or by the Imperial
+Government, whether on the Khilafat question or on the "Punjab
+question."
+
+"Do you Mr. Gandhi, realise that even amongst Mahomedans there are
+sections of people who are not enthusiastic over non-co-operation
+however much they may feel the wrong that has been done to their
+community?"--"Yes. But their number is smaller than those who are
+prepared to adopt non-co-operation."
+
+"And yet does not the fact that there has not been an adequate response
+to your appeal for resignation of titles and offices and for boycott of
+elections of the Councils indicate that you may be placing more faith
+in their strength of conviction than is warranted?"--"I think not; for
+the reason that the stage has only just come into operation and our
+people are always most cautious and slow to move. Moreover, the first
+stage largely affects the uppermost strata of society, who represent a
+microscopic minority though they are undoubtedly an influential body
+of people."
+
+"This upper class, you think, has sufficiently responded to your
+appeal?"--"I am unable to say either one way or the other at present. I
+shall be able to give a definite answer at the end of this month."...
+
+"Do you think that without one's loyalty to the King and the Royal
+Family being questioned, one can advocate non-co-operation in connection
+with the Royal visit?" "Most decidedly; for the simple reason that if
+there is any disloyalty about the proposed boycott of the Prince's
+visit, it is disloyalty to the Government of the day and not to the
+person of His Royal highness."
+
+"What do you think is to be gained by promoting this boycott in
+connection with the Royal visit?"--"Because I want to show that the
+people of India are not in sympathy with the Government of the day and
+that they strongly disapprove of the policy of the Government in regard
+to the Punjab and Khilafat, and even in respect of other important
+administrative measures. I consider that the visit of the Prince of
+Wales is a singularly good opportunity to the people to show their
+disapproval of the present Government. After all, the visit is
+calculated to have tremendous political results. It is not to be a
+non-political event, and seeing that the Government of India and the
+Imperial Government want to make the visit a political event of first
+class importance, namely, for the purpose of strengthening their hold
+upon India, I for one, consider that it is the bounden duty of the
+people to boycott the visit which is being engineered by the two
+Governments in their own interest which at the present moment is totally
+antagonistic to the people."
+
+"Do you mean that you want this boycott promoted because you feel that
+the strengthening of the hold upon India is not desirable in the best
+interests of the country?"--"Yes. The strengthening of the hold of a
+Government so wicked as the present one is not desirable for the best
+interests of the people. Not that I want the bond between England and
+India to become loosened for the sake of loosening it but I want that
+bond to become strengthened only in so far as it adds to the welfare
+of India."
+
+"Do you think that non-co-operation and the non-boycott of the
+Legislative Councils consistent?"--"No; because a person who takes up
+the programme of non-co-operation cannot consistently stand for
+Councils."
+
+"Is non-co-operation, in your opinion, an end in itself or a means to an
+end, and if so, what is the end?" "It is a means to an end, the end
+being to make the present Government just, whereas it has become mostly
+unjust. Co-operation with a just Government is a duty; non-co-operation
+with an unjust Government is equally a duty."
+
+"Will you look with favour upon the proposal to enter the Councils and
+to carry on either obstructive tactics or to decline to take the oath of
+allegiance consistent with your non-co-operation?"--"No; as an accurate
+student of non-co-operation, I consider that such a proposal is
+inconsistent with the true spirit of non-co-operation. I have often said
+that a Government really thrives on obstruction and so far as the
+proposal not to take the oath of allegiance is concerned, I can really
+see no meaning in it; it amounts to a useless waste of valuable time
+and money."
+
+"In other words, obstruction is no stage in non-co-operation?"
+--"No,"....
+
+"Are you satisfied that all efforts at constitutional agitation have
+been exhausted and that non-co-operation is the only course left us?" "I
+do not consider non-co-operation to be unconstitutional remedies now
+left open to us, non-co-operation is the only one left for us." "Do you
+consider it constitutional to adopt it with a view merely to paralyse
+Government?"--"Certainly, it is not unconstitutional, but a prudent man
+will not take all the steps that are constitutional if they are
+otherwise undesirable, nor do I advise that course. I am resorting to
+non-co-operation in progressive stages because I want to evolve true
+order out of untrue order. I am not going to take a single step in
+non-co-operation unless I am satisfied that the country is ready for
+that step, namely, non-co-operation will not be followed by anarchy or
+disorder."
+
+"How will you satisfy yourself anarchy will not follow?"
+
+"For instance, if I advise the police to lay down their arms, I shall
+have satisfied myself that we are able by voluntary assistance to
+protect ourselves against thieves and robbers. That was precisely what
+was done in Lahore and Amritsar last year by the citizens by means of
+volunteers when the Military and the police had withdrawn. Even where
+Government had not taken such measures in a place, for want of adequate
+force, I know people have successfully protected themselves."
+
+"You have advised lawyers to non-co-operate by suspending their
+practice. What is your experience? Has the lawyers' response to your
+appeal encouraged you to hope that you will be able to carry through
+all stages of non-co-operation with the help of such people?"
+
+"I cannot say that a large number has yet responded to my appeal. It is
+too early to say how many will respond. But I may say that I do not rely
+merely upon the lawyer class or highly educated men to enable the
+Committee to carry out all the stages of non-co-operation. My hope lies
+more with the masses so far as the later stages of non-co-operation are
+concerned."
+
+_August 1920_.
+
+
+RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY FOR NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+It is not without the greatest reluctance that I engage in a controversy
+with so learned a leader like Sir Narayan Chandavarkar. But in view of
+the fact that I am the author of the movement of non-co-operation, it
+becomes my painful duty to state my views even though they are opposed
+to those of the leaders whom I look upon with respect. I have just read
+during my travels in Malabar Sir Narayan's rejoinder to my answer to the
+Bombay manifesto against non-co-operation. I regret to have to say that
+the rejoinder leaves me unconvinced. He and I seem to read the teachings
+of the Bible, the Gita and the Koran from different standpoints or we
+put different interpretations on them. We seem to understand the words
+Ahimsa, politics and religion differently. I shall try my best to make
+clear my meaning of the common terms and my reading of the different
+religious.
+
+At the outset let me assure Sir Narayan that I have not changed my views
+on Ahimsa. I still believe that man not having been given the power of
+creation does not possess the right of destroying the meanest creature
+that lives. The prerogative of destruction belongs solely to the creator
+of all that lives. I accept the interpretation of Ahimsa, namely, that
+it is not merely a negative State of harmlessness, but it is a positive
+state of love, of doing good even to the evil-doer. But it does not mean
+helping the evil-doer to continue the wrong or tolerating it by passive
+acquiescence. On the contrary love, the active state of Ahimsa, requires
+you to resist the wrong-doer by dissociating yourself from him even
+though it may offend him or injure him physically. Thus if my son lives
+a life of shame, I may not help him to do so by continuing to support
+him; on the contrary, my love for him requires me to withdraw all
+support from him although it may mean even his death. And the same love
+imposes on me the obligation of welcoming him to my bosom when he
+repents. But I may not by physical force compel my son to become good.
+That in my opinion is the moral of the story of the Prodigal Son.
+
+Non-co-operation is not a passive state, it is an intensely active
+state--more active than physical resistance or violence. Passive
+resistance is a misnomer. Non-co-operation in the sense used by me must
+be non-violent and therefore neither punitive nor vindictive nor based
+on malice ill-will or hatred. It follows therefore that it would be sin
+for me to serve General Dyer and co-operate with him to shoot innocent
+men. But it will be an exercise of forgiveness or love for me to nurse
+him back to life, if he was suffering from a physical malady. I cannot
+use in this context the word co-operation as Sir Narayan would perhaps
+use it. I would co-operate a thousand times with this Government to wean
+it from its career of crime but I will not for a single moment
+co-operate with it to continue that career. And I would be guilty of
+wrong doing if I retained a title from it or "a service under it or
+supported its law-courts or schools." Better for me a beggar's bowl
+than the richest possession from hands stained with the blood of the
+innocents of Jallianwala. Better by far a warrant of imprisonment than
+honeyed words from those who have wantonly wounded the religious
+sentiment of my seventy million brothers.
+
+My reading of the Gita is diametrically opposed to Sir Narayan's. I do
+not believe that the Gita teaches violence for doing good. It is
+pre-eminently a description of the duel that goes on in our own hearts.
+The divine author has used a historical incident for inculcating the
+lesson of doing one's duty even at the peril of one's life. It
+inculcates performance of duty irrespective of the consequences, for, we
+mortals, limited by our physical frames, are incapable of controlling
+actions save our own. The Gita distinguishes between the powers of light
+and darkness and demonstrates their incompatibility.
+
+Jesus, in my humble opinion, was a prince among politicians. He did
+render unto Caesar that which was Caesar's. He gave the devil his due.
+He ever shunned him and is reported never once to have yielded to his
+incantations. The politics of his time consisted in securing the welfare
+of the people by teaching them not to be seduced by the trinkets of the
+priests and the pharisees. The latter then controlled and moulded the
+life of the people. To-day the system of government is so devised as to
+affect every department of our life. It threatens our very existence. If
+therefore we want to conserve the welfare of the nation, we must
+religiously interest ourselves in the doing of the governors and exert a
+moral influence on them by insisting on their obeying the laws of
+morality. General Dyer did produce a 'moral effect' by an act of
+butchery. Those who are engaged in forwarding the movement of
+non-co-operation, hope to produce a moral effect by a process of
+self-denial, self-sacrifice and self-purification. It surprises me that
+Sir Narayan should speak of General Dyer's massacre in the same breath
+as acts of non-co-operation. I have done my best to understand his
+meaning, but I am sorry to confess that I have failed.
+
+
+THE INWARDNESS OF NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I commend to the attention of the readers the thoughtful letter received
+from Miss Anne Marie Peterson. Miss Peterson is a lady who has been in
+India for some years and has closely followed Indian affairs. She is
+about the sever her connection with her mission for the purpose of
+giving herself to education that is truly national.
+
+I have not given the letter in full. I have omitted all personal
+references. But her argument has been left entirely untouched. The
+letter was not meant to be printed. It was written just after my Vellore
+speech. But it being intrinsically important, I asked the writer for her
+permission, which she gladly gave, for printing it.
+
+I publish it all the more gladly in that it enables me to show that the
+movement of non-co-operation is neither anti-Christian nor anti-English
+nor anti-European. It is a struggle between religion and irreligion,
+powers of light and powers of darkness.
+
+It is my firm opinion that Europe to-day represents not the spirit of
+God or Christianity but the spirit of Satan. And Satan's successes are
+the greatest when he appears with the name of God on his lips. Europe is
+to-day only nominally Christian. In reality it is worshipping Mammon.
+'It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a
+rich man to enter the kingdom.' Thus really spoke Jesus Christ. His
+so-called followers measure their moral progress by their material
+possessions. The very national anthem of England is anti-Christian.
+Jesus who asked his followers to love their enemies even as themselves,
+could not have sung of his enemies, 'confound his enemies frustrate
+their knavish tricks.' The last book that Dr. Wallace wrote set forth
+his deliberate conviction that the much vaunted advance of science had
+added not an inch to the moral stature of Europe. The last war however
+has shown, as nothing else has, the Satanic nature of the civilization
+that dominates Europe to day. Every canon of public morality has been
+broken by the victors in the name of virtue. No lie has been considered
+too foul to be uttered. The motive behind every crime is not religious
+or spiritual but grossly material. But the Mussalmans and the Hindus who
+are struggling against the Government have religion and honour as their
+motive. Even the cruel assassination which has just shocked the country
+is reported to have a religious motive behind it. It is certainly
+necessary to purge religion of its excrescences, but it is equally
+necessary to expose the hollowness of moral pretensions on the part of
+those who prefer material wealth to moral gain. It is easier to wean an
+ignorant fanatic from his error than a confirmed scoundrel from his
+scoundrelism.
+
+This however is no indictment against individuals or even nations.
+Thousands of individual Europeans are rising above their environment. I
+write of the tendency in Europe as reflected in her present leaders.
+England through her leaders is insolently crushing Indian religious and
+national sentiment under her heels. England under the false plea of
+self-determination is trying to exploit the oil fields of Mesopotamia
+which she is almost to leave because she has probably no choice. France
+through her leaders is lending her name to training Cannibals as
+soldiers and is shamelessly betraying her trust as a mandatory power by
+trying to kill the spirit of the Syrians. President Wilson has thrown on
+the scrap heap his precious fourteen points.
+
+It is this combination of evil forces which India is really fighting
+through non-violent non-cooperation. And those like Miss Peterson
+whether Christian or European, who feel that this error must be
+dethroned can exercise the privilege of doing so by joining the
+non-co-operation movement. With the honour of Islam is bound up the
+safety of religion itself and with the honour of India is bound up the
+honour of every nation known to be weak.
+
+
+A MISSIONARY ON NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+   The following letter has been received by Mr. Gandhi from Miss Anne
+   Marie Peterson of the Danish Mission in Madras:--
+
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+
+I cannot thank you enough for your kindness and the way in which you
+received me and I feel that meeting more or less decided my future. I
+have thrown myself at the feet of India. At the same time I know that in
+Christ alone is my abode and I have no longing and no desire but to live
+Him, my crucified Saviour, and reveal Him for those with whom I come in
+contact. I just cling to his feet and pray with tears that I may not
+disgrace him as we Christians have been doing by our behaviour in India.
+We go on crucifying Christ while we long to proclaim the Power of His
+resurrection by which He has conquered untruth and unrighteousness. If
+we who bear His name were true to Him, we would never bow ourselves
+before the Powers of this world, but we would always be on the side of
+the poor, the suffering and the oppressed. But we are not and therefore
+I feel myself under obligation and only to Christ but to India for His
+sake at this time of momentous importance for her future.
+
+Truly it matters little what I, a lonely and insignificant person, may
+say or do. What is my protest against the common current, the race to
+which I belong is taking and (what grieves me more), which the
+missionary societies seem to follow? Even if a respectable number
+protested it would not be of any use. Yet were I alone against the whole
+world, I must follow my conscience and my God.
+
+I therefore cannot but smile when I see people saying, you should have
+awaited the decision of the National Congress before starting the
+non-co-operation movement. You have a message for the country, and the
+Congress is the voice of the nation--its servant and not its master. A
+majority has no right simply because it is a majority.
+
+But we must try to win the majority. And it is easy to see that now that
+Congress is going to be with you. Would it have done so if you had kept
+quiet and not lent your voice to the feelings of the people? Would the
+Congress have known its mind? I think not.
+
+I myself was in much doubt before I heard you. But you convinced me. Not
+that I can feel much on the question of the Khilafat. I cannot. I can
+see what service you are doing to India, if you can prevent the
+Mahomedans from using the sword in order to take revenge and get their
+rights. I can see that if you unite the Hindus and the Mahomedans, it
+will be a master stroke. How I wish the Christian would also come
+forward and unite with you for the sake of their country and the honour
+not only of their Motherland but of Christ. I may not feel much for
+Turkey, but I feel for India, and I can see she (India) has no other way
+to protest against being trampled down and crushed than
+non-co-operation.
+
+I also want you to know that many in Denmark and all over the world,
+yes, I am sure every true Christian, will feel with and be in sympathy
+with India in the struggle which is now going on. God forbid that in the
+struggle between might and right, truth and untruth, the spirit and the
+flesh, there should be a division of races. There is not. The same
+struggle is going on all over the world. What does it matter then that
+we are a few? God is on our side.
+
+Brute force often seems to get the upper hand but righteousness always
+has and always shall conquer, be it even through much suffering, and
+what may even appear to be a defeat. Christ conquered, when the world
+crucified Him. Blessed are the meek; they shall inherit the earth.
+
+When I read your speech given at Madras it struck me that it should be
+printed as a pamphlet in English, Tamil, Hindustani and all the most
+used languages and then spread to every nook and corner of India.
+
+The non-co-operation movement once started must be worked so as to
+become successful. If it is not, I dread to think of the consequences.
+But you cannot expect it to win in a day or two. It must take time and
+you will not despair if you do not reach your goal in a hurry. For those
+who have faith there is no haste.
+
+Now for the withdrawal of the children and students from Government
+schools, I think, it a most important step. Taking the Government help
+(even if it be your money they pay you back), we must submit to its
+scheme, its rules and regulation. India and we who love her have come to
+the conclusion that the education the foreign Government has given you
+is not healthy for India and can certainly never make for her real
+growth. This movement would lead to a spontaneous rise of national
+schools. Let them be a few but let them spring up through
+self-sacrifice. Only by indigenous education can India be truly
+uplifted. Why this appeals so much to me is perhaps because I belong to
+the part of the Danish people who started their own independent,
+indigenous national schools. The Danish Free Schools and
+Folk-High-Schools, of which you may have heard, were started against
+the opposition and persecution of the State. The organisers won and
+thus have regenerated the nation. With my truly heartfelt thanks and
+prayers for you.
+
+I am,
+Your sincerely,
+Anne Marie.
+
+
+HOW TO WORK NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+Perhaps the best way of answering the fears and criticism as to
+non-co-operation is to elaborate more fully the scheme of
+non-co-operation. The critics seem to imagine that the organisers
+propose to give effect to the whole scheme at once. The fact however is
+that the organisers have fixed definite, progressive four stages. The
+first is the giving up of titles and resignation of honorary posts. If
+there is no response or if the response received is not effective,
+recourse will be had to the second stage. The second stage involves much
+previous arrangement. Certainly not a single servant will be called out
+unless he is either capable of supporting himself and his dependents or
+the Khilafat Committee is able to bear the burden. All the classes of
+servants will not be called out at once and never will any pressure be
+put upon a single servant to withdraw himself from the Government
+service. Nor will a single private employee be touched for the simple
+reason that the movement is not anti-English. It is not even
+anti-Government. Co-operation is to be withdrawn because the people must
+not be party to a wrong--a broken pledge--a violation of deep religious
+sentiment. Naturally, the movement will receive a check, if there is any
+undue influence brought to bear upon any Government servant or if any
+violence is used or countenanced by any member of the Khilafat
+Committee. The second stage must be entirely successful, if the response
+is at all on an adequate scale. For no Government--much less the Indian
+Government--can subsist if the people cease to serve it. The withdrawal
+therefore of the police and the military--the third stage--is a distant
+goal. The organisers however wanted to be fair, open and above
+suspicion. They did not want to keep back from the Government or the
+public a single step they had in contemplation even as a remote
+contingency. The fourth, _i.e.,_ suspension of taxes is still more
+remote. The organisers recognise that suspension of general taxation is
+fraught with the greatest danger. It is likely to bring a sensitive
+class in conflict with the police. They are therefore not likely to
+embark upon it, unless they can do so with the assurance that there will
+be no violence offered by the people.
+
+I admit as I have already done that non-co-operation is not unattended
+with risk, but the risk of supineness in the face of a grave issue is
+infinitely greater than the danger of violence ensuing form organizing
+non-co-operation. To do nothing is to invite violence for a certainty.
+
+It is easy enough to pass resolutions or write articles condemning
+non-co-operation. But it is no easy task to restrain the fury of a
+people incensed by a deep sense of wrong. I urge those who talk or work
+against non-co-operation to descend from their chairs and go down to the
+people, learn their feelings and write, if they have the heart against
+non-co-operation. They will find, as I have found that the only way to
+avoid violence is to enable them to give such expression to their
+feelings as to compel redress. I have found nothing save
+non-co-operation. It is logical and harmless. It is the inherent right
+of a subject to refuse to assist a Government that will not listen
+to him.
+
+Non-co-operation as a voluntary movement can only succeed, if the
+feeling is genuine and strong enough to make people suffer to the
+utmost. If the religious sentiment of the Mahomedans is deeply hurt and
+if the Hindus entertain neighbourly regard towards their Muslim
+brethren, they will both count no cost too great for achieving the end.
+Non-co-operation will not only be an effective remedy but will also be
+an effective test of the sincerity of the Muslim claim and the Hindu
+profession of friendship.
+
+There is however one formidable argument urged by friends against my
+joining the Khilafat movement. They say that it ill-becomes me, a friend
+of the English and an admirer of the British constitution, to join hands
+with those who are to-day filled with nothing but ill-will against the
+English. I am sorry to have to confess that the ordinary Mahomedan
+entertains to-day no affection for Englishmen. He considers, not without
+some cause, that they have not played the game. But if I am friendly
+towards Englishmen, I am no less so towards my countrymen, the
+Mahomedans. And as such they have a greater claim upon my attention than
+Englishmen. My personal religion however enables me to serve my
+countrymen without hurting Englishmen or for that matter anybody else.
+What I am not prepared to do to my blood-brother I would not do to an
+Englishman, I would not injure him to gain a kingdom. But I would
+withdraw co-operation from him if it becomes necessary as I had
+withdrawn from my own brother (now deceased) when it became necessary. I
+serve the Empire by refusing to partake in its wrong. William Stead
+offered public prayers for British reverses at the time of the Boer war
+because he considered that the nation to which he belonged was engaged
+in an unrighteous war. The present Prime Minister risked his life in
+opposing that war and did everything he could to obstruct his own
+Government in its prosecution. And to-day if I have thrown in my lot
+with the Mahomedans, a large number of whom, bear no friendly feelings
+towards the British, I have done so frankly as a friend of the British
+and with the object of gaining justice and of thereby showing the
+capacity of the British constitution to respond to every honest
+determination when it is coupled with suffering, I hope by my 'alliance'
+with the Mahomedans to achieve a threefold end--to obtain justice in the
+face of odds with the method of Satyagrah and to show its efficacy over
+all other methods, to secure Mahomedan friendship for the Hindus and
+thereby internal peace also, and last but not least to transform
+ill-will into affection for the British and their constitution which in
+spite of the imperfections weathered many a storm. I may fail in
+achieving any of the ends. I can but attempt. God alone can grant
+success. It will not be denied that the ends are all worthy. I invite
+Hindus and Englishman to join me in a full-hearted manner in shouldering
+the burden the Mahomedans of India are carrying. Theirs is admittedly a
+just fight. The Viceroy, the Secretary of State, the Maharaja of
+Bikuner and Lord Sinha have testified to it. Time has arrived to make
+good the testimony. People with a just cause are never satisfied with a
+mere protest. They have been known to die for it. Are a high-spirited
+people like the Mahomedans expected to do less?
+
+
+SPEECH AT MADRAS
+
+   Addressing a huge concourse of people of the city of Madras Hindus
+   and Mahomedans numbering over 50,000, assembled on the South Beach
+   opposite to the Presidency College, Madras, on the 12th August 1920,
+   Mahatma Gandhi spoke as follows:--
+
+Mr. Chairman and Friends,--Like last year, I have to ask your
+forgiveness that I should have to speak being seated. Whilst my voice
+has become stronger than it was last year, my body is still weak; and if
+I were to attempt to speak to you standing, I could not hold on for very
+many minutes before the whole frame would shake. I hope, therefore, that
+you will grant me permission to speak seated. I have sat here to address
+you on a most important question, probably a question whose importance
+we have not measured up to now.
+
+LOKAMANYA TILAK
+
+But before I approach that question on this dear old beach of Madras,
+you will expect me--you will want me--to offer my tribute to the great
+departed, Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj (loud and prolonged cheers). I would
+ask this great assembly to listen to me in silence. I have come to make
+an appeal to your hearts and to your reason and I could not do so unless
+you were prepared to listen to whatever I have to say in absolute
+silence. I wish to offer my tribute to the departed patriot and I think
+that I cannot do better than say that his death, as his life, has poured
+new vigour into the country. If you were present as I was present at
+that great funeral procession, you would realise with me the meaning of
+my words. Mr. Tilak lived for his country. The inspiration of his life
+was freedom for his country which he called Swaraj the inspiration of
+his death-bed was also freedom for his country. And it was that which
+gave him such marvellous hold upon his countrymen; it was that which
+commanded the adoration not of a few chosen Indians belonging to the
+upper strata of society but of millions of his countrymen. His life was
+one long sustained piece of self-sacrifice. He began that life of
+discipline and self-sacrifice in 1879 and he continued that life up to
+the end of his day, and that was the secret of his hold upon his
+country. He not only knew what he wanted for his country but also how to
+live for his country and how to die for his country. I hope then that
+whatever I say this evening to this vast mass of people, will bear fruit
+in that same sacrifice for which the life of Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj
+stands. His life, if it teaches us anything whatsoever, teaches one
+supreme lesson: that if we want to do anything whatsoever for our
+country we can do so not by speeches, however grand, eloquent and
+convincing they may be, but only by sacrifice at the back of every act
+of our life. I have come to ask everyone of you whether you are ready
+and willing to give sufficiently for your country's sake for country's
+honour and for religion. I have boundless faith in you, the citizens of
+Madras, and the people of this great presidency, a faith which I began
+to cultivate in the year 1903 when I first made acquaintance with the
+Tamil labourers in South Africa; and I hope that in these hours of our
+trial, this province will not be second to any other in India, and that
+it will lead in this spirit of self-sacrifice and will translate every
+word into action.
+
+NEED FOR NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+What is this non-co-operation, about which you have heard so much, and
+why do we want to offer this non-co-operation? I wish to go for the time
+being into the why. Here are two things before this country: the first
+and the foremost is the Khilafat question. On this the heart of the
+Mussalmans of India has become lascerated. British pledges given after
+the greatest deliberation by the Prime Minister of England in the name
+of the English nation, have been dragged into the mire. The promises
+given to Moslem India on the strength of which, the consideration that
+was expected by the British nation was exacted, have been broken, and
+the great religion of Islam has been placed in danger. The Mussalmans
+hold--and I venture to think they rightly hold--that so long as British
+promises remain unfulfilled, so long is it impossible for them to tender
+whole-hearted fealty and loyalty to the British connection; and if it is
+to be a choice for a devout Mussalman between loyalty to the British
+connection and loyalty to his Code and Prophet, he will not require a
+second to make his choice,--and he has declared his choice. The
+Mussalmans say frankly openly and honourably to the whole world that if
+the British Ministers and the British nation do not fulfil the pledges
+given to them and do not wish to regard with respect the sentiments of
+70 millions of the inhabitants of India who profess the faith of Islam,
+it will be impossible for them to retain Islamic loyalty. It is a
+question, then for the rest of the Indian population to consider whether
+they want to perform a neighbourly duty by their Mussalman countrymen,
+and if they do, they have an opportunity of a lifetime which will not
+occur for another hundred years, to show their good-will, fellowship and
+friendship and to prove what they have been saying for all these long
+years that the Mussalman is the brother of the Hindu. If the Hindu
+regards that before the connection with the British nation comes his
+natural connection with his Moslem brother, then I say to you that if
+you find that the Moslem claim is just, that it is based upon real
+sentiment, and that at its back ground is this great religious feeling,
+you cannot do otherwise than help the Mussalman through and through, so
+long as their cause remains just, and the means for attaining the end
+remains equally just, honourable and free from harm to India. These are
+the plain conditions which the Indian Mussalmans have accepted; and it
+was when they saw that they could accept the proferred aid of the
+Hindus, that they could always justify the cause and the means before
+the whole world, that they decided to accept the proferred hand of
+fellowship. It is then for the Hindus and Mahomedans to offer a united
+front to the whole of the Christian powers of Europe and tell them that
+weak as India is, India has still got the capacity of preserving her
+self-respect, she still knows how to die for her religion and for her
+self-respect.
+
+That is the Khilafat in a nut-shell; but you have also got the Punjab.
+The Punjab has wounded the heart of India as no other question has for
+the past century. I do not exclude from my calculation the Mutiny of
+1857. Whatever hardships India had to suffer during the Mutiny, the
+insult that was attempted to be offered to her during the passage of the
+Rowlatt legislation and that which was offered after its passage were
+unparalleled in Indian history. It is because you want justice from the
+British nation in connection with the Punjab atrocities: you have to
+devise, ways and means as to how you can get this justice. The House of
+Commons, the House of Lords, Mr. Montagu, the Viceroy of India, everyone
+of them know what the feeling of India is on this Khilafat question and
+on that of the Punjab; the debates in both the Houses of Parliament, the
+action of Mr. Montagu and that of the Viceroy have demonstrated to you
+completely that they are not willing to give the justice which is
+India's due and which she demands. I suggest that our leaders have got
+to find a way out of this great difficulty and unless we have made
+ourselves even with the British rulers in India and unless we have
+gained a measure of self-respect at the hands of the British rulers in
+India, no connection, and no friendly intercourse is possible between
+them and ourselves. I, therefore, venture to suggest this beautiful and
+unanswerable method of non-co-operation.
+
+IS IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
+
+I have been told that non-co-operation is unconstitutional. I venture to
+deny that it is unconstitutional. On the contrary, I hold that
+non-co-operation is a just and religious doctrine; it is the inherent
+right of every human being and it is perfectly constitutional. A great
+lover of the British Empire has said that under the British constitution
+even a successful rebellion is perfectly constitutional and he quotes
+historical instances, which I cannot deny, in support of his claim. I
+do not claim any constitutionality for a rebellion successful or
+otherwise, so long as that rebellion means in the ordinary sense of the
+term, what it does mean namely wresting justice by violent means. On the
+contrary, I have said it repeatedly to my countrymen that violence
+whatever end it may serve in Europe, will never serve us in India. My
+brother and friend Shaukat Ali believes in methods of violence; and if
+it was in his power to draw the sword against the British Empire, I know
+that he has got the courage of a man and he has got also the wisdom to
+see that he should offer that battle to the British Empire. But because
+he recognises as a true soldier that means of violence are not open to
+India, he sides with me accepting my humble assistance and pledges his
+word that so long as I am with him and so long as he believes in the
+doctrine, so long will he not harbour even the idea of violence against
+any single Englishman or any single man on earth. I am here to tell you
+that he has been as true as his word and has kept it religiously. I am
+here to bear witness that he has been following out this plan of
+non-violent Non-co-operation to the very letter and I am asking India to
+follow this non-violent non-co-operation. I tell you that there is not a
+better soldier living in our ranks in British India than Shaukat Ali.
+When the time for the drawing of the sword comes, if it ever comes, you
+will find him drawing that sword and you will find me retiring to the
+jungles of Hindustan. As soon as India accepts the doctrine of the
+sword, my life as an Indian is finished. It is because I believe in a
+mission special to India and it is because I believe that the ancients
+of India after centuries of experience have found out that the true
+thing for any human being on earth is not justice based on violence but
+justice based on sacrifice of self, justice based on Yagna and
+Kurbani,--I cling to that doctrine and I shall cling to it for ever,--it
+is for that reason I tell you that whilst my friend believes also in the
+doctrine of violence and has adopted the doctrine of non-violence as a
+weapon of the weak, I believe in the doctrine of non-violence as a
+weapon of the strongest. I believe that a man is the strongest soldier
+for daring to die unarmed with his breast bare before the enemy. So much
+for the non-violent part of non-co-operation. I therefore, venture to
+suggest to my learned countrymen that so long as the doctrine of
+non-co-operation remains non-violent, so long there is nothing
+unconstitutional in that doctrine.
+
+I ask further, is it unconstitutional for me to say to the British
+Government 'I refuse to serve you?' Is it unconstitutional for our
+worthy Chairman to return with every respect all the titles that he has
+ever held from the Government? Is it unconstitutional for any parent to
+withdraw his children from a Government or aided school? Is it
+unconstitutional for a lawyer to say 'I shall no longer support the arm
+of the law so long as that arm of law is used not to raise me but to
+debase me'? Is it unconstitutional for a civil servant or for a judge to
+say, 'I refuse to serve a Government which does not wish to respect the
+wishes of the whole people?' I ask, is it unconstitutional for a
+policeman or for a soldier to tender his resignation when he knows that
+he is called to serve a Government which traduces his own countrymen? Is
+it unconstitutional for me to go to the 'krishan,' to the agriculturist,
+and say to him 'it is not wise for you to pay any taxes if these taxes
+are used by the Government not to raise you but to weaken you?' I hold
+and I venture to submit, that there is nothing unconstitutional in it.
+What is more, I have done every one of these things in my life and
+nobody has questioned the constitutional character of it. I was in Kaira
+working in the midst of 7 lakhs of agriculturists. They had all
+suspended the payment of taxes and the whole of India was at one with
+me. Nobody considered that it was unconstitutional. I submit that in the
+whole plan of non-co-operation, there is nothing unconstitutional. But
+I do venture to suggest that it will be highly unconstitutional in the
+midst of this unconstitutional Government,--in the midst of a nation
+which has built up its magnificent constitution,--for the people of
+India to become weak and to crawl on their belly--it will be highly
+unconstitutional for the people of India to pocket every insult that is
+offered to them; it is highly unconstitutional for the 70 millions of
+Mohamedans of India to submit to a violent wrong done to their religion;
+it is highly unconstitutional for the whole of India to sit still and
+co-operate with an unjust Government which has trodden under its feet
+the honour of the Punjab. I say to my countrymen so long as you have a
+sense of honour and so long as you wish to remain the descendants and
+defenders of the noble traditions that have been handed to you for
+generations after generations, it is unconstitutional for you not to
+non-co-operate and unconstitutional for you to co-operate with a
+Government which has become so unjust as our Government has become. I am
+not anti-English; I am not anti-British; I am not anti any Government;
+but I am anti-untruth--anti-humbug and anti-injustice. So long as the
+Government spells injustice, it may regard me as its enemy, implacable
+enemy. I had hoped at the Congress at Amritsar--I am speaking God's
+truth before you--when I pleaded on bended knees before some of you for
+co-operation with the Government. I had full hope that the British
+ministers who are wise, as a rule, would placate the Mussalman sentiment
+that they would do full justice in the matter of the Punjab atrocities;
+and therefore, I said:--let us return good-will to the hand of
+fellowship that has been extended to us, which I then believed was
+extended to us through the Royal Proclamation. It was on that account
+that I pleaded for co-operation. But to-day that faith having gone and
+obliterated by the acts of the British ministers, I am here to plead not
+for futile obstruction in the Legislative council but for real
+substantial non-co-operation which would paralyse the mightiest
+Government on earth. That is what I stand for to-day. Until we have
+wrung justice, and until we have wrung our self-respect from unwilling
+hands and from unwilling pens there can be no co-operation. Our Shastras
+say and I say so with the greatest deference to all the greatest
+religious preceptors of India but without fear of contradiction, that
+our Shastras teach us that there shall be no co-operation between
+injustice and justice, between an unjust man and a justice-loving man,
+between truth and untruth. Co-operation is a duty only so long as
+Government protects your honour, and non-co-operation is an equal duty
+when the Government instead of protecting robs you of your honour. That
+is the doctrine of non-co-operation.
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION AND THE SPECIAL CONGRESS
+
+I have been told that I should have waited for the declaration of the
+special Congress which is the mouth piece of the whole nation. I know
+that it is the mouthpiece of the whole nation. If it was for me,
+individual Gandhi, to wait, I would have waited for eternity. But I had
+in my hands a sacred trust. I was advising my Mussalman countrymen and
+for the time being I hold their honour in my hands. I dare not ask them
+to wait for any verdict but the verdict of their own Conscience. Do you
+suppose that Mussalmans can eat their own words, can withdraw from the
+honourable position they have taken up? If perchance--and God forbid
+that it should happen--the Special Congress decides against them, I
+would still advise my countrymen the Mussalmans to stand single handed
+and fight rather than yield to the attempted dishonour to their
+religion. It is therefore given to the Mussalmans to go to the Congress
+on bended knees and plead for support. But support or no support, it was
+not possible for them to wait for the Congress to give them the lead.
+They had to choose between futile violence, drawing of the naked sword
+and peaceful non-violent but effective non-co-operation, and they have
+made their choice. I venture further to say to you that if there is any
+body of men who feel as I do, the sacred character of non-co-operation,
+it is for you and me not to wait for the Congress but to act and to make
+it impossible for the Congress to give any other verdict. After all what
+is the Congress? The Congress is the collected voice of individuals who
+form it, and if the individuals go to the Congress with a united voice,
+that will be the verdict you will gain from the Congress. But if we go
+to the Congress with no opinion because we have none or because we are
+afraid to express it, then naturally we wait the verdict of the
+Congress. To those who are unable to make up their mind I say by all
+means wait. But for those who have seen the clear light as they see the
+lights in front of them, for them to wait is a sin. The Congress does
+not expect you to wait but it expects you to act so that the Congress
+can gauge properly the national feeling. So much for the Congress.
+
+BOYCOTT OF THE COUNCILS
+
+Among the details of non-co-operation I have placed in the foremost rank
+the boycott of the councils. Friends have quarrelled with me for the use
+of the word boycott, because I have disapproved--as I disapprove even
+now--boycott of British goods or any goods for that matter. But there,
+boycott has its own meaning and here boycott has its own meaning. I not
+only do not disapprove but approve of the boycott of the councils that
+are going to be formed next year. And why do I do it? The people--the
+masses,--require from us, the leaders, a clear lead. They do not want
+any equivocation from us. The suggestion that we should seek election
+and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance, would only make the
+nation distrust the leaders. It is not a clear lead to the nation. So I
+say to you, my countrymen, not to fall into this trap. We shall sell our
+country by adopting the method of seeking election and then not taking
+the oath of allegiance. We may find it difficult, and I frankly confess
+to you that I have not that trust in so many Indians making that
+declaration and standing by it. To-day I suggest to those who honestly
+hold the view--_viz_. that we should seek election and then refuse to
+take the oath of allegiance--I suggest to them that they will fall into
+a trap which they are preparing for themselves and for the nation. That
+is my view. I hold that if we want to give the nation the clearest
+possible lead, and if we want not to play with this great nation we must
+make it clear to this nation that we cannot take any favours, no matter
+how great they may be so long as those favours are accompanied by an
+injustice a double wrong, done to India not yet redressed. The first
+indispensable thing before we can receive any favours from them is that
+they should redress this double wrong. There is a Greek proverb which
+used to say "Beware of the Greek but especially beware of them when they
+bring gifts to you." To-day from those ministers who are bent upon
+perpetuating the wrong to Islam and to the Punjab, I say we cannot
+accept gifts but we should be doubly careful lest we may not fall into
+the trap that they may have devised. I therefore suggest that we must
+not coquet with the council and must not have anything whatsoever to do
+with them. I am told that if we, who represent the national sentiment do
+not seek election, the Moderates who do not represent that sentiment
+will. I do not agree. I do not know what the Moderates represent and I
+do not know what the Nationalists represent. I know that there are good
+sheep and black sheep amongst the Moderates. I know that there are good
+sheep and black sheep amongst the Nationalists. I know that many
+Moderates hold honestly the view that it is a sin to resort to
+non-co-operation. I respectfully agree to differ from them. I do say to
+them also that they will fall into a trap which they will have devised
+if they seek election. But that does not affect my situation. If I feel
+in my heart of hearts that I ought not to go to the councils I ought at
+least to abide by this decision and it does not matter if ninety-nine
+other countrymen seek election. That is the only way in which public
+work can be done, and public opinion can be built. That is the only way
+in which reforms can be achieved and religion can be conserved. If it is
+a question of religious honour, whether I am one or among many I must
+stand upon my doctrine. Even if I should die in the attempt, it is worth
+dying for, than that I should live and deny my own doctrine. I suggest
+that it will be wrong on the part of any one to seek election to these
+Councils. If once we feel that we cannot co-operate with this
+Government, we have to commence from the top. We are the natural leaders
+of the people and we have acquired the right and the power to go to the
+nation and speak to it with the voice of non-co-operation. I therefore
+do suggest that it is inconsistent with non-co-operation to seek
+election to the Councils on any terms whatsoever.
+
+LAWYERS AND NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have suggested another difficult matter, _viz._, that the lawyers
+should suspend their practice. How should I do otherwise knowing so well
+how the Government had always been able to retain this power through the
+instrumentality of lawyers. It is perfectly true that it is the lawyers
+of to-day who are leading us, who are fighting the country's battles,
+but when it comes to a matter of action against the Government, when it
+comes to a matter of paralysing the activity of the Government I know
+that the Government always look to the lawyers, however fine fighters
+they may have been to preserve their dignity and their self-respect. I
+therefore suggest to my lawyer friends that it is their duty to suspend
+their practice and to show to the Government that they will no longer
+retain their offices, because lawyers are considered to be honorary
+officers of the courts and therefore subject to their disciplinary
+jurisdiction. They must no longer retain these honorary offices if they
+want to withdraw on operation from Government. But what will happen to
+law and order? We shall evolve law and order through the instrumentality
+of these very lawyers. We shall promote arbitration courts and dispense
+justice, pure, simple home-made justice, swadeshi justice to our
+countrymen. That is what suspension of practice means.
+
+PARENTS AND NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have suggested yet another difficulty--to withdraw our children from
+the Government schools and to ask collegiate students to withdraw from
+the College and to empty Government aided schools. How could I do
+otherwise? I want to gauge the national sentiment. I want to know
+whether the Mahomodans feel deeply. If they feel deeply they will
+understand in the twinkling of an eye, that it is not right for them to
+receive schooling from a Government in which they have lost all faith;
+and which they do not trust at all. How can I, if I do not want to help
+this Government, receive any help from that Government. I think that the
+schools and colleges are factories for making clerks and Government
+servants. I would not help this great factory for manufacturing clerks
+and servants if I want to withdraw co-operation from that Government.
+Look at it from any point of view you like. It is not possible for you
+to send your children to the schools and still believe in the doctrine
+of non-co-operation.
+
+THE DUTY OF TITLE HOLDERS
+
+I have gone further. I have suggested that our title holders should give
+up their titles. How can they hold on to the titles and honour bestowed
+by the Government? They were at one time badges of honours when we
+believed that national honour was safe in their hands. But now they are
+no longer badges of honour but badges of dishonour and disgrace when we
+really believe that we cannot get justice from this Government. Every
+title holder holds his titles and honours as trustee for the nation and
+in this first step in the withdrawal of co-operation from the Government
+they should surrender their titles without a moment's consideration. I
+suggest to my Mahomedan countrymen that if they fail in this primary
+duty they will certainly fail in non-co-operation unless the masses
+themselves reject the classes and take up non-co-operation in their own
+hands and are able to fight that battle even as the men of the French
+Revolution were able to take the reins of Government in their own hands
+leaving aside the leaders and marched to the banner of victory. I want
+no revolution. I want ordered progress. I want no disordered order. I
+want no chaos. I want real order to be evolved out of this chaos which
+is misrepresented to me as order. If it is order established by a tyrant
+in order to get hold of the tyrannical reins of Government I say that it
+is no order for me but it is disorder. I want to evolve justice out of
+this injustice. Therefore, I suggest to you the passive
+non-co-operation. If we would only realise the secret of this peaceful
+and infallible doctrine you will know and you will find that you will
+not want to use even an angry word when they lift the sword at you and
+you will not want even to lift your little finger, let alone a stick
+or a sword.
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION--SERVICE TO THE EMPIRE
+
+You may consider that I have spoken these words in anger because I have
+considered the ways of this Government immoral, unjust, debasing and
+untruthful. I use these adjectives with the greatest deliberation. I
+have used them for my own true brother with whom I was engaged in battle
+of non-co-operation for full 13 years and although the ashes cover the
+remains of my brother I tell you that I used to tell him that he was
+unjust when his plans were based upon immoral foundation. I used to tell
+him that he did not stand for truth. There was no anger in me, I told
+him this home truth because I loved him. In the same manner, I tell the
+British people that I love them, and that I want their association but I
+want that association on conditions well defined. I want my self-respect
+and I want my absolute equality with them. If I cannot gain that
+equality from the British people, I do not want that British connection.
+If I have to let the British people go and import temporary disorder and
+dislocation of national business, I will favour that disorder and
+dislocation than that I should have injustice from the hands of a great
+nation such as the British nation. You will find that by the time the
+whole chapter is closed that the successors of Mr. Montagu will give me
+the credit for having rendered the most distinguished service that I
+have yet rendered to the Empire, in having offered this non-co-operation
+and in having suggest the boycott, not of His Royal Highness the
+principle of Wales, but of boycott of a visit engineered by Government
+in order to tighten its hold on the national neck. I will not allow it
+even if I stand alone, if I cannot persuade this nation not to welcome
+that visit but will boycott that visit with all the power at my command.
+It is for that reason I stand before you and implore you to offer this
+religious battle, but it is not a battle offered to you by a visionary
+or a saint. I deny being a visionary. I do not accept the claim of
+saintliness. I am of the earth, earthy, a common gardener man as much as
+any one of you, probably much more than you are. I am prone to as many
+weaknesses as you are. But I have seen the world. I have lived in the
+world with my eyes open. I have gone through the most fiery ordeals that
+have fallen to the lot of man. I have gone through this discipline. I
+have understood the secret of my own sacred Hinduism. I have learnt the
+lesson that non-co-operation is the duty not merely of the saint but it
+is the duty of every ordinary citizen, who not know much, not caring to
+know much but wants to perform his ordinary household functions. The
+people of Europe touch even their masses, the poor people the doctrine
+of the sword. But the Rishis of India, those who have held the tradition
+of India have preached to the masses of India this doctrine, not of the
+sword, not of violence but of suffering, of self-suffering. And unless
+you and I am prepared to go through this primary lesson we are not
+ready even to offer the sword and that is the lesson my brother Shaukal
+Ali has imbibed to teach and that is why he to-day accepts my advice
+tendered to him in all prayerfulness and in all humility and says 'long
+live non-co-operation.' Please remember that even in England the little
+children were withdrawn from the schools; and colleges in Cambridge and
+Oxford were closed. Lawyers had left their desks and were fighting in
+the trenches. I do not present to you the trenches but I do ask you to
+go through the sacrifice that the men, women and the brave lads of
+England went through. Remember that you are offering battle to a nation
+which is saturated with their spirit of sacrifice whenever the occasion
+arises. Remember that the little band of Boers offered stubborn
+resistance to a mighty nation. But their lawyers had left their desks.
+Their mothers had withdrawn their children from the schools and colleges
+and the children had become the volunteers of the nation, I have seen
+them with these naked eyes of mine. I am asking my countrymen in India
+to follow no other gospel than the gospel of self-sacrifice which
+precedes every battle. Whether you belong to the school of violence or
+non-violence you will still have to go through the fire of sacrifice,
+and of discipline. May God grant you, may God grant our leaders the
+wisdom, the courage and the true knowledge to lead the nation to its
+cherished goal. May God grant the people of India the right path, the
+true vision and the ability and the courage to follow this path,
+difficult and yet easy, of sacrifice.
+
+
+SPEECH AT TRICHINOPOLY
+
+   Mahatma Gandhi made the following speech at Trichinopoly on the 18th
+   August 1920:--
+
+I think you on behalf of my brother Shaukat Ali and myself for the
+magnificent reception that the citizens of Trichinopoly have given to
+us. I thank you also for the many addresses that you have been good
+enough to present to us, but I must come to business.
+
+It is a great pleasure to me to renew your acquaintance for reasons that
+I need not give you. I expect great things from Trichinopoly, Madura and
+a few places I could name. I take it that you have read my address on
+the Madras Beach on non-co-operation. Without taking up your time in
+this great assembly, I wish to deal with one or two matters that arise
+out of Mr. S. Kasturiranga Iyongar's speech. He says in effect that I
+should have waited for the Congress mandate on Non-co-operation. That
+was impossible, because the Mussulmans had and still have a duty,
+irrespective of the Hindus, to perform in reference to their own
+religion. It was impossible for them to wait for any mandate save the
+mandate of their own religion in a matter that vitally concerned the
+honour of Islam. It is therefore possible for them only to go to the
+Congress on bended knees with a clear cut programme of their own and ask
+the Congress to pronounce its blessings upon that programme and if they
+are not so fortunate as to secure the blessings of the National Assembly
+without meaning any disrespect to that assembly, it is their bounden
+duty to go on with their programme, and so it is the duty of every Hindu
+who considers his Mussalman brother as a brother who has a just cause
+which he wishes to vindicate, to throw in his lot with his Mussalman
+brother. Our leader does not quarrel with the principle of
+non-co-operation by itself, but he objects to the three principal
+details of non-co-operation.
+
+COUNCIL ELECTIONS
+
+He considers that it is our duty to seek election to the Councils and
+fight our battle on the floor of the Council hall. I do not deny the
+possibility of a fight and a royal fight on the Council floor. We have
+done it for the last 35 years, but I venture to suggest to you and to
+him, with all due respect, that it is not non-co-operation and it is not
+half as successful as non-co-operation can be. You cannot go to a class
+of people with a view to convince them by any fight--call it even
+obstruction--who have got a settled conviction and a settled policy to
+follow. It is in medical language an incompatible mixture out of which
+you can gain nothing, but if you totally boycott the Council, you create
+a public opinion in the country with reference to the Khilafat wrong and
+the Punjab wrong which will become totally irresistible. The first
+advantage of going to the Councils must be good-will on the part of the
+rulers. It is absolutely lacking. In the place of good-will you have got
+nothing but injustice but I must move on.
+
+LAWYERS' PRACTICE
+
+I come now to the second objection of Mr. Kasturiranga Iyengar with
+reference to the suspension by lawyers of their practice. Milk is good
+in itself but it comes absolutely poisonous immediately a little bit of
+arsenic is added to it. Law courts are similarly good when justice is
+distilled through them on behalf of a Sovereign power which wants to do
+justice to its people. Law courts are one of the greatest symbols of
+power and in the battle of non-co-operation, you may not leave law
+courts untouched and claim to offer non-co-operation, but if you will
+read that objection carefully, you will find in that objection the great
+fear that the lawyers will not respond to the call that the country
+makes upon them, and it is just there that the beauty of
+non-co-operation comes in. If one lawyer alone suspends practice, it is
+so much to the good of the country and so if we are sure to deprive the
+Government of the power that it possess through its law courts, whether
+one lawyer takes it up or many, we must adopt that step.
+
+GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS
+
+He objects also to the plan of boycotting Government schools. I can only
+say what I have said with reference to lawyers that if we mean
+non-co-operation, we may not receive any favours from the Government, no
+matter how advantageous by themselves they may be. In a great struggle
+like this, it is not open to us to count how many schools will respond
+and how many parents will respond and just as a geometrical problem is
+difficult, because it does not admit of easy proof, so also because a
+certain stage in national evolution is difficult, you may not avoid that
+step without making the whole of the evolution a farce.
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+We have had a great lesson in non-co-operation and co-operation. We had
+a lesson in non-co-operation when some young men began to fight there
+and it is a dangerous weapon. I have not the slightest doubt about it.
+One man with a determined will to non-co-operate can disturb a whole
+meeting and we had a physical demonstration of it to night but ours is
+non-violent, non-co-operation in which there can be no mistake
+whatsoever in the fundamental conditions are observed. If
+non-co-operation fails, it will not be for want of any inherent strength
+in it, but it will fall because there is no response to it, or because
+people have not sufficiently grasped its simple principles. You had also
+a practical demonstration of co-operation just now; that heavy chair
+went over the heads of so many people, because all wanted to lift their
+little hand to move that chair away from them and so was that heavier
+dome also removed from our sight by co-operation of man, woman and
+child. Everybody believes and knows that this Government of our exists
+only by the co-operation of the people and not by the force of arms it
+can wield and everyman with a sense of logic will tell you that the
+converse of that also is equally true that Government cannot stand if
+this co-operation on which it exists is withdrawn. Difficulties
+undoubtedly there are, we have hitherto learned how to sacrifice our
+voice and make speeches. We must also learn to sacrifice ease, money,
+comfort and that, we may learn form the Englishmen themselves. Every one
+who has studied English history knows that we are now engaged in a
+battle with a nation which is capable of great sacrifice and the three
+hundred millions of India cannot make their mark upon the world, or gain
+their self-respect without an adequate measure of sacrifice.
+
+BOYCOTT OF BRITISH GOODS
+
+Our friend has suggested the boycott of British or foreign goods.
+Boycott of all foreign goods is another name for Swadeshi. He thinks
+that there will be a greater response in the boycott of all foreign
+goods. With the experience of years behind me and with an intimate
+knowledge of the mercantile classes, I venture to tell you that boycott
+of foreign goods, or boycott of merely British goods is more
+impracticable than any of the stops I have suggested. Whereas in all the
+steps that I have ventured to suggest there is practically no sacrifice
+of money involved, in the boycott of British or foreign goods you are
+inviting your merchant princes to sacrifice their millions. It has got
+to be done, but it is an exceedingly low process. The same may be said
+of the steps that I have ventured to suggest, I know, but boycott of
+goods in conceived as a punishment and the punishment is only effective
+when it is inflicted. What I have ventured to suggest is not a
+punishment, but the performance of a sacred duty, a measure of
+self-denial from ourselves, and therefore it is effective from its very
+inception when it is undertaken even by one man and a substantial duty
+performed even by one single man lays the foundation of nations liberty.
+
+CONCLUSION
+
+I am most anxious for my nation, for my Mussalman brethren also, to
+understand that if they want to vindicate national honour or the honour
+of Islam, it will be vindicated without a shadow of doubt, not be
+conceiving a punishment or a series of punishments, but by an adequate
+measure of self-sacrifice. I wish to speak of all our leaders in terms
+of the greatest respect, but whatever respect we wish to pay them may
+not stop or arrest the progress of the country, and I am most anxious
+that the country at this very critical period of its history should make
+its choice. The choice clearly does not lie before you and me in
+wresting by force of arms the sceptre form the British nation, but the
+choice lies in suffering this double wrong of the Khilafat and the
+Punjab, in pocketing humiliation and in accepting national emasculation
+or vindication of India's honour by sacrifice to-day by every man, woman
+and child and those who feel convinced of the rightness of things, we
+should make that choice to-night. So, citizens of Trichinopoly, you may
+not wait for the whole of India but you can enforce the first step of
+non-co-operation and begin your operations even from to-morrow, if you
+have not done so already. You can surrender all your titles to-morrow
+all the lawyers may surrender their practice to-morrow; those who cannot
+sustain body and soul by any other means can be easily supported by the
+Khilafat Committee, if they will give their whole time and attention to
+the work of that Committee and if the layers will kindly do that, you
+will find that there is no difficulty in settling your disputes by
+private arbitration. You can nationalise your schools from to-morrow if
+you have got the will and the determination. It is difficult, I know,
+when only a few of you think these things. It is as easy as we are
+sitting here when the whole of this vast audience is of one mind and as
+it was easy for you to carry that chair so is it easy for you to enforce
+this programme from to-morrow if you have one will, one determination
+and love for your country, love for the honour of your country and
+religion. (Loud and prolonged cheers.)
+
+
+SPEECH AT CALICUT
+
+Mr. Chairman and friends.--On behalf of my brother Shaukut Ali and
+myself I wish to thank you most sincerely for the warm welcome you have
+extended to us. Before I begin to explain the purpose of our mission I
+have to give you the information that Pir Mahboob Shah who was being
+tried in Sindh for sedition has been sentenced to two years' simple
+imprisonment. I do not know exactly what the offence was with which the
+Pir was charged. I do not know whether the words attributed to him were
+ever spoken by him. But I do know that the Pirsaheb declined to offer
+any defence and with perfect resignation he has accepted his penalty.
+For me it is a matter of sincere pleasure that the Pirsaheb who
+exercises great influence over his followers has understood the spirit
+of the struggle upon which we have embarked. It is not by resisting the
+authority of Government that we expect to succeed in the great task
+before us. But I do expect that we shall succeed if we understand the
+spirit of non-co-operation. The Lieutenant-Governor of Burma himself has
+told us that the British retain their hold on India not by the force of
+arms but by the force of co-operation of the people. Thus he has given
+us the remedy for any wrong that the Government may do to the people,
+whether knowingly or unknowingly. And so long as we co-operate with the
+Government, so long as we support that Government, we become to that
+extent sharers in the wrong. I admit that in ordinary circumstances a
+wise subject will tolerate the wrongs of a Government, but a wise
+subject never tolerates a wrong that a Government imposes on the
+declared will of a people. And I venture to submit to this great meeting
+that the Government of India and the Imperial Government have done a
+double wrong to India, and if we are a nation of self-respecting people
+conscious of its dignity, conscious of its right, it is not just and
+proper that we should stand the double humiliation that the Government
+has heaped upon us. By shaping and by becoming a predominant partner in
+the peace terms imposed on the helpless Sultan of Turkey, the Imperial
+Government have intentionally flouted the cherished sentiment of the
+Mussalman subjects of the Empire. The present Prime Minister gave a
+deliberate pledge after consultation with his colleagues when it was
+necessary for him to conciliate the Mussalmans of India. I claim to have
+studied this Khilafat question in a special manner. I claim to
+understand the Mussalman feeling on the Khilafat question and I am here
+to declare for the tenth time that on the Khilafat matter the Government
+has wounded the Mussalman sentiment as they had never done before. And I
+say without fear of contradiction that if the Mussalmans of India had
+not exercised great self-restraint and if there was not the gospel of
+non-co-operation preached to them and if they had not accepted it, there
+would have been bloodshed in India by this time. I am free to confess
+that spilling of blood would not have availed their cause. But a man
+who is in a state of rage whose heart has become lacerated does not
+count the cost of his action. So much for the Khilafat wrong.
+
+I propose to take you for a minute to the Punjab, the northern end of
+India. And what have both Governments done for the Punjab? I am free to
+confess again that the crowds in Amritsar went mad for a moment. They
+were goaded to madness by a wicked administration. But no madness on the
+part of a people can justify the shedding of innocent blood, and what
+have they paid for it? I venture to submit that no civilised Government
+could ever have made the people pay the penalty and retribution that
+they have paid. Innocent men were tried through mock-tribunals and
+imprisoned for life. Amnesty granted to them after; I count of no
+consequence. Innocent, unarmed men, who knew nothing of what was to
+happen, were butchered in cold blood without the slightest notice.
+Modesty of women in Manianwalla, women who had done no wrong to any
+individual, was outraged by insolent officers. I want you to understand
+what I mean by outrage of their modesty. Their veils were opened with
+his stick by an officer. Men who were declared to be utterly innocent by
+the Hunter Committee were made to crawl on their bellies. And all these
+wrongs totally undeserved remain unavenged. If it was the duty of the
+Government of India to punish those who were guilty of incendiarism and
+murder, as I hold it was their duty, it was doubly their duty to punish
+officers who insulted and oppressed innocent people. But in the face of
+these official wrongs we have the debate in the house of lords
+supporting official terrorism, it is this double wrong, the affront to
+Islam and the injury to the manhood of the Punjab, that we feel bound to
+wipe out by non-co-operation. We have prayed, petitioned, agitated, we
+have passed resolutions. Mr. Mahomed Ali supported by his friends is now
+waiting on the British public. He has pleaded the cause of Islam in a
+most manful manner, but his pleading has fallen on deaf ears and we have
+his word for it that whilst France and Italy have shown great sympathy
+for the cause of Islam, it is the British Ministers who have shown no
+sympathy. This shows which way the British Ministers and the present
+holders of office in India mean to deal by the people. There is no
+goodwill, there is no desire to placate the people of India. The people
+of India must therefore have a remedy to redress the double wrong. The
+method of the west is violence. Wherever the people of the west have
+felt a wrong either justly or unjustly, they have rebelled and shed
+blood. As I have said in my letter to the Viceroy of India, half of
+India does not believe in the remedy of violence. The other half is too
+weak to offer it. But the whole of India is deeply hurt and stirred by
+this wrong, and it is for that reason that I have suggested to the
+people of India the remedy of non-co-operation. I consider it perfectly
+harmless, absolutely constitutional and yet perfectly efficacious. It is
+a remedy in which, if it is properly adopted, victory is certain, and it
+is the age-old remedy of self-sacrifice. Are the Mussalmans of India who
+feel the great wrong done to Islam ready to make an adequate
+self-sacrifice? All the scriptures of the world teach us that there can
+be no compromise between justice and injustice. Co-operation on the part
+of a justice-loving man with an unjust man is a crime. And if we desire
+to compel this great Government to the will of the people, as we must,
+we must adopt this great remedy of non-co-operation. And if the
+Mussalmans of India offer non-co-operation to Government in order to
+secure justice in the Khilafat matter, I believe it is duty of the
+Hindus to help them so long as their moans are just. I consider the
+eternal friendship between the Hindus and Mussalmans is more important
+than the British connection. I would prefer any day anarchy and chaos in
+India to an armed peace brought about by the bayonet between the Hindus
+and Mussalmans. I have therefore ventured to suggest to my Hindu
+brethren that if they wanted to live at peace with Mussalmans, there is
+an opportunity which is not going to recur for the next hundred years.
+And I venture to assure you that if the Government of India and the
+Imperial Government come to know that there is a determination on the
+part of the people to redress this double wrong they would not hesitate
+to do what is needed. But in the Mussalmans of India will have to take
+the lead in the matter. You will have to commence the first stage of
+non-co-operation in right earnest. And if you may not help this
+Government, you may not receive help from it. Titles which were the
+other day titles of honour are to-day in my opinion badges of our
+disgrace. We must therefore surrender all titles of honour, all honorary
+offices. It will constitute an emphatic demonstration of the disapproval
+by the leaders of the people of the acts of the Government. Lawyers must
+suspend their practice and must resist the power of the Government which
+has chosen to flout public opinion. Nor may we receive instruction from
+schools controlled by Government and aided by it. Emptying of the
+schools will constitute a demonstration of the will of the middle class
+of India. It is far better for the nation even to neglect the literary
+instruction of the children than to co-operate with a Government that
+has striven to maintain an injustice and untruth on the Khilafat and
+Punjab matters. Similarly have I ventured to suggest a complete boycott
+of reformed councils. That will be an emphatic declaration of the part
+of the representatives of the people that they do not desire to
+associate with the Government so long as the two wrongs continue. We
+must equally decline to offer ourselves as recruits for the police or
+the military. It is impossible for us to go to Mesopotamia or to offer
+to police that country or to offer military assistance and to help the
+Government in that blood guiltiness. The last plank in the first stage is
+Swadeshi. Swadeshi is intended not so much to bring pressure upon the
+Government as to demonstrate the capacity for sacrifice on the part of
+the men and women of India. When one-fourth of India has its religion at
+stake and when the whole of India has its honour at stake, we can be in
+no mood to bedeck ourselves with French calico or silks from Japan. We
+must resolve to be satisfied with cloth woven by the humble weavers of
+India in their own cottages out of yarn spun by their sisters in their
+own homes. When a hundred years ago our tastes were not debased and we
+were not lured by all the fineries from the foreign countries, we were
+satisfied with the cloth produced by the men and women in India, and if
+I could but in a moment revolutionize the tastes of India and make it
+return to its original simplicity, I assure you that the Gods would
+descent to rejoice at the great act of renunciation. That is the first
+stage in non-co-operation. I hope it is as easy for you as it is easy
+for me to see that if India is capable of taking the first step in
+anything like a full measure that step will bring the redress we want. I
+therefore do not intend to take you to the other stages of
+non-co-operation. I would like you to rivet your attention upon the
+plans in the first stage. You will have noticed that but two things are
+necessary in going through the first stage: (1) Prefect spirit of
+non-violence is indispensable for non-co-operation, (2) only a little
+self-sacrifice, I pray to God that He will give the people of India
+sufficient courage and wisdom and patience to go through this experiment
+of non-co-operation. I think you for the great reception that you have
+given us. And I also thank you for the great patience and exemplary
+silence with which you have listened to my remarks.
+
+_August_ 1920.
+
+
+SPEECH AT MANGALORE
+
+Mr. Chairman and friends,--To my brother Shaukat Ali and me it was a
+pleasure to go through this beautiful garden of India. The great
+reception that you gave us this afternoon, and this great assembly are
+most welcome to us, if they are a demonstration of your sympathy with
+the cause which you have the honour to represent. I assure you that we
+have not undertaken this incessant travelling in order to have
+receptions and addresses, no matter how cordial they may be. But we have
+undertaken this travelling throughout the length and breadth of this
+dear Motherland to place before you the position that faces us to-day.
+It is our privilege, as it is our duty, to place that position before
+the country and let her make the choice.
+
+Throughout our tour we have received many addresses, but in my humble
+opinion no address was more truly worded than the address that was
+presented to us at Kasargod. It addressed both of us as 'dear revered
+brothers.' I am unable to accept the second adjective 'revered.' The
+word 'dear' is dear to me I must confess. But dearer than that is the
+expression 'brothers.' The signatories to that address recognized the
+true significance of this travel. No blood brothers can possibly be more
+intimately related, can possibly be more united in one purpose, one aim
+than my brother Shaukat Ali and I. And I considered it a proud privilege
+and honour to be addressed as blood brother to Shaukat Ali. The contents
+of that address were as equally significant. It stated that in our
+united work was represented the essence of the unity between the
+Mussalmans and Hindus in India. If we two cannot represent that very
+desirable unity, if we two cannot cement the relation between the two
+communities, I do not know who can. Then without any rhetoric and
+without any flowery language the address went on to describe the
+inwardness of the Punjab and the Khilafat struggle; and then in simple
+and beautiful language it described the spiritual significance of
+Satyagrah and Non-co-operation. This was followed by a frank and simple
+promise. Although the signatories to the address realised the momentous
+nature of the struggle on which we have embarked, and although they
+sympathise with the struggle with their whole heart, they wound up by
+saying that even if they could not follow non-co-operation in all its
+details, they would do as much as they could to help the struggle. And
+lastly, in eloquent, and true language, they said 'if we cannot rise
+equal to the occasion it will not be due to want of effort but to want
+of ability.' I can desire no better address, no better promise, and if
+you, the citizens of Mangalore, can come up to the level of the
+signatories, and give us just the assurance that you consider the
+struggle to be right and that it commands your entire approval, I am
+certain you will make all sacrifice that lies in your power. For we are
+face to face with a peril greater than plagues, greater than influenza,
+greater than earthquakes and mighty floods, which sometimes overwhelm
+this land. These physical calamities can rob us of so many Indian
+bodies. But the calamity that has at the present moment overtaken India
+touches the religious honour of a fourth of her children and the
+self-respect of the whole nation. The Khilafat wrong affects the
+Mussalmans of India, and the Punjab calamity very nearly overwhelms the
+manhood of India. Shall we in the face of this danger be weak or rise to
+our full height. The remedy for both the wrongs is the spiritual solvent
+of non-co-operation. I call it a spiritual weapon, because it demands
+discipline and sacrifice from us. It demands sacrifice from every
+individual irrespective of the rest. And the promise that is behind this
+performance of duty, the promise given by every religion that I have
+studied is sure and certain. It is that there is no spotless sacrifice
+that has been yet offered on earth, which has not carried with it its
+absolute adequate reward. It is a spiritual weapon, because it waits for
+no mandate from anybody except one's own conscience. It is a spiritual
+weapon, because it brings out the best in the nation and it absolutely
+satisfies individual honour if a single individual takes it, and it will
+satisfy national honour if the whole nation takes it up. And therefore
+it is that I have called non-co-operation in opposition to the opinion
+of many of my distinguished countrymen and leaders--a weapon that is
+infallible and absolutely practicable. It is infallible and practicable,
+because it satisfies the demands of individual conscience. God above
+cannot, will not expect Maulana Shaukat Ali to do more than he has been
+doing, for he has surrendered and placed at the disposal of God whom he
+believes to be the Almighty ruler of everyone, he has delivered all in
+the service of God. And we stand before the citizens of Mangalore and
+ask them to make their choice either to accept this precious gift that
+we lay at their feet or to reject it. And after having listened to my
+message if you come to the come to the conclusion that you have no other
+remedy than non-co-operation for the conservation of Islam and the
+honour of India, you will accept that remedy. I ask you not to be
+confused by so many bewildering issues that are placed before you, nor
+to be shaken from your purpose because you see divided counsels amongst
+your leaders. This is one of the necessary limitations of any spiritual
+or any other struggle that has ever been fought on this earth. It is
+because it comes so suddenly that it confuses the mind if the heart is
+not tuned properly. And we would be perfect human beings on this earth
+if in all of us was found absolutely perfect correspondence between the
+mind and the heart. But those of you who have been following the
+newspaper controversy, will find that no matter what division of opinion
+exists amongst our journals and leaders there is unanimity that the
+remedy is efficacious if it can be kept free from violence, and if it is
+adopted on a large scale. I admit the difficulty the virtue however lies
+in surmounting it. We cannot possibly combine violence with a spiritual
+weapon like non-co-operation. We do not offer spotless sacrifice if we
+take the lives of others in offering our own. Absolute freedom from
+violence is therefore it condition precedent to non-co-operation. But I
+have faith in my country to know that when it has assimilated the
+principle of the doctrine In the fullest extent, it will respond to it.
+And in no case will India make any headway whatsoever until she has
+learnt the lesson of self-sacrifice. Even if this country were to take
+up the doctrine of the sword, which God forbid, it will have to learn
+the lesson of self-sacrifice. The second difficulty suggested is the
+want of solidarity of the nation. I accept it too. But that difficulty I
+have already answered by saying that it is a remedy that can be taken up
+by individuals for individual and by the nation for national
+satisfaction; and therefore even if the whole nation does not take up
+non-co-operation, the individual successes, which may be obtained by
+individuals taking up non-co-operation will stand to their own credit as
+of the nation to which they belong.
+
+The first stage in my humble opinion is incredibly easy inasmuch as it
+does not involve any very great sacrifice. If your Khan bahadurs and
+other title-holders were to renounce their titles I venture to submit
+that whilst the renunciation will stand to the credit and honour of the
+nation it will involve a little or no sacrifice. On the contrary, they
+will not only have surrendered no earthly riches but they will have
+gained the applause of the nation. Let us see what it means, this first
+step. The able editor of _Hindu_, Mr. Kastariranga Iyengar, and almost
+every journalist in the country are agreed that the renunciation of
+titles is a necessary and a desirable step. And if these chosen people
+of the Government were without exception to surrender their titles to
+Government giving notice that the heart of India is doubly wounded in
+that the honour of India and of muslim religion is at stake and that
+therefore they can no longer retain their titles, I venture to suggest,
+that this their step which costs not a single penny either to them or to
+the nation will be an effective demonstration of the national will.
+
+Take the second step or the second item of non-co-operation. I know
+there is strong opposition to the boycott of councils. The opposition
+when you begin to analyse it means not that the step is faulty or that
+it is not likely to succeed, but it is due to the belief that the whole
+country will not respond to it and that the Moderates will steal into
+the councils. I ask the citizens of Mangalore to dispel that fear from
+your hearts. United the voters of Mangalore can make it impossible for
+either a moderate or an extremist or any other form of leader to enter
+the councils as your representative. This step involves no sacrifice of
+money, no sacrifice of honour but the gaining of prestige for the whole
+nation. And I venture to suggest to you that this one step alone if it
+is taken with any degree of unanimity even by the extremists can bring
+about the desired relief, but if all do not respond the individual need
+not be afraid. He at least will have laid the foundation for true self
+progress, let him have the comfort that he at least has washed his hands
+clean of the guilt of the Government.
+
+Then I come to the members of the profession which one time I used to
+carry on. I have ventured to ask the lawyers of India to suspend their
+practice and withdraw their support from a Government which no longer
+stands for justice, pure and unadulterated, for the nation. And the step
+is good for the individual lawyer who takes it and is good for the
+nation if all the lawyers take it.
+
+And so for the Government and the Government aided schools, I must
+confess that I cannot reconcile my conscience to my children going to
+Government schools and to the programme of non-co-operation is intended
+to withdraw all support from Government, and to decline all help
+from it.
+
+I will not tax your patience by taking you through the other items of
+non-co-operation important as they are. But I have ventured to place
+before you four very important and forcible steps any one of which if
+fully taken up contains in it possibilities of success. Swadeshi is
+preached as an item of non-co-operation, as a demonstration of the
+spirit of sacrifice, and it is an item which every man, woman and child
+can take up.
+
+_August_ 1920.
+
+
+SPEECH AT BEZWADA
+
+As I said this morning one essential condition for the progress of India
+is Hindu-Muslim Unity. I understand that there was a little bit of
+bickering between Hindus and Mussalmans to-day in Bezwada. My brother
+Maulana Shaukat Ali adjusted the dispute between the two communities and
+he illustrated in his own person the entire efficacy of one item in the
+first stage of Non-co-operation. He sat without any vakils appearing
+before him for either parties to arbitrate on the dispute between them.
+He required no postponement for the consideration of the question from
+time to time. His fees consisted in a broken lead pencil. That is what
+we should do, if all the lawyers suspended practice and set up
+arbitration for the settlement of private disputes. But why was there
+any quarrel at all? It is laughable in the extreme when you come to
+think of it. Because the Hindus seem to have played music whilst passing
+the mosque. I think it was improper for them to do so. Hindu Moslem
+Unity does not mean that Hindus should cease to respect the prejudices
+and sentiments cherished by Mussalmans. And as this question of music
+has given rise to many a quarrel between the two communities it behoves
+the Hindus, if they want to cultivate true Hindu-Moslem Unity, to
+refrain from acts which they know injure the sentiments of their
+Mussalman brethren. We may not take undue advantage of the great spirit
+of toleration that is developing in Mussalmans and do things likely to
+irritate them. It is never a matter of principle for a Hindu procession
+to continue playing music before mosques. And now that we desire
+voluntarily to respect Mussalman sentiment, we should be doubly careful
+at a time when Hindus are offering assistance to Mussalmans in their
+troubles. That assistance should be given in all humility and without
+any arrogation of rights. To my Mussalman brethren I would say that it
+would become their dignity to restrain themselves and not feel irritated
+when any Hindu had done anything to irritate their religious sentiment.
+But in any event, you have today presented to you a remedy for the
+settlement of any such issue. We must settle our disputes by arbitration
+as was done this after-noon. You cannot always get a Moulana Shankat
+Ali, exercising unrivalled influence on the community. But we can always
+get people enough in our own villages, towns and districts who exercise
+influence over such villages and towns and command the confidence of
+both the communities. The offended party should consider it its duty to
+approach them and not to take the law in its own hands.
+
+It gives me much pleasure to announce to you that, Mr. Kaleswar Rao has
+consented to refrain from standing for election to the new Legislative
+Councils. You will be also pleased to know that Mr. Gulam Nohiuddin has
+resigned his Honorary Magistrateship, I hope that both these patriots
+will not consider that they have done their last duty by their acts of
+renunciation, but I hope they will regard their acts as a prelude to
+acts of greater purpose and greater energy and I hope they will take in
+hand the work of educating the electorate in their districts regarding
+boycott of councils. I have said elsewhere that never for another
+century will India be faced with a conjunction of events that faces it
+to-day. The cloud that has descended upon Islam has solidified the
+Moslem world as nothing else could have. It has awakened the men and
+women of Mussulman India from their deep sleep. Inasmuch as a single
+Panjabi was made to crawl on his belly in the famous street of Amitsar,
+I hold that the whole of was made to crawl on its belly. And if we want
+to straighten up ourselves from that crawling position and stand erect
+before the whole world, it requires, a tremendous effort. H.E. the
+Viceroy in his Viceregal pronouncement at the opening of the Council was
+pleased to say that he did not desire to make any remarks on the Punjab
+events. He treated them as a closed chapter and referred us to the
+future verdict of history. I venture to tell you the citizens of Bezwada
+that India will have deserved to crawl in that lane if she accepts this
+pronouncement as the final answer, and if we want to stand erect before
+the whole world, it is impossible for a single child, man or woman in
+India to rest until fullest reparation has been done for the Punjab
+wrong. Similarly with reference to the Khilafat grievance the Mussalmans
+of India in my humble opinion will forfeit all title to consider
+themselves the followers of the great Prophet in whose name they recite
+the Kalama, day in and day out, they will forfeit their title if they do
+not put their shoulders to the wheel and lift this cloud that is hanging
+on them. But we shall make a serious blunder. India will commit suicide,
+if we do not understand and appreciate the forces that are arrayed
+against us. We have got to face a mighty Government with all its power
+ranged against us. This composed of men who are able, courageous,
+capable of making sacrifices. It is a Government which does not scruple
+to use means, fair or foul, in order to gain its end. No craft is above
+that Government. It resorts to frightfulness, terrorism. It resorts to
+bribery, in the shape of titles, honour and high offices. It administers
+opiates in the shape of Reforms. In essence then it is an autocracy
+double distilled in the guise of democracy. The greatest gift of a
+crafty cunning man are worthless so long as cunning resides in his
+heart. It is a Government representing a civilisation which is purely
+material and godless. I have given to you these qualities of this
+government in order not to excite your angry passions, but in order that
+you may appreciate the forces that are matched against you. Anger will
+serve no purpose. We shall have to meet ungodliness by godliness. We
+shall have to meet their untruth by truth; we shall have to meet their
+cunning and their craft by openness and simplicity; we shall have to
+meet their terrorism and frightfulness by bravery. And it is an
+unbending bravery which is demanded of every man, woman and child. We
+must meet their organisation by greater organising ability. We must meet
+their discipline by grater discipline, and we must meet their sacrifices
+by infinitely greater sacrifices, and if we are in a position to show
+these qualities in a full measure I have not the slightest doubt that we
+shall win this battle. If really we have fear of God in us, our prayers
+will give us the strength to secure victory. God has always come to the
+help of the helpless and we need not go before any earthly power for
+help.
+
+You heard this morning of the bravery of the sword, and the bravery of
+suffering. For me personally I have forever rejected the bravery of the
+sword. But, to-day it is not my purpose to demonstrate to you the final
+ineffectiveness of the sword. But he who runs may see that before India
+possesses itself a sword which will be more than a match for the forces
+of Europe, it will he generations. India may resort to the destruction
+of life and property here and there but such destructive cases serve no
+purpose. I have therefore presented to you a weapon called the bravery
+of suffering, otherwise called Non-co-operation. It is a bravery which
+is open to the weakest among the weak. It is open to women and children.
+The power of suffering is the prerogative of nobody, and if only 300
+millions of Indians could show the power of suffering in order to
+redress a grievous wrong done to the nation or to its religion, I make
+bold to say that, India will never require to draw the sword. And unless
+we are able to show an adequate measure of sacrifice we shall lose this
+battle. No one need tell me that India has not got this power of
+suffering. Every father and mother is witness to what I am about to say,
+viz., that every father and mother have shown in the domestic affairs
+matchless power of suffering. And if we have only developed national
+consciousness, if we have developed sufficient regard for our religion,
+we shall have developed power of suffering in the national and religious
+field. Considered in these terms the first stage in Non-co-operation is
+the simplest and the easiest state. If the title-holders of India
+consider that India is suffering from a grievous wrong both as regards
+the Punjab and the Khilafat is it any suffering on their part to
+renounce their titles to-day? What is the measure of the suffering
+awaiting the lawyers who are called upon to suspend practice when
+compared to the great benefit which is in store for the nation? And if
+thy parents of India will summon up courage to sacrifice secular
+education, they will have given their children the real education of a
+life-time. For they will have learnt the value of religion and national
+honour. And I ask you, the citizens of Bezwada, to think well before you
+accept the loaves and fishes in the form of Government offices set them
+on one side and set national honour on the other and make your service.
+What sacrifice is there involved in the individual renouncing his
+candidature for legislative councils. The councils are a tempting bait.
+All kinds of arguments are being advanced in favour of joining the
+councils. India will sacrifice the opportunity of gaining her liberty if
+she touches them. It passes comprehension how we, who have known this
+Government, who have read the Viceregal pronouncement, how we who have
+known their determination not to give justice in the Punjab and the
+Khilafat matters, can gain any benefit by co-operation, constructive or
+obstructive, with this Government? But the Nationalists, belonging to a
+great popular party, tell us that if they do not contest these scats,
+the moderates will get in. Surely, it is nothing but an exhibition of
+want of courage and faith in our own cause to feel that we must enter
+the councils lest moderates should get in. Moderates believe in the
+possibility of obtaining justice at the hands of the Government.
+Nationalists have on the other hand filled the platforms with
+denunciations of the Government and its measures. How can the
+Nationalists ever hope to gain anything by entering the councils,
+holding the belief that they do? They will better represent the popular
+will if they wring justice from the Government by means of
+Non-co-operation. A calculating spirit at the present moment in the
+history of India will prove its ruin. I, therefore, tender my hearty
+congratulation to those who have announced their resignations of
+candidature or honorary offices, and I hope that their example will
+prove infectious. I have been told, and I believe it myself from what I
+have seen, that the Andhrus are a brave, courageous and
+spiritually-inclined people. I venture therefore to ask my Andhra
+brethren whether they have understood the spirituality of this beautiful
+doctrine of Non-co-operation. If they have, I hope they will not wait
+for a single moment for a mandate from the Congress or the Moslem
+League. They will understand that a spiritual weapon is god whether it
+is wielded by one or many. I, therefore, invite you to go to Calcutta
+with a united will and a united purpose, sanctified by a spirit of
+sacrifice, with a will of your own to convert those who are still
+undecided about the spirituality or the practicability of the weapon.
+
+I thank you for the attention and patience with which you have listened
+to me. I pray to the Almighty that He may give you wisdom and courage
+that are so necessary at the present moment.--
+
+_August 1920_.
+
+
+THE CONGRESS
+
+The largest and the most important Congress ever held has come and gone,
+It was the biggest demonstration ever held against the present system of
+Government. The President uttered the whole truth when he said that it
+was a Congress in which, instead of the President and the leaders
+driving the people, the people drove him and the latter. It was clear to
+every one on the platform that the people had taken the reins in their
+own hands. The platform would gladly have moved at a slower pace.
+
+The Congress gave one day to a full discussion of the creed and voted
+solidly for it with but two dissentients after two nights' sleep over
+the discussion. It gave one day to a discussion of non-co-operation
+resolution and voted for it with unparalleled enthusiasm. It gave the
+last day to listening to the whole of the remaining thirty-two Articles
+of the Constitution which were read and translated word for word by
+Maulana Mahomed Ali in a loud and clear voice. It showed that it was
+intelligently following the reading of it, for there was dissent when
+Article Eight was reached. It referred to non-interference by the
+Congress in the internal affairs of the Native States. The Congress
+would not have passed the proviso if it had meant that it could even
+voice the feelings of the people residing in the territories ruled by
+the princes. Happily it resolution suggesting the advisability of
+establishing Responsible Government in their territories enabled me to
+illustrate to the audience that the proviso did not preclude the
+Congress from ventilating the grievances and aspirations of the subjects
+of these states, whilst it clearly prevented the Congress from taking
+any executive action in connection with them; as for instance holding a
+hostile demonstration in the Native States against any action of theirs.
+The Congress claims to dictate to the Government but it cannot do so by
+the very nature of its constitution in respect of the Native States.
+
+Thus the Congress has taken three important steps after the greatest
+deliberation. It has expressed its determination in the clearest
+possible terms to attain complete null-government, if possible still in
+association with the British people, but even without, if necessary. It
+proposes to do so only by means that are honourable and non-violent. It
+has introduced fundamental changes in the constitution regulating its
+activities and has performed an act of self-denial in voluntarily
+restricting the number of delegates to one for every fifty thousand of
+the population of India and has insisted upon the delegates being the
+real representatives of those who want to take any part in the political
+life of the country. And with a view to ensuring the representation of
+all political parties it has accepted the principle of "single
+transferable vote." It has reaffirmed the non-co-operation resolution of
+the Special Session and amplified it in every respect. It has emphasised
+the necessity of non-violence and laid down that the attainment of
+Swaraj is conditional upon the complete harmony between the component
+parts of India, and has therefore inculcated Hindu-Muslim unity. The
+Hindu delegates have called upon their leaders to settle disputes
+between Brahmins and non-Brahmins and have urged upon the religious
+heads the necessity of getting rid of the poison of untouchability. The
+Congress has told the parents of school-going children, and the lawyers
+that they have not responded sufficiently to the call of the nation and
+and that they must make greater effort in doing so. It therefore follows
+that the lawyers who do not respond quickly to the call for suspension
+and the parents who persist in keeping their children in Government and
+aided institutions must find themselves dropping out from the public
+life of the country. The country calls upon every man and woman in India
+to do their full share. But of the details of the non-co-operation
+resolution I must write later.
+
+
+WHO IS DISLOYAL?
+
+Mr. Montagu has discovered a new definition of disloyalty. He considers
+my suggestion to boycott the visit of the Prince of Wales to be disloyal
+and some newspapers taking the cue from him have called persons who have
+made the suggestion 'unmannerly'. They have even attributed to these
+'unmannerly' persons the suggestion of boycotting the Prince. I draw a
+sharp and fundamental distinction between boycotting the Prince and
+boycotting any welcome arranged for him. Personally I would extend the
+heartiest welcome to His Royal Highness if he came or could come without
+official patronage and the protecting wings of the Government of the
+day. Being the heir to a constitutional monarch, the Prince's movements
+are regulated and dictated by the ministers, no matter how much the
+dictation may be concealed beneath diplomatically polite language. In
+suggesting the boycott therefore the promoters have suggested boycott of
+an insolent bureaucracy and dishonest ministers of his Majesty.
+
+You cannot have it both ways. It is true that under a constitutional
+monarchy, the royalty is above politics. But you cannot send the Prince
+on a political visit for the purpose of making political capital out of
+him, and then complain that those who will not play your game and in
+order to checkmate you, proclaim boycott of the Royal visit do not know
+constitutional usage. For the Prince's visit is not for pleasure. His
+Royal Highness is to come in Mr. Lloyd George's words, as the
+"ambassador of the British nation," in other words, his own ambassador
+in order to issue a certificate of merit to him and possibly to give the
+ministers a new lease of life. The wish is designed to consolidate and
+strengthen a power that spells mischief for India. Even us it is, Mr.
+Montagu has foreseen, that the welcome will probably be excelled by any
+hitherto extended to Royalty, meaning that the people are not really and
+deeply affected and stirred by the official atrocities in the Punjab and
+the manifestly dishonest breach of official declarations on the
+Khilafat. With the knowledge that India was bleeding at heart, the
+Government of India should have told His Majesty's ministers that the
+moment was inopportune for sending the Prince. I venture to submit that
+it is adding insult to injury to bring the Prince and through his visit
+to steal honours and further prestige for a Government that deserves to
+be dismissed with disgrace. I claim that I prove my loyalty by saying
+that India is in no mood, is too deeply in mourning, to take part in and
+to welcome His Royal Highness, and that the ministers and the Indian
+Government show their disloyalty by making the Prince a catspaw of their
+deep political game. If they persist, it is the clear duty of India to
+have nothing to do with the visit.
+
+
+CRUSADE AGAINST NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have most carefully read the manifesto addressed by Sir Narayan
+Chandavarkar and others dissuading the people from joining the non
+co-operation movement. I had expected to find some solid argument
+against non-co-operation, but to my great regret I have found in it
+nothing but distortion (no doubt unconscious) of the great religions and
+history. The manifesto says that 'non-co-operation is deprecated by the
+religious tenets and traditions of our motherland, nay, of all the
+religions that have saved and elevated the human race.' I venture to
+submit that the Bhagwad Gita is a gospel of non-co-operation between
+forces of darkness and those of light. If it is to be literally
+interpreted Arjun representing a just cause was enjoined to engage in
+bloody warfare with the unjust Kauravas. Tulsidas advises the Sant (the
+good) to shun the Asant (the evil-doers). The Zendavesta represents a
+perpetual dual between Ormuzd and Ahriman, between whom there is no
+compromise. To say of the Bible that it taboos non-co-operation is not
+to know Jesus, a Prince among passive resisters, who uncompromisingly
+challenged the might of the Sadducees and the Pharisees and for the sake
+of truth did not hesitate to divide sons from their parents. And what
+did the Prophet of Islam do? He non-co-operated in Mecca in a most
+active manner so long as his life was not in danger and wiped the dust
+of Mecca off his feet when he found that he and his followers might have
+uselessly to perish, and fled to Medina and returned when he was strong
+enough to give battle to his opponents. The duty of non-co-operation
+with unjust men and kings is as strictly enjoined by all the religions
+as is the duty of co-operation with just men and kings. Indeed most of
+the scriptures of the world seem even to go beyond non-co-operation and
+prefer a violence to effeminate submission to a wrong. The Hindu
+religious tradition of which the manifesto speaks, clearly proves the
+duty of non-co-operation. Prahlad dissociated himself from his father,
+Meerabai from her husband, Bibhishan from his brutal brother.
+
+The manifesto speaking of the secular aspect says, 'The history of
+nations affords no instance to show that it (meaning non-co-operation)
+has, when employed, succeeded and done good,' One most recent instance
+of brilliant success of non-co-operation is that of General Botha who
+boycotted Lord Milner's reformed councils and thereby procured a perfect
+constitution for his country. The Dukhobours of Russia offered
+non-co-operation, and a handful though they were, their grievances so
+deeply moved the civilized world that Canada offered them a home where
+they form a prosperous community. In India instances can be given by the
+dozen, in which in little principalities the raiyats when deeply grieved
+by their chiefs have cut off all connection with them and bent them to
+their will. I know of no instance in history where well-managed
+non-co-operation has failed.
+
+Hitherto I have given historical instances of bloodless
+non-co-operation, I will not insult the intelligence of the reader by
+citing historical instances of non-co-operation combined with,
+violence, but I am free to confess that there are on record as many
+successes as failures in violent non-co-operation. And it is because I
+know this fact that I have placed before the country a non-violent
+scheme in which, if at all worked satisfactorily, success is a certainty
+and in which non-response means no harm. For if even one man
+non-co-operates, say, by resigning some office, he has gained, not lost.
+That is its ethical or religious aspect. For its political result
+naturally it requires polymerous support. I fear therefore no disastrous
+result from non-co-operation save for an outbreak of violence on the
+part of the people whether under provocation or otherwise. I would risk
+violence a thousand times than risk the emasculation of a whole race.
+
+
+SPEECH AT MUZAFFARABAD
+
+Before a crowded meeting of Mussalmans in the Muzaffarabad, Bombay, held
+on the 29th July 1920, speaking on the impending non-co-operation which
+commenced on the 1st of August, Mr. Gandhi said: The time for speeches
+on non-co-operation was past and the time for practice had arrived. But
+two things were needful for complete success. An environment free from
+any violence on the part of the people and a spirit of self-sacrifice.
+Non-co-operation, as the speaker had conceived it, was an impossibility
+in an atmosphere surcharged with the spirit of violence. Violence was an
+exhibition of anger and any such exhibition was dissipation of valuable
+energy. Subduing of one's anger was a storing up of national energy,
+which, when set free in an ordered manner, would produce astounding
+results. His conception of non-co-operation did not involve rapine,
+plunder, incendiarism and all the concomitants of mass madness. His
+scheme presupposed ability on their part to control all the forces of
+evil. If, therefore, any disorderliness was found on the part of the
+people which they could not control, he for one would certainly help the
+Government to control them. In the presence of disorder it would be for
+him a choice of evil, and evil through he considered the present
+Government to be, he would not hesitate for the time being to help the
+Government to control disorder. But he had faith in the people. He
+believed that they knew that the cause could only be won by non-violent
+methods. To put it at the lowest, the people had not the power, even if
+they had the will, to resist with brute strength the unjust Governments
+of Europe who had, in the intoxication of their success disregarding
+every canon of justice dealt so cruelly by the only Islamic Power
+in Europe.
+
+In non-co-operation they had a matchless and powerful weapon. It was a
+sign of religious atrophy to sustain an unjust Government that supported
+an injustice by resorting to untruth and camouflage. So long therefore
+as the Government did not purge itself of the canker of injustice and
+untruth, it was their duty to withdraw all help from it consistently
+with their ability to preserve order in the social structure. The first
+stage of non-co-operation was therefore arranged so as to involve
+minimum of danger to public peace and minimum of sacrifice on the part
+of those who participated in the movement. And if they might not help an
+evil Government nor receive any favours from it, it followed that they
+must give up all titles of honour which were no longer a proud
+possession. Lawyers, who were in reality honorary officers of the Court,
+should cease to support Courts that uphold the prestige of an unjust
+Government and the people must be able to settle their disputes and
+quarrels by private arbitration. Similarly parents should withdraw their
+children from the public schools and they must evolve a system of
+national education or private education totally independent of the
+Government. An insolent Government conscious of its brute strength,
+might laugh at such withdrawals by the people especially as the Law
+courts and schools were supposed to help the people, but he had not a
+shadow of doubt that the moral effect of such a step could not possibly
+be lost even upon a Government whose conscience had become stifled by
+the intoxication of power.
+
+He had hesitation in accepting Swadeshi as a plank in non-co-operation.
+To him Swadeshi was as dear as life itself. But he had no desire to
+smuggle in Swadeshi through the Khilafat movement, if it could not
+legitimately help that movement, but conceived as non-co-operation was,
+in a spirit of self-sacrifice, Swadeshi had a legitimate place in the
+movement. Pure Swadeshi meant sacrifice of the liking for fineries. He
+asked the nation to sacrifice its liking for the fineries of Europe and
+Japan and be satisfied with the coarse but beautiful fabrics woven on
+their handlooms out of yarns spun by millions of their sisters. If the
+nation had become really awakened to a sense of the danger to its
+religions and its self-respect, it could not but perceive the absolute
+and immediate necessity of the adoption of Swadeshi in its intense form
+and if the people of India adopted Swadeshi with the religious zeal he
+begged to assure them that its adoption would arm them with a new power
+and would produce an unmistakable impression throughout the whole world.
+He, therefore, expected the Mussalmans to give the lead by giving up all
+the fineries they were so fond of and adopt the simple cloth that could
+be produced by the manual labour of their sisters and brethren in their
+own cottages. And he hoped that the Hindus would follow suit. It was a
+sacrifice in which the whole nation, every man, woman and child could
+take part.
+
+RIDICULE REPLACING REPRESSION
+
+Had His Excellency the Viceroy not made it impossible by his defiant
+attitude on the Punjab and the Khilafat, I would have tendered him
+hearty congratulations for substituting ridicule for repression in order
+to kill a movement distasteful to him. For, torn from its context and
+read by itself His Excellency's discourse on non-co-operation is
+unexceptionable. It is a symptom of translation from savagery to
+civilization. Pouring ridicule on one's opponent is an approved method
+in civilised politics. And if the method is consistently continued, it
+will mark an important improvement upon the official barbarity of the
+Punjab. His interpretation of Mr. Montagu's statement about the movement
+is also not open to any objection whatsoever. Without doubt a government
+has the right to use sufficient force to put down an actual outbreak
+of violence.
+
+But I regret to have to confess that this attempt to pour ridicule on
+the movement, read in conjunction with the sentiments on the Punjab and
+the Khilafat, preceding the ridicule, seems to show that His Excellency
+has made it a virtue of necessity. He has not finally abandoned the
+method of terrorism and frightfulness, but he finds the movement being
+conducted in such an open and truthful manner that any attempt to kill
+it by violent repression would not expose him not only to ridicule but
+contempt of all right-thinking men.
+
+Let us however examine the adjectives used by His Excellency to kill the
+movement by laughing at it. It is 'futile,' 'ill-advised,'
+'intrinsically insane,' 'unpractical,' 'visionary.' He has rounded off
+the adjectives by describing the movement as 'most foolish of all
+foolish schemes.' His Excellency has become so impatient of it that he
+has used all his vocabulary for showing the magnitude of the ridiculous
+nature of non-co-operation.
+
+Unfortunately for His Excellency the movement is likely to grow with
+ridicule as it is certain to flourish on repression. No vital movement
+can be killed except by the impatience, ignorance or laziness of its
+authors. A movement cannot be 'insane' that is conducted by men of
+action as I claim the members of the Non-co-operation Committee are. It
+is hardly 'unpractical,' seeing that if the people respond, every one
+admits that it will achieve the end. At the same time it is perfectly
+true that if there is no response from the people, the movement will be
+popularly described as 'visionary.' It is for the nation to return an
+effective answer by organised non-co-operation and change ridicule into
+respect. Ridicule is like repression. Both give place to respect when
+they fail to produce the intended effect.
+
+THE VICEREGAL PRONOUNCEMENT
+
+It may be that having lost faith in His Excellency's probity and
+capacity to hold the high office of Viceroy of India, I now read his
+speeches with a biased mind, but the speech His Excellency delivered at
+the time of opening of the council shows to me a mental attitude which
+makes association with him or his Government impossible for
+self-respecting men.
+
+The remarks on the Punjab mean a flat refusal to grant redress. He would
+have us to 'concentrate on the problems of the immediate future!' The
+immediate future is to compel repentance on the part of the Government
+on the Punjab matter. Of this there is no sign. On the contrary, His
+Excellency resists the temptation to reply to his critics, meaning
+thereby that he has not changed his opinion on the many vital matters
+affecting the honour of India. He is 'content to leave the issues to the
+verdict of history.' Now this kind of language, in my opinion, is
+calculated further to inflame the Indian mind. Of what use can a
+favourable verdict of history be to men who have been wronged and who
+are still under the heels of officers who have shown themselves utterly
+unfit to hold offices of trust and responsibility? The plea for
+co-operation is, to say the least, hypocritical in the face of the
+determination to refuse justice to the Punjab. Can a patient who is
+suffering from an intolerable ache be soothed by the most tempting
+dishes placed before him? Will he not consider it mockery on the part of
+the physician who so tempted him without curing him of his pain?
+
+His Excellency is, if possible, even less happy on the Khilafat. "So far
+as any Government could," says this trustee for the nation, "we pressed
+upon the Peace Conference the views of Indian Moslems. But
+notwithstanding our efforts on their behalf we are threatened with a
+campaign of non-co-operation because, forsooth, the allied Powers found
+themselves unable to accept the contentions advanced by Indian Moslems."
+This is most misleading if not untruthful. His Excellency knows that the
+peace terms are not the work of the allied Powers. He knows that Mr.
+Lloyd George is the prime author of terms and that the latter has never
+repudiated his responsibility for them. He has with amazing audacity
+justified them in spite of his considered pledge to the Moslems of India
+regarding Constantinople, Thrace and the rich and renowned lands of Asia
+minor. It is not truthful to saddle responsibility for the terms on the
+allied Powers when Great Britain alone has promoted them. The offence of
+the Viceroy becomes greater when we remember that he admits the justness
+of the Muslim claim. He could not have 'pressed' it if he did not admit
+its justice.
+
+I venture to think that His Excellency by his pronouncement on the
+Punjab has strengthened the nation in its efforts to seek a remedy to
+compel redress of the two wrongs before it can make anything of the
+so-called Reforms.
+
+FROM RIDICULE, TO--?
+
+It will be admitted that non-co-operation has passed the stage ridicule.
+Whether it will now be met by repression or respect remains to be seen.
+Opinion has already been expressed in these columns that ridicule is an
+approved and civilized method of opposition. The viceregal ridicule
+though expressed in unnecessarily impolite terms was not open to
+exception.
+
+But the testing time has now arrived. In a civilized country when
+ridicule fails to kill a movement it begins to command respect.
+Opponents meet it by respectful and cogent argument and the mutual
+behaviour of rival parties never becomes violent. Each party seeks to
+convert the other or draw the uncertain element towards its side by pure
+argument and reasoning.
+
+There is little doubt now that the boycott of the councils will be
+extensive if it is not complete. The students have become disturbed.
+Important institutions may any day become truly national. Pandit Motilal
+Nehru's great renunciation of a legal practice which was probably second
+to nobody's is by itself an event calculated to change ridicule into
+respect. It ought to set people thinking seriously about their own
+attitude. There must be something very wrong about our Government--to
+warrant the step Pundit Motilal Nehru has taken. Post graduate students
+have given up their fellowships. Medical students have refused to appear
+for their final examination. Non-co-operation in these circumstances
+cannot be called an inane movement.
+
+Either the Government must bend to the will of the people which is being
+expressed in no unmistakable terms through non-co-operation, or it must
+attempt to crush the movement by repression.
+
+Any force used by a government under any circumstance is not repression.
+An open trial of a person accused of having advocated methods of
+violence is not repression. Every State has the right to put down or
+prevent violence by force. But the trial of Mr. Zafar Ali Khan and two
+Moulvis of Panipat shows that the Government is seeking not to put down
+or prevent violence but to suppress expression of opinion, to prevent
+the spread of disaffection. This is repression. The trials are the
+beginning of it. It has not still assumed a virulent form but if these
+trials do not result in stilling the propaganda, it is highly likely
+that severe repression will be resorted to by the Government.
+
+The only other way to prevent the spread of disaffection is to remove
+the causes thereof. And that would be to respect the growing response of
+the country to the programme of non-co-operation. It is too much to
+expect repentance and humility from a government intoxicated with
+success and power.
+
+We must therefore assume that the second stage in the Government
+programme will be repression growing in violence in the same ratio as
+the progress of non-co-operation. And if the movement survives
+repression, the day of victory of truth is near. We must then be
+prepared for prosecutions, punishments even up to deportations. We must
+evolve the capacity for going on with our programme without the leaders.
+That means capacity for self-government. And as no government in the
+world can possibly put a whole nation in prison, it must yield to its
+demand or abdication in favour of a government suited to that nation.
+
+It is clear that abstention from violence and persistence in the
+programme are our only and surest chance of attaining our end.
+
+The government has its choice, either to respect the movement or to try
+to repress it by barbarous methods. Our choice is either to succumb to
+repression or to continue in spite of repression.
+
+
+TO EVERY ENGLISHMAN IN INDIA
+
+Dear Friend,
+
+I wish that every Englishman will see this appeal and give thoughtful
+attention to it.
+
+Let me introduce myself to you. In my humble opinion no Indian has
+co-operated with the British Government more than I have for an unbroken
+period of twenty-nine years of public life in the face of circumstances
+that might well have turned any other man into a rebel. I ask you to
+believe me when I tell you that my co-operation was not based on the
+fear of the punishments provided by your laws or any other selfish
+motives. It was free and voluntary co-operation based on the belief that
+the sum total of the activity of the British Government was for the
+benefit of India. I put my life in peril four times for the sake of the
+Empire,--at the time of the Boer war when I was in charge of the
+Ambulance corps whose work was mentioned in General Buller's dispatches,
+at the time of the Zulu revolt in Natal when I was in charge of a
+similar corps at the time of the commencement of the late war when I
+raised an Ambulance corps and as a result of the strenuous training had
+a severe attack of pleurisy, and lastly, in fulfilment of my promise to
+Lord Chelmsford at the War Conference in Delhi. I threw myself in such
+an active recruiting campaign in Kuira District involving long and
+trying marches that I had an attack of dysentry which proved almost
+fatal. I did all this in the full belief that acts such as mine must
+gain for my country an equal status in the Empire. So late as last
+December I pleaded hard for a trustful co-operation, I fully believed
+that Mr. Lloyd George would redeem his promise to the Mussalmans and
+that the revelations of the official atrocities in the Punjab would
+secure full reparation for the Punjabis. But the treachery of Mr. Lloyd
+George and its appreciation by you, and the condonation of the Punjab
+atrocities have completely shattered my faith in the good intentions of
+the Government and the nation which is supporting it.
+
+But though, my faith in your good intentions is gone, I recognise your
+bravery and I know that what you will not yield to justice and reason,
+you will gladly yield to bravery.
+
+_See what this Empire means to India_
+
+Exploitation of India's resources for the benefit of Great Britain.
+
+An ever-increasing military expenditure, and a civil service the most
+expensive in the world.
+
+Extravagant working of every department in utter disregard of India's
+poverty.
+
+Disarmament and consequent emasculation of a whole nation lest an armed
+nation might imperil the lives of a handful of you in our midst.
+Traffic in intoxicating liquors and drugs for the purposes of
+sustaining a top heavy administration.
+
+Progressively representative legislation in order to suppress an
+evergrowing agitation seeking to give expression to a nation's agony.
+
+Degrading treatment of Indians residing in your dominions, and
+
+You have shown total disregard of our feelings by glorifying the Punjab
+administration and flouting the Mosulman sentiment.
+
+I know you would not mind if we could fight and wrest the sceptre form
+your hands. You know that we are powerless to do that, for you have
+ensured our incapacity to fight in open and honourable battle. Bravery
+on the battlefield is thus impossible for us. Bravery of the soul still
+remains open to us. I know you will respond to that also. I am engaged
+in evoking that bravery. Non-co-operation means nothing less than
+training in self-sacrifice. Why should we co-operate with you when we
+know that by your administration of this great country we are lifting
+daily enslaved in an increasing degree. This response of the people to
+my appeal is not due to my personality. I would like you to dismiss me,
+and for that matter the Ali Brothers too, from your consideration. My
+personality will fail to evoke any response to anti-Muslim cry if I were
+foolish enough to rise it, as the magic name of the Ali Brothers would
+fail to inspire the Mussalmans with enthusiasm if they were madly to
+raise in anti-Hindu cry. People flock in their thousands to listen to us
+because we to-day represent the voice of a nation groaning under iron
+heels. The Ali Brothers were your friends as I was, and still am. My
+religion forbids me to bear any ill-will towards you. I would not raise
+my hand against you even if I had the power. I expect to conquer you
+only by my suffering. The Ali Brothers will certainly draw the sword, if
+they could, in defence of their religion and their country. But they and
+I have made common cause with the people of India in their attempt to
+voice their feelings and to find a remedy for their distress.
+
+You are in search of a remedy to suppress this rising ebullition of
+national feeling. I venture to suggest to you that the only way to
+suppress it is to remove the causes. You have yet the power. You can
+repent of the wrongs done to Indians. You can compel Mr. Lloyd George to
+redeem his promises. I assure you he has kept many escape doors. You can
+compel the Viceroy to retire in favour of a better one, you can revise
+your ideas about Sir Michael O'Dwyer and General Dyer. You can compel
+the Government to summon a conference of the recognised lenders of the
+people, duly elected by them and representing all shades of opinion so
+as to devise means for granting _Swaraj_ in accordance with the wishes
+of the people of India. But this you cannot do unless you consider
+every Indian to be in reality your equal and brother. I ask for no
+patronage, I merely point out to you, as a friend, as honourable
+solution of a grave problem. The other solution, namely repression is
+open to YOU. I prophesy that it will fail. It has begun already. The
+Government has already imprisoned two brave men of Panipat for holding
+and expressing their opinions freely. Another is on his trial in Lahore
+for having expressed similar opinion. One in the Oudh District is
+already imprisoned. Another awaits judgment. You should know what is
+going on in your midst. Our propaganda is being carried on in
+anticipation of repression. I invite you respectfully to choose the
+better way and make common cause with the people of India whose salt you
+are eating. To seek to thwart their inspirations is disloyalty to
+the country.
+
+I am,
+Your faithful friend,
+M. K. GANDHI
+
+
+ONE STEP ENOUGH FOR ME
+
+Mr. Stokes is a Christian, who wants to follow the light that God gives
+him. He has adopted India as his home. He is watching the
+non-co-operation movement from the Kotgarh hills where he is living in
+isolation from the India of the plains and serving the hillmen. He has
+contributed three articles on non-co-operation to the columns of the
+Servant of Calcutta and other papers. I had the pleasure of reading them
+during my Bengal tour. Mr. Stokes approves of non-co-operation but
+dreads the consequences that may follow complete success _i.e.,_
+evacuation of India by the British. He conjures up before his mind a
+picture of India invaded by the Afghans from the North-West, plundered
+by the Gurkhas from the Hills. For me I say with Cardinal Newman: 'I do
+not ask to see the distant scene; one step enough for me.' The movement
+is essentially religious. The business of every god-fearing man is to
+dissociate himself from evil in total disregard of consequences. He must
+have faith in a good deed producing only a good result: that in my
+opinion is the Gita doctrine of work without attachment. God does not
+permit him to peep into the future. He follows truth although the
+following of it may endanger his very life. He knows that it is better
+to die in the way of God than to live in the way of Satan. Therefore who
+ever is satisfied that this Government represents the activity of Satan
+has no choice left to him but to dissociate himself from it.
+
+However, let us consider the worst that can happen to India on a sudden
+evacuation of India by the British. What does it matter that the Gurkhas
+and the Pathans attack us? Surely we would be better able to deal with
+their violence than we are with the continued violence, moral and
+physical, perpetrated by the present Government. Mr. Stokes does not
+seem to eschew the use of physical force. Surely the combined labour of
+the Rajput, the Sikh and the Mussalman warriors in a united India may be
+trusted to deal with plunderers from any or all the sides. Imagine
+however the worst: Japan overwhelming us from the Bay of Bengal, the
+Gurkhas from the Hills, and the Pathans from the North-West. If we not
+succeed in driving them out we make terms with them and drive them at
+the first opportunity. This will be a more manly course than a hopeless
+submission to an admittedly wrongful State.
+
+But I refuse to contemplate the dismal out-look. If the movement
+succeeds through non-violent non-co-operation, and that is the
+supposition Mr. Stokes has started with, the English whether they remain
+or retire, they will do so as friends and under a well-ordered agreement
+as between partners. I still believe in the goodness of human nature,
+whether it is English or any other. I therefore do not believe that the
+English will leave in a night.
+
+And do I consider the Gurkha and the Afghan being incorrigible thieves
+and robbers without ability to respond to purifying influences? I do
+not. If India returns to her spirituality, it will react upon the
+neighbouring tribes, she will interest herself in the welfare of these
+hardy but poor people, and even support them if necessary, not out of
+fear but as a matter of neighbourly duty. She will have dealt with Japan
+simultaneously with the British. Japan will not want to invade India, if
+India has learnt to consider it a sin to use a single foreign article
+that she can manufacture within her own borders. She produces enough to
+eat and her men and women can without difficulty manufacture enough to
+clothe to cover their nakedness and protect themselves from heat and
+cold. We become prey to invasion if we excite the greed of foreign
+nation, by dealing with them under a feeling dependence on them. We must
+learn to be independent of every one of them.
+
+Whether therefore we finally succeed through violence or non-violence in
+my opinion, the prospect is by no means so gloomy as Mr. Stokes has
+imagined. Any conceivable prospect is, in my opinion, less black than
+the present unmanly and helpless condition. And we cannot do better than
+following out fearlessly and with confidence the open and honourable
+programme of non-violence and sacrifice that we have mapped for
+ourselves.
+
+
+THE NEED FOR HUMILITY
+
+The spirit of non-violence necessarily leads to humility. Non-violence
+means reliance on God, the Rocks of ages. If we would seek His aid, we
+must approach Him with a humble and a contrite heart.
+Non-co-operationists may not trade upon their amazing success at the
+Congress. We must act, even as the mango tree which drops as it bears
+fruit. Its grandeur lies in its majestic lowliness. But one hears of
+non-co-operationists being insolent and intolerant in their behaviour
+towards those who differ from them. I know that they will lose all their
+majesty and glory, if they betray any inflation. Whilst we may not be
+dissatisfied with the progress made so far, we have little to our
+credit to make us feel proud. We have to sacrifice much more than we
+have done to justify pride, much less elation. Thousands, who flocked to
+the Congress pandal, have undoubtedly given their intellectual assent to
+the doctrine but few have followed it out in practice. Leaving aside the
+pleaders, how many parents have withdrawn their children from schools?
+How many of those who registered their vote in favour of
+non-co-operation have taken to hand-spinning or discarded the use of all
+foreign cloth?
+
+Non-co-operation is not a movement of brag, bluster, or bluff. It is a
+test of our sincerity. It requires solid and silent self-sacrifice. It
+challenges our honesty and our capacity for national work. It is a
+movement that aims at translating ideas into action. And the more we do,
+the more we find that much more must be done than we have expected. And
+this thought of our imperfection must make us humble.
+
+A non-co-operationist strives to compel attention and to set an example
+not by his violence but by his unobtrusive humility. He allows his solid
+action to speak for his creed. His strength lies in his reliance upon
+the correctness of his position. And the conviction of it grows most in
+his opponent when he least interposes his speech between his action and
+his opponent. Speech, especially when it is haughty, betrays want of
+confidence and it makes one's opponent sceptical about the reality of
+the act itself. Humility therefore is the key to quick success. I hope
+that every non-co-operationist will recognise the necessity of being
+humble and self-restrained. It is because so little is really required
+to be done because all of that little depends entirely upon ourselves
+that I have ventured the belief that Swaraj is attainable in less
+than one year.
+
+
+SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED
+
+"I write to thank you for yours of the 7th instant and especially for
+your request that I should after reading your writings in "Young India"
+on non-co-operation, give a full and frank criticism of them. I know
+that your sole desire is to find out the truth and to act accordingly,
+and hence I venture to make the following remarks. In the issue of May
+5th you say that non-co-operation is "not even anti-Government." But
+surely to refuse to have anything to do with the Government to the
+extent of not serving it and of not paying its taxes is actually, if not
+theoretically anti-Government; and such a course must ultimately make
+all Government impossible. Again, you say, "It is the inherent right of
+a subject to refuse to assist a government that will not listen to him."
+Leaving aside the question of the ethical soundness of this
+proposition, may I ask which Government, in the present case? Has not
+the Indian Government done all it possibly can in the matter? Then if
+its attempts to voice the request of India should fail, would it be fair
+and just to do anything against it? Would not the proper course be
+non-co-operation with the Supreme Council of the Allies, including Great
+Britain, if it be found that the latter has failed properly to support
+the demand of the Indian Government and people? It seems to me that in
+all your writings and speeches you forget that in the present question
+both Government and people are as one, and if they fail to get what they
+justly want, how does the question of non-co-operation arise? Hindus
+and Englishmen and the Government are all at present "shouldering in a
+full-hearted manner the burden that Muhomedans of India are carrying
+etc. etc." But supposing we fail of our object--what then? Are we all to
+refuse to co-operate and with whom?
+
+Might I recommend the consideration of the following course of conduct?
+
+(1) "Wait and see" what the actual terms of the Treaty with Turkey are?
+
+(2) If they are not in accordance with the aspirations and
+recommendations of the Government and the people of India, the every
+legitimate effort should be made to have the terms revised.
+
+(3) To the bitter end, co-operate with a Government that co-operates
+with us, and only when it refuses co-operation, go in for
+non-co-operation.
+
+So far I personally see no reason whatsoever for non-co-operation with
+the Indian Government, and till it fails to voice the needs and demands
+of India as a whole there can be no reason. The Indian Government does
+some times make mistakes, but in the Khilafat matter it is sound and
+therefore deserves or ought to have the sympathetic and whole-hearted
+co-operation of every one in India. I hope that you will kindly consider
+the above and perhaps you will be able to find time for a reply in
+_Young India_."
+
+I gladly make room for the above letter and respond to the suggestion
+to give a public reply as no doubt the difficulty experienced by the
+English friend is experienced by many. Causes are generally lost, not
+owing to the determined opposition of men who will not see the truth as
+they want to perpetuate an injustice but because they are able to enlist
+in their favour the allegiance of those who are anxious to understand a
+particular cause and take sides after mature judgment. It is only by
+patient argument with such honest men that one is able to check oneself,
+correct one's own errors of judgment and at times to wean them from
+their error and bring them over to one's side. This Khilafat question is
+specially difficult because there are so many side-issues. It is
+therefore no wonder that many have more or less difficulty in making up
+their minds. It is further complicated because the painful necessity for
+some direct action has arisen in connection with it. But whatever the
+difficulty, I am convinced that there is no question so important as
+this one if we want harmony and peace in India.
+
+My friend objects to my statement that non-co-operation is not
+anti-Government, because he considers that refusal to serve it and pay
+its taxes is actually anti-Government. I respectfully dissent from the
+view. If a brother has fundamental differences with his brother, and
+association with the latter involves his partaking of what in his
+opinion is an injustice. I hold that it is brotherly duty to refrain
+from serving his brother and sharing his earnings with him. This happens
+in everyday life. Prahalad did not act against his father, when he
+declined to associate himself with the latter's blasphemies. Nor was
+Jesus anti-Jewish when he declaimed against the Pharisees and the
+hypocrites, and would have none of them. In such matters, is it not
+intention that determines the character of a particular act? It is
+hardly correct as the friend suggests that withdrawal of association
+under general circumstances would make all government impossible. But it
+is true that such withdrawal would make all injustice impossible.
+
+My correspondent considers that the Government of India having done all
+it possibly could, non-co-operation could not be applicable to that
+Government. In my opinion, whilst it is true that the Government of
+India has done a great deal, it has not done half as much as it might
+have done, and might even now do. No Government can absolve itself from
+further action beyond protesting, when it realises that the people whom
+it represents feel as keenly as do lakhs of Indian Mussalmans in the
+Khilafat question. No amount of sympathy with a starving man can possibly
+avail. He must have bread or he dies, and what is wanted at that
+critical moment is some exertion to fetch the wherewithal to feed the
+dying man. The Government of India can to-day heed the agitation and
+ask, to the point of insistence for full vindication of the pledged word
+of a British Minister. Has the Government of India resigned by way of
+protest against the threatened, shameful betrayal of trust on the part
+of Mr. Lloyd George? Why does the Government of India hide itself behind
+secret despatches? At a less critical moment Lord Hardiage committed a
+constitutional indiscretion, openly sympathised with South African
+Passive Resistance movement and stemmed the surging tide of public
+indignation in India, though at the same time he incurred the wrath of
+the then South African Cabinet and some public men in Great Britain.
+After all, the utmost that the Government of India has done is on its
+own showing to transmit and press the Mahomedan claim. Was that not the
+least it could have done? Could it have done anything less without
+covering itself with disgrace? What Indian Mahomedans and the Indian
+public expect the Government of India to do at this critical juncture is
+not the least, but the utmost that it could do. Viceroys have been known
+to tender resignations for much smaller causes. Wounded pride brought
+forth not very long ago the resignation of a Lieutenant Governor. On the
+Khilafat question, a sacred cause dear to the hearts of several million
+Mahomedans is in danger of being wounded. I would therefore invite the
+English friend, and every Englishman in India, and every Hindu, be he
+moderate or extremist, to make common cause with the Mahomedans and
+thereby compel the Government of India to do its duty, and thereby
+compel His Majesty's Ministers to do theirs.
+
+There has been much talk of violence ensuing from active
+non-co-operation. I venture to suggest that the Mussalmans of India, if
+they had nothing in the shape of non-co-operation in view, would have
+long ago yielded to counsels of despair. I admit that non-co-operation
+is not unattended with danger. But violence is a certainty without,
+violence is only a possibility with non-co-operation. And it will he a
+greater possibility if all the important men, English, Hindu and others
+of the country discountenance it.
+
+I think, that the recommendation made by the friend is being literally
+followed by the Mahomedans. Although they practically know the fate,
+they are waiting for the actual terms of the treaty with Turkey. They
+are certainly going to try every means at their disposal to have the
+terms revised before beginning non-co-operation. And there will
+certainly be no non-co-operation commenced so long as there is even hope
+of active co-operation on the part of the Government of India with the
+Mahomedans, that is, co-operation strong enough to secure a revision of
+the terms should they be found to be in conflict with the pledges of
+British statesmen. But if all these things fail, can Mahomedans as men
+of honour who hold their religion dearer than their lives do anything
+less than wash their hands clean of the guilt of British Ministers and
+the Government of India by refusing to co-operate with them? And can
+Hindus and Englishmen, if they value Mahomedan friendship, and if they
+admit then full justice of the Mahomaden friendship and if they admit
+the full justice of the Mahomedan claim do otherwise than heartily
+support the Mahomedans by word and deed.
+
+
+PLEDGES BROKEN
+
+After the forgoing was printed the long-expected peace terms regarding
+Turkey were received. In my humble opinion they are humiliating to the
+Supreme Council, to the British ministers, and if as a Hindu with deep
+reverence for Christianity I may say so, a denial of Christ's teachings.
+Turkey broken down and torn with dissentions within may submit to the
+arrogant disposal of herself, and Indian Mahomedans may out of fear do
+likewise. Hindus out of fear, apathy or want of appreciation of the
+situation, may refuse to help their Mahomedan brethren in their hour of
+peril. The fact remains that a solemn promise of the Prime Minister of
+England has been wantonly broken. I will say nothing about President
+Wilson's fourteen points, for they seem now to be entirely forgotten as
+a day's wonder. It is a matter of deep sorrow that the Government of
+India _communique_ offers a defence of the terms, calls them a
+fulfilment of Mr. Lloyd George's pledge of 5th January 1918 and yet
+apologises for their defective nature and appeals to the Mahomedans of
+India as if to mock them that they would accept the terms with quiet
+resignation. The mask that veils the hypocrisy is too thin to deceive
+anybody. It would have been dignified if the _communique_ had boldly
+admitted Mr. Lloyd George's mistake in having made the promise referred
+to. As it is, the claim of fulfilment of the promise only adds to the
+irritation caused by its glaring breach. What is the use of the Viceroy
+saying, "The question of the Khilafat is one for the Mahomedans and
+Mahomedans only and that with their free choice in the matter Government
+have no desire to interfere," while the Khalif's dominions are
+ruthlessly dismembered, his control of the Holy places of Islam
+shamelessly taken away from him and he himself reduced to utter
+impotence in his own palace which can no longer be called a palace but
+which can he more fitly described us a prison? No wonder, His Excellency
+fears that the peace includes "terms which must be painful to all
+Moslems." Why should he insult Muslim intelligence by sending the
+Mussalmans of India a of encouragement and sympathy? Are they expected
+to find encouragement in the cruel recital of the arrogant terms or in a
+remembrance of 'the splendid response' made by them to the call of the
+King 'in the day of the Empire's need.' It ill becomes His Excellency to
+talk of the triumph of those ideals of justice and humanity for which
+the Allies fought. Indeed, the terms of the so called peace with Turkey
+if they are to last, will be a monument of human arrogance and man-made
+injustice. To attempt to crush the spirit of a brave and gallant race,
+because it has lost in the fortunes of war, is a triumph not of humanity
+but a demonstration of inhumanity. And if Turkey enjoyed the closest
+ties of friendship with Great Britain before the war, Great Britain has
+certainly made ample reparation for her mistake by having made the
+largest contribution to the humiliation of Turkey. It is insufferable
+therefore when the Viceroy feels confident that with the conclusion of
+this new treaty that friendship will quickly take life again and a
+Turkey regenerate full of hope and strength, will stand forth in the
+future as in the past a pillar of the Islamic faith. The Viceregal
+message audaciously concludes, "This thought will I trust strengthen you
+to accept the peace terms with resignation, courage and fortitude and to
+keep your loyalty towards the Crown bright and untarnished as it has
+been for so many generations." If Muslim loyalty remains untarnished it
+will certainly not be for want of effort on the part of the Government
+of India to put the heaviest strain upon it, but it will remain so
+because the Mahomedans realise their own strength--the strength in the
+knowledge that their cause is just and that they have got the power to
+vindicate justice in spite of the aberration suffered by Great Britain
+under a Prime Minister whom continued power has made as reckless in
+making promises as in breaking them.
+
+Whilst therefore I admit that there is nothing either in the peace terms
+or in the Viceregal message covering them to inspire the Mahomedans and
+Indians in general with confidence or hope, I venture to suggest that
+there is no cause for despair and anger. Now is the time for Mahomedans
+to retain absolute self-control, to unite their forces and, weak though
+they are, with firm faith in God to carry on the struggle with redoubled
+vigour till justice is done. If India--both Hindu and Mahomedan--can act
+as one man and can withdraw her partnership in this crime against
+humanity which the peace terms represent, she will soon secure a
+revision of the treaty and give herself and the Empire at least, if not
+the world, a lasting peace. There is no doubt that the struggle would be
+bitter sharp and possibly prolonged, but it is worth all the sacrifice
+that it is likely to call forth. Both the Mussalmans and the Hindus are
+on their trial. Is the humiliation of the Khilafat a matter of concern
+to the former? And if it is, are they prepared to exercise restraint,
+religiously refrain from violence and practise non-co-operation without
+counting the material loss it may entail upon the community? Do the
+Hindus honestly feel for their Mahomedan brethren to the extent of
+sharing their sufferings to the fullest extent? The answer to these
+questions and not the peace terms, will finally decide the fate of
+the Khilafat.
+
+
+MORE OBJECTIONS ANSWERED
+
+_Swadeshmitran_ is one of the most influential Tamil dailies of Madras.
+It is widely read. Everything appearing in its columns is entitled to
+respect. The Editor has suggested some practical difficulty in the way
+of non-co-operation. I would therefore like, to the best of my ability,
+to deal with them.
+
+I do not know where the information has been derived from that I have
+given up the last two stages of non-co-operation. What I have said is
+that they are a distant goal. I abide by it. I admit that all the stages
+are fraught with some danger, but the last two are fraught with the
+greatest--the last most of all. The stages have been fixed with a view
+to running the least possible risk. The last two stages will not be
+taken up unless the committee has attained sufficient control over the
+people to warrant the beliefs that the laying down of arms or suspension
+of taxes will, humanly speaking, be free from an outbreak of violence on
+the part of the people. I do entertain the belief that it is possible
+for the people to attain the discipline necessary for taking the two
+steps. When once they realise that violence is totally unnecessary to
+bend an unwilling government to their will and that the result can be
+obtained with certainty by dignified non-co-operation, they will cease
+to think of violence even by way of retaliation. The fact is that
+hitherto we have not attempted to take concerted and disciplined action
+from the masses. Some day, if we are to become truly a self-governing
+nation, that attempt has to be made. The present, in my opinion, is a
+propitious movement. Every Indian feels the insult to the Punjab as a
+personal wrong, every Mussalman resents the wrong done to the Khilafat.
+There is therefore a favourable atmosphere for expecting cohesive and
+restrained movement on the part of the masses.
+
+So far as response is concerned, I agree with the Editor that the
+quickest and the largest response is to be expected in the matter of
+suspension of payment of taxes, but as I have said so long as the masses
+are not educated to appreciate the value of non-violence even whilst
+their holding are being sold, so long must it be difficult to take up
+the last stage into any appreciable extent.
+
+I agree too that a sudden withdrawal of the military and the police will
+be a disaster if we have not acquired the ability to protect ourselves
+against robbers and thieves. But I suggest that when we are ready to
+call out the military and the police on an extensive scale we would find
+ourselves in a position to defend ourselves. If the police and the
+military resign from patriotic motives, I would certainly expect them to
+perform the same duty as national volunteers, not has hirelings but as
+willing protectors of the life and liberty of their countrymen. The
+movement of non-co-operation is one of automatic adjustment. If the
+Government schools are emptied, I would certainly expect national
+schools to come into being. If the lawyers as a whole suspended
+practice, they would devise arbitration courts and the nation will have
+expeditions and cheaper method of setting private disputes and awarding
+punishment to the wrong-doer. I may add that the Khilafat Committee is
+fully alive to the difficulty of the task and is taking all the
+necessary steps to meet the contingencies as they arise.
+
+Regarding the leaving of civil employment, no danger is feared, because
+no one will leave his employment, unless he is in a position to find
+support for himself and family either through friends or otherwise.
+
+Disapproval of the proposed withdrawal of students betrays, in my
+humble opinion, lack of appreciation of the true nature of
+non-co-operation. It is true enough that we pay the money wherewith our
+children are educated. But, when the agency imparting the education has
+become corrupt, we may not employ it without partaking of the agents,
+corruption. When students leave schools or colleges I hardly imagine
+that the teachers will fail to perceive the advisability of themselves
+resigning. But even if they do not, money can hardly be allowed to count
+where honour or religion are at the stake.
+
+As to the boycott of the councils, it is not the entry of the Moderates
+or any other persons that matters so much as the entry of those who
+believe in non-co-operation. You may not co-operate at the top and
+non-co-operate at the bottom. A councillor cannot remain in the council
+and ask the _gumasta_ who cleans the council-table to resign.
+
+
+MR. PENNINGTON'S OBJECTIONS ANSWERED
+
+I gladly publish Mr. Pennington's letter with its enclosure just as I
+have received them. Evidently Mr. Pennington is not a regular reader of
+'Young India,' or he would have noticed that no one has condemned mob
+outrages more than I have. He seems to think that the article he has
+objected to was the only thing I have ever written on General Dyer. He
+does not seem to know that I have endeavoured with the utmost
+impartiality to examine the Jallianwala massacre. And he can see any day
+all the proof adduced by my fellow-commissioners and myself in support
+of our findings on the massacre. The ordinary readers of 'Young India'
+knew all the facts and therefore it was unnecessary for me to support my
+assertion otherwise. But unfortunately Mr. Pennington represents the
+typical Englishman. He does not want to be unjust, nevertheless he is
+rarely just in his appreciation of world events because he has no time
+to study them except cursorily and that through a press whose business
+is to air only party views. The average Englishman therefore except in
+parochial matters is perhaps the least informed though he claims to be
+well-informed about every variety of interest. Mr. Pennington's
+ignorance is thus typical of the others and affords the best reason for
+securing control of our own affairs in our own hands. Ability will come
+with use and not by waiting to be trained by those whose natural
+interest is to prolong the period of tutelage as much as possible.
+
+But to return to Mr. Pennington's letter he complains that there has
+been no 'proper trial of any one.' The fault is not ours. India has
+consistently and insistently demanded a trial of all the officers
+concerned in the crimes against the Punjab.
+
+He next objects to be 'violence' of my language. If truth is violent, I
+plead guilty to the charge of violence of language. But I could not,
+without doing violence to truth, refrain from using the language, I
+have, regarding General Dyer's action. It has been proved out of his own
+mouth or hostile witnesses:
+
+(1) That the crowd was unarmed.
+
+(2) That it contained children.
+
+(3) That the 13th was the day of Vaisakhi fair.
+
+(4) That thousands had come to the fair.
+
+(5) That there was no rebellion.
+
+(6) That during the intervening two days before the 'massacre' there was
+peace in Amritsar.
+
+(7) That the proclamation of the meeting was made the same day as
+General Dyer's proclamation.
+
+(8) That General Dyer's proclamation prohibited not meetings but
+processions or gatherings of four men on the streets and not in private
+or public places.
+
+(9) That General Dyer ran no risk whether outside or inside the city.
+
+(10) That he admitted himself that many in the crowd did not know
+anything of his proclamation.
+
+(11) That he fired without warning the crowd and even after it had
+begun to disperse. He fired on the backs of the people who were
+in flight.
+
+(12) That the men were practically penned in an enclosure.
+
+In the face of these admitted facts I do call the deed a 'massacre.' The
+action amounted not to 'an error of judgment' but its 'paralysis in the
+face of fancied danger.'
+
+I am sorry to have to say that Mr. Pennington's notes, which too the
+reader will find published elsewhere, betray as much ignorance as
+his letter.
+
+Whatever was adopted on paper in the days of Canning was certainly not
+translated into action in its full sense. 'Promises made to the ear were
+broken to the hope,' was said by a reactionary Viceroy. Military
+expenditure has grown enormously since the days of Canning.
+
+The demonstration in favour of General Dyer is practically a myth.
+
+No trace was found of the so-called Danda Fauj dignified by the name of
+bludgeon-army by Mr. Pennington. There was no rebel army in Amritsar.
+The crown that committed the horrible murders and incendiarism contained
+no one community exclusively. The sheet was found posted only in Lahore
+and not in Amritsar. Mr. Pennington should moreover have known by this
+time that the meeting held on the 13th was held, among other things, for
+the purpose of condemning mob excesses. This was brought out at the
+Amritsar trial. Those who surrounded him could not stop General Dyer. He
+says he made up his mind to shoot in a moment. He consulted nobody. When
+the correspondent says that the troops would have objected to being
+concerned in 'what might in that case be not unfairly called a
+'massacre,' he writes as if he had never lived in India. I wish the
+Indian troops had the moral courage to refuse to shoot innocent, unarmed
+men in full flight. But the Indian troops have been brought in too
+slavish an atmosphere to dare do any such correct act.
+
+I hope Mr. Pennington will not accuse me again of making unverified
+assertions because I have not quoted from the books. The evidence is
+there for him to use. I can only assure him that the assertions are
+based on positive proofs mostly obtained from official sources.
+
+Mr. Pennington wants me to publish an exact account of what happened on
+the 10th April. He can find it in the reports, and if he will patiently
+go through them he will discover that Sir Michael O'Dwyer and his
+officials goaded the people into frenzied fury--a fury which nobody, as
+I have already said, has condemned more than I have. The account of the
+following days is summed up in one word, _viz._ 'peace' on the part of
+the crowd disturbed by indiscriminate arrests, the massacre and the
+series of official crimes that followed.
+
+I am prepared to give Mr. Pennington credit for seeking after the truth.
+But he has gone about it in the wrong manner. I suggest his reading the
+evidence before the Hunter Committee and the Congress Committee. He need
+not read the reports. But the evidence will convince him that I have
+understated the case against General Dyer.
+
+When however I read his description of himself as "for 12 years Chief
+Magistrate of Districts in the South of India before reform, by
+assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable." I despair of his
+being able to find the truth. An angry or a biased man renders himself
+incapable of finding it. And Mr. Pennington is evidently both angry and
+biased. What does he mean by saying, "before reform by assassination and
+otherwise became so fashionable?" It ill becomes him to talk of
+assassination when the school of assassination seems happily to have
+become extinct. Englishmen will never see the truth so long as they
+permit their vision to be blinded by arrogant assumption of superiority
+or ignorant assumptions of infallibility.
+
+
+MR. PENNINGTON'S LETTER TO MR. GANDHI
+
+   Dear Sir,
+
+   I do not like your scheme for "boycotting" the Government of India
+   under what seems to be the somewhat less offensive (though more
+   cumbrous) name of non-co-operation; but have always given you credit
+   for a genuine desire to carry out revolution by peaceful means and am
+   astonished at the violence of the language you use in describing
+   General Dyer on page 4 of your issue of the 14th July last. You begin
+   by saying that he is "by no means the worst offender," and, so far, I
+   am inclined to agree, though as there has been no proper trial of
+   anyone it is impossible to apportion their guilt; but then you say
+   "his brutality is unmistakable," "his abject and unsoldierlike
+   cowardice is apparent, he has called an _unarmed crowd_ of men and
+   children--mostly holiday makers--a rebel army." "He believes himself
+   to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot down
+   like rabbits men who were _penned_ in an enclosure; such a man is
+   unworthy to be considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his
+   action. He ran no risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and
+   without warning. This is not an error of judgement. It is paralysis
+   of it in the face of _fancied_ danger. It is proof of criminal
+   incapacity and heartlessness," etc.
+
+   You must excuse me for saying that all this is mere rhetoric
+   unsupported by any proof, even where proof was possible. To begin
+   with, neither you nor I were present at the Jallianwalla Bagh on that
+   dreadful day--dreadful especially for General Dyer for whom you show
+   no sympathy,--and therefore cannot know for certain whether the crowd
+   was or was not unarmed.' That it was an 'illegal,' because a
+   'prohibited,' assembly is evident; for it is absurd to suppose that
+   General Dyer's 4-1/2 hours march, through the city that very morning,
+   during the whole of which he was warning the inhabitants against the
+   danger of any sort of gathering, was not thoroughly well-known. You
+   say they were 'mostly holiday makers,' but you give nor proof; and
+   the idea of holiday gathering in Amritsar just then in incredible. I
+   cannot understand your making such a suggestion. General Dyer was not
+   the only officer present on the occasion and it is impossible to
+   suppose that he would have been allowed to go on shooting into an
+   innocent body of holiday-makers. Even the troops would have refused
+   to carry out what might then have been not unfairly called a
+   "massacre."
+
+   I notice that you never even allude to the frightful brutality of the
+   mob which was immediately responsible for the punitive measure
+   reluctantly adopted by General Dyer. Your sympathies seem to be only
+   with the murderers, and I am not sanguine enough to suppose that my
+   view of the case will have much influence with you. Still I am bound
+   to do what I can to get at the truth, and enclose a copy of some
+   notes I have had occasion to make. If you can publish an _exact_
+   account of what happened at Amritsar on the 10th of April, 1919 and
+   the following days, especially on the 13th, including the
+   demonstration in favour of General Dyer, (if there was one), I for
+   one, as a mere seeker after the truth, should be very much obliged to
+   you. Mere abuse is not convincing, as you so often observe in your
+   generally reasonable paper,
+
+   Yours faithfully,
+   J. R. PENNINGTON, I.O.S. (Retd.)
+   35, VICTORIA ROAD, WORTHING, SUSSEX
+   27th Aug. 1920.
+
+   For 12 years Chief Magistrate of Districts in the south of India
+   before reform, by assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable.
+
+   P.S. Let us get the case in this way. General Dyer, acting as the
+   only representative of Government on the spot shot some hundreds of
+   people (some of them _perhaps_ innocently mixed up in an illegal
+   assembly), in the _bona fide_ belief that he was dealing with the
+   remains of a very dangerous rebellion and was thereby saving the
+   lives of very many thousands, and in the opinion of a great many
+   people did actually save the city from falling in the hands of a
+   dangerous mob.
+
+
+SOME DOUBTS
+
+Babu Janakdhari Prasad was a staunch coworker with me in Champaran. He
+has written a long letter setting forth his reasons for his belief that
+India has a great mission before her, and that she can achieve her
+purpose only by non-violent non-co-operation. But he has doubts which he
+would have me answer publicly. The letter being long, I am withholding.
+But the doubts are entitled to respect and I must endeavour to answer
+them. Here they are us framed by Bubu Janakdhari Prasad.
+
+(a) Is not the non-co-operation movement creating a sort of race-hatred
+between Englishmen and Indians, and is it in accordance with the Divine
+plan of universal love and brotherhood?
+
+(b) Does not the use of words "devilish," "satanic," etc., savour of
+unbrotherly sentiment and incite feelings of hatred?
+
+(c) Should not the non-co-operation movement be conducted on strictly
+non-violent and non-emotional lines both in speech and action?
+
+(d) Is there no danger of the movement going out of control and lending
+to violence?
+
+As to (a), I must say that the movement is not 'creating' race-hatred.
+It certainly gives, as I have already said, disciplined expression to
+it. You cannot eradicate evil by ignoring it. It is because I want to
+promote universal brotherhood that I have taken up non-co-operation so
+that, by self-purification, India may make the world better than it is.
+
+As to (b), I know that the words 'satanic' and 'devilish' are strong,
+but they relate the exact truth. They describe a system not persons: We
+are bound to hate evil, if we would shun it. But by means of
+non-co-operation we are able to distinguish between the evil and the
+evil-doer. I have found no difficulty in describing a particular
+activity of a brother of mine to be devilish, but I am not aware of
+having harboured any hatred about him. Non-co-operation teaches us to
+love our fellowmen in spite of their faults, not by ignoring or
+over-looking them.
+
+As to (c), the movement is certainly being conducted on strictly
+non-violent lines. That all non-co-operators have not yet thoroughly
+imbibed the doctrine is true. But that just shows what an evil legacy we
+have inherited. Emotion there is in the movement. And it will remain. A
+man without emotion is a man without feeling.
+
+As to (d), there certainly is danger of the movement becoming violent.
+But we may no more drop non-violent non-co-operation because of its
+dangers, than we may stop freedom because of the danger of its abuse.
+
+
+REJOINDER
+
+Messrs. Popley and Philips have been good enough to reply to my letter
+"To Every Englishman in India." I recognise and appreciate the friendly
+spirit of their letter. But I see that there are fundamental differences
+which must for the time being divide them and me. So long as I felt
+that, in spite of grievous lapses the British Empire represented an
+activity for the worlds and India's good, I clung to it like a child to
+its mother's breast. But that faith is gone. The British nation has
+endorsed the Punjab and Khilsfat crimes. The is no doubt a dissenting
+minority. But a dissenting minority that satisfies itself with a mere
+expression of its opinion and continues to help the wrong-doer partakes
+in wrong-doing.
+
+And when the sum total of his energy represents a minus quantity one may
+not pick out the plus quantities, hold them up for admiration, and ask
+an admiring public to help regarding them. It is a favourite design of
+Satan to temper evil with a show of good and thus lure the unwary into
+the trap. The only way the world has known of defeating Satan is by
+shunning him. I invite Englishmen, who could work out the ideal the
+believe in, to join the ranks of the non-co-operationists. W.T. Stead
+prayed for the reverse of the British arms during the Boer war. Miss
+Hobbhouse invited the Boers to keep up the fight. The betrayal of India
+is much worse than the injustice done to the Boers. The Boers fought and
+bled for their rights. When therefore, we are prepared to bleed, the
+right will have become embodied, and idolatrous world will perceive it
+and do homage to it.
+
+But Messers. Popley and Phillips object that I have allied myself with
+those who would draw the sword if they could. I see nothing wrong in
+it. They represent the right no less than I do. And is it not worth
+while trying to prevent an unsheathing of the sword by helping to win
+the bloodless battle? Those who recognise the truth of the Indian
+position can only do God's work by assisting this non-violent campaign.
+
+The second objection raised by these English friends is more to the
+point. I would be guilty of wrong-doing myself if the Muslim cause was
+not just. The fact is that the Muslim claim is not to perpetuate foreign
+domination of non-Muslim or Turkish races. The Indian Mussalmans do not
+resist self-determination, but they would fight to the last the
+nefarious plan of exploiting Mesopotamia under the plea of
+self-determination. They must resist the studied attempt to humiliate
+Turkey and therefore Islam, under the false pretext of ensuring Armenian
+independence.
+
+The third objection has reference to schools. I do object to missionary
+or any schools being carried on with Government money. It is true that
+it was at one time our money. Will these good missionaries be justified
+in educating me with funds given to them by a robber who has robbed me
+of my money, religion and honour because the money was originally mine.
+
+I personally tolerated the financial robbery of India, but it would
+have been a sin to have tolerated the robbery of honour through the
+Punjab, and of religion through Turkey. This is strong language. But
+nothing less would truly describe my deep conviction. Needless to add
+that the emptying of Government aided, or affiliated, schools does not
+mean starving the young mind National Schools are coming into being as
+fast as the others are emptied.
+
+Messrs. Popley and Phillips think that my sense of justice has been
+blurred by the knowledge of the Punjab and the Khilafat wrongs. I hope
+not. I have asked friends to show me some good fruit (intended and
+deliberately produced) of the British occupation of India. And I assure
+them that I shall make the amplest amends if I find that I have erred in
+my eagerness about the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs.
+
+
+TWO ENGLISHMEN REPLY
+
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+
+Thank you for your letter to every Englishman in India, with its
+hard-hitting and its generous tone. Something within us responds to the
+note which you have struck. We are not representatives of any corporate
+body, but we think that millions of our countrymen in England, and not
+a few in India, feel as we do. The reading of your letter convinces us
+that you and we cannot be real enemies.
+
+May we say at once that in so far as the British Empire stands for the
+domination and exploitation of other races for Britain's benefit, for
+degrading treatment of any, for traffic in intoxicating liquors, for
+repressive legislation, for administration such as that which to the
+Amritsar incidents, we desire the end of it as much as you do? We quite
+understand that in the excitement of the present crisis, owing to
+certain acts of the British Administration, which we join with you in
+condemning, the Empire presents itself to you under this aspect along.
+But from personal contact with our countrymen, we know that working like
+leaven in the midst of such tendencies, as you and we deplore, is the
+faith in a better ideal--the ideal of a commonwealth of free peoples
+voluntarily linked together by the ties of common experience in the past
+and common aspirations for the future, a commonwealth which may hope to
+spread liberty and progress through the whole earth. With vast numbers
+of our countrymen we value the British Empire mainly as affording the
+possibility of the realization of such an idea and on the ground give it
+our loyal allegiance.
+
+Meanwhile we do repent of that arrogant attitude to Indians which has
+been all too common among our countrymen, we do hold Indians to be our
+brothers and equals, many of them our superiors, and we would rather be
+servants than rulers of India. We desire an administration which cannot
+he intimated either by the selfish element in Anglo-Indian political
+opinion or by any other sectional interest and which shall govern in
+accordance with the best democratic principles. We should welcome the
+convening of a National assembly of recognized leaders of the people,
+representing all shades of political opinion of every caste, race and
+creed, to frame a constitution for Swaraj. In all the things that matter
+most we are with you. Surely you and we can co-operate in the service of
+India, in such matters for example as education. It seems to us nothing
+short of a tragedy that you should be rallying Indian Patriotism to
+inaugurate a new era of good will under a watchword that divides,
+instead of uniting all.
+
+We have spoken of the large amount of common ground upon which you and
+we can stand. But frankness demands that we express our anxiety about
+some items in your programme. Leaving aside smaller questions on which
+your letter seems to us to do the British side less than justice, may we
+mention three main points? Your insistence on spiritual forces alone we
+deeply respect and desire to emulate, but we cannot understand your
+combining into it with a close alliance with those who, as you frankly
+say, would draw the sword as soon as they could.
+
+Your desire for an education truly national commands our whole-hearted
+approval. But instead of Indianizing the present system, as you could
+begin to do from the beginning of next year, or instead of creating a
+hundred institutions such as that at Bolpur and turning into them the
+stream of India's young intellectual life, you appear to be turning that
+stream out of its present channel into open sands where it may dry up.
+In other words, you seem to us to be risking the complete cessation, for
+a period possibly, of years, of all education, for a large number of
+boys and young men. Is it best, for those young men or for India that
+the present imperfect education should cease before a better education
+is ready to take its place?
+
+Your desire to unite Mohammedan and Hindu and to share with your
+Mohammedan brethren in seeking the satisfaction of Mohammedan
+aspirations, we can understand and sympathize with. But is there no
+danger, in the course which some of your party have urged upon the
+Government, that certain races in the former Ottoman Empire might be
+fixed under a foreign yoke, for worse than that which you hold the
+English yoke to be? You could not wish to purchase freedom in India at
+the price of enslavement in the middle East.
+
+To sum up, we thank you for the spirit of your letter, to which we have
+tried to respond in the same spirit. We are with you in the desire for
+an India genuinely free to develop the best that is in her and in the
+belief that best is something wonderful of which the world to-day
+stands in need.
+
+We are ready to co-operate with you and with every other man of any race
+or nationality who will help India to realize her best. Are you going to
+insist that you can have nothing to do with us if we receive a
+government grant (i.e., Indian money), for an Indian School. Surely some
+more inspiring battle cry than non-co-operation can be discovered. We
+have ventured quite frankly to point out three items in your present
+programme, which seem to us likely to hinder the attainment of your true
+ideals for Indian greatness. But those ideals themselves command our
+warm sympathy, and we desire to work, so far as we have opportunity, for
+their attainment. In fact, it is only thus that we can interpret our
+British citizenship.
+
+Yours sincerely,
+(Sd.) H.A. POPLEY,
+(Sd.) G.E. PHILLIPS.
+Bangalore,
+November 15, 1920.
+
+
+RENUNCIATION OF MEDALS
+
+Mr. Gandhi has addressed the following letter to the Viceroy:--
+
+It is not without a pang that I return the Kaisar-i-Hind gold medal
+granted to me by your predecessor for my humanitarian work in South
+Africa, the Zulu war medal granted in South Africa for my services as
+officer in charge of the Indian volunteer ambulance corps in 1906 and
+the Boer war medal fur my services as assistant superintendent of the
+Indian volunteer stretcher bearer corps during the Boer war of
+1899-1900. I venture to return these medals in pursuance of the scheme
+of non-co-operation inaugurated to-day in connection with the Khilafat
+movement. Valuable as those honours have been to me, I cannot wear them
+with an easy conscience so long as my Mussalman countrymen have to
+labour under a wrong done to their religious sentiment. Events that have
+happened during the past month have confirmed me in the opinion that the
+Imperial Government have acted in the Khilafat matter in an
+unscrupulous, immoral and unjust manner and have been moving from wrong
+to wrong in order to defend their immorality. I can retain neither
+respect nor affection for such a Government.
+
+The attitude of the Imperial and Your Excellency's Governments on the
+Punjab question has given me additional cause for grave dissatisfaction.
+I had the honour, as Your Excellency is aware, as one of the congress
+commissioners to investigate the causes of the disorders in the Punjab
+during the April of 1919. And it is my deliberate conviction that Sir
+Michael O'Dwyer was totally unfit to hold the office of Lieutenant
+Governor of Punjab and that his policy was primarily responsible for
+infuriating the mob at Amritsar. No doubt the mob excesses were
+unpardonable; incendiarism, murder of five innocent Englishmen and the
+cowardly assault on Miss Sherwood were most deplorable and uncalled for.
+But the punitive measures taken by General Dyer, Col. Frank Johnson,
+Col. O'Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram Sud, Mr. Malik Khan and
+other officers were out of all proportional to the crime of the people
+and amounted to wanton cruelty and inhumanity and almost unparalleled in
+modern times. Your excellency's light-hearted treatment of the official
+crime, your, exoneration of Sir Michael O'Dwyer, Mr. Montagu's dispatch
+and above all the shameful ignorance of the Punjab events and callous
+disregard of the feelings of Indians betrayed by the House of Lords,
+have filled me with the gravest misgivings regarding the future of the
+Empire, have estranged me completely from the present Government and
+have disabled me from tendering, as I have hitherto whole-heartedly
+tendered, my loyal co-operation.
+
+In my humble opinion the ordinary method of agitating by way of
+petitions, deputations and the like is no remedy for moving to
+repentence a Government so hopelessly indifferent to the welfare of its
+charges as the Government of India has proved to me. In European
+countries, condonation of such grievous wrongs as the Khilafat and the
+Punjab would have resulted in a bloody revolution by the people. They
+would have resisted at all costs national emasculation such as the said
+wrongs imply. But half of India is to weak to offer violent resistance
+and the other half is unwilling to do so.
+
+I have therefore ventured to suggest the remedy of non-co-operation which
+enables those who wish, to dissociate themselves from the Government and
+which, if it is unattended by violence and undertaken in an ordered
+manner, must compel it to retrace its steps and undo the wrongs
+committed. But whilst I shall pursue the policy of non-co-operation in
+so far as I can carry the people with me, I shall not lose hope that you
+will yet see your way to do justice. I therefore respectfully ask Your
+Excellency to summon a conference of the recognised leaders of the
+people and in consultation with them find a way that would placate the
+Mussalmans and do reparation to the unhappy Punjab.
+
+_August 4, 1920._
+
+
+MAHATMA GANDHI'S LETTER TO H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT
+
+The following letter has been addressed by Mr. Gandhi to his Royal
+Highness the Duke of Connaught;--
+
+Sir,
+
+Your Royal Highness must have heard a great deal about non-co-operation,
+non-co-operationists and their methods and incidentally of me its humble
+author. I fear that the information given to Your Royal Highness must
+have been in its nature one-sided. I owe it to you and to my friends and
+myself that I should place before you what I conceive to be the scope of
+non-co-operation as followed not only be me but my closest associates
+such as Messrs. Shaukat Ali and Mahomed Ali.
+
+For me it is no joy and pleasure to be actively associated in the
+boycott of your Royal Highness' visit--I have tendered loyal and
+voluntary association to the Government for an unbroken period of nearly
+30 years in the full belief that through that way lay the path of
+freedom for my country. It was therefore no slight thing for me to
+suggest to my countrymen that we should take no part in welcoming Your
+Royal Highness. Not one among us has anything against you as an English
+gentleman. We hold your person as sacred as that of a dearest friend. I
+do not know any of my friends who would not guard it with his life, if
+he found it in danger. We are not at war with individual Englishmen we
+seek not to destroy English life. We do desire to destroy a system that
+has emasculated our country in body, mind and soul. We are determined to
+battle with all our might against that in the English nature which has
+made O'Dwyerism and Dyerism possible in the Punjab and has resulted in a
+wanton affront upon Islam a faith professed by seven crores of our
+countrymen. The affront has been put in breach of the letter and the
+spirit of the solemn declaration of the Prime Minister. We consider it
+to be inconsistent with our self respect any longer to brook the spirit
+of superiority and dominance which has systematically ignored and
+disregarded the sentiments of thirty crores of the innocent people of
+India on many a vital matter. It is humiliating to us, it cannot be a
+matter of pride to you, that thirty crores of Indians should live day in
+and day out in the fear of their lives from one hundred thousand
+Englishmen and therefore be under subjection to them.
+
+Your Royal Highness has come not to end the system I have described but
+to sustain it by upholding its prestige. Your first pronouncement was a
+laudation of Lord Wellingdon. I have the privilege of knowing him. I
+believe him to be an honest and amiable gentleman who will not willingly
+hurt even a fly. But, he has certainly failed as a ruler. He allowed
+himself to be guided by those whose interest it was to support their
+power. He is reading the mind of the Dravidian province. Here in Bengal
+you are issuing a certificate of merit to a Governor who is again from
+all I have heard an estimable gentleman. But he knows nothing of the
+heart of Bengal and its yearnings. Bengal is not Calcutta. Fort William
+and the palaces of Calcutta represent an insolent exploitation of the
+unmurmuring and highly cultured peasantry of this fair province.
+Non-co-operationists have come to the conclusion that they must not be
+deceived by the reforms that tinker with the problem of India's distress
+and humiliation. Nor must they be impatient and angry. We must not in
+our impatient anger resort, to stupid violence. We freely admit that we
+must take our due share of the blame for the existing state. It is not
+so much the British guns that are responsible fur our subjection, as our
+voluntary co-operation. Our non-participation in a hearty welcome to
+your Royal Highness is thus in no sense a demonstration against your
+high personage but it is against the system you have come to uphold. I
+know that individual Englishmen cannot even if they will alter the
+English nature all of a sudden. If we would be equals of Englishmen we
+must cast off fear. We must learn to be self-reliant and independent of
+the schools, courts, protection, and patronage of a Government, we seek
+to end, if it will not mend. Hence this non-violent non-co-operation. I
+know that we have not all yet become non-violent in speech and deed. But
+the results so far achieved have I assure Your Royal Highness, been
+amazing. The people have understood the secret and the value of
+non-violence as they have never done before. He who runs may see that
+this a religious, purifying movement. We are leaving off drink, we are
+trying to rid India of the curse of untouchability. We are trying to
+throw off foreign tinsel splendour and by reverting to the spinning
+wheel reviving the ancient and the poetic simplicity of life. We hope
+thereby to sterilize the existing harmful institution. I ask Your Royal
+Highness as an Englishman to study this movement and its possibilities
+for the Empire and the world. We are at war with nothing that is good in
+the world. In protecting Islam in the manner we are, we are protecting
+all religions. In protecting the honour of India we are protecting the
+honour of humanity. For our means are hurtful to none. We desire to live
+on terms of friendship with Englishmen but that friendship must be
+friendship of equals in both theory and practice. And we must continue
+to non-co-operate, i.e. to purify ourselves till the goal is achieved.
+
+I ask Your Royal Highness and through you every Englishman to
+appreciate the view-point of the non-co-operationists.
+
+I beg to remain,
+Your Royal Highness's faithful servant,
+(Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+_February_, 1921
+
+
+THE GREATEST THING
+
+It is to be wished that non-co-operationists will clearly recognise that
+nothing can stop the onward march of the nation as violence. Ireland may
+gain its freedom by violence. Turkey may regain her lost possessions by
+violence within measurable distance of time. But India cannot win her
+freedom by violence for a century, because her people are not built in
+the manner of other nations. They have been nurtured in the traditions
+of suffering. Rightly or wrongly, for good or ill, Islam too has evolved
+along peaceful lines in India. And I make bold to say that, if the
+honour of Islam is to be vindicated through its followers in India, it
+will only be by methods of peaceful, silent, dignified, conscious, and
+courageous suffering. The more I study that wonderful faith, the more
+convinced I become that the glory of Islam is due not to the sword but
+to the sufferings, the renunciation, and the nobility of its early
+Caliphs. Islam decayed when its followers, mistaking the evil for the
+good, dangled the sword in the face of man, and lost sight of the
+godliness, the humility, and austerity of its founder and his disciples.
+But, I am not at the present moment, concerned with showing that the
+basis of Islam, as of all religions, is not violence but suffering not
+the taking of life but the giving of it.
+
+What I am anxious to show is that non-co-operationists must be true as
+well to the spirit as to the letter of their vow if they would gain
+Swaraj within one year. They may forget non-co-operation but they dare
+not forget non-violence. Indeed, non-co-operation is non-violence. We
+are violent when we sustain a government whose creed is violence. It
+bases itself finally not on right but on might. Its last appeal is not
+to reason, nor the heart, but to the sword. We are tired of this creed
+and we have risen against it. Let us not ourselves belie our profession
+by being violent. Though the English are very few, they are organised
+for violence. Though we are many we cannot be organised for violence for
+a long time to come. Violence for us is a gospel or despair.
+
+I have seen a pathetic letter from a god-fearing English woman who
+defends Dyerism for she thinks that, if General Dyer had not enacted
+Jallianwala, women and children would have been murdered by us. If we
+are such brutes as to desire the blood of innocent women and children,
+we deserve to be blotted out from the face of the earth. There is the
+other side. It did not strike this good lady that, if we were friends,
+the price that her countrymen paid at Jallianwala for buying their
+safety was too great. They gained their safety at the cost of their
+humanity. General Dyer has been haltingly blamed, and his evil genius
+Sir Michael O'Dwyer entirely exonerated because Englishmen do not want
+to leave this country of fields even if everyone of us has to be killed.
+If we go mad again as we did at Amritsar, let there be no mistake that a
+blacker Jallianwala will be enacted.
+
+Shall we copy Dyerism and O'Dwyerism even whilst we are condemning it?
+Let not our rock be violence and devilry. Our rock must be non-violence
+and godliness. Let us, workers, be clear as to what we are about.
+_Swaraj depends upon our ability to control all the forces of violence
+on our side._ Therefore there is no Swaraj within one year, if there is
+violence on the part of the people.
+
+We must then refrain from sitting _dhurna_, we must refrain from crying
+'shame, shame' to anybody, we must not use any coercion to persuade our
+people to adopt our way. We must guarantee to them the same freedom we
+claim for ourselves. We must not tamper with the masses. It is dangerous
+to make political use of factory labourers or the peasantry--not that we
+are not entitled to do so, but we are not ready for it. We have
+neglected their political (as distinguished from literary) education all
+these long years. We have not got enough honest, intelligent, reliable,
+and brave workers to enable us to act upon these countrymen of ours.
+
+
+
+
+IX. MAHATMA GANDHI'S STATEMENT
+
+
+[The following is the Statement of Mahatma Gandhi made before the Court
+during his Trial in Ahmedabad on the 18th March 1921.]
+
+Before reading his written statement Mahatma Gandhi spoke a few words as
+introductory remarks to the whole statement. He said: Before I read this
+statement, I would like to state that I entirely endorse the learned
+Advocate-General's remarks in connection with my humble self. I think
+that he was entirely fair to me in all the statements that he has made,
+because it is very true and I have no desire whatsoever to conceal from
+this Court the fact that to preach disaffection towards the existing
+system of Government has become almost a passion with me. And the
+learned Advocate-General is also entirely in the right when he says that
+my preaching of disaffection did not commence with my connection with
+"Young India" but that it commenced much earlier and in the statement
+that I am about to read it will be my painful duty to admit before this
+Court that it commenced much earlier than the period stated by the
+Advocate-General. It is the most painful duty with me but I have to
+discharge that duty knowing the responsibility that rested upon my
+shoulders. And I wish to endorse all the blame that the
+Advocate-General has thrown on my shoulders in connection with the
+Bombay occurrence, Madras occurrences, and the Chouri Choura occurrences
+thinking over these things deeply, and sleeping over them night after
+night and examining my heart I have come to the conclusion that it is
+impossible for me to dissociate myself from the diabolical crimes of
+Chouri Choura or the mad outrages of Bombay. He is quite right when he
+says that as a man of responsibility, a man having received a fair share
+of education, having had a fair share of experience of this world, I
+should know them. I knew that I was playing with fire. I ran the risk
+and if I was set free I would still do the same. I would be failing in
+my duty if I do not do so. I have felt it this morning that I would have
+failed in my duty if I did not say all what I said here just now. I
+wanted to avoid violence. Non-violence is the first article of my faith.
+It is the last article of my faith. But I had to make my choice. I had
+either to submit to a system which I considered has done an irreparable
+harm to my country or incur the risk of the mad fury of my people
+bursting forth when they understood the truth from my lips. I know that
+my people have sometimes gone mad. I am deeply sorry for it; and I am,
+therefore, here to submit not to a light penalty but to the highest
+penalty. I do not ask for mercy. I do not plead any extenuating act. I
+am here, therefore, to invite and submit to the highest penalty that can
+be inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what
+appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen. The only course open
+to you, Mr. Judge, is, as I am just going to say in my statement, either
+to resign your post or inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe
+that the system and law you are assisting to administer are good for the
+people. I do not expect that kind of conversion. But by the time I have
+finished with my statement you will, perhaps, have a glimpse of what is
+raging within my breast to run this maddest risk which a sane man
+can run.
+
+WRITTEN STATEMENT
+
+I owe it perhaps to the Indian public and to the public in England to
+placate which this prosecution is mainly taken up that I should explain
+why from a staunch loyalist and co-operator I have become an
+uncompromising disaffectionist and non-co-operator. To the Court too I
+should say why I plead guilty to the charge of promoting disaffection
+towards the Government established by law in India. My public life
+began in 1893 in South Africa in troubled weather. My first contact with
+British authority in that country was not of a happy character. I
+discovered that as a man and as an Indian I had no rights. On the
+contrary I discovered that I had no rights as a man because I was
+an Indian.
+
+But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of Indians was an
+excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically and mainly good. I gave
+the Government my voluntary and hearty co-operation, criticising it
+fully where I felt it was faulty but never wishing its destruction.
+
+Consequently when the existence of the Empire was threatened in 1899 by
+the Boer challenge, I offered my services to it, raised a volunteer
+ambulance corps and served at several actions that took place for the
+relief of Ladysmith. Similarly in 1906 at the time of the Zulu revolt I
+raised a stretcher-bearer party and served till the end of the
+'rebellion'. On both these occasions I received medals and was even
+mentioned in despatches. For my work in South Africa I was given by Lord
+Hardinge a Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal. When the war broke out in 1914
+between England and Germany I raised a volunteer ambulance corps in
+London consisting of the then resident Indians in London, chiefly
+students. Its work was acknowledged by the authorities to be valuable.
+Lastly in India when a special appeal was made at the War Conference
+in Delhi in 1917 by Lord Chelmsford for recruits, I struggled at the
+cost of my health to raise a corps in Kheda and the response was being
+made when the hostilities ceased and orders were received that no more
+recruits were wanted. In all those efforts at service I was actuated by
+the belief that it was possible by such services to gain a status of
+full equality in the Empire for my countrymen.
+
+The first shock came in the shape of the Rowlalt Act a law designed to
+rob the people of all real freedom. I felt called upon to lead an
+intensive agitation against it. Then followed the Punjab horrors
+beginning with the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh and culminating in
+brawling orders, public floggings and other indescribable humiliations,
+I discovered too that the plighted word of the Prime Minister to the
+Mussalmans of India regarding the integrity of Turkey and the holy
+places of Islam was not likely to be fulfilled. But in spite of the
+foreboding and the grave warnings of friends, at the Amritsar Congress
+in 1919 I fought for co-operation and working the Montagu-Chelmsford
+reforms, hoping that the Prime Minister would redeem his promise to the
+Indian Mussalmans, that the Punjab wound would be healed and that the
+reforms inadequate and unsatisfactory though they were, marked a new era
+of hope in the life of India. But all that hope was shattered. The
+Khilafat promise was not to be redeemed. The Punjab crime was
+white-washed and most culprits went not only unpunished but remained in
+service and some continued to draw pensions from the Indian revenue, and
+in some cases were even rewarded. I saw too that not only did the
+reforms not mark a change of heart, but they were only a method of
+further draining India of her wealth and of prolonging her servitude.
+
+I came reluctantly to the conclusion that the British connection had
+made India more helpless than she ever was before, politically and
+economically. A disarmed India has no power of resistance against any
+aggressor if she wanted to engage in an armed conflict with him. So much
+is this the case that some of our best men consider that India must take
+generations before she can achieve the Dominion status. She has become
+so poor that she has little power of resisting famines. Before the
+British advent India spun and wove in her millions of cottages just the
+supplement she needed for adding to her meagre agricultural resources.
+The cottage industry, so vital for India's existence, has been ruined by
+incredibly heartless and inhuman processes as described by English
+witnesses. Little do town-dwellers know how the semi-starved masses of
+Indians are slowly sinking to lifelessness. Little do they know that
+their miserable comfort represents the brokerage they get for the work
+they do for the foreign exploiter, that the profits and the brokerage
+are sucked from the masses. Little do they realise that the Government
+established by law in British India is carried on for this exploitation
+of the masses. No sophistry, no jugglery in figures can explain away the
+evidence the skeletons in many villages present to the naked eye. I have
+no doubt whatsoever that both England and the town dwellers of India
+will have to answer, if there is a God above, for this crime against
+humanity which is perhaps unequalled in history. The law itself in this
+country has been used to serve the foreign exploiter. My unbiased,
+examination of the Punjab Martial Law cases had led me to believe that
+at least ninety-five per cent. of convictions were wholly bad. My
+experience of political cases in India leads me to the conclusion that
+in nine out of every ten the condemned men were totally innocent. Their
+crime consisted in love of their country. In ninety-nine cases out of
+hundred justice has been denied to Indians as against Europeans in the
+Court of India. This is not an exaggerated picture. It is the experience
+of almost every Indian who has had anything to do such cases. In my
+opinion the administration of the law is thus prostituted consciously or
+unconsciously for the benefit of the exploiter. The greatest misfortune
+is that Englishmen and their Indian associates in the administration of
+the country do not know that they are engaged in the crime I have
+attempted to describe. I am satisfied that many English and Indian
+officials honestly believe that they are administering one of the best
+systems devised in the world and that India is making steady though slow
+progress. They do not know that a subtle but effective system of
+terrorism and an organised display of force on the one hand and the
+deprivation of all powers of retaliation of self-defence on the other
+have emasculated the people and induced in them the habit of simulation.
+This awful habit has added to the ignorance and the self-deception of
+the administrators. Section 124-A under which I am happily charged is
+perhaps the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code
+designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen. Affection cannot be
+manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection for a person
+or thing one should be free to give the fullest expression to his
+disaffection so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite to
+violence. But the section under which mere promotion of disaffection is
+a crime. I have studied some of the cases tried under it, and I know
+that some of the most loved of India's patriots have been convicted
+under it. I consider it a privilege therefore, to be charged under it.
+I have endeavoured to give in their briefest outline the reasons for my
+disaffection. I have no personal ill-will against any single
+administrator, much less can I have any disaffection towards the King's
+person. But I hold it to be a virtue to be disaffected towards a
+Government which in its totality has done more harm to India than any
+previous system. India is less manly under the British rule than she
+ever was before. Holding such a belief, I consider it to be a sin to
+have affection for the system. And it has been a precious privilege for
+me to be able to write what I have in the various articles tendered in
+evidence against me.
+
+In fact I believe that I have rendered a service to India and England by
+showing in non-co-operation the way out of the unnatural state in which
+both are living. In my humble opinion, non-co-operation with evil is as
+much a duty as is co-operation with good. But in the past,
+non-co-operation has been deliberately expressed in violence to the evil
+doer. I am endeavouring to show to my countrymen that violent
+non-co-operation only multiplies evil and that as evil can only be
+sustained by violence, withdrawal of support of evil requires complete
+abstention from violence. Non-violent implies voluntary submission to
+the penalty for non-co-operation with evil. I am here, therefore, to
+invite and submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can he
+inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears
+to me to be the highest duty of a citizen. The only course open to you,
+the Judge and the Assessors, is either to resign your posts and thus
+dissociate yourselves from evil if you feel that the law you are called
+upon to administer is an evil and that in reality I am innocent, or to
+inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe that the system and
+the law you are assisting to administer are good for the people of this
+country and that my activity is therefore injurious to the public weal.
+
+M. K. GHANDI.
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***
diff --git a/10366-h/10366-h.htm b/10366-h/10366-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1430aeb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/10366-h/10366-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,8169 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
+<title>Freedom’s battle | Project Gutenberg</title>
+
+<style type="text/css">
+
+body { margin-left: 20%;
+       margin-right: 20%;
+       text-align: justify; }
+
+h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 {text-align: center; font-style: normal; font-weight:
+normal; line-height: 1.5; margin-top: .5em; margin-bottom: .5em;}
+
+h1 {font-size: 300%;
+    margin-top: 0.6em;
+    margin-bottom: 0.6em;
+    letter-spacing: 0.12em;
+    word-spacing: 0.2em;
+    text-indent: 0em;}
+h2 {font-size: 150%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em;}
+h3 {font-size: 130%; margin-top: 1em;}
+h4 {font-size: 120%;}
+h5 {font-size: 110%;}
+
+.no-break {page-break-before: avoid;} /* for epubs */
+
+div.chapter {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em;}
+
+hr {width: 80%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;}
+
+p {text-indent: 1em;
+   margin-top: 0.25em;
+   margin-bottom: 0.25em; }
+
+p.letter {text-indent: 0%;
+          margin-left: 10%;
+          margin-right: 10%;
+          margin-top: 1em;
+          margin-bottom: 1em; }
+
+p.noindent {text-indent: 0% }
+
+p.center  {text-align: center;
+           text-indent: 0em;
+           margin-top: 1em;
+           margin-bottom: 1em; }
+
+a:link {color:blue; text-decoration:none}
+a:visited {color:blue; text-decoration:none}
+a:hover {color:red}
+
+</style>
+</head>
+<body>
+<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***</div>
+
+<p>
+[Transcriber’s Note: The inconsistent spelling of the original has been
+preserved in this etext.]
+</p>
+
+<h1>FREEDOM’S BATTLE</h1>
+
+<h3>BEING A COMPREHENSIVE COLLECTION OF WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ON THE PRESENT
+SITUATION</h3>
+
+<h2 class="no-break">BY MAHATMA GANDHI</h2>
+
+<hr />
+
+<h3>Second Edition</h3>
+
+<h3>1922</h3>
+
+<p class="center">
+The Publishers express their indebtedness to the Editor and Publisher of the
+“Young India” for allowing the free use of the articles appeared in that
+journal under the name of Mahatma Gandhi, and also to Mr. C. Rajagopalachar for
+the valuable introduction and help rendered in bringing out the book.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2>CONTENTS</h2>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap01">I. INTRODUCTION</a></h3>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap02">II. THE KHILAFAT</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Why I have joined the Khilafat Movement<br/>
+The Turkish Treaty<br/>
+Turkish Peace Terms<br/>
+The Suzerainty over Arabia<br/>
+Further Questions Answered<br/>
+Mr. Candler’s Open Letter<br/>
+In process of keeping<br/>
+Appeal to the Viceroy<br/>
+The Premier’s reply<br/>
+The Muslim Representation<br/>
+Criticism of the Manifesto<br/>
+The Mahomedan Decision<br/>
+Mr. Andrew’s Difficulty<br/>
+The Khilafat Agitation<br/>
+Hijarat and its Meaning
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap03">III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Political Freemasonry<br/>
+The Duty of the Punjabec<br/>
+General Dyer<br/>
+The Punjab Sentences
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap04">IV. SWARAJ</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Swaraj in one year<br/>
+British Rule an evil<br/>
+A movement of purification<br/>
+Why was India lost<br/>
+Swaraj my ideal<br/>
+On the wrong track<br/>
+The Congress Constitution<br/>
+Swaraj in nine months<br/>
+The Attainment of Swaraj
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap05">V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+The Hindus and the Mahomedans<br/>
+Hindu Mahomedan unity<br/>
+Hindu Muslim unity
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap06">VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Depressed Classes<br/>
+Amelioration of the depressed classes<br/>
+The Sin of Untouchability
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap07">VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Indians abroad<br/>
+Indians overseas<br/>
+Pariahs of the Empire
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap08">VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Non-co-operation<br/>
+Mr. Montagu on the Khilafat Agitation<br/>
+At the call of the country<br/>
+Non-co-operation explained<br/>
+Religious Authority for non-co-operation<br/>
+The inwardness of non-co-operation<br/>
+A missionary on non-co-operation<br/>
+How to work non-co-operation<br/>
+Speech at Madras<br/>
+” Trichinopoly<br/>
+” Calicut<br/>
+” Mangalore<br/>
+” Bexwada<br/>
+The Congress<br/>
+Who is disloyal<br/>
+Crusade against non-co-operation<br/>
+Speech at Muxafarbail<br/>
+Ridicule replacing Repression<br/>
+The Viceregal pronouncement<br/>
+From Ridicule to—?<br/>
+To every Englishman In India<br/>
+One step enough for me<br/>
+The need for humility<br/>
+Some Questions Answered<br/>
+Pledges broken<br/>
+More Objections answered<br/>
+Mr. Pennington’s Objections Answered<br/>
+Some doubts<br/>
+Rejoinder<br/>
+Two Englishmen Reply<br/>
+Letter to the Viceroy—Renunciation of Medals<br/>
+Letter to H.R.H. The Duke of Connaught<br/>
+The Greatest thing
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap09">IX. MAHATMA GANDHI’S STATEMENT</a></h3>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap01"></a>I. INTRODUCTION</h2>
+
+<p>
+After the great war it is difficult, to point out a single nation that is
+happy; but this has come out of the war, that there is not a single nation
+outside India, that is not either free or striving to be free.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is said that we, too, are on the road to freedom, that it is better to be on
+the certain though slow course of gradual unfoldment of freedom than to take
+the troubled and dangerous path of revolution whether peaceful or violent, and
+that the new Reforms are a half-way house to freedom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The new constitution granted to India keeps all the military forces, both in
+the direction and in the financial control, entirely outside the scope of
+responsibility to the people of India. What does this mean? It means that the
+revenues of India are spent away on what the nation does not want. But after
+the mid-Eastern complications and the fresh Asiatic additions to British
+Imperial spheres of action. This Indian military servitude is a clear danger to
+national interests.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The new constitution gives no scope for retrenchment and therefore no scope for
+measures of social reform except by fresh taxation, the heavy burden of which
+on the poor will outweigh all the advantages of any reforms. It maintains all
+the existing foreign services, and the cost of the administrative machinery
+high as it already is, is further increased.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The reformed constitution keeps all the fundamental liberties of person,
+property, press, and association completely under bureaucratic control. All
+those laws which give to the irresponsible officers of the Executive Government
+of India absolute powers to override the popular will, are still unrepealed. In
+spite of the tragic price paid in the Punjab for demonstrating the danger of
+unrestrained power in the hands of a foreign bureaucracy and the inhumanity of
+spirit by which tyranny in a panic will seek to save itself, we stand just
+where we were before, at the mercy of the Executive in respect of all our
+fundamental liberties.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Not only is Despotism intact in the Law, but unparalleled crimes and cruelties
+against the people have been encouraged and even after boastful admissions and
+clearest proofs, left unpunished. The spirit of unrepentant cruelty has thus
+been allowed to permeate the whole administration.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MUSSALMAN AGONY</h3>
+
+<p>
+To understand our present condition it is not enough to realise the general
+political servitude. We should add to it the reality and the extent of the
+injury inflicted by Britain on Islam, and thereby on the Mussalmans of India.
+The articles of Islamic faith which it is necessary to understand in order to
+realise why Mussalman India, which was once so loyal is now so strongly moved
+to the contrary are easily set out and understood. Every religion should be
+interpreted by the professors of that religion. The sentiments and religious
+ideas of Muslims founded on the traditions of long generations cannot be
+altered now by logic or cosmopolitanism, as others understand it. Such an
+attempt is the more unreasonable when it is made not even as a bonafide and
+independent effort of proselytising logic or reason, but only to justify a
+treaty entered into for political and worldly purposes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Khalifa is the authority that is entrusted with the duty of defending
+Islam. He is the successor to Muhammad and the agent of God on earth. According
+to Islamic tradition he must possess sufficient temporal power effectively to
+protect Islam against non-Islamic powers and he should be one elected or
+accepted by the Mussalman world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is the area bounded by the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, the
+Persian Gulf, and the waters of the Tigris and the Euphrates. It is the sacred
+Home of Islam and the centre towards which Islam throughout the world turns in
+prayer. According to the religious injunctions of the Mussalmans, this entire
+area should always be under Muslim control, its scientific border being
+believed to be a protection for the integrity of Islamic life and faith. Every
+Mussalman throughout the world is enjoined to sacrifice his all, if necessary,
+for preserving the Jazirat-ul-Arab under complete Muslim control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The sacred places of Islam should be in the possession of the Khalifa. They
+should not merely be free for the entry of the Mussalmans of the world by the
+grace or the license of non-Muslim powers, but should be the possession and
+property of Islam in the fullest degree.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is a religions obligation, on every Mussalman to go forth and help the
+Khalifa in every possible way where his unaided efforts in the defence of the
+Khilifat have failed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The grievance of the Indian Mussalmans is that a government that pretends to
+protect and spread peace and happiness among them has no right to ignore or set
+aside these articles of their cherished faith.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+According to the Peace Treaty imposed on the nominal Government at
+Constantinople, the Khalifa far from having the temporal authority or power
+needed to protect Islam, is a prisoner in his own city. He is to have no real
+fighting force, army or navy, and the financial control over his own
+territories is vested in other Governments. His capital is cut off from the
+rest of his possessions by an intervening permanent military occupation. It is
+needless to say that under these conditions he is absolutely incapable of
+protecting Islam as the Mussulmans of the world understand it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is split up; a great part of it given to powerful
+non-Muslim Powers, the remnant left with petty chiefs dominated all round by
+non-Muslim Governments.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Holy places of Islam are all taken out of the Khalifa’s kingdom, some left
+in the possession of minor Muslim chiefs of Arabia entirely dependent on
+European control, and some relegated to newly-formed non-Muslim states.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In a word, the Mussalman’s free choice of a Khalifa such as Islamic tradition
+defines is made an unreality.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE HINDU DHARMA</h3>
+
+<p>
+The age of misunderstanding and mutual warfare among religions is gone. If
+India has a mission of its own to the world, it is to establish the unity and
+the truth of all religions. This unity is established by mutual help and
+understanding between the various religions. It has come as a rare privilege to
+the Hindus in the fulfilment of this mission of India to stand up in defence of
+Islam against the onslaught of the earth-greed of the military powers of the
+west.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Dharma of Hinduism in this respect is placed beyond all doubt by the
+Bhagavat Gita.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Those who are the votaries of other Gods and worship them with faith—even they,
+O Kaunteya, worship me alone, though not as the Shastra requires—IX, 23.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whoever being devoted wishes in perfect faith to worship a particular form, of
+such a one I maintain the same faith unshaken,—VII 21.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Hinduism will realise its fullest beauty when in the fulfilment of this
+cardinal tenet, its followers offer themselves as sacrifice for the protection
+of the faith of their brothers, the Mussalmans.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If Hindus and Mussalmans attain the height of courage and sacrifice that is
+needed for this battle on behalf of Islam against the greed of the West, a
+victory will be won not alone for Islam, but for Christianity itself.
+Militarism has robbed the crucified God of his name and his very cross and the
+World has been mistaking it to be Christianity. After the battle of Islam is
+won, Islam and Hinduism together can emancipate Christianity itself from the
+lust for power and wealth which have strangled it now and the true Christianity
+of the Gospels will be established. This battle of non-cooperation with its
+suffering and peaceful withdrawal of service will once for all establish its
+superiority over the power of brute force and unlimited slaughter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What a glorious privilege it is to play our part in this history of the world,
+when Hinduism and Christianity will unite on behalf of Islam, and in that
+strife of mutual love and support each religion will attain its own truest
+shape and beauty.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AN ENDURING TREATY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Swaraj for India has two great problems, one internal and the other external.
+How can Hindus and Mussalmans so different from each other form a strong and
+united nation governing themselves peacefully? This was the question for years,
+and no one could believe that the two communities could suffer for each other
+till the miracle was actually worked. The Khilafat has solved the problem. By
+the magic of suffering, each has truly touched and captured the other’s heart,
+and the Nation now is strong and united.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Not internal strength and unity alone has the Khilafat brought to India. The
+great block in the way of Indian aspiration for full freedom was the problem of
+external defence. How is India, left to herself defend her frontiers against
+her Mussalman neighbours? None but emasculated nations would accept such
+difficulties and responsibilities as an answer to the demand for freedom. It is
+only a people whose mentality has been perverted that can soothe itself with
+the domination by one race from a distant country, as a preventative against
+the aggression of another, a permanent and natural neighbour. Instead of
+developing strength to protect ourselves against those near whom we are
+permanently placed, a feeling of incurable impotence has been generated. Two
+strong and brave nations can live side by side, strengthening each other
+through enforcing constant vigilance, and maintain in full vigour each its own
+national strength, unity, patriotism and resources. If a nation wishes to be
+respected by its neighbours it has to develop and enter into honourable
+treaties. These are the only natural conditions of national liberty; but not a
+surrender to distant military powers to save oneself from one’s neighbours.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat has solved the problem of distrust of Asiatic neighbours out of
+our future. The Indian struggle for the freedom of Islam has brought about a
+more lasting <i>entente</i> and a more binding treaty between the people of
+India and the people of the Mussalman states around it than all the ententes
+and treaties among the Governments of Europe. No wars of aggression are
+possible where the common people on the two sides have become grateful friends.
+The faith of the Mussulman is a better sanction than the seal of the European
+Diplomats and plenipotentiaries. Not only has this great friendship between
+India and the Mussulman States around it removed for all time the fear of
+Mussulman aggression from outside, but it has erected round India, a solid wall
+of defence against all aggression from beyond against all greed from Europe,
+Russia or elsewhere. No secret diplomacy could establish a better
+<i>entente</i> or a stronger federation than what this open and
+non-governmental treaty between Islam and India has established. The Indian
+support of the Khilafat has, as if by a magic wand, converted what Was once the
+Pan-Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship and defence for
+India.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE BRITISH CONNECTION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Every nation like every individual is born free. Absolute freedom is the
+birthright of every people. The only limitations are those which a people may
+place over themselves. The British connection is invaluable as long as it is a
+defence against any worse connection sought to be imposed by violence. But it
+is only a means to an end, not a mandate of Providence of Nature. The alliance
+of neighbours, born of suffering for each other’s sake, for ends that purify
+those that suffer, is necessarily a more natural and more enduring bond than
+one that has resulted from pure greed on the one side and weakness on the
+other. Where such a natural and enduring alliance has been accomplished among
+Asiatic peoples and not only between the respective governments, it may truly
+be felt to be more valuable than the British connection itself, after that
+connection has denied freedom or equality, and even justice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE ALTERNATIVE</h3>
+
+<p>
+Is violence or total surrender the only choice open to any people to whom
+Freedom or Justice is denied? Violence at a time when the whole world has
+learnt from bitter experience the futility of violence is unworthy of a country
+whose ancient people’s privilege, it was, to see this truth long ago.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Violence may rid a nation of its foreign masters but will only enslave it from
+inside. No nation can really be free which is at the mercy of its army and its
+military heroes. If a people rely for freedom on its soldiers, the soldiers
+will rule the country, not the people. Till the recent awakening of the workers
+of Europe, this was the only freedom which the powers of Europe really enjoyed.
+True freedom can exist only when those who produce, not those who destroy or
+know only to live on other’s labour, are the masters.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Even were violence the true road to freedom, is violence possible to a nation
+which has been emasculated and deprived of all weapons, and the whole world is
+hopelessly in advance of all our possibilities in the manufacture and the
+wielding of weapons of destruction.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Submission or withdrawal of co-operation is the real and only alternative
+before India. Submission to injustice puts on the tempting garb of peace and,
+gradual progress, but there is no surer way to death than submission to wrong.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE FIFTH UPAYA</h3>
+
+<p>
+Our ancients classified the arts of conquest into four well-known
+<i>Upayas</i>. Sama, Dana, Uheda, and Danda. A fifth Upuya was recognised
+sometimes by our ancients, which they called <i>Upeshka</i>. It is this
+<i>Punchamopaya</i> that is placed by Mahatma Gandhi before the people of India
+in the form of Non-cooperation as an alternative, besides violence, to
+surrender.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Where in any case negotiations have failed and the enemy is neither corruptible
+nor incapable of being divided, and a resort to violence has failed or would
+certainly be futile the method of <i>Upeshka</i> remains to be applied to the
+case. Indeed, when the very existence of the power we seek to defeat really
+depends on our continuous co-operation with it, and where our <i>Upeskha</i>
+its very life, our <i>Upeskha</i> or non-co-operation is the most natural and
+most effective expedient that we can employ to bend it to our will.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+No Englishman believes that his nation can rule or keep India for a day unless
+the people of India actively co-operate to maintain that rule. Whether the
+co-operation be given willingly or through ignorance, cupidity, habit or fear,
+the withdrawal of that co-operation means impossibility of foreign rule in
+India. Some of us may not realise this, but those who govern us have long ago
+known and are now keenly alive to this truth. The active assistance of the
+people of this country in the supply of the money, men, and knowledge of the
+languages, customs and laws of the land, is the main-spring of the continuous
+life of the foreign administration. Indeed the circumstances of British rule in
+this country are such that but for a double supply of co-operation on the part
+of the governed, it must have broken down long ago. Any system of race
+domination is unnatural, and can be kept up only by active coercion through a
+foreign-recruited public, service invested with large powers, however much it
+may be helped by the perversion of mentality shaping the education of the youth
+of the country. The foreign recruited service must necessarily be very highly
+paid. This creates a wrong standard for the Indian recruited officials also.
+Military expenditure has to cover not only the needs of defence against foreign
+aggression, but also the possibilities of internal unrest and rebellion. Police
+charges have to go beyond the prevention and deletion of ordinary crime, for
+though this would be the only expenditure over the police of a self-governing
+people where any nation governs anther, a large chapter of artificial crime has
+to be added to the penal code, and the work of the police extended accordingly.
+The military and public organisations must also be such as not only to result
+in outside efficiency, but also at the same time guarantee internal impotency.
+This is to be achieved by the adjustment and careful admixture of officers and
+units from different races. All this can be and is maintained only by extra
+cost and extra-active co-operation on the part of the people. The slightest
+withdrawal of assistance must put such machinery out of gear. This is the basis
+of the programme of progressive non violent non-co-operation that has been
+adopted by the National Congress.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME OBJECTIONS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The powerful character of the measure, however, leads some to object to
+non-co-operation because of that very reason. Striking as it does at the very
+root of Government in India, they fear that non-co-operation must lead to
+anarchy, and that the remedy is worse than the disease. This is an objection
+arising out of insufficient allowance for human nature. It is assumed that the
+British people will allow their connection with India to cease rather than
+remedy the wrongs for which we seek justice. If this assumption be correct, no
+doubt it must lead to separation and possibly also anarchy for a time. If the
+operatives in a factory have grievances, negotiations having failed, a strike
+would on a similar argument be never admissible. Unyielding obstinacy being
+presumed, it must end in the closing down of the factory and break up of the
+men. But if in ninety-nine out of a hundred cases it is not the case that
+strikes end in this manner, it is more unlikely that, instead of righting the
+manifest wrongs that India complains about, the British people will value their
+Indian Dominion so low as to prefer to allow us to non-co-operate up to the
+point of separation. It would be a totally false reading of British character
+and British history. But if such wicked obstinacy be ultimately shown by a
+government, far be it from us to prefer peace at the price of abject surrender
+to wrong. There is no anarchy greater than the moral anarchy of surrender to
+unrepentant wrong. We may, however, be certain that if we show the strength and
+unity necessary for non-co-operation, long before we progress with it far, we
+shall have developed true order and true self-government wherein there is no
+place for anarchy.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Another fear sometimes expressed that, if non-co-operation were to succeed, the
+British would have to go, leaving us unable to defend ourselves against foreign
+aggression. If we have the self-respect, the patriotism, the tenacious purpose,
+and the power of organisation that are necessary to drive the British out from
+their entrenched position, no lesser foreign power will dare after that,
+undertake the futile task of conquering or enslaving us.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is sometimes said that non-co-operation is negative and destructive of the
+advantages which a stable government has conferred on us. That non-co-operation
+is negative is merely a half-truth. Non-co-operation with the government means
+greater co-operation among ourselves, greater mutual dependence among the many
+different castes and classes of our country. Non-co-operation is not mere
+negation. It will lead to the recovery of the lost art of co-operation among
+ourselves. Long dependence on an outside government which by its interference
+suppressed or prevented the consequences of our differences has made us forget
+the duty of mutual trust and the art of friendly adjustment. Having allowed
+Government to do everything for us, we have gradually become incapable of doing
+anything for ourselves. Even if we had no grievance against this Government,
+non-co-operation with it for a time would be desirable so far as it would
+perforce lead us to trusting and working with one another and thereby
+strengthen the bonds of national unity.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The most tragic consequence of dependence on the complex machinery of a foreign
+government is the atrophy of the communal sense. The direct touch with
+administrative cause and effect is lost. An outside protector performs all the
+necessary functions of the community in a mysterious manner, and communal
+duties are not realised by the people. The one reason addressed by those who
+deny to us the capacity for self-rule is the insufficient appreciation by the
+people of communal duties and discipline. It is only by actually refraining for
+a time from dependence on Government that we can regain self-reliance, learn
+first-hand the value of communal duties and build up true national
+co-operation. Non-co-operation is a practical and positive training in
+Swadharma, and Swadharma alone can lead up to Swaraj.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The negative is the best and most impressive method of enforcing the value of
+the positive. Few outside government circles realise in the present police
+anything but tyranny and corruption. But if the units of the present police
+were withdrawn we would soon perforce set about organising a substitute, and
+most people would realise the true social value of a police force. Few realise
+in the present taxes anything but coercion and waste, but most people would
+soon see that a share of every man’s income is due for common purposes and that
+there are many limitations to the economical management of public institutions;
+we would begin once again to contribute directly, build up and maintain
+national institutions in the place of those that now mysteriously spring up and
+live under Government orders.
+</p>
+
+<h3>EMANCIPATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Freedom is a priceless thing. But it is a stable possession only when it is
+acquired by a nation’s strenuous effort. What is not by chance or outward
+circumstance, or given by the generous impulse of a tyrant prince or people is
+not a reality. A nation will truly enjoy freedom only when in the process of
+winning or defending its freedom, it has been purified and consolidated through
+and through, until liberty has become a part of its very soul. Otherwise it
+would be but a change of the form of government, which might please the fancy
+of politicians, or satisfy the classes in power, but could never emancipate a
+people. An Act of Parliament can never create citizens in Hindustan. The
+strength, spirit, and happiness of a people who have fought and won their
+liberty cannot be got by Reform Acts. Effort and sacrifice are the necessary
+conditions of real stable emancipation. Liberty unacquired, merely found, will
+on the test fail like the Dead-Sea-apple or the magician’s plenty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The war that the people of India have declared and which will purify and
+consolidate India, and forge for her a true and stable liberty is a war with
+the latest and most effective weapon. In this war, what has hitherto been in
+the world an undesirable but necessary incident in freedom’s battles, the
+killing of innocent men, has been eliminated; and that which is the true
+essential for forging liberty, the self-purification and self-strengthening of
+men and women has been kept pure and unalloyed. It is for men, women and youth,
+every one of them that lives in and loves India, to do his bit in this battle,
+not waiting for others, not calculating the chances of his surviving the battle
+to enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice. Soldiers in the old-world wars did not
+insure their lives before going to the front. The privilege of youth in special
+is for country’s sake to exercise their comparative freedom and give up the
+yearning for lives and careers built on the slavery of the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That on which a foreign government truly rests whatever may be the illusions on
+their or our part is not the strength of its armed forces, but our own
+co-operation. Actual service on the part of one generation, and educational
+preparation for future service on the part of the next generation are the two
+main branches of this co-operation of slaves in the perpetuation of slavery.
+The boycott of government service and the law-courts is aimed at the first, the
+boycott of government controlled schools is to stop the second. If either the
+one or the other of these two branches of co-operation is withdrawn in
+sufficient measure, there will be an automatic and perfectly peaceful change
+from slavery to liberty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The beat preparation for any one who desires to take part in the great battle
+now going on is a silent study of the writings and speeches collected herein,
+and proposed to be completed in a supplementary volume to be soon issued.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+C. RAJAGOPALACHAR
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap02"></a>II. THE KHILAFAT</h2>
+
+<h3>WHY I HAVE JOINED THE KHILAFAT MOVEMENT</h3>
+
+<p>
+An esteemed South African friend who is at present living in England has
+written to me a letter from which I make the following excerpts:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“You will doubtless remember having met me in South Africa at the time when the
+Rev. J.J. Doke was assisting you in your campaign there and I subsequently
+returned to England deeply impressed with the rightness of your attitude in
+that country. During the months before war I wrote and lectured and spoke on
+your behalf in several places which I do not regret. Since returning from
+military service, however, I have noticed from the papers that you appear to be
+adopting a more militant attitude... I notice a report in “The Times” that you
+are assisting and countenancing a union between the Hindus and Moslems with a
+view of embarrassing England and the Allied Powers in the matter of the
+dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire or the ejection of the Turkish Government
+from Constantinople. Knowing as I do your sense of justice and your humane
+instincts I feel that I am entitled, in view of the humble part that I have
+taken to promote your interests on this side, to ask you whether this latter
+report is correct. I cannot believe that you have wrongly countenanced a
+movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government
+above the interests of humanity, for if any country has crippled these
+interests in the East it has surely been Turkey. I am personally familiar with
+the conditions in Syria and Armenia and I can only suppose that if the report,
+which “The Times” has published is correct, you have thrown to one side, your
+moral responsibilities and allied yourself with one of the prevailing
+anarchies. However, until I hear that this is not your attitude I cannot
+prejudice my mind. Perhaps you will do me the favour of sending me a reply.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have sent a reply to the writer. But as the views expressed in the quotation
+are likely to be shared by many of my English friends and as I do not wish, if
+I can possibly help it, to forfeit their friendship or their esteem I shall
+endeavour to state my position as clearly as I can on the Khilafat question.
+The letter shows what risk public men run through irresponsible journalism. I
+have not seen <i>The Times</i> report, referred to by my friend. But it is
+evident that the report has made the writer to suspect my alliance with “the
+prevailing anarchies” and to think that I have “thrown to one side” my “moral
+responsibilities.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is just my sense of moral responsibilities which has made me take up the
+Khilafat question and to identify myself entirely with the Mahomedans. It is
+perfectly true that I am assisting and countenancing the union between Hindus
+and Muslims, but certainly not with “a view of embarrassing England and the
+Allied Powers in the matter of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire,” it is
+contrary to my creed to embarrass governments or anybody else. This does not
+how ever mean that certain acts of mine may not result in embarrassment. But I
+should not hold myself responsible for having caused embarrassment when I
+resist the wrong of a wrong-doer by refusing assistance in his wrong-doing. On
+the Khilafat question I refuse to be party to a broken pledge. Mr. Lloyd
+George’s solemn declaration is practically the whole of the case for Indian
+Mahomedans and when that case is fortified by scriptural authority it becomes
+unanswerable. Moreover, it is incorrect to say that I have “allied myself to
+one of the prevailing anarchies” or that I have wrongly countenanced the
+movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government
+above the interests of humanity. In the whole of the Mahomedan demand there is
+no insistance on the retention of the so-called unjust despotism of the
+Stamboul Government; on the contrary the Mahomedans have accepted the principle
+of taking full guarantees from that Government for the protection of non-Muslim
+minorities. I do not know how far the condition of Armenia and Syria may be
+considered an ‘anarchy’ and how far the Turkish Government may be held
+responsible for it. I much suspect that the reports from these quarters are
+much exaggerated and that the European powers are themselves in a measure
+responsible for what misrule there may be in Armenia and Syria. But I am in no
+way interested in supporting Turkish or any other anarchy. The Allied Powers
+can easily prevent it by means other than that of ending Turkish rule or
+dismembering and weakening the Ottoman Empire. The Allied Powers are not
+dealing with a new situation. If Turkey was to be partitioned, the position
+should have been made clear at the commencement of the war. There would then
+have been no question of a broken pledge. As it is, no Indian Mahomedan has any
+regard for the promises of British Ministers. In his opinion, the cry against
+Turkey is that of Christianity <i>vs.</i> Islam with England as the louder in
+the cry. The latest cablegram from Mr. Mahomed Ali strengthens the impression,
+for he says that unlike as in England his deputation is receiving much support
+from the French Government and the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus, if it is true, as I hold it is true that the Indian Mussalmans have a
+cause that is just and is supported by scriptural authority, then for the
+Hindus not to support them to the utmost would be a cowardly breach of
+brotherhood and they would forfeit all claim to consideration from their
+Mahomedan countrymen. As a public-server therefore, I would be unworthy of the
+position I claim, if I did not support Indian Mussalmans in their struggle to
+maintain the Khilafat in accordance with their religious belief. I believe that
+in supporting them I am rendering a service to the Empire, because by assisting
+my Mahomedan countrymen to give a disciplined expression to their sentiment it
+becomes possible to make the agitation thoroughly, orderly and even successful.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE TURKISH TREATY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Turkish treaty will be out on the 10th of May. It is stated to provide for
+the internationalisation of the Straits, the occupation of Gallipoli by the
+Allies, the maintenance of Allied contingents in Constantinople and the
+appointment of a Commission of Control over Turkish finances. The San Remo
+Conference has entrusted Britain with Mandates for Mesopotamia and Palestine
+and France with the Mandate for Syria. As regards Smyrna the accounts so far
+received inform that Turkish suzerainty over Smyrna will be indicated by the
+fact that the population will not be entitled to send delegates to the Greek
+Parliament but at the end of five years local Smyrna Parliament will have the
+right of voting in favour of union with Greece and in such an event Turkish
+suzerainty will cease. Turkish suzerainty will be confined to the area within
+the Chatalja lines. With regard to Emir Foisul’s position there is no news
+except that the Mandates of Britain and France transform his military title
+into a civil title.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+We have given above the terms of the Turkish treaty as indicated in Router’s
+messages. These reports are incomplete and all of them are not equally
+authenticated. But if these terms are true, they are a challenge to the Muslim
+demands. Turkish Sovereignty is confined to the Chatalja lines. This means that
+the Big Three of the Supreme Council have cut off Thrace from Turkish
+dominions. This is a distinct breach of the pledge given by one of these Three,
+<i>viz.</i>, the Premier of the British Empire. To remain within the Chatalja
+lines and, we are afraid, as a dependent of the Allies, is for the Sultan a
+humiliating position inconsistent with the Koranic injunctions. Such a
+restricted position of the Turks is virtually a success of the bag and baggage
+school.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not yet known how the Supreme Council disposed of the rich and renowned
+lands of Asia Minor. If Mr. Lloyd George’s views recently expressed in this
+respect have received the Allies’ sanction—it is probable—nothing less than a
+common control is expected. The decision in the case of Smyrna will be
+satisfying to none, though the Allies seem to have made by their arrangement a
+skillful attempt to please all the parties concerned. Mr. Lloyd George, in his
+reply to the Khilafat Deputation, had talked about the careful investigations
+by an impartial committee and had added; “The great majority of the population
+undoubtedly prefer Greek rule to Turkish rule, so I understand” But the
+decision postpones to carry out his understanding till a period of five years.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+When we come to the question of mandates, the Allied Powers’ motives come out
+more distinctly. The Arabs’ claim of independence was used as a difficulty
+against keeping Turkish Sovereignty. This was defended in the of
+self-determination and by pointing out parallels of Transylvania and other
+provinces. When the final moment came, the Allies have ventured to divide the
+spoils amongst themselves. Britain is given the mandate over Mesopotamia and
+Palestine and France has the mandate over Syria. The Arab delegation complains
+in their note lately issued expressing their disappointment at the Supreme
+Council’s decision with regard to the Arab liberated countries, which, it
+declares, is contrary to the principle of self-determination.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+So what little news has arrived about the Turkish treaty, is uniformly
+disquieting. The Moslems have found sufficient ground to honour Russia, more
+than the Allies. Russia has recognised the freedom of Khiva and Bokhara. The
+Moslem world, as H. M. the Amir of Afghanistan said in his speech, will feel
+grateful towards Russia in spite of all the rumours abroad about its anarchy
+and disorder, whereas the whole Moslem world will resent the action of the
+other European nations who have allied with each other to carry out a joint
+coercion and extinction of Turkey in the name of self-determination and partly
+in the guise of the interest of civilization.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+The terms of the Turkish treaty are not only a breach of the Premier’s pledge,
+not only a sin against the principle of self-determination, but they also show
+a reckless indifference of the Allied Powers towards the Koranic injunctions.
+The terms point out that Mr. Lloyd George’s misinformed ideas of Khilafat have
+prevailed in the Council. Like Mr. Lloyd George other statesmen also at San
+Remo have compared Caliphate with Popedom and ignored the Koronic idea of
+associating spiritual power with temporal power. These misguided statesmen were
+too much possessed by haughtiness and so they refused to receive any
+enlightenment on the question of Khilafat from the Deputation. They could have
+corrected themselves had they heard Mr. Mahomed Ali on this point. Speaking at
+the Essex Hall meeting Mr. Mahomed Ali distinguished between Popedom and
+Caliphate and clearly explained what Caliphate means. He said:
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“Islam is supernational and not national, the basis of Islamic sympathy is a
+common outlook on life and common culture.... And it has two centres. The
+personal centre is the island of Arabia. The Khalifa is the Commander of the
+Faithful and his orders must be obeyed by all Muslims so long and so long only,
+as they are not at variance with the Commandments of God and the Traditions of
+the Prophet. But since there is no lacerating distinction between things
+temporal and things spiritual, the Khalifa is something more than a Pope and
+cannot be “Vaticanised.” But he is also less than a Pope for he is not
+infallible. If he persists in un-Islamic conduct we can depose him. And we have
+deposed him more than once. But so long as he orders only that which Islam
+demands we must support him. He and no other ruler is the Defender of
+<i>our</i> faith.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+These few words could have removed the mis-undertakings rooted in the minds of
+those that at San Remo, if they were in earnest for a just solution. But Mr.
+Mahomed Ali’s deputation was not given any hearing by the Peace Conference.
+They were told that the Peace Conference had already heard the official
+delegation of India on this question. But the wrong notions the Allies still
+entertain about Caliphate are a sufficient indication of the effects of the
+work of this official delegation. The result of these wrong notions is the
+present settlement and this unjust settlement will unsettle the world. They
+know not what they do.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TURKISH PEACE TERMS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The question of question to-day is the Khilafat question, otherwise known as
+that of the Turkish peace terms. His Excellency the Viceroy deserves our thanks
+for receiving the joint deputation even at this late hour, especially when he
+was busy preparing to receive the head of the different provinces. His
+Excellency must be thanked for the unfailing courtesy with which he received
+the deputation and the courteous language in which his reply was couched. But
+mere courtesy, valuable as it is at all times, never so valuable as at this, is
+not enough at this critical moment. ‘Sweet words butter no parsnips’ is a
+proverb more applicable to-day than ever before. Behind the courtesy there was
+the determination to punish Turkey. Punishment of Turkey is a thing which
+Muslim sentiment cannot tolerate for a moment. Muslim soldiers are as
+responsible for the result of the war as any others. It was to appease them
+that Mr. Asquith said when Turkey decided to join the Central Powers that the
+British Government had no designs on Turkey and that His Majesty’s Government
+would never think of punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish
+Committee. Examined by that standard the Viceregal reply is not only
+disappointing but it is a fall from truth and justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What is this British Empire? It is as much Mahomedan and Hindu as it is
+Christian. Its religious neutrality is not a virtue, or if it is, it is a
+virtue of necessity. Such a mighty Empire could not be held together on any
+other terms. British ministers are therefore bound to protect Mahomedan
+interests as any other. Indeed as the Muslim rejoinder says, they are bound to
+make the cause their own. What is the use of His Excellency having presented
+the Muslim claim before the Conference? If the cause is lost the Mahomedans
+will be entitled to think that Britain did not do her duty by them. And the
+Viceregal reply confirms the view. When His Excellency says that Turkey must
+suffer for her having joined the Central Powers he but expresses the opinion of
+British ministers. We hope, therefore, with the framers of the Muslim rejoinder
+that His Majesty’s ministers will mend the mistakes if any have been committed
+and secure a settlement that would satisfy Mahomedan sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What does the sentiment demand? The preservation of the Khilafat with such
+guarantee as may be necessary for the protection of the interests of the
+non-Muslim races living under Turkish rule and the Khalif’s control over Arabia
+and the Holy Places with such arrangement as may be required for guaranteeing
+Arab self-rule, should the Arabs desire it. It is hardly possible to state the
+claim more fairly than has been done. It is a claim backed by justice, by the
+declarations of British ministers and by the unanimous Hindu and Muslim
+opinion. It would be midsummer madness to reject or whittle down a claim so
+backed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE SUZERAINTY OVER ARABIA</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“As I told you in my last letter I think Mr. Gandhi has made a serious mistake
+in the Kailafat business. The Indian Mahomedans base their demand on the
+assertion that their religion requires the Turkish rule over Arabia: but when
+they have against them in this matter, the Arabs themselves, it is impossible
+to regard the theory of the Indian Mahomedans as essential to Islam. After all
+if the Arabs do not represent Islam, who does? It is as if the German Roman
+Catholics made a demand in the name of Roman Catholicism with Rome and the
+Italians making a contrary demand. But even if the religion of the Indian
+Mahomedans did require that Turkish rule should be imposed upon the Arabs
+against their will, one could not, now-a-days, recognise as a really religious
+demand, one which required the continued oppression of one people by another.
+When an assurance was given at the beginning of the war to the Indian
+Mahomedans that the Mahomedan religion would be respected, that could never
+have meant that a temporal sovereignty which violated the principles of
+self-determination would be upheld. We could not now stand by and see the Turks
+re-conquer the Arabs (for the Arabs would certainly fight against them) without
+grossly betraying the Arabs to whom we have given pledges. It is not true that
+the Arab hostility to the Turks was due simply to European suggestion. No
+doubt, during the war we availed ourselves of the Arab hostility to the Turks
+to get another ally, but the hostility had existed long before the war. The
+Non-Turkish Mahomedan subjects of the Sultan in general wanted to get rid of
+his rule. It is the Indian Mahomedans who have no experience of that rule who
+want to impose it on others. As a matter of fact the idea of any restoration of
+Turkish rule in Syria or Arabia, seems so remote from all possibilities that to
+discuss it seems like discussing a restoration of the Holy Roman Empire. I
+cannot conceive what series of events could bring it about. The Indian
+Mahomedans certainly could not march into Arabia themselves and conquer the
+Arabs for the Sultan. And no amount of agitation and trouble in India would
+ever induce England to put back Turkish rule in Arabia. In this matter it is
+not English Imperialism which the Indian Mahomedans are up against, but the
+mass of English Liberal and Humanitarian opinion, the mass of the better
+opinion of England, which wants self-determination to go forward in India.
+Supposing the Indian Mahomedans could stir up an agitation so violent in India
+as to sever the connection between India and the British Crown, still they
+would not be any nearer to their purpose. For to-day they do have considerable
+influence on British world-policy. Even if in this matter of the Turkish
+question their influence has not been sufficient to turn the scale against the
+very heavy weights on the other side, it has weighed in the scale. But apart
+from the British connection, Indian Mahomedans would have no influence at all
+outside India. They would not count for more in world politics than the
+Mahomedans of China. I think it is likely (apart from the pressure of America
+on the other side. I should say certain) that the influence of the Indian
+Mahomedans may at any rate avail to keep the Sultan in Constantinople. But I
+doubt whether they will gain any advantage by doing so. For a Turkey cut down
+to the Turkish parts of Asia-Minor, Constantinople would be a very inconvenient
+capital. I think its inconvenience would more than outweigh the sentimental
+gratification of keeping up a phantom of the old Ottoman Empire. But if the
+Indian Mahomedans want the Sultan to retain his place in Constantinople I think
+the assurances given officially by the Viceroy in India now binds us to insist
+on his remaining there and I think he will remain there in spite of America.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This is an extract, from the letter of an Englishman enjoying a position in
+Great Britain, to a friend in India. It is a typical letter, sober, honest, to
+the point and put in such graceful language that whilst it challenges you, it
+commands your respect by its very gracefulness. But it is just this attitude
+based upon insufficient or false information which has ruined many a cause in
+the British Isles. The superficiality, the one-sidedness the inaccuracy and
+often even dishonesty that have crept into modern journalism, continuously
+mislead honest men who want to see nothing but justice done. Then there are
+always interested groups whose business it is to serve their ends by means of
+faul or food. And the honest Englishman wishing to vote for justice but swayed
+by conflicting opinions and dominated by distorted versions, often ends by
+becoming an instrument of injustice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The writer of the letter quoted above has built up convincing argument on
+imaginary data. He has successfully shown that the Mahomedan case, as it has
+been presented to him, is a rotten case. In India, where it is not quite easy
+to distort facts about the Khilafat, English friends admit the utter justice of
+the Indian-Mahomedan claim. But they plead helplessness and tell us that the
+Government of India and Mr. Montagu have done all it was humanly possible for
+them to do. And if now the judgment goes against Islam, Indian Mahomedans
+should resign themselves to it. This extraordinary state of things would not be
+possible except under this modern rush and preoccupations of all responsible
+people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us for a moment examine the case as it has been imagined by the writer. He
+suggests that Indian Mahomedans want Turkish rule in Arabia in spite of the
+opposition of the Arabs themselves, and that, if the Arabs do not want Turkish
+rule, the writer argues, no false religions sentiment can be permitted to
+interfere with self-determination of the Arabs when India herself has been
+pleading for that very status. Now the fact is that the Mahomedans, as is known
+to everybody who has at all studied the case, have never asked for Turkish rule
+in Arabia in opposition to the Arabs. On the contrary, they have said that they
+have no intention of resisting Arabian self-government. All they ask for is
+Turkish suzerainty over Arabia which would guarantee complete self-rule for the
+Arabs. They want Khalif’s control of the Holy Places of Islam. In other words
+they ask for nothing more than what was guaranteed by Mr. Lloyd George and on
+the strength of which guarantee Mahomedan soldiers split their blood on behalf
+of the Allied Powers. All the elaborate argument therefore and the cogent
+reasoning of the above extract fall to pieces based as they are upon a case
+that has never existed. I have thrown myself heart and soul into this question
+because British pledges abstract justice, and religious sentiment coincide. I
+can conceive the possibility of a blind and fanatical religious sentiment
+existing in opposition to pure justice. I should then resist the former and
+fight for the latter. Nor would I insist upon pledges given dishonestly to
+support an unjust cause as has happened with England in the case of the secret
+treaties. Resistance there becomes not only lawful but obligatory on the part
+of a nation that prides itself on its righteousness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is unnecessary for me to examine the position imagined by the English
+friend, viz., how India would have fared had she been an independent power. It
+is unnecessary because Indian Mahomedans, and for that matter India, are
+fighting for a cause that is admittedly just; a cause in aid of which they are
+invoking the whole-hearted support of the British people. I would however
+venture to suggest that this is a cause in which mere sympathy will not
+suffice. It is a cause which demands support that is strong enough to bring
+about substantial justice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>FURTHER QUESTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+I have been overwhelmed with public criticism and private advice and even
+anonymous letters telling me exactly what I should do. Some are impatient that
+I do not advise immediate and extensive non-co-operation; others tell me what
+harm I am doing the country by throwing it knowingly in a tempest of violence
+on either side. It is difficult for me to deal with the whole of the criticism,
+but I would summarize some of the objections and endeavour to answer them to
+the best of my ability. These are in addition to those I have already
+answered:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) Turkish claim is immoral or unjust and how can I, a lover of truth and
+justice, support it? (2) Even if the claim be just in theory, the Turk is
+hopelessly incapable, weak and cruel. He does not deserve any assistance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) Even if Turkey deserves all that is claimed for her, why should I land
+India in an international struggle?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) It is no part of the Indian Mahomedans’ business to meddle in this affair.
+If they cherish any political ambition, they have tried, they have failed and
+they should now sit still. If it is a religious matter with them, it cannot
+appeal to the Hindu reason in the manner it is put and in any case Hindus ought
+not to identify themselves with Mahomedans in their religious quarrel with
+Christendom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) In no case should I advocate non-co-operation which in its extreme sense is
+nothing but a rebellion, no matter how peaceful it may be.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) Moreover, my experience of last year must show me that it is beyond the
+capacity of any single human being to control the forces of violence that are
+lying dormant in the land.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) Non-co-operation is futile because people will never respond in right
+earnest, and reaction that might afterwards set in will be worse than the state
+of hopefulness we are now in.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) Non-co-operation will bring about cessation of all other activities, even
+working of the Reforms, thus set back the clock of progress. (9) However pure
+my motives may be, those of the Mussalmans are obviously revengeful.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I shall now answer the objections in the order in which they are stated—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) In my opinion the Turkish claim is not only not immoral and unjust, but it
+is highly equitable, if only because Turkey wants to retain what is her own.
+And the Mahomedan manifesto has definitely declared that whatever guarantees
+may be necessary to be taken for the protection of non-Muslim and non-Turkish
+races, should be taken so as to give the Christians theirs and the Arabs their
+self-government under the Turkish suzerainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) I do not believe the Turk to be weak, incapable or cruel. He is certainly
+disorganised and probably without good generalship. He has been obliged to
+fight against heavy odds. The argument of weakness, incapacity and cruelty one
+often hears quoted in connection with those from whom power is sought to be
+taken away. About the alleged massacres a proper commission has been asked for,
+but never granted. And in any case security can be taken against oppression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) I have already stated that if I were not interested in the Indian
+Mahomedans, I would not interest myself in the welfare of the Turks any more
+than I am in that of the Austrians or the Poles. But I am bound as an Indian to
+share the sufferings and trial of fellow-Indians. If I deem the Mahomedan to be
+my brother. It is my duty to help him in his hour of peril to the best of my
+ability, if his cause commends itself to me as just.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) The fourth refers to the extent Hindus should join hands with the
+Mahomedans. It is therefore a matter of feeling and opinion. It is expedient to
+suffer for my Mahomedan brother to the utmost in a just cause and I should
+therefore travel with him along the whole road so long as the means employed by
+him are as honourable as his end. I cannot regulate the Mahomedan feeling. I
+must accept his statement that the Khilafat is with him a religious question in
+the sense that it binds him to reach the goal even at the cost of his own life.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) I do not consider non-co-operation to be a rebellion, because it is free
+from violence. In a larger sense all opposition to a Government measure is a
+rebellion. In that sense, rebellion in a just cause is a duty, the extent of
+opposition being determined by the measure of the injustice done and felt.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) My experience of last year shows me that in spite of aberrations in some
+parts of India, the country was entirely under control that the influence of
+Satyagraha was profoundly for its good and that where violence did break out
+there were local causes that directly contributed to it. At the same time I
+admit that even the violence that did take place on the part of the people and
+the spirit of lawlessness that was undoubtedly shown in some parts should have
+remained under check. I have made ample acknowledgment of the miscalculation I
+then made. But all the painful experience that I then gained did not any way
+shake my belief in Satyagraha or in the possibility of that matchless force
+being utilised in India. Ample provision is being made this time to avoid the
+mistakes of the past. But I must refuse to be deterred from a clear course;
+because it may be attended by violence totally unintended and in spite of
+extraordinary efforts that are being made to prevent it. At the same time I
+must make my position clear. Nothing can possibly prevent a Satyagrahi from
+doing his duty because of the frown of the authorities. I would risk, if
+necessary, a million lives so long as they are voluntary sufferers and are
+innocent, spotless victims. It is the mistakes of the people that matter in a
+Satyagraha campaign. Mistakes, even insanity must be expected from the strong
+and the powerful, and the moment of victory has come when there is no retort to
+the mad fury of the powerful, but a voluntary, dignified and quiet submission
+but not submission to the will of the authority that has put itself in the
+wrong. The secret of success lies therefore in holding every English life and
+the life of every officer serving the Government as sacred as those of our own
+dear ones. All the wonderful experience I have gained now during nearly 40
+years of conscious existence, has convinced me that there is no gift so
+precious as that of life. I make bold to say that the moment the Englishmen
+feel that although they are in India in a hopeless minority, their lives are
+protected against harm not because of the matchless weapons of destruction
+which are at their disposal, but because Indians refuse to take the lives even
+of those whom they may consider to be utterly in the wrong that moment will see
+a transformation in the English nature in its relation to India and that moment
+will also be the moment when all the destructive cutlery that is to be had in
+India will begin to rust. I know that this is a far-off vision. That cannot
+matter to me. It is enough for me to see the light and to act up to it, and it
+is more than enough when I gain companions in the onward march. I have claimed
+in private conversations with English friends that it is because of my
+incessant preaching of the gospel of non-violence and my having successfully
+demonstrated its practical utility that so far the forces of violence, which
+are undoubtedly in existence in connection with the Khilafat movement, have
+remained under complete control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) From a religious standpoint the seventh objection is hardly worth
+considering. If people do not respond to the movement of non-co-operation, it
+would be a pity, but that can be no reason for a reformer not to try. It would
+be to me a demonstration that the present position of hopefulness is not
+dependent on any inward strength or knowledge, but it is hope born of ignorance
+and superstition.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) If non-co-operation is taken up in earnest, it must bring about a cessation
+of all other activities including the Reforms, but I decline to draw therefore
+the corollary that it will set back the clock of progress. On the contrary, I
+consider non-co-operation to be such a powerful and pure instrument, that if it
+is enforced in an earnest spirit, it will be like seeking first the Kingdom of
+God and everything else following as a matter of course. People will have then
+realised their true power. They would have learnt the value of discipline,
+self-control, joint action, non-violence, organisation and everything else that
+goes to make a nation great and good, and not merely great.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(9) I do not know that I have a right to arrogate greater purity for myself
+than for our Mussalman brethren. But I do admit that they do not believe in my
+doctrine of non-violence to the full extent. For them it is a weapon of the
+weak, an expedient. They consider non-co-operation without violence to be the
+only thing open to them in the war of direct action. I know that if some of
+them could offer successful violence, they would do to-day. But they are
+convinced that humanly speaking it is an impossibility. For them, therefore,
+non-co-operation is a matter not merely of duty but also of revenge. Whereas I
+take up non-co-operation against the Government as I have actually taken it up
+in practice against members of my own family. I entertain very high regard for
+the British constitution, I have not only no enmity against Englishmen but I
+regard much in English character as worthy of my emulation. I count many as my
+friends. It is against my religion to regard any one as an enemy. I entertain
+similar sentiments with respect to Mahomedans. I find their cause to be just
+and pure. Although therefore their viewpoint is different from mine I do not
+hesitate to associate with them and invite them to give my method a trial, for,
+I believe that the use of a pure weapon even from a mistaken motive does not
+fail to produce some good, even as the telling of truth if only because for the
+time being it is the best policy, is at least so much to the good.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. CANDLER’S OPEN LETTER</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler has favoured me with an open letter on this question of questions.
+The letter has already appeared in the Press. I can appreciate Mr. Candler’s
+position as I would like him and other Englishmen to appreciate mine and that
+of hundreds of Hindus who feel as I do. Mr. Candler’s letter is an attempt to
+show that Mr. Lloyd George’s pledge is not in any way broken by the peace
+terms. I quite agree with him that Mr. Lloyd George’s words ought not to be
+torn from their context to support the Mahomedan claim. These are Mr. Lloyd
+George’s words as quoted in the recent Viceregal message: “Nor are we fighting
+to destroy Austria-Hungary or to deprive Turkey of its capital or of the rich
+and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in
+race.” Mr. Candler seems to read ‘which’, as if it meant ‘if they,’ whereas I
+give the pronoun its natural meaning, namely, that the Prime Minister knew in
+1918, that the lands referred to by him were “predominantly Turkish in race.”
+And if this is the meaning I venture to suggest that the pledge has been broken
+in a most barefaced manner, for there is practically nothing left to the Turk
+of ‘the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have already my view of the retention of the Sultan in Constantinople. It is
+an insult to the intelligence of man to suggest that ‘the maintenance of the
+Turkish Empire in the homeland of the Turkish race with its capital at
+Constantinople has been left unimpaired by the terms of peace. This is the
+other passage from the speech which I presume Mr. Candler wants me to read
+together with the one already quoted:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“While we do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the
+home-land of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople, the passage
+between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea being inter-nationalised, Armenia,
+Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine are in our judgment entitled to a recognition
+of their separate national condition.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Did that mean entire removal of Turkish influence, extinction of Turkish
+suzerainty and the introduction of European-Christian influence under the guise
+of Mandates? Have the Moslems of Arabia, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria and
+Palestine been committed, or is the new arrangement being superimposed upon
+them by Powers conscious of their own brute-strength rather than of justice of
+their action? I for one would nurse by every legitimate means the spirit of
+independence in the brave Arabs, but I shudder to think what will happen to
+them under the schemes of exploitation of their country by the greedy
+capitalists protected as they will be by the mandatory Powers. If the pledge is
+to be fulfilled, let these places have full self-government with suzerainty to
+be retained with Turkey as has been suggested by the <i>Times of India</i>. Let
+there be all the necessary guarantees taken from Turkey about the internal
+independence of the Arabs. But to remove that suzerainty, to deprive the Khalif
+of the wardenship of the Holy Places is to render Khilafat a mockery which no
+Mahomedan can possibly look upon with equanimity, I am not alone in my
+interpretation of the pledge. The Right Hon’ble Ameer Ali calls the peace terms
+a breach of faith. Mr. Charles Roberts reminds the British public that the
+Indian Mussalman sentiment regarding the Turkish Treaty is based upon the Prime
+Minister’s pledge “regarding Thrace, Constantinople and Turkish lands in Asia
+Minor, repeated on February 26 last with deliberation by Mr. Lloyd George. Mr.
+Roberts holds that the pledge must be treated as a whole, not as binding only
+regarding Constantinople but also binding as regards Thrace and Asia Minor. He
+describes the pledge as binding upon the nation as a whole and its breach in
+any part as a gross breach of faith on the part of the British Empire. He
+demands that if there is an unanswerable reply to the charge of breach of faith
+it ought to be given and adds the Prime Minister may regard his own word
+lightly if he chooses, but he has no right to break a pledge given on behalf of
+the nation. He concludes that it is incredible that such pledge should not have
+been kept in the letter and in the spirit.” He adds: “I have reason to believe
+that these views are fully shared by prominent members of the Cabinet.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I wonder if Mr. Candler knows what is going on to-day in England. Mr. Pickthall
+writing in <i>New Age</i> says: “No impartial international enquiry into the
+whole question of the Armenian massacres has been instituted in the ample time
+which has elapsed since the conclusion of armistice with Turkey. The Turkish
+Government has asked for such enquiry. But the Armenian organisations and the
+Armenian partisans refuse to hear of such a thing, declaring that the Bryce and
+Lepssens reports are quite sufficient to condemn the Turks. In other words the
+judgment should be given on the case for prosecution alone. The inter-allied
+commission which investigated the unfortunate events in Smyrna last year, made
+a report unfavourable to Greek claims. Therefore, that report has not been
+published here in England, though in other countries it has long been public
+property.” He then goes on to show how money is being scattered by Armenian and
+Greek emissaries in order to popularise their cause and adds: “This conjunction
+of dense ignorance and cunning falsehood is fraught with instant danger to the
+British realm,” and concludes: “A Government and people which prefer propaganda
+to fact as the ground of policy—and foreign policy at that—is self-condemned.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have reproduced the above extract in order to show that the present British
+policy has been affected by propaganda of an unscrupulous nature. Turkey which
+was dominant over two million square miles of Asia, Africa and Europe in the
+17th century, under the terms of the treaty, says the <i>London Chronicle</i>,
+has dwindled down to little more than 1,000 square miles. It says, “All
+European Turkey could now be accommodated comfortably between the Landsend and
+the Tamar, Cornawal alone exceeding its total area and but for its alliance
+with Germany, Turkey could have been assured of retaining at least sixty
+thousand square miles of the Eastern Balkans.” I do not know whether the
+<i>Chronicle</i> view is generally shared. Is it by way of punishment that
+Turkey is to undergo such shrinkage, or is it because justice demands it? If
+Turkey had not made the mistake of joining Germany, would the principle of
+nationality have been still applied to Armenia, Arabia, Mesopotamia and
+Palestine?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let me now remind those who think with Mr. Candler that the promise was not
+made by Mr. Lloyd George to the people of India in anticipation of the supply
+of recruits continuing. In defending his own statement Mr. Lloyd George is
+reported to have said:
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“The effect of the statement in India was that recruiting went up appreciably
+from that very moment. They were not all Mahomedans but there were many
+Mahomedans amongst them. Now we are told that was an offer to Turkey. But they
+rejected it, and therefore we were absolutely free. It was not. It is too often
+forgotten that we are the greatest Mahomedan power in the world and one-fourth
+of the population of the British Empire is Mahomedan. There have been no more
+loyal adherents to the throne and no more effective and loyal supporters of the
+Empire in its hour of trial. <i>We gave a solemn pledge and they accepted
+it</i>. They are disturbed by the prospect of our not abiding by it.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Who shall interpret that pledge and how? How did the Government of India itself
+interpret it? Did it or did it not energetically support the claim for the
+control of the Holy Places of Islam vesting in the Khalif? Did the Government
+of India suggest that the whole of Jazirat-ul-Arab could be taken away
+consistently with that pledge from the sphere of influence of the Khalif, and
+given over to the Allies as mandatory Powers? Why does the Government of India
+sympathise with the Indian Mussalmans if the terms are all they should be? So
+much for the pledge. I would like to guard myself against being understood that
+I stand or fall absolutely by Mr. Lloyd George’s declaration. I have advisedly
+used the adverb ‘practically’ in connection with it. It is an important
+qualification.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler seems to suggest that my goal is something more than merely
+attaining justice on the Khilafat. If so, he is right. Attainment of justice is
+undoubtedly the corner-stone, and if I found that I was wrong in my conception
+of justice on this question, I hope I shall have the courage immediately to
+retrace my steps. But by helping the Mahomedans of India at a critical moment
+in their history, I want to buy their friendship. Moreover, if I can carry the
+Mahomedans with me I hope to wean Great Britain from the downward path along
+which the Prime Minister seems to me to be taking her. I hope also to show to
+India and the Empire at large that given a certain amount of capacity for
+self-sacrifice, justice can be secured by peacefullest and cleanest means
+without sowing or increasing bitterness between English and Indians. For,
+whatever may be the temporary effect of my methods, I know enough of them to
+feel certain that they alone are immune from lasting bitterness. They are
+untainted with hatred, expedience or untruth.
+</p>
+
+<h3>IN PROCESS OF KEEPING</h3>
+
+<p>
+The writer of ‘Current Topics’ in the “Times of India” has attempted to
+challenge the statement made in my Khilafat article regarding ministerial
+pledges, and in doing so cites Mr. Asquith’s Guild-Hall speech of November 10,
+1914. When I wrote the articles, I had in mind Mr. Asquith’s speech. I am sorry
+that he ever made that speech. For, in my humble opinion, it betrayed to say
+the least, a confusion of thought. Could he think of the Turkish people as
+apart from the Ottoman Government? And what is the meaning of the death-knell
+of Ottoman Dominion in Europe and Asia if it be not the death knell of Turkish
+people as a free and governing race? Is it, again, true historically that the
+Turkish rule has always been a blight that ‘has withered some of the fairest
+regions of the earth?’ And what is the meaning of his statement that followed,
+viz., “Nothing is further from our thoughts than to imitate or encourage a
+crusade against their belief?” If words have any meaning, the qualifications
+that Mr. Asquith introduced in his speech should have meant a scrupulous regard
+for Indian Muslim feeling. And if that be the meaning of his speech, without
+anything further to support me I would claim that even Mr. Asquith’s assurance
+is in danger of being set at nought if the resolutions of the San Remo
+Conference are to be crystallised into action. But I base remarks on a
+considered speech made by Mr. Asquith’s successor two years later when things
+had assumed a more threatening shape than in 1914 and when the need for Indian
+help was much greater than in 1914. His pledge would bear repetition till it is
+fulfilled. He said: “Nor are we fighting to deprive Turkey of its capital or of
+the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly
+Turkish in race. We do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in
+the homelands of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople.” If only
+every word of this pledge is fulfilled both in letter and in spirit, there
+would be little left for quarrelling about. In so far as Mr. Asquith’s
+declaration can be considered hostile to the Indian Muslim claim, it its
+superseded by the later and more considered declaration of Mr. Lloyd George—a
+declaration made irrevocable by fulfilment of the consideration it expected,
+viz. the enlistment of the brave Mahomedan soldiery which fought in the very
+place which is now being partitioned in spite of the pledge. But the writer of
+‘Current Topics’ says Mr. Lloyd George “is now in process of keeping his
+pledge” I hope he is right. But what has already happened gives little ground
+for any such hope. For, imprisonment or internment of the Khalif in his own
+capital will be not only a mockery of fulfilment but it would he adding injury
+to insult. Either the Turkish Empire is to be maintained in the homelands of
+the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople or it is not. If it is, let
+the Indian Mahomedans feel the full glow of it or if the Empire is to be broken
+up, let the mask of hypocrisy be lifted and India see the truth in its
+nakedness. To join the Khilafat movement then means to join a movement to keep
+inviolate the pledge of a British minister. Surely, such a movement is worth
+much greater sacrifice than may be involved in non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>APPEAL TO THE VICEROY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As one who has enjoyed a certain measure of your Excellency’s confidence, and
+as one who claims to be a devoted well-wisher of the British Empire, I owe it
+to your Excellency, and through your Excellency to His Majesty’s Ministers, to
+explain my connection with and my conduct in the Khilafat question.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the very earliest stages of the war, even whilst I was in London organising
+the Indian Volunteer Ambulance Corps, I began to interest myself in the
+Khilafat question. I perceived how deeply moved the little Mussalman World in
+London was when Turkey decided to throw in her lot with Germany. On my arrival
+in India in the January of 1915, I found the same anxiousness and earnestness
+among the Mussalmans with whom I came in contact. Their anxiety became intense
+when the information about the Secret Treaties leaked out. Distrust of British
+intentions filled their minds, and despair took possession of them. Even at
+that moment I advised my Mussalman friends not to give way to despair, but to
+express their fear and their hopes in a disciplined manner. It will be admitted
+that the whole of Mussalman India has behaved in a singularly restrained manner
+during the past five years and that the leaders have been able to keep the
+turbulent sections of their community under complete control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The peace terms and your Excellency’s defence of them have given the Mussalmans
+of India a shock from which it will be difficult for them to recover. The terms
+violate ministerial pledges and utterly disregard Mussalman sentiment. I
+consider that as a staunch Hindu wishing to live on terms of the closest
+friendship with my Mussalman countrymen. I should be an unworthy son of India
+if I did not stand by them in their hour of trial. In my humble opinion their
+cause is just. They claim that Turkey must be <i>punished</i> if their
+sentiment is to be respected. Muslim soldiers did fight to inflict punishment
+on their own Khalifa or to deprive him of his territories. The Mussalman
+attitude has been consistent, throughout these five years.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My duty to the Empire to which I owe my loyalty requires me to resist the cruel
+violence that has been done to the Mussalman sentiment. So far as I am aware,
+Mussulmans and Hindus have as a whole lost faith in British justice and honour.
+The report of the majority of the Hunter Committee, Your Excellency’s despatch
+thereon and Mr. Montagu’s reply have only aggravated the distrust.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In these circumstances the only course open to one like me is either in despair
+to sever all connection with British rule, or, if I still retained faith in the
+inherent superiority of the British constitution to all others at present in
+vogue to adopt such means as will rectify the wrong done, and thus restore
+confidence. I have not lost faith in such superiority and I am not without hope
+that somehow or other justice will yet be rendered if we show the requisite
+capacity for suffering. Indeed, my conception of that constitution is that it
+helps only those who are ready to help themselves. I do not believe that it
+protects the weak. It gives free scope to the strong to maintain their strength
+and develop it. The weak under it go to the wall.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is, then, because I believe in the British constitution that I have advised
+my Mussalman friends to withdraw their support from your Excellency’s
+Government and the Hindus to join them, should the peace terms not be revised
+in accordance with the solemn pledges of Ministers and the Muslim sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Three courses were open to the Mahomedans in order to mark their emphatic
+disapproval of the utter injustice to which His Majesty’s Ministers have become
+party, if they have not actually been the prime perpetrators of it. They are:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) To resort to violence,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) To advise emigration on a wholesale scale,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) Not to be party to the injustice by ceasing to co-operate with the
+Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency must be aware that there was a time when the boldest, though
+the most thoughtless among the Mussulmans favoured violence, and the “Hijrat”
+(emigration) has not yet ceased to be the battle-cry. I venture to claim that I
+have succeeded by patient reasoning in weaning the party of violence from its
+ways. I confess that I did not—I did not attempt to succeed in weaning them
+from violence on moral grounds, but purely on utilitarian grounds. The result,
+for the time being at any has, however, been to stop violence. The School of
+“Hijrat” has received a check, if it has not stopped its activity entirely. I
+hold that no repression could have prevented a violent eruption, if the people
+had not had presented to them a form of direct action involving considerable
+sacrifice and ensuring success if such direct action was largely taken up by
+the public. Non-co-operation was the only dignified and constitutional form of
+such direct action. For it is the right recognised from times immemorial of the
+subject to refuse to assist a ruler who misrules.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the same time I admit that non-co-operation practised by the mass of people
+is attended with grave risks. But, in a crisis such as has overtaken the
+Mussalmans of India, no step that is unattended with large risks, can possibly
+bring about the desired change. Not to run some risks now will be to court much
+greater risks if not virtual destruction of Law and Order.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But there is yet an escape from non-co-operation. The Mussalman representation
+has requested your Excellency to lead the agitation yourself, as did your
+distinguished predecessor at the time of the South African trouble. But if you
+cannot see your way to do so, and non-co-operation becomes a dire necessity, I
+hope that your Excellency will give those who have accepted my advice and
+myself the credit for being actuated by nothing less than a stern sense of
+duty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have the honour to remain,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency’s faithful servant, (Sd.) M.K. GANDHI. Laburnam Road, Gamdevi,
+Bombay 22nd June 1920
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE PREMIER’S REPLY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The English mail has brought us a full and official report of the Premier’s
+speech which he recently made when he received the Khilafat deputation. Mr.
+Lloyd George’s speech is more definite and therefore more disappointing than
+H.E. the Viceroy’s reply to the deputation here. He draws quite unwarranted
+deductions from the same high principles on which he had based his own pledge
+only two years ago. He declares that Turkey must pay the penalty of defeat.
+This determination to punish Turkey does not become one whose immediate
+predecessor had, in order to appease Muslim soldiers, promised that the British
+Government had no designs on Turkey and that His Majesty’s Government would
+never think of punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish Committee.
+Mr. Lloyd George has expressed his belief that the majority of the population
+of Turkey did not really want to quarrel with Great Britain and that their
+rulers misled the country. In spite of this conviction and in spite of Mr.
+Asquith’s promise, he is out to punish Turkey and punish it in the name of
+justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He expounds the principle of self-determination and justifies the scheme of
+depriving Turkey of its territories one after another. While justifying this
+scheme he does not exclude even Thrace and this strikes the reader most,
+because this very Thrace he had mentioned in his pledge as predominantly
+Turkish. Now we are told by him that both the Turkish census and the Greek
+census agree in pointing out the Mussulman population in Thrace is in a
+considerable minority! Mr. Yakub Hussain speaking at the Madras Khilafat
+conference has challenged the truth of this statement. The Prime Minister cites
+among others also the example of Smyrna where, he says, we had a most careful
+investigation by a very impartial committee in the whole of the question of
+Smyrna and it was found that considerable majority was non-Turkish.’ Who will
+believe the one-sided “impartial committee’s” investigations until it is
+disproved that thousands of Musselmans have been murdered and hundreds of
+thousands have been driven away from their hearths and homes? Strangely enough
+Mr. Lloyd George, believes in the necessity of fresh investigations by a
+purposely appointed committee in Smyrna as the most authenticated and
+up-to-date report, whereas he would not accept Mr. Mahomed Ali’s proposal for
+an impartial commission in regard to Armenian massacre! Doubtful and one-sided
+facts and figures suffice for him even to conclude that the Turkish Government
+is incapable of protecting its subjects. And he proceeds to suggest foreign
+interference in ruling over Asia Minor in the interests of civilization. Here
+he cuts at the root of the Sultan’s independence. This proposal of
+appropriating supervision is distinctly unlike the treatment meted out to other
+enemy powers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This detraction of the Sultan’s suzerainty is only a corollary of the Premier’s
+indifference towards the Muslim idea of the Caliphate. The premier’s injustice
+in treating the Turkish question becomes graver when he thus lightly handles
+the Khilafat question. There had been occasions when the British have used to
+their advantage the Muslim idea of associating the Caliph’s spiritual power
+with temporal power. Now this very association is treated as a controversial
+question by the great statesman.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Will this raise the reputation of Great Britain or stain it? Can this be
+tolerated by those who fought against Turkey with full faith in British
+honesty? Mere receipts of gratitude cannot console the wounded Mussalmans.
+There lies the alternative for England to choose between two mandates—a mandate
+over some Turkish territories which is sure to lead to chaos all over the world
+and a mandate over the hearts of the Muhomedans which will redeem the pledged
+honour of Britain. The prime minister has an unwise choice. This narrow view
+registers the latest temperature of British diplomacy.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MUSSULMAN REPRESENTATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Slowly but surely the Mussulmans are preparing for the battle before them. They
+have to fight against odds that are undoubtedly heavy but not half as heavy as
+the prophet had against him. How often did he not put his life in danger? But
+his faith in God was unquenchable. He went forward with a light heart, for God
+was on his side, for he represented truth. If his followers have half the
+prophet’s faith and half his spirit of sacrifice, the odds will be presently
+even and will in little while turn against the despoilers of Turkey. Already
+the rapacity of the Allies is telling against themselves. France finds her task
+difficult. Greece cannot stomach her ill-gotten gains. And England finds
+Mesopotamia a tough job. The oil of Mosul may feed the fire she has so wantonly
+lighted and burn her fingers badly. The newspapers say the Arabs do not like
+the presence of the Indian soldiery in their midst. I do not wonder. They are a
+fierce and a brave people and do not understand why Indian soldiers should find
+themselves in Mesopotamia. Whatever the fate of non-co-operation, I wish that
+not a single Indian will offer his services for Mesopotamia whether for the
+civil or the military department. We must learn to think for ourselves and
+before entering upon any employment find out whether thereby we may not make
+ourselves instruments of injustice. Apart from the question of Khilafat and
+from the point of abstract justice the English have no right to hold
+Mesopotamia. It is no part of our loyalty to help the Imperial Government in
+what is in plain language daylight robbery. If therefore we seek civil or
+military employment in Mesopotamia we do so for the sake of earning a
+livelihood. It is our duty to see that the source is not tainted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It surprises me to find so many people shirking over the mention of
+non-co-operation. There is no instrument so clean, so harmless and yet so
+effective as non-co-operation. Judiciously hauled it need not produce any evil
+consequences. And its intensity will depend purely on the capacity of the
+people for sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The chief thing is to prepare the atmosphere of non-co-operation. “We are not
+going to co-operate with you in your injustice,” is surely the right and the
+duty of every intelligent subject to say. Were it not for our utter servility,
+helplessness and want of confidence in ourselves, we would certainly grasp this
+clean weapon and make the most effective use of it. Even the most despotic
+government cannot stand except for the consent of the governed which consent is
+often forcibly procured by the despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear
+the despotic force his power is gone. But the British government is never and
+nowhere entirely or laid upon force. It does make an honest attempt to secure
+the goodwill of the governed. But it does not hesitate to adopt unscrupulous
+means to compel the consent of the governed. It has not gone beyond the
+‘Honesty is the best policy’ idea. It therefore bribes you into consenting its
+will by awarding titles, medals and ribbons, by giving you employment, by its
+superior financial ability to open for its employees avenues for enriching
+themselves and finally when these fail, it resorts to force. That is what Sir
+Michael O’Dwyer did and that is almost every British administrator will
+certainly do if he thought it necessary. If then we would not be greedy, if we
+would not run after titles and medals and honorary posts which do the country
+no good, half the battle is won.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My advisers are never tired of telling me that even if the Turkish peace terms
+are revised it will not be due to non-co-operation. I venture to suggest to
+them that non-co-operation has a higher purpose than mere revision of the
+terms. If I cannot compel revision I must at least cease to support a
+government that becomes party to the usurpation. And if I succeed in pushing
+non-co-operation to the extreme limit, I do compel the Government to choose
+between India and the usurpation. I have faith enough in England to know that
+at that moment England will expel her present jaded ministers and put in others
+who will make a clean sweep of the terms in consultation with an awakened
+India, draft terms that will be honourable to her, to Turkey and acceptable to
+India. But I hear my critics say “India has not the strength of purpose and the
+capacity for the sacrifice to achieve such a noble end. They are partly right.
+India has not these qualities now, because we have not—shall we not evolve them
+and infect the nation with them? Is not the attempt worth making? Is my
+sacrifice too great to gain such a great purpose?”
+</p>
+
+<h3>CRITICISM OF THE MUSLIM MANIFESTO</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat representation addressed to the Viceroy and my letter on the same
+subject have been severely criticised by the Anglo-Indian press. <i>The Times
+of India</i> which generally adopts an impartial attitude has taken strong
+exception to certain statements made in the Muslim manifesto and has devoted a
+paragraph of its article to an advance criticism of my suggestion that His
+Excellency should resign if the peace terms are not revised.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>The Times of India</i> excepts to the submission that the British Empire may
+not treat Turkey like a departed enemy. The signatories have, I think, supplied
+the best of reasons. They say “We respectfully submit that in the treatment of
+Turkey the British Government are bound to respect Indian Muslim sentiment in
+so far as it is neither unjust nor unreasonable.” If the seven crore Mussulmans
+are partners in the Empire, I submit that their wish must be held to be all
+sufficient for refraining from punishing Turkey. It is beside the point to
+quote what Turkey did during the war. It has suffered for it. <i>The Times</i>
+inquires wherein Turkey has been treated worse than the other Powers. I thought
+that the fact was self-evident. Neither Germany nor Austria and Hungary has
+been treated in the same way that Turkey has been. The whole of the Empire has
+been reduced to the retention of a portion of its capital, as it were, to mock
+the Sultan and that too has been done under terms so humiliating that no
+self-respecting person much less a reigning sovereign can possibly accept.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>The Times</i> has endeavoured to make capital out of the fact that the
+representation does not examine the reason for Turkey not joining the Allies.
+Well there was no mystery about it. The fact of Russia being one of the Allies
+was enough to warn Turkey against joining them. With Russia knocking at the
+gate at the time of the war it was not an easy matter for Turkey to join the
+Allies. But Turkey had cause to suspect Great Britain herself. She knew that
+England had done no friendly turn to her during the Bulgarian War. She was
+hardly well served at the time of the war with Italy. It was still no doubt a
+bad choice. With the Musssalmans of India awakened and ready to support her,
+her statesmen might have relied upon Britain not being allowed to damage Turkey
+if she had remained with the Allies. But this is all wisdom after event. Turkey
+made a bad choice and she was punished for it. To humiliate her now is to
+ignore the Indian Mussulman sentiment. Britain may not do it and retain the
+loyalty of the awakened Mussulmans of India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For “The Times” to say that the peace terms strictly follow the principle of
+self-determination is to throw dust in the eyes of its readers. Is it the
+principle of self-determination that has caused the cessation of Adrianople and
+Thrace to Greece? By what principle of self-determination has Smyrna been
+handed to Greece? Have the inhabitants of Thrace and Smyrna asked for Grecian
+tutelege?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I decline to believe that the Arabs like the disposition that has been made of
+them. Who is the King of Hedjaj and who is Emir Feisul? Have the Arabs elected
+these kings and chiefs? Do the Arabs like the Mandate being taken by England?
+By the time the whole thing is finished, the very name self-determination will
+stink in one’s nostrils. Already signs are not wanting to show that the Arabs,
+the Thracians and the Smyrnans are resenting their disposal. They may not like
+Turkish rule but they like the present arrangement less. They could have made
+their own honourable terms with Turkey but these self-determining people will
+now be held down by the ‘matchless might’ of the allied <i>i.e.</i>, British
+forces. Britain had the straight course open to her of keeping the Turkish
+Empire intact and taking sufficient guarantees for good government. But her
+Prime Minister chose the crooked course of secret treaties, duplicity and
+hypocritical subterfuges.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is still a way out. Let her treat India as a real partner. Let her call
+the true representatives of the Mussalmans. Let them go to Arabia and the other
+parts of the Turkish Empire and let her devise a scheme that would not
+humiliate Turkey, that would satisfy the just Muslim sentiment and that will
+secure honest self-determination for the races composing that Empire. If it was
+Canada, Australia or South Africa that had to be placated, Mr. Lloyd George
+would not have dared to ignore them. They have the power to secede. India has
+not. Let him no more insult India by calling her a partner, if her feelings
+count for naught. I invite <i>The Times of India</i> to reconsider its position
+and join an honourable agitation in which a high-souled people are seeking
+nothing but justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do with all deference still suggest that the least that Lord Chelmsford can
+do is to resign if the sacred feelings of India’s sons are not to be consulted
+and respected by the Ministers. <i>The Times</i> is over-taxing the
+constitution when it suggests that as a constitutional Viceroy it is not open
+to Lord Chelmsford to go against the decision of his Majesty’s Ministers. It is
+certainly not open to a Viceroy to retain office and oppose ministerial
+decisions. But the constitution does allow a Viceroy to resign his high office
+when he is called upon to carry out decisions that are immoral as the peace
+terms are or like these terms are calculated to stir to their very depth the
+feelings of those whose affair he is administering for the time being.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MAHOMEDAN DECISION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat meeting at Allahabad has unanimously reaffirmed the principle of
+non-co-operation and appointed an executive committee to lay down and enforce a
+detailed programme. This meeting was preceded by a joint Hindu-Mahomedan
+meeting at which Hindu leaders were invited to give their views. Mrs. Beasant,
+the Hon’ble Pandit Malaviyuji, the Hon’ble Dr. Sapru Motilal Nehru Chintamani
+and others were present at the meeting. It was a wise step on the part of the
+Khilafat Committee to invite Hindus representing all shades of thought to give
+them the benefit of their advice. Mrs. Besant and Dr. Sapru strongly dissuaded
+the Mahomedans present from the policy of non-co-operation. The other Hindu
+speakers made non-committal speeches. Whilst the other Hindu speakers approved
+of the principle of non-co-operation in theory, they saw many practical
+difficulties and they feared also complications arising from Mahomedans
+welcoming an Afghan invasion of India. The Mahomedan speakers gave the fullest
+and frankest assurances that they would fight to a man any invader who wanted
+to conquer India, but were equally frank in asserting that any invasion from
+without undertaken with a view to uphold the prestige of Islam and to vindicate
+justice would have their full sympathy if not their actual support. It is easy
+enough to understand and justify the Hindu caution. It is difficult to resist
+Mahomedan position. In my opinion, the best way to prevent India from becoming
+the battle ground between the forces of Islam and those of the English is for
+Hindus to make non-co-operation a complete and immediate success, and I have
+little doubt that if the Mahomedans remain true to their declared intention and
+are able to exercise self-restraint, and make sacrifices the Hindus will “play
+the game” and join them in the campaign of non-co-operation. I feel equally
+certain that the Hindus will not assist Mahomedans in promoting or bringing
+about an armed conflict between the British Government and their allies, and
+Afghanistan. British forces are too well organised to admit of any successful
+invasion of the Indian frontier. The only way, therefore, the Mahomedans can
+carry on an effective struggle on behalf of the honour of Islam is to take up
+non-co-operation in real earnest. It will not only be completely effective if
+it is adopted by the people on an extensive scale, but it will also provide
+full scope for individual conscience. If I cannot bear an injustice done by an
+individual or a corporation, and if I am directly or indirectly instrumental in
+upholding that individual or corporation, I must answer for it before my Maker,
+but I have done all it is humanly possible for me to do consistently with the
+moral code that refuses to injure even the wrong-doer, if I cease to support
+the injustice in the manner described above. In applying therefore such a great
+force there should be no haste, there should be no temper shown.
+Non-co-operation must be and remain absolutely a voluntary effort. The whole
+thing then depends upon Mahomedans themselves. If they will but help themselves
+Hindu help will come and the Government, great and mighty though it is, will
+have to bend before this irresistible force. No Government can possibly
+withstand the bloodless opposition of a whole nation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. ANDREWS’ DIFFICULTY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews whose love for India is equalled only by his love for England and
+whose mission in life is to serve God, i.e., humanity through India, has
+contributed remarkable articles to the ‘Bombay Chronicle’ on the Khilafat
+movement. He has not spared England, France or Italy. He has shown how Turkey
+has been most unjustly dealt with and how the Prime Minister’s pledge has been
+broken. He has devoted the last article to an examination of Mr. Mahomed Ali’s
+letter to the Sultan and has come to the conclusion that Mr. Mahomed Ali’s
+statement of claim is at variance with the claim set forth in the latest
+Khilafat representation to the Viceroy which he wholly approves.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews and I have discussed the question as fully as it was possible. He
+asked me publicly to define my own position more fully than I have done. His
+sole object in inviting discussion is to give strength to a cause which he
+holds as intrinsically just, and to gather round it the best opinion of Europe
+so that the allied powers and especially England may for very shame be obliged
+to revise the terms.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I gladly respond to Mr. Andrew’s invitation. I should clear the ground by
+stating that I reject any religious doctrine that does not appeal to reason and
+is in conflict with morality. I tolerate unreasonable religious sentiment when
+it is not immoral. I hold the Khilafat claim to be both just and reasonable and
+therefore it derives greater force because it has behind it the religious
+sentiment of the Mussalman world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my opinion Mr. Mahomed Ali’s statement is unexceptionable. It is no doubt
+clothed in diplomatic language. But I am not prepared to quarrel with the
+language so long as it is sound in substance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews considers that Mr. Mahomed Ali’s language goes to show that he
+would resist Armenian independence against the Armenians and the Arabian
+against the Arabs. I attach no such meaning to it. What he, the whole of
+Mussalmans and therefore I think also the Hindus resist is the shameless
+attempt of England and the other Powers under cover of self-determination to
+emasculate and dismember Turkey. If I understand the spirit of Islam properly,
+it is essentially republican in the truest sense of the term. Therefore if
+Armenia or Arabia desired independence of Turkey they should have it. In the
+case of Arabia, complete Arabian independence would mean transference of the
+Khilafat to an Arab chieftain. Arabia in that sense is a Mussulman trust, not
+purely Arabian. And the Arabs without ceasing to be Mussulman, could not hold
+Arabia against Muslim opinion. The Khalifa must be the custodian of the Holy
+places and therefore also the routes to them. He must be able to defend them
+against the whole world. And if an Arab chief arose who could better satisfy
+that test than the Sultan of Turkey, I have no doubt that he would be
+recognised as the Khalifa.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have thus discussed the question academically. The fact is that neither the
+Mussulmans nor the Hindus believe in the English Ministerial word. They do not
+believe that the Arabs or the Armenians want complete independence of Turkey.
+That they want self-government is beyond doubt. Nobody disputes that claim. But
+nobody has ever ascertained that either the Arabs or the Armenians desire to do
+away with all connection, even nominal, with Turkey.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The solution of the question lies not in our academic discussion of the ideal
+position, it lies in an honest appointment of a mixed commission of absolutely
+independent Indian Mussulmans and Hindus and independent Europeans to
+investigate the real wish of the Armenians and the Arabs and then to come to a
+<i>modus vivendi</i> where by the claims of the nationality and those of Islam
+may be adjusted and satisfied.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is common knowledge that Smyrna and Thrace including Adrianople have been
+dishonestly taken away from Turkey and that mandates have been unscrupulously
+established in Syria and Mesopotamia and a British nominee has been set up in
+Hedjaj under the protection of British guns. This is a position that is
+intolerable and unjust. Apart therefore from the questions of Armenia and
+Arabia, the dishonesty and hypocrisy that pollute the peace terms require to be
+instantaneously removed. It paves the way to an equitable solution of the
+question of Armenian and Arabian independence which in theory no one denies and
+which in practice may be easily guaranteed if only the wishes of the people
+concerned could with any degree of certainty be ascertained.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE KHILAFAT AGITATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I did not
+come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though I had not
+fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and that I could not
+plead ‘not guilty’ if I was charged under it. For I must admit that I can
+pretend to no ‘affection’ for the present Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And my speeches are intended to create ‘dis-affection’ such that the people
+might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a Government that had
+forfeited all title to confidence, respect or support.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government. The
+latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by the former.
+And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of terrorism and
+emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter. British ministers have
+broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded the feelings of the seventy
+million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men and women were insulted by the
+insolent officers of the Punjab Government. Their wrongs not only remain
+unrighted but the very officers who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous
+humiliation retain office under the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could command
+for co-operation with the Government and for response to the wishes expressed
+in the Royal Proclamation. I did so because I honestly believed that, a new era
+was about to begin, and that the old spirit of fear, distrust and consequent
+terrorism was about to give place to the new spirit of respect, trust and
+goodwill. I sincerely believed that the Mussulman sentiment would be placated
+and that the officers that had misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the
+Punjab would be at least dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to
+feel that a Government that had always been found quick (and mighty) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents’ misdeeds. But to my
+amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present representatives of the
+Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous. They have no real regard for the
+wishes of the people of India and they count Indian honour as of little
+consequence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it is
+now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be witness
+to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right in threatening
+me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in endangering the existence of
+the Government. For that must be the result if my activity bears fruit. My only
+regret is that inasmuch as Mr. Montagu admits my past services, he might have
+perceived that there must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a
+well-wisher like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussalmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed
+I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection towards an
+unjust Government I had rendered greater services to the Empire than I am
+already credited with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve my activity is
+clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of my liberty, should
+the Government of India deem it to be their duty to take it away. A citizen has
+no right to resist such restriction imposed in accordance with the laws of the
+State to which he belongs. Much less have those who sympathise with him. In my
+case there can be no question of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the
+Government to the extent of trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For
+my supporters, therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It
+means the beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to stop
+the progress of Non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+Non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest, the
+Government must imprison others or grant the people’s wish in order to gain
+their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the people even
+under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore it is I or any one
+else who is arrested during the campaign, the first condition of success is
+that there must be no resentment shown against it. We cannot imperil the very
+existence of a Government and quarrel with its attempt to save itself by
+punishing those who place it in danger.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HIJARAT AND ITS MEANING</h3>
+
+<p>
+India is a continent. Its articulate thousands know what its inarticulate
+millions are doing or thinking. The Government and the educated Indians may
+think that the Khilafat movement is merely a passing phase. The millions of
+Mussalmans think otherwise. The flight of the Mussalmans is growing apace. The
+newspapers contain paragraphs in out of the way corners informing the readers
+that a special train containing a barrister with sixty women, forty children
+including twenty sucklings, all told 765, have left for Afghanistan. They were
+cheered <i>en route</i>. They were presented with cash, edibles and other
+things, and were joined by more Muhajarins on the way. No fanatical preaching
+by Shaukatali can make people break up and leave their homes for an unknown
+land. There must be an abiding faith in them. That it is better for them to
+leave a State which has no regard for their religious sentiment and face a
+beggar’s life than to remain in it even though it may be in a princely manner.
+Nothing but pride of power can blind the Government of India to the scene that
+is being enacted before it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But there is yet another side to the movement. Here are the facts as stated in
+the following Government <i>Communique</i> dated 10th July 1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+An unfortunate affair in connection with the Mahajarin occurred on the 8th
+instant at Kacha Garhi between Peshawar and Jamrud. The following are the facts
+as at present reported. Two members of a party of the Mahajarins proceeding by
+train to Jamrud were detected by the British military police travelling without
+tickets. Altercation ensued at Islamia College Station, but the train proceeded
+to Kacha Garhi. An attempt was made to evict these Mahajarins, whereupon the
+military police were attacked by a crowd of some forty Mahajarins and the
+British officer who intervened was seriously wounded with a spade. A detachment
+of Indian troops at Kacha Garhi thereupon fired two or three shots at the
+Mahajarin for making murderous assault on the British officer. One Mahajarin
+was killed and one wounded and three arrested. Both the military and the police
+were injured. The body of the Mahajarin was despatched to Peshawar and buried
+on the morning of the 9th. This incident has caused considerable excitement in
+Peshawar City, and the Khilafat Hijrat Committee are exercising restraining
+influence. Shops were closed on the morning of the 9th. A full enquiry has been
+instituted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Now Peshawar to Jamrud is a matter of a few miles. It was clearly the duty of
+the military not to attempt to pull out the ticketless Mahajarins for the sake
+of a few annas. But they actually attempted force. Intervention by the rest of
+the party was a foregone conclusion. An altercation ensued. A British officer
+was attacked with a spade. Firing and a death of a Mahajarin was the result.
+Has British prestige been enhanced by the episode? Why have not the Government
+put tactful officers in charge at the frontier, whilst a great religious
+emigration is in progress? The action of the military will pass from tongue to
+tongue throughout India and the Mussalman world around, will not doubt be
+unconsciously and even consciously exaggerated in the passage and the feeling
+bitter as it already is will grow in bitterness. The <i>Communique</i> says
+that the Government are making further inquiry. Let us hope that it will be
+full and that better arrangements will be made to prevent a repetition of what
+appears to have been a thoughtless act on the part of the military.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And may I draw the attention of those who are opposing non-co-operation that
+unless they find out a substitute they should either join the non-co-operation
+movement or prepare to face a disorganised subterranean upheaval whose effect
+no one can foresee and whose spread it would be impossible to check or
+regulate?
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap03"></a>III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS</h2>
+
+<h3>POLITICAL FREEMASONRY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Freemasonry is a secret brotherhood which has more by its secret and iron rules
+than by its service to humanity obtained a hold upon some of the best minds.
+Similarly there seems to be some secret code of conduct governing the official
+class in India before which the flower of the great British nation fall
+prostrate and unconsciously become instruments of injustice which as private
+individuals they would be ashamed of perpetrating. In no other way is it
+possible for one to understand the majority report of the Hunter Committee, the
+despatch of the Government of India, and the reply thereto of the Secretary of
+State for India. In spite of the energetic protests of a section of the Press
+to the personnel of the committee, it might be said that on the whole the
+public were prepared to trust it especially as it contained three Indian
+members who could fairly be claimed to be independent. The first rude shock to
+this confidence was delivered by the refusal of Lord Hunter’s Committee to
+accept the very moderate and reasonable demand of the Congress Committee that
+the imprisoned Punjab leaders might be allowed to appear before it to instruct
+Counsel. Any doubt that might have been left in the mind of any person has been
+dispelled by the report of the majority of that committee. The result has
+justified the attitude of the Congress Committee. The evidence collected by it
+shows what lord Hunter’s Committee purposely denied itself.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The minority report stands out like an oasis in a desert. The Indian members
+deserve the congratulation of their countrymen for having dared to do their
+duty in the face of heavy odds. I wish that they had refused to associate
+themselves even in a modified manner with the condemnation of the civil
+disobedience form of Satyagraha. The defiant spirit of the Delhi mob on the
+30th March 1919 can hardly be used for condemning a great spiritual movement
+which is admittedly and manifestly intended to restrain the violent tendencies
+of mobs and to replace criminal lawlessness by civil disobedience of authority,
+when it has forfeited all title to respect. On the 30th March civil
+disobedience had not even been started. Almost every great popular
+demonstration has been hitherto attended all the world over by a certain amount
+of lawlessness. The demonstration of 30th March and 6th April could have been
+held under any other aegis us under that of Satyagrah. I hold that without the
+advent of the spirit of civility and orderliness the disobedience would have
+taken a much more violent form than it did even at Delhi. It was only the
+wonderfully quick acceptance by the people of the principle of Satyagrah that
+effectively checked the spread of violence throughout the length and breadth of
+India. And even to-day it is not the memory of the black barbarity of General
+Dyer that is keeping the undoubted restlessness among the people from breaking
+forth into violence. The hold that Satyagrah has gained on the people—it may be
+even against their will—is curbing the forces of disorder and violence. But I
+must not detain the reader on a defence of Satyagrah against unjust attacks. If
+it has gained a foothold in India, it will survive much fiercer attacks than
+the one made by the majority of the Hunter Committee and somewhat supported by
+the minority. Had the majority report been defective only in this direction and
+correct in every other there would have been nothing but praise for it. After
+all Satyagrah is a new experiment in political field. And a hasty attributing
+to it of any popular disorder would have been pardonable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The universally pronounced adverse judgment upon the report and the despatches
+rests upon far more painful revelations. Look at the manifestly laboured
+defence of every official act of inhumanity except where condemnation could not
+be avoided through the impudent admissions made by the actors themselves; look
+at the special pleading introduced to defend General Dyer even against himself;
+look at the vain glorification of Sir Michael O’Dwyer although it was his
+spirit that actuated every act of criminality on the part of the subordinates;
+look at the deliberate refusal to examine his wild career before the events of
+April. His acts were an open book of which the committee ought to have taken
+judicial notices. Instead of accepting everything that the officials had to
+say, the Committee’s obvious duty was to tax itself to find out the real cause
+of the disorders. It ought to have gone out of its way to search out the
+inwardness of the events. Instead of patiently going behind the hard crust of
+official documents, the Committee allowed itself to be guided with criminal
+laziness by mere official evidence. The report and the despatches, in my humble
+opinion, constitute an attempt to condone official lawlessness. The cautious
+and half-hearted condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer’s massacre and the
+notorious crawling order only deepens the disappointment of the reader as he
+goes through page after page of thinly disguised official whitewash. I need,
+however, scarcely attempt any elaborate examination of the report or the
+despatches which have been so justly censured by the whole national press
+whether of the moderate or the extremist hue. The point to consider is how to
+break down this secret—be the secrecy over so unconscious—conspiracy to uphold
+official iniquity. A scandal of this magnitude cannot be tolerated by the
+nation, if it is to preserve its self-respect and become a free partner in the
+Empire. The All-India Congress Committee has resolved upon convening a special
+session of the Congress for the purpose of considering, among other things, the
+situation arising from the report. In my opinion the time has arrived when we
+must cease to rely upon mere petition to Parliament for effective action.
+Petitions will have value, when the nation has behind it the power to enforce
+its will. What power then have we? When we are firmly of opinion that grave
+wrong has been done us and when after an appeal to the highest authority we
+fail to secure redress, there must be some power available to us for undoing
+the wrong. It is true that in the vast majority of cases it is the duty of a
+subject to submit to wrongs on failure of the usual procedure, so long as they
+do not affect his vital being. But every nation and every individual has the
+right and it is their duty, to rise against an intolerable wrong. I do not
+believe in armed risings. They are a remedy worse than the disease sought to be
+cured. They are a token of the spirit of revenge and impatience and anger. The
+method of violence cannot do good in the long run. Witness the effect of the
+armed rising of the allied powers against Germany. Have they not become even
+like the Germans, as the latter have been depicted to us by them?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We have a better method. Unlike that of violence it certainly involves the
+exercise of restraint and patience: but it requires also resoluteness of will.
+This method is to refuse to be party to the wrong. No tyrant has ever yet
+succeeded in his purpose without carrying the victim with him, it may be, as it
+often is, by force. Most people choose rather to yield to the will of the
+tyrant than to suffer for the consequences of resistance. Hence does terrorism
+form part of the stock-in-trade of the tyrant. But we have instances in history
+where terrorism has failed to impose the terrorist’s will upon his victim.
+India has the choice before her now. If then the acts of the Punjab Government
+be an insufferable wrong, if the report of Lord Hunter’s Committee and the two
+despatches be a greater wrong by reason of their grievous condonation of those
+acts, it is clear that we must refuse to submit to this official violence.
+Appeal the Parliament by all means, if necessary, but if the Parliament fails
+us and if we are worthy to call ourselves a nation, we must refuse to uphold
+the Government by withdrawing co-operation from it.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE DUTY OF THE PUNJABEE</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Allahabad <i>Leader</i> deserves to be congratulated for publishing the
+correspondence on Mr. Bosworth Smith who was one of the Martial Law officers
+against whom the complaints about persistent and continuous ill-treatment were
+among the bitterest. It appears from the correspondence that Mr. Bosworth Smith
+has received promotion instead of dismissal. Sometime before Martial Law Mr.
+Smith appears to have been degraded. “He has since been restored,” says the
+<i>Leader</i> correspondent, “to his position of a Deputy Commissioner of the
+second grade from which he was degraded and also been invested with power under
+section 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Since his arrival, the poor Indian
+population of the town of Amhala Cantonment has been living under a regime of
+horror and tyranny.” The correspondent adds: “I use both these words
+deliberately for conveying precisely what they mean.” I cull a few passage from
+this illuminating letter to illustrate the meaning of horror and tyranny. “In
+private complaints he never takes the statement of the complainant. It is taken
+down by the reader when the court rises and got signed by the magistrate the
+following day. Whether the report received (upon such complaints) is favourable
+to the complainant or unfavourable to him, it is never ready by the magistrate,
+and complaints are dismissed without proper trial. This is the fate of private
+complaints. Now as regards police chellans. Pleaders for the accused are not
+allowed to interview under trial prisoners in police custody. They are not
+allowed to cross-examine prosecution witnesses.... Prosecution witnesses are
+examined with leading questions.... Thus a whole prosecution story is put into
+the mouth of police, witnesses for the defence though called in are not allowed
+to be examined by the defence counsel.... The accused is silenced if he picks
+up courage to say anything in defence.... Any Cantonment servant can write down
+the name of any citizen of the Cantonment on a chit of paper and ask him to
+appear the next day in court. This is a summons.... If any one does not appear
+in court who is thus ordered, criminal warrants of arrest are issued against
+him.” There is much more of this style in the letter which is worth producing,
+but I have given enough to illustrate the writer’s meaning. Let me turn for a
+while to this official’s record during Martial Law. He is the official who
+tried people in batches and convicted them after a farcical trial. Witnesses
+have deposed to his having assembled people, having asked them to give false
+evidence, having removed women’s veils, called them ‘flies, bitches, she-asses’
+and having spat upon them. He it was who subjected the innocent pleaders of
+Shokhupura indescribable persecution. Mr. Andrews personally investigated
+complaints against this official and came to the conclusion that no official
+had behaved worse than Mr. Smith. He gathered the people of Shokhupura,
+humiliated them in a variety of ways, called them ‘suvarlog,’ ‘gandi mukkhi.’
+His evidence before the Hunter Commission betrays his total disregard for truth
+and this is the officer who, if the correspondent in question has given correct
+facts, has been promoted. The question however is why, he is at all in
+Government service and why he has not been tried for assaulting and abusing
+innocent men and women.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I notice a desire for the impeachment of General Dyer and Sir Michael O’Dwyer.
+I will not stop to examine whether the course is feasible. I was sorry to find
+Mr. Shastriar joining this cry for the prosecution of General Dyer. If the
+English people will willingly do so, I would welcome such prosecution as a sign
+of their strong disapproval of the Jallianwalla Bagh atrocity, but I would
+certainly not spend a single farthing in a vain pursuit after the conviction of
+this man. Surely the public has received sufficient experience of the English
+mind. Practically the whole English Press has joined the conspiracy to screen
+these offenders against humanity. I would not be party to make heroes of them
+by joining the cry for prosecution private or public. If I can only persuade
+India to insist upon their complete dismissal, I should be satisfied. But more
+than the dismissal, of Sir Michael O’Dwyer and General Dyer, is necessary the
+peremptory dismissal, if not a trial, of Colonel O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith,
+Rai Shri Ram and others mentioned in the Congress Sub-Committee’s Report. Bad
+as General Dyer is I consider Mr. Smith to be infinitely worse and his crimes
+to be far more serious than the massacre of Jallianwalla Bugh. General Dyer
+sincerely believed that it was a soldierly act to terrorise people by shooting
+them. But Mr. Smith was wantonly cruel, vulgar and debased. If all the facts
+that have been deposed to against him are true, there is not a spark of
+humanity about him. Unlike General Dyer he lacks the courage to confirm what he
+has done and he wriggles when challenged. This officer remains free to inflict
+himself upon people who have done no wrong to him, and who is permitted to
+disgrace the rule he represents for the time being.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What is the Punjab doing? Is it not the duty of the Punjabis not to rest until
+they have secured the dismissal of Mr. Smith and the like? The Punjab leaders
+have been discharged in vain if they will not utilise the liberty they have
+received, in order to purge the administration of Messrs. Bosworth Smith and
+Company. I am sure that if they will only begin a determined agitation they
+will have the whole India by their side. I venture to suggest to them that the
+best way to qualify for sending General Dyer to the gallows is to perform the
+easier and the more urgent duty of arresting the mischief still continued by
+the officials against whom they have assisted in collecting overwhelming
+evidence.
+</p>
+
+<h3>GENERAL DYER</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Army Council has found General Dyer guilty of error of judgment and advised
+that he should not receive any office under the Crown. Mr. Montagu has been
+unsparing in his criticism of General Dyer’s conduct. And yet somehow or other
+I cannot help feeling that General Dyer is by no means the worst offender. His
+brutality is unmistakable. His abject and unsoldier-like cowardice is apparent
+in every line of his amazing defence before the Army Council. He has called an
+unarmed crowd of men and children—mostly holiday-makers—‘a rebel army.’ He
+believes himself to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot
+down like rabbits men who were penned in an inclosure. Such a man is unworthy
+of being considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran no
+risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and without warning. This is not
+an ‘error of judgement.’ It is paralysis of it in the face of fancied danger.
+It is proof of criminal incapacity and heartlessness. But the fury that has
+been spent upon General Dyer is, I am sure, largely misdirected. No doubt the
+shooting was ‘frightful,’ the loss of innocent life deplorable. But the slow
+torture, degradation and emasculation that followed was much worse, more
+calculated, malicious and soul-killing, and the actors who performed the deeds
+deserve greater condemnation that General Dyer for the Jallianwalla Bagh
+massacre. The latter merely destroyed a few bodies but the others tried to kill
+the soul of a nation. Who ever talks of Col. Frank Johnson who was by far the
+worst offender? He terrorised guiltless Lahore, and by his merciless orders set
+the tone to the whole of the Martial Law officers. But what I am concerned with
+is not even Col. Johnson. The first business of the people of the Punjab and of
+India is to rid the service of Col O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram
+and Mr. Malik Khan. They are still retained in the service. Their guilt is as
+much proved as that of General Dyer. We shall have failed in our duty if the
+condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer produces a sense of satisfaction and
+the obvious duty of purging the administration in the Punjab is neglected. That
+task will not be performed by platform rhetoric or resolutions merely. Stern
+action is required on out part if we are to make any headway with ourselves and
+make any impression upon the officials that they are not to consider themselves
+as masters of the people but as their trusties and servants who cannot hold
+office if they misbehave themselves and prove unworthy of the trust reposed in
+them.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE PUNJAB SENTENCES</h3>
+
+<p>
+The commissioners appointed by the Congress Punjab Sub Committee have in their
+report accused His Excellency the Viceroy of criminal want of imagination. His
+Excellency’s refusal to commute two death sentences out of five is a fine
+illustration of the accusation. The rejection of the appeal by the Privy
+Council no more proves the guilt of the condemned than their innocence would
+have been proved by quashing the proceedings before the Martial Law Tribunal.
+Moreover, these cases clearly come under the Royal Proclamation in accordance
+with its interpretation by the Punjab Government. The murders in Amritsar were
+not due to any private quarrel between the murderers and their victims. The
+offence grave, though it was, was purely political and committed under
+excitement. More than full reparation has been taken for the murders and arson.
+In the circumstances commonsense dictates reduction of the death sentences. The
+popular belief favours the view that the condemned men are innocent and have
+not had a fair trial. The execution has been so long delayed that hanging at
+this stage would give a rude shock to Indian society. Any Viceroy with
+imagination would have at once announced commutation of the death sentences—not
+so Lord Chelmsford. In his estimation, evidently, the demands of justice will
+not be satisfied if at least some of the condemned men are not hanged. Public
+feeling with him counts for nothing. We shall still hope that, either the
+Viceroy or Mr. Montagu will commute the death sentences.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But if the Government will grievously err, if they carry out the sentences, the
+people will equally err if they give way to anger or grief over the hanging if
+it has unfortunately to take plane. Before we become a nation possessing an
+effective voice in the councils of nations, we must be prepared to contemplate
+with equanimity, not a thousand murders of innocent men and women but many
+thousands before we attain a status in the world that, shall not be surpassed
+by any nation. We hope therefore that all concerned will take rather than lose
+heart and treat hanging as an ordinary affair of life.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+[Since the above was in type, we have received cruel news. At last H.E. the
+Viceroy has mercilessly given the rude shock to Indian society. It is now for
+the latter to take heart in spite of the unkindest cut.—Ed. Y.I.]
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap04"></a>IV. SWARAJ</h2>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ IN ONE YEAR</h3>
+
+<p>
+Much laughter has been indulged in at my expense for having told the Congress
+audience at Calcutta that if there was sufficient response to my programme of
+non-co-operation Swaraj would be attained in one year. Some have ignored my
+condition and laughed because of the impossibility of getting Swaraj anyhow
+within one year. Others have spelt the ‘if’ in capitals and suggested that if
+‘ifs’ were permissible in argument, any absurdity could be proved to be a
+possibility. My proposition however is based on a mathematical calculation. And
+I venture to say that true Swaraj is a practical impossibility without due
+fulfilment of my conditions. Swaraj means a state such that we can maintain our
+separate existence without the presence of the English. If it is to be a
+partnership, it must be partnership at will. There can be no Swaraj without our
+feeling and being the equals of Englishmen. To-day we feel that we are
+dependent upon them for our internal and external security, for an armed peace
+between the Hindus and the Mussulmans, for our education and for the supply of
+daily wants, nay, even for the settlement of our religious squabbles. The
+Rajahs are dependent upon the British for their powers and the millionaires for
+their millions. The British know our helplessness and Sir Thomas Holland cracks
+jokes quite legitimately at the expense of non-co-operationists. To get Swaraj
+then is to get rid of our helplessness. The problem is no doubt stupendous even
+as it is for the fabled lion who having been brought up in the company of goats
+found it impossible to feel that he was a lion. As Tolstoy used to put it,
+mankind often laboured under hypnotism. Under its spell continuously we feel
+the feeling of helplessness. The British themselves cannot be expected to help
+us out of it. On the contrary, they din into our ears that we shall be fit to
+govern ourselves only by slow educative processes. The “Times” suggested that
+if we boycott the councils we shall lose the opportunity of a training in
+Swaraj. I have no doubt that there are many who believe what the “Times” says.
+It even resorts to a falsehood. It audaciously says that Lord Milner’s Mission
+listened to the Egyptians only when they were ready to lift the boycott of the
+Egyptian Council. For me the only training in Swaraj we need is the ability to
+defend ourselves against the whole world and to live our natural life in
+perfect freedom even though it may be full of defects. Good Government is no
+substitute for self-Government. The Afghans have a bad Government but it is
+self-Government. I envy them. The Japanese learnt the art through a sea of
+blood. And if we to-day had the power to drive out the English by superior
+brute force, we would be counted their superiors, and in spite of our
+inexperience in debating at the Council table or in holding executive offices,
+we would be held fit to govern ourselves. For brute force is the only test the
+west has hitherto recognised. The Germans were defeated not because they were
+necessarily in the wrong, but because the allied Powers were found to possess
+greater brute strength. In the end therefore India must either learn the art of
+war which the British will not teach her or, she must follow her own way of
+discipline and self-sacrifice through non-co-operation. It is as amazing as it
+is humiliating that less than one hundred-thousand white men should be able to
+rule three hundred and fifteen million Indians. They do so somewhat undoubtedly
+by force, but more by securing our co-operation in a thousand ways and making
+us more and more helpless and dependent on them as time goes forward. Let us
+not mistake reformed councils, more lawcourts and even governorships for real
+freedom or power. They are but subtler methods of emasculation. The British
+cannot rule us by mere force. And so they resort to all means, honourable and
+dishonourable, in order to retain their hold on India. They want India’s
+billions and they want India’s man power for their imperialistic greed. If we
+refuse to supply them with men and money, we achieve our goal, namely, Swaraj,
+equality, manliness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The cup of our humiliation was filled during the closing scenes in the
+Viceregal Council. Mr. Shustri could not move his resolution on the Punjab. The
+Indian victims of Jullianwala received Rs. 1,250, the English victims of
+mob-frenzy received lakhs. The officials who were guilty of crimes against
+those whose servants they were, were reprimanded. And the councillors were
+satisfied. If India were powerful, India would not have stood this addition of
+insult, to her injury.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not blame the British. If we were weak in numbers as they are, we too
+would perhaps have resorted to the same methods as they are now employing.
+Terrorism and deception are weapons not of the strong but of the weak. The
+British are weak in numbers we are weak in spite of our numbers. The result is
+that each is dragging the other down. It is common experience that Englishmen
+lose in character after residence in India and that Indians lose in courage and
+manliness by contact with Englishmen. This process of weakening is good neither
+for us, two nations, nor for the world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But if we Indians take care of ourselves the English and the rest of the world
+would take care of themselves. Our contributions to the world’s progress must
+therefore consist in setting our own house in order.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Training in arms for the present is out of the question. I go a step further
+and believe that India has a better mission for the world. It is within her to
+show that she can achieve her destiny by pure self-sacrifice, i.e.,
+self-purification. This can be done only by non-co-operation. And
+non-co-operation is possible only when those who commenced to co-operate being
+the process of withdrawal. If we can but free ourselves from the threefold
+<i>maya</i> of Government-controlled schools, Government law-courts and
+legislative councils, and truly control our own education regulate our disputes
+and be indifferent to their legislation, we are ready to govern ourselves and
+we are only then ready to ask the government servants, whether civil or
+military, to resign, and the tax-payers to suspend payment of taxes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And is it such an impracticable proposition to expect parents to withdraw their
+children from schools and colleges and establish their own institutions or to
+ask lawyers to suspend their practice and devote their whole time attention to
+national service against payment where necessary, of their maintenance, or to
+ask candidates for councils not to enter councils and lend their passive or
+active assistance to the legislative machinery through which all control is
+exercised. The movement of non-co-operation is nothing but an attempt to
+isolate the brute force of the British from all the trappings under which it is
+hidden and to show that brute force by itself cannot for one single moment hold
+India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I frankly confess that, until the three conditions mentioned by me are
+fulfilled, there is no Swaraj. We may not go on taking our college degrees,
+taking thousands of rupees monthly from clients for cases which can be finished
+in five minutes and taking the keenest delight in wasting national time on the
+council floor and still expect to gain national self-respect.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The last though not the least important part of the Maya still remains to be
+considered. That is Swadeshi. Had we not abandoned Swadeshi, we need not have
+been in the present fallen state. If we would get rid of the economic slavery,
+we must manufacture our own cloth and at the present moment only by
+hand-spinning and hand weaving.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+All this means discipline, self-denial, self-sacrifice, organising ability,
+confidence and courage. If we show this in one year among the classes that
+to-day count, and make public opinion, we certainly gain Swaraj within one
+year. If I am told that even we who lead have not these qualities in us, there
+certainly will never be Swaraj for India, but then we shall have no right to
+blame the English for what they are doing. Our salvation and its time are
+solely dependent upon us.
+</p>
+
+<h3>BRITISH RULE—AN EVIL</h3>
+
+<p>
+The <i>Interpreter</i> is however more to the point in asking, “Does Mr. Gandhi
+hold without hesitation or reserve that British rule in India is altogether an
+evil and that the people of India are to be taught so to regard it? He must
+hold it to be so evil that the wrongs it does outweigh the benefit it confers,
+for only so is non-co-operation to be justified at the bar of conscience or of
+Christ.” My answer is emphatically in the affirmative. So long as I believed
+that the sum total of the energy of the British Empire was good, I clung to it
+despite what I used to regard as temporary aberrations. I am not sorry for
+having done so. But having my eyes opened, it would be sin for me to associate
+myself with the Empire unless it purges itself of its evil character. I write
+this with sorrow and I should be pleased if I discovered that I was in error
+and that my present attitude was a reaction. The continuous financial drain,
+the emasculation of the Punjab and the betrayal of the Muslim sentiment
+constitute, in my humble opinion, a threefold robbery of India. ‘The blessings
+of <i>pax Britanica</i>’ I reckon, therefore, to be a curse. We would have at
+least remained like the other nations brave men and women, instead of feeling
+as we do so utterly helpless, if we had no British Rule imposing on us an armed
+peace. ‘The blessing’ of roads and railways is a return no self-respecting
+nation would accept for its degradation. ‘The blessing’ of education is proving
+one of the greatest obstacles in our progress towards freedom.
+</p>
+
+<h3>A MOVEMENT OF PURIFICATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The fact is that non-co-operation by reason of its non-violence has become a
+religious and purifying movement. It is daily bringing strength to the nation,
+showing it its weak spots and the remedy for removing them. It is a movement of
+self-reliance. It is the mightiest force for revolutionising opinion and
+stimulating thought. It is a movement of self-imposed suffering and therefore
+possesses automatic checks against extravagance or impatience. The capacity of
+the nation for suffering regulates its advance towards freedom. It isolates the
+force of evil by refraining from participation in it, in any shape or form.
+</p>
+
+<h3>WHY WAS INDIA LOST?</h3>
+
+<p>
+[A dialog between the Reader and Editor,—<i>Indian Home Rule</i>].
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: You have said much about civilisation—enough to make me ponder over it.
+I do not know what I should adopt and what I should avoid from the nations of
+Europe. but one question comes to my lips immediately. If civilisation is a
+disease, and if it has attacked England why has she been able to take India,
+and why is she able to retain it?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: Your question is not very difficult to answer, and we shall presently
+be able to examine the true nature of Swaraj; for I am aware that I have still
+to answer that question. I will, however, take up your previous question. The
+English have not taken India; we have given it to them. They are not in India
+because of their strength, but because we keep them. Let us now see whether
+these positions can be sustained. They came to our country originally for the
+purpose of trade. Recall the Company Bahadur. Who made it Bahadur? They had not
+the slightest intention at the time of establishing a kingdom. Who assisted the
+Company’s officers? Who was tempted at the sight of their silver? Who bought
+their goods? History testifies that we did all this. In order to become rich
+all at once, we welcomed the Company’s officers with open arms. We assisted
+them. If I am in the habit of drinking Bhang, and a seller thereof sells it to
+me, am I to blame him or myself? By blaming the seller shall I be able to avoid
+the habit? And, if a particular retailer is driven away will not another take
+his place? A true servant of India will have to go to the root of the matter.
+If an excess of food has caused me indigestion I will certainly not avoid it by
+blaming water. He is a true physician who probes the cause of disease and, if
+you pose as a physician for the disease of India, you will have to find out its
+true cause.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: You are right. Now, I think you will not have to argue much with me to
+drive your conclusions home. I am impatient to know your further views. We are
+now on a most interesting topic. I shall, therefore, endeavour to follow your
+thought, and stop you when I am in doubt.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: I am afraid that, in spite of your enthusiasm, as we proceed further we
+shall have differences of opinion. Nevertheless, I shall argue only when you
+will stop me. We have already seen that the English merchants were able to get
+a footing in India because we encouraged them. When our princes fought among
+themselves, they sought the assistance of Company Bahadar. That corporation was
+versed alike in commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality.
+Its object was to increase its commerce and to make money. It accepted our
+assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the latter
+it employed an army which was utilised by us also. Is it not then useless to
+blame the English for what we did at that time? The Hindus and the Mahomedans
+were at daggers drawn. This, too, gave the Company its opportunity, and thus we
+created the circumstances that gave the Company its control over India. Hence
+it is truer to say that we gave India to the English than that India was lost.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: Will you now tell me how they are able to retain India?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: The causes that gave them India enable them to retain it. Some
+Englishmen state that they took, and they hold, India by the sword. Both these
+statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding India. We alone
+keep them. Napoleon is said to have described the English as a nation of shop
+keepers. It is a fitting description. They hold whatever dominions they have
+for the sake of their commerce. Their army and their navy are intended to
+protect it. When the Transvaal offered no such attractions, the late Mr.
+Gladstone discovered that it was no right for the English to hold it. When it
+became a paying proposition, resistance led to war. Mr. Chamberlain soon
+discovered that England enjoyed a suzerainty over the Transvaal. It is related
+that some one asked the late President Kruger whether there was gold in the
+moon? He replied that it was highly unlikely, because, if there were, the
+English would have annexed it. Many problems can be solved by remembering that
+money is their God. Then it follows that we keep the English in India for our
+base self-interest. We like their commerce, they please us by their subtle
+methods, and get what they want from us. To blame them for this is to
+perpetuate their power. We further strengthen their hold by quarrelling amongst
+ourselves. If you accept the above statements, it is proved that the English
+entered India for the purposes of trade. They remain in it for the same
+purpose, and we help them to do so. Their arms and ammunition are perfectly
+useless. In this connection, I remind you that it is the British flag which is
+waving in Japan, and not the Japanese. The English have a treaty with Japan for
+the sake of their commerce and you will see that, if they can manage it, their
+commerce will greatly expand in that country. They wish to convert the whole
+word into a vast market for their goods. That they cannot do so is true, but
+the blame will not be theirs. They will leave no stone unturned to reach the
+goal.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ MY IDEAL</h3>
+
+<p>
+The following is a fairly full report of Mr. Gandhi’s important speech at
+Calcutta on the 13th December 1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The very fact, that so many of you cannot understand Hindi which is bound to be
+the National medium of expression throughout Hindustan in gatherings of Indians
+belonging to different parts of the land, shows the depth of the degradation to
+which we have sunk, and points to the supreme necessity of the non-co-operation
+movement which is intended to lift us out of that condition. This Government
+has been instrumental in degrading this great nation in various ways, and it is
+impossible to be free from it without co-operation amongst ourselves which is
+in turn impossible without a national medium of expression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I am not here to day to plead for the medium. I am to plead for the
+acceptance by the country of the programme of non-violent, progressive
+non-co-operation. Now all the words that I have used here are absolutely
+necessary and the two adjectives ‘progressive’ and ‘non-violent’ are integral
+part of a whole. With me non-violence is part of my religion, a matter of
+creed. But with the great number of Mussalmans non-violence is a policy, with
+thousand, if not millions of Hindus, it is equally a matter of policy. But
+whether it is a creed or a policy, it is utterly impossible for you to finish
+the programme for the enfranchisement of the millions of India, without
+recognising the necessity and the value of non-violence. Violence may for a
+moment avail to secure a certain measure of success but it could not in the
+long run achieve any appreciable result. On the other hand all violence would
+prove destructive to the honour and self-respect of the nation. The blue books
+issued by the Government of India show that inasmuch as we have used violence,
+military expenditure has gone up, not proportionately but in geometrical
+progression. The bonds of our slavery have been forged all the stronger for our
+having offered violence. And the whole history of British rule in India is a
+demonstration of the fact that we have never been able to offer successful
+violence. Whilst therefore I say that rather than have the yoke of a Government
+that has so emasculated us, I would welcome violence. I would urge with all the
+emphasis that I can command that India will never be able to regain her own by
+methods of violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Lord Ronaldshay who has done me the honour of reading my booklet on Home Rule
+has warned my countrymen against engaging themselves in a struggle for a Swaraj
+such as is described in that booklet. Now though I do not want to withdraw a
+single word of it, I would say to you on this occasion that I do not ask India
+to follow out to-day the methods prescribed in my booklet. If they could do
+that they would have Home Rule not in a year but in a day, and India by
+realising that ideal wants to acquire an ascendancy over the rest of the world.
+But it must remain a day dream more or less for the time being. What I am doing
+to-day is that I am giving the country a pardonable programme not the abolition
+of law courts, posts, telegraphs and of railways but for the attainment of
+Parliamentary Swarja. I am telling you to do that so long as we do not isolate
+ourselves from this Government, we are co-operating with it through schools,
+law courts and councils, through service civil and military and payment of
+taxes and foreign trade.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The moment this fact is realised and non-co-operation is effected, this
+Government must totter to pieces. If I know that the masses were prepared for
+the whole programme at once, I would not delay in putting it at once to work.
+It is not possible at the present moment, to prevent the masses from bursting
+out into wrath against those who come to execute the law, it is not possible,
+that the military would lay down their arms without the slightest violence. If
+that were possible to-day, I would propose all the stages of non-co-operation
+to be worked simultaneously. But we have not secured that control over the
+masses, we have uselessly frittered away precious years of the nation’s life in
+mastering a language which we need least for winning our liberty; we have
+frittered away all those years in learning liberty from Milton and Shakespeare,
+in deriving inspiration from the pages of Mill, whilst liberty could be learnt
+at our doors. We have thus succeeded in isolating ourselves from the masses: we
+have been westernised. We have failed these 35 years to utilise our education
+in order to permeate the masses. We have sat upon the pedestal and from there
+delivered harangues to them in a language they do not understand and we see
+to-day that we are unable to conduct large gatherings in a disciplined manner.
+And discipline is the essence of success. Here is therefore one reason why I
+have introduced the word ‘progressive’ in the non-co-operation Resolution.
+Without any impertinence I may say that I understand the mass mind better than
+any one amongst the educated Indians. I contend that the masses are not ready
+for suspension of payment of taxes. They have not yet learnt sufficient
+self-control. If I was sure of non-violence on their part I would ask them to
+suspend payment to-day and not waste a single moment of the nations time. With
+me the liberty of India has become a passion. Liberty of Islam is as dear to
+me. I would not therefore delay a moment if I found that the whole of the
+programme could be enforced at once.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It grieves me to miss the faces of dear and revered leaders in this assembly.
+We miss here the trumpet voice of Surendranath Banorji, who has rendered
+inestimable service to the country. And though we stand as poles asunder
+to-day, though we may have sharp differences with him, we must express them
+with becoming restraint. I do not ask you to give up a single iota of
+principle. I urge non-violence in language and in deed. If non-violence is
+essential in our dealings with Government, it is more essential in our dealings
+with our leaders. And it grieves me deeply to hear of recent instances of
+violence reported to have been used in East Bongal against our own people. I
+was pained to hear that the ears of a man who had voted at the recent elections
+had been cut, and night soil had been thrown into the bed of a man who had
+stood as a candidate. Non-co-operation is never going to succeed in this way.
+It will not succeed unless we create an atmosphere of perfect freedom, unless
+we prize our opponents liberty as much as our own. The liberty of faith,
+conscience, thought and action which we claim for ourselves must be conceded
+equally to others. Non co-operation is a process of purification and we must
+continually try to touch the hearts of those who differ from us, their minds,
+and their emotions, but never their bodies. Discipline and restraint are the
+cardinal principles of our conduct and I warn you against any sort of
+tyrannical social ostracism. I was deeply grieved therefore to hear of the
+insult offered to a dead body in Delhi and feel that if it was the action of
+non-co-operators they have disgraced themselves and their creed. I repeat we
+cannot deliver our land through violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It was not a joke when I said on the congress platform that Swaraj could be
+established in one year if there was sufficient response from the nation. Three
+months of this year are gone. If we are true to our salt, true to our nation,
+true to the songs we sing, if we are true to the Bhagwad Gita and the Koran, we
+would finish the programme in the remaining nine months and deliver Islam the
+Punjab and India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have proposed a limited programme workable within one year, having a special
+regard to the educated classes. We seem to be labouring under the illusion that
+we cannot possibly live without Councils, law courts and schools provided by
+the Government. The moment we are disillusioned we have Swaraj. It is
+demoralising both for Government and the governed that a hundred thousand
+pilgrims should dictate terms to a nation composed of three hundred millions.
+And how is it they can thus dictate terms. It is because we have been divided
+and they have ruled. I have never forgotten Humes’ frank confession that the
+British Government was sustained by the policy of “Divide and Rule.” Therefore
+it is that I have laid stress upon Hindu Muslim Unity as one of the important
+essentials for the success of Non-co-operation. But, it should be no lip unity,
+nor bunia unity it should be a unity broad based on a recognition of the heart.
+If we want to save Hinduism, I say for Gods sake, do not seek to bargain with
+the Mussalmans. I have been going about with Maulana Shaukat Ali all these
+months, but I have not so much as whispered anything about the protection of
+the cow. My alliance with the Ali Brothers is one of honour. I feel that I am
+on my honour, the whole of Hinduism is on its honour, and if it will not be
+found wanting, it will do its duty towards the Mussalmans of India. Any
+bargaining would be degrading to us. Light brings light not darkness, and
+nobility done with a noble purpose will be twice rewarded. It will be God alone
+who can protect the cow. Ask me not to-day—‘what about the cow,’ ask me after
+Islam is vindicated through India. Ask the Rajas what they do to entertain
+their English guests. Do they not provide beef and champagne for their guests.
+Persuade them first to stop cow killing and then think of bargaining with
+Mussalmans. And how are we Hindus behaving ourselves towards the cow and her
+progeny! Do we treat her as our religion requires us? Not till we have set our
+own house in order and saved the cow from the Englishmen have we the right to
+plead on her behalf with the Mussalmans. And the best way of saving the cow
+from them is to give them unconditional help in their hour of trouble.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Similarly what do we owe the Punjab? The whole of India was made to crawl on
+her belly in as much as a single Punjabi was made to crawl in that dirty lane
+in Amritsar, the whole womanhood of India was unveiled in as much as the
+innocent woman of Manianwalla were unveiled by an insolent office; and Indian
+childhood was dishonoured in that, that school children of tender age were made
+to walk four times a day to stated places within the martial area in the Punjab
+and to salute the Union Jack, through the effect of which order two children,
+seven years old died of sunstroke having been made to wait in the noonday sun.
+In my opinion it is a sin to attend the schools and colleges conducted under
+the aegis of this Government so long as it has not purged itself of these
+crimes by proper repentance. We may not with any sense of self-respect plead
+before the courts of the Government when we remember that it was through the
+Punjab Courts that innocent men were sentenced to be imprisoned and hanged. We
+become participators in the crime of the Government by voluntarily helping it
+or being helped by it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The women of India have intuitively understood the spiritual nature of the
+struggle. Thousands have attended to listen to the message of non-violent
+non-co-operation and have given me their precious ornaments for the purpose of
+advancing the cause of Swaraj. Is it any wonder if I believe the possibility of
+gaining Swaraj within a year after all these wonderful demonstrations? I would
+be guilty of want of faith in God if I under-rated the significance of the
+response from the women of India. I hope that the students will do their duty.
+The country certainly expects the lawyers who have hitherto led public
+agitation to recognise the new awakening.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have used strong language but I have done so with the greatest deliberation,
+I am not actuated by any feeling of revenge. I do not consider Englishmen as my
+enemy. I recognise the worth of many. I enjoy the privilege of having many
+English friends, but I am a determined enemy of the English rule as is
+conducted at present and if the power—tapasya—of one man could destroy it, I
+would certainly destroy it, if it could not be mended. An Empire that stands
+for injustice and breach of faith does not deserve to stand if its custodians
+will not repent and non-co-operation has been devised in order to enable the
+nation to compel justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hope that Bengal will take her proper place in this movement of
+self-purification. Bengal began Swadeshi and national education when the rest
+of India was sleeping. I hope that Bengal will come to the front in this
+movement for gaining Swaraj and gaining justice for the Khilafat and the Punjab
+through purification and self-sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>ON THE WRONG TRACK</h3>
+
+<p>
+Lord Ronaldshay has been doing me the favour of reading my booklet on Indian
+Home Rule which is a translation of Hind Swaraj. His Lordship told his audience
+that if Swaraj meant what I had described it to be in the booklet, the Bengalis
+would have none of it. I am sorry that Swaraj of the Congress resolution does
+not mean the Swaraj depicted in the booklet; Swaraj according to the Congress
+means Swaraj that the people of India want, not what the British Government may
+condescend to give. In so far as I can see, Swaraj will be a Parliament chosen
+by the people with the fullest power over the finance, the police, the
+military, the navy, the courts, and the educational institutions.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am free to confess that the Swaraj I expect to gain within one year, if India
+responds will be such Swaraj as will make practically impossible the repetition
+of the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs, and will enable the nation to do good or
+evil as it chooses, and not he ‘good’ at the dictation of an irresponsible,
+insolent, and godless bureaucracy. Under that Swaraj the nation will have the
+power to impose a heavy protective tariff on such foreign goods as are capable
+of being manufactured in India, as also the power to refuse to send a single
+soldier outside India for the purpose of enslaving the surrounding or remote
+nationalities. The Swaraj that I dream of will be a possibility only, when the
+nation is free to make its choice both of good and evil.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+I adhere to all I have said in that booklet and I would certainly recommend it
+to the reader. Government over self is the truest Swaraj, it is synonymous with
+<i>moksha</i> or salvation, and I have seen nothing to alter the view that
+doctors, lawyers, and railways are no help, and are often a hindrance, to the
+one thing worth striving after. But I know that association, a satanic
+activity, such as the Government is engaged in, makes even an effort for such
+freedom a practical impossibility. I cannot tender allegiance to God and Satan
+at the same time.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+The surest sign of the satanic nature of the present system is that even a
+nobleman of the type of Lord Ronaldshay is obliged to put us off the track. He
+will not deal with the one thing needful. Why is he silent about the Punjab?
+Why does he evade the Khilafat? Can ointments soothe a patient who is suffering
+from corroding consumption? Does his lordship not see that it is not the
+inadequacy of the reforms that has set India aflame but that it is the
+infliction of the two wrongs and the wicked attempt to make us forget them?
+Does he not see that a complete change of heart is required before
+reconciliation?
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+But it has become the fashion nowadays to ascribe hatred to
+non-co-operationism. And I regret to find that even Col. Wedgewood has fallen
+into the trap. I make bold to say that the only way to remove hatred is to give
+it disciplined vent. No man can—I cannot—perform the impossible task of
+removing hatred so long as contempt and despise for the feelings of India are
+sedulously nursed. It is a mockery to ask India not to hate when in the same
+breath India’s most sacred feelings are contemptuously brushed aside. India
+feels weak and helpless and so expresses her helplessness by hating the tyrant
+who despises her and makes her crawl on the belly, lifts the veils of her
+innocent women and compels her tender children to acknowledge his power by
+saluting his flag four times a day. The gospel of Non-co-operation addresses
+itself to the task of making the people strong and self-reliant. It is an
+attempt to transform hatred into pity. A strong and self-reliant India will
+cease to hate Bosworth Smiths and Frank Johnsons, for she will have the power
+to punish them and therefore the power also to pity and forgive them. To-day
+she can neither punish nor forgive, and therefore helplessly nurses hatred. If
+the Mussalmans were strong, they would not hate the English but would fight and
+wrest from them the dearest possessions of Islam. I know that the Ali Brothers
+who live only for the honour and the prestige of Islam, and are prepared any
+moment to die for it, will to-day make friends with the latter Englishmen, if
+they were to do justice to the Khilafat which it is in their power to do.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+I am positively certain that there is no personal element in this fight. Both
+the Hindus and the Mahomedans would to-day invoke blessings on the English if
+they would but give proof positive of their goodness, faithfulness, and loyalty
+to India. Non-co-operation then is a godsend; it will purify and strengthen
+India; and a strong India will be a strength to the world as an Indian weak and
+helpless is a curse to mankind. Indian soldiers have involuntarily helped to
+destroy Turkey and are now destroying the flower of the Arabian nation. I
+cannot recall a single campaign in which the Indian soldier has been employed
+by the British Government for the good of mankind. And yet, (Oh! the shame of
+it!) Indian Maharajas are never tired of priding themselves on the loyal help
+they have rendered the English! Could degradation sink any lower?
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE CONGRESS CONSTITUTION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The belated report of the Congress Constitution Committee has now been
+published for general information and opinion has been invited from all public
+bodies in order to assist the deliberations of the All India Congress
+Committee. It is a pity that, small though the Constitution Committee was, all
+the members never met at any one time in spite of efforts, to have a meeting of
+them all. It is perhaps no body’s fault that all the members could not meet. At
+the same time the draft report has passed through the searching examination of
+all but one member and the report represents the mature deliberations of four
+out of the five members. It must be stated at the same time that it does not
+pretend to be the unanimous opinion of the members. Rather than present a
+dissenting minute, a workable scheme has been brought out leaving each member
+free to press his own views on the several matters in which they are not quite
+unanimous. The most important part of the constitution, however, is the
+alteration of the creed. So far as I am aware there is no fundamental
+difference of opinion between the members. In my opinion the altered creed
+represents the exact feeling of the country at the present moment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I know that the proposed alteration has been subjected to hostile criticism in
+several newspapers of note. But the extraordinary situation that faces the
+country is that popular opinion is far in advance of several newspapers which
+have hitherto commanded influence and have undoubtedly moulded public opinion.
+The fact is that the formation of opinion to-day is by no means confined to the
+educated classes, but the masses have taken it upon themselves not only to
+formulate opinion but to enforce it. It would be a mistake to belittle or
+ignore this opinion, or to ascribe it to a temporary upheaval. It would be
+equally a mistake to suppose that this awakening amongst the masses is due
+either to the activity of the Ali Brothers or myself. For the time being we
+have the ear of the masses because we voice their sentiments. The masses are by
+no means so foolish or unintelligent as we sometimes imagine. They often
+perceive things with their intuition, which we ourselves fail to see with our
+intellect. But whilst the masses know what they want, they often do not know
+how to express their wants and, less often, how to get what they want. Herein
+comes the use of leadership, and disastrous results can easily follow a bad,
+hasty, or what is worse, selfish lead.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first part of the proposed creed expresses the present desire of the
+nation, and the second shows the way that desire can be fulfilled. In my humble
+opinion the Congress creed with the proposed alteration is but an extension of
+the original. And so long as no break with the British connection is attempted,
+it is strictly within even the existing article that defines the Congress
+creed. The extension lies in the contemplated possibility of a break with the
+British connection. In my humble opinion, if India is to make unhampered
+progress, we must make it clear to the British people that whilst we desire to
+retain the British connection, if we can rise to our full height with it we are
+determined to dispense with, and even to get rid of that connection, if that is
+necessary for full national development. I hold that it is not only derogatory
+to national dignity but it actually impedes national progress superstitiously
+to believe that our progress towards our goal is impossible without British
+connection. It is this superstition which makes some of the best of us tolerate
+the Punjab wrong and the Khilafat insult. This blind adherence to that
+connection makes us feel helpless. The proposed alteration in the creed enables
+us to rid ourselves of our helpless condition. I personally hold that it is
+perfectly constitutional openly to strive after independence, but lest there
+may be dispute as to the constitutional character of any movement for complete
+independence, the doubtful and highly technical adjective “constitutional” has
+been removed from the altered creed in the draft. Surely it should be enough to
+ensure that the methods for achieving our end are legitimate, honourable, and
+peaceful, I believe that this was the reasoning that guided my colleagues in
+accepting the proposed creed. In any case, such was certainly my view of the
+whole alteration. There is no desire on my part to adopt any means that are
+subversive of law and order. I know, however, that I am treading on delicate
+ground when I write about law and order for, to some of our distinguished
+leaders even my present methods appear to be lawless and conducive to disorder.
+But even they will perhaps grant that the retention of the word
+‘constitutional’ cannot protect the country against methods such as I am
+employing. It gives rise, no doubt, to a luminous legal discussion, but any
+such discussion is fruitless when the nation means business. The other
+important alteration refers to the limitation of the number of delegates. I
+believe that the advantages of such a limitation are obvious. We are fast
+reaching a time when without any such limitation the Congress will become an
+unwieldy body. It is difficult even to have an unlimited number of visitors; it
+is impossible to transact national business if we have an unlimited number of
+delegates.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The next important alteration is about the election of the members of the
+All-India Congress Committee, making that committee practically the Subjects
+Committee, and the redistribution of India for the purposes of the Congress on
+a linguistic basis. It is not necessary to comment on these alterations, but I
+wish to add that if the Congress accepts the principle of limiting the number
+of delegates it would be advisable to introduce the principle of proportional
+representation. That would enable all parties who wish to be represented at the
+Congress.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I observe that <i>the Servant of India</i> sees an inconsistency between my
+implied acceptance of the British Committee, so far as the published draft
+constitution is concerned, and my recent article in <i>Young India</i> on that
+Committee and the newspaper <i>India</i>. But it is well known that for several
+years I have held my present views about the existence of that body. It would
+have been irrelevant for me, perhaps, to suggest to my colleagues the
+extinction of that committee. It was not our function to report on the
+usefulness or otherwise of the Committee. We were commissioned only for
+preparing a new constitution. Moreover I knew that my colleagues were not
+averse to the existence of the British Committee. And the drawing up of a new
+constitution enabled me to show that where there was no question of principle I
+was desirous of agreeing quickly with my opponents in opinions. But I propose
+certainly to press for abolition of the committee as it is at present
+continued, and the stopping of its organ <i>India</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ IN NINE MONTHS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Asked by the <i>Times</i> representative as to his impressions formed as a
+result of his activities during the last three months, Mr. Gandhi said:—“My own
+impression of these three months’ extensive experience is that this movement of
+non-co-operation has come to stay, and it is most decidedly a purifying
+movement, in spite of isolated instances of rowdyism, as for instance at Mrs.
+Besant’s meeting in Bombay, at some places in Delhi, Bengal, and even in
+Gujarat. The people are assimilating day after day the spirit of non-violence,
+not necessarily as a creed, but as an inevitable policy. I expect most
+startling results, more startling than, say, the discoveries of Sir J.C. Bose,
+or the acceptance by the people of non-violence. If the Government could be
+assured beyond any possibility of doubt that no violence would ever be offered
+by us the Government would from that moment alter its character, unconsciously
+and involuntarily, but nonetheless surely on that account.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Alter its character,—in what, direction?” asked the <i>Times</i>
+representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Certainly in the direction which we ask it should move—that being in the
+direction of Government becoming responsive to every call of the nation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Will you kindly explain further?” asked the representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“By that I mean,” said Mr. Gandhi, “people will be able by asserting themselves
+through fixed determination and self-sacrifice to gain the redress of the
+Khilafat wrong, the Punjab wrong, and attain the Swaraj of their choice.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But what is your Swaraj, and where does the Government come in there—the
+Government which, you say will alter its character unconsciously?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“My Swaraj,” said Mr. Gandhi, “is the Parliamentary Government of India in the
+modern sense of the term for the time being, and that Government would be
+secured to us either through the friendly offices of the British people or
+without them.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What do you mean by the phrase, ‘without them!’” questioned the interviewer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This movement,” continued Mr. Gandhi, “is an endeavour to purge the present
+Government of selfishness and greed which determine almost every one of their
+activities. Suppose that we have made it impossible by disassociation from them
+to feed their greed. They might not wish to remain in India, as happened in the
+case of Somaliland, where the moment its administration ceased to be a paying
+proposition they evacuated it.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How do you think,” queried the representative, “in practice this will work
+out?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What I have sketched before you,” said Mr. Gandhi, “is the final possibility.
+What I expect is that nothing of that kind will happen. In so far as I
+understand the British people I will recognise the force of public opinion when
+it has become real and patent. Then, and only then, will they realise the
+hideous injustice which in their name the Imperial ministers and their
+representatives in India have perpetrated. They will therefore remedy the two
+wrongs in accordance with the wishes of the people, and they will also offer a
+constitution exactly in accordance with the wishes of the people of India, as
+represented by their chosen leaders.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Supposing that the British Government wish to retire because India is not a
+paying concern, what do you think will then be the position of India?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi answered: “At that stage surely it is easy to understand that India
+will then have evolved either outstanding spiritual height or the ability to
+offer violence, against violence. She will have evolved an organising ability
+of a high order, and will therefore be in every way able to cope with any
+emergency that might arise.” “In other words,” observed the <i>Times</i>
+representative, “you expect the moment of the British evacuation, if such a
+contingency arises, will coincide with the moment of India’s preparedness and
+ability and conditions favourable for India to take over the Indian
+administration as a going concern and work it for the benefit and advancement
+of the Nation?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi answered the question with an emphatic affirmative. “My experience
+during the last months fills me with the hope,” continued Mr. Gandhi, “that
+within the nine months that remain of the year in which I have expected Swaraj
+for India we shall redress the two wrongs and we shall see Swaraj established
+in accordance with the wishes of the people of India.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Where will the present Government be at the end of the nine months?” Asked the
+<i>Times</i> representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi, with a significant smile, said: “The lion will then lie with the
+lamb.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>Young India, December, 1920.</i>
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE ATTAINMENT OF SWARAJ</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi in moving his resolution on the creed before the Congress, said,
+“The resolution which I have the honour to move is as follows: The object of
+the Indian National Congress is the attainment of Swarajya by the people of
+India by all legitimate and peaceful means.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There are only two kinds of objections, so far as I understand, that will be
+advanced from this platform. One is that we may not to-day think of dissolving
+the British connection. What I say is that it is derogatory to national dignity
+to think of permanence of British connection at any cost. We are labouring
+under a grievous wrong, which it is the personal duty of every Indian to get
+redressed. This British Government not only refused to redress the wrong, but
+it refuses to acknowledge <i>its</i> mistake and so long as it retains its
+attitude, it is not possible for us to say all that we want to be or all that
+we want to get, retaining British connection. No matter what difficulties be in
+our path, we must make the clearest possible declaration to the world and to
+the whole of India, that we may not possibly have British connection, if the
+British people will not do this elementary justice. I do not, for one moment,
+suggest that we want to end at the British connection at all costs,
+unconditionally. If the British connection is for the advancement of India, we
+do not want to destroy it. But if it is inconsistent with our national self
+respect, then it is our bounden duty to destroy it. There is room in this
+resolution for both—those who believe that, by retaining British connection, we
+can purify ourselves and purify British people, and those who have no belief.
+As for instance, take the extreme case of Mr. Andrews. He says all hope for
+India is gone for keeping the British connection. He says there must be
+complete severance—complete independence. There is room enough in this creed
+for a man like Mr. Andrews also. Take another illustration, a man like myself
+or my brother Shaukat Ali. There is certainly no room for us, if we have
+eternally to subscribe to the doctrine, whether these wrongs are redressed or
+not, we shall have to evolve ourselves within the British Empire; there is no
+room for me in that creed. Therefore this creed is elastic enough to take in
+both shades of opinions and the British people will have to beware that, if
+they do not want to do justice, it will be the bounden duty of every Indian to
+destroy the Empire.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I want just now to wind up my remarks with a personal appeal, drawing your
+attention to an object lesson that was presented in the Bengal camp yesterday.
+If you want Swaraj, you have got a demonstration of how to get Swaraj. There
+was a little bit of skirmish, a little bit of squabble, and a little bit of
+difference in the Bengal camp, as there will always be differences so long as
+the world lasts. I have known differences between husband and wife, because I
+am still a husband; I have noticed differences between parents and children,
+because I am still a father of four boys, and they are all strong enough to
+destroy their father so far as bodily struggle is concerned; I possess that
+varied experience of husband and parent; I know that we shall always have
+squabbles, we shall always have differences but the lesson that I want to draw
+your attention to is that I had the honour and privilege of addressing both the
+parties. They gave me their undivided attention and what is more they showed
+their attachment, their affection and their fellowship for me by accepting the
+humble advice that I had the honour of tendering to them, and I told them I am
+not here to distribute justice that can be awarded only through our worthy
+president. But I ask you not to go to the president, you need not worry him. If
+you are strong, if you are brave, if you are intent upon getting Swaraj, and if
+you really want to revise the creed, then you will bottle up your rage, you
+will bottle up all the feelings of injustice that may rankle in your hearts and
+forget these things here under this very roof and I told them to forget their
+differences, to forgot the wrongs. I don’t want to tell you or go into the
+history of that incident. Probably most of you know. I simply want to invite
+your attention to the fact. I don’t say they have settled up their differences.
+I hope they have but I do know that they undertook to forget the differences.
+They undertook not to worry the President, they undertook not to make any
+demonstration here or in the Subjects Committee. All honour to those who
+listened to that advice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I only wanted my Bengali friends and all the other friends who have come to
+this great assembly with a fixed determination to seek nothing but the
+settlement of their country, to seek nothing but the advancement of their
+respective rights, to seek nothing but the conservation of the national honour.
+I appeal to every one of you to copy the example set by those who felt
+aggrieved and who felt that their heads were broken. I know, before we have
+done with this great battle on which we have embarked at the special sessions
+of the Congress, we have to go probably, possibly through a sea of blood, but
+let it not be said of us or any one of us that we are guilty of shedding blood,
+but let it be said by generations yet to be born that we suffered, that we shed
+not somebody’s blood but our own, and so I have no hesitation in saying that I
+do not want to show much sympathy for those who had their heads broken or who
+were said to be even in danger of losing their lives. What does it matter? It
+is much better to die at the hands, at least, of our own countrymen. What is
+there to revenge ourselves about or upon. So I ask everyone of you that if at
+any time there is blood-boiling within you against some fellow countrymen of
+yours, even though he may be in the employ of Government, though he may be in
+the Secret Service, you will take care not to be offended and not to return
+blow for blow. Understand that the very moment you return the blow from the
+detective, your cause is lost. This is your non-violent campaign. And so I ask
+everyone of you not to retaliate but to bottle up all your rage, to dismiss
+your rage from you and you will rise graver men. I am here to congratulate
+those who have restrained themselves from going to the President and bringing
+the dispute before him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Therefore I appeal to those who feel aggrieved to feel that they have done the
+right thing in forgetting it and if they have not forgotten I ask them to try
+to forget the thing; and that is the object lesson to which I wanted to draw
+your attention if you want to carry this resolution. Do not carry this
+resolution only by an acclamation for this resolution, but I want you to
+accompany the carrying out of this resolution with a faith and resolve which
+nothing on earth can move. That you are intent upon getting Swaraj at the
+earliest possible moment and that you are intent upon getting Swaraj by means
+that are legitimate, that are honourable and by means that are non-violent,
+that are peaceful, you have resolved upon, so far you can say to-day. We cannot
+give battle to this Government by means of steel, but we can give battle by
+exercising, what I have so often called, “soul force” and soul force is not the
+prerogative of one man of a Sanyasi or even a so-called saint. Soul force is
+the prerogative of every human being, female or male and therefore I ask my
+countrymen, if they want to accept this resolution, to accept it with that firm
+determination and to understand that it is inaugurated under such good and
+favourable auspices as I have described to you.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my humble opinion, the Congress will have done the rightest thing, if it
+unanimously adopts this resolution. May God grant that you will pass this
+resolution unanimously, may God grant that you will also have the courage and
+the ability to carry out the resolution and that within one year.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap05"></a>V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY</h2>
+
+<p>
+[A dialogue between Editor and reader on the Hindu-Moslem Unity—<i>Indian Home
+Rule</i>.]
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE HINDUS AND THE MAHOMEDANS.</h3>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: Your last question is a serious one, and yet, on careful consideration,
+it will be found to be easy of solution. The question arises because of the
+presence of the railways of the lawyers, and of the doctors. We shall presently
+examine the last two. We have already considered the railways. I should,
+however, like to add that man is so made by nature as to require him to
+restrict his movements as far as his hands and feet will take him. If we did
+not rush about from place to place by means of railways such other maddening
+conveniences, much of the confusion that arises would be obviated. Our
+difficulties are of our own creation. God set a limit to a man’s locomotive
+ambition in the construction of his body. Man immediately proceeded to discover
+means of overriding the limit. God gifted man with intellect that he might know
+his Maker. Man abused it, so that he might forget his Maker. I am so
+constructed that I can only serve my immediate neighbours, but, in my conceit,
+I pretend to have discovered that I must with my body serve every individual in
+the Universe. In thus attempting the impossible, man comes in contact with
+different natures, different religions, and is utterly confounded. According to
+this reasoning, it must be apparent to you that railways are a most dangerous
+institution. Man has therefore gone further away from his Maker.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But I am impatient to hear your answer to my question. Has the
+introduction of Mahomedanism not unmade the nation?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: India cannot cease to be one nation because people belonging to
+different religions live in it. The introduction of foreigners does not
+necessarily destroy the nation, they merge in it. A country is one nation only
+when such a condition obtains in it. That country must have a faculty for
+assimilation. India has ever been such a country. In reality, there are as many
+religions as there are individuals, but those who are conscious of the spirit
+of nationality do not interfere with one another’s religion. If they do, they
+are not fit to be considered a nation. If the Hindus believe that India should
+be peopled only by Hindus, they are living in dreamland. The Hindus, the
+Mahomedans, the Parsees and the Christians who have made India their country
+are fellow countrymen, and they will have to live in unity if only for their
+own interest. In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion
+synonymous terms: nor has it ever been so in India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But what about the inborn enmity between Hindus and Mahomedans?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: That phrase has been invented by our mutual enemy. When the Hindus and
+Mahomedans fought against one another, they certainly spoke in that strain.
+They have long since ceased to fight. How, then, can there be any inborn
+enmity? Pray remember this, too, that we did not cease to fight only after
+British occupation. The Hindus flourished under Moslem sovereigns, and Moslems
+under the Hindu. Each party recognised that mutual fighting was suicidal, and
+that neither party would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both parties,
+therefore, decided to live in peace. With the English advent the quarrels
+recommenced.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The proverbs you have quoted were coined when both were fighting; to quote them
+now is obviously harmful. Should we not remember that many Hindus and
+Mahomedans own the same ancestors, and the same blood runs through their veins?
+Do people become enemies because they change their religion? Is the God of the
+Mahomedan different from the God of the Hindu? Religions are different roads
+converging to the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads,
+so long as we reach the same goal? Wherein is the cause for quarrelling?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Moreover, there are deadly proverbs as between the followers of Shiva and those
+of Vishnu, yet nobody suggests that these two do not belong to the same nation.
+It is said that the Vedic religion is different from Jainism, but the followers
+of the respective faiths are not different nations. The fact is that we have
+become enslaved, and, therefore, quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided
+by a third party. There are Hindu iconoclasts as there are Mahomedan. The more
+we advance in true knowledge, the better we shall understand that we need not
+be at war with those whose religion we may not follow.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: Now I would like to know your views about cow protection.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: I myself respect the cow, that is, I look upon her with affectionate
+reverence. The cow is the protector of India, because, it being an agricultural
+country, is dependent on the cow’s progeny. She is a most useful animal in
+hundreds of ways. Our Mahomedan brethren will admit this.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But, just as I respect the cow so do I respect my fellow-men. A man is just as
+useful as a cow, no matter whether he be a Mahomedan or a Hindu. Am I, then to
+fight with or kill a Mahomedan in order to save a cow? In doing so, I would
+become an enemy as well of the cow as of the Mahomedan. Therefore, the only
+method I know of protecting the cow is that I should approach my Mahomedan
+brother and urge him for the sake of the country to join me in protecting her.
+If he would not listen to me, I should let the cow go for the simple reason
+that the matter is beyond my ability. If I were over full of pity for the cow,
+I should sacrifice my life to save her, but not take my brother’s. This, I
+hold, is the law of our religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When men become obstinate, it is a difficult thing. If I pull one way, my
+Moslem brother will pull another. If I put on a superior air, he will return
+the compliment. If I bow to him gently, he will do it much, more so, and if he
+does not, I shall not be considered to have done wrong in having bowed. When
+the Hindus became insistent, the killing of cows increased. In my opinion, cow
+protection societies may be considered cow killing societies. It is a disgrace
+to us that we should need such societies. When we forgot how to protect cows, I
+suppose we needed such societies.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What am I to do when a blood-brother is on the point of killing a cow? Am I to
+kill him, or to fall down at his feet and implore him? If you admit that I
+should adopt the latter course I must do the same to my Moslem brother. Who
+protects the cow from destruction by Hindus when they cruelly ill-treat her?
+Whoever reasons with the Hindus when they mercilessly belabour the progeny of
+the cow with their sticks? But this has not prevented us from remaining one
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Lastly, if it be true that the Hindus believe in the doctrine of non-killing,
+and the Mahomedans do not, what, I pray, is the duty of the former? It is not
+written that a follower of the religion of Ahimsa (non-killing) may kill a
+fellow-man. For him the way is straight. In order to save one being, he may not
+kill another. He can only plead—therein lies his sole duty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But does every Hindu believe in Ahimsa? Going to the root of the matter, not
+one man really practises such a religion, because we do destroy life. We are
+said to follow that religion because we want to obtain freedom from liability
+to kill any kind of life. Generally speaking, we may observe that many Hindus
+partake of meat and are not, therefore, followers of Ahimsa. It is, therefore,
+preposterous to suggest that the two cannot live together amicably because the
+Hindus believe in Ahimsa and the Mahomedans do not.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+These thoughts are put into our minds by selfish and false religious teachers.
+The English put the finishing touch. They have a habit of writing history; they
+pretend to study the manners and customs of all peoples, God has given us a
+limited mental capacity, but they usurp the function of the Godhead and indulge
+in novel experiments. They write about their own researches in most laudatory
+terms and hypnotise us into believing them. We in our ignorance, then fall at
+their feet.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Those who do not wish to misunderstand things may read up the Koran, and will
+find therein hundreds of passages acceptable to the Hindus; and the Bhagavad
+Gita contains passages to which not a Mahomedan can take exception. Am I to
+dislike a Mahomedan because there are passages in the Koran I do not understand
+or like? It takes two to make a quarrel. If I do not want to quarrel with a
+Mahomedan, the latter will be powerless to foist a quarrel on me, and,
+similarly, I should be powerless if a Mahomedan refuses his assistance to
+quarrel with me. An arm striking the air will become disjointed. If everyone
+will try to understand the core of his own religion and adhere to it, and will
+not allow false teachers to dictate to him, there will be no room left for
+quarrelling.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But, will the English ever allow the two bodies to join hands?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: This question arises out of your timidity. It betrays our shallowness.
+If two brothers want to live in peace, is it possible for a third party to
+separate them? If they were to listen to evil counsels, we would consider them
+to be foolish. Similarly, we Hindus and Mahomedans would have to blame our
+folly rather than the English, if we allowed them to put asunder. A clay pot
+would break through impact; if not with one stone, thou with another. The way
+to save the pot is not to keep it away from the danger point, but to bake it so
+that no stone would break it. We have then to make our hearts of perfectly
+baked clay. Then we shall be steeled against all danger. This can be easily
+done by the Hindus. They are superior in numbers, they pretend that they are
+more educated, they are, therefore, better able to shield themselves from
+attack on their amicable relations with the Mahomedans.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is a mutual distrust between the two communities. The Mahomedans,
+therefore, ask for certain concessions from Lord Morley. Why should the Hindus
+oppose this? If the Hindus desisted, the English would notice it, the
+Mahomedans would gradually begin to trust the Hindus, and brotherliness would
+be the outcome. We should be ashamed to take our quarrels to the English.
+Everyone can find out for himself that the Hindus can lose nothing be
+desisting. The man who has inspired confidence in another has never lost
+anything in this world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not suggest that the Hindus and the Mahomedans will never fight. Two
+brothers living together often do so. We shall sometimes have our heads broken.
+Such a thing ought not to be necessary, but all men are not equi-minded. When
+people are in a rage, they do many foolish things. These we have to put up
+with. But, when we do quarrel, we certainly do not want to engage counsel and
+to resort to English or any law-courts. Two men fight; both have their heads
+broken, or one only. How shall a third party distribute justice amongst them?
+Those who fight may expect to be injured.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HINDU-MAHOMEDAN UNITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler some time ago asked me in an imaginary interview whether if I was
+sincere in my professions of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. I would eat and drink with
+a Mahomedean and give my daughter in marriage to a Mahomedan. This question has
+been asked again by some friends in another form. Is it necessary for Hindu
+Mahomedan Unity that there should he interdining and intermarrying? The
+questioners say that if the two are necessary, real unity can never take place
+because crores of <i>Sanatanis</i> would never reconcile themselves to
+interdining, much less to intermarriage.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am one of those who do not consider caste to be a harmful institution. In its
+origin caste was a wholesome custom and promoted national well-being. In my
+opinion the idea that interdining or intermarrying is necessary for national
+growth, is a superstition borrowed from the West. Eating is a process just as
+vital as the other sanitary necessities of life. And if mankind had not, much
+to its harm, made of eating a fetish and indulgence we would have performed the
+operation of eating in private even as one performs the other necessary
+functions of life in private. Indeed the highest culture in Hinduism regards
+eating in that light and there are thousands of Hindus still living who will
+not eat their food in the presence of anybody. I can recall the names of
+several cultured men and women who ate their food in entire privacy but who
+never had any illwill against anybody and who lived on the friendliest terms
+with all.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Intermarriage is a still more difficult question. If brothers and sisters can
+live on the friendliest footing without ever thinking of marrying each other, I
+can see no difficulty in my daughter regarding every Mahomedan brother and
+<i>vice versa</i>. I hold strong views on religion and on marriage. The greater
+the restraint we exercise with regard to our appetites whether about eating or
+marrying, the better we become from a religious standpoint. I should despair of
+ever cultivating amicable relations with the world, if I had to recognise the
+right or the propriety of any young man offering his hand in marriage to my
+daughter or to regard it as necessary for me to dine with anybody and
+everybody. I claim that I am living on terms of friendliness with the whole
+world. I have never quarrelled with a single Mahomedan or Christian but for
+years I have taken nothing but fruit in Mahomedan or Christian households. I
+would most certainly decline to eat food cooked from the same plate with my son
+or to drink water out of a cup which his lips have touched and which has not
+been washed. But the restraint or the exclusiveness exercised in these matters
+by me has never affected the closest companionship with the Mahomedan or the
+Christian friends or my sons.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But interdining and intermarriage have never been a bar to disunion, quarrels
+and worse. The Pandavas and the Kauravas flew at one another’s throats without
+compunction although they interdined and intermarried. The bitterness between
+the English and the Germans has not yet died out.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The fact is that intermarriage and interdining are not necessary factors in
+friendship and unity though they are often emblems thereof. But insistence on
+either the one or the other can easily become and is to-day a bar to
+Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. If we make ourselves believe that Hindus and Mahomedans
+cannot be one unless they interdine or intermarry, we would be creating an
+artificial barrier between us which it might be almost impossible to remove.
+And it would seriously interfere with the flowing unity between Hindus and
+Mahomedans if, for example, Mahomedan youths consider it lawful to court Hindu
+girls. The Hindu parents will not, even if they suspected any such thing,
+freely admit Mahomedans to their homes as they have begun to do now. In my
+opinion it is necessary for Hindu and Mahomedan young men to recognise this
+limitation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hold it to be utterly impossible for Hindus and Mahomedans to intermarry and
+yet retain intact each other’s religion. And the true beauty of Hindu-Mahomedan
+Unity lies in each remaining true to his own religion and yet being true to
+each other. For, we are thinking of Hindus and Mahomedans even of the most
+orthodox type being able to regard one another as natural friends instead of
+regarding one another as natural enemies as they have done hitherto.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What then does the Hindu-Mahomedan Unity consist in and how can it be best
+promoted? The answer is simple. It consists in our having a common purpose, a
+common goal and common sorrows. It is best promoted by co-operating to reach
+the common goal, by sharing one another’s sorrow and by mutual toleration. A
+common goal we have. We wish this great country of ours to be greater and
+self-governing.[4] We have enough sorrows to share and to-day seeing that the
+Mahomedans are deeply touched on the question of Khilafat and their case is
+just, nothing can be so powerful for winning Mahomedans friendship for the
+Hindu as to give his whole-hearted support to the Mahomedan claim. No amount of
+drinking out of the same cup or dining out of the same bowl can bind the two as
+this help in the Khilafat question.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And mutual toleration is a necessity for all time and for all races. We cannot
+live in peace if the Hindu will not tolerate the Mahomedan form of worship of
+God and his manners and customs or if the mahomedans will be impatient of Hindu
+idolatory, cow-worship. It is not necessary for toleration that I must approve
+of what I tolerate. I heartily dislike drinking, meat eating and smoking, but I
+tolerate all these in Hindus, Mahomedans and Christians even as I expect them
+to tolerate my abstinence from all these, although they may dislike it. All the
+quarrels between the Hindus and the Mahomedans have arisen from each wanting to
+<i>force</i> the other his view.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HINDU-MUSLIM UNITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+There can be no doubt that successful non-co-operation depends as much on
+Hindu-Muslim Unity as on non-violence. Greatest strain will be put upon both in
+the course of the struggle and if it survives that strain, victory is a
+certainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A severe strain was put upon it in Agra and it has been stated that when either
+party went to the authorities they were referred to Maulana Shaukat Ali and me.
+Fortunately there was a far better man at hand. Hakimji Ajmal khan is a devout
+Muslim who commands the confidence and the respect of both the parties. He with
+his band of workers hastened to Agra, settled the dispute and the parties
+became friends as they were never before. An incident occurred nearer Delhi and
+the same influence worked successfully to avoid what might have become an
+explosion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But Hakimji Ajmal khan cannot be everywhere appearing at the exact hour as an
+angel of peace. Nor can Maulana Shankat Ali or I go everywhere. And yet perfect
+peace must be observed between the two communities in spite of attempts to
+divide them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Why was there any appeal made to the authorities at all at Agra? If we are to
+work out non-co-operation with any degree of success we must be able to
+dispense with the protection of the Government when we quarrel among ourselves.
+The whole scheme of non-co-operation must break to pieces, if our final
+reliance is to be upon British intervention for the adjustment of our quarrels
+or the punishment of the guilty ones. In every village and hamlet there must be
+at least one Hindu and one Muslim, whose primary business must be to prevent
+quarrels between the two. Some times however, even blood-brothers come to
+blows. In the initial stages we are bound to do so here and there.
+Unfortunately we who are public workers have made little attempt to understand
+and influence the masses and least of all the most turbulent among them. During
+the process of insinuating ourselves in the estimation of the masses and until
+we have gained control over the unruly, there are bound to be exhibitions of
+hasty temper now and then. We must learn at such times to do without an appeal
+to the Government. Hakimji Ajmal Khan has shown us how to do it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The union that we want is not a patched up thing but a union of hearts based
+upon a definite recognition of the indubitable proposition that Swaraj for
+India must be an impossible dream without an indissoluble union between the
+Hindus and the Muslims of India. It must not be a mere truce. It cannot be
+based upon mutual fear. It must be a partnership between equals each respecting
+the religion of the other.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I would frankly despair of reaching such union if there was anything in the
+holy Quran enjoining upon the followers of Islam to treat Hindus as their
+natural enemies or if there was anything in Hinduism to warrant a belief in the
+eternal enmity between the two.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We would ill learn our history if we conclude that because we have quarrelled
+in the past, we are destined so to continue unless some such strong power like
+the British keep us by force of arms from flying at each other’s throats. But I
+am convinced that there is no warrant in Islam or Hinduism for any such belief.
+True it is that interested fanatical priests in both religions have set the one
+against the other. It is equally true that Muslim rulers like Christian rulers
+have used the sword for the propagation of their respective faiths. But in
+spite of many dark things of the modern times, the world’s opinion to-day will
+as little tolerate forcible conversions as it will tolerate forcible slavery.
+That probably is the most effective contribution of the scientific spirit of
+the age. That spirit has revolutionised many a false notion about Christianity
+as it has about Islam. I do not know a single writer on Islam who defends the
+use of force in the proselytising process. The influences exerted in our times
+are far more subtle than that of the sword.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I believe that in the midst of all the bloodshed, chicane and fraud being
+resorted to on a colossal scale in the west, the whole humanity is silently but
+surely making progress towards a better age. And India by finding true
+independence and self-expression through an imperishable Hindu-Muslim unity and
+through non-violent means, i.e., unadulterated self sacrifice can point a way
+out of the prevailing darkness.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap06"></a>VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</h2>
+
+<h3>DEPRESSED CLASSES</h3>
+
+<p>
+Vivekanand used to call the Panchamas ‘suppressed classes.’ There is no doubt
+that Vivekanand’s is a more accurate adjective. We have suppressed them and
+have consequently become ourselves depressed. That we have become the ‘Pariahs
+of the Empire’ is, in Gokhale’s language, the retributive justice meted out to
+us by a just God. A correspondent indignantly asks me in a pathetic letter
+reproduced elsewhere, what I am doing for them. I have given the letter with
+the correspondent’s own heading. Should not we the Hindus wash our bloodstained
+hands before we ask the English to wash theirs? This is a proper question
+reasonably put. And if a member of a slave nation could deliver the suppressed
+classes from their slavery without freeing myself from my own, I would do so to
+day. But it is an impossible task. A slave has not the freedom even to do the
+right thing. It is a right for me to prohibit the importation of foreign goods,
+but I have no power to bring it about. It was right for Maulana Mahomed Ali to
+go to Turkey and to tell the Turks personally that India was with them in their
+righteous struggle. He was not free to do so. If I had a truly national
+legislative I would answer Hindu insolence by creating special and better wells
+for the exclusive use of suppressed classes and by erecting better and more
+numerous schools for them, so that there would be not a single member of the
+suppressed classes left without a school to teach their children. But I must
+wait for that better day.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Meanwhile are the depressed classes to be loft to their own resources? Nothing
+of the sort. In my own humble manner I have done and am doing all I can for my
+Panchama brother.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There are three courses open to those downtrodden members of the nation. For
+their impatience they may call in the assistance of the slave owning
+Government. They will get it but they will fall from the frying pan into the
+fire. To-day they are slaves of slaves. By seeking Government aid, they will be
+used for suppressing their kith and kin. Instead of being sinned against, they
+will themselves be the sinners. The Mussalmans tried it and failed. They found
+that they were worse off than before. The Sikhs did it unwittingly and failed.
+To-day there is no more discontented community in India than the Sikhs.
+Government aid is therefore no solution.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second is rejection of Hinduism and wholesale conversion to Islam or
+Christianity. And if a change of religion could be justified for worldly
+betterment, I would advise it without hesitation. But religion is a matter of
+the heart. No physical inconvenience can warrant abandonment of one’s own
+religion. If the inhuman treatment of the Panchamas were a part of Hinduism,
+its rejection would be a paramount duty both for them and for those like me who
+would not make a fetish even of religion and condone every evil in its sacred
+name. But, I believe that untouchability is no part of Hinduism. It is rather
+its excrescence to be removed by every effort. And there is quite an army of
+Hindu reformers who have set their heart upon ridding Hinduism of this blot.
+Conversion, therefore, I hold, is no remedy whatsoever.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Then there remains, finally, self-help and self-dependence, with such aid as
+the non-Panchama Hindus will render of their own motion, not as a matter of
+patronage but as a matter of duty. And herein comes the use of
+non-co-operation. My correspondent was correctly informed by Mr.
+Rajagopaluchari and Mr. Hanumantarao that I would favour well-regulated
+non-co-operation for this acknowledged evil. But non-co-operation means
+independence of outside help, it means effort from within. It would not be
+non-co-operation to insist on visiting prohibited areas. That may be civil
+disobedience if it is peacefully carried out. But I have found to my cost that
+civil disobedience requires far greater preliminary training and self-control.
+All can non-co-operate, but few only can offer civil disobedience. Therefore,
+by way of protest against Hinduism, the Panchamas can certainly stop all
+contact and connection with the other Hindus so long as special grievances are
+maintained. But this means organised intelligent effort. And so far as I can
+see, there is no leader among the Panchamas who can lead them to victory
+through non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The better way, therefore, perhaps, is for the Panchamas heartily to join the
+great national movement that is now going on for throwing off the slavery of
+the present Government. It is easy enough for the Panchama friends to see that
+non-co-operation against this evil government presupposes co-operation between
+the different sections forming the Indian nation. The Hindus must realise that
+if they wish to offer successful non-co-operation against the Government, they
+must make common cause with the Panchamas, even as they have made common cause
+with the Mussalmans. Non-co-operation with it is free from violence, is
+essentially a movement of intensive self-purification. That process has
+commenced and whether the Panchamas deliberately take part in it or not, the
+rest of the Hindus dare not neglect them without hampering their own progress.
+Hence though the Panchama problem is as dear to me as life itself, I rest
+satisfied with the exclusive attention to national non-co-operation. I feel
+sure that the greater includes the less.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Closely allied to this question is the non-Brahmin question. I wish I had
+studied it more closely than I have been able to. A quotation from my speech
+delivered at a private meeting in Madras has been torn from its context and
+misused to further the antagonism between the so-called Brahmins and the
+so-called non-Brahmins. I do not wish to retract a word of what I said at that
+meeting, I was appealing to those who are accepted as Brahmins. I told them
+that in my opinion the treatment of non-Brahmins by the Brahmins was as satanic
+as the treatment of us by the British. I added that the non-Brahmins should be
+placated without any ado or bargaining. But my remarks were never intended to
+encourage the powerful non-Brahmins of Maharashira or Madras, or the
+mischievous element among them, to overawe the so-called Brahmins. I use the
+word ‘so-called’ advisedly. For the Brahmins who have freed themselves from the
+thraldom of superstitious orthodoxy have not only no quarrel with non-Brahmins
+as such, but are in every way eager to advance non-Brahmins wherever they are
+weak. No lover of his country can possibly achieve its general advance if he
+dared to neglect the least of his countrymen. Those non-Brahmins therefore who
+are coqueting with the Government are selling themselves and the nation to
+which they belong. By all means let those who have faith in the Government help
+to sustain it, but let no Indian worthy of his birth cut off his nose to spite
+the face.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AMELIORATION OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</h3>
+
+<p>
+The resolution of the Senate of the Gujarat National University in regard to
+Mr. Andrews’ question about the admission of children of the ‘depressed’
+classes to the schools affiliated to that University is reported to have raised
+a flutter in Ahmedabad. Not only has the flutter given satisfaction to a ‘Times
+of India’ correspondent, but the occasion has led to the discovery by him of
+another defect in the constitution of the Senate in that it does not contain a
+single Muslim member. The discovery, however, I may inform the reader, is no
+proof of the want of national character of the University. The Hindu-Muslim
+unity is no mere lip expression. It requires no artificial proofs. The simple
+reason why there is no Mussalman representative on the Senate is that no higher
+educated Mussalman, able to give his time, has been found to take sufficient
+interest in the national education movement. I merely refer to this matter to
+show that we must reckon with attempts to discredit the movement even
+misinterpretation of motives. That is a difficulty from without and easier to
+deal with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The ‘depressed’ classes difficulty is internal and therefore far more serious
+because it may give rise to a split and weaken the cause—no cause can survive
+internal difficulties if they are indefinitely multiplied. Yet there can be no
+surrender in the matter of principles for the avoidance of splits. You cannot
+promote a cause when you are undermining it by surrendering its vital parts.
+The depressed classes problem is a vital part of the cause. <i>Swaraj</i> is as
+inconceivable without full reparation to the ‘depressed’ classes as it is
+impossible without real Hindu-Muslim unity. In my opinion we have become
+‘pariahs of the Empire’ because we have created ‘pariahs’ in our midst. The
+slave owner is always more hurt than the slave. We shall be unfit to gain
+Swaraj so long as we would keep in bondage a fifth of the population of
+Hindustan. Have we not made the ‘pariah’ crawl on his belly? Have we not
+segregated him? And if it is religion so to treat the ‘pariah.’ It is the
+religion of the white race to segregate us. And if it is no argument for the
+white races to say that we are satisfied with the badge of our inferiority, it
+is less for us to say that the ‘pariah’ is satisfied with his. Our slavery is
+complete when we begin to hug it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Gujarat Senate therefore counted the cost when it refused to bend before
+the storm. This non-co-operation is a process of self-purification. We may not
+cling to putrid customs and claim the pure boon of <i>Swaraj</i>.
+Untouchability I hold is a custom, not an integral part of Hinduism. The world
+advanced in thought, though it is still barbarous in action. And no religion
+can stand that which is not based on fundamental truths. Any glorification of
+error will destroy a religion as surely as disregard of a disease is bound to
+destroy a body.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This government of ours is an unscrupulous corporation. It has ruled by
+dividing Mussalmans from Hindus. It is quite capable of taking advantage of the
+internal weaknesses of Hinduism. It will set the ‘depressed’ classes against
+the rest of the Hindus, non-Brahmins against Brahmins. The Gujarat Senate
+resolution does not end the trouble. It merely points out the difficulty. The
+trouble will end only when the masses and classes of Hindus have rid themselves
+of the sin of untouchability. A Hindu lover of Swaraj will as assiduously work
+for the amelioration of the lot of the ‘depressed’ classes as he works for
+Hindu-Muslim unity. We must treat them as our brothers and give them the same
+rights that we claim for ourselves.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE SIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is worthy of note that the subjects Committee accepted without any
+opposition the clause regarding the sin of untouchability. It is well that the
+National assembly passed the resolution stating that the removal of this blot
+on Hinduism was necessary for the attainment of Swaraj. The Devil succeeds only
+by receiving help from his fellows. He always takes advantage of the weakest
+spots in our natures in order to gain mastery over us. Even so does the
+Government retain its control over us through our weaknesses or vices. And if
+we would render ourselves proof against its machination, we must remove our
+weaknesses. It is for that reason that I have called non-co-operation a process
+of purification. As soon as that process is completed, this government must
+fall to pieces for want of the necessary environment, just as mosquitos cease
+to haunt a place whose cess-pools are filled up and dried.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Has not a just Nemesis overtaken us for the crime of untouchability? Have we
+not reaped as we have sown? Have we not practised Dwyerism and O’Dwyerism on
+our own kith and kin? We have segregated the ‘pariah’ and we are in turn
+segregated in the British Colonies. We deny him the use of public wells; we
+throw the leavings of our plates at him. His very shadow pollutes us. Indeed
+there is no charge that the ‘pariah’ cannot fling in our faces and which we do
+not fling in the faces of Englishmen.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+How is this blot on Hinduism to be removed? ‘Do unto others as you would that
+others should do unto you.’ I have often told English officials that, if they
+are friends and servants of India, they should come down from their pedestal,
+cease to be patrons, demonstrate by their loving deeds that they are in every
+respect our friends, and believe us to be equals in the same sense they believe
+fellow Englishmen to be their equals. After the experiences of the Punjab and
+the Khilafat, I have gone a step further and asked them to repent and to change
+their hearts. Even so is it necessary for us Hindus to repent of the wrong we
+have done, to alter our behaviour towards those whom we have ‘suppressed’ by a
+system as devilish as we believe the English system of the Government of India
+to be. We must not throw a few miserable schools at them; we must not adopt the
+air of superiority towards them. We must treat them as our blood brothers as
+they are in fact. We must return to them the inheritance of which we have
+robbed them. And this must not be the act of a few English-knowing reformers
+merely, but it must be a conscious voluntary effort on the part of the masses.
+We may not wait till eternity for this much belated reformation. We must aim at
+bringing it about within this year of grace, probation, preparation and
+<i>tapasya</i>. It is a reform not to follow <i>Swaraj</i> but to precede it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Untouchability is not a sanction of religion, it is a devise of Satan. The
+devil has always quoted scriptures. But scriptures cannot transcend reason and
+truth. They are intended to purify reason and illuminate truth. I am not going
+to burn a spotless horse because the Vedas are reported to have advised,
+tolerated, or sanctioned the sacrifice. For me the Vedas are divine and
+unwritten. ‘The letter killeth.’ It is the spirit that giveth the light. And
+the spirit of the Vedas is purity, truth, innocence, chastity, humility,
+simplicity, forgiveness, godliness, and all that makes a man or woman noble and
+brave. There is neither nobility nor bravery in treating the great and
+uncomplaining scavengers of the nation as worse than dogs to be despised and
+spat upon. Would that God gave us the strength and the wisdom to become
+voluntary scavengers of the nation as the ‘suppressed’ classes are forced to
+be. There are Augean stables enough and to spare for us to clean.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap07"></a>VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD</h2>
+
+<h3>INDIANS ABROAD</h3>
+
+<p>
+The prejudice against Indian settlers outside India is showing itself in a
+variety of ways: Under the impudent suggestion of sedition the Fiji Government
+has deported Mr. Manilal Doctor who with his brave and cultured wife has been
+rendering assistance to the poor indentured Indians of Fiji in a variety of
+ways. The whole trouble has arisen over the strike of the labourers in Fiji.
+Indentures have been canceled, but the spirit of slavery is by no means dead.
+We do not know the genesis of the strike; we do not know that the strikers have
+done no wrong. But we do know what is behind when a charge of sedition is
+brought against the strikers and their friends. The readers must remember that
+the Government that has scented sedition in the recent upheaval in Fiji is the
+Government that had the hardihood to libel Mr. Andrew’s character. What can be
+the meaning of sedition in connection with the Fiji strikers and Mr. Manilal
+Doctor? Did they and he want to seize the reins of Government? Did they want
+any power in that country? They struck for elementary freedom. And it is a
+prostitution of terms to use the word sedition in such connection. The strikers
+may have been overhasty. Mr. Manilal Doctor may have misled them. If his advice
+bordered on the criminal he should have been tried. The information in our
+possession goes to show that he has been strictly constitutional. Our point,
+however, is that it is an abuse of power for the Fiji Government to have
+deported Mr. Manilal Doctor without a trial. It is wrong in principle to
+deprive a person of his liberty on mere suspicion and without giving him an
+opportunity of clearing his character. Mr. Manilal Doctor, be it remembered,
+has for years past made Fiji his home. He has, we believe, bought property
+there. He has children born in Fiji. Have the children no rights? Has the wife
+none? May a promising career be ruined at the bidding of a lawless Government?
+Has Mr. Manilal Doctor been compensated for the losses he must sustain? We
+trust that the Government of India which has endeavoured to protect the rights
+of Indian settlers abroad will take up the question of Mr. Doctor’s
+deportation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nor is Fiji the only place where the spirit of lawlessness among the powerful
+has come to the surface. Indians of (the late) German East Africa find
+themselves in a worse position than heretofore. They state that even their
+property is not safe. They have to pay all kinds of dues on passports. They are
+hampered in their trade. They are not able even to send money orders.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In British East Africa the cloud is perhaps the thickest. The European settlers
+there are doing their utmost to deprive the Indian settlers of practically
+every right they have hitherto possessed. An attempt is being made to compass
+their ruin both by legislative enactment and administrative action.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In South Africa every Indian who has anything to do with that part of the
+British Dominions is watching with bated breath the progress of commission that
+is now sitting.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Government of India have no easy job in protecting the interests of Indian
+settlers in these various parts of His Majesty’s dominions. They will be able
+to do so only by following the firmest and the most consistent policy. Justice
+is admittedly on the side of the Indian settlers. But they are the weak party.
+A strong agitation in India followed by strong action by the Government of
+India can alone save the situation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>INDIANS OVERSEAS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The meeting held at the Excelsior Theatre in Bombay to pass resolutions
+regarding East Africa and Fiji, and presided over by Sir Narayan Chandavarkar,
+was an impressive gathering. The Theatre was filled to overflowing. Mr.
+Andrews’ speech made clear what is needed. Both the political and the civil
+rights of Indians of East Africa are at stake. Mr. Anantani, himself an East
+African settler, showed in a forceful speech that the Indians were the pioneer
+settlers. An Indian sailor named Kano directed the celebrated Vasco De Gama to
+India. He added amid applause that Stanley’s expedition for the search and
+relief of Dr. Livingstone was also fitted out by Indians. Indian workmen had
+built the Uganda Railway at much peril to their lives. An Indian contractor had
+taken the contract. Indian artisans had supplied the skill. And now their
+countrymen were in danger of being debarred from its use.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The uplands of East Africa have been declared a Colony and the lowlands a
+Protectorate. There is a sinister significance attached to the declaration. The
+Colonial system gives the Europeans larger powers. It will tax all the
+resources of the Government of India to prevent the healthy uplands from
+becoming a whiteman’s preserve and the Indians from being relegated to the
+swampy lowlands.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The question of franchise will soon become a burning one. It will be suicidal
+to divide the electorate or to appoint Indians by nomination. There must be one
+general electoral roll applying the same qualifications to all the voters. This
+principle, as Mr. Andrews reminded the meeting, had worked well at the Cape.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second part of the East African resolution shows the condition of our
+countrymen in the late German East Africa. Indian soldiers fought there and now
+the position of Indians is worse than under German rule. H.H. the Agakhan
+suggested that German East Africa should be administered from India. Sir
+Theodore Morison would have couped up all Indians in German East Africa. The
+result was that both the proposals went by the board and the expected has
+happened. The greed of the English speculator has prevailed and he is trying to
+squeeze out the Indian. What will the Government of India protect? Has it the
+will to do so? Is not India itself being exploited? Mr. Jehangir Petit recalled
+the late Mr. Gokhale’s views that we were not to expect a full satisfaction
+regarding the status of our countrymen across the seas until we had put our own
+house in order. Helots in our own country, how could we do better outside? Mr.
+Petit wants systematic and severe retaliation. In my opinion, retaliation is a
+double-edged weapon. It does not fail to hurt the user if it also hurts the
+party against whom it is used. And who is to give effect to retaliation? It is
+too much to expect an English Government to adopt effective retaliation against
+their own people. They will expostulate, they will remonstrate, but they will
+not go to war with their own Colonies. For the logical outcome of retaliation
+must mean war, if retaliation will not answer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us face the facts frankly. The problem is difficult alike for Englishmen
+and for us. The Englishmen and Indians do not agree in the Colonies. The
+Englishmen do not want us where they can live. Their civilisation is different
+from ours. The two cannot coalesce until there is mutual respect. The
+Englishman considers himself to belong to the ruling race. The Indian struggles
+to think that he does not belong to the subject race and in the very act of
+thinking admits his subjection. We must then attain equality at home before we
+can make any real impression abroad.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This is not to say that we must not strive to do better abroad whilst we are
+ill at ease in our own home. We must preserve, we must help our countrymen who
+have settled outside India. Only if we recognise the true situation, we and our
+countrymen abroad will learn to be patient and know that our chief energy must
+be concentrated on a betterment of our position at home. If we can raise our
+status here to that of equal partners not in name but in reality so that every
+Indian might feel it, all else must follow as a matter of course.
+</p>
+
+<h3>PARIAHS OF THE EMPIRE</h3>
+
+<p>
+The memorable Conference at Gujrat in its resolution on the status of Indians
+abroad has given it as its opinion that even this question may become one more
+reason for non-co-operation. And so it may. Nowhere has there been such open
+defiance of every canon of justice and propriety as in the shameless decision
+of confiscation of Indian rights in the Kenia Colony announced by its Governor.
+This decision has been supported by Lord Milnor and Mr. Montagu. And his Indian
+colleagues are satisfied with the decision. Indians, who have made East Africa,
+who out-number the English, are deprived practically of the right of
+representation on the Council. They are to be segregated in parts not habitable
+by the English. They are to have neither the political nor the material
+comfort. They are to become ‘Pariahs’ in a country made by their own labour,
+wealth and intelligence. The Viceroy is pleased to say that he does not like
+the outlook and is considering the steps to be taken to vindicate the justice.
+He is not met with a new situation. The Indians of East Africa had warned him
+of the impending doom. And if His Excellency has not yet found the means of
+ensuring redress, he is not likely to do it in future. I would respectfully ask
+his Indian colleagues whether they can stand this robbery of their countrymen
+rights.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In South Africa the situation is not less disquieting. My misgivings seem to be
+proving true, and repatriation is more likely to prove compulsory than
+voluntary. It is a response to the anti-Asiatic agitation, not a measure of
+relief for indigent Indians. It looks very like a trap laid for the unwary
+Indian. The Union Government appears to be taking an unlawful advantage of a
+section of a relieving law designed for a purpose totally different from the
+one now intended.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As for Fiji, the crime against humanity is evidently to be hushed up. I do hope
+that unless an inquiry is to be made into the Fiji Martial Law doings, no
+Indian member will undertake to go to Fiji. The Government of India appear to
+have given an undertaking to send Indian labour to Fiji provided the commission
+that was to proceed there in order to investigate the condition on the spot
+returns with a favourable report.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For British Guiana I observe from the papers received from that quarter, that
+the mission that came here is already declaring that Indian labour will be
+forthcoming from India. There seems to me to be no real prospect for Indian
+enterprise in that part of the world. We are not wanted in any part of the
+British Dominion except as Pariahs to do the scavenging for the European
+settlers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The situation is clear. We are Pariahs in our own home. We get only what
+Government intend to give, not what we demand and have a right to. We may get
+the crumbs, never the loaf. I have seen large and tempting crumbs from a lavish
+table. And I have seen the eyes of our Pariahs—the shame of
+Hinduism—brightening to see those heavy crumbs filling their baskets. But the
+superior Hindu, who is filling the basket from a safe distance, knows that they
+are unfit for his own consumption. And so we in our turn may receive even
+Governorships which the real rulers no longer require or which they cannot
+retain with safety for their material interest—the political and material hold
+on India. It is time we realised our true status.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap08"></a>VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION</h2>
+
+<p>
+A writer in the “Times of India,” the Editor of that wonderful daily and Mrs.
+Besant have all in their own manner condemned non-co-operation conceived in
+connection with the Khilafat movement. All the three writings naturally discuss
+many side issues which I shall omit for the time being. I propose to answer two
+serious objections raised by the writers. The sobriety with which they are
+stated entitles them to a greater consideration than if they had been given in
+violent language. In non-co-operation, the writers think, it would be difficult
+if not impossible to avoid violence. Indeed violence, the “Times of India”
+editorial says, has already commenced in that ostracism has been resorted to in
+Calcutta and Delhi. Now I fear that ostracism to a certain extent is impossible
+to avoid. I remember in South Africa in the initial stages of the passive
+resistance campaign those who had fallen away were ostracised. Ostracism is
+violent or peaceful in according to the manner in which it is practised. A
+congregation may well refuse to recite prayers after a priest who prizes his
+title above his honour. But the ostracism will become violent if the individual
+life of a person is made unbearable by insults innuendoes or abuse. The real
+danger of violence lies in the people resorting to non-co-operation becoming
+impatient and revengeful. This may happen, if, for instance, payment of taxes
+is suddenly withdrawn or if pressure is put upon soldiers to lay down their
+arms. I however do not fear any evil consequences, for the simple reason that
+every responsible Mahomedan understands that non-co-operation to be successful
+must be totally unattended with violence. The other objection raised is that
+those who may give up their service may have to starve. That is just a
+possibility but a remote one, for the committee will certainly make due
+provision for those who may suddenly find themselves out of employment. I
+propose however to examine the whole of the difficult question much more fully
+in a future issue and hope to show that if Indian-Mahomedan feeling is to be
+respected, there is nothing left but non-co-operation if the decision arrived
+at is adverse.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. MONTAGU ON THE KHILAFAT AGITATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Montagu does not like the Khilafat agitation that is daily gathering force.
+In answer to questions put in the House of Commons, he is reported to have said
+that whilst he acknowledged that I had rendered distinguished services to the
+country in the past, he could not look upon my present attitude with equanimity
+and that it was not to be expected that I could now be treated as leniently as
+I was during the Rowlatt Act agitation. He added that he had every confidence
+in the central and the local Governments, that they were carefully watching the
+movement and that they had full power to deal with the situation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This statement of Mr. Montagu has been regarded in some quarters as a threat.
+It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the Government of India to
+re-establish the reign of terror if they chose. It is certainly inconsistent
+with his desire to base the Government on the goodwill of the people. At the
+same time if the Hunter Committee’s finding be true and if I was the cause of
+the disturbances last year, I was undoubtedly treated with exceptional
+leniency, I admit too that my activity this year is fraught with greater peril
+to the Empire as it is being conducted to-day than was last year’s activity.
+Non-co-operation in itself is more harmless than civil disobedience, but in its
+effect it is far more dangerous for the Government than civil disobedience.
+Non-co-operation is intended so far to paralyse the Government, as to compel
+justice from it. If it is carried to the extreme point, it can bring the
+Government to a standstill.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I did not
+come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though I had not
+fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and that I could not
+plead ‘not guilty’ if I was charged under it. For I must admit that I can
+pretend to no ‘affection’ for the present Government. And my speeches are
+intended to create ‘disaffection’ such that the people might consider it a
+shame to assist or co-operate with a Government that had forfeited all title to
+confidence, respect or support.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government. The
+latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by the former.
+And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of terrorism and
+emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter. British ministers have
+broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded the feelings of the seventy
+million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men and women were insulted by the
+insolent officers of the Punjab Government. Their wrongs not only unrighted but
+the very officers who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain
+office under the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could command
+for co-operation with the Government and for response to the wishes expressed
+in the Royal Proclamation; I did so because I honestly believed that a new era
+was about to begin, and that the old spirit of fear, distrust and consequent
+terrorism was about to give place to the new spirit of respect, trust and
+good-will. I sincerely believed that the Mussalman sentiment would be placated
+and that the officers that had misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the
+Punjab would be at least dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to
+feel that a Government that had always been found quick (and rightly) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents’ misdeeds. But to my
+amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present representatives of the
+Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous. They have no real regard for the
+wishes of the people of India and they count Indian honour as of little
+consequence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it is
+now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be a witness
+to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right in threatening
+me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in endangering the existence of
+the Government. For that must be the result if my activity bears fruit. My only
+regret is that inasmuch as Mr. Montagu admits my past services, he might have
+perceived that there must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a
+well-wisher like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussulmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed
+I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection towards an
+unjust Government I have rendered greater services to the Empire than I am
+already credited with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve of my activity is
+clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of my liberty, should
+the Government of India deem it to be their duty to take it away. A citizen has
+no right to resist such restriction imposed in accordance with the laws of the
+State to which he belongs. Much less have those who sympathize with him. In my
+case there can be no question of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the
+Government to the extent of trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For
+my supporters, therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It
+means the beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to stop
+the progress of non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest, the
+Government must imprison others or grant the people’s wish in order to gain
+their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the people even
+under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore it is I or any one
+else who is arrested during the campaign, the first condition of success is
+that there must be no resentment shown against it. We cannot imperil the very
+existence of a Government and quarrel with its attempt to save itself by
+punishing those who place it in danger.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AT THE CALL OF THE COUNTRY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dr. Sapru delivered before the Khilafat Conference at Allahabad an impassioned
+address sympathising with the Mussulmans in their trouble but dissuaded them
+from embarking on non-co-operation. He was frankly unable to suggest a
+substitute but was emphatically of opinion that whether there was a substitute
+or not non-co-operation was a remedy worse than the disease. He said further
+that Mussulmans will be taking upon their shoulders, a serious responsibility,
+if whilst they appealed to the ignorant masses to join them, they could not
+appeal to the Indian judges to resign and if they did they would not succeed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I acknowledge the force of Dr. Sapru’s last argument. At the back of Dr.
+Sapru’s mind is the fear that non-co-operation by the ignorant people would
+lead to distress and chaos and would do no good. In my opinion any
+non-co-operation is bound to do some good. Even the Viceragal door-keeper
+saying, ‘Please Sir, I can serve the Government no longer because it has hurt
+my national honour’ and resigning is a step mightier and more effective than
+the mightiest speech declaiming against the Government for its injustice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nevertheless it would be wrong to appeal to the door-keeper until one has
+appealed to the highest in the land. And as I propose, if the necessity arose,
+to ask the door-keepers of the Government to dissociate themselves from an
+unjust Government I propose now to address, an appeal to the Judges and the
+Executive Councillors to join the protest that is rising from all over India
+against the double wrong done to India, on the Khilafat and the Punjab
+question. In both, national honour is involved.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I take it that these gentlemen have entered upon their high offices not for the
+sake of emolument, nor I hope for the sake of fame, but for the sake of serving
+their country. It was not for money, for they were earning more than they do
+now. It must not be for fame, for they cannot buy fame at the cost of national
+honour. The only consideration, that can at the present moment keep them in
+office must be service of the country.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When the people have faith in the government, when it represents the popular
+will, the judges and the executive officials possibly serve the country. But
+when that government does not represent the will of the people, when it
+supports dishonesty and terrorism, the judges and the executive officials by
+retaining office become instrument of dishonesty and terrorism. And the least
+therefore that these holders of high offices can do is to cease to become
+agents of a dishonest and terrorising government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For the judges, the objection will be raised that they are above politics, and
+so they are and should be. But the doctrine is true only in so far as the
+government is on the whole for the benefit of the people and at least
+represents the will of the majority. Not to take part in politics means not to
+take sides. But when a whole country has one mind, one will, when a whole
+country has been denied justice, it is no longer a question of party politics,
+it is a matter of life and death. It then becomes the duty of every citizen to
+refuse to serve a government which misbehaves and flouts national wish. The
+judges are at that moment bound to follow the nation if they are ultimately its
+servants.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There remains another argument to be examined. It applies to both the judges
+and the members of the executive. It will be urged that my appeal could only be
+meant for the Indians and what good can it do by Indians renouncing offices
+which have been won for the nation by hard struggle. I wish that I could make
+an effective appeal to the English as well as the Indians. But I confess that I
+have written with the mental reservation that the appeal is addressed only to
+the Indians. I must therefore examine the argument just stated. Whilst it is
+true that these offices have been secured after a prolonged struggle, they are
+of use not because of the struggle, but because they are intended to serve the
+nation. The moment they cease to possess that quality, they become useless and
+as in the present case harmful, no matter how hard-earned and therefore
+valuable they may have been at the outset.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I would submit too to our distinguished countrymen who occupy high offices that
+their giving up will bring the struggle to a speedy end and would probably
+obviate the danger attendant upon the masses being called upon to signify their
+disapproval by withdrawing co-operation. If the titleholders gave up their
+titles, if the holders of honorary offices gave up their appointment and if the
+high officials gave up their posts, and the would-be councillors boycotted the
+councils, the Government would quickly come to its senses and give effect to
+the people’s will. For the alternative before the Government then would be
+nothing but despotic rule pure and simple. That would probably mean military
+dictatorship. The world’s opinion has advanced so far that Britain dare not
+contemplate such dictatorship with equanimity. The taking of the steps
+suggested by me will constitute the peacefullest revolution the world has ever
+seen. Once the infallibility of non-co-operation is realised, there is an end
+to all bloodshed and violence in any shape or form.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Undoubtedly a cause must be grave to warrant the drastic method of national
+non-co-operation. I do say that the affront such as has been put upon Islam
+cannot be repeated for a century. Islam must rise now or ‘be fallen’ if not for
+ever, certainly for a century. And I cannot imagine a graver wrong than the
+massacre of Jallianwalla and the barbarity that followed it, the whitewash by
+the Hunter Committee, the dispatch of the Government of India, Mr. Montagu’s
+letter upholding the Viceroy and the then Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab,
+the refusal to remove officials who made of the lives of the Punjabis ‘a hell’
+during the Martial Law period. These act constitute a complete series of
+continuing wrongs against India which if India has any sense of honour, she
+must right at the sacrifice of all the material wealth she possesses. If she
+does not, she will have bartered her soul for a ‘mess of pottage.’
+</p>
+
+<h3>NON-CO-OPERATION EXPLAINED</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+A representative of Madras Mail called on Mr. M.K. Gandhi at his temporary
+residence in the Pursewalkam High road for an interview on the subject of
+non-co-operation. Mr. Gandhi, who has come to Madras on a tour to some of the
+principal Muslim centres in Southern India, was busy with a number of workers
+discussing his programme; but he expressed his readiness to answer questions on
+the chief topic which is agitating Muslims and Hindus.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“After your experience of the Satyagraha agitation last year, Mr. Gandhi, are
+you still hopeful and convinced of the wisdom of advising
+non-co-operation?”—“Certainly.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How do you consider conditions have altered since the Satyagraha movement of
+last year?”—“I consider that people are better disciplined now than they were
+before. In this I include even the masses who I have had opportunities of
+seeing in large numbers in various parts of the country.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And you are satisfied that the masses understand the spirit of
+Satyagraha?”—“Yes.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And that is why you are pressing on with the programme of
+non-co-operation?”—“Yes. Moreover, the danger that attended the civil
+disobedience part of Satyagraha does not apply to non-co-operation, because in
+non-co-operation we are not taking up civil disobedience of laws as a mass
+movement. The result hitherto has been most encouraging. For instance, people
+in Sindh and Delhi in spite of the irritating restrictions upon their liberty
+by the authorities have carried out the Committee’s instructions in regard to
+the Seditious Meetings Proclamation and to the prohibition of posting placards
+on the walls which we hold to be inoffensive but which the authorities consider
+to be offensive.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What is the pressure which you expect to bring to bear on the authorities if
+co-operation is withdrawn?”—“I believe, and everybody must grant, that no
+Government can exist for a single moment without the co-operation of the
+people, willing or forced, and if people suddenly withdraw their co-operation
+in every detail, the Government will come to a stand-still.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But is there not a big ‘If’ in it?”—“Certainly there is.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And how do you propose to succeed against the big ‘If’?”—“In my plan of
+campaign expediency has no room. If the Khilafat movement has really permeated
+the masses and the classes, there must be adequate response from the people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But are you not begging the question?”—“I am not begging the question, because
+so far as the data before me go, I believe that the Muslims keenly feel the
+Khilafat grievance. It remains to be seen whether their feeling is intense
+enough to evoke in them the measure of sacrifice adequate for successful
+non-co-operation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“That is, your survey of the conditions, you think, justifies your advising
+non-co-operation in the full conviction that you have behind you the support of
+the vast masses of the Mussalman population?”—“Yes.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This non-co-operation, you are satisfied, will extend to complete severance of
+co-operation with the Government?”—No; nor is it at the present moment my
+desire that it should. I am simply practising non-co-operation to the extent
+that is necessary to make the Government realise the depth of popular feeling
+in the matter and the dissatisfaction with the Government that all that could
+be done has not been done either by the Government of India or by the Imperial
+Government, whether on the Khilafat question or on the “Punjab question.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you Mr. Gandhi, realise that even amongst Mahomedans there are sections of
+people who are not enthusiastic over non-co-operation however much they may
+feel the wrong that has been done to their community?”—“Yes. But their number
+is smaller than those who are prepared to adopt non-co-operation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And yet does not the fact that there has not been an adequate response to your
+appeal for resignation of titles and offices and for boycott of elections of
+the Councils indicate that you may be placing more faith in their strength of
+conviction than is warranted?”—“I think not; for the reason that the stage has
+only just come into operation and our people are always most cautious and slow
+to move. Moreover, the first stage largely affects the uppermost strata of
+society, who represent a microscopic minority though they are undoubtedly an
+influential body of people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This upper class, you think, has sufficiently responded to your appeal?”—“I am
+unable to say either one way or the other at present. I shall be able to give a
+definite answer at the end of this month.”...
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you think that without one’s loyalty to the King and the Royal Family being
+questioned, one can advocate non-co-operation in connection with the Royal
+visit?” “Most decidedly; for the simple reason that if there is any disloyalty
+about the proposed boycott of the Prince’s visit, it is disloyalty to the
+Government of the day and not to the person of His Royal highness.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What do you think is to be gained by promoting this boycott in connection with
+the Royal visit?”—“Because I want to show that the people of India are not in
+sympathy with the Government of the day and that they strongly disapprove of
+the policy of the Government in regard to the Punjab and Khilafat, and even in
+respect of other important administrative measures. I consider that the visit
+of the Prince of Wales is a singularly good opportunity to the people to show
+their disapproval of the present Government. After all, the visit is calculated
+to have tremendous political results. It is not to be a non-political event,
+and seeing that the Government of India and the Imperial Government want to
+make the visit a political event of first class importance, namely, for the
+purpose of strengthening their hold upon India, I for one, consider that it is
+the bounden duty of the people to boycott the visit which is being engineered
+by the two Governments in their own interest which at the present moment is
+totally antagonistic to the people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you mean that you want this boycott promoted because you feel that the
+strengthening of the hold upon India is not desirable in the best interests of
+the country?”—“Yes. The strengthening of the hold of a Government so wicked as
+the present one is not desirable for the best interests of the people. Not that
+I want the bond between England and India to become loosened for the sake of
+loosening it but I want that bond to become strengthened only in so far as it
+adds to the welfare of India.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you think that non-co-operation and the non-boycott of the Legislative
+Councils consistent?”—“No; because a person who takes up the programme of
+non-co-operation cannot consistently stand for Councils.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Is non-co-operation, in your opinion, an end in itself or a means to an end,
+and if so, what is the end?” “It is a means to an end, the end being to make
+the present Government just, whereas it has become mostly unjust. Co-operation
+with a just Government is a duty; non-co-operation with an unjust Government is
+equally a duty.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Will you look with favour upon the proposal to enter the Councils and to carry
+on either obstructive tactics or to decline to take the oath of allegiance
+consistent with your non-co-operation?”—“No; as an accurate student of
+non-co-operation, I consider that such a proposal is inconsistent with the true
+spirit of non-co-operation. I have often said that a Government really thrives
+on obstruction and so far as the proposal not to take the oath of allegiance is
+concerned, I can really see no meaning in it; it amounts to a useless waste of
+valuable time and money.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“In other words, obstruction is no stage in non-co-operation?” —“No,”....
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Are you satisfied that all efforts at constitutional agitation have been
+exhausted and that non-co-operation is the only course left us?” “I do not
+consider non-co-operation to be unconstitutional remedies now left open to us,
+non-co-operation is the only one left for us.” “Do you consider it
+constitutional to adopt it with a view merely to paralyse
+Government?”—“Certainly, it is not unconstitutional, but a prudent man will not
+take all the steps that are constitutional if they are otherwise undesirable,
+nor do I advise that course. I am resorting to non-co-operation in progressive
+stages because I want to evolve true order out of untrue order. I am not going
+to take a single step in non-co-operation unless I am satisfied that the
+country is ready for that step, namely, non-co-operation will not be followed
+by anarchy or disorder.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How will you satisfy yourself anarchy will not follow?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“For instance, if I advise the police to lay down their arms, I shall have
+satisfied myself that we are able by voluntary assistance to protect ourselves
+against thieves and robbers. That was precisely what was done in Lahore and
+Amritsar last year by the citizens by means of volunteers when the Military and
+the police had withdrawn. Even where Government had not taken such measures in
+a place, for want of adequate force, I know people have successfully protected
+themselves.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“You have advised lawyers to non-co-operate by suspending their practice. What
+is your experience? Has the lawyers’ response to your appeal encouraged you to
+hope that you will be able to carry through all stages of non-co-operation with
+the help of such people?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“I cannot say that a large number has yet responded to my appeal. It is too
+early to say how many will respond. But I may say that I do not rely merely
+upon the lawyer class or highly educated men to enable the Committee to carry
+out all the stages of non-co-operation. My hope lies more with the masses so
+far as the later stages of non-co-operation are concerned.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August 1920</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY FOR NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is not without the greatest reluctance that I engage in a controversy with
+so learned a leader like Sir Narayan Chandavarkar. But in view of the fact that
+I am the author of the movement of non-co-operation, it becomes my painful duty
+to state my views even though they are opposed to those of the leaders whom I
+look upon with respect. I have just read during my travels in Malabar Sir
+Narayan’s rejoinder to my answer to the Bombay manifesto against
+non-co-operation. I regret to have to say that the rejoinder leaves me
+unconvinced. He and I seem to read the teachings of the Bible, the Gita and the
+Koran from different standpoints or we put different interpretations on them.
+We seem to understand the words Ahimsa, politics and religion differently. I
+shall try my best to make clear my meaning of the common terms and my reading
+of the different religious.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the outset let me assure Sir Narayan that I have not changed my views on
+Ahimsa. I still believe that man not having been given the power of creation
+does not possess the right of destroying the meanest creature that lives. The
+prerogative of destruction belongs solely to the creator of all that lives. I
+accept the interpretation of Ahimsa, namely, that it is not merely a negative
+State of harmlessness, but it is a positive state of love, of doing good even
+to the evil-doer. But it does not mean helping the evil-doer to continue the
+wrong or tolerating it by passive acquiescence. On the contrary love, the
+active state of Ahimsa, requires you to resist the wrong-doer by dissociating
+yourself from him even though it may offend him or injure him physically. Thus
+if my son lives a life of shame, I may not help him to do so by continuing to
+support him; on the contrary, my love for him requires me to withdraw all
+support from him although it may mean even his death. And the same love imposes
+on me the obligation of welcoming him to my bosom when he repents. But I may
+not by physical force compel my son to become good. That in my opinion is the
+moral of the story of the Prodigal Son.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation is not a passive state, it is an intensely active state—more
+active than physical resistance or violence. Passive resistance is a misnomer.
+Non-co-operation in the sense used by me must be non-violent and therefore
+neither punitive nor vindictive nor based on malice ill-will or hatred. It
+follows therefore that it would be sin for me to serve General Dyer and
+co-operate with him to shoot innocent men. But it will be an exercise of
+forgiveness or love for me to nurse him back to life, if he was suffering from
+a physical malady. I cannot use in this context the word co-operation as Sir
+Narayan would perhaps use it. I would co-operate a thousand times with this
+Government to wean it from its career of crime but I will not for a single
+moment co-operate with it to continue that career. And I would be guilty of
+wrong doing if I retained a title from it or “a service under it or supported
+its law-courts or schools.” Better for me a beggar’s bowl than the richest
+possession from hands stained with the blood of the innocents of Jallianwala.
+Better by far a warrant of imprisonment than honeyed words from those who have
+wantonly wounded the religious sentiment of my seventy million brothers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My reading of the Gita is diametrically opposed to Sir Narayan’s. I do not
+believe that the Gita teaches violence for doing good. It is pre-eminently a
+description of the duel that goes on in our own hearts. The divine author has
+used a historical incident for inculcating the lesson of doing one’s duty even
+at the peril of one’s life. It inculcates performance of duty irrespective of
+the consequences, for, we mortals, limited by our physical frames, are
+incapable of controlling actions save our own. The Gita distinguishes between
+the powers of light and darkness and demonstrates their incompatibility.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Jesus, in my humble opinion, was a prince among politicians. He did render unto
+Caesar that which was Caesar’s. He gave the devil his due. He ever shunned him
+and is reported never once to have yielded to his incantations. The politics of
+his time consisted in securing the welfare of the people by teaching them not
+to be seduced by the trinkets of the priests and the pharisees. The latter then
+controlled and moulded the life of the people. To-day the system of government
+is so devised as to affect every department of our life. It threatens our very
+existence. If therefore we want to conserve the welfare of the nation, we must
+religiously interest ourselves in the doing of the governors and exert a moral
+influence on them by insisting on their obeying the laws of morality. General
+Dyer did produce a ‘moral effect’ by an act of butchery. Those who are engaged
+in forwarding the movement of non-co-operation, hope to produce a moral effect
+by a process of self-denial, self-sacrifice and self-purification. It surprises
+me that Sir Narayan should speak of General Dyer’s massacre in the same breath
+as acts of non-co-operation. I have done my best to understand his meaning, but
+I am sorry to confess that I have failed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE INWARDNESS OF NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+I commend to the attention of the readers the thoughtful letter received from
+Miss Anne Marie Peterson. Miss Peterson is a lady who has been in India for
+some years and has closely followed Indian affairs. She is about to sever her
+connection with her mission for the purpose of giving herself to education that
+is truly national.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have not given the letter in full. I have omitted all personal references.
+But her argument has been left entirely untouched. The letter was not meant to
+be printed. It was written just after my Vellore speech. But it being
+intrinsically important, I asked the writer for her permission, which she
+gladly gave, for printing it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I publish it all the more gladly in that it enables me to show that the
+movement of non-co-operation is neither anti-Christian nor anti-English nor
+anti-European. It is a struggle between religion and irreligion, powers of
+light and powers of darkness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is my firm opinion that Europe to-day represents not the spirit of God or
+Christianity but the spirit of Satan. And Satan’s successes are the greatest
+when he appears with the name of God on his lips. Europe is to-day only
+nominally Christian. In reality it is worshipping Mammon. ‘It is easier for a
+camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the
+kingdom.’ Thus really spoke Jesus Christ. His so-called followers measure their
+moral progress by their material possessions. The very national anthem of
+England is anti-Christian. Jesus who asked his followers to love their enemies
+even as themselves, could not have sung of his enemies, ‘confound his enemies
+frustrate their knavish tricks.’ The last book that Dr. Wallace wrote set forth
+his deliberate conviction that the much vaunted advance of science had added
+not an inch to the moral stature of Europe. The last war however has shown, as
+nothing else has, the Satanic nature of the civilization that dominates Europe
+to day. Every canon of public morality has been broken by the victors in the
+name of virtue. No lie has been considered too foul to be uttered. The motive
+behind every crime is not religious or spiritual but grossly material. But the
+Mussalmans and the Hindus who are struggling against the Government have
+religion and honour as their motive. Even the cruel assassination which has
+just shocked the country is reported to have a religious motive behind it. It
+is certainly necessary to purge religion of its excrescences, but it is equally
+necessary to expose the hollowness of moral pretensions on the part of those
+who prefer material wealth to moral gain. It is easier to wean an ignorant
+fanatic from his error than a confirmed scoundrel from his scoundrelism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This however is no indictment against individuals or even nations. Thousands of
+individual Europeans are rising above their environment. I write of the
+tendency in Europe as reflected in her present leaders. England through her
+leaders is insolently crushing Indian religious and national sentiment under
+her heels. England under the false plea of self-determination is trying to
+exploit the oil fields of Mesopotamia which she is almost to leave because she
+has probably no choice. France through her leaders is lending her name to
+training Cannibals as soldiers and is shamelessly betraying her trust as a
+mandatory power by trying to kill the spirit of the Syrians. President Wilson
+has thrown on the scrap heap his precious fourteen points.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is this combination of evil forces which India is really fighting through
+non-violent non-cooperation. And those like Miss Peterson whether Christian or
+European, who feel that this error must be dethroned can exercise the privilege
+of doing so by joining the non-co-operation movement. With the honour of Islam
+is bound up the safety of religion itself and with the honour of India is bound
+up the honour of every nation known to be weak.
+</p>
+
+<h3>A MISSIONARY ON NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+The following letter has been received by Mr. Gandhi from Miss Anne Marie
+Peterson of the Danish Mission in Madras:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I cannot thank you enough for your kindness and the way in which you received
+me and I feel that meeting more or less decided my future. I have thrown myself
+at the feet of India. At the same time I know that in Christ alone is my abode
+and I have no longing and no desire but to live Him, my crucified Saviour, and
+reveal Him for those with whom I come in contact. I just cling to his feet and
+pray with tears that I may not disgrace him as we Christians have been doing by
+our behaviour in India. We go on crucifying Christ while we long to proclaim
+the Power of His resurrection by which He has conquered untruth and
+unrighteousness. If we who bear His name were true to Him, we would never bow
+ourselves before the Powers of this world, but we would always be on the side
+of the poor, the suffering and the oppressed. But we are not and therefore I
+feel myself under obligation and only to Christ but to India for His sake at
+this time of momentous importance for her future.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Truly it matters little what I, a lonely and insignificant person, may say or
+do. What is my protest against the common current, the race to which I belong
+is taking and (what grieves me more), which the missionary societies seem to
+follow? Even if a respectable number protested it would not be of any use. Yet
+were I alone against the whole world, I must follow my conscience and my God.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I therefore cannot but smile when I see people saying, you should have awaited
+the decision of the National Congress before starting the non-co-operation
+movement. You have a message for the country, and the Congress is the voice of
+the nation—its servant and not its master. A majority has no right simply
+because it is a majority.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But we must try to win the majority. And it is easy to see that now that
+Congress is going to be with you. Would it have done so if you had kept quiet
+and not lent your voice to the feelings of the people? Would the Congress have
+known its mind? I think not.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I myself was in much doubt before I heard you. But you convinced me. Not that I
+can feel much on the question of the Khilafat. I cannot. I can see what service
+you are doing to India, if you can prevent the Mahomedans from using the sword
+in order to take revenge and get their rights. I can see that if you unite the
+Hindus and the Mahomedans, it will be a master stroke. How I wish the Christian
+would also come forward and unite with you for the sake of their country and
+the honour not only of their Motherland but of Christ. I may not feel much for
+Turkey, but I feel for India, and I can see she (India) has no other way to
+protest against being trampled down and crushed than non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I also want you to know that many in Denmark and all over the world, yes, I am
+sure every true Christian, will feel with and be in sympathy with India in the
+struggle which is now going on. God forbid that in the struggle between might
+and right, truth and untruth, the spirit and the flesh, there should be a
+division of races. There is not. The same struggle is going on all over the
+world. What does it matter then that we are a few? God is on our side.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Brute force often seems to get the upper hand but righteousness always has and
+always shall conquer, be it even through much suffering, and what may even
+appear to be a defeat. Christ conquered, when the world crucified Him. Blessed
+are the meek; they shall inherit the earth.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When I read your speech given at Madras it struck me that it should be printed
+as a pamphlet in English, Tamil, Hindustani and all the most used languages and
+then spread to every nook and corner of India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The non-co-operation movement once started must be worked so as to become
+successful. If it is not, I dread to think of the consequences. But you cannot
+expect it to win in a day or two. It must take time and you will not despair if
+you do not reach your goal in a hurry. For those who have faith there is no
+haste.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Now for the withdrawal of the children and students from Government schools, I
+think, it a most important step. Taking the Government help (even if it be your
+money they pay you back), we must submit to its scheme, its rules and
+regulation. India and we who love her have come to the conclusion that the
+education the foreign Government has given you is not healthy for India and can
+certainly never make for her real growth. This movement would lead to a
+spontaneous rise of national schools. Let them be a few but let them spring up
+through self-sacrifice. Only by indigenous education can India be truly
+uplifted. Why this appeals so much to me is perhaps because I belong to the
+part of the Danish people who started their own independent, indigenous
+national schools. The Danish Free Schools and Folk-High-Schools, of which you
+may have heard, were started against the opposition and persecution of the
+State. The organisers won and thus have regenerated the nation. With my truly
+heartfelt thanks and prayers for you.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am, Your sincerely, Anne Marie.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HOW TO WORK NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Perhaps the best way of answering the fears and criticism as to
+non-co-operation is to elaborate more fully the scheme of non-co-operation. The
+critics seem to imagine that the organisers propose to give effect to the whole
+scheme at once. The fact however is that the organisers have fixed definite,
+progressive four stages. The first is the giving up of titles and resignation
+of honorary posts. If there is no response or if the response received is not
+effective, recourse will be had to the second stage. The second stage involves
+much previous arrangement. Certainly not a single servant will be called out
+unless he is either capable of supporting himself and his dependents or the
+Khilafat Committee is able to bear the burden. All the classes of servants will
+not be called out at once and never will any pressure be put upon a single
+servant to withdraw himself from the Government service. Nor will a single
+private employee be touched for the simple reason that the movement is not
+anti-English. It is not even anti-Government. Co-operation is to be withdrawn
+because the people must not be party to a wrong—a broken pledge—a violation of
+deep religious sentiment. Naturally, the movement will receive a check, if
+there is any undue influence brought to bear upon any Government servant or if
+any violence is used or countenanced by any member of the Khilafat Committee.
+The second stage must be entirely successful, if the response is at all on an
+adequate scale. For no Government—much less the Indian Government—can subsist
+if the people cease to serve it. The withdrawal therefore of the police and the
+military—the third stage—is a distant goal. The organisers however wanted to be
+fair, open and above suspicion. They did not want to keep back from the
+Government or the public a single step they had in contemplation even as a
+remote contingency. The fourth, <i>i.e.,</i> suspension of taxes is still more
+remote. The organisers recognise that suspension of general taxation is fraught
+with the greatest danger. It is likely to bring a sensitive class in conflict
+with the police. They are therefore not likely to embark upon it, unless they
+can do so with the assurance that there will be no violence offered by the
+people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I admit as I have already done that non-co-operation is not unattended with
+risk, but the risk of supineness in the face of a grave issue is infinitely
+greater than the danger of violence ensuing form organizing non-co-operation.
+To do nothing is to invite violence for a certainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is easy enough to pass resolutions or write articles condemning
+non-co-operation. But it is no easy task to restrain the fury of a people
+incensed by a deep sense of wrong. I urge those who talk or work against
+non-co-operation to descend from their chairs and go down to the people, learn
+their feelings and write, if they have the heart against non-co-operation. They
+will find, as I have found that the only way to avoid violence is to enable
+them to give such expression to their feelings as to compel redress. I have
+found nothing save non-co-operation. It is logical and harmless. It is the
+inherent right of a subject to refuse to assist a Government that will not
+listen to him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation as a voluntary movement can only succeed, if the feeling is
+genuine and strong enough to make people suffer to the utmost. If the religious
+sentiment of the Mahomedans is deeply hurt and if the Hindus entertain
+neighbourly regard towards their Muslim brethren, they will both count no cost
+too great for achieving the end. Non-co-operation will not only be an effective
+remedy but will also be an effective test of the sincerity of the Muslim claim
+and the Hindu profession of friendship.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is however one formidable argument urged by friends against my joining
+the Khilafat movement. They say that it ill-becomes me, a friend of the English
+and an admirer of the British constitution, to join hands with those who are
+to-day filled with nothing but ill-will against the English. I am sorry to have
+to confess that the ordinary Mahomedan entertains to-day no affection for
+Englishmen. He considers, not without some cause, that they have not played the
+game. But if I am friendly towards Englishmen, I am no less so towards my
+countrymen, the Mahomedans. And as such they have a greater claim upon my
+attention than Englishmen. My personal religion however enables me to serve my
+countrymen without hurting Englishmen or for that matter anybody else. What I
+am not prepared to do to my blood-brother I would not do to an Englishman, I
+would not injure him to gain a kingdom. But I would withdraw co-operation from
+him if it becomes necessary as I had withdrawn from my own brother (now
+deceased) when it became necessary. I serve the Empire by refusing to partake
+in its wrong. William Stead offered public prayers for British reverses at the
+time of the Boer war because he considered that the nation to which he belonged
+was engaged in an unrighteous war. The present Prime Minister risked his life
+in opposing that war and did everything he could to obstruct his own Government
+in its prosecution. And to-day if I have thrown in my lot with the Mahomedans,
+a large number of whom, bear no friendly feelings towards the British, I have
+done so frankly as a friend of the British and with the object of gaining
+justice and of thereby showing the capacity of the British constitution to
+respond to every honest determination when it is coupled with suffering, I hope
+by my ‘alliance’ with the Mahomedans to achieve a threefold end—to obtain
+justice in the face of odds with the method of Satyagrah and to show its
+efficacy over all other methods, to secure Mahomedan friendship for the Hindus
+and thereby internal peace also, and last but not least to transform ill-will
+into affection for the British and their constitution which in spite of the
+imperfections weathered many a storm. I may fail in achieving any of the ends.
+I can but attempt. God alone can grant success. It will not be denied that the
+ends are all worthy. I invite Hindus and Englishman to join me in a
+full-hearted manner in shouldering the burden the Mahomedans of India are
+carrying. Theirs is admittedly a just fight. The Viceroy, the Secretary of
+State, the Maharaja of Bikuner and Lord Sinha have testified to it. Time has
+arrived to make good the testimony. People with a just cause are never
+satisfied with a mere protest. They have been known to die for it. Are a
+high-spirited people like the Mahomedans expected to do less?
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MADRAS</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Addressing a huge concourse of people of the city of Madras Hindus and
+Mahomedans numbering over 50,000, assembled on the South Beach opposite to the
+Presidency College, Madras, on the 12th August 1920, Mahatma Gandhi spoke as
+follows:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and Friends,—Like last year, I have to ask your forgiveness that I
+should have to speak being seated. Whilst my voice has become stronger than it
+was last year, my body is still weak; and if I were to attempt to speak to you
+standing, I could not hold on for very many minutes before the whole frame
+would shake. I hope, therefore, that you will grant me permission to speak
+seated. I have sat here to address you on a most important question, probably a
+question whose importance we have not measured up to now.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LOKAMANYA TILAK</h4>
+
+<p>
+But before I approach that question on this dear old beach of Madras, you will
+expect me—you will want me—to offer my tribute to the great departed, Lokamanya
+Tilak Maharaj (loud and prolonged cheers). I would ask this great assembly to
+listen to me in silence. I have come to make an appeal to your hearts and to
+your reason and I could not do so unless you were prepared to listen to
+whatever I have to say in absolute silence. I wish to offer my tribute to the
+departed patriot and I think that I cannot do better than say that his death,
+as his life, has poured new vigour into the country. If you were present as I
+was present at that great funeral procession, you would realise with me the
+meaning of my words. Mr. Tilak lived for his country. The inspiration of his
+life was freedom for his country which he called Swaraj the inspiration of his
+death-bed was also freedom for his country. And it was that which gave him such
+marvellous hold upon his countrymen; it was that which commanded the adoration
+not of a few chosen Indians belonging to the upper strata of society but of
+millions of his countrymen. His life was one long sustained piece of
+self-sacrifice. He began that life of discipline and self-sacrifice in 1879 and
+he continued that life up to the end of his day, and that was the secret of his
+hold upon his country. He not only knew what he wanted for his country but also
+how to live for his country and how to die for his country. I hope then that
+whatever I say this evening to this vast mass of people, will bear fruit in
+that same sacrifice for which the life of Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj stands. His
+life, if it teaches us anything whatsoever, teaches one supreme lesson: that if
+we want to do anything whatsoever for our country we can do so not by speeches,
+however grand, eloquent and convincing they may be, but only by sacrifice at
+the back of every act of our life. I have come to ask everyone of you whether
+you are ready and willing to give sufficiently for your country’s sake for
+country’s honour and for religion. I have boundless faith in you, the citizens
+of Madras, and the people of this great presidency, a faith which I began to
+cultivate in the year 1903 when I first made acquaintance with the Tamil
+labourers in South Africa; and I hope that in these hours of our trial, this
+province will not be second to any other in India, and that it will lead in
+this spirit of self-sacrifice and will translate every word into action.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NEED FOR NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+What is this non-co-operation, about which you have heard so much, and why do
+we want to offer this non-co-operation? I wish to go for the time being into
+the why. Here are two things before this country: the first and the foremost is
+the Khilafat question. On this the heart of the Mussalmans of India has become
+lascerated. British pledges given after the greatest deliberation by the Prime
+Minister of England in the name of the English nation, have been dragged into
+the mire. The promises given to Moslem India on the strength of which, the
+consideration that was expected by the British nation was exacted, have been
+broken, and the great religion of Islam has been placed in danger. The
+Mussalmans hold—and I venture to think they rightly hold—that so long as
+British promises remain unfulfilled, so long is it impossible for them to
+tender whole-hearted fealty and loyalty to the British connection; and if it is
+to be a choice for a devout Mussalman between loyalty to the British connection
+and loyalty to his Code and Prophet, he will not require a second to make his
+choice,—and he has declared his choice. The Mussalmans say frankly openly and
+honourably to the whole world that if the British Ministers and the British
+nation do not fulfil the pledges given to them and do not wish to regard with
+respect the sentiments of 70 millions of the inhabitants of India who profess
+the faith of Islam, it will be impossible for them to retain Islamic loyalty.
+It is a question, then for the rest of the Indian population to consider
+whether they want to perform a neighbourly duty by their Mussalman countrymen,
+and if they do, they have an opportunity of a lifetime which will not occur for
+another hundred years, to show their good-will, fellowship and friendship and
+to prove what they have been saying for all these long years that the Mussalman
+is the brother of the Hindu. If the Hindu regards that before the connection
+with the British nation comes his natural connection with his Moslem brother,
+then I say to you that if you find that the Moslem claim is just, that it is
+based upon real sentiment, and that at its back ground is this great religious
+feeling, you cannot do otherwise than help the Mussalman through and through,
+so long as their cause remains just, and the means for attaining the end
+remains equally just, honourable and free from harm to India. These are the
+plain conditions which the Indian Mussalmans have accepted; and it was when
+they saw that they could accept the proferred aid of the Hindus, that they
+could always justify the cause and the means before the whole world, that they
+decided to accept the proferred hand of fellowship. It is then for the Hindus
+and Mahomedans to offer a united front to the whole of the Christian powers of
+Europe and tell them that weak as India is, India has still got the capacity of
+preserving her self-respect, she still knows how to die for her religion and
+for her self-respect.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That is the Khilafat in a nut-shell; but you have also got the Punjab. The
+Punjab has wounded the heart of India as no other question has for the past
+century. I do not exclude from my calculation the Mutiny of 1857. Whatever
+hardships India had to suffer during the Mutiny, the insult that was attempted
+to be offered to her during the passage of the Rowlatt legislation and that
+which was offered after its passage were unparalleled in Indian history. It is
+because you want justice from the British nation in connection with the Punjab
+atrocities: you have to devise, ways and means as to how you can get this
+justice. The House of Commons, the House of Lords, Mr. Montagu, the Viceroy of
+India, everyone of them know what the feeling of India is on this Khilafat
+question and on that of the Punjab; the debates in both the Houses of
+Parliament, the action of Mr. Montagu and that of the Viceroy have demonstrated
+to you completely that they are not willing to give the justice which is
+India’s due and which she demands. I suggest that our leaders have got to find
+a way out of this great difficulty and unless we have made ourselves even with
+the British rulers in India and unless we have gained a measure of self-respect
+at the hands of the British rulers in India, no connection, and no friendly
+intercourse is possible between them and ourselves. I, therefore, venture to
+suggest this beautiful and unanswerable method of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>IS IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL?</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have been told that non-co-operation is unconstitutional. I venture to deny
+that it is unconstitutional. On the contrary, I hold that non-co-operation is a
+just and religious doctrine; it is the inherent right of every human being and
+it is perfectly constitutional. A great lover of the British Empire has said
+that under the British constitution even a successful rebellion is perfectly
+constitutional and he quotes historical instances, which I cannot deny, in
+support of his claim. I do not claim any constitutionality for a rebellion
+successful or otherwise, so long as that rebellion means in the ordinary sense
+of the term, what it does mean namely wresting justice by violent means. On the
+contrary, I have said it repeatedly to my countrymen that violence whatever end
+it may serve in Europe, will never serve us in India. My brother and friend
+Shaukat Ali believes in methods of violence; and if it was in his power to draw
+the sword against the British Empire, I know that he has got the courage of a
+man and he has got also the wisdom to see that he should offer that battle to
+the British Empire. But because he recognises as a true soldier that means of
+violence are not open to India, he sides with me accepting my humble assistance
+and pledges his word that so long as I am with him and so long as he believes
+in the doctrine, so long will he not harbour even the idea of violence against
+any single Englishman or any single man on earth. I am here to tell you that he
+has been as true as his word and has kept it religiously. I am here to bear
+witness that he has been following out this plan of non-violent
+Non-co-operation to the very letter and I am asking India to follow this
+non-violent non-co-operation. I tell you that there is not a better soldier
+living in our ranks in British India than Shaukat Ali. When the time for the
+drawing of the sword comes, if it ever comes, you will find him drawing that
+sword and you will find me retiring to the jungles of Hindustan. As soon as
+India accepts the doctrine of the sword, my life as an Indian is finished. It
+is because I believe in a mission special to India and it is because I believe
+that the ancients of India after centuries of experience have found out that
+the true thing for any human being on earth is not justice based on violence
+but justice based on sacrifice of self, justice based on Yagna and Kurbani,—I
+cling to that doctrine and I shall cling to it for ever,—it is for that reason
+I tell you that whilst my friend believes also in the doctrine of violence and
+has adopted the doctrine of non-violence as a weapon of the weak, I believe in
+the doctrine of non-violence as a weapon of the strongest. I believe that a man
+is the strongest soldier for daring to die unarmed with his breast bare before
+the enemy. So much for the non-violent part of non-co-operation. I therefore,
+venture to suggest to my learned countrymen that so long as the doctrine of
+non-co-operation remains non-violent, so long there is nothing unconstitutional
+in that doctrine.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I ask further, is it unconstitutional for me to say to the British Government
+‘I refuse to serve you?’ Is it unconstitutional for our worthy Chairman to
+return with every respect all the titles that he has ever held from the
+Government? Is it unconstitutional for any parent to withdraw his children from
+a Government or aided school? Is it unconstitutional for a lawyer to say ‘I
+shall no longer support the arm of the law so long as that arm of law is used
+not to raise me but to debase me’? Is it unconstitutional for a civil servant
+or for a judge to say, ‘I refuse to serve a Government which does not wish to
+respect the wishes of the whole people?’ I ask, is it unconstitutional for a
+policeman or for a soldier to tender his resignation when he knows that he is
+called to serve a Government which traduces his own countrymen? Is it
+unconstitutional for me to go to the ‘krishan,’ to the agriculturist, and say
+to him ‘it is not wise for you to pay any taxes if these taxes are used by the
+Government not to raise you but to weaken you?’ I hold and I venture to submit,
+that there is nothing unconstitutional in it. What is more, I have done every
+one of these things in my life and nobody has questioned the constitutional
+character of it. I was in Kaira working in the midst of 7 lakhs of
+agriculturists. They had all suspended the payment of taxes and the whole of
+India was at one with me. Nobody considered that it was unconstitutional. I
+submit that in the whole plan of non-co-operation, there is nothing
+unconstitutional. But I do venture to suggest that it will be highly
+unconstitutional in the midst of this unconstitutional Government,—in the midst
+of a nation which has built up its magnificent constitution,—for the people of
+India to become weak and to crawl on their belly—it will be highly
+unconstitutional for the people of India to pocket every insult that is offered
+to them; it is highly unconstitutional for the 70 millions of Mohamedans of
+India to submit to a violent wrong done to their religion; it is highly
+unconstitutional for the whole of India to sit still and co-operate with an
+unjust Government which has trodden under its feet the honour of the Punjab. I
+say to my countrymen so long as you have a sense of honour and so long as you
+wish to remain the descendants and defenders of the noble traditions that have
+been handed to you for generations after generations, it is unconstitutional
+for you not to non-co-operate and unconstitutional for you to co-operate with a
+Government which has become so unjust as our Government has become. I am not
+anti-English; I am not anti-British; I am not anti any Government; but I am
+anti-untruth—anti-humbug and anti-injustice. So long as the Government spells
+injustice, it may regard me as its enemy, implacable enemy. I had hoped at the
+Congress at Amritsar—I am speaking God’s truth before you—when I pleaded on
+bended knees before some of you for co-operation with the Government. I had
+full hope that the British ministers who are wise, as a rule, would placate the
+Mussalman sentiment that they would do full justice in the matter of the Punjab
+atrocities; and therefore, I said:—let us return good-will to the hand of
+fellowship that has been extended to us, which I then believed was extended to
+us through the Royal Proclamation. It was on that account that I pleaded for
+co-operation. But to-day that faith having gone and obliterated by the acts of
+the British ministers, I am here to plead not for futile obstruction in the
+Legislative council but for real substantial non-co-operation which would
+paralyse the mightiest Government on earth. That is what I stand for to-day.
+Until we have wrung justice, and until we have wrung our self-respect from
+unwilling hands and from unwilling pens there can be no co-operation. Our
+Shastras say and I say so with the greatest deference to all the greatest
+religious preceptors of India but without fear of contradiction, that our
+Shastras teach us that there shall be no co-operation between injustice and
+justice, between an unjust man and a justice-loving man, between truth and
+untruth. Co-operation is a duty only so long as Government protects your
+honour, and non-co-operation is an equal duty when the Government instead of
+protecting robs you of your honour. That is the doctrine of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NON-CO-OPERATION AND THE SPECIAL CONGRESS</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have been told that I should have waited for the declaration of the special
+Congress which is the mouth piece of the whole nation. I know that it is the
+mouthpiece of the whole nation. If it was for me, individual Gandhi, to wait, I
+would have waited for eternity. But I had in my hands a sacred trust. I was
+advising my Mussalman countrymen and for the time being I hold their honour in
+my hands. I dare not ask them to wait for any verdict but the verdict of their
+own Conscience. Do you suppose that Mussalmans can eat their own words, can
+withdraw from the honourable position they have taken up? If perchance—and God
+forbid that it should happen—the Special Congress decides against them, I would
+still advise my countrymen the Mussalmans to stand single handed and fight
+rather than yield to the attempted dishonour to their religion. It is therefore
+given to the Mussalmans to go to the Congress on bended knees and plead for
+support. But support or no support, it was not possible for them to wait for
+the Congress to give them the lead. They had to choose between futile violence,
+drawing of the naked sword and peaceful non-violent but effective
+non-co-operation, and they have made their choice. I venture further to say to
+you that if there is any body of men who feel as I do, the sacred character of
+non-co-operation, it is for you and me not to wait for the Congress but to act
+and to make it impossible for the Congress to give any other verdict. After all
+what is the Congress? The Congress is the collected voice of individuals who
+form it, and if the individuals go to the Congress with a united voice, that
+will be the verdict you will gain from the Congress. But if we go to the
+Congress with no opinion because we have none or because we are afraid to
+express it, then naturally we wait the verdict of the Congress. To those who
+are unable to make up their mind I say by all means wait. But for those who
+have seen the clear light as they see the lights in front of them, for them to
+wait is a sin. The Congress does not expect you to wait but it expects you to
+act so that the Congress can gauge properly the national feeling. So much for
+the Congress.
+</p>
+
+<h4>BOYCOTT OF THE COUNCILS</h4>
+
+<p>
+Among the details of non-co-operation I have placed in the foremost rank the
+boycott of the councils. Friends have quarrelled with me for the use of the
+word boycott, because I have disapproved—as I disapprove even now—boycott of
+British goods or any goods for that matter. But there, boycott has its own
+meaning and here boycott has its own meaning. I not only do not disapprove but
+approve of the boycott of the councils that are going to be formed next year.
+And why do I do it? The people—the masses,—require from us, the leaders, a
+clear lead. They do not want any equivocation from us. The suggestion that we
+should seek election and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance, would only
+make the nation distrust the leaders. It is not a clear lead to the nation. So
+I say to you, my countrymen, not to fall into this trap. We shall sell our
+country by adopting the method of seeking election and then not taking the oath
+of allegiance. We may find it difficult, and I frankly confess to you that I
+have not that trust in so many Indians making that declaration and standing by
+it. To-day I suggest to those who honestly hold the view—<i>viz</i>. that we
+should seek election and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance—I suggest
+to them that they will fall into a trap which they are preparing for themselves
+and for the nation. That is my view. I hold that if we want to give the nation
+the clearest possible lead, and if we want not to play with this great nation
+we must make it clear to this nation that we cannot take any favours, no matter
+how great they may be so long as those favours are accompanied by an injustice
+a double wrong, done to India not yet redressed. The first indispensable thing
+before we can receive any favours from them is that they should redress this
+double wrong. There is a Greek proverb which used to say “Beware of the Greek
+but especially beware of them when they bring gifts to you.” To-day from those
+ministers who are bent upon perpetuating the wrong to Islam and to the Punjab,
+I say we cannot accept gifts but we should be doubly careful lest we may not
+fall into the trap that they may have devised. I therefore suggest that we must
+not coquet with the council and must not have anything whatsoever to do with
+them. I am told that if we, who represent the national sentiment do not seek
+election, the Moderates who do not represent that sentiment will. I do not
+agree. I do not know what the Moderates represent and I do not know what the
+Nationalists represent. I know that there are good sheep and black sheep
+amongst the Moderates. I know that there are good sheep and black sheep amongst
+the Nationalists. I know that many Moderates hold honestly the view that it is
+a sin to resort to non-co-operation. I respectfully agree to differ from them.
+I do say to them also that they will fall into a trap which they will have
+devised if they seek election. But that does not affect my situation. If I feel
+in my heart of hearts that I ought not to go to the councils I ought at least
+to abide by this decision and it does not matter if ninety-nine other
+countrymen seek election. That is the only way in which public work can be
+done, and public opinion can be built. That is the only way in which reforms
+can be achieved and religion can be conserved. If it is a question of religious
+honour, whether I am one or among many I must stand upon my doctrine. Even if I
+should die in the attempt, it is worth dying for, than that I should live and
+deny my own doctrine. I suggest that it will be wrong on the part of any one to
+seek election to these Councils. If once we feel that we cannot co-operate with
+this Government, we have to commence from the top. We are the natural leaders
+of the people and we have acquired the right and the power to go to the nation
+and speak to it with the voice of non-co-operation. I therefore do suggest that
+it is inconsistent with non-co-operation to seek election to the Councils on
+any terms whatsoever.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LAWYERS AND NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have suggested another difficult matter, <i>viz.</i>, that the lawyers should
+suspend their practice. How should I do otherwise knowing so well how the
+Government had always been able to retain this power through the
+instrumentality of lawyers. It is perfectly true that it is the lawyers of
+to-day who are leading us, who are fighting the country’s battles, but when it
+comes to a matter of action against the Government, when it comes to a matter
+of paralysing the activity of the Government I know that the Government always
+look to the lawyers, however fine fighters they may have been to preserve their
+dignity and their self-respect. I therefore suggest to my lawyer friends that
+it is their duty to suspend their practice and to show to the Government that
+they will no longer retain their offices, because lawyers are considered to be
+honorary officers of the courts and therefore subject to their disciplinary
+jurisdiction. They must no longer retain these honorary offices if they want to
+withdraw on operation from Government. But what will happen to law and order?
+We shall evolve law and order through the instrumentality of these very
+lawyers. We shall promote arbitration courts and dispense justice, pure, simple
+home-made justice, swadeshi justice to our countrymen. That is what suspension
+of practice means.
+</p>
+
+<h4>PARENTS AND NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have suggested yet another difficulty—to withdraw our children from the
+Government schools and to ask collegiate students to withdraw from the College
+and to empty Government aided schools. How could I do otherwise? I want to
+gauge the national sentiment. I want to know whether the Mahomodans feel
+deeply. If they feel deeply they will understand in the twinkling of an eye,
+that it is not right for them to receive schooling from a Government in which
+they have lost all faith; and which they do not trust at all. How can I, if I
+do not want to help this Government, receive any help from that Government. I
+think that the schools and colleges are factories for making clerks and
+Government servants. I would not help this great factory for manufacturing
+clerks and servants if I want to withdraw co-operation from that Government.
+Look at it from any point of view you like. It is not possible for you to send
+your children to the schools and still believe in the doctrine of
+non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>THE DUTY OF TITLE HOLDERS</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have gone further. I have suggested that our title holders should give up
+their titles. How can they hold on to the titles and honour bestowed by the
+Government? They were at one time badges of honours when we believed that
+national honour was safe in their hands. But now they are no longer badges of
+honour but badges of dishonour and disgrace when we really believe that we
+cannot get justice from this Government. Every title holder holds his titles
+and honours as trustee for the nation and in this first step in the withdrawal
+of co-operation from the Government they should surrender their titles without
+a moment’s consideration. I suggest to my Mahomedan countrymen that if they
+fail in this primary duty they will certainly fail in non-co-operation unless
+the masses themselves reject the classes and take up non-co-operation in their
+own hands and are able to fight that battle even as the men of the French
+Revolution were able to take the reins of Government in their own hands leaving
+aside the leaders and marched to the banner of victory. I want no revolution. I
+want ordered progress. I want no disordered order. I want no chaos. I want real
+order to be evolved out of this chaos which is misrepresented to me as order.
+If it is order established by a tyrant in order to get hold of the tyrannical
+reins of Government I say that it is no order for me but it is disorder. I want
+to evolve justice out of this injustice. Therefore, I suggest to you the
+passive non-co-operation. If we would only realise the secret of this peaceful
+and infallible doctrine you will know and you will find that you will not want
+to use even an angry word when they lift the sword at you and you will not want
+even to lift your little finger, let alone a stick or a sword.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NON-CO-OPERATION—SERVICE TO THE EMPIRE</h4>
+
+<p>
+You may consider that I have spoken these words in anger because I have
+considered the ways of this Government immoral, unjust, debasing and
+untruthful. I use these adjectives with the greatest deliberation. I have used
+them for my own true brother with whom I was engaged in battle of
+non-co-operation for full 13 years and although the ashes cover the remains of
+my brother I tell you that I used to tell him that he was unjust when his plans
+were based upon immoral foundation. I used to tell him that he did not stand
+for truth. There was no anger in me, I told him this home truth because I loved
+him. In the same manner, I tell the British people that I love them, and that I
+want their association but I want that association on conditions well defined.
+I want my self-respect and I want my absolute equality with them. If I cannot
+gain that equality from the British people, I do not want that British
+connection. If I have to let the British people go and import temporary
+disorder and dislocation of national business, I will favour that disorder and
+dislocation than that I should have injustice from the hands of a great nation
+such as the British nation. You will find that by the time the whole chapter is
+closed that the successors of Mr. Montagu will give me the credit for having
+rendered the most distinguished service that I have yet rendered to the Empire,
+in having offered this non-co-operation and in having suggest the boycott, not
+of His Royal Highness the principle of Wales, but of boycott of a visit
+engineered by Government in order to tighten its hold on the national neck. I
+will not allow it even if I stand alone, if I cannot persuade this nation not
+to welcome that visit but will boycott that visit with all the power at my
+command. It is for that reason I stand before you and implore you to offer this
+religious battle, but it is not a battle offered to you by a visionary or a
+saint. I deny being a visionary. I do not accept the claim of saintliness. I am
+of the earth, earthy, a common gardener man as much as any one of you, probably
+much more than you are. I am prone to as many weaknesses as you are. But I have
+seen the world. I have lived in the world with my eyes open. I have gone
+through the most fiery ordeals that have fallen to the lot of man. I have gone
+through this discipline. I have understood the secret of my own sacred
+Hinduism. I have learnt the lesson that non-co-operation is the duty not merely
+of the saint but it is the duty of every ordinary citizen, who not know much,
+not caring to know much but wants to perform his ordinary household functions.
+The people of Europe touch even their masses, the poor people the doctrine of
+the sword. But the Rishis of India, those who have held the tradition of India
+have preached to the masses of India this doctrine, not of the sword, not of
+violence but of suffering, of self-suffering. And unless you and I am prepared
+to go through this primary lesson we are not ready even to offer the sword and
+that is the lesson my brother Shaukal Ali has imbibed to teach and that is why
+he to-day accepts my advice tendered to him in all prayerfulness and in all
+humility and says ‘long live non-co-operation.’ Please remember that even in
+England the little children were withdrawn from the schools; and colleges in
+Cambridge and Oxford were closed. Lawyers had left their desks and were
+fighting in the trenches. I do not present to you the trenches but I do ask you
+to go through the sacrifice that the men, women and the brave lads of England
+went through. Remember that you are offering battle to a nation which is
+saturated with their spirit of sacrifice whenever the occasion arises. Remember
+that the little band of Boers offered stubborn resistance to a mighty nation.
+But their lawyers had left their desks. Their mothers had withdrawn their
+children from the schools and colleges and the children had become the
+volunteers of the nation, I have seen them with these naked eyes of mine. I am
+asking my countrymen in India to follow no other gospel than the gospel of
+self-sacrifice which precedes every battle. Whether you belong to the school of
+violence or non-violence you will still have to go through the fire of
+sacrifice, and of discipline. May God grant you, may God grant our leaders the
+wisdom, the courage and the true knowledge to lead the nation to its cherished
+goal. May God grant the people of India the right path, the true vision and the
+ability and the courage to follow this path, difficult and yet easy, of
+sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT TRICHINOPOLY</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Mahatma Gandhi made the following speech at Trichinopoly on the 18th August
+1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I thank you on behalf of my brother Shaukat Ali and myself for the magnificent
+reception that the citizens of Trichinopoly have given to us. I thank you also
+for the many addresses that you have been good enough to present to us, but I
+must come to business.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is a great pleasure to me to renew your acquaintance for reasons that I need
+not give you. I expect great things from Trichinopoly, Madura and a few places
+I could name. I take it that you have read my address on the Madras Beach on
+non-co-operation. Without taking up your time in this great assembly, I wish to
+deal with one or two matters that arise out of Mr. S. Kasturiranga Iyongar’s
+speech. He says in effect that I should have waited for the Congress mandate on
+Non-co-operation. That was impossible, because the Mussulmans had and still
+have a duty, irrespective of the Hindus, to perform in reference to their own
+religion. It was impossible for them to wait for any mandate save the mandate
+of their own religion in a matter that vitally concerned the honour of Islam.
+It is therefore possible for them only to go to the Congress on bended knees
+with a clear cut programme of their own and ask the Congress to pronounce its
+blessings upon that programme and if they are not so fortunate as to secure the
+blessings of the National Assembly without meaning any disrespect to that
+assembly, it is their bounden duty to go on with their programme, and so it is
+the duty of every Hindu who considers his Mussalman brother as a brother who
+has a just cause which he wishes to vindicate, to throw in his lot with his
+Mussalman brother. Our leader does not quarrel with the principle of
+non-co-operation by itself, but he objects to the three principal details of
+non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>COUNCIL ELECTIONS</h4>
+
+<p>
+He considers that it is our duty to seek election to the Councils and fight our
+battle on the floor of the Council hall. I do not deny the possibility of a
+fight and a royal fight on the Council floor. We have done it for the last 35
+years, but I venture to suggest to you and to him, with all due respect, that
+it is not non-co-operation and it is not half as successful as non-co-operation
+can be. You cannot go to a class of people with a view to convince them by any
+fight—call it even obstruction—who have got a settled conviction and a settled
+policy to follow. It is in medical language an incompatible mixture out of
+which you can gain nothing, but if you totally boycott the Council, you create
+a public opinion in the country with reference to the Khilafat wrong and the
+Punjab wrong which will become totally irresistible. The first advantage of
+going to the Councils must be good-will on the part of the rulers. It is
+absolutely lacking. In the place of good-will you have got nothing but
+injustice but I must move on.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LAWYERS’ PRACTICE</h4>
+
+<p>
+I come now to the second objection of Mr. Kasturiranga Iyengar with reference
+to the suspension by lawyers of their practice. Milk is good in itself but it
+comes absolutely poisonous immediately a little bit of arsenic is added to it.
+Law courts are similarly good when justice is distilled through them on behalf
+of a Sovereign power which wants to do justice to its people. Law courts are
+one of the greatest symbols of power and in the battle of non-co-operation, you
+may not leave law courts untouched and claim to offer non-co-operation, but if
+you will read that objection carefully, you will find in that objection the
+great fear that the lawyers will not respond to the call that the country makes
+upon them, and it is just there that the beauty of non-co-operation comes in.
+If one lawyer alone suspends practice, it is so much to the good of the country
+and so if we are sure to deprive the Government of the power that it possess
+through its law courts, whether one lawyer takes it up or many, we must adopt
+that step.
+</p>
+
+<h4>GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS</h4>
+
+<p>
+He objects also to the plan of boycotting Government schools. I can only say
+what I have said with reference to lawyers that if we mean non-co-operation, we
+may not receive any favours from the Government, no matter how advantageous by
+themselves they may be. In a great struggle like this, it is not open to us to
+count how many schools will respond and how many parents will respond and just
+as a geometrical problem is difficult, because it does not admit of easy proof,
+so also because a certain stage in national evolution is difficult, you may not
+avoid that step without making the whole of the evolution a farce.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+We have had a great lesson in non-co-operation and co-operation. We had a
+lesson in non-co-operation when some young men began to fight there and it is a
+dangerous weapon. I have not the slightest doubt about it. One man with a
+determined will to non-co-operate can disturb a whole meeting and we had a
+physical demonstration of it to night but ours is non-violent, non-co-operation
+in which there can be no mistake whatsoever in the fundamental conditions are
+observed. If non-co-operation fails, it will not be for want of any inherent
+strength in it, but it will fall because there is no response to it, or because
+people have not sufficiently grasped its simple principles. You had also a
+practical demonstration of co-operation just now; that heavy chair went over
+the heads of so many people, because all wanted to lift their little hand to
+move that chair away from them and so was that heavier dome also removed from
+our sight by co-operation of man, woman and child. Everybody believes and knows
+that this Government of our exists only by the co-operation of the people and
+not by the force of arms it can wield and everyman with a sense of logic will
+tell you that the converse of that also is equally true that Government cannot
+stand if this co-operation on which it exists is withdrawn. Difficulties
+undoubtedly there are, we have hitherto learned how to sacrifice our voice and
+make speeches. We must also learn to sacrifice ease, money, comfort and that,
+we may learn form the Englishmen themselves. Every one who has studied English
+history knows that we are now engaged in a battle with a nation which is
+capable of great sacrifice and the three hundred millions of India cannot make
+their mark upon the world, or gain their self-respect without an adequate
+measure of sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h4>BOYCOTT OF BRITISH GOODS</h4>
+
+<p>
+Our friend has suggested the boycott of British or foreign goods. Boycott of
+all foreign goods is another name for Swadeshi. He thinks that there will be a
+greater response in the boycott of all foreign goods. With the experience of
+years behind me and with an intimate knowledge of the mercantile classes, I
+venture to tell you that boycott of foreign goods, or boycott of merely British
+goods is more impracticable than any of the stops I have suggested. Whereas in
+all the steps that I have ventured to suggest there is practically no sacrifice
+of money involved, in the boycott of British or foreign goods you are inviting
+your merchant princes to sacrifice their millions. It has got to be done, but
+it is an exceedingly low process. The same may be said of the steps that I have
+ventured to suggest, I know, but boycott of goods in conceived as a punishment
+and the punishment is only effective when it is inflicted. What I have ventured
+to suggest is not a punishment, but the performance of a sacred duty, a measure
+of self-denial from ourselves, and therefore it is effective from its very
+inception when it is undertaken even by one man and a substantial duty
+performed even by one single man lays the foundation of nations liberty.
+</p>
+
+<h4>CONCLUSION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I am most anxious for my nation, for my Mussalman brethren also, to understand
+that if they want to vindicate national honour or the honour of Islam, it will
+be vindicated without a shadow of doubt, not be conceiving a punishment or a
+series of punishments, but by an adequate measure of self-sacrifice. I wish to
+speak of all our leaders in terms of the greatest respect, but whatever respect
+we wish to pay them may not stop or arrest the progress of the country, and I
+am most anxious that the country at this very critical period of its history
+should make its choice. The choice clearly does not lie before you and me in
+wresting by force of arms the sceptre form the British nation, but the choice
+lies in suffering this double wrong of the Khilafat and the Punjab, in
+pocketing humiliation and in accepting national emasculation or vindication of
+India’s honour by sacrifice to-day by every man, woman and child and those who
+feel convinced of the rightness of things, we should make that choice to-night.
+So, citizens of Trichinopoly, you may not wait for the whole of India but you
+can enforce the first step of non-co-operation and begin your operations even
+from to-morrow, if you have not done so already. You can surrender all your
+titles to-morrow all the lawyers may surrender their practice to-morrow; those
+who cannot sustain body and soul by any other means can be easily supported by
+the Khilafat Committee, if they will give their whole time and attention to the
+work of that Committee and if the layers will kindly do that, you will find
+that there is no difficulty in settling your disputes by private arbitration.
+You can nationalise your schools from to-morrow if you have got the will and
+the determination. It is difficult, I know, when only a few of you think these
+things. It is as easy as we are sitting here when the whole of this vast
+audience is of one mind and as it was easy for you to carry that chair so is it
+easy for you to enforce this programme from to-morrow if you have one will, one
+determination and love for your country, love for the honour of your country
+and religion. (Loud and prolonged cheers.)
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT CALICUT</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and friends.—On behalf of my brother Shaukut Ali and myself I wish
+to thank you most sincerely for the warm welcome you have extended to us.
+Before I begin to explain the purpose of our mission I have to give you the
+information that Pir Mahboob Shah who was being tried in Sindh for sedition has
+been sentenced to two years’ simple imprisonment. I do not know exactly what
+the offence was with which the Pir was charged. I do not know whether the words
+attributed to him were ever spoken by him. But I do know that the Pirsaheb
+declined to offer any defence and with perfect resignation he has accepted his
+penalty. For me it is a matter of sincere pleasure that the Pirsaheb who
+exercises great influence over his followers has understood the spirit of the
+struggle upon which we have embarked. It is not by resisting the authority of
+Government that we expect to succeed in the great task before us. But I do
+expect that we shall succeed if we understand the spirit of non-co-operation.
+The Lieutenant-Governor of Burma himself has told us that the British retain
+their hold on India not by the force of arms but by the force of co-operation
+of the people. Thus he has given us the remedy for any wrong that the
+Government may do to the people, whether knowingly or unknowingly. And so long
+as we co-operate with the Government, so long as we support that Government, we
+become to that extent sharers in the wrong. I admit that in ordinary
+circumstances a wise subject will tolerate the wrongs of a Government, but a
+wise subject never tolerates a wrong that a Government imposes on the declared
+will of a people. And I venture to submit to this great meeting that the
+Government of India and the Imperial Government have done a double wrong to
+India, and if we are a nation of self-respecting people conscious of its
+dignity, conscious of its right, it is not just and proper that we should stand
+the double humiliation that the Government has heaped upon us. By shaping and
+by becoming a predominant partner in the peace terms imposed on the helpless
+Sultan of Turkey, the Imperial Government have intentionally flouted the
+cherished sentiment of the Mussalman subjects of the Empire. The present Prime
+Minister gave a deliberate pledge after consultation with his colleagues when
+it was necessary for him to conciliate the Mussalmans of India. I claim to have
+studied this Khilafat question in a special manner. I claim to understand the
+Mussalman feeling on the Khilafat question and I am here to declare for the
+tenth time that on the Khilafat matter the Government has wounded the Mussalman
+sentiment as they had never done before. And I say without fear of
+contradiction that if the Mussalmans of India had not exercised great
+self-restraint and if there was not the gospel of non-co-operation preached to
+them and if they had not accepted it, there would have been bloodshed in India
+by this time. I am free to confess that spilling of blood would not have
+availed their cause. But a man who is in a state of rage whose heart has become
+lacerated does not count the cost of his action. So much for the Khilafat
+wrong.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I propose to take you for a minute to the Punjab, the northern end of India.
+And what have both Governments done for the Punjab? I am free to confess again
+that the crowds in Amritsar went mad for a moment. They were goaded to madness
+by a wicked administration. But no madness on the part of a people can justify
+the shedding of innocent blood, and what have they paid for it? I venture to
+submit that no civilised Government could ever have made the people pay the
+penalty and retribution that they have paid. Innocent men were tried through
+mock-tribunals and imprisoned for life. Amnesty granted to them after; I count
+of no consequence. Innocent, unarmed men, who knew nothing of what was to
+happen, were butchered in cold blood without the slightest notice. Modesty of
+women in Manianwalla, women who had done no wrong to any individual, was
+outraged by insolent officers. I want you to understand what I mean by outrage
+of their modesty. Their veils were opened with his stick by an officer. Men who
+were declared to be utterly innocent by the Hunter Committee were made to crawl
+on their bellies. And all these wrongs totally undeserved remain unavenged. If
+it was the duty of the Government of India to punish those who were guilty of
+incendiarism and murder, as I hold it was their duty, it was doubly their duty
+to punish officers who insulted and oppressed innocent people. But in the face
+of these official wrongs we have the debate in the house of lords supporting
+official terrorism, it is this double wrong, the affront to Islam and the
+injury to the manhood of the Punjab, that we feel bound to wipe out by
+non-co-operation. We have prayed, petitioned, agitated, we have passed
+resolutions. Mr. Mahomed Ali supported by his friends is now waiting on the
+British public. He has pleaded the cause of Islam in a most manful manner, but
+his pleading has fallen on deaf ears and we have his word for it that whilst
+France and Italy have shown great sympathy for the cause of Islam, it is the
+British Ministers who have shown no sympathy. This shows which way the British
+Ministers and the present holders of office in India mean to deal by the
+people. There is no goodwill, there is no desire to placate the people of
+India. The people of India must therefore have a remedy to redress the double
+wrong. The method of the west is violence. Wherever the people of the west have
+felt a wrong either justly or unjustly, they have rebelled and shed blood. As I
+have said in my letter to the Viceroy of India, half of India does not believe
+in the remedy of violence. The other half is too weak to offer it. But the
+whole of India is deeply hurt and stirred by this wrong, and it is for that
+reason that I have suggested to the people of India the remedy of
+non-co-operation. I consider it perfectly harmless, absolutely constitutional
+and yet perfectly efficacious. It is a remedy in which, if it is properly
+adopted, victory is certain, and it is the age-old remedy of self-sacrifice.
+Are the Mussalmans of India who feel the great wrong done to Islam ready to
+make an adequate self-sacrifice? All the scriptures of the world teach us that
+there can be no compromise between justice and injustice. Co-operation on the
+part of a justice-loving man with an unjust man is a crime. And if we desire to
+compel this great Government to the will of the people, as we must, we must
+adopt this great remedy of non-co-operation. And if the Mussalmans of India
+offer non-co-operation to Government in order to secure justice in the Khilafat
+matter, I believe it is duty of the Hindus to help them so long as their moans
+are just. I consider the eternal friendship between the Hindus and Mussalmans
+is more important than the British connection. I would prefer any day anarchy
+and chaos in India to an armed peace brought about by the bayonet between the
+Hindus and Mussalmans. I have therefore ventured to suggest to my Hindu
+brethren that if they wanted to live at peace with Mussalmans, there is an
+opportunity which is not going to recur for the next hundred years. And I
+venture to assure you that if the Government of India and the Imperial
+Government come to know that there is a determination on the part of the people
+to redress this double wrong they would not hesitate to do what is needed. But
+in the Mussalmans of India will have to take the lead in the matter. You will
+have to commence the first stage of non-co-operation in right earnest. And if
+you may not help this Government, you may not receive help from it. Titles
+which were the other day titles of honour are to-day in my opinion badges of
+our disgrace. We must therefore surrender all titles of honour, all honorary
+offices. It will constitute an emphatic demonstration of the disapproval by the
+leaders of the people of the acts of the Government. Lawyers must suspend their
+practice and must resist the power of the Government which has chosen to flout
+public opinion. Nor may we receive instruction from schools controlled by
+Government and aided by it. Emptying of the schools will constitute a
+demonstration of the will of the middle class of India. It is far better for
+the nation even to neglect the literary instruction of the children than to
+co-operate with a Government that has striven to maintain an injustice and
+untruth on the Khilafat and Punjab matters. Similarly have I ventured to
+suggest a complete boycott of reformed councils. That will be an emphatic
+declaration of the part of the representatives of the people that they do not
+desire to associate with the Government so long as the two wrongs continue. We
+must equally decline to offer ourselves as recruits for the police or the
+military. It is impossible for us to go to Mesopotamia or to offer to police
+that country or to offer military assistance and to help the Government in that
+blood guiltiness. The last plank in the first stage is Swadeshi. Swadeshi is
+intended not so much to bring pressure upon the Government as to demonstrate
+the capacity for sacrifice on the part of the men and women of India. When
+one-fourth of India has its religion at stake and when the whole of India has
+its honour at stake, we can be in no mood to bedeck ourselves with French
+calico or silks from Japan. We must resolve to be satisfied with cloth woven by
+the humble weavers of India in their own cottages out of yarn spun by their
+sisters in their own homes. When a hundred years ago our tastes were not
+debased and we were not lured by all the fineries from the foreign countries,
+we were satisfied with the cloth produced by the men and women in India, and if
+I could but in a moment revolutionize the tastes of India and make it return to
+its original simplicity, I assure you that the Gods would descent to rejoice at
+the great act of renunciation. That is the first stage in non-co-operation. I
+hope it is as easy for you as it is easy for me to see that if India is capable
+of taking the first step in anything like a full measure that step will bring
+the redress we want. I therefore do not intend to take you to the other stages
+of non-co-operation. I would like you to rivet your attention upon the plans in
+the first stage. You will have noticed that but two things are necessary in
+going through the first stage: (1) Prefect spirit of non-violence is
+indispensable for non-co-operation, (2) only a little self-sacrifice, I pray to
+God that He will give the people of India sufficient courage and wisdom and
+patience to go through this experiment of non-co-operation. I think you for the
+great reception that you have given us. And I also thank you for the great
+patience and exemplary silence with which you have listened to my remarks.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August</i> 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MANGALORE</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and friends,—To my brother Shaukat Ali and me it was a pleasure to
+go through this beautiful garden of India. The great reception that you gave us
+this afternoon, and this great assembly are most welcome to us, if they are a
+demonstration of your sympathy with the cause which you have the honour to
+represent. I assure you that we have not undertaken this incessant travelling
+in order to have receptions and addresses, no matter how cordial they may be.
+But we have undertaken this travelling throughout the length and breadth of
+this dear Motherland to place before you the position that faces us to-day. It
+is our privilege, as it is our duty, to place that position before the country
+and let her make the choice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Throughout our tour we have received many addresses, but in my humble opinion
+no address was more truly worded than the address that was presented to us at
+Kasargod. It addressed both of us as ‘dear revered brothers.’ I am unable to
+accept the second adjective ‘revered.’ The word ‘dear’ is dear to me I must
+confess. But dearer than that is the expression ‘brothers.’ The signatories to
+that address recognized the true significance of this travel. No blood brothers
+can possibly be more intimately related, can possibly be more united in one
+purpose, one aim than my brother Shaukat Ali and I. And I considered it a proud
+privilege and honour to be addressed as blood brother to Shaukat Ali. The
+contents of that address were as equally significant. It stated that in our
+united work was represented the essence of the unity between the Mussalmans and
+Hindus in India. If we two cannot represent that very desirable unity, if we
+two cannot cement the relation between the two communities, I do not know who
+can. Then without any rhetoric and without any flowery language the address
+went on to describe the inwardness of the Punjab and the Khilafat struggle; and
+then in simple and beautiful language it described the spiritual significance
+of Satyagrah and Non-co-operation. This was followed by a frank and simple
+promise. Although the signatories to the address realised the momentous nature
+of the struggle on which we have embarked, and although they sympathise with
+the struggle with their whole heart, they wound up by saying that even if they
+could not follow non-co-operation in all its details, they would do as much as
+they could to help the struggle. And lastly, in eloquent, and true language,
+they said ‘if we cannot rise equal to the occasion it will not be due to want
+of effort but to want of ability.’ I can desire no better address, no better
+promise, and if you, the citizens of Mangalore, can come up to the level of the
+signatories, and give us just the assurance that you consider the struggle to
+be right and that it commands your entire approval, I am certain you will make
+all sacrifice that lies in your power. For we are face to face with a peril
+greater than plagues, greater than influenza, greater than earthquakes and
+mighty floods, which sometimes overwhelm this land. These physical calamities
+can rob us of so many Indian bodies. But the calamity that has at the present
+moment overtaken India touches the religious honour of a fourth of her children
+and the self-respect of the whole nation. The Khilafat wrong affects the
+Mussalmans of India, and the Punjab calamity very nearly overwhelms the manhood
+of India. Shall we in the face of this danger be weak or rise to our full
+height. The remedy for both the wrongs is the spiritual solvent of
+non-co-operation. I call it a spiritual weapon, because it demands discipline
+and sacrifice from us. It demands sacrifice from every individual irrespective
+of the rest. And the promise that is behind this performance of duty, the
+promise given by every religion that I have studied is sure and certain. It is
+that there is no spotless sacrifice that has been yet offered on earth, which
+has not carried with it its absolute adequate reward. It is a spiritual weapon,
+because it waits for no mandate from anybody except one’s own conscience. It is
+a spiritual weapon, because it brings out the best in the nation and it
+absolutely satisfies individual honour if a single individual takes it, and it
+will satisfy national honour if the whole nation takes it up. And therefore it
+is that I have called non-co-operation in opposition to the opinion of many of
+my distinguished countrymen and leaders—a weapon that is infallible and
+absolutely practicable. It is infallible and practicable, because it satisfies
+the demands of individual conscience. God above cannot, will not expect Maulana
+Shaukat Ali to do more than he has been doing, for he has surrendered and
+placed at the disposal of God whom he believes to be the Almighty ruler of
+everyone, he has delivered all in the service of God. And we stand before the
+citizens of Mangalore and ask them to make their choice either to accept this
+precious gift that we lay at their feet or to reject it. And after having
+listened to my message if you come to the come to the conclusion that you have
+no other remedy than non-co-operation for the conservation of Islam and the
+honour of India, you will accept that remedy. I ask you not to be confused by
+so many bewildering issues that are placed before you, nor to be shaken from
+your purpose because you see divided counsels amongst your leaders. This is one
+of the necessary limitations of any spiritual or any other struggle that has
+ever been fought on this earth. It is because it comes so suddenly that it
+confuses the mind if the heart is not tuned properly. And we would be perfect
+human beings on this earth if in all of us was found absolutely perfect
+correspondence between the mind and the heart. But those of you who have been
+following the newspaper controversy, will find that no matter what division of
+opinion exists amongst our journals and leaders there is unanimity that the
+remedy is efficacious if it can be kept free from violence, and if it is
+adopted on a large scale. I admit the difficulty the virtue however lies in
+surmounting it. We cannot possibly combine violence with a spiritual weapon
+like non-co-operation. We do not offer spotless sacrifice if we take the lives
+of others in offering our own. Absolute freedom from violence is therefore it
+condition precedent to non-co-operation. But I have faith in my country to know
+that when it has assimilated the principle of the doctrine In the fullest
+extent, it will respond to it. And in no case will India make any headway
+whatsoever until she has learnt the lesson of self-sacrifice. Even if this
+country were to take up the doctrine of the sword, which God forbid, it will
+have to learn the lesson of self-sacrifice. The second difficulty suggested is
+the want of solidarity of the nation. I accept it too. But that difficulty I
+have already answered by saying that it is a remedy that can be taken up by
+individuals for individual and by the nation for national satisfaction; and
+therefore even if the whole nation does not take up non-co-operation, the
+individual successes, which may be obtained by individuals taking up
+non-co-operation will stand to their own credit as of the nation to which they
+belong.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first stage in my humble opinion is incredibly easy inasmuch as it does not
+involve any very great sacrifice. If your Khan bahadurs and other title-holders
+were to renounce their titles I venture to submit that whilst the renunciation
+will stand to the credit and honour of the nation it will involve a little or
+no sacrifice. On the contrary, they will not only have surrendered no earthly
+riches but they will have gained the applause of the nation. Let us see what it
+means, this first step. The able editor of <i>Hindu</i>, Mr. Kastariranga
+Iyengar, and almost every journalist in the country are agreed that the
+renunciation of titles is a necessary and a desirable step. And if these chosen
+people of the Government were without exception to surrender their titles to
+Government giving notice that the heart of India is doubly wounded in that the
+honour of India and of muslim religion is at stake and that therefore they can
+no longer retain their titles, I venture to suggest, that this their step which
+costs not a single penny either to them or to the nation will be an effective
+demonstration of the national will.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Take the second step or the second item of non-co-operation. I know there is
+strong opposition to the boycott of councils. The opposition when you begin to
+analyse it means not that the step is faulty or that it is not likely to
+succeed, but it is due to the belief that the whole country will not respond to
+it and that the Moderates will steal into the councils. I ask the citizens of
+Mangalore to dispel that fear from your hearts. United the voters of Mangalore
+can make it impossible for either a moderate or an extremist or any other form
+of leader to enter the councils as your representative. This step involves no
+sacrifice of money, no sacrifice of honour but the gaining of prestige for the
+whole nation. And I venture to suggest to you that this one step alone if it is
+taken with any degree of unanimity even by the extremists can bring about the
+desired relief, but if all do not respond the individual need not be afraid. He
+at least will have laid the foundation for true self progress, let him have the
+comfort that he at least has washed his hands clean of the guilt of the
+Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Then I come to the members of the profession which one time I used to carry on.
+I have ventured to ask the lawyers of India to suspend their practice and
+withdraw their support from a Government which no longer stands for justice,
+pure and unadulterated, for the nation. And the step is good for the individual
+lawyer who takes it and is good for the nation if all the lawyers take it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And so for the Government and the Government aided schools, I must confess that
+I cannot reconcile my conscience to my children going to Government schools and
+to the programme of non-co-operation is intended to withdraw all support from
+Government, and to decline all help from it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I will not tax your patience by taking you through the other items of
+non-co-operation important as they are. But I have ventured to place before you
+four very important and forcible steps any one of which if fully taken up
+contains in it possibilities of success. Swadeshi is preached as an item of
+non-co-operation, as a demonstration of the spirit of sacrifice, and it is an
+item which every man, woman and child can take up.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August</i> 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT BEZWADA</h3>
+
+<p>
+As I said this morning one essential condition for the progress of India is
+Hindu-Muslim Unity. I understand that there was a little bit of bickering
+between Hindus and Mussalmans to-day in Bezwada. My brother Maulana Shaukat Ali
+adjusted the dispute between the two communities and he illustrated in his own
+person the entire efficacy of one item in the first stage of Non-co-operation.
+He sat without any vakils appearing before him for either parties to arbitrate
+on the dispute between them. He required no postponement for the consideration
+of the question from time to time. His fees consisted in a broken lead pencil.
+That is what we should do, if all the lawyers suspended practice and set up
+arbitration for the settlement of private disputes. But why was there any
+quarrel at all? It is laughable in the extreme when you come to think of it.
+Because the Hindus seem to have played music whilst passing the mosque. I think
+it was improper for them to do so. Hindu Moslem Unity does not mean that Hindus
+should cease to respect the prejudices and sentiments cherished by Mussalmans.
+And as this question of music has given rise to many a quarrel between the two
+communities it behoves the Hindus, if they want to cultivate true Hindu-Moslem
+Unity, to refrain from acts which they know injure the sentiments of their
+Mussalman brethren. We may not take undue advantage of the great spirit of
+toleration that is developing in Mussalmans and do things likely to irritate
+them. It is never a matter of principle for a Hindu procession to continue
+playing music before mosques. And now that we desire voluntarily to respect
+Mussalman sentiment, we should be doubly careful at a time when Hindus are
+offering assistance to Mussalmans in their troubles. That assistance should be
+given in all humility and without any arrogation of rights. To my Mussalman
+brethren I would say that it would become their dignity to restrain themselves
+and not feel irritated when any Hindu had done anything to irritate their
+religious sentiment. But in any event, you have today presented to you a remedy
+for the settlement of any such issue. We must settle our disputes by
+arbitration as was done this after-noon. You cannot always get a Moulana
+Shankat Ali, exercising unrivalled influence on the community. But we can
+always get people enough in our own villages, towns and districts who exercise
+influence over such villages and towns and command the confidence of both the
+communities. The offended party should consider it its duty to approach them
+and not to take the law in its own hands.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It gives me much pleasure to announce to you that, Mr. Kaleswar Rao has
+consented to refrain from standing for election to the new Legislative
+Councils. You will be also pleased to know that Mr. Gulam Nohiuddin has
+resigned his Honorary Magistrateship, I hope that both these patriots will not
+consider that they have done their last duty by their acts of renunciation, but
+I hope they will regard their acts as a prelude to acts of greater purpose and
+greater energy and I hope they will take in hand the work of educating the
+electorate in their districts regarding boycott of councils. I have said
+elsewhere that never for another century will India be faced with a conjunction
+of events that faces it to-day. The cloud that has descended upon Islam has
+solidified the Moslem world as nothing else could have. It has awakened the men
+and women of Mussulman India from their deep sleep. Inasmuch as a single
+Panjabi was made to crawl on his belly in the famous street of Amitsar, I hold
+that the whole of was made to crawl on its belly. And if we want to straighten
+up ourselves from that crawling position and stand erect before the whole
+world, it requires, a tremendous effort. H.E. the Viceroy in his Viceregal
+pronouncement at the opening of the Council was pleased to say that he did not
+desire to make any remarks on the Punjab events. He treated them as a closed
+chapter and referred us to the future verdict of history. I venture to tell you
+the citizens of Bezwada that India will have deserved to crawl in that lane if
+she accepts this pronouncement as the final answer, and if we want to stand
+erect before the whole world, it is impossible for a single child, man or woman
+in India to rest until fullest reparation has been done for the Punjab wrong.
+Similarly with reference to the Khilafat grievance the Mussalmans of India in
+my humble opinion will forfeit all title to consider themselves the followers
+of the great Prophet in whose name they recite the Kalama, day in and day out,
+they will forfeit their title if they do not put their shoulders to the wheel
+and lift this cloud that is hanging on them. But we shall make a serious
+blunder. India will commit suicide, if we do not understand and appreciate the
+forces that are arrayed against us. We have got to face a mighty Government
+with all its power ranged against us. This composed of men who are able,
+courageous, capable of making sacrifices. It is a Government which does not
+scruple to use means, fair or foul, in order to gain its end. No craft is above
+that Government. It resorts to frightfulness, terrorism. It resorts to bribery,
+in the shape of titles, honour and high offices. It administers opiates in the
+shape of Reforms. In essence then it is an autocracy double distilled in the
+guise of democracy. The greatest gift of a crafty cunning man are worthless so
+long as cunning resides in his heart. It is a Government representing a
+civilisation which is purely material and godless. I have given to you these
+qualities of this government in order not to excite your angry passions, but in
+order that you may appreciate the forces that are matched against you. Anger
+will serve no purpose. We shall have to meet ungodliness by godliness. We shall
+have to meet their untruth by truth; we shall have to meet their cunning and
+their craft by openness and simplicity; we shall have to meet their terrorism
+and frightfulness by bravery. And it is an unbending bravery which is demanded
+of every man, woman and child. We must meet their organisation by greater
+organising ability. We must meet their discipline by grater discipline, and we
+must meet their sacrifices by infinitely greater sacrifices, and if we are in a
+position to show these qualities in a full measure I have not the slightest
+doubt that we shall win this battle. If really we have fear of God in us, our
+prayers will give us the strength to secure victory. God has always come to the
+help of the helpless and we need not go before any earthly power for help.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You heard this morning of the bravery of the sword, and the bravery of
+suffering. For me personally I have forever rejected the bravery of the sword.
+But, to-day it is not my purpose to demonstrate to you the final
+ineffectiveness of the sword. But he who runs may see that before India
+possesses itself a sword which will be more than a match for the forces of
+Europe, it will he generations. India may resort to the destruction of life and
+property here and there but such destructive cases serve no purpose. I have
+therefore presented to you a weapon called the bravery of suffering, otherwise
+called Non-co-operation. It is a bravery which is open to the weakest among the
+weak. It is open to women and children. The power of suffering is the
+prerogative of nobody, and if only 300 millions of Indians could show the power
+of suffering in order to redress a grievous wrong done to the nation or to its
+religion, I make bold to say that, India will never require to draw the sword.
+And unless we are able to show an adequate measure of sacrifice we shall lose
+this battle. No one need tell me that India has not got this power of
+suffering. Every father and mother is witness to what i am about to say, viz.,
+that every father and mother have shown in the domestic affairs matchless power
+of suffering. And if we have only developed national consciousness, if we have
+developed sufficient regard for our religion, we shall have developed power of
+suffering in the national and religious field. Considered in these terms the
+first stage in Non-co-operation is the simplest and the easiest state. If the
+title-holders of India consider that India is suffering from a grievous wrong
+both as regards the Punjab and the Khilafat is it any suffering on their part
+to renounce their titles to-day? What is the measure of the suffering awaiting
+the lawyers who are called upon to suspend practice when compared to the great
+benefit which is in store for the nation? And if thy parents of India will
+summon up courage to sacrifice secular education, they will have given their
+children the real education of a life-time. For they will have learnt the value
+of religion and national honour. And I ask you, the citizens of Bezwada, to
+think well before you accept the loaves and fishes in the form of Government
+offices set them on one side and set national honour on the other and make your
+service. What sacrifice is there involved in the individual renouncing his
+candidature for legislative councils. The councils are a tempting bait. All
+kinds of arguments are being advanced in favour of joining the councils. India
+will sacrifice the opportunity of gaining her liberty if she touches them. It
+passes comprehension how we, who have known this Government, who have read the
+Viceregal pronouncement, how we who have known their determination not to give
+justice in the Punjab and the Khilafat matters, can gain any benefit by
+co-operation, constructive or obstructive, with this Government? But the
+Nationalists, belonging to a great popular party, tell us that if they do not
+contest these scats, the moderates will get in. Surely, it is nothing but an
+exhibition of want of courage and faith in our own cause to feel that we must
+enter the councils lest moderates should get in. Moderates believe in the
+possibility of obtaining justice at the hands of the Government. Nationalists
+have on the other hand filled the platforms with denunciations of the
+Government and its measures. How can the Nationalists ever hope to gain
+anything by entering the councils, holding the belief that they do? They will
+better represent the popular will if they wring justice from the Government by
+means of Non-co-operation. A calculating spirit at the present moment in the
+history of India will prove its ruin. I, therefore, tender my hearty
+congratulation to those who have announced their resignations of candidature or
+honorary offices, and I hope that their example will prove infectious. I have
+been told, and I believe it myself from what I have seen, that the Andhrus are
+a brave, courageous and spiritually-inclined people. I venture therefore to ask
+my Andhra brethren whether they have understood the spirituality of this
+beautiful doctrine of Non-co-operation. If they have, I hope they will not wait
+for a single moment for a mandate from the Congress or the Moslem League. They
+will understand that a spiritual weapon is god whether it is wielded by one or
+many. I, therefore, invite you to go to Calcutta with a united will and a
+united purpose, sanctified by a spirit of sacrifice, with a will of your own to
+convert those who are still undecided about the spirituality or the
+practicability of the weapon.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I thank you for the attention and patience with which you have listened to me.
+I pray to the Almighty that He may give you wisdom and courage that are so
+necessary at the present moment.—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August 1920</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE CONGRESS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The largest and the most important Congress ever held has come and gone, It was
+the biggest demonstration ever held against the present system of Government.
+The President uttered the whole truth when he said that it was a Congress in
+which, instead of the President and the leaders driving the people, the people
+drove him and the latter. It was clear to every one on the platform that the
+people had taken the reins in their own hands. The platform would gladly have
+moved at a slower pace.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Congress gave one day to a full discussion of the creed and voted solidly
+for it with but two dissentients after two nights’ sleep over the discussion.
+It gave one day to a discussion of non-co-operation resolution and voted for it
+with unparalleled enthusiasm. It gave the last day to listening to the whole of
+the remaining thirty-two Articles of the Constitution which were read and
+translated word for word by Maulana Mahomed Ali in a loud and clear voice. It
+showed that it was intelligently following the reading of it, for there was
+dissent when Article Eight was reached. It referred to non-interference by the
+Congress in the internal affairs of the Native States. The Congress would not
+have passed the proviso if it had meant that it could even voice the feelings
+of the people residing in the territories ruled by the princes. Happily it
+resolution suggesting the advisability of establishing Responsible Government
+in their territories enabled me to illustrate to the audience that the proviso
+did not preclude the Congress from ventilating the grievances and aspirations
+of the subjects of these states, whilst it clearly prevented the Congress from
+taking any executive action in connection with them; as for instance holding a
+hostile demonstration in the Native States against any action of theirs. The
+Congress claims to dictate to the Government but it cannot do so by the very
+nature of its constitution in respect of the Native States.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus the Congress has taken three important steps after the greatest
+deliberation. It has expressed its determination in the clearest possible terms
+to attain complete null-government, if possible still in association with the
+British people, but even without, if necessary. It proposes to do so only by
+means that are honourable and non-violent. It has introduced fundamental
+changes in the constitution regulating its activities and has performed an act
+of self-denial in voluntarily restricting the number of delegates to one for
+every fifty thousand of the population of India and has insisted upon the
+delegates being the real representatives of those who want to take any part in
+the political life of the country. And with a view to ensuring the
+representation of all political parties it has accepted the principle of
+“single transferable vote.” It has reaffirmed the non-co-operation resolution
+of the Special Session and amplified it in every respect. It has emphasised the
+necessity of non-violence and laid down that the attainment of Swaraj is
+conditional upon the complete harmony between the component parts of India, and
+has therefore inculcated Hindu-Muslim unity. The Hindu delegates have called
+upon their leaders to settle disputes between Brahmins and non-Brahmins and
+have urged upon the religious heads the necessity of getting rid of the poison
+of untouchability. The Congress has told the parents of school-going children,
+and the lawyers that they have not responded sufficiently to the call of the
+nation and that they must make greater effort in doing so. It therefore follows
+that the lawyers who do not respond quickly to the call for suspension and the
+parents who persist in keeping their children in Government and aided
+institutions must find themselves dropping out from the public life of the
+country. The country calls upon every man and woman in India to do their full
+share. But of the details of the non-co-operation resolution I must write
+later.
+</p>
+
+<h3>WHO IS DISLOYAL?</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Montagu has discovered a new definition of disloyalty. He considers my
+suggestion to boycott the visit of the Prince of Wales to be disloyal and some
+newspapers taking the cue from him have called persons who have made the
+suggestion ‘unmannerly’. They have even attributed to these ‘unmannerly’
+persons the suggestion of boycotting the Prince. I draw a sharp and fundamental
+distinction between boycotting the Prince and boycotting any welcome arranged
+for him. Personally I would extend the heartiest welcome to His Royal Highness
+if he came or could come without official patronage and the protecting wings of
+the Government of the day. Being the heir to a constitutional monarch, the
+Prince’s movements are regulated and dictated by the ministers, no matter how
+much the dictation may be concealed beneath diplomatically polite language. In
+suggesting the boycott therefore the promoters have suggested boycott of an
+insolent bureaucracy and dishonest ministers of his Majesty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You cannot have it both ways. It is true that under a constitutional monarchy,
+the royalty is above politics. But you cannot send the Prince on a political
+visit for the purpose of making political capital out of him, and then complain
+that those who will not play your game and in order to checkmate you, proclaim
+boycott of the Royal visit do not know constitutional usage. For the Prince’s
+visit is not for pleasure. His Royal Highness is to come in Mr. Lloyd George’s
+words, as the “ambassador of the British nation,” in other words, his own
+ambassador in order to issue a certificate of merit to him and possibly to give
+the ministers a new lease of life. The wish is designed to consolidate and
+strengthen a power that spells mischief for India. Even us it is, Mr. Montagu
+has foreseen, that the welcome will probably be excelled by any hitherto
+extended to Royalty, meaning that the people are not really and deeply affected
+and stirred by the official atrocities in the Punjab and the manifestly
+dishonest breach of official declarations on the Khilafat. With the knowledge
+that India was bleeding at heart, the Government of India should have told His
+Majesty’s ministers that the moment was inopportune for sending the Prince. I
+venture to submit that it is adding insult to injury to bring the Prince and
+through his visit to steal honours and further prestige for a Government that
+deserves to be dismissed with disgrace. I claim that I prove my loyalty by
+saying that India is in no mood, is too deeply in mourning, to take part in and
+to welcome His Royal Highness, and that the ministers and the Indian Government
+show their disloyalty by making the Prince a catspaw of their deep political
+game. If they persist, it is the clear duty of India to have nothing to do with
+the visit.
+</p>
+
+<h3>CRUSADE AGAINST NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+I have most carefully read the manifesto addressed by Sir Narayan Chandavarkar
+and others dissuading the people from joining the non co-operation movement. I
+had expected to find some solid argument against non-co-operation, but to my
+great regret I have found in it nothing but distortion (no doubt unconscious)
+of the great religions and history. The manifesto says that ‘non-co-operation
+is deprecated by the religious tenets and traditions of our motherland, nay, of
+all the religions that have saved and elevated the human race.’ I venture to
+submit that the Bhagwad Gita is a gospel of non-co-operation between forces of
+darkness and those of light. If it is to be literally interpreted Arjun
+representing a just cause was enjoined to engage in bloody warfare with the
+unjust Kauravas. Tulsidas advises the Sant (the good) to shun the Asant (the
+evil-doers). The Zendavesta represents a perpetual dual between Ormuzd and
+Ahriman, between whom there is no compromise. To say of the Bible that it
+taboos non-co-operation is not to know Jesus, a Prince among passive resisters,
+who uncompromisingly challenged the might of the Sadducees and the Pharisees
+and for the sake of truth did not hesitate to divide sons from their parents.
+And what did the Prophet of Islam do? He non-co-operated in Mecca in a most
+active manner so long as his life was not in danger and wiped the dust of Mecca
+off his feet when he found that he and his followers might have uselessly to
+perish, and fled to Medina and returned when he was strong enough to give
+battle to his opponents. The duty of non-co-operation with unjust men and kings
+is as strictly enjoined by all the religions as is the duty of co-operation
+with just men and kings. Indeed most of the scriptures of the world seem even
+to go beyond non-co-operation and prefer a violence to effeminate submission to
+a wrong. The Hindu religious tradition of which the manifesto speaks, clearly
+proves the duty of non-co-operation. Prahlad dissociated himself from his
+father, Meerabai from her husband, Bibhishan from his brutal brother.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The manifesto speaking of the secular aspect says, ‘The history of nations
+affords no instance to show that it (meaning non-co-operation) has, when
+employed, succeeded and done good,’ One most recent instance of brilliant
+success of non-co-operation is that of General Botha who boycotted Lord
+Milner’s reformed councils and thereby procured a perfect constitution for his
+country. The Dukhobours of Russia offered non-co-operation, and a handful
+though they were, their grievances so deeply moved the civilized world that
+Canada offered them a home where they form a prosperous community. In India
+instances can be given by the dozen, in which in little principalities the
+raiyats when deeply grieved by their chiefs have cut off all connection with
+them and bent them to their will. I know of no instance in history where
+well-managed non-co-operation has failed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Hitherto I have given historical instances of bloodless non-co-operation, I
+will not insult the intelligence of the reader by citing historical instances
+of non-co-operation combined with, violence, but I am free to confess that
+there are on record as many successes as failures in violent non-co-operation.
+And it is because I know this fact that I have placed before the country a
+non-violent scheme in which, if at all worked satisfactorily, success is a
+certainty and in which non-response means no harm. For if even one man
+non-co-operates, say, by resigning some office, he has gained, not lost. That
+is its ethical or religious aspect. For its political result naturally it
+requires polymerous support. I fear therefore no disastrous result from
+non-co-operation save for an outbreak of violence on the part of the people
+whether under provocation or otherwise. I would risk violence a thousand times
+than risk the emasculation of a whole race.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MUZAFFARABAD</h3>
+
+<p>
+Before a crowded meeting of Mussalmans in the Muzaffarabad, Bombay, held on the
+29th July 1920, speaking on the impending non-co-operation which commenced on
+the 1st of August, Mr. Gandhi said: The time for speeches on non-co-operation
+was past and the time for practice had arrived. But two things were needful for
+complete success. An environment free from any violence on the part of the
+people and a spirit of self-sacrifice. Non-co-operation, as the speaker had
+conceived it, was an impossibility in an atmosphere surcharged with the spirit
+of violence. Violence was an exhibition of anger and any such exhibition was
+dissipation of valuable energy. Subduing of one’s anger was a storing up of
+national energy, which, when set free in an ordered manner, would produce
+astounding results. His conception of non-co-operation did not involve rapine,
+plunder, incendiarism and all the concomitants of mass madness. His scheme
+presupposed ability on their part to control all the forces of evil. If,
+therefore, any disorderliness was found on the part of the people which they
+could not control, he for one would certainly help the Government to control
+them. In the presence of disorder it would be for him a choice of evil, and
+evil through he considered the present Government to be, he would not hesitate
+for the time being to help the Government to control disorder. But he had faith
+in the people. He believed that they knew that the cause could only be won by
+non-violent methods. To put it at the lowest, the people had not the power,
+even if they had the will, to resist with brute strength the unjust Governments
+of Europe who had, in the intoxication of their success disregarding every
+canon of justice dealt so cruelly by the only Islamic Power in Europe.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In non-co-operation they had a matchless and powerful weapon. It was a sign of
+religious atrophy to sustain an unjust Government that supported an injustice
+by resorting to untruth and camouflage. So long therefore as the Government did
+not purge itself of the canker of injustice and untruth, it was their duty to
+withdraw all help from it consistently with their ability to preserve order in
+the social structure. The first stage of non-co-operation was therefore
+arranged so as to involve minimum of danger to public peace and minimum of
+sacrifice on the part of those who participated in the movement. And if they
+might not help an evil Government nor receive any favours from it, it followed
+that they must give up all titles of honour which were no longer a proud
+possession. Lawyers, who were in reality honorary officers of the Court, should
+cease to support Courts that uphold the prestige of an unjust Government and
+the people must be able to settle their disputes and quarrels by private
+arbitration. Similarly parents should withdraw their children from the public
+schools and they must evolve a system of national education or private
+education totally independent of the Government. An insolent Government
+conscious of its brute strength, might laugh at such withdrawals by the people
+especially as the Law courts and schools were supposed to help the people, but
+he had not a shadow of doubt that the moral effect of such a step could not
+possibly be lost even upon a Government whose conscience had become stifled by
+the intoxication of power.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He had hesitation in accepting Swadeshi as a plank in non-co-operation. To him
+Swadeshi was as dear as life itself. But he had no desire to smuggle in
+Swadeshi through the Khilafat movement, if it could not legitimately help that
+movement, but conceived as non-co-operation was, in a spirit of self-sacrifice,
+Swadeshi had a legitimate place in the movement. Pure Swadeshi meant sacrifice
+of the liking for fineries. He asked the nation to sacrifice its liking for the
+fineries of Europe and Japan and be satisfied with the coarse but beautiful
+fabrics woven on their handlooms out of yarns spun by millions of their
+sisters. If the nation had become really awakened to a sense of the danger to
+its religions and its self-respect, it could not but perceive the absolute and
+immediate necessity of the adoption of Swadeshi in its intense form and if the
+people of India adopted Swadeshi with the religious zeal he begged to assure
+them that its adoption would arm them with a new power and would produce an
+unmistakable impression throughout the whole world. He, therefore, expected the
+Mussalmans to give the lead by giving up all the fineries they were so fond of
+and adopt the simple cloth that could be produced by the manual labour of their
+sisters and brethren in their own cottages. And he hoped that the Hindus would
+follow suit. It was a sacrifice in which the whole nation, every man, woman and
+child could take part.
+</p>
+
+<h4>RIDICULE REPLACING REPRESSION</h4>
+
+<p>
+Had His Excellency the Viceroy not made it impossible by his defiant attitude
+on the Punjab and the Khilafat, I would have tendered him hearty
+congratulations for substituting ridicule for repression in order to kill a
+movement distasteful to him. For, torn from its context and read by itself His
+Excellency’s discourse on non-co-operation is unexceptionable. It is a symptom
+of translation from savagery to civilization. Pouring ridicule on one’s
+opponent is an approved method in civilised politics. And if the method is
+consistently continued, it will mark an important improvement upon the official
+barbarity of the Punjab. His interpretation of Mr. Montagu’s statement about
+the movement is also not open to any objection whatsoever. Without doubt a
+government has the right to use sufficient force to put down an actual outbreak
+of violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I regret to have to confess that this attempt to pour ridicule on the
+movement, read in conjunction with the sentiments on the Punjab and the
+Khilafat, preceding the ridicule, seems to show that His Excellency has made it
+a virtue of necessity. He has not finally abandoned the method of terrorism and
+frightfulness, but he finds the movement being conducted in such an open and
+truthful manner that any attempt to kill it by violent repression would not
+expose him not only to ridicule but contempt of all right-thinking men.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us however examine the adjectives used by His Excellency to kill the
+movement by laughing at it. It is ‘futile,’ ‘ill-advised,’ ‘intrinsically
+insane,’ ‘unpractical,’ ‘visionary.’ He has rounded off the adjectives by
+describing the movement as ‘most foolish of all foolish schemes.’ His
+Excellency has become so impatient of it that he has used all his vocabulary
+for showing the magnitude of the ridiculous nature of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Unfortunately for His Excellency the movement is likely to grow with ridicule
+as it is certain to flourish on repression. No vital movement can be killed
+except by the impatience, ignorance or laziness of its authors. A movement
+cannot be ‘insane’ that is conducted by men of action as I claim the members of
+the Non-co-operation Committee are. It is hardly ‘unpractical,’ seeing that if
+the people respond, every one admits that it will achieve the end. At the same
+time it is perfectly true that if there is no response from the people, the
+movement will be popularly described as ‘visionary.’ It is for the nation to
+return an effective answer by organised non-co-operation and change ridicule
+into respect. Ridicule is like repression. Both give place to respect when they
+fail to produce the intended effect.
+</p>
+
+<h4>THE VICEREGAL PRONOUNCEMENT</h4>
+
+<p>
+It may be that having lost faith in His Excellency’s probity and capacity to
+hold the high office of Viceroy of India, I now read his speeches with a biased
+mind, but the speech His Excellency delivered at the time of opening of the
+council shows to me a mental attitude which makes association with him or his
+Government impossible for self-respecting men.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The remarks on the Punjab mean a flat refusal to grant redress. He would have
+us to ‘concentrate on the problems of the immediate future!’ The immediate
+future is to compel repentance on the part of the Government on the Punjab
+matter. Of this there is no sign. On the contrary, His Excellency resists the
+temptation to reply to his critics, meaning thereby that he has not changed his
+opinion on the many vital matters affecting the honour of India. He is ‘content
+to leave the issues to the verdict of history.’ Now this kind of language, in
+my opinion, is calculated further to inflame the Indian mind. Of what use can a
+favourable verdict of history be to men who have been wronged and who are still
+under the heels of officers who have shown themselves utterly unfit to hold
+offices of trust and responsibility? The plea for co-operation is, to say the
+least, hypocritical in the face of the determination to refuse justice to the
+Punjab. Can a patient who is suffering from an intolerable ache be soothed by
+the most tempting dishes placed before him? Will he not consider it mockery on
+the part of the physician who so tempted him without curing him of his pain?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+His Excellency is, if possible, even less happy on the Khilafat. “So far as any
+Government could,” says this trustee for the nation, “we pressed upon the Peace
+Conference the views of Indian Moslems. But notwithstanding our efforts on
+their behalf we are threatened with a campaign of non-co-operation because,
+forsooth, the allied Powers found themselves unable to accept the contentions
+advanced by Indian Moslems.” This is most misleading if not untruthful. His
+Excellency knows that the peace terms are not the work of the allied Powers. He
+knows that Mr. Lloyd George is the prime author of terms and that the latter
+has never repudiated his responsibility for them. He has with amazing audacity
+justified them in spite of his considered pledge to the Moslems of India
+regarding Constantinople, Thrace and the rich and renowned lands of Asia minor.
+It is not truthful to saddle responsibility for the terms on the allied Powers
+when Great Britain alone has promoted them. The offence of the Viceroy becomes
+greater when we remember that he admits the justness of the Muslim claim. He
+could not have ‘pressed’ it if he did not admit its justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I venture to think that His Excellency by his pronouncement on the Punjab has
+strengthened the nation in its efforts to seek a remedy to compel redress of
+the two wrongs before it can make anything of the so-called Reforms.
+</p>
+
+<h4>FROM RIDICULE, TO—?</h4>
+
+<p>
+It will be admitted that non-co-operation has passed the stage ridicule.
+Whether it will now be met by repression or respect remains to be seen. Opinion
+has already been expressed in these columns that ridicule is an approved and
+civilized method of opposition. The viceregal ridicule though expressed in
+unnecessarily impolite terms was not open to exception.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But the testing time has now arrived. In a civilized country when ridicule
+fails to kill a movement it begins to command respect. Opponents meet it by
+respectful and cogent argument and the mutual behaviour of rival parties never
+becomes violent. Each party seeks to convert the other or draw the uncertain
+element towards its side by pure argument and reasoning.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is little doubt now that the boycott of the councils will be extensive if
+it is not complete. The students have become disturbed. Important institutions
+may any day become truly national. Pandit Motilal Nehru’s great renunciation of
+a legal practice which was probably second to nobody’s is by itself an event
+calculated to change ridicule into respect. It ought to set people thinking
+seriously about their own attitude. There must be something very wrong about
+our Government—to warrant the step Pundit Motilal Nehru has taken. Post
+graduate students have given up their fellowships. Medical students have
+refused to appear for their final examination. Non-co-operation in these
+circumstances cannot be called an inane movement.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Either the Government must bend to the will of the people which is being
+expressed in no unmistakable terms through non-co-operation, or it must attempt
+to crush the movement by repression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Any force used by a government under any circumstance is not repression. An
+open trial of a person accused of having advocated methods of violence is not
+repression. Every State has the right to put down or prevent violence by force.
+But the trial of Mr. Zafar Ali Khan and two Moulvis of Panipat shows that the
+Government is seeking not to put down or prevent violence but to suppress
+expression of opinion, to prevent the spread of disaffection. This is
+repression. The trials are the beginning of it. It has not still assumed a
+virulent form but if these trials do not result in stilling the propaganda, it
+is highly likely that severe repression will be resorted to by the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The only other way to prevent the spread of disaffection is to remove the
+causes thereof. And that would be to respect the growing response of the
+country to the programme of non-co-operation. It is too much to expect
+repentance and humility from a government intoxicated with success and power.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We must therefore assume that the second stage in the Government programme will
+be repression growing in violence in the same ratio as the progress of
+non-co-operation. And if the movement survives repression, the day of victory
+of truth is near. We must then be prepared for prosecutions, punishments even
+up to deportations. We must evolve the capacity for going on with our programme
+without the leaders. That means capacity for self-government. And as no
+government in the world can possibly put a whole nation in prison, it must
+yield to its demand or abdication in favour of a government suited to that
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is clear that abstention from violence and persistence in the programme are
+our only and surest chance of attaining our end.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The government has its choice, either to respect the movement or to try to
+repress it by barbarous methods. Our choice is either to succumb to repression
+or to continue in spite of repression.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TO EVERY ENGLISHMAN IN INDIA</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dear Friend,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I wish that every Englishman will see this appeal and give thoughtful attention
+to it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let me introduce myself to you. In my humble opinion no Indian has co-operated
+with the British Government more than I have for an unbroken period of
+twenty-nine years of public life in the face of circumstances that might well
+have turned any other man into a rebel. I ask you to believe me when I tell you
+that my co-operation was not based on the fear of the punishments provided by
+your laws or any other selfish motives. It was free and voluntary co-operation
+based on the belief that the sum total of the activity of the British
+Government was for the benefit of India. I put my life in peril four times for
+the sake of the Empire,—at the time of the Boer war when I was in charge of the
+Ambulance corps whose work was mentioned in General Buller’s dispatches, at the
+time of the Zulu revolt in Natal when I was in charge of a similar corps at the
+time of the commencement of the late war when I raised an Ambulance corps and
+as a result of the strenuous training had a severe attack of pleurisy, and
+lastly, in fulfilment of my promise to Lord Chelmsford at the War Conference in
+Delhi. I threw myself in such an active recruiting campaign in Kuira District
+involving long and trying marches that I had an attack of dysentry which proved
+almost fatal. I did all this in the full belief that acts such as mine must
+gain for my country an equal status in the Empire. So late as last December I
+pleaded hard for a trustful co-operation, I fully believed that Mr. Lloyd
+George would redeem his promise to the Mussalmans and that the revelations of
+the official atrocities in the Punjab would secure full reparation for the
+Punjabis. But the treachery of Mr. Lloyd George and its appreciation by you,
+and the condonation of the Punjab atrocities have completely shattered my faith
+in the good intentions of the Government and the nation which is supporting it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But though, my faith in your good intentions is gone, I recognise your bravery
+and I know that what you will not yield to justice and reason, you will gladly
+yield to bravery.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>See what this Empire means to India</i>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Exploitation of India’s resources for the benefit of Great Britain.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+An ever-increasing military expenditure, and a civil service the most expensive
+in the world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Extravagant working of every department in utter disregard of India’s poverty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Disarmament and consequent emasculation of a whole nation lest an armed nation
+might imperil the lives of a handful of you in our midst. Traffic in
+intoxicating liquors and drugs for the purposes of sustaining a top heavy
+administration.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Progressively representative legislation in order to suppress an evergrowing
+agitation seeking to give expression to a nation’s agony.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Degrading treatment of Indians residing in your dominions, and
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You have shown total disregard of our feelings by glorifying the Punjab
+administration and flouting the Mosulman sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I know you would not mind if we could fight and wrest the sceptre form your
+hands. You know that we are powerless to do that, for you have ensured our
+incapacity to fight in open and honourable battle. Bravery on the battlefield
+is thus impossible for us. Bravery of the soul still remains open to us. I know
+you will respond to that also. I am engaged in evoking that bravery.
+Non-co-operation means nothing less than training in self-sacrifice. Why should
+we co-operate with you when we know that by your administration of this great
+country we are lifting daily enslaved in an increasing degree. This response of
+the people to my appeal is not due to my personality. I would like you to
+dismiss me, and for that matter the Ali Brothers too, from your consideration.
+My personality will fail to evoke any response to anti-Muslim cry if I were
+foolish enough to rise it, as the magic name of the Ali Brothers would fail to
+inspire the Mussalmans with enthusiasm if they were madly to raise in
+anti-Hindu cry. People flock in their thousands to listen to us because we
+to-day represent the voice of a nation groaning under iron heels. The Ali
+Brothers were your friends as I was, and still am. My religion forbids me to
+bear any ill-will towards you. I would not raise my hand against you even if I
+had the power. I expect to conquer you only by my suffering. The Ali Brothers
+will certainly draw the sword, if they could, in defence of their religion and
+their country. But they and I have made common cause with the people of India
+in their attempt to voice their feelings and to find a remedy for their
+distress.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You are in search of a remedy to suppress this rising ebullition of national
+feeling. I venture to suggest to you that the only way to suppress it is to
+remove the causes. You have yet the power. You can repent of the wrongs done to
+Indians. You can compel Mr. Lloyd George to redeem his promises. I assure you
+he has kept many escape doors. You can compel the Viceroy to retire in favour
+of a better one, you can revise your ideas about Sir Michael O’Dwyer and
+General Dyer. You can compel the Government to summon a conference of the
+recognised lenders of the people, duly elected by them and representing all
+shades of opinion so as to devise means for granting <i>Swaraj</i> in
+accordance with the wishes of the people of India. But this you cannot do
+unless you consider every Indian to be in reality your equal and brother. I ask
+for no patronage, I merely point out to you, as a friend, as honourable
+solution of a grave problem. The other solution, namely repression is open to
+YOU. I prophesy that it will fail. It has begun already. The Government has
+already imprisoned two brave men of Panipat for holding and expressing their
+opinions freely. Another is on his trial in Lahore for having expressed similar
+opinion. One in the Oudh District is already imprisoned. Another awaits
+judgment. You should know what is going on in your midst. Our propaganda is
+being carried on in anticipation of repression. I invite you respectfully to
+choose the better way and make common cause with the people of India whose salt
+you are eating. To seek to thwart their inspirations is disloyalty to the
+country.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am, Your faithful friend, M. K. GANDHI
+</p>
+
+<h3>ONE STEP ENOUGH FOR ME</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Stokes is a Christian, who wants to follow the light that God gives him. He
+has adopted India as his home. He is watching the non-co-operation movement
+from the Kotgarh hills where he is living in isolation from the India of the
+plains and serving the hillmen. He has contributed three articles on
+non-co-operation to the columns of the Servant of Calcutta and other papers. I
+had the pleasure of reading them during my Bengal tour. Mr. Stokes approves of
+non-co-operation but dreads the consequences that may follow complete success
+<i>i.e.,</i> evacuation of India by the British. He conjures up before his mind
+a picture of India invaded by the Afghans from the North-West, plundered by the
+Gurkhas from the Hills. For me I say with Cardinal Newman: ‘I do not ask to see
+the distant scene; one step enough for me.’ The movement is essentially
+religious. The business of every god-fearing man is to dissociate himself from
+evil in total disregard of consequences. He must have faith in a good deed
+producing only a good result: that in my opinion is the Gita doctrine of work
+without attachment. God does not permit him to peep into the future. He follows
+truth although the following of it may endanger his very life. He knows that it
+is better to die in the way of God than to live in the way of Satan. Therefore
+who ever is satisfied that this Government represents the activity of Satan has
+no choice left to him but to dissociate himself from it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+However, let us consider the worst that can happen to India on a sudden
+evacuation of India by the British. What does it matter that the Gurkhas and
+the Pathans attack us? Surely we would be better able to deal with their
+violence than we are with the continued violence, moral and physical,
+perpetrated by the present Government. Mr. Stokes does not seem to eschew the
+use of physical force. Surely the combined labour of the Rajput, the Sikh and
+the Mussalman warriors in a united India may be trusted to deal with plunderers
+from any or all the sides. Imagine however the worst: Japan overwhelming us
+from the Bay of Bengal, the Gurkhas from the Hills, and the Pathans from the
+North-West. If we not succeed in driving them out we make terms with them and
+drive them at the first opportunity. This will be a more manly course than a
+hopeless submission to an admittedly wrongful State.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I refuse to contemplate the dismal out-look. If the movement succeeds
+through non-violent non-co-operation, and that is the supposition Mr. Stokes
+has started with, the English whether they remain or retire, they will do so as
+friends and under a well-ordered agreement as between partners. I still believe
+in the goodness of human nature, whether it is English or any other. I
+therefore do not believe that the English will leave in a night.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And do I consider the Gurkha and the Afghan being incorrigible thieves and
+robbers without ability to respond to purifying influences? I do not. If India
+returns to her spirituality, it will react upon the neighbouring tribes, she
+will interest herself in the welfare of these hardy but poor people, and even
+support them if necessary, not out of fear but as a matter of neighbourly duty.
+She will have dealt with Japan simultaneously with the British. Japan will not
+want to invade India, if India has learnt to consider it a sin to use a single
+foreign article that she can manufacture within her own borders. She produces
+enough to eat and her men and women can without difficulty manufacture enough
+to clothe to cover their nakedness and protect themselves from heat and cold.
+We become prey to invasion if we excite the greed of foreign nation, by dealing
+with them under a feeling dependence on them. We must learn to be independent
+of every one of them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whether therefore we finally succeed through violence or non-violence in my
+opinion, the prospect is by no means so gloomy as Mr. Stokes has imagined. Any
+conceivable prospect is, in my opinion, less black than the present unmanly and
+helpless condition. And we cannot do better than following out fearlessly and
+with confidence the open and honourable programme of non-violence and sacrifice
+that we have mapped for ourselves.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE NEED FOR HUMILITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The spirit of non-violence necessarily leads to humility. Non-violence means
+reliance on God, the Rocks of ages. If we would seek His aid, we must approach
+Him with a humble and a contrite heart. Non-co-operationists may not trade upon
+their amazing success at the Congress. We must act, even as the mango tree
+which drops as it bears fruit. Its grandeur lies in its majestic lowliness. But
+one hears of non-co-operationists being insolent and intolerant in their
+behaviour towards those who differ from them. I know that they will lose all
+their majesty and glory, if they betray any inflation. Whilst we may not be
+dissatisfied with the progress made so far, we have little to our credit to
+make us feel proud. We have to sacrifice much more than we have done to justify
+pride, much less elation. Thousands, who flocked to the Congress pandal, have
+undoubtedly given their intellectual assent to the doctrine but few have
+followed it out in practice. Leaving aside the pleaders, how many parents have
+withdrawn their children from schools? How many of those who registered their
+vote in favour of non-co-operation have taken to hand-spinning or discarded the
+use of all foreign cloth?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation is not a movement of brag, bluster, or bluff. It is a test of
+our sincerity. It requires solid and silent self-sacrifice. It challenges our
+honesty and our capacity for national work. It is a movement that aims at
+translating ideas into action. And the more we do, the more we find that much
+more must be done than we have expected. And this thought of our imperfection
+must make us humble.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A non-co-operationist strives to compel attention and to set an example not by
+his violence but by his unobtrusive humility. He allows his solid action to
+speak for his creed. His strength lies in his reliance upon the correctness of
+his position. And the conviction of it grows most in his opponent when he least
+interposes his speech between his action and his opponent. Speech, especially
+when it is haughty, betrays want of confidence and it makes one’s opponent
+sceptical about the reality of the act itself. Humility therefore is the key to
+quick success. I hope that every non-co-operationist will recognise the
+necessity of being humble and self-restrained. It is because so little is
+really required to be done because all of that little depends entirely upon
+ourselves that I have ventured the belief that Swaraj is attainable in less
+than one year.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+“I write to thank you for yours of the 7th instant and especially for your
+request that I should after reading your writings in “Young India” on
+non-co-operation, give a full and frank criticism of them. I know that your
+sole desire is to find out the truth and to act accordingly, and hence I
+venture to make the following remarks. In the issue of May 5th you say that
+non-co-operation is “not even anti-Government.” But surely to refuse to have
+anything to do with the Government to the extent of not serving it and of not
+paying its taxes is actually, if not theoretically anti-Government; and such a
+course must ultimately make all Government impossible. Again, you say, “It is
+the inherent right of a subject to refuse to assist a government that will not
+listen to him.” Leaving aside the question of the ethical soundness of this
+proposition, may I ask which Government, in the present case? Has not the
+Indian Government done all it possibly can in the matter? Then if its attempts
+to voice the request of India should fail, would it be fair and just to do
+anything against it? Would not the proper course be non-co-operation with the
+Supreme Council of the Allies, including Great Britain, if it be found that the
+latter has failed properly to support the demand of the Indian Government and
+people? It seems to me that in all your writings and speeches you forget that
+in the present question both Government and people are as one, and if they fail
+to get what they justly want, how does the question of non-co-operation arise?
+Hindus and Englishmen and the Government are all at present “shouldering in a
+full-hearted manner the burden that Muhomedans of India are carrying etc. etc.”
+But supposing we fail of our object—what then? Are we all to refuse to
+co-operate and with whom?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Might I recommend the consideration of the following course of conduct?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) “Wait and see” what the actual terms of the Treaty with Turkey are?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) If they are not in accordance with the aspirations and recommendations of
+the Government and the people of India, the every legitimate effort should be
+made to have the terms revised.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) To the bitter end, co-operate with a Government that co-operates with us,
+and only when it refuses co-operation, go in for non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+So far I personally see no reason whatsoever for non-co-operation with the
+Indian Government, and till it fails to voice the needs and demands of India as
+a whole there can be no reason. The Indian Government does some times make
+mistakes, but in the Khilafat matter it is sound and therefore deserves or
+ought to have the sympathetic and whole-hearted co-operation of every one in
+India. I hope that you will kindly consider the above and perhaps you will be
+able to find time for a reply in <i>Young India</i>.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I gladly make room for the above letter and respond to the suggestion to give a
+public reply as no doubt the difficulty experienced by the English friend is
+experienced by many. Causes are generally lost, not owing to the determined
+opposition of men who will not see the truth as they want to perpetuate an
+injustice but because they are able to enlist in their favour the allegiance of
+those who are anxious to understand a particular cause and take sides after
+mature judgment. It is only by patient argument with such honest men that one
+is able to check oneself, correct one’s own errors of judgment and at times to
+wean them from their error and bring them over to one’s side. This Khilafat
+question is specially difficult because there are so many side-issues. It is
+therefore no wonder that many have more or less difficulty in making up their
+minds. It is further complicated because the painful necessity for some direct
+action has arisen in connection with it. But whatever the difficulty, I am
+convinced that there is no question so important as this one if we want harmony
+and peace in India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My friend objects to my statement that non-co-operation is not anti-Government,
+because he considers that refusal to serve it and pay its taxes is actually
+anti-Government. I respectfully dissent from the view. If a brother has
+fundamental differences with his brother, and association with the latter
+involves his partaking of what in his opinion is an injustice. I hold that it
+is brotherly duty to refrain from serving his brother and sharing his earnings
+with him. This happens in everyday life. Prahalad did not act against his
+father, when he declined to associate himself with the latter’s blasphemies.
+Nor was Jesus anti-Jewish when he declaimed against the Pharisees and the
+hypocrites, and would have none of them. In such matters, is it not intention
+that determines the character of a particular act? It is hardly correct as the
+friend suggests that withdrawal of association under general circumstances
+would make all government impossible. But it is true that such withdrawal would
+make all injustice impossible.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My correspondent considers that the Government of India having done all it
+possibly could, non-co-operation could not be applicable to that Government. In
+my opinion, whilst it is true that the Government of India has done a great
+deal, it has not done half as much as it might have done, and might even now
+do. No Government can absolve itself from further action beyond protesting,
+when it realises that the people whom it represents feel as keenly as do lakhs
+of Indian Mussalmans in the Khilafat question. No amount of sympathy with a
+starving man can possibly avail. He must have bread or he dies, and what is
+wanted at that critical moment is some exertion to fetch the wherewithal to
+feed the dying man. The Government of India can to-day heed the agitation and
+ask, to the point of insistence for full vindication of the pledged word of a
+British Minister. Has the Government of India resigned by way of protest
+against the threatened, shameful betrayal of trust on the part of Mr. Lloyd
+George? Why does the Government of India hide itself behind secret despatches?
+At a less critical moment Lord Hardiage committed a constitutional
+indiscretion, openly sympathised with South African Passive Resistance movement
+and stemmed the surging tide of public indignation in India, though at the same
+time he incurred the wrath of the then South African Cabinet and some public
+men in Great Britain. After all, the utmost that the Government of India has
+done is on its own showing to transmit and press the Mahomedan claim. Was that
+not the least it could have done? Could it have done anything less without
+covering itself with disgrace? What Indian Mahomedans and the Indian public
+expect the Government of India to do at this critical juncture is not the
+least, but the utmost that it could do. Viceroys have been known to tender
+resignations for much smaller causes. Wounded pride brought forth not very long
+ago the resignation of a Lieutenant Governor. On the Khilafat question, a
+sacred cause dear to the hearts of several million Mahomedans is in danger of
+being wounded. I would therefore invite the English friend, and every
+Englishman in India, and every Hindu, be he moderate or extremist, to make
+common cause with the Mahomedans and thereby compel the Government of India to
+do its duty, and thereby compel His Majesty’s Ministers to do theirs.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There has been much talk of violence ensuing from active non-co-operation. I
+venture to suggest that the Mussalmans of India, if they had nothing in the
+shape of non-co-operation in view, would have long ago yielded to counsels of
+despair. I admit that non-co-operation is not unattended with danger. But
+violence is a certainty without, violence is only a possibility with
+non-co-operation. And it will he a greater possibility if all the important
+men, English, Hindu and others of the country discountenance it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I think, that the recommendation made by the friend is being literally followed
+by the Mahomedans. Although they practically know the fate, they are waiting
+for the actual terms of the treaty with Turkey. They are certainly going to try
+every means at their disposal to have the terms revised before beginning
+non-co-operation. And there will certainly be no non-co-operation commenced so
+long as there is even hope of active co-operation on the part of the Government
+of India with the Mahomedans, that is, co-operation strong enough to secure a
+revision of the terms should they be found to be in conflict with the pledges
+of British statesmen. But if all these things fail, can Mahomedans as men of
+honour who hold their religion dearer than their lives do anything less than
+wash their hands clean of the guilt of British Ministers and the Government of
+India by refusing to co-operate with them? And can Hindus and Englishmen, if
+they value Mahomedan friendship, and if they admit then full justice of the
+Mahomaden friendship and if they admit the full justice of the Mahomedan claim
+do otherwise than heartily support the Mahomedans by word and deed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>PLEDGES BROKEN</h3>
+
+<p>
+After the forgoing was printed the long-expected peace terms regarding Turkey
+were received. In my humble opinion they are humiliating to the Supreme
+Council, to the British ministers, and if as a Hindu with deep reverence for
+Christianity I may say so, a denial of Christ’s teachings. Turkey broken down
+and torn with dissentions within may submit to the arrogant disposal of
+herself, and Indian Mahomedans may out of fear do likewise. Hindus out of fear,
+apathy or want of appreciation of the situation, may refuse to help their
+Mahomedan brethren in their hour of peril. The fact remains that a solemn
+promise of the Prime Minister of England has been wantonly broken. I will say
+nothing about President Wilson’s fourteen points, for they seem now to be
+entirely forgotten as a day’s wonder. It is a matter of deep sorrow that the
+Government of India <i>communique</i> offers a defence of the terms, calls them
+a fulfilment of Mr. Lloyd George’s pledge of 5th January 1918 and yet
+apologises for their defective nature and appeals to the Mahomedans of India as
+if to mock them that they would accept the terms with quiet resignation. The
+mask that veils the hypocrisy is too thin to deceive anybody. It would have
+been dignified if the <i>communique</i> had boldly admitted Mr. Lloyd George’s
+mistake in having made the promise referred to. As it is, the claim of
+fulfilment of the promise only adds to the irritation caused by its glaring
+breach. What is the use of the Viceroy saying, “The question of the Khilafat is
+one for the Mahomedans and Mahomedans only and that with their free choice in
+the matter Government have no desire to interfere,” while the Khalif’s
+dominions are ruthlessly dismembered, his control of the Holy places of Islam
+shamelessly taken away from him and he himself reduced to utter impotence in
+his own palace which can no longer be called a palace but which can he more
+fitly described us a prison? No wonder, His Excellency fears that the peace
+includes “terms which must be painful to all Moslems.” Why should he insult
+Muslim intelligence by sending the Mussalmans of India a of encouragement and
+sympathy? Are they expected to find encouragement in the cruel recital of the
+arrogant terms or in a remembrance of ‘the splendid response’ made by them to
+the call of the King ‘in the day of the Empire’s need.’ It ill becomes His
+Excellency to talk of the triumph of those ideals of justice and humanity for
+which the Allies fought. Indeed, the terms of the so called peace with Turkey
+if they are to last, will be a monument of human arrogance and man-made
+injustice. To attempt to crush the spirit of a brave and gallant race, because
+it has lost in the fortunes of war, is a triumph not of humanity but a
+demonstration of inhumanity. And if Turkey enjoyed the closest ties of
+friendship with Great Britain before the war, Great Britain has certainly made
+ample reparation for her mistake by having made the largest contribution to the
+humiliation of Turkey. It is insufferable therefore when the Viceroy feels
+confident that with the conclusion of this new treaty that friendship will
+quickly take life again and a Turkey regenerate full of hope and strength, will
+stand forth in the future as in the past a pillar of the Islamic faith. The
+Viceregal message audaciously concludes, “This thought will I trust strengthen
+you to accept the peace terms with resignation, courage and fortitude and to
+keep your loyalty towards the Crown bright and untarnished as it has been for
+so many generations.” If Muslim loyalty remains untarnished it will certainly
+not be for want of effort on the part of the Government of India to put the
+heaviest strain upon it, but it will remain so because the Mahomedans realise
+their own strength—the strength in the knowledge that their cause is just and
+that they have got the power to vindicate justice in spite of the aberration
+suffered by Great Britain under a Prime Minister whom continued power has made
+as reckless in making promises as in breaking them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whilst therefore I admit that there is nothing either in the peace terms or in
+the Viceregal message covering them to inspire the Mahomedans and Indians in
+general with confidence or hope, I venture to suggest that there is no cause
+for despair and anger. Now is the time for Mahomedans to retain absolute
+self-control, to unite their forces and, weak though they are, with firm faith
+in God to carry on the struggle with redoubled vigour till justice is done. If
+India—both Hindu and Mahomedan—can act as one man and can withdraw her
+partnership in this crime against humanity which the peace terms represent, she
+will soon secure a revision of the treaty and give herself and the Empire at
+least, if not the world, a lasting peace. There is no doubt that the struggle
+would be bitter sharp and possibly prolonged, but it is worth all the sacrifice
+that it is likely to call forth. Both the Mussalmans and the Hindus are on
+their trial. Is the humiliation of the Khilafat a matter of concern to the
+former? And if it is, are they prepared to exercise restraint, religiously
+refrain from violence and practise non-co-operation without counting the
+material loss it may entail upon the community? Do the Hindus honestly feel for
+their Mahomedan brethren to the extent of sharing their sufferings to the
+fullest extent? The answer to these questions and not the peace terms, will
+finally decide the fate of the Khilafat.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MORE OBJECTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+<i>Swadeshmitran</i> is one of the most influential Tamil dailies of Madras. It
+is widely read. Everything appearing in its columns is entitled to respect. The
+Editor has suggested some practical difficulty in the way of non-co-operation.
+I would therefore like, to the best of my ability, to deal with them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not know where the information has been derived from that I have given up
+the last two stages of non-co-operation. What I have said is that they are a
+distant goal. I abide by it. I admit that all the stages are fraught with some
+danger, but the last two are fraught with the greatest—the last most of all.
+The stages have been fixed with a view to running the least possible risk. The
+last two stages will not be taken up unless the committee has attained
+sufficient control over the people to warrant the beliefs that the laying down
+of arms or suspension of taxes will, humanly speaking, be free from an outbreak
+of violence on the part of the people. I do entertain the belief that it is
+possible for the people to attain the discipline necessary for taking the two
+steps. When once they realise that violence is totally unnecessary to bend an
+unwilling government to their will and that the result can be obtained with
+certainty by dignified non-co-operation, they will cease to think of violence
+even by way of retaliation. The fact is that hitherto we have not attempted to
+take concerted and disciplined action from the masses. Some day, if we are to
+become truly a self-governing nation, that attempt has to be made. The present,
+in my opinion, is a propitious movement. Every Indian feels the insult to the
+Punjab as a personal wrong, every Mussalman resents the wrong done to the
+Khilafat. There is therefore a favourable atmosphere for expecting cohesive and
+restrained movement on the part of the masses.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+So far as response is concerned, I agree with the Editor that the quickest and
+the largest response is to be expected in the matter of suspension of payment
+of taxes, but as I have said so long as the masses are not educated to
+appreciate the value of non-violence even whilst their holding are being sold,
+so long must it be difficult to take up the last stage into any appreciable
+extent.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I agree too that a sudden withdrawal of the military and the police will be a
+disaster if we have not acquired the ability to protect ourselves against
+robbers and thieves. But I suggest that when we are ready to call out the
+military and the police on an extensive scale we would find ourselves in a
+position to defend ourselves. If the police and the military resign from
+patriotic motives, I would certainly expect them to perform the same duty as
+national volunteers, not has hirelings but as willing protectors of the life
+and liberty of their countrymen. The movement of non-co-operation is one of
+automatic adjustment. If the Government schools are emptied, I would certainly
+expect national schools to come into being. If the lawyers as a whole suspended
+practice, they would devise arbitration courts and the nation will have
+expeditions and cheaper method of setting private disputes and awarding
+punishment to the wrong-doer. I may add that the Khilafat Committee is fully
+alive to the difficulty of the task and is taking all the necessary steps to
+meet the contingencies as they arise.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Regarding the leaving of civil employment, no danger is feared, because no one
+will leave his employment, unless he is in a position to find support for
+himself and family either through friends or otherwise.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Disapproval of the proposed withdrawal of students betrays, in my humble
+opinion, lack of appreciation of the true nature of non-co-operation. It is
+true enough that we pay the money wherewith our children are educated. But,
+when the agency imparting the education has become corrupt, we may not employ
+it without partaking of the agents, corruption. When students leave schools or
+colleges I hardly imagine that the teachers will fail to perceive the
+advisability of themselves resigning. But even if they do not, money can hardly
+be allowed to count where honour or religion are at the stake.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to the boycott of the councils, it is not the entry of the Moderates or any
+other persons that matters so much as the entry of those who believe in
+non-co-operation. You may not co-operate at the top and non-co-operate at the
+bottom. A councillor cannot remain in the council and ask the <i>gumasta</i>
+who cleans the council-table to resign.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. PENNINGTON’S OBJECTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+I gladly publish Mr. Pennington’s letter with its enclosure just as I have
+received them. Evidently Mr. Pennington is not a regular reader of ‘Young
+India,’ or he would have noticed that no one has condemned mob outrages more
+than I have. He seems to think that the article he has objected to was the only
+thing I have ever written on General Dyer. He does not seem to know that I have
+endeavoured with the utmost impartiality to examine the Jallianwala massacre.
+And he can see any day all the proof adduced by my fellow-commissioners and
+myself in support of our findings on the massacre. The ordinary readers of
+‘Young India’ knew all the facts and therefore it was unnecessary for me to
+support my assertion otherwise. But unfortunately Mr. Pennington represents the
+typical Englishman. He does not want to be unjust, nevertheless he is rarely
+just in his appreciation of world events because he has no time to study them
+except cursorily and that through a press whose business is to air only party
+views. The average Englishman therefore except in parochial matters is perhaps
+the least informed though he claims to be well-informed about every variety of
+interest. Mr. Pennington’s ignorance is thus typical of the others and affords
+the best reason for securing control of our own affairs in our own hands.
+Ability will come with use and not by waiting to be trained by those whose
+natural interest is to prolong the period of tutelage as much as possible.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But to return to Mr. Pennington’s letter he complains that there has been no
+‘proper trial of any one.’ The fault is not ours. India has consistently and
+insistently demanded a trial of all the officers concerned in the crimes
+against the Punjab.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He next objects to be ‘violence’ of my language. If truth is violent, I plead
+guilty to the charge of violence of language. But I could not, without doing
+violence to truth, refrain from using the language, I have, regarding General
+Dyer’s action. It has been proved out of his own mouth or hostile witnesses:
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) That the crowd was unarmed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) That it contained children.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) That the 13th was the day of Vaisakhi fair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) That thousands had come to the fair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) That there was no rebellion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) That during the intervening two days before the ‘massacre’ there was peace
+in Amritsar.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) That the proclamation of the meeting was made the same day as General
+Dyer’s proclamation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) That General Dyer’s proclamation prohibited not meetings but processions or
+gatherings of four men on the streets and not in private or public places.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(9) That General Dyer ran no risk whether outside or inside the city.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(10) That he admitted himself that many in the crowd did not know anything of
+his proclamation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(11) That he fired without warning the crowd and even after it had begun to
+disperse. He fired on the backs of the people who were in flight.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(12) That the men were practically penned in an enclosure.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the face of these admitted facts I do call the deed a ‘massacre.’ The action
+amounted not to ‘an error of judgment’ but its ‘paralysis in the face of
+fancied danger.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am sorry to have to say that Mr. Pennington’s notes, which too the reader
+will find published elsewhere, betray as much ignorance as his letter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whatever was adopted on paper in the days of Canning was certainly not
+translated into action in its full sense. ‘Promises made to the ear were broken
+to the hope,’ was said by a reactionary Viceroy. Military expenditure has grown
+enormously since the days of Canning.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The demonstration in favour of General Dyer is practically a myth.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+No trace was found of the so-called Danda Fauj dignified by the name of
+bludgeon-army by Mr. Pennington. There was no rebel army in Amritsar. The crown
+that committed the horrible murders and incendiarism contained no one community
+exclusively. The sheet was found posted only in Lahore and not in Amritsar. Mr.
+Pennington should moreover have known by this time that the meeting held on the
+13th was held, among other things, for the purpose of condemning mob excesses.
+This was brought out at the Amritsar trial. Those who surrounded him could not
+stop General Dyer. He says he made up his mind to shoot in a moment. He
+consulted nobody. When the correspondent says that the troops would have
+objected to being concerned in ‘what might in that case be not unfairly called
+a ‘massacre,’ he writes as if he had never lived in India. I wish the Indian
+troops had the moral courage to refuse to shoot innocent, unarmed men in full
+flight. But the Indian troops have been brought in too slavish an atmosphere to
+dare do any such correct act.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hope Mr. Pennington will not accuse me again of making unverified assertions
+because I have not quoted from the books. The evidence is there for him to use.
+I can only assure him that the assertions are based on positive proofs mostly
+obtained from official sources.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Pennington wants me to publish an exact account of what happened on the
+10th April. He can find it in the reports, and if he will patiently go through
+them he will discover that Sir Michael O’Dwyer and his officials goaded the
+people into frenzied fury—a fury which nobody, as I have already said, has
+condemned more than I have. The account of the following days is summed up in
+one word, <i>viz.</i> ‘peace’ on the part of the crowd disturbed by
+indiscriminate arrests, the massacre and the series of official crimes that
+followed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am prepared to give Mr. Pennington credit for seeking after the truth. But he
+has gone about it in the wrong manner. I suggest his reading the evidence
+before the Hunter Committee and the Congress Committee. He need not read the
+reports. But the evidence will convince him that I have understated the case
+against General Dyer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When however I read his description of himself as “for 12 years Chief
+Magistrate of Districts in the South of India before reform, by assassination
+and otherwise, became so fashionable.” I despair of his being able to find the
+truth. An angry or a biased man renders himself incapable of finding it. And
+Mr. Pennington is evidently both angry and biased. What does he mean by saying,
+“before reform by assassination and otherwise became so fashionable?” It ill
+becomes him to talk of assassination when the school of assassination seems
+happily to have become extinct. Englishmen will never see the truth so long as
+they permit their vision to be blinded by arrogant assumption of superiority or
+ignorant assumptions of infallibility.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. PENNINGTON’S LETTER TO MR. GANDHI</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Dear Sir,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not like your scheme for “boycotting” the Government of India under what
+seems to be the somewhat less offensive (though more cumbrous) name of
+non-co-operation; but have always given you credit for a genuine desire to
+carry out revolution by peaceful means and am astonished at the violence of the
+language you use in describing General Dyer on page 4 of your issue of the 14th
+July last. You begin by saying that he is “by no means the worst offender,”
+and, so far, I am inclined to agree, though as there has been no proper trial
+of anyone it is impossible to apportion their guilt; but then you say “his
+brutality is unmistakable,” “his abject and unsoldierlike cowardice is
+apparent, he has called an <i>unarmed crowd</i> of men and children—mostly
+holiday makers—a rebel army.” “He believes himself to be the saviour of the
+Punjab in that he was able to shoot down like rabbits men who were
+<i>penned</i> in an enclosure; such a man is unworthy to be considered a
+soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran no risk. He shot without
+the slightest opposition and without warning. This is not an error of
+judgement. It is paralysis of it in the face of <i>fancied</i> danger. It is
+proof of criminal incapacity and heartlessness,” etc.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You must excuse me for saying that all this is mere rhetoric unsupported by any
+proof, even where proof was possible. To begin with, neither you nor I were
+present at the Jallianwalla Bagh on that dreadful day—dreadful especially for
+General Dyer for whom you show no sympathy,—and therefore cannot know for
+certain whether the crowd was or was not unarmed.’ That it was an ‘illegal,’
+because a ‘prohibited,’ assembly is evident; for it is absurd to suppose that
+General Dyer’s 4-1/2 hours march, through the city that very morning, during
+the whole of which he was warning the inhabitants against the danger of any
+sort of gathering, was not thoroughly well-known. You say they were ‘mostly
+holiday makers,’ but you give nor proof; and the idea of holiday gathering in
+Amritsar just then in incredible. I cannot understand your making such a
+suggestion. General Dyer was not the only officer present on the occasion and
+it is impossible to suppose that he would have been allowed to go on shooting
+into an innocent body of holiday-makers. Even the troops would have refused to
+carry out what might then have been not unfairly called a “massacre.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I notice that you never even allude to the frightful brutality of the mob which
+was immediately responsible for the punitive measure reluctantly adopted by
+General Dyer. Your sympathies seem to be only with the murderers, and I am not
+sanguine enough to suppose that my view of the case will have much influence
+with you. Still I am bound to do what I can to get at the truth, and enclose a
+copy of some notes I have had occasion to make. If you can publish an
+<i>exact</i> account of what happened at Amritsar on the 10th of April, 1919
+and the following days, especially on the 13th, including the demonstration in
+favour of General Dyer, (if there was one), I for one, as a mere seeker after
+the truth, should be very much obliged to you. Mere abuse is not convincing, as
+you so often observe in your generally reasonable paper,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Yours faithfully, J. R. PENNINGTON, I.O.S. (Retd.) 35, VICTORIA ROAD, WORTHING,
+SUSSEX 27th Aug. 1920.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For 12 years Chief Magistrate of Districts in the south of India before reform,
+by assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P.S. Let us get the case in this way. General Dyer, acting as the only
+representative of Government on the spot shot some hundreds of people (some of
+them <i>perhaps</i> innocently mixed up in an illegal assembly), in the <i>bona
+fide</i> belief that he was dealing with the remains of a very dangerous
+rebellion and was thereby saving the lives of very many thousands, and in the
+opinion of a great many people did actually save the city from falling in the
+hands of a dangerous mob.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME DOUBTS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Babu Janakdhari Prasad was a staunch coworker with me in Champaran. He has
+written a long letter setting forth his reasons for his belief that India has a
+great mission before her, and that she can achieve her purpose only by
+non-violent non-co-operation. But he has doubts which he would have me answer
+publicly. The letter being long, I am withholding. But the doubts are entitled
+to respect and I must endeavour to answer them. Here they are us framed by Bubu
+Janakdhari Prasad.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(a) Is not the non-co-operation movement creating a sort of race-hatred between
+Englishmen and Indians, and is it in accordance with the Divine plan of
+universal love and brotherhood?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(b) Does not the use of words “devilish,” “satanic,” etc., savour of
+unbrotherly sentiment and incite feelings of hatred?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(c) Should not the non-co-operation movement be conducted on strictly
+non-violent and non-emotional lines both in speech and action?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(d) Is there no danger of the movement going out of control and lending to
+violence?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (a), I must say that the movement is not ‘creating’ race-hatred. It
+certainly gives, as I have already said, disciplined expression to it. You
+cannot eradicate evil by ignoring it. It is because I want to promote universal
+brotherhood that I have taken up non-co-operation so that, by
+self-purification, India may make the world better than it is.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (b), I know that the words ‘satanic’ and ‘devilish’ are strong, but they
+relate the exact truth. They describe a system not persons: We are bound to
+hate evil, if we would shun it. But by means of non-co-operation we are able to
+distinguish between the evil and the evil-doer. I have found no difficulty in
+describing a particular activity of a brother of mine to be devilish, but I am
+not aware of having harboured any hatred about him. Non-co-operation teaches us
+to love our fellowmen in spite of their faults, not by ignoring or over-looking
+them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (c), the movement is certainly being conducted on strictly non-violent
+lines. That all non-co-operators have not yet thoroughly imbibed the doctrine
+is true. But that just shows what an evil legacy we have inherited. Emotion
+there is in the movement. And it will remain. A man without emotion is a man
+without feeling.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (d), there certainly is danger of the movement becoming violent. But we
+may no more drop non-violent non-co-operation because of its dangers, than we
+may stop freedom because of the danger of its abuse.
+</p>
+
+<h3>REJOINDER</h3>
+
+<p>
+Messrs. Popley and Philips have been good enough to reply to my letter “To
+Every Englishman in India.” I recognise and appreciate the friendly spirit of
+their letter. But I see that there are fundamental differences which must for
+the time being divide them and me. So long as I felt that, in spite of grievous
+lapses the British Empire represented an activity for the worlds and India’s
+good, I clung to it like a child to its mother’s breast. But that faith is
+gone. The British nation has endorsed the Punjab and Khilsfat crimes. The is no
+doubt a dissenting minority. But a dissenting minority that satisfies itself
+with a mere expression of its opinion and continues to help the wrong-doer
+partakes in wrong-doing.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And when the sum total of his energy represents a minus quantity one may not
+pick out the plus quantities, hold them up for admiration, and ask an admiring
+public to help regarding them. It is a favourite design of Satan to temper evil
+with a show of good and thus lure the unwary into the trap. The only way the
+world has known of defeating Satan is by shunning him. I invite Englishmen, who
+could work out the ideal the believe in, to join the ranks of the
+non-co-operationists. W.T. Stead prayed for the reverse of the British arms
+during the Boer war. Miss Hobbhouse invited the Boers to keep up the fight. The
+betrayal of India is much worse than the injustice done to the Boers. The Boers
+fought and bled for their rights. When therefore, we are prepared to bleed, the
+right will have become embodied, and idolatrous world will perceive it and do
+homage to it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But Messers. Popley and Phillips object that I have allied myself with those
+who would draw the sword if they could. I see nothing wrong in it. They
+represent the right no less than I do. And is it not worth while trying to
+prevent an unsheathing of the sword by helping to win the bloodless battle?
+Those who recognise the truth of the Indian position can only do God’s work by
+assisting this non-violent campaign.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second objection raised by these English friends is more to the point. I
+would be guilty of wrong-doing myself if the Muslim cause was not just. The
+fact is that the Muslim claim is not to perpetuate foreign domination of
+non-Muslim or Turkish races. The Indian Mussalmans do not resist
+self-determination, but they would fight to the last the nefarious plan of
+exploiting Mesopotamia under the plea of self-determination. They must resist
+the studied attempt to humiliate Turkey and therefore Islam, under the false
+pretext of ensuring Armenian independence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The third objection has reference to schools. I do object to missionary or any
+schools being carried on with Government money. It is true that it was at one
+time our money. Will these good missionaries be justified in educating me with
+funds given to them by a robber who has robbed me of my money, religion and
+honour because the money was originally mine.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I personally tolerated the financial robbery of India, but it would have been a
+sin to have tolerated the robbery of honour through the Punjab, and of religion
+through Turkey. This is strong language. But nothing less would truly describe
+my deep conviction. Needless to add that the emptying of Government aided, or
+affiliated, schools does not mean starving the young mind National Schools are
+coming into being as fast as the others are emptied.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Messrs. Popley and Phillips think that my sense of justice has been blurred by
+the knowledge of the Punjab and the Khilafat wrongs. I hope not. I have asked
+friends to show me some good fruit (intended and deliberately produced) of the
+British occupation of India. And I assure them that I shall make the amplest
+amends if I find that I have erred in my eagerness about the Khilafat and the
+Punjab wrongs.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TWO ENGLISHMEN REPLY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thank you for your letter to every Englishman in India, with its hard-hitting
+and its generous tone. Something within us responds to the note which you have
+struck. We are not representatives of any corporate body, but we think that
+millions of our countrymen in England, and not a few in India, feel as we do.
+The reading of your letter convinces us that you and we cannot be real enemies.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+May we say at once that in so far as the British Empire stands for the
+domination and exploitation of other races for Britain’s benefit, for degrading
+treatment of any, for traffic in intoxicating liquors, for repressive
+legislation, for administration such as that which to the Amritsar incidents,
+we desire the end of it as much as you do? We quite understand that in the
+excitement of the present crisis, owing to certain acts of the British
+Administration, which we join with you in condemning, the Empire presents
+itself to you under this aspect along. But from personal contact with our
+countrymen, we know that working like leaven in the midst of such tendencies,
+as you and we deplore, is the faith in a better ideal—the ideal of a
+commonwealth of free peoples voluntarily linked together by the ties of common
+experience in the past and common aspirations for the future, a commonwealth
+which may hope to spread liberty and progress through the whole earth. With
+vast numbers of our countrymen we value the British Empire mainly as affording
+the possibility of the realization of such an idea and on the ground give it
+our loyal allegiance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Meanwhile we do repent of that arrogant attitude to Indians which has been all
+too common among our countrymen, we do hold Indians to be our brothers and
+equals, many of them our superiors, and we would rather be servants than rulers
+of India. We desire an administration which cannot he intimated either by the
+selfish element in Anglo-Indian political opinion or by any other sectional
+interest and which shall govern in accordance with the best democratic
+principles. We should welcome the convening of a National assembly of
+recognized leaders of the people, representing all shades of political opinion
+of every caste, race and creed, to frame a constitution for Swaraj. In all the
+things that matter most we are with you. Surely you and we can co-operate in
+the service of India, in such matters for example as education. It seems to us
+nothing short of a tragedy that you should be rallying Indian Patriotism to
+inaugurate a new era of good will under a watchword that divides, instead of
+uniting all.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We have spoken of the large amount of common ground upon which you and we can
+stand. But frankness demands that we express our anxiety about some items in
+your programme. Leaving aside smaller questions on which your letter seems to
+us to do the British side less than justice, may we mention three main points?
+Your insistence on spiritual forces alone we deeply respect and desire to
+emulate, but we cannot understand your combining into it with a close alliance
+with those who, as you frankly say, would draw the sword as soon as they could.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your desire for an education truly national commands our whole-hearted
+approval. But instead of Indianizing the present system, as you could begin to
+do from the beginning of next year, or instead of creating a hundred
+institutions such as that at Bolpur and turning into them the stream of India’s
+young intellectual life, you appear to be turning that stream out of its
+present channel into open sands where it may dry up. In other words, you seem
+to us to be risking the complete cessation, for a period possibly, of years, of
+all education, for a large number of boys and young men. Is it best, for those
+young men or for India that the present imperfect education should cease before
+a better education is ready to take its place?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your desire to unite Mohammedan and Hindu and to share with your Mohammedan
+brethren in seeking the satisfaction of Mohammedan aspirations, we can
+understand and sympathize with. But is there no danger, in the course which
+some of your party have urged upon the Government, that certain races in the
+former Ottoman Empire might be fixed under a foreign yoke, for worse than that
+which you hold the English yoke to be? You could not wish to purchase freedom
+in India at the price of enslavement in the middle East.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To sum up, we thank you for the spirit of your letter, to which we have tried
+to respond in the same spirit. We are with you in the desire for an India
+genuinely free to develop the best that is in her and in the belief that best
+is something wonderful of which the world to-day stands in need.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We are ready to co-operate with you and with every other man of any race or
+nationality who will help India to realize her best. Are you going to insist
+that you can have nothing to do with us if we receive a government grant (i.e.,
+Indian money), for an Indian School. Surely some more inspiring battle cry than
+non-co-operation can be discovered. We have ventured quite frankly to point out
+three items in your present programme, which seem to us likely to hinder the
+attainment of your true ideals for Indian greatness. But those ideals
+themselves command our warm sympathy, and we desire to work, so far as we have
+opportunity, for their attainment. In fact, it is only thus that we can
+interpret our British citizenship.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Yours sincerely, (Sd.) H.A. POPLEY, (Sd.) G.E. PHILLIPS. Bangalore, November
+15, 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>RENUNCIATION OF MEDALS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi has addressed the following letter to the Viceroy:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not without a pang that I return the Kaisar-i-Hind gold medal granted to
+me by your predecessor for my humanitarian work in South Africa, the Zulu war
+medal granted in South Africa for my services as officer in charge of the
+Indian volunteer ambulance corps in 1906 and the Boer war medal fur my services
+as assistant superintendent of the Indian volunteer stretcher bearer corps
+during the Boer war of 1899-1900. I venture to return these medals in pursuance
+of the scheme of non-co-operation inaugurated to-day in connection with the
+Khilafat movement. Valuable as those honours have been to me, I cannot wear
+them with an easy conscience so long as my Mussalman countrymen have to labour
+under a wrong done to their religious sentiment. Events that have happened
+during the past month have confirmed me in the opinion that the Imperial
+Government have acted in the Khilafat matter in an unscrupulous, immoral and
+unjust manner and have been moving from wrong to wrong in order to defend their
+immorality. I can retain neither respect nor affection for such a Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The attitude of the Imperial and Your Excellency’s Governments on the Punjab
+question has given me additional cause for grave dissatisfaction. I had the
+honour, as Your Excellency is aware, as one of the congress commissioners to
+investigate the causes of the disorders in the Punjab during the April of 1919.
+And it is my deliberate conviction that Sir Michael O’Dwyer was totally unfit
+to hold the office of Lieutenant Governor of Punjab and that his policy was
+primarily responsible for infuriating the mob at Amritsar. No doubt the mob
+excesses were unpardonable; incendiarism, murder of five innocent Englishmen
+and the cowardly assault on Miss Sherwood were most deplorable and uncalled
+for. But the punitive measures taken by General Dyer, Col. Frank Johnson, Col.
+O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram Sud, Mr. Malik Khan and other
+officers were out of all proportional to the crime of the people and amounted
+to wanton cruelty and inhumanity and almost unparalleled in modern times. Your
+excellency’s light-hearted treatment of the official crime, your, exoneration
+of Sir Michael O’Dwyer, Mr. Montagu’s dispatch and above all the shameful
+ignorance of the Punjab events and callous disregard of the feelings of Indians
+betrayed by the House of Lords, have filled me with the gravest misgivings
+regarding the future of the Empire, have estranged me completely from the
+present Government and have disabled me from tendering, as I have hitherto
+whole-heartedly tendered, my loyal co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my humble opinion the ordinary method of agitating by way of petitions,
+deputations and the like is no remedy for moving to repentence a Government so
+hopelessly indifferent to the welfare of its charges as the Government of India
+has proved to me. In European countries, condonation of such grievous wrongs as
+the Khilafat and the Punjab would have resulted in a bloody revolution by the
+people. They would have resisted at all costs national emasculation such as the
+said wrongs imply. But half of India is to weak to offer violent resistance and
+the other half is unwilling to do so.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have therefore ventured to suggest the remedy of non-co-operation which
+enables those who wish, to dissociate themselves from the Government and which,
+if it is unattended by violence and undertaken in an ordered manner, must
+compel it to retrace its steps and undo the wrongs committed. But whilst I
+shall pursue the policy of non-co-operation in so far as I can carry the people
+with me, I shall not lose hope that you will yet see your way to do justice. I
+therefore respectfully ask Your Excellency to summon a conference of the
+recognised leaders of the people and in consultation with them find a way that
+would placate the Mussalmans and do reparation to the unhappy Punjab. <i>August
+4, 1920.</i>
+</p>
+
+<h3>MAHATMA GANDHI’S LETTER TO H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT</h3>
+
+<p>
+The following letter has been addressed by Mr. Gandhi to his Royal Highness the
+Duke of Connaught;—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Sir,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Royal Highness must have heard a great deal about non-co-operation,
+non-co-operationists and their methods and incidentally of me its humble
+author. I fear that the information given to Your Royal Highness must have been
+in its nature one-sided. I owe it to you and to my friends and myself that I
+should place before you what I conceive to be the scope of non-co-operation as
+followed not only be me but my closest associates such as Messrs. Shaukat Ali
+and Mahomed Ali.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For me it is no joy and pleasure to be actively associated in the boycott of
+your Royal Highness’ visit—I have tendered loyal and voluntary association to
+the Government for an unbroken period of nearly 30 years in the full belief
+that through that way lay the path of freedom for my country. It was therefore
+no slight thing for me to suggest to my countrymen that we should take no part
+in welcoming Your Royal Highness. Not one among us has anything against you as
+an English gentleman. We hold your person as sacred as that of a dearest
+friend. I do not know any of my friends who would not guard it with his life,
+if he found it in danger. We are not at war with individual Englishmen we seek
+not to destroy English life. We do desire to destroy a system that has
+emasculated our country in body, mind and soul. We are determined to battle
+with all our might against that in the English nature which has made O’Dwyerism
+and Dyerism possible in the Punjab and has resulted in a wanton affront upon
+Islam a faith professed by seven crores of our countrymen. The affront has been
+put in breach of the letter and the spirit of the solemn declaration of the
+Prime Minister. We consider it to be inconsistent with our self respect any
+longer to brook the spirit of superiority and dominance which has
+systematically ignored and disregarded the sentiments of thirty crores of the
+innocent people of India on many a vital matter. It is humiliating to us, it
+cannot be a matter of pride to you, that thirty crores of Indians should live
+day in and day out in the fear of their lives from one hundred thousand
+Englishmen and therefore be under subjection to them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Royal Highness has come not to end the system I have described but to
+sustain it by upholding its prestige. Your first pronouncement was a laudation
+of Lord Wellingdon. I have the privilege of knowing him. I believe him to be an
+honest and amiable gentleman who will not willingly hurt even a fly. But, he
+has certainly failed as a ruler. He allowed himself to be guided by those whose
+interest it was to support their power. He is reading the mind of the Dravidian
+province. Here in Bengal you are issuing a certificate of merit to a Governor
+who is again from all I have heard an estimable gentleman. But he knows nothing
+of the heart of Bengal and its yearnings. Bengal is not Calcutta. Fort William
+and the palaces of Calcutta represent an insolent exploitation of the
+unmurmuring and highly cultured peasantry of this fair province.
+Non-co-operationists have come to the conclusion that they must not be deceived
+by the reforms that tinker with the problem of India’s distress and
+humiliation. Nor must they be impatient and angry. We must not in our impatient
+anger resort, to stupid violence. We freely admit that we must take our due
+share of the blame for the existing state. It is not so much the British guns
+that are responsible fur our subjection, as our voluntary co-operation. Our
+non-participation in a hearty welcome to your Royal Highness is thus in no
+sense a demonstration against your high personage but it is against the system
+you have come to uphold. I know that individual Englishmen cannot even if they
+will alter the English nature all of a sudden. If we would be equals of
+Englishmen we must cast off fear. We must learn to be self-reliant and
+independent of the schools, courts, protection, and patronage of a Government,
+we seek to end, if it will not mend. Hence this non-violent non-co-operation. I
+know that we have not all yet become non-violent in speech and deed. But the
+results so far achieved have I assure Your Royal Highness, been amazing. The
+people have understood the secret and the value of non-violence as they have
+never done before. He who runs may see that this a religious, purifying
+movement. We are leaving off drink, we are trying to rid India of the curse of
+untouchability. We are trying to throw off foreign tinsel splendour and by
+reverting to the spinning wheel reviving the ancient and the poetic simplicity
+of life. We hope thereby to sterilize the existing harmful institution. I ask
+Your Royal Highness as an Englishman to study this movement and its
+possibilities for the Empire and the world. We are at war with nothing that is
+good in the world. In protecting Islam in the manner we are, we are protecting
+all religions. In protecting the honour of India we are protecting the honour
+of humanity. For our means are hurtful to none. We desire to live on terms of
+friendship with Englishmen but that friendship must be friendship of equals in
+both theory and practice. And we must continue to non-co-operate, i.e. to
+purify ourselves till the goal is achieved.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I ask Your Royal Highness and through you every Englishman to appreciate the
+view-point of the non-co-operationists.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I beg to remain, Your Royal Highness’s faithful servant, (Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+<i>February</i>, 1921
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE GREATEST THING</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is to be wished that non-co-operationists will clearly recognise that
+nothing can stop the onward march of the nation as violence. Ireland may gain
+its freedom by violence. Turkey may regain her lost possessions by violence
+within measurable distance of time. But India cannot win her freedom by
+violence for a century, because her people are not built in the manner of other
+nations. They have been nurtured in the traditions of suffering. Rightly or
+wrongly, for good or ill, Islam too has evolved along peaceful lines in India.
+And I make bold to say that, if the honour of Islam is to be vindicated through
+its followers in India, it will only be by methods of peaceful, silent,
+dignified, conscious, and courageous suffering. The more I study that wonderful
+faith, the more convinced I become that the glory of Islam is due not to the
+sword but to the sufferings, the renunciation, and the nobility of its early
+Caliphs. Islam decayed when its followers, mistaking the evil for the good,
+dangled the sword in the face of man, and lost sight of the godliness, the
+humility, and austerity of its founder and his disciples. But, I am not at the
+present moment, concerned with showing that the basis of Islam, as of all
+religions, is not violence but suffering not the taking of life but the giving
+of it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What I am anxious to show is that non-co-operationists must be true as well to
+the spirit as to the letter of their vow if they would gain Swaraj within one
+year. They may forget non-co-operation but they dare not forget non-violence.
+Indeed, non-co-operation is non-violence. We are violent when we sustain a
+government whose creed is violence. It bases itself finally not on right but on
+might. Its last appeal is not to reason, nor the heart, but to the sword. We
+are tired of this creed and we have risen against it. Let us not ourselves
+belie our profession by being violent. Though the English are very few, they
+are organised for violence. Though we are many we cannot be organised for
+violence for a long time to come. Violence for us is a gospel or despair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have seen a pathetic letter from a god-fearing English woman who defends
+Dyerism for she thinks that, if General Dyer had not enacted Jallianwala, women
+and children would have been murdered by us. If we are such brutes as to desire
+the blood of innocent women and children, we deserve to be blotted out from the
+face of the earth. There is the other side. It did not strike this good lady
+that, if we were friends, the price that her countrymen paid at Jallianwala for
+buying their safety was too great. They gained their safety at the cost of
+their humanity. General Dyer has been haltingly blamed, and his evil genius Sir
+Michael O’Dwyer entirely exonerated because Englishmen do not want to leave
+this country of fields even if everyone of us has to be killed. If we go mad
+again as we did at Amritsar, let there be no mistake that a blacker Jallianwala
+will be enacted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Shall we copy Dyerism and O’Dwyerism even whilst we are condemning it? Let not
+our rock be violence and devilry. Our rock must be non-violence and godliness.
+Let us, workers, be clear as to what we are about. <i>Swaraj depends upon our
+ability to control all the forces of violence on our side.</i> Therefore there
+is no Swaraj within one year, if there is violence on the part of the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We must then refrain from sitting <i>dhurna</i>, we must refrain from crying
+‘shame, shame’ to anybody, we must not use any coercion to persuade our people
+to adopt our way. We must guarantee to them the same freedom we claim for
+ourselves. We must not tamper with the masses. It is dangerous to make
+political use of factory labourers or the peasantry—not that we are not
+entitled to do so, but we are not ready for it. We have neglected their
+political (as distinguished from literary) education all these long years. We
+have not got enough honest, intelligent, reliable, and brave workers to enable
+us to act upon these countrymen of ours.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap09"></a>IX. MAHATMA GANDHI’S STATEMENT</h2>
+
+<p>
+[The following is the Statement of Mahatma Gandhi made before the Court during
+his Trial in Ahmedabad on the 18th March 1921.]
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Before reading his written statement Mahatma Gandhi spoke a few words as
+introductory remarks to the whole statement. He said: Before I read this
+statement, I would like to state that I entirely endorse the learned
+Advocate-General’s remarks in connection with my humble self. I think that he
+was entirely fair to me in all the statements that he has made, because it is
+very true and I have no desire whatsoever to conceal from this Court the fact
+that to preach disaffection towards the existing system of Government has
+become almost a passion with me. And the learned Advocate-General is also
+entirely in the right when he says that my preaching of disaffection did not
+commence with my connection with “Young India” but that it commenced much
+earlier and in the statement that I am about to read it will be my painful duty
+to admit before this Court that it commenced much earlier than the period
+stated by the Advocate-General. It is the most painful duty with me but I have
+to discharge that duty knowing the responsibility that rested upon my
+shoulders. And I wish to endorse all the blame that the Advocate-General has
+thrown on my shoulders in connection with the Bombay occurrence, Madras
+occurrences, and the Chouri Choura occurrences thinking over these things
+deeply, and sleeping over them night after night and examining my heart I have
+come to the conclusion that it is impossible for me to dissociate myself from
+the diabolical crimes of Chouri Choura or the mad outrages of Bombay. He is
+quite right when he says that as a man of responsibility, a man having received
+a fair share of education, having had a fair share of experience of this world,
+I should know them. I knew that I was playing with fire. I ran the risk and if
+I was set free I would still do the same. I would be failing in my duty if I do
+not do so. I have felt it this morning that I would have failed in my duty if I
+did not say all what I said here just now. I wanted to avoid violence.
+Non-violence is the first article of my faith. It is the last article of my
+faith. But I had to make my choice. I had either to submit to a system which I
+considered has done an irreparable harm to my country or incur the risk of the
+mad fury of my people bursting forth when they understood the truth from my
+lips. I know that my people have sometimes gone mad. I am deeply sorry for it;
+and I am, therefore, here to submit not to a light penalty but to the highest
+penalty. I do not ask for mercy. I do not plead any extenuating act. I am here,
+therefore, to invite and submit to the highest penalty that can be inflicted
+upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the
+highest duty of a citizen. The only course open to you, Mr. Judge, is, as I am
+just going to say in my statement, either to resign your post or inflict on me
+the severest penalty if you believe that the system and law you are assisting
+to administer are good for the people. I do not expect that kind of conversion.
+But by the time I have finished with my statement you will, perhaps, have a
+glimpse of what is raging within my breast to run this maddest risk which a
+sane man can run.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+WRITTEN STATEMENT
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I owe it perhaps to the Indian public and to the public in England to placate
+which this prosecution is mainly taken up that I should explain why from a
+staunch loyalist and co-operator I have become an uncompromising
+disaffectionist and non-co-operator. To the Court too I should say why I plead
+guilty to the charge of promoting disaffection towards the Government
+established by law in India. My public life began in 1893 in South Africa in
+troubled weather. My first contact with British authority in that country was
+not of a happy character. I discovered that as a man and as an Indian I had no
+rights. On the contrary I discovered that I had no rights as a man because I
+was an Indian.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of Indians was an
+excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically and mainly good. I gave the
+Government my voluntary and hearty co-operation, criticising it fully where I
+felt it was faulty but never wishing its destruction.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Consequently when the existence of the Empire was threatened in 1899 by the
+Boer challenge, I offered my services to it, raised a volunteer ambulance corps
+and served at several actions that took place for the relief of Ladysmith.
+Similarly in 1906 at the time of the Zulu revolt I raised a stretcher-bearer
+party and served till the end of the ‘rebellion’. On both these occasions I
+received medals and was even mentioned in despatches. For my work in South
+Africa I was given by Lord Hardinge a Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal. When the war
+broke out in 1914 between England and Germany I raised a volunteer ambulance
+corps in London consisting of the then resident Indians in London, chiefly
+students. Its work was acknowledged by the authorities to be valuable. Lastly
+in India when a special appeal was made at the War Conference in Delhi in 1917
+by Lord Chelmsford for recruits, I struggled at the cost of my health to raise
+a corps in Kheda and the response was being made when the hostilities ceased
+and orders were received that no more recruits were wanted. In all those
+efforts at service I was actuated by the belief that it was possible by such
+services to gain a status of full equality in the Empire for my countrymen.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first shock came in the shape of the Rowlalt Act a law designed to rob the
+people of all real freedom. I felt called upon to lead an intensive agitation
+against it. Then followed the Punjab horrors beginning with the massacre at
+Jallianwala Bagh and culminating in brawling orders, public floggings and other
+indescribable humiliations, I discovered too that the plighted word of the
+Prime Minister to the Mussalmans of India regarding the integrity of Turkey and
+the holy places of Islam was not likely to be fulfilled. But in spite of the
+foreboding and the grave warnings of friends, at the Amritsar Congress in 1919
+I fought for co-operation and working the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, hoping
+that the Prime Minister would redeem his promise to the Indian Mussalmans, that
+the Punjab wound would be healed and that the reforms inadequate and
+unsatisfactory though they were, marked a new era of hope in the life of India.
+But all that hope was shattered. The Khilafat promise was not to be redeemed.
+The Punjab crime was white-washed and most culprits went not only unpunished
+but remained in service and some continued to draw pensions from the Indian
+revenue, and in some cases were even rewarded. I saw too that not only did the
+reforms not mark a change of heart, but they were only a method of further
+draining India of her wealth and of prolonging her servitude.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I came reluctantly to the conclusion that the British connection had made India
+more helpless than she ever was before, politically and economically. A
+disarmed India has no power of resistance against any aggressor if she wanted
+to engage in an armed conflict with him. So much is this the case that some of
+our best men consider that India must take generations before she can achieve
+the Dominion status. She has become so poor that she has little power of
+resisting famines. Before the British advent India spun and wove in her
+millions of cottages just the supplement she needed for adding to her meagre
+agricultural resources. The cottage industry, so vital for India’s existence,
+has been ruined by incredibly heartless and inhuman processes as described by
+English witnesses. Little do town-dwellers know how the semi-starved masses of
+Indians are slowly sinking to lifelessness. Little do they know that their
+miserable comfort represents the brokerage they get for the work they do for
+the foreign exploiter, that the profits and the brokerage are sucked from the
+masses. Little do they realise that the Government established by law in
+British India is carried on for this exploitation of the masses. No sophistry,
+no jugglery in figures can explain away the evidence the skeletons in many
+villages present to the naked eye. I have no doubt whatsoever that both England
+and the town dwellers of India will have to answer, if there is a God above,
+for this crime against humanity which is perhaps unequalled in history. The law
+itself in this country has been used to serve the foreign exploiter. My
+unbiased, examination of the Punjab Martial Law cases had led me to believe
+that at least ninety-five per cent. of convictions were wholly bad. My
+experience of political cases in India leads me to the conclusion that in nine
+out of every ten the condemned men were totally innocent. Their crime consisted
+in love of their country. In ninety-nine cases out of hundred justice has been
+denied to Indians as against Europeans in the Court of India. This is not an
+exaggerated picture. It is the experience of almost every Indian who has had
+anything to do such cases. In my opinion the administration of the law is thus
+prostituted consciously or unconsciously for the benefit of the exploiter. The
+greatest misfortune is that Englishmen and their Indian associates in the
+administration of the country do not know that they are engaged in the crime I
+have attempted to describe. I am satisfied that many English and Indian
+officials honestly believe that they are administering one of the best systems
+devised in the world and that India is making steady though slow progress. They
+do not know that a subtle but effective system of terrorism and an organised
+display of force on the one hand and the deprivation of all powers of
+retaliation of self-defence on the other have emasculated the people and
+induced in them the habit of simulation. This awful habit has added to the
+ignorance and the self-deception of the administrators. Section 124-A under
+which I am happily charged is perhaps the prince among the political sections
+of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.
+Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection
+for a person or thing one should be free to give the fullest expression to his
+disaffection so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite to violence.
+But the section under which mere promotion of disaffection is a crime. I have
+studied some of the cases tried under it, and I know that some of the most
+loved of India’s patriots have been convicted under it. I consider it a
+privilege therefore, to be charged under it. I have endeavoured to give in
+their briefest outline the reasons for my disaffection. I have no personal
+ill-will against any single administrator, much less can I have any
+disaffection towards the King’s person. But I hold it to be a virtue to be
+disaffected towards a Government which in its totality has done more harm to
+India than any previous system. India is less manly under the British rule than
+she ever was before. Holding such a belief, I consider it to be a sin to have
+affection for the system. And it has been a precious privilege for me to be
+able to write what I have in the various articles tendered in evidence against
+me.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In fact I believe that I have rendered a service to India and England by
+showing in non-co-operation the way out of the unnatural state in which both
+are living. In my humble opinion, non-co-operation with evil is as much a duty
+as is co-operation with good. But in the past, non-co-operation has been
+deliberately expressed in violence to the evil doer. I am endeavouring to show
+to my countrymen that violent non-co-operation only multiplies evil and that as
+evil can only be sustained by violence, withdrawal of support of evil requires
+complete abstention from violence. Non-violent implies voluntary submission to
+the penalty for non-co-operation with evil. I am here, therefore, to invite and
+submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can he inflicted upon me for what
+in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a
+citizen. The only course open to you, the Judge and the Assessors, is either to
+resign your posts and thus dissociate yourselves from evil if you feel that the
+law you are called upon to administer is an evil and that in reality I am
+innocent, or to inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe that the
+system and the law you are assisting to administer are good for the people of
+this country and that my activity is therefore injurious to the public weal.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+M. K. GHANDI.
+</p>
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***</div>
+</body>
+
+</html>
+
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b8cb1f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #10366 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10366)
diff --git a/old/10366-0.txt b/old/10366-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1862abc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/10366-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,7701 @@
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***
+[Transcriber's Note: The inconsistent spelling of the original has been
+preserved in this etext.]
+
+FREEDOM'S BATTLE
+
+BEING A COMPREHENSIVE COLLECTION OF WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ON THE PRESENT
+SITUATION
+
+BY MAHATMA GANDHI
+
+Second Edition
+
+1922
+
+The Publishers express their indebtedness to the Editor and Publisher
+of the "Young India" for allowing the free use of the articles
+appeared in that journal under the name of Mahatma Gandhi, and also to
+Mr. C. Rajagopalachar for the valuable introduction and help rendered in
+bringing out the book.
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+I. INTRODUCTION
+
+II. THE KHILAFAT
+
+  Why I have joined the Khilafat Movement
+
+  The Turkish Treaty
+
+  Turkish Peace Terms
+
+  The Suzerainty over Arabia
+
+  Further Questions Answered
+
+  Mr. Candler's Open Letter
+
+  In process of keeping
+
+  Appeal to the Viceroy
+
+  The Premier's reply
+
+  The Muslim Representation
+
+  Criticism of the Manifesto
+
+  The Mahomedan Decision
+
+  Mr. Andrew's Difficulty
+
+  The Khilafat Agitation
+
+  Hijarat and its Meaning
+
+III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS
+
+  Political Freemasonry
+
+  The Duty of the Punjabec
+
+  General Dyer
+
+  The Punjab Sentences
+
+IV. SWARAJ
+
+  Swaraj in one year
+
+  British Rule an evil
+
+  A movement of purification
+
+  Why was India lost
+
+  Swaraj my ideal
+
+  On the wrong track
+
+  The Congress Constitution
+
+  Swaraj in nine months
+
+  The Attainment of Swaraj
+
+V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY
+
+  The Hindus and the Mahomedans
+
+  Hindu Mahomedan unity
+
+  Hindu Muslim unity
+
+VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+  Depressed Classes
+
+  Amelioration of the depressed classes
+
+  The Sin of Untouchability
+
+VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD
+
+  Indians abroad
+
+  Indians overseas
+
+  Pariahs of the Empire
+
+VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+  Non-co-operation
+
+  Mr. Montagu on the Khilafat Agitation
+
+  At the call of the country
+
+  Non-co-operation explained
+
+  Religious Authority for non-co-operation
+
+  The inwardness of non-co-operation
+
+  A missionary on non-co-operation
+
+  How to work non-co-operation
+
+  Speech at Madras
+
+      "     Trichinopoly
+
+      "     Calicut
+
+      "     Mangalore
+
+      "     Bexwada
+
+  The Congress
+
+  Who is disloyal
+
+  Crusade against non-co-operation
+
+  Speech at Muxafarbail
+
+  Ridicule replacing Repression
+
+  The Viceregal pronouncement
+
+  From Ridicule to--?
+
+  To every Englishman In India
+
+  One step enough for me
+
+  The need for humility
+
+  Some Questions Answered
+
+  Pledges broken
+
+  More Objections answered
+
+  Mr. Pennington's Objections Answered
+
+  Some doubts
+
+  Rejoinder
+
+  Two Englishmen Reply
+
+  Letter to the Viceroy--Renunciation of Medals
+
+  Letter to H.R.H. The Duke of Connaught
+
+  The Greatest thing
+
+  Mahatma Gandhi's Statement
+
+IX. WRITTEN STATEMENT
+
+Index
+
+
+
+
+
+I. INTRODUCTION
+
+After the great war it is difficult, to point out a single nation that
+is happy; but this has come out of the war, that there is not a single
+nation outside India, that is not either free or striving to be free.
+
+It is said that we, too, are on the road to freedom, that it is better
+to be on the certain though slow course of gradual unfoldment of freedom
+than to take the troubled and dangerous path of revolution whether
+peaceful or violent, and that the new Reforms are a half-way house
+to freedom.
+
+The new constitution granted to India keeps all the military forces,
+both in the direction and in the financial control, entirely outside the
+scope of responsibility to the people of India. What does this mean? It
+means that the revenues of India are spent away on what the nation does
+not want. But after the mid-Eastern complications and the fresh Asiatic
+additions to British Imperial spheres of action. This Indian military
+servitude is a clear danger to national interests.
+
+The new constitution gives no scope for retrenchment and therefore no
+scope for measures of social reform except by fresh taxation, the heavy
+burden of which on the poor will outweigh all the advantages of any
+reforms. It maintains all the existing foreign services, and the cost of
+the administrative machinery high as it already is, is further
+increased.
+
+The reformed constitution keeps all the fundamental liberties of person,
+property, press, and association completely under bureaucratic control.
+All those laws which give to the irresponsible officers of the Executive
+Government of India absolute powers to override the popular will, are
+still unrepealed. In spite of the tragic price paid in the Punjab for
+demonstrating the danger of unrestrained power in the hands of a foreign
+bureaucracy and the inhumanity of spirit by which tyranny in a panic
+will seek to save itself, we stand just where we were before, at the
+mercy of the Executive in respect of all our fundamental liberties.
+
+Not only is Despotism intact in the Law, but unparalleled crimes and
+cruelties against the people have been encouraged and even after
+boastful admissions and clearest proofs, left unpunished. The spirit of
+unrepentant cruelty has thus been allowed to permeate the whole
+administration.
+
+
+THE MUSSALMAN AGONY
+
+To understand our present condition it is not enough to realise the
+general political servitude. We should add to it the reality and the
+extent of the injury inflicted by Britain on Islam, and thereby on the
+Mussalmans of India. The articles of Islamic faith which it is necessary
+to understand in order to realise why Mussalman India, which was once so
+loyal is now so strongly moved to the contrary are easily set out and
+understood. Every religion should be interpreted by the professors of
+that religion. The sentiments and religious ideas of Muslims founded on
+the traditions of long generations cannot be altered now by logic or
+cosmopolitanism, as others understand it. Such an attempt is the more
+unreasonable when it is made not even as a bonafide and independent
+effort of proselytising logic or reason, but only to justify a treaty
+entered into for political and worldly purposes.
+
+The Khalifa is the authority that is entrusted with the duty of
+defending Islam. He is the successor to Muhammad and the agent of God on
+earth. According to Islamic tradition he must possess sufficient
+temporal power effectively to protect Islam against non-Islamic powers
+and he should be one elected or accepted by the Mussalman world.
+
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is the area bounded by the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea,
+the Persian Gulf, and the waters of the Tigris and the Euphrates. It is
+the sacred Home of Islam and the centre towards which Islam throughout
+the world turns in prayer. According to the religious injunctions of the
+Mussalmans, this entire area should always be under Muslim control, its
+scientific border being believed to be a protection for the integrity of
+Islamic life and faith. Every Mussalman throughout the world is enjoined
+to sacrifice his all, if necessary, for preserving the Jazirat-ul-Arab
+under complete Muslim control.
+
+The sacred places of Islam should be in the possession of the Khalifa.
+They should not merely be free for the entry of the Mussalmans of the
+world by the grace or the license of non-Muslim powers, but should be
+the possession and property of Islam in the fullest degree.
+
+It is a religions obligation, on every Mussalman to go forth and help
+the Khalifa in every possible way where his unaided efforts in the
+defence of the Khilifat have failed.
+
+The grievance of the Indian Mussalmans is that a government that
+pretends to protect and spread peace and happiness among them has no
+right to ignore or set aside these articles of their cherished faith.
+
+According to the Peace Treaty imposed on the nominal Government at
+Constantinople, the Khalifa far from having the temporal authority or
+power needed to protect Islam, is a prisoner in his own city. He is to
+have no real fighting force, army or navy, and the financial control
+over his own territories is vested in other Governments. His capital is
+cut off from the rest of his possessions by an intervening permanent
+military occupation. It is needless to say that under these conditions
+he is absolutely incapable of protecting Islam as the Mussulmans of the
+world understand it.
+
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is split up; a great part of it given to powerful
+non-Muslim Powers, the remnant left with petty chiefs dominated all
+round by non-Muslim Governments.
+
+The Holy places of Islam are all taken out of the Khalifa's kingdom,
+some left in the possession of minor Muslim chiefs of Arabia entirely
+dependent on European control, and some relegated to newly-formed
+non-Muslim states.
+
+In a word, the Mussalman's free choice of a Khalifa such as Islamic
+tradition defines is made an unreality.
+
+
+THE HINDU DHARMA
+
+The age of misunderstanding and mutual warfare among religions is gone.
+If India has a mission of its own to the world, it is to establish the
+unity and the truth of all religions. This unity is established by
+mutual help and understanding between the various religions. It has come
+as a rare privilege to the Hindus in the fulfilment of this mission of
+India to stand up in defence of Islam against the onslaught of the
+earth-greed of the military powers of the west.
+
+The Dharma of Hinduism in this respect is placed beyond all doubt by the
+Bhagavat Gita.
+
+Those who are the votaries of other Gods and worship them with
+faith--even they, O Kaunteya, worship me alone, though not as the
+Shastra requires--IX, 23.
+
+Whoever being devoted wishes in perfect faith to worship a particular
+form, of such a one I maintain the same faith unshaken,--VII 21.
+
+Hinduism will realise its fullest beauty when in the fulfilment of this
+cardinal tenet, its followers offer themselves as sacrifice for the
+protection of the faith of their brothers, the Mussalmans.
+
+If Hindus and Mussalmans attain the height of courage and sacrifice that
+is needed for this battle on behalf of Islam against the greed of the
+West, a victory will be won not alone for Islam, but for Christianity
+itself. Militarism has robbed the crucified God of his name and his very
+cross and the World has been mistaking it to be Christianity. After the
+battle of Islam is won, Islam and Hinduism together can emancipate
+Christianity itself from the lust for power and wealth which have
+strangled it now and the true Christianity of the Gospels will be
+established. This battle of non-cooperation with its suffering and
+peaceful withdrawal of service will once for all establish its
+superiority over the power of brute force and unlimited slaughter.
+
+What a glorious privilege it is to play our part in this history of the
+world, when Hinduism and Christianity will unite on behalf of Islam, and
+in that strife of mutual love and support each religion will attain its
+own truest shape and beauty.
+
+
+AN ENDURING TREATY
+
+Swaraj for India has two great problems, one internal and the other
+external. How can Hindus and Mussalmans so different from each other
+form a strong and united nation governing themselves peacefully? This
+was the question for years, and no one could believe that the two
+communities could suffer for each other till the miracle was actually
+worked. The Khilafat has solved the problem. By the magic of suffering,
+each has truly touched and captured the other's heart, and the Nation
+now is strong and united.
+
+Not internal strength and unity alone has the Khilafat brought to India.
+The great block in the way of Indian aspiration for full freedom was
+the problem of external defence. How is India, left to herself defend
+her frontiers against her Mussalman neighbours? None but emasculated
+nations would accept such difficulties and responsibilities as an answer
+to the demand for freedom. It is only a people whose mentality has been
+perverted that can soothe itself with the domination by one race from a
+distant country, as a preventative against the aggression of another, a
+permanent and natural neighbour. Instead of developing strength to
+protect ourselves against those near whom we are permanently placed, a
+feeling of incurable impotence has been generated. Two strong and brave
+nations can live side by side, strengthening each other through
+enforcing constant vigilance, and maintain in full vigour each its own
+national strength, unity, patriotism and resources. If a nation wishes
+to be respected by its neighbours it has to develop and enter into
+honourable treaties. These are the only natural conditions of national
+liberty; but not a surrender to distant military powers to save oneself
+from one's neighbours.
+
+The Khilafat has solved the problem of distrust of Asiatic neighbours
+out of our future. The Indian struggle for the freedom of Islam has
+brought about a more lasting _entente_ and a more binding treaty between
+the people of India and the people of the Mussalman states around it
+than all the ententes and treaties among the Governments of Europe. No
+wars of aggression are possible where the common people on the two sides
+have become grateful friends. The faith of the Mussulman is a better
+sanction than the seal of the European Diplomats and plenipotentiaries.
+Not only has this great friendship between India and the Mussulman
+States around it removed for all time the fear of Mussulman aggression
+from outside, but it has erected round India, a solid wall of defence
+against all aggression from beyond against all greed from Europe, Russia
+or elsewhere. No secret diplomacy could establish a better _entente_ or
+a stronger federation than what this open and non-governmental treaty
+between Islam and India has established. The Indian support of the
+Khilafat has, as if by a magic wand, converted what Was once the
+Pan-Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship and
+defence for India.
+
+
+THE BRITISH CONNECTION
+
+Every nation like every individual is born free. Absolute freedom is the
+birthright of every people. The only limitations are those which a
+people may place over themselves. The British connection is invaluable
+as long as it is a defence against any worse connection sought to be
+imposed by violence. But it is only a means to an end, not a mandate of
+Providence of Nature. The alliance of neighbours, born of suffering for
+each other's sake, for ends that purify those that suffer, is
+necessarily a more natural and more enduring bond than one that has
+resulted from pure greed on the one side and weakness on the other.
+Where such a natural and enduring alliance has been accomplished among
+Asiatic peoples and not only between the respective governments, it may
+truly be felt to be more valuable than the British connection itself,
+after that connection has denied freedom or equality, and even justice.
+
+
+THE ALTERNATIVE
+
+Is violence or total surrender the only choice open to any people to
+whom Freedom or Justice is denied? Violence at a time when the whole
+world has learnt from bitter experience the futility of violence is
+unworthy of a country whose ancient people's privilege, it was, to see
+this truth long ago.
+
+Violence may rid a nation of its foreign masters but will only enslave
+it from inside. No nation can really be free which is at the mercy of
+its army and its military heroes. If a people rely for freedom on its
+soldiers, the soldiers will rule the country, not the people. Till the
+recent awakening of the workers of Europe, this was the only freedom
+which the powers of Europe really enjoyed. True freedom can exist only
+when those who produce, not those who destroy or know only to live on
+other's labour, are the masters.
+
+Even were violence the true road to freedom, is violence possible to a
+nation which has been emasculated and deprived of all weapons, and the
+whole world is hopelessly in advance of all our possibilities in the
+manufacture and the wielding of weapons of destruction.
+
+Submission or withdrawal of co-operation is the real and only
+alternative before India. Submission to injustice puts on the tempting
+garb of peace and, gradual progress, but there is no surer way to death
+than submission to wrong.
+
+
+THE FIFTH UPAYA
+
+Our ancients classified the arts of conquest into four well-known
+_Upayas_. Sama, Dana, Uheda, and Danda. A fifth Upuya was recognised
+sometimes by our ancients, which they called _Upeshka_. It is this
+_Punchamopaya_ that is placed by Mahatma Gandhi before the people of
+India in the form of Non-cooperation as an alternative, besides
+violence, to surrender.
+
+Where in any case negotiations have failed and the enemy is neither
+corruptible nor incapable of being divided, and a resort to violence has
+failed or would certainly be futile the method of _Upeshka_ remains to
+be applied to the case. Indeed, when the very existence of the power we
+seek to defeat really depends on our continuous co-operation with it,
+and where our _Upeskha_ its very life, our _Upeskha_ or non-co-operation
+is the most natural and most effective expedient that we can employ to
+bend it to our will.
+
+No Englishman believes that his nation can rule or keep India for a day
+unless the people of India actively co-operate to maintain that rule.
+Whether the co-operation be given willingly or through ignorance,
+cupidity, habit or fear, the withdrawal of that co-operation means
+impossibility of foreign rule in India. Some of us may not realise this,
+but those who govern us have long ago known and are now keenly alive to
+this truth. The active assistance of the people of this country in the
+supply of the money, men, and knowledge of the languages, customs and
+laws of the land, is the main-spring of the continuous life of the
+foreign administration. Indeed the circumstances of British rule in this
+country are such that but for a double supply of co-operation on the
+part of the governed, it must have broken down long ago. Any system of
+race domination is unnatural, and can be kept up only by active
+coercion through a foreign-recruited public, service invested with large
+powers, however much it may be helped by the perversion of mentality
+shaping the education of the youth of the country. The foreign recruited
+service must necessarily be very highly paid. This creates a wrong
+standard for the Indian recruited officials also. Military expenditure
+has to cover not only the needs of defence against foreign aggression,
+but also the possibilities of internal unrest and rebellion. Police
+charges have to go beyond the prevention and deletion of ordinary crime,
+for though this would be the only expenditure over the police of a
+self-governing people where any nation governs another, a large chapter of
+artificial crime has to be added to the penal code, and the work of the
+police extended accordingly. The military and public organisations must
+also be such as not only to result in outside efficiency, but also at
+the same time guarantee internal impotency. This is to be achieved by
+the adjustment and careful admixture of officers and units from
+different races. All this can be and is maintained only by extra cost
+and extra-active co-operation on the part of the people. The slightest
+withdrawal of assistance must put such machinery out of gear. This is
+the basis of the programme of progressive non violent non-co-operation
+that has been adopted by the National Congress.
+
+
+SOME OBJECTIONS
+
+The powerful character of the measure, however, leads some to object to
+non-co-operation because of that very reason. Striking as it does at the
+very root of Government in India, they fear that non-co-operation must
+lead to anarchy, and that the remedy is worse than the disease. This is
+an objection arising out of insufficient allowance for human nature. It
+is assumed that the British people will allow their connection with
+India to cease rather than remedy the wrongs for which we seek justice.
+If this assumption be correct, no doubt it must lead to separation and
+possibly also anarchy for a time. If the operatives in a factory have
+grievances, negotiations having failed, a strike would on a similar
+argument be never admissible. Unyielding obstinacy being presumed, it
+must end in the closing down of the factory and break up of the men. But
+if in ninety-nine out of a hundred cases it is not the case that strikes
+end in this manner, it is more unlikely that, instead of righting the
+manifest wrongs that India complains about, the British people will
+value their Indian Dominion so low as to prefer to allow us to
+non-co-operate up to the point of separation. It would be a totally
+false reading of British character and British history. But if such
+wicked obstinacy be ultimately shown by a government, far be it from us
+to prefer peace at the price of abject surrender to wrong. There is no
+anarchy greater than the moral anarchy of surrender to unrepentant
+wrong. We may, however, be certain that if we show the strength and
+unity necessary for non-co-operation, long before we progress with it
+far, we shall have developed true order and true self-government wherein
+there is no place for anarchy.
+
+Another fear sometimes expressed that, if non-co-operation were to
+succeed, the British would have to go, leaving us unable to defend
+ourselves against foreign aggression. If we have the self-respect, the
+patriotism, the tenacious purpose, and the power of organisation that are
+necessary to drive the British out from their entrenched position, no
+lesser foreign power will dare after that, undertake the futile task of
+conquering or enslaving us.
+
+It is sometimes said that non-co-operation is negative and destructive
+of the advantages which a stable government has conferred on us. That
+non-co-operation is negative is merely a half-truth. Non-co-operation
+with the government means greater co-operation among ourselves, greater
+mutual dependence among the many different castes and classes of our
+country. Non-co-operation is not mere negation. It will lead to the
+recovery of the lost art of co-operation among ourselves. Long
+dependence on an outside government which by its interference
+suppressed or prevented the consequences of our differences has made us
+forget the duty of mutual trust and the art of friendly adjustment.
+Having allowed Government to do everything for us, we have gradually
+become incapable of doing anything for ourselves. Even if we had no
+grievance against this Government, non-co-operation with it for a time
+would be desirable so far as it would perforce lead us to trusting and
+working with one another and thereby strengthen the bonds of
+national unity.
+
+The most tragic consequence of dependence on the complex machinery of a
+foreign government is the atrophy of the communal sense. The direct
+touch with administrative cause and effect is lost. An outside protector
+performs all the necessary functions of the community in a mysterious
+manner, and communal duties are not realised by the people. The one
+reason addressed by those who deny to us the capacity for self-rule is
+the insufficient appreciation by the people of communal duties and
+discipline. It is only by actually refraining for a time from dependence
+on Government that we can regain self-reliance, learn first-hand the
+value of communal duties and build up true national co-operation.
+Non-co-operation is a practical and positive training in Swadharma, and
+Swadharma alone can lead up to Swaraj.
+
+The negative is the best and most impressive method of enforcing the
+value of the positive. Few outside government circles realise in the
+present police anything but tyranny and corruption. But if the units of
+the present police were withdrawn we would soon perforce set about
+organising a substitute, and most people would realise the true social
+value of a police force. Few realise in the present taxes anything but
+coercion and waste, but most people would soon see that a share of every
+man's income is due for common purposes and that there are many
+limitations to the economical management of public institutions; we
+would begin once again to contribute directly, build up and maintain
+national institutions in the place of those that now mysteriously spring
+up and live under Government orders.
+
+
+EMANCIPATION
+
+Freedom is a priceless thing. But it is a stable possession only when it
+is acquired by a nation's strenuous effort. What is not by chance or
+outward circumstance, or given by the generous impulse of a tyrant
+prince or people is not a reality. A nation will truly enjoy freedom
+only when in the process of winning or defending its freedom, it has
+been purified and consolidated through and through, until liberty has
+become a part of its very soul. Otherwise it would be but a change of
+the form of government, which might please the fancy of politicians, or
+satisfy the classes in power, but could never emancipate a people. An
+Act of Parliament can never create citizens in Hindustan. The strength,
+spirit, and happiness of a people who have fought and won their liberty
+cannot be got by Reform Acts. Effort and sacrifice are the necessary
+conditions of real stable emancipation. Liberty unacquired, merely found,
+will on the test fail like the Dead-Sea-apple or the magician's plenty.
+
+The war that the people of India have declared and which will purify and
+consolidate India, and forge for her a true and stable liberty is a war
+with the latest and most effective weapon. In this war, what has
+hitherto been in the world an undesirable but necessary incident in
+freedom's battles, the killing of innocent men, has been eliminated; and
+that which is the true essential for forging liberty, the
+self-purification and self-strengthening of men and women has been kept
+pure and unalloyed. It is for men, women and youth, every one of them
+that lives in and loves India, to do his bit in this battle, not waiting
+for others, not calculating the chances of his surviving the battle to
+enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice. Soldiers in the old-world wars did
+not insure their lives before going to the front. The privilege of youth
+in special is for country's sake to exercise their comparative freedom
+and give up the yearning for lives and careers built on the slavery of
+the people.
+
+That on which a foreign government truly rests whatever may be the
+illusions on their or our part is not the strength of its armed forces,
+but our own co-operation. Actual service on the part of one generation,
+and educational preparation for future service on the part of the next
+generation are the two main branches of this co-operation of slaves in
+the perpetuation of slavery. The boycott of government service and the
+law-courts is aimed at the first, the boycott of government controlled
+schools is to stop the second. If either the one or the other of these
+two branches of co-operation is withdrawn in sufficient measure, there
+will be an automatic and perfectly peaceful change from slavery
+to liberty.
+
+The beat preparation for any one who desires to take part in the great
+battle now going on is a silent study of the writings and speeches
+collected herein, and proposed to be completed in a supplementary volume
+to be soon issued.
+
+C. RAJAGOPALACHAR
+
+
+
+
+II. THE KHILAFAT
+
+
+WHY I HAVE JOINED THE KHILAFAT MOVEMENT
+
+An esteemed South African friend who is at present living in England has
+written to me a letter from which I make the following excerpts:--
+
+   "You will doubtless remember having met me in South Africa at the
+   time when the Rev. J.J. Doke was assisting you in your campaign there
+   and I subsequently returned to England deeply impressed with the
+   rightness of your attitude in that country. During the months before
+   war I wrote and lectured and spoke on your behalf in several places
+   which I do not regret. Since returning from military service,
+   however, I have noticed from the papers that you appear to be
+   adopting a more militant attitude... I notice a report in "The Times"
+   that you are assisting and countenancing a union between the Hindus
+   and Moslems with a view of embarrassing England and the Allied Powers
+   in the matter of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire or the
+   ejection of the Turkish Government from Constantinople. Knowing as I
+   do your sense of justice and your humane instincts I feel that I am
+   entitled, in view of the humble part that I have taken to promote
+   your interests on this side, to ask you whether this latter report is
+   correct. I cannot believe that you have wrongly countenanced a
+   movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul
+   Government above the interests of humanity, for if any country has
+   crippled these interests in the East it has surely been Turkey. I am
+   personally familiar with the conditions in Syria and Armenia and I
+   can only suppose that if the report, which "The Times" has published
+   is correct, you have thrown to one side, your moral responsibilities
+   and allied yourself with one of the prevailing anarchies. However,
+   until I hear that this is not your attitude I cannot prejudice my
+   mind. Perhaps you will do me the favour of sending me a reply."
+
+I have sent a reply to the writer. But as the views expressed in the
+quotation are likely to be shared by many of my English friends and as I
+do not wish, if I can possibly help it, to forfeit their friendship or
+their esteem I shall endeavour to state my position as clearly as I can
+on the Khilafat question. The letter shows what risk public men run
+through irresponsible journalism. I have not seen _The Times_ report,
+referred to by my friend. But it is evident that the report has made the
+writer to suspect my alliance with "the prevailing anarchies" and to
+think that I have "thrown to one side" my "moral responsibilities."
+
+It is just my sense of moral responsibilities which has made me take up
+the Khilafat question and to identify myself entirely with the
+Mahomedans. It is perfectly true that I am assisting and countenancing
+the union between Hindus and Muslims, but certainly not with "a view of
+embarrassing England and the Allied Powers in the matter of the
+dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire," it is contrary to my creed to
+embarrass governments or anybody else. This does not how ever mean that
+certain acts of mine may not result in embarrassment. But I should not
+hold myself responsible for having caused embarrassment when I resist
+the wrong of a wrong-doer by refusing assistance in his wrong-doing. On
+the Khilafat question I refuse to be party to a broken pledge. Mr. Lloyd
+George's solemn declaration is practically the whole of the case for
+Indian Mahomedans and when that case is fortified by scriptural
+authority it becomes unanswerable. Moreover, it is incorrect to say that
+I have "allied myself to one of the prevailing anarchies" or that I have
+wrongly countenanced the movement to place the cruel and unjust
+despotism of the Stamboul Government above the interests of humanity.
+In the whole of the Mahomedan demand there is no insistance on the
+retention of the so-called unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government;
+on the contrary the Mahomedans have accepted the principle of taking
+full guarantees from that Government for the protection of non-Muslim
+minorities. I do not know how far the condition of Armenia and Syria may
+be considered an 'anarchy' and how far the Turkish Government may be
+held responsible for it. I much suspect that the reports from these
+quarters are much exaggerated and that the European powers are
+themselves in a measure responsible for what misrule there may be in
+Armenia and Syria. But I am in no way interested in supporting Turkish
+or any other anarchy. The Allied Powers can easily prevent it by means
+other than that of ending Turkish rule or dismembering and weakening the
+Ottoman Empire. The Allied Powers are not dealing with a new situation.
+If Turkey was to be partitioned, the position should have been made
+clear at the commencement of the war. There would then have been no
+question of a broken pledge. As it is, no Indian Mahomedan has any
+regard for the promises of British Ministers. In his opinion, the cry
+against Turkey is that of Christianity _vs._ Islam with England as the
+louder in the cry. The latest cablegram from Mr. Mahomed Ali strengthens
+the impression, for he says that unlike as in England his deputation is
+receiving much support from the French Government and the people.
+
+Thus, if it is true, as I hold it is true that the Indian Mussalmans
+have a cause that is just and is supported by scriptural authority, then
+for the Hindus not to support them to the utmost would be a cowardly
+breach of brotherhood and they would forfeit all claim to consideration
+from their Mahomedan countrymen. As a public-server therefore, I would
+be unworthy of the position I claim, if I did not support Indian
+Mussalmans in their struggle to maintain the Khilafat in accordance with
+their religious belief. I believe that in supporting them I am rendering
+a service to the Empire, because by assisting my Mahomedan countrymen to
+give a disciplined expression to their sentiment it becomes possible to
+make the agitation thoroughly, orderly and even successful.
+
+
+THE TURKISH TREATY
+
+The Turkish treaty will be out on the 10th of May. It is stated to
+provide for the internationalisation of the Straits, the occupation of
+Gallipoli by the Allies, the maintenance of Allied contingents in
+Constantinople and the appointment of a Commission of Control over
+Turkish finances. The San Remo Conference has entrusted Britain with
+Mandates for Mesopotamia and Palestine and France with the Mandate for
+Syria. As regards Smyrna the accounts so far received inform that
+Turkish suzerainty over Smyrna will be indicated by the fact that the
+population will not be entitled to send delegates to the Greek
+Parliament but at the end of five years local Smyrna Parliament will
+have the right of voting in favour of union with Greece and in such an
+event Turkish suzerainty will cease. Turkish suzerainty will be confined
+to the area within the Chatalja lines. With regard to Emir Foisul's
+position there is no news except that the Mandates of Britain and France
+transform his military title into a civil title.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+We have given above the terms of the Turkish treaty as indicated in
+Router's messages. These reports are incomplete and all of them are not
+equally authenticated. But if these terms are true, they are a challenge
+to the Muslim demands. Turkish Sovereignty is confined to the Chatalja
+lines. This means that the Big Three of the Supreme Council have cut off
+Thrace from Turkish dominions. This is a distinct breach of the pledge
+given by one of these Three, _viz._, the Premier of the British Empire.
+To remain within the Chatalja lines and, we are afraid, as a dependent
+of the Allies, is for the Sultan a humiliating position inconsistent
+with the Koranic injunctions. Such a restricted position of the Turks is
+virtually a success of the bag and baggage school.
+
+It is not yet known how the Supreme Council disposed of the rich and
+renowned lands of Asia Minor. If Mr. Lloyd George's views recently
+expressed in this respect have received the Allies' sanction--it is
+probable--nothing less than a common control is expected. The decision
+in the case of Smyrna will be satisfying to none, though the Allies seem
+to have made by their arrangement a skillful attempt to please all the
+parties concerned. Mr. Lloyd George, in his reply to the Khilafat
+Deputation, had talked about the careful investigations by an impartial
+committee and had added; "The great majority of the population
+undoubtedly prefer Greek rule to Turkish rule, so I understand" But the
+decision postpones to carry out his understanding till a period of
+five years.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+When we come to the question of mandates, the Allied Powers' motives
+come out more distinctly. The Arabs' claim of independence was used as a
+difficulty against keeping Turkish Sovereignty. This was defended in the
+of self-determination and by pointing out parallels of Transylvania and
+other provinces. When the final moment came, the Allies have ventured to
+divide the spoils amongst themselves. Britain is given the mandate over
+Mesopotamia and Palestine and France has the mandate over Syria. The
+Arab delegation complains in their note lately issued expressing their
+disappointment at the Supreme Council's decision with regard to the
+Arab liberated countries, which, it declares, is contrary to the
+principle of self-determination.
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+So what little news has arrived about the Turkish treaty, is uniformly
+disquieting. The Moslems have found sufficient ground to honour Russia,
+more than the Allies. Russia has recognised the freedom of Khiva and
+Bokhara. The Moslem world, as H. M. the Amir of Afghanistan said in his
+speech, will feel grateful towards Russia in spite of all the rumours
+abroad about its anarchy and disorder, whereas the whole Moslem world
+will resent the action of the other European nations who have allied
+with each other to carry out a joint coercion and extinction of Turkey
+in the name of self-determination and partly in the guise of the
+interest of civilization.
+
+       *       *       *       *      *
+
+The terms of the Turkish treaty are not only a breach of the Premier's
+pledge, not only a sin against the principle of self-determination, but
+they also show a reckless indifference of the Allied Powers towards the
+Koranic injunctions. The terms point out that Mr. Lloyd George's
+misinformed ideas of Khilafat have prevailed in the Council. Like Mr.
+Lloyd George other statesmen also at San Remo have compared Caliphate
+with Popedom and ignored the Koronic idea of associating spiritual
+power with temporal power. These misguided statesmen were too much
+possessed by haughtiness and so they refused to receive any
+enlightenment on the question of Khilafat from the Deputation. They
+could have corrected themselves had they heard Mr. Mahomed Ali on this
+point. Speaking at the Essex Hall meeting Mr. Mahomed Ali distinguished
+between Popedom and Caliphate and clearly explained what Caliphate
+means. He said:
+
+   "Islam is supernational and not national, the basis of Islamic
+   sympathy is a common outlook on life and common culture.... And it
+   has two centres. The personal centre is the island of Arabia. The
+   Khalifa is the Commander of the Faithful and his orders must be
+   obeyed by all Muslims so long and so long only, as they are not at
+   variance with the Commandments of God and the Traditions of the
+   Prophet. But since there is no lacerating distinction between things
+   temporal and things spiritual, the Khalifa is something more than a
+   Pope and cannot be "Vaticanised." But he is also less than a Pope for
+   he is not infallible. If he persists in un-Islamic conduct we can
+   depose him. And we have deposed him more than once. But so long as he
+   orders only that which Islam demands we must support him. He and no
+   other ruler is the Defender of _our_ faith."
+
+These few words could have removed the mis-undertakings rooted in the
+minds of those that at San Remo, if they were in earnest for a just
+solution. But Mr. Mahomed Ali's deputation was not given any hearing by
+the Peace Conference. They were told that the Peace Conference had
+already heard the official delegation of India on this question. But the
+wrong notions the Allies still entertain about Caliphate are a
+sufficient indication of the effects of the work of this official
+delegation. The result of these wrong notions is the present settlement
+and this unjust settlement will unsettle the world. They know not
+what they do.
+
+
+TURKISH PEACE TERMS
+
+The question of question to-day is the Khilafat question, otherwise
+known as that of the Turkish peace terms. His Excellency the Viceroy
+deserves our thanks for receiving the joint deputation even at this late
+hour, especially when he was busy preparing to receive the head of the
+different provinces. His Excellency must be thanked for the unfailing
+courtesy with which he received the deputation and the courteous
+language in which his reply was couched. But mere courtesy, valuable as
+it is at all times, never so valuable as at this, is not enough at this
+critical moment. 'Sweet words butter no parsnips' is a proverb more
+applicable to-day than ever before. Behind the courtesy there was the
+determination to punish Turkey. Punishment of Turkey is a thing which
+Muslim sentiment cannot tolerate for a moment. Muslim soldiers are as
+responsible for the result of the war as any others. It was to appease
+them that Mr. Asquith said when Turkey decided to join the Central
+Powers that the British Government had no designs on Turkey and that His
+Majesty's Government would never think of punishing the Sultan for the
+misdeeds of the Turkish Committee. Examined by that standard the
+Viceregal reply is not only disappointing but it is a fall from truth
+and justice.
+
+What is this British Empire? It is as much Mahomedan and Hindu as it is
+Christian. Its religious neutrality is not a virtue, or if it is, it is
+a virtue of necessity. Such a mighty Empire could not be held together
+on any other terms. British ministers are therefore bound to protect
+Mahomedan interests as any other. Indeed as the Muslim rejoinder says,
+they are bound to make the cause their own. What is the use of His
+Excellency having presented the Muslim claim before the Conference? If
+the cause is lost the Mahomedans will be entitled to think that Britain
+did not do her duty by them. And the Viceregal reply confirms the view.
+When His Excellency says that Turkey must suffer for her having joined
+the Central Powers he but expresses the opinion of British ministers.
+We hope, therefore, with the framers of the Muslim rejoinder that His
+Majesty's ministers will mend the mistakes if any have been committed
+and secure a settlement that would satisfy Mahomedan sentiment.
+
+What does the sentiment demand? The preservation of the Khilafat with
+such guarantee as may be necessary for the protection of the interests
+of the non-Muslim races living under Turkish rule and the Khalif's
+control over Arabia and the Holy Places with such arrangement as may be
+required for guaranteeing Arab self-rule, should the Arabs desire it. It
+is hardly possible to state the claim more fairly than has been done. It
+is a claim backed by justice, by the declarations of British ministers
+and by the unanimous Hindu and Muslim opinion. It would be midsummer
+madness to reject or whittle down a claim so backed.
+
+
+THE SUZERAINTY OVER ARABIA
+
+   "As I told you in my last letter I think Mr. Gandhi has made a
+   serious mistake in the Kailafat business. The Indian Mahomedans base
+   their demand on the assertion that their religion requires the
+   Turkish rule over Arabia: but when they have against them in this
+   matter, the Arabs themselves, it is impossible to regard the theory
+   of the Indian Mahomedans as essential to Islam. After all if the
+   Arabs do not represent Islam, who does? It is as if the German Roman
+   Catholics made a demand in the name of Roman Catholicism with Rome
+   and the Italians making a contrary demand. But even if the religion
+   of the Indian Mahomedans did require that Turkish rule should be
+   imposed upon the Arabs against their will, one could not, now-a-days,
+   recognise as a really religious demand, one which required the
+   continued oppression of one people by another. When an assurance was
+   given at the beginning of the war to the Indian Mahomedans that the
+   Mahomedan religion would be respected, that could never have meant
+   that a temporal sovereignty which violated the principles of
+   self-determination would be upheld. We could not now stand by and see
+   the Turks re-conquer the Arabs (for the Arabs would certainly fight
+   against them) without grossly betraying the Arabs to whom we have
+   given pledges. It is not true that the Arab hostility to the Turks
+   was due simply to European suggestion. No doubt, during the war we
+   availed ourselves of the Arab hostility to the Turks to get another
+   ally, but the hostility had existed long before the war. The
+   Non-Turkish Mahomedan subjects of the Sultan in general wanted to get
+   rid of his rule. It is the Indian Mahomedans who have no experience
+   of that rule who want to impose it on others. As a matter of fact the
+   idea of any restoration of Turkish rule in Syria or Arabia, seems so
+   remote from all possibilities that to discuss it seems like
+   discussing a restoration of the Holy Roman Empire. I cannot conceive
+   what series of events could bring it about. The Indian Mahomedans
+   certainly could not march into Arabia themselves and conquer the
+   Arabs for the Sultan. And no amount of agitation and trouble in India
+   would ever induce England to put back Turkish rule in Arabia. In this
+   matter it is not English Imperialism which the Indian Mahomedans are
+   up against, but the mass of English Liberal and Humanitarian opinion,
+   the mass of the better opinion of England, which wants
+   self-determination to go forward in India. Supposing the Indian
+   Mahomedans could stir up an agitation so violent in India as to sever
+   the connection between India and the British Crown, still they would
+   not be any nearer to their purpose. For to-day they do have
+   considerable influence on British world-policy. Even if in this
+   matter of the Turkish question their influence has not been
+   sufficient to turn the scale against the very heavy weights on the
+   other side, it has weighed in the scale. But apart from the British
+   connection, Indian Mahomedans would have no influence at all outside
+   India. They would not count for more in world politics than the
+   Mahomedans of China. I think it is likely (apart from the pressure
+   of America on the other side. I should say certain) that the
+   influence of the Indian Mahomedans may at any rate avail to keep the
+   Sultan in Constantinople. But I doubt whether they will gain any
+   advantage by doing so. For a Turkey cut down to the Turkish parts of
+   Asia-Minor, Constantinople would be a very inconvenient capital. I
+   think its inconvenience would more than outweigh the sentimental
+   gratification of keeping up a phantom of the old Ottoman Empire. But
+   if the Indian Mahomedans want the Sultan to retain his place in
+   Constantinople I think the assurances given officially by the Viceroy
+   in India now binds us to insist on his remaining there and I think he
+   will remain there in spite of America."
+
+This is an extract, from the letter of an Englishman enjoying a position
+in Great Britain, to a friend in India. It is a typical letter, sober,
+honest, to the point and put in such graceful language that whilst it
+challenges you, it commands your respect by its very gracefulness. But
+it is just this attitude based upon insufficient or false information
+which has ruined many a cause in the British Isles. The superficiality,
+the one-sidedness the inaccuracy and often even dishonesty that have
+crept into modern journalism, continuously mislead honest men who want
+to see nothing but justice done. Then there are always interested
+groups whose business it is to serve their ends by means of faul or
+food. And the honest Englishman wishing to vote for justice but swayed
+by conflicting opinions and dominated by distorted versions, often ends
+by becoming an instrument of injustice.
+
+The writer of the letter quoted above has built up convincing argument
+on imaginary data. He has successfully shown that the Mahomedan case, as
+it has been presented to him, is a rotten case. In India, where it is
+not quite easy to distort facts about the Khilafat, English friends
+admit the utter justice of the Indian-Mahomedan claim. But they plead
+helplessness and tell us that the Government of India and Mr. Montagu
+have done all it was humanly possible for them to do. And if now the
+judgment goes against Islam, Indian Mahomedans should resign themselves
+to it. This extraordinary state of things would not be possible except
+under this modern rush and preoccupations of all responsible people.
+
+Let us for a moment examine the case as it has been imagined by the
+writer. He suggests that Indian Mahomedans want Turkish rule in Arabia
+in spite of the opposition of the Arabs themselves, and that, if the
+Arabs do not want Turkish rule, the writer argues, no false religions
+sentiment can be permitted to interfere with self-determination of the
+Arabs when India herself has been pleading for that very status. Now the
+fact is that the Mahomedans, as is known to everybody who has at all
+studied the case, have never asked for Turkish rule in Arabia in
+opposition to the Arabs. On the contrary, they have said that they have
+no intention of resisting Arabian self-government. All they ask for is
+Turkish suzerainty over Arabia which would guarantee complete self-rule
+for the Arabs. They want Khalif's control of the Holy Places of Islam.
+In other words they ask for nothing more than what was guaranteed by Mr.
+Lloyd George and on the strength of which guarantee Mahomedan soldiers
+split their blood on behalf of the Allied Powers. All the elaborate
+argument therefore and the cogent reasoning of the above extract fall to
+pieces based as they are upon a case that has never existed. I have
+thrown myself heart and soul into this question because British pledges
+abstract justice, and religious sentiment coincide. I can conceive the
+possibility of a blind and fanatical religious sentiment existing in
+opposition to pure justice. I should then resist the former and fight
+for the latter. Nor would I insist upon pledges given dishonestly to
+support an unjust cause as has happened with England in the case of the
+secret treaties. Resistance there becomes not only lawful but obligatory
+on the part of a nation that prides itself on its righteousness.
+
+It is unnecessary for me to examine the position imagined by the English
+friend, viz., how India would have fared had she been an independent
+power. It is unnecessary because Indian Mahomedans, and for that matter
+India, are fighting for a cause that is admittedly just; a cause in aid
+of which they are invoking the whole-hearted support of the British
+people. I would however venture to suggest that this is a cause in which
+mere sympathy will not suffice. It is a cause which demands support that
+is strong enough to bring about substantial justice.
+
+
+FURTHER QUESTIONS ANSWERED
+
+I have been overwhelmed with public criticism and private advice and
+even anonymous letters telling me exactly what I should do. Some are
+impatient that I do not advise immediate and extensive non-co-operation;
+others tell me what harm I am doing the country by throwing it knowingly
+in a tempest of violence on either side. It is difficult for me to deal
+with the whole of the criticism, but I would summarize some of the
+objections and endeavour to answer them to the best of my ability. These
+are in addition to those I have already answered:--
+
+(1) Turkish claim is immoral or unjust and how can I, a lover of truth
+and justice, support it? (2) Even if the claim be just in theory, the
+Turk is hopelessly incapable, weak and cruel. He does not deserve any
+assistance.
+
+(3) Even if Turkey deserves all that is claimed for her, why should I
+land India in an international struggle?
+
+(4) It is no part of the Indian Mahomedans' business to meddle in this
+affair. If they cherish any political ambition, they have tried, they
+have failed and they should now sit still. If it is a religious matter
+with them, it cannot appeal to the Hindu reason in the manner it is put
+and in any case Hindus ought not to identify themselves with Mahomedans
+in their religious quarrel with Christendom.
+
+(5) In no case should I advocate non-co-operation which in its extreme
+sense is nothing but a rebellion, no matter how peaceful it may be.
+
+(6) Moreover, my experience of last year must show me that it is beyond
+the capacity of any single human being to control the forces of violence
+that are lying dormant in the land.
+
+(7) Non-co-operation is futile because people will never respond in
+right earnest, and reaction that might afterwards set in will be worse
+than the state of hopefulness we are now in.
+
+(8) Non-co-operation will bring about cessation of all other activities,
+even working of the Reforms, thus set back the clock of progress. (9)
+However pure my motives may be, those of the Mussalmans are obviously
+revengeful.
+
+I shall now answer the objections in the order in which they are
+stated--
+
+(1) In my opinion the Turkish claim is not only not immoral and unjust,
+but it is highly equitable, if only because Turkey wants to retain what
+is her own. And the Mahomedan manifesto has definitely declared that
+whatever guarantees may be necessary to be taken for the protection of
+non-Muslim and non-Turkish races, should be taken so as to give the
+Christians theirs and the Arabs their self-government under the Turkish
+suzerainty.
+
+(2) I do not believe the Turk to be weak, incapable or cruel. He is
+certainly disorganised and probably without good generalship. He has
+been obliged to fight against heavy odds. The argument of weakness,
+incapacity and cruelty one often hears quoted in connection with those
+from whom power is sought to be taken away. About the alleged massacres
+a proper commission has been asked for, but never granted. And in any
+case security can be taken against oppression.
+
+(3) I have already stated that if I were not interested in the Indian
+Mahomedans, I would not interest myself in the welfare of the Turks any
+more than I am in that of the Austrians or the Poles. But I am bound as
+an Indian to share the sufferings and trial of fellow-Indians. If I deem
+the Mahomedan to be my brother. It is my duty to help him in his hour
+of peril to the best of my ability, if his cause commends itself to
+me as just.
+
+(4) The fourth refers to the extent Hindus should join hands with the
+Mahomedans. It is therefore a matter of feeling and opinion. It is
+expedient to suffer for my Mahomedan brother to the utmost in a just
+cause and I should therefore travel with him along the whole road so
+long as the means employed by him are as honourable as his end. I cannot
+regulate the Mahomedan feeling. I must accept his statement that the
+Khilafat is with him a religious question in the sense that it binds him
+to reach the goal even at the cost of his own life.
+
+(5) I do not consider non-co-operation to be a rebellion, because it is
+free from violence. In a larger sense all opposition to a Government
+measure is a rebellion. In that sense, rebellion in a just cause is a
+duty, the extent of opposition being determined by the measure of the
+injustice done and felt.
+
+(6) My experience of last year shows me that in spite of aberrations in
+some parts of India, the country was entirely under control that the
+influence of Satyagraha was profoundly for its good and that where
+violence did break out there were local causes that directly contributed
+to it. At the same time I admit that even the violence that did take
+place on the part of the people and the spirit of lawlessness that was
+undoubtedly shown in some parts should have remained under check. I have
+made ample acknowledgment of the miscalculation I then made. But all the
+painful experience that I then gained did not any way shake my belief in
+Satyagraha or in the possibility of that matchless force being utilised
+in India. Ample provision is being made this time to avoid the mistakes
+of the past. But I must refuse to be deterred from a clear course;
+because it may be attended by violence totally unintended and in spite
+of extraordinary efforts that are being made to prevent it. At the same
+time I must make my position clear. Nothing can possibly prevent a
+Satyagrahi from doing his duty because of the frown of the authorities.
+I would risk, if necessary, a million lives so long as they are
+voluntary sufferers and are innocent, spotless victims. It is the
+mistakes of the people that matter in a Satyagraha campaign. Mistakes,
+even insanity must be expected from the strong and the powerful, and the
+moment of victory has come when there is no retort to the mad fury of
+the powerful, but a voluntary, dignified and quiet submission but not
+submission to the will of the authority that has put itself in the
+wrong. The secret of success lies therefore in holding every English
+life and the life of every officer serving the Government as sacred as
+those of our own dear ones. All the wonderful experience I have gained
+now during nearly 40 years of conscious existence, has convinced me that
+there is no gift so precious as that of life. I make bold to say that
+the moment the Englishmen feel that although they are in India in a
+hopeless minority, their lives are protected against harm not because of
+the matchless weapons of destruction which are at their disposal, but
+because Indians refuse to take the lives even of those whom they may
+consider to be utterly in the wrong that moment will see a
+transformation in the English nature in its relation to India and that
+moment will also be the moment when all the destructive cutlery that is
+to be had in India will begin to rust. I know that this is a far-off
+vision. That cannot matter to me. It is enough for me to see the light
+and to act up to it, and it is more than enough when I gain companions
+in the onward march. I have claimed in private conversations with
+English friends that it is because of my incessant preaching of the
+gospel of non-violence and my having successfully demonstrated its
+practical utility that so far the forces of violence, which are
+undoubtedly in existence in connection with the Khilafat movement, have
+remained under complete control.
+
+(7) From a religious standpoint the seventh objection is hardly worth
+considering. If people do not respond to the movement of
+non-co-operation, it would be a pity, but that can be no reason for a
+reformer not to try. It would be to me a demonstration that the present
+position of hopefulness is not dependent on any inward strength or
+knowledge, but it is hope born of ignorance and superstition.
+
+(8) If non-co-operation is taken up in earnest, it must bring about a
+cessation of all other activities including the Reforms, but I decline
+to draw therefore the corollary that it will set back the clock of
+progress. On the contrary, I consider non-co-operation to be such a
+powerful and pure instrument, that if it is enforced in an earnest
+spirit, it will be like seeking first the Kingdom of God and everything
+else following as a matter of course. People will have then realised
+their true power. They would have learnt the value of discipline,
+self-control, joint action, non-violence, organisation and everything
+else that goes to make a nation great and good, and not merely great.
+
+(9) I do not know that I have a right to arrogate greater purity for
+myself than for our Mussalman brethren. But I do admit that they do not
+believe in my doctrine of non-violence to the full extent. For them it
+is a weapon of the weak, an expedient. They consider non-co-operation
+without violence to be the only thing open to them in the war of direct
+action. I know that if some of them could offer successful violence,
+they would do to-day. But they are convinced that humanly speaking it is
+an impossibility. For them, therefore, non-co-operation is a matter not
+merely of duty but also of revenge. Whereas I take up non-co-operation
+against the Government as I have actually taken it up in practice
+against members of my own family. I entertain very high regard for the
+British constitution, I have not only no enmity against Englishmen but I
+regard much in English character as worthy of my emulation. I count many
+as my friends. It is against my religion to regard any one as an enemy.
+I entertain similar sentiments with respect to Mahomedans. I find their
+cause to be just and pure. Although therefore their viewpoint is
+different from mine I do not hesitate to associate with them and invite
+them to give my method a trial, for, I believe that the use of a pure
+weapon even from a mistaken motive does not fail to produce some good,
+even as the telling of truth if only because for the time being it is
+the best policy, is at least so much to the good.
+
+
+MR. CANDLER'S OPEN LETTER
+
+Mr. Candler has favoured me with an open letter on this question of
+questions. The letter has already appeared in the Press. I can
+appreciate Mr. Candler's position as I would like him and other
+Englishmen to appreciate mine and that of hundreds of Hindus who feel as
+I do. Mr. Candler's letter is an attempt to show that Mr. Lloyd George's
+pledge is not in any way broken by the peace terms. I quite agree with
+him that Mr. Lloyd George's words ought not to be torn from their
+context to support the Mahomedan claim. These are Mr. Lloyd George's
+words as quoted in the recent Viceregal message: "Nor are we fighting to
+destroy Austria-Hungary or to deprive Turkey of its capital or of the
+rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly
+Turkish in race." Mr. Candler seems to read 'which', as if it meant 'if
+they,' whereas I give the pronoun its natural meaning, namely, that the
+Prime Minister knew in 1918, that the lands referred to by him were
+"predominantly Turkish in race." And if this is the meaning I venture to
+suggest that the pledge has been broken in a most barefaced manner, for
+there is practically nothing left to the Turk of 'the rich and renowned
+lands of Asia Minor and Thrace.'
+
+I have already my view of the retention of the Sultan in Constantinople.
+It is an insult to the intelligence of man to suggest that 'the
+maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the homeland of the Turkish race
+with its capital at Constantinople has been left unimpaired by the terms
+of peace. This is the other passage from the speech which I presume Mr.
+Candler wants me to read together with the one already quoted:--
+
+   "While we do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in
+   the home-land of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople,
+   the passage between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea being
+   inter-nationalised, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine are in
+   our judgment entitled to a recognition of their separate national
+   condition."
+
+Did that mean entire removal of Turkish influence, extinction of Turkish
+suzerainty and the introduction of European-Christian influence under
+the guise of Mandates? Have the Moslems of Arabia, Armenia, Mesopotamia,
+Syria and Palestine been committed, or is the new arrangement being
+superimposed upon them by Powers conscious of their own brute-strength
+rather than of justice of their action? I for one would nurse by every
+legitimate means the spirit of independence in the brave Arabs, but I
+shudder to think what will happen to them under the schemes of
+exploitation of their country by the greedy capitalists protected as
+they will be by the mandatory Powers. If the pledge is to be fulfilled,
+let these places have full self-government with suzerainty to be
+retained with Turkey as has been suggested by the _Times of India_. Let
+there be all the necessary guarantees taken from Turkey about the
+internal independence of the Arabs. But to remove that suzerainty, to
+deprive the Khalif of the wardenship of the Holy Places is to render
+Khilafat a mockery which no Mahomedan can possibly look upon with
+equanimity, I am not alone in my interpretation of the pledge. The Right
+Hon'ble Ameer Ali calls the peace terms a breach of faith. Mr. Charles
+Roberts reminds the British public that the Indian Mussalman sentiment
+regarding the Turkish Treaty is based upon the Prime Minister's pledge
+"regarding Thrace, Constantinople and Turkish lands in Asia Minor,
+repeated on February 26 last with deliberation by Mr. Lloyd George. Mr.
+Roberts holds that the pledge must be treated as a whole, not as binding
+only regarding Constantinople but also binding as regards Thrace and
+Asia Minor. He describes the pledge as binding upon the nation as a
+whole and its breach in any part as a gross breach of faith on the part
+of the British Empire. He demands that if there is an unanswerable reply
+to the charge of breach of faith it ought to be given and adds the Prime
+Minister may regard his own word lightly if he chooses, but he has no
+right to break a pledge given on behalf of the nation. He concludes that
+it is incredible that such pledge should not have been kept in the
+letter and in the spirit." He adds: "I have reason to believe that these
+views are fully shared by prominent members of the Cabinet."
+
+I wonder if Mr. Candler knows what is going on to-day in England. Mr.
+Pickthall writing in _New Age_ says: "No impartial international enquiry
+into the whole question of the Armenian massacres has been instituted in
+the ample time which has elapsed since the conclusion of armistice with
+Turkey. The Turkish Government has asked for such enquiry. But the
+Armenian organisations and the Armenian partisans refuse to hear of such
+a thing, declaring that the Bryce and Lepssens reports are quite
+sufficient to condemn the Turks. In other words the judgment should be
+given on the case for prosecution alone. The inter-allied commission
+which investigated the unfortunate events in Smyrna last year, made a
+report unfavourable to Greek claims. Therefore, that report has not been
+published here in England, though in other countries it has long been
+public property." He then goes on to show how money is being scattered
+by Armenian and Greek emissaries in order to popularise their cause and
+adds: "This conjunction of dense ignorance and cunning falsehood is
+fraught with instant danger to the British realm," and concludes: "A
+Government and people which prefer propaganda to fact as the ground of
+policy--and foreign policy at that--is self-condemned."
+
+I have reproduced the above extract in order to show that the present
+British policy has been affected by propaganda of an unscrupulous
+nature. Turkey which was dominant over two million square miles of
+Asia, Africa and Europe in the 17th century, under the terms of the
+treaty, says the _London Chronicle_, has dwindled down to little more
+than 1,000 square miles. It says, "All European Turkey could now be
+accommodated comfortably between the Landsend and the Tamar, Cornawal
+alone exceeding its total area and but for its alliance with Germany,
+Turkey could have been assured of retaining at least sixty thousand
+square miles of the Eastern Balkans." I do not know whether the
+_Chronicle_ view is generally shared. Is it by way of punishment that
+Turkey is to undergo such shrinkage, or is it because justice demands
+it? If Turkey had not made the mistake of joining Germany, would the
+principle of nationality have been still applied to Armenia, Arabia,
+Mesopotamia and Palestine?
+
+Let me now remind those who think with Mr. Candler that the promise was
+not made by Mr. Lloyd George to the people of India in anticipation of
+the supply of recruits continuing. In defending his own statement Mr.
+Lloyd George is reported to have said:
+
+   "The effect of the statement in India was that recruiting went up
+   appreciably from that very moment. They were not all Mahomedans but
+   there were many Mahomedans amongst them. Now we are told that was an
+   offer to Turkey. But they rejected it, and therefore we were
+   absolutely free. It was not. It is too often forgotten that we are
+   the greatest Mahomedan power in the world and one-fourth of the
+   population of the British Empire is Mahomedan. There have been no
+   more loyal adherents to the throne and no more effective and loyal
+   supporters of the Empire in its hour of trial. _We gave a solemn
+   pledge and they accepted it_. They are disturbed by the prospect of
+   our not abiding by it."
+
+Who shall interpret that pledge and how? How did the Government of India
+itself interpret it? Did it or did it not energetically support the
+claim for the control of the Holy Places of Islam vesting in the Khalif?
+Did the Government of India suggest that the whole of Jazirat-ul-Arab
+could be taken away consistently with that pledge from the sphere of
+influence of the Khalif, and given over to the Allies as mandatory
+Powers? Why does the Government of India sympathise with the Indian
+Mussalmans if the terms are all they should be? So much for the pledge.
+I would like to guard myself against being understood that I stand or
+fall absolutely by Mr. Lloyd George's declaration. I have advisedly used
+the adverb 'practically' in connection with it. It is an important
+qualification.'
+
+Mr. Candler seems to suggest that my goal is something more than merely
+attaining justice on the Khilafat. If so, he is right. Attainment of
+justice is undoubtedly the corner-stone, and if I found that I was wrong
+in my conception of justice on this question, I hope I shall have the
+courage immediately to retrace my steps. But by helping the Mahomedans
+of India at a critical moment in their history, I want to buy their
+friendship. Moreover, if I can carry the Mahomedans with me I hope to
+wean Great Britain from the downward path along which the Prime Minister
+seems to me to be taking her. I hope also to show to India and the
+Empire at large that given a certain amount of capacity for
+self-sacrifice, justice can be secured by peacefullest and cleanest
+means without sowing or increasing bitterness between English and
+Indians. For, whatever may be the temporary effect of my methods, I know
+enough of them to feel certain that they alone are immune from lasting
+bitterness. They are untainted with hatred, expedience or untruth.
+
+
+IN PROCESS OF KEEPING
+
+The writer of 'Current Topics' in the "Times of India" has attempted to
+challenge the statement made in my Khilafat article regarding
+ministerial pledges, and in doing so cites Mr. Asquith's Guild-Hall
+speech of November 10, 1914. When I wrote the articles, I had in mind
+Mr. Asquith's speech. I am sorry that he ever made that speech. For, in
+my humble opinion, it betrayed to say the least, a confusion of thought.
+Could he think of the Turkish people as apart from the Ottoman
+Government? And what is the meaning of the death-knell of Ottoman
+Dominion in Europe and Asia if it be not the death knell of Turkish
+people as a free and governing race? Is it, again, true historically
+that the Turkish rule has always been a blight that 'has withered some
+of the fairest regions of the earth?' And what is the meaning of his
+statement that followed, viz., "Nothing is further from our thoughts
+than to imitate or encourage a crusade against their belief?" If words
+have any meaning, the qualifications that Mr. Asquith introduced in his
+speech should have meant a scrupulous regard for Indian Muslim feeling.
+And if that be the meaning of his speech, without anything further to
+support me I would claim that even Mr. Asquith's assurance is in danger
+of being set at nought if the resolutions of the San Remo Conference are
+to be crystallised into action. But I base remarks on a considered
+speech made by Mr. Asquith's successor two years later when things had
+assumed a more threatening shape than in 1914 and when the need for
+Indian help was much greater than in 1914. His pledge would bear
+repetition till it is fulfilled. He said: "Nor are we fighting to
+deprive Turkey of its capital or of the rich and renowned lands of Asia
+Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in race. We do not
+challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the homelands of the
+Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople." If only every word of
+this pledge is fulfilled both in letter and in spirit, there would be
+little left for quarrelling about. In so far as Mr. Asquith's
+declaration can be considered hostile to the Indian Muslim claim, it its
+superseded by the later and more considered declaration of Mr. Lloyd
+George--a declaration made irrevocable by fulfilment of the
+consideration it expected, viz. the enlistment of the brave Mahomedan
+soldiery which fought in the very place which is now being partitioned
+in spite of the pledge. But the writer of 'Current Topics' says Mr.
+Lloyd George "is now in process of keeping his pledge" I hope he is
+right. But what has already happened gives little ground for any such
+hope. For, imprisonment or internment of the Khalif in his own capital
+will be not only a mockery of fulfilment but it would he adding injury
+to insult. Either the Turkish Empire is to be maintained in the
+homelands of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople or it
+is not. If it is, let the Indian Mahomedans feel the full glow of it or
+if the Empire is to be broken up, let the mask of hypocrisy be lifted
+and India see the truth in its nakedness. To join the Khilafat movement
+then means to join a movement to keep inviolate the pledge of a British
+minister. Surely, such a movement is worth much greater sacrifice than
+may be involved in non-co-operation.
+
+
+APPEAL TO THE VICEROY
+
+Your Excellency.
+
+As one who has enjoyed a certain measure of your Excellency's
+confidence, and as one who claims to be a devoted well-wisher of the
+British Empire, I owe it to your Excellency, and through your Excellency
+to His Majesty's Ministers, to explain my connection with and my conduct
+in the Khilafat question.
+
+At the very earliest stages of the war, even whilst I was in London
+organising the Indian Volunteer Ambulance Corps, I began to interest
+myself in the Khilafat question. I perceived how deeply moved the little
+Mussalman World in London was when Turkey decided to throw in her lot
+with Germany. On my arrival in India in the January of 1915, I found the
+same anxiousness and earnestness among the Mussalmans with whom I came
+in contact. Their anxiety became intense when the information about the
+Secret Treaties leaked out. Distrust of British intentions filled their
+minds, and despair took possession of them. Even at that moment I
+advised my Mussalman friends not to give way to despair, but to express
+their fear and their hopes in a disciplined manner. It will be admitted
+that the whole of Mussalman India has behaved in a singularly restrained
+manner during the past five years and that the leaders have been able to
+keep the turbulent sections of their community under complete control.
+
+The peace terms and your Excellency's defence of them have given the
+Mussalmans of India a shock from which it will be difficult for them to
+recover. The terms violate ministerial pledges and utterly disregard
+Mussalman sentiment. I consider that as a staunch Hindu wishing to live
+on terms of the closest friendship with my Mussalman countrymen. I
+should be an unworthy son of India if I did not stand by them in their
+hour of trial. In my humble opinion their cause is just. They claim that
+Turkey must be _punished_ if their sentiment is to be respected. Muslim
+soldiers did fight to inflict punishment on their own Khalifa or to
+deprive him of his territories. The Mussalman attitude has been
+consistent, throughout these five years.
+
+My duty to the Empire to which I owe my loyalty requires me to resist
+the cruel violence that has been done to the Mussalman sentiment. So far
+as I am aware, Mussulmans and Hindus have as a whole lost faith in
+British justice and honour. The report of the majority of the Hunter
+Committee, Your Excellency's despatch thereon and Mr. Montagu's reply
+have only aggravated the distrust.
+
+In these circumstances the only course open to one like me is either in
+despair to sever all connection with British rule, or, if I still
+retained faith in the inherent superiority of the British constitution
+to all others at present in vogue to adopt such means as will rectify
+the wrong done, and thus restore confidence. I have not lost faith in
+such superiority and I am not without hope that somehow or other justice
+will yet be rendered if we show the requisite capacity for suffering.
+Indeed, my conception of that constitution is that it helps only those
+who are ready to help themselves. I do not believe that it protects the
+weak. It gives free scope to the strong to maintain their strength and
+develop it. The weak under it go to the wall.
+
+It is, then, because I believe in the British constitution that I have
+advised my Mussalman friends to withdraw their support from your
+Excellency's Government and the Hindus to join them, should the peace
+terms not be revised in accordance with the solemn pledges of Ministers
+and the Muslim sentiment.
+
+Three courses were open to the Mahomedans in order to mark their
+emphatic disapproval of the utter injustice to which His Majesty's
+Ministers have become party, if they have not actually been the prime
+perpetrators of it. They are:--
+
+(1) To resort to violence,
+
+(2) To advise emigration on a wholesale scale,
+
+(3) Not to be party to the injustice by ceasing to co-operate with the
+Government.
+
+Your Excellency must be aware that there was a time when the boldest,
+though the most thoughtless among the Mussulmans favoured violence, and
+the "Hijrat" (emigration) has not yet ceased to be the battle-cry. I
+venture to claim that I have succeeded by patient reasoning in weaning
+the party of violence from its ways. I confess that I did not--I did not
+attempt to succeed in weaning them from violence on moral grounds, but
+purely on utilitarian grounds. The result, for the time being at any
+has, however, been to stop violence. The School of "Hijrat" has received
+a check, if it has not stopped its activity entirely. I hold that no
+repression could have prevented a violent eruption, if the people had
+not had presented to them a form of direct action involving considerable
+sacrifice and ensuring success if such direct action was largely taken
+up by the public. Non-co-operation was the only dignified and
+constitutional form of such direct action. For it is the right
+recognised from times immemorial of the subject to refuse to assist a
+ruler who misrules.
+
+At the same time I admit that non-co-operation practised by the mass of
+people is attended with grave risks. But, in a crisis such as has
+overtaken the Mussalmans of India, no step that is unattended with large
+risks, can possibly bring about the desired change. Not to run some
+risks now will be to court much greater risks if not virtual destruction
+of Law and Order.
+
+But there is yet an escape from non-co-operation. The Mussalman
+representation has requested your Excellency to lead the agitation
+yourself, as did your distinguished predecessor at the time of the South
+African trouble. But if you cannot see your way to do so, and
+non-co-operation becomes a dire necessity, I hope that your Excellency
+will give those who have accepted my advice and myself the credit for
+being actuated by nothing less than a stern sense of duty.
+
+I have the honour to remain,
+
+Your Excellency's faithful servant,
+
+(Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+
+Laburnam Road, Gamdevi, Bombay
+
+22nd June 1920
+
+
+THE PREMIER'S REPLY
+
+The English mail has brought us a full and official report of the
+Premier's speech which he recently made when he received the Khilafat
+deputation. Mr. Lloyd George's speech is more definite and therefore
+more disappointing than H.E. the Viceroy's reply to the deputation here.
+He draws quite unwarranted deductions from the same high principles on
+which he had based his own pledge only two years ago. He declares that
+Turkey must pay the penalty of defeat. This determination to punish
+Turkey does not become one whose immediate predecessor had, in order to
+appease Muslim soldiers, promised that the British Government had no
+designs on Turkey and that His Majesty's Government would never think of
+punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish Committee. Mr.
+Lloyd George has expressed his belief that the majority of the
+population of Turkey did not really want to quarrel with Great Britain
+and that their rulers misled the country. In spite of this conviction
+and in spite of Mr. Asquith's promise, he is out to punish Turkey and
+punish it in the name of justice.
+
+He expounds the principle of self-determination and justifies the scheme
+of depriving Turkey of its territories one after another. While
+justifying this scheme he does not exclude even Thrace and this strikes
+the reader most, because this very Thrace he had mentioned in his pledge
+as predominantly Turkish. Now we are told by him that both the Turkish
+census and the Greek census agree in pointing out the Mussulman
+population in Thrace is in a considerable minority! Mr. Yakub Hussain
+speaking at the Madras Khilafat conference has challenged the truth of
+this statement. The Prime Minister cites among others also the example
+of Smyrna where, he says, we had a most careful investigation by a very
+impartial committee in the whole of the question of Smyrna and it was
+found that considerable majority was non-Turkish.' Who will believe the
+one-sided "impartial committee's" investigations until it is disproved
+that thousands of Musselmans have been murdered and hundreds of
+thousands have been driven away from their hearths and homes? Strangely
+enough Mr. Lloyd George, believes in the necessity of fresh
+investigations by a purposely appointed committee in Smyrna as the most
+authenticated and up-to-date report, whereas he would not accept Mr.
+Mahomed Ali's proposal for an impartial commission in regard to Armenian
+massacre! Doubtful and one-sided facts and figures suffice for him even
+to conclude that the Turkish Government is incapable of protecting its
+subjects. And he proceeds to suggest foreign interference in ruling over
+Asia Minor in the interests of civilization. Here he cuts at the root of
+the Sultan's independence. This proposal of appropriating supervision is
+distinctly unlike the treatment meted out to other enemy powers.
+
+This detraction of the Sultan's suzerainty is only a corollary of the
+Premier's indifference towards the Muslim idea of the Caliphate. The
+premier's injustice in treating the Turkish question becomes graver when
+he thus lightly handles the Khilafat question. There had been occasions
+when the British have used to their advantage the Muslim idea of
+associating the Caliph's spiritual power with temporal power. Now this
+very association is treated as a controversial question by the great
+statesman.
+
+Will this raise the reputation of Great Britain or stain it? Can this be
+tolerated by those who fought against Turkey with full faith in British
+honesty? Mere receipts of gratitude cannot console the wounded
+Mussalmans. There lies the alternative for England to choose between two
+mandates--a mandate over some Turkish territories which is sure to lead
+to chaos all over the world and a mandate over the hearts of the
+Muhomedans which will redeem the pledged honour of Britain. The prime
+minister has an unwise choice. This narrow view registers the latest
+temperature of British diplomacy.
+
+
+THE MUSSULMAN REPRESENTATION
+
+Slowly but surely the Mussulmans are preparing for the battle before
+them. They have to fight against odds that are undoubtedly heavy but
+not half as heavy as the prophet had against him. How often did he not
+put his life in danger? But his faith in God was unquenchable. He went
+forward with a light heart, for God was on his side, for he represented
+truth. If his followers have half the prophet's faith and half his
+spirit of sacrifice, the odds will be presently even and will in little
+while turn against the despoilers of Turkey. Already the rapacity of the
+Allies is telling against themselves. France finds her task difficult.
+Greece cannot stomach her ill-gotten gains. And England finds
+Mesopotamia a tough job. The oil of Mosul may feed the fire she has so
+wantonly lighted and burn her fingers badly. The newspapers say the
+Arabs do not like the presence of the Indian soldiery in their midst. I
+do not wonder. They are a fierce and a brave people and do not
+understand why Indian soldiers should find themselves in Mesopotamia.
+Whatever the fate of non-co-operation, I wish that not a single Indian
+will offer his services for Mesopotamia whether for the civil or the
+military department. We must learn to think for ourselves and before
+entering upon any employment find out whether thereby we may not make
+ourselves instruments of injustice. Apart from the question of Khilafat
+and from the point of abstract justice the English have no right to hold
+Mesopotamia. It is no part of our loyalty to help the Imperial
+Government in what is in plain language daylight robbery. If therefore
+we seek civil or military employment in Mesopotamia we do so for the
+sake of earning a livelihood. It is our duty to see that the source is
+not tainted.
+
+It surprises me to find so many people shirking over the mention of
+non-co-operation. There is no instrument so clean, so harmless and yet
+so effective as non-co-operation. Judiciously hauled it need not produce
+any evil consequences. And its intensity will depend purely on the
+capacity of the people for sacrifice.
+
+The chief thing is to prepare the atmosphere of non-co-operation. "We
+are not going to co-operate with you in your injustice," is surely the
+right and the duty of every intelligent subject to say. Were it not for
+our utter servility, helplessness and want of confidence in ourselves,
+we would certainly grasp this clean weapon and make the most effective
+use of it. Even the most despotic government cannot stand except for the
+consent of the governed which consent is often forcibly procured by the
+despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear the despotic force his
+power is gone. But the British government is never and nowhere entirely
+or laid upon force. It does make an honest attempt to secure the
+goodwill of the governed. But it does not hesitate to adopt unscrupulous
+means to compel the consent of the governed. It has not gone beyond the
+'Honesty is the best policy' idea. It therefore bribes you into
+consenting its will by awarding titles, medals and ribbons, by giving
+you employment, by its superior financial ability to open for its
+employees avenues for enriching themselves and finally when these fail,
+it resorts to force. That is what Sir Michael O'Dwyer did and that is
+almost every British administrator will certainly do if he thought it
+necessary. If then we would not be greedy, if we would not run after
+titles and medals and honorary posts which do the country no good, half
+the battle is won.
+
+My advisers are never tired of telling me that even if the Turkish peace
+terms are revised it will not be due to non-co-operation. I venture to
+suggest to them that non-co-operation has a higher purpose than mere
+revision of the terms. If I cannot compel revision I must at least cease
+to support a government that becomes party to the usurpation. And if I
+succeed in pushing non-co-operation to the extreme limit, I do compel
+the Government to choose between India and the usurpation. I have faith
+enough in England to know that at that moment England will expel her
+present jaded ministers and put in others who will make a clean sweep of
+the terms in consultation with an awakened India, draft terms that will
+be honourable to her, to Turkey and acceptable to India. But I hear my
+critics say "India has not the strength of purpose and the capacity for
+the sacrifice to achieve such a noble end. They are partly right. India
+has not these qualities now, because we have not--shall we not evolve
+them and infect the nation with them? Is not the attempt worth making?
+Is my sacrifice too great to gain such a great purpose?"
+
+
+CRITICISM OF THE MUSLIM MANIFESTO
+
+The Khilafat representation addressed to the Viceroy and my letter on
+the same subject have been severely criticised by the Anglo-Indian
+press. _The Times of India_ which generally adopts an impartial attitude
+has taken strong exception to certain statements made in the Muslim
+manifesto and has devoted a paragraph of its article to an advance
+criticism of my suggestion that His Excellency should resign if the
+peace terms are not revised.
+
+_The Times of India_ excepts to the submission that the British Empire
+may not treat Turkey like a departed enemy. The signatories have, I
+think, supplied the best of reasons. They say "We respectfully submit
+that in the treatment of Turkey the British Government are bound to
+respect Indian Muslim sentiment in so far as it is neither unjust nor
+unreasonable." If the seven crore Mussulmans are partners in the Empire,
+I submit that their wish must be held to be all sufficient for
+refraining from punishing Turkey. It is beside the point to quote what
+Turkey did during the war. It has suffered for it. _The Times_ inquires
+wherein Turkey has been treated worse than the other Powers. I thought
+that the fact was self-evident. Neither Germany nor Austria and Hungary
+has been treated in the same way that Turkey has been. The whole of the
+Empire has been reduced to the retention of a portion of its capital, as
+it were, to mock the Sultan and that too has been done under terms so
+humiliating that no self-respecting person much less a reigning
+sovereign can possibly accept.
+
+_The Times_ has endeavoured to make capital out of the fact that the
+representation does not examine the reason for Turkey not joining the
+Allies. Well there was no mystery about it. The fact of Russia being one
+of the Allies was enough to warn Turkey against joining them. With
+Russia knocking at the gate at the time of the war it was not an easy
+matter for Turkey to join the Allies. But Turkey had cause to suspect
+Great Britain herself. She knew that England had done no friendly turn
+to her during the Bulgarian War. She was hardly well served at the time
+of the war with Italy. It was still no doubt a bad choice. With the
+Musssalmans of India awakened and ready to support her, her statesmen
+might have relied upon Britain not being allowed to damage Turkey if she
+had remained with the Allies. But this is all wisdom after event. Turkey
+made a bad choice and she was punished for it. To humiliate her now is
+to ignore the Indian Mussulman sentiment. Britain may not do it and
+retain the loyalty of the awakened Mussulmans of India.
+
+For "The Times" to say that the peace terms strictly follow the
+principle of self-determination is to throw dust in the eyes of its
+readers. Is it the principle of self-determination that has caused the
+cessation of Adrianople and Thrace to Greece? By what principle of
+self-determination has Smyrna been handed to Greece? Have the
+inhabitants of Thrace and Smyrna asked for Grecian tutelege?
+
+I decline to believe that the Arabs like the disposition that has been
+made of them. Who is the King of Hedjaj and who is Emir Feisul? Have the
+Arabs elected these kings and chiefs? Do the Arabs like the Mandate
+being taken by England? By the time the whole thing is finished, the
+very name self-determination will stink in one's nostrils. Already signs
+are not wanting to show that the Arabs, the Thracians and the Smyrnans
+are resenting their disposal. They may not like Turkish rule but they
+like the present arrangement less. They could have made their own
+honourable terms with Turkey but these self-determining people will now
+be held down by the 'matchless might' of the allied _i.e._, British
+forces. Britain had the straight course open to her of keeping the
+Turkish Empire intact and taking sufficient guarantees for good
+government. But her Prime Minister chose the crooked course of secret
+treaties, duplicity and hypocritical subterfuges.
+
+There is still a way out. Let her treat India as a real partner. Let her
+call the true representatives of the Mussalmans. Let them go to Arabia
+and the other parts of the Turkish Empire and let her devise a scheme
+that would not humiliate Turkey, that would satisfy the just Muslim
+sentiment and that will secure honest self-determination for the races
+composing that Empire. If it was Canada, Australia or South Africa that
+had to be placated, Mr. Lloyd George would not have dared to ignore
+them. They have the power to secede. India has not. Let him no more
+insult India by calling her a partner, if her feelings count for naught.
+I invite _The Times of India_ to reconsider its position and join an
+honourable agitation in which a high-souled people are seeking nothing
+but justice.
+
+I do with all deference still suggest that the least that Lord
+Chelmsford can do is to resign if the sacred feelings of India's sons
+are not to be consulted and respected by the Ministers. _The Times_ is
+over-taxing the constitution when it suggests that as a constitutional
+Viceroy it is not open to Lord Chelmsford to go against the decision of
+his Majesty's Ministers. It is certainly not open to a Viceroy to retain
+office and oppose ministerial decisions. But the constitution does allow
+a Viceroy to resign his high office when he is called upon to carry out
+decisions that are immoral as the peace terms are or like these terms
+are calculated to stir to their very depth the feelings of those whose
+affair he is administering for the time being.
+
+
+THE MAHOMEDAN DECISION
+
+The Khilafat meeting at Allahabad has unanimously reaffirmed the
+principle of non-co-operation and appointed an executive committee to
+lay down and enforce a detailed programme. This meeting was preceded by
+a joint Hindu-Mahomedan meeting at which Hindu leaders were invited to
+give their views. Mrs. Beasant, the Hon'ble Pandit Malaviyuji, the
+Hon'ble Dr. Sapru Motilal Nehru Chintamani and others were present at
+the meeting. It was a wise step on the part of the Khilafat Committee to
+invite Hindus representing all shades of thought to give them the
+benefit of their advice. Mrs. Besant and Dr. Sapru strongly dissuaded
+the Mahomedans present from the policy of non-co-operation. The other
+Hindu speakers made non-committal speeches. Whilst the other Hindu
+speakers approved of the principle of non-co-operation in theory, they
+saw many practical difficulties and they feared also complications
+arising from Mahomedans welcoming an Afghan invasion of India. The
+Mahomedan speakers gave the fullest and frankest assurances that they
+would fight to a man any invader who wanted to conquer India, but were
+equally frank in asserting that any invasion from without undertaken
+with a view to uphold the prestige of Islam and to vindicate justice
+would have their full sympathy if not their actual support. It is easy
+enough to understand and justify the Hindu caution. It is difficult to
+resist Mahomedan position. In my opinion, the best way to prevent India
+from becoming the battle ground between the forces of Islam and those of
+the English is for Hindus to make non-co-operation a complete and
+immediate success, and I have little doubt that if the Mahomedans remain
+true to their declared intention and are able to exercise
+self-restraint, and make sacrifices the Hindus will "play the game" and
+join them in the campaign of non-co-operation. I feel equally certain
+that the Hindus will not assist Mahomedans in promoting or bringing
+about an armed conflict between the British Government and their allies,
+and Afghanistan. British forces are too well organised to admit of any
+successful invasion of the Indian frontier. The only way, therefore, the
+Mahomedans can carry on an effective struggle on behalf of the honour of
+Islam is to take up non-co-operation in real earnest. It will not only
+be completely effective if it is adopted by the people on an extensive
+scale, but it will also provide full scope for individual conscience. If
+I cannot bear an injustice done by an individual or a corporation, and
+if I am directly or indirectly instrumental in upholding that individual
+or corporation, I must answer for it before my Maker, but I have done
+all it is humanly possible for me to do consistently with the moral code
+that refuses to injure even the wrong-doer, if I cease to support the
+injustice in the manner described above. In applying therefore such a
+great force there should be no haste, there should be no temper shown.
+Non-co-operation must be and remain absolutely a voluntary effort. The
+whole thing then depends upon Mahomedans themselves. If they will but
+help themselves Hindu help will come and the Government, great and
+mighty though it is, will have to bend before this irresistible force.
+No Government can possibly withstand the bloodless opposition of a whole
+nation.
+
+
+MR. ANDREWS' DIFFICULTY
+
+Mr. Andrews whose love for India is equalled only by his love for
+England and whose mission in life is to serve God, i.e., humanity
+through India, has contributed remarkable articles to the 'Bombay
+Chronicle' on the Khilafat movement. He has not spared England, France
+or Italy. He has shown how Turkey has been most unjustly dealt with and
+how the Prime Minister's pledge has been broken. He has devoted the last
+article to an examination of Mr. Mahomed Ali's letter to the Sultan and
+has come to the conclusion that Mr. Mahomed Ali's statement of claim is
+at variance with the claim set forth in the latest Khilafat
+representation to the Viceroy which he wholly approves.
+
+Mr. Andrews and I have discussed the question as fully as it was
+possible. He asked me publicly to define my own position more fully than
+I have done. His sole object in inviting discussion is to give strength
+to a cause which he holds as intrinsically just, and to gather round it
+the best opinion of Europe so that the allied powers and especially
+England may for very shame be obliged to revise the terms.
+
+I gladly respond to Mr. Andrew's invitation. I should clear the ground
+by stating that I reject any religious doctrine that does not appeal to
+reason and is in conflict with morality. I tolerate unreasonable
+religious sentiment when it is not immoral. I hold the Khilafat claim to
+be both just and reasonable and therefore it derives greater force
+because it has behind it the religious sentiment of the Mussalman world.
+
+In my opinion Mr. Mahomed Ali's statement is unexceptionable. It is no
+doubt clothed in diplomatic language. But I am not prepared to quarrel
+with the language so long as it is sound in substance.
+
+Mr. Andrews considers that Mr. Mahomed Ali's language goes to show that
+he would resist Armenian independence against the Armenians and the
+Arabian against the Arabs. I attach no such meaning to it. What he, the
+whole of Mussalmans and therefore I think also the Hindus resist is the
+shameless attempt of England and the other Powers under cover of
+self-determination to emasculate and dismember Turkey. If I understand
+the spirit of Islam properly, it is essentially republican in the truest
+sense of the term. Therefore if Armenia or Arabia desired independence
+of Turkey they should have it. In the case of Arabia, complete Arabian
+independence would mean transference of the Khilafat to an Arab
+chieftain. Arabia in that sense is a Mussulman trust, not purely
+Arabian. And the Arabs without ceasing to be Mussulman, could not hold
+Arabia against Muslim opinion. The Khalifa must be the custodian of the
+Holy places and therefore also the routes to them. He must be able to
+defend them against the whole world. And if an Arab chief arose who
+could better satisfy that test than the Sultan of Turkey, I have no
+doubt that he would be recognised as the Khalifa.
+
+I have thus discussed the question academically. The fact is that
+neither the Mussulmans nor the Hindus believe in the English Ministerial
+word. They do not believe that the Arabs or the Armenians want complete
+independence of Turkey. That they want self-government is beyond doubt.
+Nobody disputes that claim. But nobody has ever ascertained that either
+the Arabs or the Armenians desire to do away with all connection, even
+nominal, with Turkey.
+
+The solution of the question lies not in our academic discussion of the
+ideal position, it lies in an honest appointment of a mixed commission
+of absolutely independent Indian Mussulmans and Hindus and independent
+Europeans to investigate the real wish of the Armenians and the Arabs
+and then to come to a _modus vivendi_ where by the claims of the
+nationality and those of Islam may be adjusted and satisfied.
+
+It is common knowledge that Smyrna and Thrace including Adrianople have
+been dishonestly taken away from Turkey and that mandates have been
+unscrupulously established in Syria and Mesopotamia and a British
+nominee has been set up in Hedjaj under the protection of British guns.
+This is a position that is intolerable and unjust. Apart therefore from
+the questions of Armenia and Arabia, the dishonesty and hypocrisy that
+pollute the peace terms require to be instantaneously removed. It paves
+the way to an equitable solution of the question of Armenian and Arabian
+independence which in theory no one denies and which in practice may be
+easily guaranteed if only the wishes of the people concerned could with
+any degree of certainty be ascertained.
+
+
+THE KHILAFAT AGITATION
+
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I
+did not come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though
+I had not fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and
+that I could not plead 'not guilty' if I was charged under it. For I
+must admit that I can pretend to no 'affection' for the present
+Government.
+
+And my speeches are intended to create 'dis-affection' such that the
+people might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a
+Government that had forfeited all title to confidence, respect or
+support.
+
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government.
+The latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by
+the former. And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of
+terrorism and emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter.
+British ministers have broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded
+the feelings of the seventy million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men
+and women were insulted by the insolent officers of the Punjab
+Government. Their wrongs not only remain unrighted but the very officers
+who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain office
+under the Government.
+
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could
+command for co-operation with the Government and for response to the
+wishes expressed in the Royal Proclamation. I did so because I honestly
+believed that, a new era was about to begin, and that the old spirit of
+fear, distrust and consequent terrorism was about to give place to the
+new spirit of respect, trust and goodwill. I sincerely believed that the
+Mussulman sentiment would be placated and that the officers that had
+misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the Punjab would be at least
+dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to feel that a
+Government that had always been found quick (and mighty) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents' misdeeds. But to
+my amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present
+representatives of the Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous.
+They have no real regard for the wishes of the people of India and they
+count Indian honour as of little consequence.
+
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it
+is now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be
+witness to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right
+in threatening me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in
+endangering the existence of the Government. For that must be the result
+if my activity bears fruit. My only regret is that inasmuch as Mr.
+Montagu admits my past services, he might have perceived that there must
+be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a well-wisher like
+me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to insist on
+justice being done to the Mussalmans and to the Punjab than to threaten
+me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed I
+fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection
+towards an unjust Government I had rendered greater services to the
+Empire than I am already credited with.
+
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve my
+activity is clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of
+my liberty, should the Government of India deem it to be their duty to
+take it away. A citizen has no right to resist such restriction imposed
+in accordance with the laws of the State to which he belongs. Much less
+have those who sympathise with him. In my case there can be no question
+of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the Government to the extent of
+trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For my supporters,
+therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It means the
+beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to
+stop the progress of Non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+Non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest,
+the Government must imprison others or grant the people's wish in order
+to gain their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the
+people even under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore
+it is I or any one else who is arrested during the campaign, the first
+condition of success is that there must be no resentment shown against
+it. We cannot imperil the very existence of a Government and quarrel
+with its attempt to save itself by punishing those who place it in
+danger.
+
+
+HIJARAT AND ITS MEANING
+
+India is a continent. Its articulate thousands know what its
+inarticulate millions are doing or thinking. The Government and the
+educated Indians may think that the Khilafat movement is merely a
+passing phase. The millions of Mussalmans think otherwise. The flight of
+the Mussalmans is growing apace. The newspapers contain paragraphs in
+out of the way corners informing the readers that a special train
+containing a barrister with sixty women, forty children including twenty
+sucklings, all told 765, have left for Afghanistan. They were cheered
+_en route_. They were presented with cash, edibles and other things, and
+were joined by more Muhajarins on the way. No fanatical preaching by
+Shaukatali can make people break up and leave their homes for an unknown
+land. There must be an abiding faith in them. That it is better for them
+to leave a State which has no regard for their religious sentiment and
+face a beggar's life than to remain in it even though it may be in a
+princely manner. Nothing but pride of power can blind the Government of
+India to the scene that is being enacted before it.
+
+But there is yet another side to the movement. Here are the facts as
+stated in the following Government _Communique_ dated 10th July 1920:--
+
+   An unfortunate affair in connection with the Mahajarin occurred on
+   the 8th instant at Kacha Garhi between Peshawar and Jamrud. The
+   following are the facts as at present reported. Two members of a
+   party of the Mahajarins proceeding by train to Jamrud were detected
+   by the British military police travelling without tickets.
+   Altercation ensued at Islamia College Station, but the train
+   proceeded to Kacha Garhi. An attempt was made to evict these
+   Mahajarins, whereupon the military police were attacked by a crowd of
+   some forty Mahajarins and the British officer who intervened was
+   seriously wounded with a spade. A detachment of Indian troops at
+   Kacha Garhi thereupon fired two or three shots at the Mahajarin for
+   making murderous assault on the British officer. One Mahajarin was
+   killed and one wounded and three arrested. Both the military and the
+   police were injured. The body of the Mahajarin was despatched to
+   Peshawar and buried on the morning of the 9th. This incident has
+   caused considerable excitement in Peshawar City, and the Khilafat
+   Hijrat Committee are exercising restraining influence. Shops were
+   closed on the morning of the 9th. A full enquiry has been instituted.
+
+Now Peshawar to Jamrud is a matter of a few miles. It was clearly the
+duty of the military not to attempt to pull out the ticketless
+Mahajarins for the sake of a few annas. But they actually attempted
+force. Intervention by the rest of the party was a foregone conclusion.
+An altercation ensued. A British officer was attacked with a spade.
+Firing and a death of a Mahajarin was the result. Has British prestige
+been enhanced by the episode? Why have not the Government put tactful
+officers in charge at the frontier, whilst a great religious emigration
+is in progress? The action of the military will pass from tongue to
+tongue throughout India and the Mussalman world around, will not doubt
+be unconsciously and even consciously exaggerated in the passage and the
+feeling bitter as it already is will grow in bitterness. The
+_Communique_ says that the Government are making further inquiry. Let us
+hope that it will be full and that better arrangements will be made to
+prevent a repetition of what appears to have been a thoughtless act on
+the part of the military.
+
+And may I draw the attention of those who are opposing non-co-operation
+that unless they find out a substitute they should either join the
+non-co-operation movement or prepare to face a disorganised subterranean
+upheaval whose effect no one can foresee and whose spread it would be
+impossible to check or regulate?
+
+
+
+
+III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS
+
+
+POLITICAL FREEMASONRY
+
+Freemasonry is a secret brotherhood which has more by its secret and
+iron rules than by its service to humanity obtained a hold upon some of
+the best minds. Similarly there seems to be some secret code of conduct
+governing the official class in India before which the flower of the
+great British nation fall prostrate and unconsciously become instruments
+of injustice which as private individuals they would be ashamed of
+perpetrating. In no other way is it possible for one to understand the
+majority report of the Hunter Committee, the despatch of the Government
+of India, and the reply thereto of the Secretary of State for India. In
+spite of the energetic protests of a section of the Press to the
+personnel of the committee, it might be said that on the whole the
+public were prepared to trust it especially as it contained three Indian
+members who could fairly be claimed to be independent. The first rude
+shock to this confidence was delivered by the refusal of Lord Hunter's
+Committee to accept the very moderate and reasonable demand of the
+Congress Committee that the imprisoned Punjab leaders might be allowed
+to appear before it to instruct Counsel. Any doubt that might have been
+left in the mind of any person has been dispelled by the report of the
+majority of that committee. The result has justified the attitude of the
+Congress Committee. The evidence collected by it shows what lord
+Hunter's Committee purposely denied itself.
+
+The minority report stands out like an oasis in a desert. The Indian
+members deserve the congratulation of their countrymen for having dared
+to do their duty in the face of heavy odds. I wish that they had refused
+to associate themselves even in a modified manner with the condemnation
+of the civil disobedience form of Satyagraha. The defiant spirit of the
+Delhi mob on the 30th March 1919 can hardly be used for condemning a
+great spiritual movement which is admittedly and manifestly intended to
+restrain the violent tendencies of mobs and to replace criminal
+lawlessness by civil disobedience of authority, when it has forfeited
+all title to respect. On the 30th March civil disobedience had not even
+been started. Almost every great popular demonstration has been hitherto
+attended all the world over by a certain amount of lawlessness. The
+demonstration of 30th March and 6th April could have been held under any
+other aegis us under that of Satyagrah. I hold that without the advent
+of the spirit of civility and orderliness the disobedience would have
+taken a much more violent form than it did even at Delhi. It was only
+the wonderfully quick acceptance by the people of the principle of
+Satyagrah that effectively checked the spread of violence throughout the
+length and breadth of India. And even to-day it is not the memory of the
+black barbarity of General Dyer that is keeping the undoubted
+restlessness among the people from breaking forth into violence. The
+hold that Satyagrah has gained on the people--it may be even against
+their will--is curbing the forces of disorder and violence. But I must
+not detain the reader on a defence of Satyagrah against unjust attacks.
+If it has gained a foothold in India, it will survive much fiercer
+attacks than the one made by the majority of the Hunter Committee and
+somewhat supported by the minority. Had the majority report been
+defective only in this direction and correct in every other there would
+have been nothing but praise for it. After all Satyagrah is a new
+experiment in political field. And a hasty attributing to it of any
+popular disorder would have been pardonable.
+
+The universally pronounced adverse judgment upon the report and the
+despatches rests upon far more painful revelations. Look at the
+manifestly laboured defence of every official act of inhumanity except
+where condemnation could not be avoided through the impudent admissions
+made by the actors themselves; look at the special pleading introduced
+to defend General Dyer even against himself; look at the vain
+glorification of Sir Michael O'Dwyer although it was his spirit that
+actuated every act of criminality on the part of the subordinates; look
+at the deliberate refusal to examine his wild career before the events
+of April. His acts were an open book of which the committee ought to
+have taken judicial notices. Instead of accepting everything that the
+officials had to say, the Committee's obvious duty was to tax itself to
+find out the real cause of the disorders. It ought to have gone out of
+its way to search out the inwardness of the events. Instead of patiently
+going behind the hard crust of official documents, the Committee allowed
+itself to be guided with criminal laziness by mere official evidence.
+The report and the despatches, in my humble opinion, constitute an
+attempt to condone official lawlessness. The cautious and half-hearted
+condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer's massacre and the notorious
+crawling order only deepens the disappointment of the reader as he goes
+through page after page of thinly disguised official whitewash. I need,
+however, scarcely attempt any elaborate examination of the report or the
+despatches which have been so justly censured by the whole national
+press whether of the moderate or the extremist hue. The point to
+consider is how to break down this secret--be the secrecy over so
+unconscious--conspiracy to uphold official iniquity. A scandal of this
+magnitude cannot be tolerated by the nation, if it is to preserve its
+self-respect and become a free partner in the Empire. The All-India
+Congress Committee has resolved upon convening a special session of the
+Congress for the purpose of considering, among other things, the
+situation arising from the report. In my opinion the time has arrived
+when we must cease to rely upon mere petition to Parliament for
+effective action. Petitions will have value, when the nation has behind
+it the power to enforce its will. What power then have we? When we are
+firmly of opinion that grave wrong has been done us and when after an
+appeal to the highest authority we fail to secure redress, there must be
+some power available to us for undoing the wrong. It is true that in the
+vast majority of cases it is the duty of a subject to submit to wrongs
+on failure of the usual procedure, so long as they do not affect his
+vital being. But every nation and every individual has the right and it
+is their duty, to rise against an intolerable wrong. I do not believe in
+armed risings. They are a remedy worse than the disease sought to be
+cured. They are a token of the spirit of revenge and impatience and
+anger. The method of violence cannot do good in the long run. Witness
+the effect of the armed rising of the allied powers against Germany.
+Have they not become even like the Germans, as the latter have been
+depicted to us by them?
+
+We have a better method. Unlike that of violence it certainly involves
+the exercise of restraint and patience: but it requires also
+resoluteness of will. This method is to refuse to be party to the wrong.
+No tyrant has ever yet succeeded in his purpose without carrying the
+victim with him, it may be, as it often is, by force. Most people choose
+rather to yield to the will of the tyrant than to suffer for the
+consequences of resistance. Hence does terrorism form part of the
+stock-in-trade of the tyrant. But we have instances in history where
+terrorism has failed to impose the terrorist's will upon his victim.
+India has the choice before her now. If then the acts of the Punjab
+Government be an insufferable wrong, if the report of Lord Hunter's
+Committee and the two despatches be a greater wrong by reason of their
+grievous condonation of those acts, it is clear that we must refuse to
+submit to this official violence. Appeal the Parliament by all means, if
+necessary, but if the Parliament fails us and if we are worthy to call
+ourselves a nation, we must refuse to uphold the Government by
+withdrawing co-operation from it.
+
+
+THE DUTY OF THE PUNJABEE
+
+The Allahabad _Leader_ deserves to be congratulated for publishing the
+correspondence on Mr. Bosworth Smith who was one of the Martial Law
+officers against whom the complaints about persistent and continuous
+ill-treatment were among the bitterest. It appears from the
+correspondence that Mr. Bosworth Smith has received promotion instead of
+dismissal. Sometime before Martial Law Mr. Smith appears to have been
+degraded. "He has since been restored," says the _Leader_ correspondent,
+"to his position of a Deputy Commissioner of the second grade from which
+he was degraded and also been invested with power under section 30 of
+the Criminal Procedure Code. Since his arrival, the poor Indian
+population of the town of Amhala Cantonment has been living under a
+regime of horror and tyranny." The correspondent adds: "I use both these
+words deliberately for conveying precisely what they mean." I cull a few
+passage from this illuminating letter to illustrate the meaning of
+horror and tyranny. "In private complaints he never takes the statement
+of the complainant. It is taken down by the reader when the court rises
+and got signed by the magistrate the following day. Whether the report
+received (upon such complaints) is favourable to the complainant or
+unfavourable to him, it is never ready by the magistrate, and
+complaints are dismissed without proper trial. This is the fate of
+private complaints. Now as regards police chellans. Pleaders for the
+accused are not allowed to interview under trial prisoners in police
+custody. They are not allowed to cross-examine prosecution witnesses....
+Prosecution witnesses are examined with leading questions.... Thus a
+whole prosecution story is put into the mouth of police, witnesses for
+the defence though called in are not allowed to be examined by the
+defence counsel.... The accused is silenced if he picks up courage to
+say anything in defence.... Any Cantonment servant can write down the
+name of any citizen of the Cantonment on a chit of paper and ask him to
+appear the next day in court. This is a summons.... If any one does not
+appear in court who is thus ordered, criminal warrants of arrest are
+issued against him." There is much more of this style in the letter
+which is worth producing, but I have given enough to illustrate the
+writer's meaning. Let me turn for a while to this official's record
+during Martial Law. He is the official who tried people in batches and
+convicted them after a farcical trial. Witnesses have deposed to his
+having assembled people, having asked them to give false evidence,
+having removed women's veils, called them 'flies, bitches, she-asses'
+and having spat upon them. He it was who subjected the innocent pleaders
+of Shokhupura indescribable persecution. Mr. Andrews personally
+investigated complaints against this official and came to the conclusion
+that no official had behaved worse than Mr. Smith. He gathered the
+people of Shokhupura, humiliated them in a variety of ways, called them
+'suvarlog,' 'gandi mukkhi.' His evidence before the Hunter Commission
+betrays his total disregard for truth and this is the officer who, if
+the correspondent in question has given correct facts, has been
+promoted. The question however is why, he is at all in Government
+service and why he has not been tried for assaulting and abusing
+innocent men and women.
+
+I notice a desire for the impeachment of General Dyer and Sir Michael
+O'Dwyer. I will not stop to examine whether the course is feasible. I
+was sorry to find Mr. Shastriar joining this cry for the prosecution of
+General Dyer. If the English people will willingly do so, I would
+welcome such prosecution as a sign of their strong disapproval of the
+Jallianwalla Bagh atrocity, but I would certainly not spend a single
+farthing in a vain pursuit after the conviction of this man. Surely the
+public has received sufficient experience of the English mind.
+Practically the whole English Press has joined the conspiracy to screen
+these offenders against humanity. I would not be party to make heroes of
+them by joining the cry for prosecution private or public. If I can only
+persuade India to insist upon their complete dismissal, I should be
+satisfied. But more than the dismissal, of Sir Michael O'Dwyer and
+General Dyer, is necessary the peremptory dismissal, if not a trial, of
+Colonel O'Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram and others mentioned
+in the Congress Sub-Committee's Report. Bad as General Dyer is I
+consider Mr. Smith to be infinitely worse and his crimes to be far more
+serious than the massacre of Jallianwalla Bugh. General Dyer sincerely
+believed that it was a soldierly act to terrorise people by shooting
+them. But Mr. Smith was wantonly cruel, vulgar and debased. If all the
+facts that have been deposed to against him are true, there is not a
+spark of humanity about him. Unlike General Dyer he lacks the courage to
+confirm what he has done and he wriggles when challenged. This officer
+remains free to inflict himself upon people who have done no wrong to
+him, and who is permitted to disgrace the rule he represents for the
+time being.
+
+What is the Punjab doing? Is it not the duty of the Punjabis not to rest
+until they have secured the dismissal of Mr. Smith and the like? The
+Punjab leaders have been discharged in vain if they will not utilise the
+liberty they have received, in order to purge the administration of
+Messrs. Bosworth Smith and Company. I am sure that if they will only
+begin a determined agitation they will have the whole India by their
+side. I venture to suggest to them that the best way to qualify for
+sending General Dyer to the gallows is to perform the easier and the
+more urgent duty of arresting the mischief still continued by the
+officials against whom they have assisted in collecting
+overwhelming evidence.
+
+
+GENERAL DYER
+
+The Army Council has found General Dyer guilty of error of judgment and
+advised that he should not receive any office under the Crown. Mr.
+Montagu has been unsparing in his criticism of General Dyer's conduct.
+And yet somehow or other I cannot help feeling that General Dyer is by
+no means the worst offender. His brutality is unmistakable. His abject
+and unsoldier-like cowardice is apparent in every line of his amazing
+defence before the Army Council. He has called an unarmed crowd of men
+and children--mostly holiday-makers--'a rebel army.' He believes himself
+to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot down like
+rabbits men who were penned in an inclosure. Such a man is unworthy of
+being considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran
+no risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and without warning.
+This is not an 'error of judgement.' It is paralysis of it in the face
+of fancied danger. It is proof of criminal incapacity and
+heartlessness. But the fury that has been spent upon General Dyer is, I
+am sure, largely misdirected. No doubt the shooting was 'frightful,' the
+loss of innocent life deplorable. But the slow torture, degradation and
+emasculation that followed was much worse, more calculated, malicious
+and soul-killing, and the actors who performed the deeds deserve greater
+condemnation that General Dyer for the Jallianwalla Bagh massacre. The
+latter merely destroyed a few bodies but the others tried to kill the
+soul of a nation. Who ever talks of Col. Frank Johnson who was by far
+the worst offender? He terrorised guiltless Lahore, and by his merciless
+orders set the tone to the whole of the Martial Law officers. But what I
+am concerned with is not even Col. Johnson. The first business of the
+people of the Punjab and of India is to rid the service of Col O'Brien,
+Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram and Mr. Malik Khan. They are still
+retained in the service. Their guilt is as much proved as that of
+General Dyer. We shall have failed in our duty if the condemnation
+pronounced upon General Dyer produces a sense of satisfaction and the
+obvious duty of purging the administration in the Punjab is neglected.
+That task will not be performed by platform rhetoric or resolutions
+merely. Stern action is required on out part if we are to make any
+headway with ourselves and make any impression upon the officials that
+they are not to consider themselves as masters of the people but as
+their trusties and servants who cannot hold office if they misbehave
+themselves and prove unworthy of the trust reposed in them.
+
+
+THE PUNJAB SENTENCES
+
+The commissioners appointed by the Congress Punjab Sub Committee have in
+their report accused His Excellency the Viceroy of criminal want of
+imagination. His Excellency's refusal to commute two death sentences out
+of five is a fine illustration of the accusation. The rejection of the
+appeal by the Privy Council no more proves the guilt of the condemned
+than their innocence would have been proved by quashing the proceedings
+before the Martial Law Tribunal. Moreover, these cases clearly come
+under the Royal Proclamation in accordance with its interpretation by
+the Punjab Government. The murders in Amritsar were not due to any
+private quarrel between the murderers and their victims. The offence
+grave, though it was, was purely political and committed under
+excitement. More than full reparation has been taken for the murders and
+arson. In the circumstances commonsense dictates reduction of the death
+sentences. The popular belief favours the view that the condemned men
+are innocent and have not had a fair trial. The execution has been so
+long delayed that hanging at this stage would give a rude shock to
+Indian society. Any Viceroy with imagination would have at once
+announced commutation of the death sentences--not so Lord Chelmsford. In
+his estimation, evidently, the demands of justice will not be satisfied
+if at least some of the condemned men are not hanged. Public feeling
+with him counts for nothing. We shall still hope that, either the
+Viceroy or Mr. Montagu will commute the death sentences.
+
+But if the Government will grievously err, if they carry out the
+sentences, the people will equally err if they give way to anger or
+grief over the hanging if it has unfortunately to take plane. Before we
+become a nation possessing an effective voice in the councils of
+nations, we must be prepared to contemplate with equanimity, not a
+thousand murders of innocent men and women but many thousands before we
+attain a status in the world that, shall not be surpassed by any nation.
+We hope therefore that all concerned will take rather than lose heart
+and treat hanging as an ordinary affair of life.
+
+[Since the above was in type, we have received cruel news. At last H.E.
+the Viceroy has mercilessly given the rude shock to Indian society. It
+is now for the latter to take heart in spite of the unkindest
+cut.--Ed. Y.I.]
+
+
+
+
+IV. SWARAJ
+
+
+SWARAJ IN ONE YEAR
+
+Much laughter has been indulged in at my expense for having told the
+Congress audience at Calcutta that if there was sufficient response to
+my programme of non-co-operation Swaraj would be attained in one year.
+Some have ignored my condition and laughed because of the impossibility
+of getting Swaraj anyhow within one year. Others have spelt the 'if' in
+capitals and suggested that if 'ifs' were permissible in argument, any
+absurdity could be proved to be a possibility. My proposition however is
+based on a mathematical calculation. And I venture to say that true
+Swaraj is a practical impossibility without due fulfilment of my
+conditions. Swaraj means a state such that we can maintain our separate
+existence without the presence of the English. If it is to be a
+partnership, it must be partnership at will. There can be no Swaraj
+without our feeling and being the equals of Englishmen. To-day we feel
+that we are dependent upon them for our internal and external security,
+for an armed peace between the Hindus and the Mussulmans, for our
+education and for the supply of daily wants, nay, even for the
+settlement of our religious squabbles. The Rajahs are dependent upon the
+British for their powers and the millionaires for their millions. The
+British know our helplessness and Sir Thomas Holland cracks jokes quite
+legitimately at the expense of non-co-operationists. To get Swaraj then
+is to get rid of our helplessness. The problem is no doubt stupendous
+even as it is for the fabled lion who having been brought up in the
+company of goats found it impossible to feel that he was a lion. As
+Tolstoy used to put it, mankind often laboured under hypnotism. Under
+its spell continuously we feel the feeling of helplessness. The British
+themselves cannot be expected to help us out of it. On the contrary,
+they din into our ears that we shall be fit to govern ourselves only by
+slow educative processes. The "Times" suggested that if we boycott the
+councils we shall lose the opportunity of a training in Swaraj. I have
+no doubt that there are many who believe what the "Times" says. It even
+resorts to a falsehood. It audaciously says that Lord Milner's Mission
+listened to the Egyptians only when they were ready to lift the boycott
+of the Egyptian Council. For me the only training in Swaraj we need is
+the ability to defend ourselves against the whole world and to live our
+natural life in perfect freedom even though it may be full of defects.
+Good Government is no substitute for self-Government. The Afghans have a
+bad Government but it is self-Government. I envy them. The Japanese
+learnt the art through a sea of blood. And if we to-day had the power to
+drive out the English by superior brute force, we would be counted their
+superiors, and in spite of our inexperience in debating at the Council
+table or in holding executive offices, we would be held fit to govern
+ourselves. For brute force is the only test the west has hitherto
+recognised. The Germans were defeated not because they were necessarily
+in the wrong, but because the allied Powers were found to possess
+greater brute strength. In the end therefore India must either learn the
+art of war which the British will not teach her or, she must follow her
+own way of discipline and self-sacrifice through non-co-operation. It is
+as amazing as it is humiliating that less than one hundred-thousand
+white men should be able to rule three hundred and fifteen million
+Indians. They do so somewhat undoubtedly by force, but more by securing
+our co-operation in a thousand ways and making us more and more helpless
+and dependent on them as time goes forward. Let us not mistake reformed
+councils, more lawcourts and even governorships for real freedom or
+power. They are but subtler methods of emasculation. The British cannot
+rule us by mere force. And so they resort to all means, honourable and
+dishonourable, in order to retain their hold on India. They want India's
+billions and they want India's man power for their imperialistic greed.
+If we refuse to supply them with men and money, we achieve our goal,
+namely, Swaraj, equality, manliness.
+
+The cup of our humiliation was filled during the closing scenes in the
+Viceregal Council. Mr. Shustri could not move his resolution on the
+Punjab. The Indian victims of Jullianwala received Rs. 1,250, the
+English victims of mob-frenzy received lakhs. The officials who were
+guilty of crimes against those whose servants they were, were
+reprimanded. And the councillors were satisfied. If India were powerful,
+India would not have stood this addition of insult, to her injury.
+
+I do not blame the British. If we were weak in numbers as they are, we
+too would perhaps have resorted to the same methods as they are now
+employing. Terrorism and deception are weapons not of the strong but of
+the weak. The British are weak in numbers we are weak in spite of our
+numbers. The result is that each is dragging the other down. It is
+common experience that Englishmen lose in character after residence in
+India and that Indians lose in courage and manliness by contact with
+Englishmen. This process of weakening is good neither for us, two
+nations, nor for the world.
+
+But if we Indians take care of ourselves the English and the rest of
+the world would take care of themselves. Our contributions to the
+world's progress must therefore consist in setting our own house
+in order.
+
+Training in arms for the present is out of the question. I go a step
+further and believe that India has a better mission for the world. It is
+within her to show that she can achieve her destiny by pure
+self-sacrifice, i.e., self-purification. This can be done only by
+non-co-operation. And non-co-operation is possible only when those who
+commenced to co-operate being the process of withdrawal. If we can but
+free ourselves from the threefold _maya_ of Government-controlled
+schools, Government law-courts and legislative councils, and truly
+control our own education regulate our disputes and be indifferent to
+their legislation, we are ready to govern ourselves and we are only then
+ready to ask the government servants, whether civil or military, to
+resign, and the tax-payers to suspend payment of taxes.
+
+And is it such an impracticable proposition to expect parents to
+withdraw their children from schools and colleges and establish their
+own institutions or to ask lawyers to suspend their practice and devote
+their whole time attention to national service against payment where
+necessary, of their maintenance, or to ask candidates for councils not
+to enter councils and lend their passive or active assistance to the
+legislative machinery through which all control is exercised. The
+movement of non-co-operation is nothing but an attempt to isolate the
+brute force of the British from all the trappings under which it is
+hidden and to show that brute force by itself cannot for one single
+moment hold India.
+
+But I frankly confess that, until the three conditions mentioned by me
+are fulfilled, there is no Swaraj. We may not go on taking our college
+degrees, taking thousands of rupees monthly from clients for cases which
+can be finished in five minutes and taking the keenest delight in
+wasting national time on the council floor and still expect to gain
+national self-respect.
+
+The last though not the least important part of the Maya still remains
+to be considered. That is Swadeshi. Had we not abandoned Swadeshi, we
+need not have been in the present fallen state. If we would get rid of
+the economic slavery, we must manufacture our own cloth and at the
+present moment only by hand-spinning and hand weaving.
+
+All this means discipline, self-denial, self-sacrifice, organising
+ability, confidence and courage. If we show this in one year among the
+classes that to-day count, and make public opinion, we certainly gain
+Swaraj within one year. If I am told that even we who lead have not
+these qualities in us, there certainly will never be Swaraj for India,
+but then we shall have no right to blame the English for what they are
+doing. Our salvation and its time are solely dependent upon us.
+
+
+BRITISH RULE--AN EVIL
+
+The _Interpreter_ is however more to the point in asking, "Does Mr.
+Gandhi hold without hesitation or reserve that British rule in India is
+altogether an evil and that the people of India are to be taught so to
+regard it? He must hold it to be so evil that the wrongs it does
+outweigh the benefit it confers, for only so is non-co-operation to be
+justified at the bar of conscience or of Christ." My answer is
+emphatically in the affirmative. So long as I believed that the sum
+total of the energy of the British Empire was good, I clung to it
+despite what I used to regard as temporary aberrations. I am not sorry
+for having done so. But having my eyes opened, it would be sin for me to
+associate myself with the Empire unless it purges itself of its evil
+character. I write this with sorrow and I should be pleased if I
+discovered that I was in error and that my present attitude was a
+reaction. The continuous financial drain, the emasculation of the Punjab
+and the betrayal of the Muslim sentiment constitute, in my humble
+opinion, a threefold robbery of India. 'The blessings of _pax
+Britanica_' I reckon, therefore, to be a curse. We would have at least
+remained like the other nations brave men and women, instead of feeling
+as we do so utterly helpless, if we had no British Rule imposing on us
+an armed peace. 'The blessing' of roads and railways is a return no
+self-respecting nation would accept for its degradation. 'The blessing'
+of education is proving one of the greatest obstacles in our progress
+towards freedom.
+
+
+A MOVEMENT OF PURIFICATION
+
+The fact is that non-co-operation by reason of its non-violence has
+become a religious and purifying movement. It is daily bringing strength
+to the nation, showing it its weak spots and the remedy for removing
+them. It is a movement of self-reliance. It is the mightiest force for
+revolutionising opinion and stimulating thought. It is a movement of
+self-imposed suffering and therefore possesses automatic checks against
+extravagance or impatience. The capacity of the nation for suffering
+regulates its advance towards freedom. It isolates the force of evil by
+refraining from participation in it, in any shape or form.
+
+
+WHY WAS INDIA LOST?
+
+[A dialog between the Reader and Editor,--_Indian Home Rule_].
+
+Reader: You have said much about civilisation--enough to make me ponder
+over it. I do not know what I should adopt and what I should avoid from
+the nations of Europe. but one question comes to my lips immediately. If
+civilisation is a disease, and if it has attacked England why has she
+been able to take India, and why is she able to retain it?
+
+Editor: Your question is not very difficult to answer, and we shall
+presently be able to examine the true nature of Swaraj; for I am aware
+that I have still to answer that question. I will, however, take up your
+previous question. The English have not taken India; we have given it to
+them. They are not in India because of their strength, but because we
+keep them. Let us now see whether these positions can be sustained. They
+came to our country originally for the purpose of trade. Recall the
+Company Bahadur. Who made it Bahadur? They had not the slightest
+intention at the time of establishing a kingdom. Who assisted the
+Company's officers? Who was tempted at the sight of their silver? Who
+bought their goods? History testifies that we did all this. In order to
+become rich all at once, we welcomed the Company's officers with open
+arms. We assisted them. If I am in the habit of drinking Bhang, and a
+seller thereof sells it to me, am I to blame him or myself? By blaming
+the seller shall I be able to avoid the habit? And, if a particular
+retailer is driven away will not another take his place? A true servant
+of India will have to go to the root of the matter. If an excess of food
+has caused me indigestion I will certainly not avoid it by blaming
+water. He is a true physician who probes the cause of disease and, if
+you pose as a physician for the disease of India, you will have to find
+out its true cause.
+
+Reader: You are right. Now, I think you will not have to argue much with
+me to drive your conclusions home. I am impatient to know your further
+views. We are now on a most interesting topic. I shall, therefore,
+endeavour to follow your thought, and stop you when I am in doubt.
+
+Editor: I am afraid that, in spite of your enthusiasm, as we proceed
+further we shall have differences of opinion. Nevertheless, I shall
+argue only when you will stop me. We have already seen that the English
+merchants were able to get a footing in India because we encouraged
+them. When our princes fought among themselves, they sought the
+assistance of Company Bahadar. That corporation was versed alike in
+commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality. Its object
+was to increase its commerce and to make money. It accepted our
+assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the
+latter it employed an army which was utilised by us also. Is it not then
+useless to blame the English for what we did at that time? The Hindus
+and the Mahomedans were at daggers drawn. This, too, gave the Company
+its opportunity, and thus we created the circumstances that gave the
+Company its control over India. Hence it is truer to say that we gave
+India to the English than that India was lost.
+
+Reader: Will you now tell me how they are able to retain India?
+
+Editor: The causes that gave them India enable them to retain it. Some
+Englishmen state that they took, and they hold, India by the sword. Both
+these statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding
+India. We alone keep them. Napoleon is said to have described the
+English as a nation of shop keepers. It is a fitting description. They
+hold whatever dominions they have for the sake of their commerce. Their
+army and their navy are intended to protect it. When the Transvaal
+offered no such attractions, the late Mr. Gladstone discovered that it
+was no right for the English to hold it. When it became a paying
+proposition, resistance led to war. Mr. Chamberlain soon discovered that
+England enjoyed a suzerainty over the Transvaal. It is related that some
+one asked the late President Kruger whether there was gold in the moon?
+He replied that it was highly unlikely, because, if there were, the
+English would have annexed it. Many problems can be solved by
+remembering that money is their God. Then it follows that we keep the
+English in India for our base self-interest. We like their commerce,
+they please us by their subtle methods, and get what they want from us.
+To blame them for this is to perpetuate their power. We further
+strengthen their hold by quarrelling amongst ourselves. If you accept
+the above statements, it is proved that the English entered India for
+the purposes of trade. They remain in it for the same purpose, and we
+help them to do so. Their arms and ammunition are perfectly useless. In
+this connection, I remind you that it is the British flag which is
+waving in Japan, and not the Japanese. The English have a treaty with
+Japan for the sake of their commerce and you will see that, if they can
+manage it, their commerce will greatly expand in that country. They
+wish to convert the whole word into a vast market for their goods. That
+they cannot do so is true, but the blame will not be theirs. They will
+leave no stone unturned to reach the goal.
+
+
+SWARAJ MY IDEAL
+
+The following is a fairly full report of Mr. Gandhi's important speech
+at Calcutta on the 13th December 1920:--
+
+The very fact, that so many of you cannot understand Hindi which is
+bound to be the National medium of expression throughout Hindustan in
+gatherings of Indians belonging to different parts of the land, shows
+the depth of the degradation to which we have sunk, and points to the
+supreme necessity of the non-co-operation movement which is intended to
+lift us out of that condition. This Government has been instrumental in
+degrading this great nation in various ways, and it is impossible to be
+free from it without co-operation amongst ourselves which is in turn
+impossible without a national medium of expression.
+
+But I am not here to day to plead for the medium. I am to plead for the
+acceptance by the country of the programme of non-violent, progressive
+non-co-operation. Now all the words that I have used here are absolutely
+necessary and the two adjectives 'progressive' and 'non-violent' are
+integral part of a whole. With me non-violence is part of my religion, a
+matter of creed. But with the great number of Mussalmans non-violence is
+a policy, with thousand, if not millions of Hindus, it is equally a
+matter of policy. But whether it is a creed or a policy, it is utterly
+impossible for you to finish the programme for the enfranchisement of
+the millions of India, without recognising the necessity and the value
+of non-violence. Violence may for a moment avail to secure a certain
+measure of success but it could not in the long run achieve any
+appreciable result. On the other hand all violence would prove
+destructive to the honour and self-respect of the nation. The blue books
+issued by the Government of India show that inasmuch as we have used
+violence, military expenditure has gone up, not proportionately but in
+geometrical progression. The bonds of our slavery have been forged all
+the stronger for our having offered violence. And the whole history of
+British rule in India is a demonstration of the fact that we have never
+been able to offer successful violence. Whilst therefore I say that
+rather than have the yoke of a Government that has so emasculated us, I
+would welcome violence. I would urge with all the emphasis that I can
+command that India will never be able to regain her own by methods
+of violence.
+
+Lord Ronaldshay who has done me the honour of reading my booklet on Home
+Rule has warned my countrymen against engaging themselves in a struggle
+for a Swaraj such as is described in that booklet. Now though I do not
+want to withdraw a single word of it, I would say to you on this
+occasion that I do not ask India to follow out to-day the methods
+prescribed in my booklet. If they could do that they would have Home
+Rule not in a year but in a day, and India by realising that ideal wants
+to acquire an ascendancy over the rest of the world. But it must remain
+a day dream more or less for the time being. What I am doing to-day is
+that I am giving the country a pardonable programme not the abolition of
+law courts, posts, telegraphs and of railways but for the attainment of
+Parliamentary Swarja. I am telling you to do that so long as we do not
+isolate ourselves from this Government, we are co-operating with it
+through schools, law courts and councils, through service civil and
+military and payment of taxes and foreign trade.
+
+The moment this fact is realised and non-co-operation is effected, this
+Government must totter to pieces. If I know that the masses were
+prepared for the whole programme at once, I would not delay in putting
+it at once to work. It is not possible at the present moment, to prevent
+the masses from bursting out into wrath against those who come to
+execute the law, it is not possible, that the military would lay down
+their arms without the slightest violence. If that were possible to-day,
+I would propose all the stages of non-co-operation to be worked
+simultaneously. But we have not secured that control over the masses, we
+have uselessly frittered away precious years of the nation's life in
+mastering a language which we need least for winning our liberty; we
+have frittered away all those years in learning liberty from Milton and
+Shakespeare, in deriving inspiration from the pages of Mill, whilst
+liberty could be learnt at our doors. We have thus succeeded in
+isolating ourselves from the masses: we have been westernised. We have
+failed these 35 years to utilise our education in order to permeate the
+masses. We have sat upon the pedestal and from there delivered harangues
+to them in a language they do not understand and we see to-day that we
+are unable to conduct large gatherings in a disciplined manner. And
+discipline is the essence of success. Here is therefore one reason why I
+have introduced the word 'progressive' in the non-co-operation
+Resolution. Without any impertinence I may say that I understand the
+mass mind better than any one amongst the educated Indians. I contend
+that the masses are not ready for suspension of payment of taxes. They
+have not yet learnt sufficient self-control. If I was sure of
+non-violence on their part I would ask them to suspend payment to-day
+and not waste a single moment of the nations time. With me the liberty
+of India has become a passion. Liberty of Islam is as dear to me. I
+would not therefore delay a moment if I found that the whole of the
+programme could be enforced at once.
+
+It grieves me to miss the faces of dear and revered leaders in this
+assembly. We miss here the trumpet voice of Surendranath Banorji, who
+has rendered inestimable service to the country. And though we stand as
+poles asunder to-day, though we may have sharp differences with him, we
+must express them with becoming restraint. I do not ask you to give up a
+single iota of principle. I urge non-violence in language and in deed.
+If non-violence is essential in our dealings with Government, it is more
+essential in our dealings with our leaders. And it grieves me deeply to
+hear of recent instances of violence reported to have been used in East
+Bongal against our own people. I was pained to hear that the ears of a
+man who had voted at the recent elections had been cut, and night soil
+had been thrown into the bed of a man who had stood as a candidate.
+Non-co-operation is never going to succeed in this way. It will not
+succeed unless we create an atmosphere of perfect freedom, unless we
+prize our opponents liberty as much as our own. The liberty of faith,
+conscience, thought and action which we claim for ourselves must be
+conceded equally to others. Non co-operation is a process of
+purification and we must continually try to touch the hearts of those
+who differ from us, their minds, and their emotions, but never their
+bodies. Discipline and restraint are the cardinal principles of our
+conduct and I warn you against any sort of tyrannical social ostracism.
+I was deeply grieved therefore to hear of the insult offered to a dead
+body in Delhi and feel that if it was the action of non-co-operators
+they have disgraced themselves and their creed. I repeat we cannot
+deliver our land through violence.
+
+It was not a joke when I said on the congress platform that Swaraj could
+be established in one year if there was sufficient response from the
+nation. Three months of this year are gone. If we are true to our salt,
+true to our nation, true to the songs we sing, if we are true to the
+Bhagwad Gita and the Koran, we would finish the programme in the
+remaining nine months and deliver Islam the Punjab and India.
+
+I have proposed a limited programme workable within one year, having a
+special regard to the educated classes. We seem to be labouring under
+the illusion that we cannot possibly live without Councils, law courts
+and schools provided by the Government. The moment we are disillusioned
+we have Swaraj. It is demoralising both for Government and the governed
+that a hundred thousand pilgrims should dictate terms to a nation
+composed of three hundred millions. And how is it they can thus dictate
+terms. It is because we have been divided and they have ruled. I have
+never forgotten Humes' frank confession that the British Government was
+sustained by the policy of "Divide and Rule." Therefore it is that I
+have laid stress upon Hindu Muslim Unity as one of the important
+essentials for the success of Non-co-operation. But, it should be no lip
+unity, nor bunia unity it should be a unity broad based on a recognition
+of the heart. If we want to save Hinduism, I say for Gods sake, do not
+seek to bargain with the Mussalmans. I have been going about with
+Maulana Shaukat Ali all these months, but I have not so much as
+whispered anything about the protection of the cow. My alliance with the
+Ali Brothers is one of honour. I feel that I am on my honour, the whole
+of Hinduism is on its honour, and if it will not be found wanting, it
+will do its duty towards the Mussalmans of India. Any bargaining would
+be degrading to us. Light brings light not darkness, and nobility done
+with a noble purpose will be twice rewarded. It will be God alone who
+can protect the cow. Ask me not to-day--'what about the cow,' ask me
+after Islam is vindicated through India. Ask the Rajas what they do to
+entertain their English guests. Do they not provide beef and champagne
+for their guests. Persuade them first to stop cow killing and then think
+of bargaining with Mussalmans. And how are we Hindus behaving ourselves
+towards the cow and her progeny! Do we treat her as our religion
+requires us? Not till we have set our own house in order and saved the
+cow from the Englishmen have we the right to plead on her behalf with
+the Mussalmans. And the best way of saving the cow from them is to give
+them unconditional help in their hour of trouble.
+
+Similarly what do we owe the Punjab? The whole of India was made to
+crawl on her belly in as much as a single Punjabi was made to crawl in
+that dirty lane in Amritsar, the whole womanhood of India was unveiled
+in as much as the innocent woman of Manianwalla were unveiled by an
+insolent office; and Indian childhood was dishonoured in that, that
+school children of tender age were made to walk four times a day to
+stated places within the martial area in the Punjab and to salute the
+Union Jack, through the effect of which order two children, seven years
+old died of sunstroke having been made to wait in the noonday sun. In my
+opinion it is a sin to attend the schools and colleges conducted under
+the aegis of this Government so long as it has not purged itself of
+these crimes by proper repentance. We may not with any sense of
+self-respect plead before the courts of the Government when we remember
+that it was through the Punjab Courts that innocent men were sentenced
+to be imprisoned and hanged. We become participators in the crime of the
+Government by voluntarily helping it or being helped by it.
+
+The women of India have intuitively understood the spiritual nature of
+the struggle. Thousands have attended to listen to the message of
+non-violent non-co-operation and have given me their precious ornaments
+for the purpose of advancing the cause of Swaraj. Is it any wonder if I
+believe the possibility of gaining Swaraj within a year after all these
+wonderful demonstrations? I would be guilty of want of faith in God if I
+under-rated the significance of the response from the women of India. I
+hope that the students will do their duty. The country certainly expects
+the lawyers who have hitherto led public agitation to recognise the new
+awakening.
+
+I have used strong language but I have done so with the greatest
+deliberation, I am not actuated by any feeling of revenge. I do not
+consider Englishmen as my enemy. I recognise the worth of many. I enjoy
+the privilege of having many English friends, but I am a determined
+enemy of the English rule as is conducted at present and if the
+power--tapasya--of one man could destroy it, I would certainly destroy
+it, if it could not be mended. An Empire that stands for injustice and
+breach of faith does not deserve to stand if its custodians will not
+repent and non-co-operation has been devised in order to enable the
+nation to compel justice.
+
+I hope that Bengal will take her proper place in this movement of
+self-purification. Bengal began Swadeshi and national education when the
+rest of India was sleeping. I hope that Bengal will come to the front
+in this movement for gaining Swaraj and gaining justice for the Khilafat
+and the Punjab through purification and self-sacrifice.
+
+
+ON THE WRONG TRACK
+
+Lord Ronaldshay has been doing me the favour of reading my booklet on
+Indian Home Rule which is a translation of Hind Swaraj. His Lordship
+told his audience that if Swaraj meant what I had described it to be in
+the booklet, the Bengalis would have none of it. I am sorry that Swaraj
+of the Congress resolution does not mean the Swaraj depicted in the
+booklet; Swaraj according to the Congress means Swaraj that the people
+of India want, not what the British Government may condescend to give.
+In so far as I can see, Swaraj will be a Parliament chosen by the people
+with the fullest power over the finance, the police, the military, the
+navy, the courts, and the educational institutions.
+
+I am free to confess that the Swaraj I expect to gain within one year,
+if India responds will be such Swaraj as will make practically
+impossible the repetition of the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs, and
+will enable the nation to do good or evil as it chooses, and not he
+'good' at the dictation of an irresponsible, insolent, and godless
+bureaucracy. Under that Swaraj the nation will have the power to impose
+a heavy protective tariff on such foreign goods as are capable of being
+manufactured in India, as also the power to refuse to send a single
+soldier outside India for the purpose of enslaving the surrounding or
+remote nationalities. The Swaraj that I dream of will be a possibility
+only, when the nation is free to make its choice both of good and evil.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+I adhere to all I have said in that booklet and I would certainly
+recommend it to the reader. Government over self is the truest Swaraj,
+it is synonymous with _moksha_ or salvation, and I have seen nothing to
+alter the view that doctors, lawyers, and railways are no help, and are
+often a hindrance, to the one thing worth striving after. But I know
+that association, a satanic activity, such as the Government is engaged
+in, makes even an effort for such freedom a practical impossibility. I
+cannot tender allegiance to God and Satan at the same time.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+The surest sign of the satanic nature of the present system is that even
+a nobleman of the type of Lord Ronaldshay is obliged to put us off the
+track. He will not deal with the one thing needful. Why is he silent
+about the Punjab? Why does he evade the Khilafat? Can ointments soothe
+a patient who is suffering from corroding consumption? Does his lordship
+not see that it is not the inadequacy of the reforms that has set India
+aflame but that it is the infliction of the two wrongs and the wicked
+attempt to make us forget them? Does he not see that a complete change
+of heart is required before reconciliation?
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+But it has become the fashion nowadays to ascribe hatred to
+non-co-operationism. And I regret to find that even Col. Wedgewood has
+fallen into the trap. I make bold to say that the only way to remove
+hatred is to give it disciplined vent. No man can--I cannot--perform the
+impossible task of removing hatred so long as contempt and despise for
+the feelings of India are sedulously nursed. It is a mockery to ask
+India not to hate when in the same breath India's most sacred feelings
+are contemptuously brushed aside. India feels weak and helpless and so
+expresses her helplessness by hating the tyrant who despises her and
+makes her crawl on the belly, lifts the veils of her innocent women and
+compels her tender children to acknowledge his power by saluting his
+flag four times a day. The gospel of Non-co-operation addresses itself
+to the task of making the people strong and self-reliant. It is an
+attempt to transform hatred into pity. A strong and self-reliant India
+will cease to hate Bosworth Smiths and Frank Johnsons, for she will have
+the power to punish them and therefore the power also to pity and
+forgive them. To-day she can neither punish nor forgive, and therefore
+helplessly nurses hatred. If the Mussalmans were strong, they would not
+hate the English but would fight and wrest from them the dearest
+possessions of Islam. I know that the Ali Brothers who live only for the
+honour and the prestige of Islam, and are prepared any moment to die for
+it, will to-day make friends with the latter Englishmen, if they were to
+do justice to the Khilafat which it is in their power to do.
+
+      *      *      *      *       *
+
+I am positively certain that there is no personal element in this fight.
+Both the Hindus and the Mahomedans would to-day invoke blessings on the
+English if they would but give proof positive of their goodness,
+faithfulness, and loyalty to India. Non-co-operation then is a godsend;
+it will purify and strengthen India; and a strong India will be a
+strength to the world as an Indian weak and helpless is a curse to
+mankind. Indian soldiers have involuntarily helped to destroy Turkey and
+are now destroying the flower of the Arabian nation. I cannot recall a
+single campaign in which the Indian soldier has been employed by the
+British Government for the good of mankind. And yet, (Oh! the shame of
+it!) Indian Maharajas are never tired of priding themselves on the loyal
+help they have rendered the English! Could degradation sink any lower?
+
+
+THE CONGRESS CONSTITUTION
+
+The belated report of the Congress Constitution Committee has now been
+published for general information and opinion has been invited from all
+public bodies in order to assist the deliberations of the All India
+Congress Committee. It is a pity that, small though the Constitution
+Committee was, all the members never met at any one time in spite of
+efforts, to have a meeting of them all. It is perhaps no body's fault
+that all the members could not meet. At the same time the draft report
+has passed through the searching examination of all but one member and
+the report represents the mature deliberations of four out of the five
+members. It must be stated at the same time that it does not pretend to
+be the unanimous opinion of the members. Rather than present a
+dissenting minute, a workable scheme has been brought out leaving each
+member free to press his own views on to several matters in which they
+are not quite unanimous. The most important part of the constitution,
+however, is the alteration of the creed. So far as I am aware there is
+no fundamental difference of opinion between the members. In my opinion
+the altered creed represents the exact feeling of the country at the
+present moment.
+
+I know that the proposed alteration has been subjected to hostile
+criticism in several newspapers of note. But the extraordinary situation
+that faces the country is that popular opinion is far in advance of
+several newspapers which have hitherto commanded influence and have
+undoubtedly moulded public opinion. The fact is that the formation of
+opinion to-day is by no means confined to the educated classes, but the
+masses have taken it upon themselves not only to formulate opinion but
+to enforce it. It would be a mistake to belittle or ignore this opinion,
+or to ascribe it to a temporary upheaval. It would be equally a mistake
+to suppose that this awakening amongst the masses is due either to the
+activity of the Ali Brothers or myself. For the time being we have the
+ear of the masses because we voice their sentiments. The masses are by
+no means so foolish or unintelligent as we sometimes imagine. They often
+perceive things with their intuition, which we ourselves fail to see
+with our intellect. But whilst the masses know what they want, they
+often do not know how to express their wants and, less often, how to get
+what they want. Herein comes the use of leadership, and disastrous
+results can easily follow a bad, hasty, or what is worse, selfish lead.
+
+The first part of the proposed creed expresses the present desire of
+the nation, and the second shows the way that desire can be fulfilled.
+In my humble opinion the Congress creed with the proposed alteration is
+but an extension of the original. And so long as no break with the
+British connection is attempted, it is strictly within even the existing
+article that defines the Congress creed. The extension lies in the
+contemplated possibility of a break with the British connection. In my
+humble opinion, if India is to make unhampered progress, we must make it
+clear to the British people that whilst we desire to retain the British
+connection, if we can rise to our full height with it we are determined
+to dispense with, and even to get rid of that connection, if that is
+necessary for full national development. I hold that it is not only
+derogatory to national dignity but it actually impedes national progress
+superstitiously to believe that our progress towards our goal is
+impossible without British connection. It is this superstition which
+makes some of the best of us tolerate the Punjab wrong and the Khilafat
+insult. This blind adherence to that connection makes us feel helpless.
+The proposed alteration in the creed enables us to rid ourselves of our
+helpless condition. I personally hold that it is perfectly
+constitutional openly to strive after independence, but lest there may
+be dispute as to the constitutional character of any movement for
+complete independence, the doubtful and highly technical adjective
+"constitutional" has been removed from the altered creed in the draft.
+Surely it should be enough to ensure that the methods for achieving our
+end are legitimate, honourable, and peaceful, I believe that this was
+the reasoning that guided my colleagues in accepting the proposed creed.
+In any case, such was certainly my view of the whole alteration. There
+is no desire on my part to adopt any means that are subversive of law
+and order. I know, however, that I am treading on delicate ground when I
+write about law and order for, to some of our distinguished leaders even
+my present methods appear to be lawless and conducive to disorder. But
+even they will perhaps grant that the retention of the word
+'constitutional' cannot protect the country against methods such as I am
+employing. It gives rise, no doubt, to a luminous legal discussion, but
+any such discussion is fruitless when the nation means business. The
+other important alteration refers to the limitation of the number of
+delegates. I believe that the advantages of such a limitation are
+obvious. We are fast reaching a time when without any such limitation
+the Congress will become an unwieldy body. It is difficult even to have
+an unlimited number of visitors; it is impossible to transact national
+business if we have an unlimited number of delegates.
+
+The next important alteration is about the election of the members of
+the All-India Congress Committee, making that committee practically the
+Subjects Committee, and the redistribution of India for the purposes of
+the Congress on a linguistic basis. It is not necessary to comment on
+these alterations, but I wish to add that if the Congress accepts the
+principle of limiting the number of delegates it would be advisable to
+introduce the principle of proportional representation. That would
+enable all parties who wish to be represented at the Congress.
+
+I observe that _the Servant of India_ sees an inconsistency between my
+implied acceptance of the British Committee, so far as the published
+draft constitution is concerned, and my recent article in _Young India_
+on that Committee and the newspaper _India_. But it is well known that
+for several years I have held my present views about the existence of
+that body. It would have been irrelevant for me, perhaps, to suggest to
+my colleagues the extinction of that committee. It was not our function
+to report on the usefulness or otherwise of the Committee. We were
+commissioned only for preparing a new constitution. Moreover I knew that
+my colleagues were not averse to the existence of the British Committee.
+And the drawing up of a new constitution enabled me to show that where
+there was no question of principle I was desirous of agreeing quickly
+with my opponents in opinions. But I propose certainly to press for
+abolition of the committee as it is at present continued, and the
+stopping of its organ _India_.
+
+
+SWARAJ IN NINE MONTHS
+
+Asked by the _Times_ representative as to his impressions formed as a
+result of his activities during the last three months, Mr. Gandhi
+said:--"My own impression of these three months' extensive experience is
+that this movement of non-co-operation has come to stay, and it is most
+decidedly a purifying movement, in spite of isolated instances of
+rowdyism, as for instance at Mrs. Besant's meeting in Bombay, at some
+places in Delhi, Bengal, and even in Gujarat. The people are
+assimilating day after day the spirit of non-violence, not necessarily
+as a creed, but as an inevitable policy. I expect most startling
+results, more startling than, say, the discoveries of Sir J.C. Bose, or
+the acceptance by the people of non-violence. If the Government could be
+assured beyond any possibility of doubt that no violence would ever be
+offered by us the Government would from that moment alter its character,
+unconsciously and involuntarily, but nonetheless surely on that
+account."
+
+"Alter its character,--in what, direction?" asked the _Times_
+representative.
+
+"Certainly in the direction which we ask it should move--that being in
+the direction of Government becoming responsive to every call of
+the nation."
+
+"Will you kindly explain further?" asked the representative.
+
+"By that I mean," said Mr. Gandhi, "people will be able by asserting
+themselves through fixed determination and self-sacrifice to gain the
+redress of the Khilafat wrong, the Punjab wrong, and attain the Swaraj
+of their choice."
+
+"But what is your Swaraj, and where does the Government come in
+there--the Government which, you say will alter its character
+unconsciously?"
+
+"My Swaraj," said Mr. Gandhi, "is the Parliamentary Government of India
+in the modern sense of the term for the time being, and that Government
+would be secured to us either through the friendly offices of the
+British people or without them."
+
+"What do you mean by the phrase, 'without them!'" questioned the
+interviewer.
+
+"This movement," continued Mr. Gandhi, "is an endeavour to purge the
+present Government of selfishness and greed which determine almost every
+one of their activities. Suppose that we have made it impossible by
+disassociation from them to feed their greed. They might not wish to
+remain in India, as happened in the case of Somaliland, where the moment
+its administration ceased to be a paying proposition they evacuated it."
+
+"How do you think," queried the representative, "in practice this will
+work out?"
+
+"What I have sketched before you," said Mr. Gandhi, "is the final
+possibility. What I expect is that nothing of that kind will happen. In
+so far as I understand the British people I will recognise the force of
+public opinion when it has become real and patent. Then, and only then,
+will they realise the hideous injustice which in their name the Imperial
+ministers and their representatives in India have perpetrated. They will
+therefore remedy the two wrongs in accordance with the wishes of the
+people, and they will also offer a constitution exactly in accordance
+with the wishes of the people of India, as represented by their
+chosen leaders.
+
+"Supposing that the British Government wish to retire because India is
+not a paying concern, what do you think will then be the position
+of India?"
+
+Mr. Gandhi answered: "At that stage surely it is easy to understand that
+India will then have evolved either outstanding spiritual height or the
+ability to offer violence, against violence. She will have evolved an
+organising ability of a high order, and will therefore be in every way
+able to cope with any emergency that might arise." "In other words,"
+observed the _Times_ representative, "you expect the moment of the
+British evacuation, if such a contingency arises, will coincide with the
+moment of India's preparedness and ability and conditions favourable for
+India to take over the Indian administration as a going concern and work
+it for the benefit and advancement of the Nation?"
+
+Mr. Gandhi answered the question with an emphatic affirmative. "My
+experience during the last months fills me with the hope," continued Mr.
+Gandhi, "that within the nine months that remain of the year in which I
+have expected Swaraj for India we shall redress the two wrongs and we
+shall see Swaraj established in accordance with the wishes of the people
+of India."
+
+"Where will the present Government be at the end of the nine months?"
+Asked the _Times_ representative.
+
+Mr. Gandhi, with a significant smile, said: "The lion will then lie with
+the lamb."
+
+_Young India, December, 1920._
+
+
+THE ATTAINMENT OF SWARAJ
+
+Mr. Gandhi in moving his resolution on the creed before the Congress,
+said, "The resolution which I have the honour to move is as follows: The
+object of the Indian National Congress is the attainment of Swarajya by
+the people of India by all legitimate and peaceful means."
+
+There are only two kinds of objections, so far as I understand, that
+will be advanced from this platform. One is that we may not to-day think
+of dissolving the British connection. What I say is that it is
+derogatory to national dignity to think of permanence of British
+connection at any cost. We are labouring under a grievous wrong, which
+it is the personal duty of every Indian to get redressed. This British
+Government not only refused to redress the wrong, but it refuses to
+acknowledge _its_ mistake and so long as it retains its attitude, it is
+not possible for us to say all that we want to be or all that we want to
+get, retaining British connection. No matter what difficulties be in our
+path, we must make the clearest possible declaration to the world and to
+the whole of India, that we may not possibly have British connection, if
+the British people will not do this elementary justice. I do not, for
+one moment, suggest that we want to end at the British connection at all
+costs, unconditionally. If the British connection is for the advancement
+of India, we do not want to destroy it. But if it is inconsistent with
+our national self respect, then it is our bounden duty to destroy it.
+There is room in this resolution for both--those who believe that, by
+retaining British connection, we can purify ourselves and purify British
+people, and those who have no belief. As for instance, take the extreme
+case of Mr. Andrews. He says all hope for India is gone for keeping the
+British connection. He says there must be complete severance--complete
+independence. There is room enough in this creed for a man like Mr.
+Andrews also. Take another illustration, a man like myself or my brother
+Shaukat Ali. There is certainly no room for us, if we have eternally to
+subscribe to the doctrine, whether these wrongs are redressed or not, we
+shall have to evolve ourselves within the British Empire; there is no
+room for me in that creed. Therefore this creed is elastic enough to
+take in both shades of opinions and the British people will have to
+beware that, if they do not want to do justice, it will be the bounden
+duty of every Indian to destroy the Empire.
+
+I want just now to wind up my remarks with a personal appeal, drawing
+your attention to an object lesson that was presented in the Bengal
+camp yesterday. If you want Swaraj, you have got a demonstration of how
+to get Swaraj. There was a little bit of skirmish, a little bit of
+squabble, and a little bit of difference in the Bengal camp, as there
+will always be differences so long as the world lasts. I have known
+differences between husband and wife, because I am still a husband; I
+have noticed differences between parents and children, because I am
+still a father of four boys, and they are all strong enough to destroy
+their father so far as bodily struggle is concerned; I possess that
+varied experience of husband and parent; I know that we shall always
+have squabbles, we shall always have differences but the lesson that I
+want to draw your attention to is that I had the honour and privilege of
+addressing both the parties. They gave me their undivided attention and
+what is more they showed their attachment, their affection and their
+fellowship for me by accepting the humble advice that I had the honour
+of tendering to them, and I told them I am not here to distribute
+justice that can be awarded only through our worthy president. But I ask
+you not to go to the president, you need not worry him. If you are
+strong, if you are brave, if you are intent upon getting Swaraj, and if
+you really want to revise the creed, then you will bottle up your rage,
+you will bottle up all the feelings of injustice that may rankle in
+your hearts and forget these things here under this very roof and I told
+them to forget their differences, to forgot the wrongs. I don't want to
+tell you or go into the history of that incident. Probably most of you
+know. I simply want to invite your attention to the fact. I don't say
+they have settled up their differences. I hope they have but I do know
+that they undertook to forget the differences. They undertook not to
+worry the President, they undertook not to make any demonstration here
+or in the Subjects Committee. All honour to those who listened to
+that advice.
+
+I only wanted my Bengali friends and all the other friends who have come
+to this great assembly with a fixed determination to seek nothing but
+the settlement of their country, to seek nothing but the advancement of
+their respective rights, to seek nothing but the conservation of the
+national honour. I appeal to every one of you to copy the example set by
+those who felt aggrieved and who felt that their heads were broken. I
+know, before we have done with this great battle on which we have
+embarked at the special sessions of the Congress, we have to go
+probably, possibly through a sea of blood, but let it not be said of us
+or any one of us that we are guilty of shedding blood, but let it be
+said by generations yet to be born that we suffered, that we shed not
+somebody's blood but our own, and so I have no hesitation in saying that
+I do not want to show much sympathy for those who had their heads
+broken or who were said to be even in danger of losing their lives. What
+does it matter? It is much better to die at the hands, at least, of our
+own countrymen. What is there to revenge ourselves about or upon. So I
+ask everyone of you that if at any time there is blood-boiling within
+you against some fellow countrymen of yours, even though he may be in
+the employ of Government, though he may be in the Secret Service, you
+will take care not to be offended and not to return blow for blow.
+Understand that the very moment you return the blow from the detective,
+your cause is lost. This is your non-violent campaign. And so I ask
+everyone of you not to retaliate but to bottle up all your rage, to
+dismiss your rage from you and you will rise graver men. I am here to
+congratulate those who have restrained themselves from going to the
+President and bringing the dispute before him.
+
+Therefore I appeal to those who feel aggrieved to feel that they have
+done the right thing in forgetting it and if they have not forgotten I
+ask them to try to forget the thing; and that is the object lesson to
+which I wanted to draw your attention if you want to carry this
+resolution. Do not carry this resolution only by an acclamation for this
+resolution, but I want you to accompany the carrying out of this
+resolution with a faith and resolve which nothing on earth can move.
+That you are intent upon getting Swaraj at the earliest possible moment
+and that you are intent upon getting Swaraj by means that are
+legitimate, that are honourable and by means that are non-violent, that
+are peaceful, you have resolved upon, so far you can say to-day. We
+cannot give battle to this Government by means of steel, but we can give
+battle by exercising, what I have so often called, "soul force" and soul
+force is not the prerogative of one man of a Sanyasi or even a so-called
+saint. Soul force is the prerogative of every human being, female or
+male and therefore I ask my countrymen, if they want to accept this
+resolution, to accept it with that firm determination and to understand
+that it is inaugurated under such good and favourable auspices as I have
+described to you.
+
+In my humble opinion, the Congress will have done the rightest thing, if
+it unanimously adopts this resolution. May God grant that you will pass
+this resolution unanimously, may God grant that you will also have the
+courage and the ability to carry out the resolution and that within one
+year.
+
+
+
+
+V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY
+
+
+[A dialogue between Editor and reader on the Hindu-Moslem Unity--_Indian
+Home Rule_.]
+
+
+THE HINDUS AND THE MAHOMEDANS.
+
+EDITOR: Your last question is a serious one, and yet, on careful
+consideration, it will be found to be easy of solution. The question
+arises because of the presence of the railways of the lawyers, and of
+the doctors. We shall presently examine the last two. We have already
+considered the railways. I should, however, like to add that man is so
+made by nature as to require him to restrict his movements as far as his
+hands and feet will take him. If we did not rush about from place to
+place by means of railways such other maddening conveniences, much of
+the confusion that arises would be obviated. Our difficulties are of our
+own creation. God set a limit to a man's locomotive ambition in the
+construction of his body. Man immediately proceeded to discover means of
+overriding the limit. God gifted man with intellect that he might know
+his Maker. Man abused it, so that he might forget his Maker. I am so
+constructed that I can only serve my immediate neighbours, but, in my
+conceit, I pretend to have discovered that I must with my body serve
+every individual in the Universe. In thus attempting the impossible, man
+comes in contact with different natures, different religions, and is
+utterly confounded. According to this reasoning, it must be apparent to
+you that railways are a most dangerous institution. Man has therefore
+gone further away from his Maker.
+
+READER: But I am impatient to hear your answer to my question. Has the
+introduction of Mahomedanism not unmade the nation?
+
+EDITOR: India cannot cease to be one nation because people belonging to
+different religions live in it. The introduction of foreigners does not
+necessarily destroy the nation, they merge in it. A country is one
+nation only when such a condition obtains in it. That country must have
+a faculty for assimilation. India has ever been such a country. In
+reality, there are as many religions as there are individuals, but those
+who are conscious of the spirit of nationality do not interfere with one
+another's religion. If they do, they are not fit to be considered a
+nation. If the Hindus believe that India should be peopled only by
+Hindus, they are living in dreamland. The Hindus, the Mahomedans, the
+Parsees and the Christians who have made India their country are fellow
+countrymen, and they will have to live in unity if only for their own
+interest. In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion
+synonymous terms: nor has it ever been so in India.
+
+READER: But what about the inborn enmity between Hindus and Mahomedans?
+
+EDITOR: That phrase has been invented by our mutual enemy. When the
+Hindus and Mahomedans fought against one another, they certainly spoke
+in that strain. They have long since ceased to fight. How, then, can
+there be any inborn enmity? Pray remember this, too, that we did not
+cease to fight only after British occupation. The Hindus flourished
+under Moslem sovereigns, and Moslems under the Hindu. Each party
+recognised that mutual fighting was suicidal, and that neither party
+would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both parties, therefore,
+decided to live in peace. With the English advent the quarrels
+recommenced.
+
+The proverbs you have quoted were coined when both were fighting; to
+quote them now is obviously harmful. Should we not remember that many
+Hindus and Mahomedans own the same ancestors, and the same blood runs
+through their veins? Do people become enemies because they change their
+religion? Is the God of the Mahomedan different from the God of the
+Hindu? Religions are different roads converging to the same point. What
+does it matter that we take different roads, so long as we reach the
+same goal? Wherein is the cause for quarrelling?
+
+Moreover, there are deadly proverbs as between the followers of Shiva
+and those of Vishnu, yet nobody suggests that these two do not belong to
+the same nation. It is said that the Vedic religion is different from
+Jainism, but the followers of the respective faiths are not different
+nations. The fact is that we have become enslaved, and, therefore,
+quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided by a third party. There
+are Hindu iconoclasts as there are Mahomedan. The more we advance in
+true knowledge, the better we shall understand that we need not be at
+war with those whose religion we may not follow.
+
+READER: Now I would like to know your views about cow protection.
+
+EDITOR: I myself respect the cow, that is, I look upon her with
+affectionate reverence. The cow is the protector of India, because, it
+being an agricultural country, is dependent on the cow's progeny. She is
+a most useful animal in hundreds of ways. Our Mahomedan brethren will
+admit this.
+
+But, just as I respect the cow so do I respect my fellow-men. A man is
+just as useful as a cow, no matter whether he be a Mahomedan or a Hindu.
+Am I, then to fight with or kill a Mahomedan in order to save a cow? In
+doing so, I would become an enemy as well of the cow as of the
+Mahomedan. Therefore, the only method I know of protecting the cow is
+that I should approach my Mahomedan brother and urge him for the sake of
+the country to join me in protecting her. If he would not listen to me,
+I should let the cow go for the simple reason that the matter is beyond
+my ability. If I were over full of pity for the cow, I should sacrifice
+my life to save her, but not take my brother's. This, I hold, is the law
+of our religion.
+
+When men become obstinate, it is a difficult thing. If I pull one way,
+my Moslem brother will pull another. If I put on a superior air, he will
+return the compliment. If I bow to him gently, he will do it much, more
+so, and if he does not, I shall not be considered to have done wrong in
+having bowed. When the Hindus became insistent, the killing of cows
+increased. In my opinion, cow protection societies may be considered cow
+killing societies. It is a disgrace to us that we should need such
+societies. When we forgot how to protect cows, I suppose we needed such
+societies.
+
+What am I to do when a blood-brother is on the point of killing a cow?
+Am I to kill him, or to fall down at his feet and implore him? If you
+admit that I should adopt the latter course I must do the same to my
+Moslem brother. Who protects the cow from destruction by Hindus when
+they cruelly ill-treat her? Whoever reasons with the Hindus when they
+mercilessly belabour the progeny of the cow with their sticks? But this
+has not prevented us from remaining one nation.
+
+Lastly, if it be true that the Hindus believe in the doctrine of
+non-killing, and the Mahomedans do not, what, I pray, is the duty of the
+former? It is not written that a follower of the religion of Ahimsa
+(non-killing) may kill a fellow-man. For him the way is straight. In
+order to save one being, he may not kill another. He can only
+plead--therein lies his sole duty.
+
+But does every Hindu believe in Ahimsa? Going to the root of the matter,
+not one man really practises such a religion, because we do destroy
+life. We are said to follow that religion because we want to obtain
+freedom from liability to kill any kind of life. Generally speaking, we
+may observe that many Hindus partake of meat and are not, therefore,
+followers of Ahimsa. It is, therefore, preposterous to suggest that the
+two cannot live together amicably because the Hindus believe in Ahimsa
+and the Mahomedans do not.
+
+These thoughts are put into our minds by selfish and false religious
+teachers. The English put the finishing touch. They have a habit of
+writing history; they pretend to study the manners and customs of all
+peoples, God has given us a limited mental capacity, but they usurp the
+function of the Godhead and indulge in novel experiments. They write
+about their own researches in most laudatory terms and hypnotise us into
+believing them. We in our ignorance, then fall at their feet.
+
+Those who do not wish to misunderstand things may read up the Koran, and
+will find therein hundreds of passages acceptable to the Hindus; and the
+Bhagavad Gita contains passages to which not a Mahomedan can take
+exception. Am I to dislike a Mahomedan because there are passages in the
+Koran I do not understand or like? It takes two to make a quarrel. If I
+do not want to quarrel with a Mahomedan, the latter will be powerless to
+foist a quarrel on me, and, similarly, I should be powerless if a
+Mahomedan refuses his assistance to quarrel with me. An arm striking the
+air will become disjointed. If everyone will try to understand the core
+of his own religion and adhere to it, and will not allow false teachers
+to dictate to him, there will be no room left for quarrelling.
+
+READER: But, will the English ever allow the two bodies to join hands?
+
+EDITOR: This question arises out of your timidity. It betrays our
+shallowness. If two brothers want to live in peace, is it possible for a
+third party to separate them? If they were to listen to evil counsels,
+we would consider them to be foolish. Similarly, we Hindus and
+Mahomedans would have to blame our folly rather than the English, if we
+allowed them to put asunder. A clay pot would break through impact; if
+not with one stone, thou with another. The way to save the pot is not to
+keep it away from the danger point, but to bake it so that no stone
+would break it. We have then to make our hearts of perfectly baked clay.
+Then we shall be steeled against all danger. This can be easily done by
+the Hindus. They are superior in numbers, they pretend that they are
+more educated, they are, therefore, better able to shield themselves
+from attack on their amicable relations with the Mahomedans.
+
+There is a mutual distrust between the two communities. The Mahomedans,
+therefore, ask for certain concessions from Lord Morley. Why should the
+Hindus oppose this? If the Hindus desisted, the English would notice it,
+the Mahomedans would gradually begin to trust the Hindus, and
+brotherliness would be the outcome. We should be ashamed to take our
+quarrels to the English. Everyone can find out for himself that the
+Hindus can lose nothing be desisting. The man who has inspired
+confidence in another has never lost anything in this world.
+
+I do not suggest that the Hindus and the Mahomedans will never fight.
+Two brothers living together often do so. We shall sometimes have our
+heads broken. Such a thing ought not to be necessary, but all men are
+not equi-minded. When people are in a rage, they do many foolish things.
+These we have to put up with. But, when we do quarrel, we certainly do
+not want to engage counsel and to resort to English or any law-courts.
+Two men fight; both have their heads broken, or one only. How shall a
+third party distribute justice amongst them? Those who fight may expect
+to be injured.
+
+
+HINDU-MAHOMEDAN UNITY
+
+Mr. Candler some time ago asked me in an imaginary interview whether if
+I was sincere in my professions of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. I would eat
+and drink with a Mahomedean and give my daughter in marriage to a
+Mahomedan. This question has been asked again by some friends in another
+form. Is it necessary for Hindu Mahomedan Unity that there should he
+interdining and intermarrying? The questioners say that if the two are
+necessary, real unity can never take place because crores of _Sanatanis_
+would never reconcile themselves to interdining, much less to
+intermarriage.
+
+I am one of those who do not consider caste to be a harmful institution.
+In its origin caste was a wholesome custom and promoted national
+well-being. In my opinion the idea that interdining or intermarrying is
+necessary for national growth, is a superstition borrowed from the West.
+Eating is a process just as vital as the other sanitary necessities of
+life. And if mankind had not, much to its harm, made of eating a fetish
+and indulgence we would have performed the operation of eating in
+private even as one performs the other necessary functions of life in
+private. Indeed the highest culture in Hinduism regards eating in that
+light and there are thousands of Hindus still living who will not eat
+their food in the presence of anybody. I can recall the names of several
+cultured men and women who ate their food in entire privacy but who
+never had any illwill against anybody and who lived on the friendliest
+terms with all.
+
+Intermarriage is a still more difficult question. If brothers and
+sisters can live on the friendliest footing without ever thinking of
+marrying each other, I can see no difficulty in my daughter regarding
+every Mahomedan brother and _vice versa_. I hold strong views on
+religion and on marriage. The greater the restraint we exercise with
+regard to our appetites whether about eating or marrying, the better we
+become from a religious standpoint. I should despair of ever cultivating
+amicable relations with the world, if I had to recognise the right or
+the propriety of any young man offering his hand in marriage to my
+daughter or to regard it as necessary for me to dine with anybody and
+everybody. I claim that I am living on terms of friendliness with the
+whole world. I have never quarrelled with a single Mahomedan or
+Christian but for years I have taken nothing but fruit in Mahomedan or
+Christian households. I would most certainly decline to eat food cooked
+from the same plate with my son or to drink water out of a cup which his
+lips have touched and which has not been washed. But the restraint or
+the exclusiveness exercised in these matters by me has never affected
+the closest companionship with the Mahomedan or the Christian friends
+or my sons.
+
+But interdining and intermarriage have never been a bar to disunion,
+quarrels and worse. The Pandavas and the Kauravas flew at one another's
+throats without compunction although they interdined and intermarried.
+The bitterness between the English and the Germans has not yet died out.
+
+The fact is that intermarriage and interdining are not necessary factors
+in friendship and unity though they are often emblems thereof. But
+insistence on either the one or the other can easily become and is
+to-day a bar to Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. If we make ourselves believe that
+Hindus and Mahomedans cannot be one unless they interdine or intermarry,
+we would be creating an artificial barrier between us which it might be
+almost impossible to remove. And it would seriously interfere with the
+flowing unity between Hindus and Mahomedans if, for example, Mahomedan
+youths consider it lawful to court Hindu girls. The Hindu parents will
+not, even if they suspected any such thing, freely admit Mahomedans to
+their homes as they have begun to do now. In my opinion it is necessary
+for Hindu and Mahomedan young men to recognise this limitation.
+
+I hold it to be utterly impossible for Hindus and Mahomedans to
+intermarry and yet retain intact each other's religion. And the true
+beauty of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity lies in each remaining true to his own
+religion and yet being true to each other. For, we are thinking of
+Hindus and Mahomedans even of the most orthodox type being able to
+regard one another as natural friends instead of regarding one another
+as natural enemies as they have done hitherto.
+
+What then does the Hindu-Mahomedan Unity consist in and how can it be
+best promoted? The answer is simple. It consists in our having a common
+purpose, a common goal and common sorrows. It is best promoted by
+co-operating to reach the common goal, by sharing one another's sorrow
+and by mutual toleration. A common goal we have. We wish this great
+country of ours to be greater and self-governing.[4] We have enough
+sorrows to share and to-day seeing that the Mahomedans are deeply
+touched on the question of Khilafat and their case is just, nothing can
+be so powerful for winning Mahomedans friendship for the Hindu as to
+give his whole-hearted support to the Mahomedan claim. No amount of
+drinking out of the same cup or dining out of the same bowl can bind the
+two as this help in the Khilafat question.
+
+And mutual toleration is a necessity for all time and for all races. We
+cannot live in peace if the Hindu will not tolerate the Mahomedan form
+of worship of God and his manners and customs or if the mahomedans will
+be impatient of Hindu idolatory, cow-worship. It is not necessary for
+toleration that I must approve of what I tolerate. I heartily dislike
+drinking, meat eating and smoking, but I tolerate all these in Hindus,
+Mahomedans and Christians even as I expect them to tolerate my
+abstinence from all these, although they may dislike it. All the
+quarrels between the Hindus and the Mahomedans have arisen from each
+wanting to _force_ the other his view.
+
+
+HINDU-MUSLIM UNITY
+
+There can be no doubt that successful non-co-operation depends as much
+on Hindu-Muslim Unity as on non-violence. Greatest strain will be put
+upon both in the course of the struggle and if it survives that strain,
+victory is a certainty.
+
+A severe strain was put upon it in Agra and it has been stated that when
+either party went to the authorities they were referred to Maulana
+Shaukat Ali and me. Fortunately there was a far better man at hand.
+Hakimji Ajmal khan is a devout Muslim who commands the confidence and
+the respect of both the parties. He with his band of workers hastened to
+Agra, settled the dispute and the parties became friends as they were
+never before. An incident occurred nearer Delhi and the same influence
+worked successfully to avoid what might have become an explosion.
+
+But Hakimji Ajmal khan cannot be everywhere appearing at the exact hour
+as an angel of peace. Nor can Maulana Shankat Ali or I go everywhere.
+And yet perfect peace must be observed between the two communities in
+spite of attempts to divide them.
+
+Why was there any appeal made to the authorities at all at Agra? If we
+are to work out non-co-operation with any degree of success we must be
+able to dispense with the protection of the Government when we quarrel
+among ourselves. The whole scheme of non-co-operation must break to
+pieces, if our final reliance is to be upon British intervention for the
+adjustment of our quarrels or the punishment of the guilty ones. In
+every village and hamlet there must be at least one Hindu and one
+Muslim, whose primary business must be to prevent quarrels between the
+two. Some times however, even blood-brothers come to blows. In the
+initial stages we are bound to do so here and there. Unfortunately we
+who are public workers have made little attempt to understand and
+influence the masses and least of all the most turbulent among them.
+During the process of insinuating ourselves in the estimation of the
+masses and until we have gained control over the unruly, there are bound
+to be exhibitions of hasty temper now and then. We must learn at such
+times to do without an appeal to the Government. Hakimji Ajmal Khan has
+shown us how to do it.
+
+The union that we want is not a patched up thing but a union of hearts
+based upon a definite recognition of the indubitable proposition that
+Swaraj for India must be an impossible dream without an indissoluble
+union between the Hindus and the Muslims of India. It must not be a mere
+truce. It cannot be based upon mutual fear. It must be a partnership
+between equals each respecting the religion of the other.
+
+I would frankly despair of reaching such union if there was anything in
+the holy Quran enjoining upon the followers of Islam to treat Hindus as
+their natural enemies or if there was anything in Hinduism to warrant a
+belief in the eternal enmity between the two.
+
+We would ill learn our history if we conclude that because we have
+quarrelled in the past, we are destined so to continue unless some such
+strong power like the British keep us by force of arms from flying at
+each other's throats. But I am convinced that there is no warrant in
+Islam or Hinduism for any such belief. True it is that interested
+fanatical priests in both religions have set the one against the other.
+It is equally true that Muslim rulers like Christian rulers have used
+the sword for the propagation of their respective faiths. But in spite
+of many dark things of the modern times, the world's opinion to-day will
+as little tolerate forcible conversions as it will tolerate forcible
+slavery. That probably is the most effective contribution of the
+scientific spirit of the age. That spirit has revolutionised many a
+false notion about Christianity as it has about Islam. I do not know a
+single writer on Islam who defends the use of force in the proselytising
+process. The influences exerted in our times are far more subtle than
+that of the sword.
+
+
+I believe that in the midst of all the bloodshed, chicane and fraud
+being resorted to on a colossal scale in the west, the whole humanity is
+silently but surely making progress towards a better age. And India by
+finding true independence and self-expression through an imperishable
+Hindu-Muslim unity and through non-violent means, i.e., unadulterated
+self sacrifice can point a way out of the prevailing darkness.
+
+
+
+
+VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+
+DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+Vivekanand used to call the Panchamas 'suppressed classes.' There is no
+doubt that Vivekanand's is a more accurate adjective. We have suppressed
+them and have consequently become ourselves depressed. That we have
+become the 'Pariahs of the Empire' is, in Gokhale's language, the
+retributive justice meted out to us by a just God. A correspondent
+indignantly asks me in a pathetic letter reproduced elsewhere, what I am
+doing for them. I have given the letter with the correspondent's own
+heading. Should not we the Hindus wash our bloodstained hands before we
+ask the English to wash theirs? This is a proper question reasonably
+put. And if a member of a slave nation could deliver the suppressed
+classes from their slavery without freeing myself from my own, I would
+do so to day. But it is an impossible task. A slave has not the freedom
+even to do the right thing. It is a right for me to prohibit the
+importation of foreign goods, but I have no power to bring it about. It
+was right for Maulana Mahomed Ali to go to Turkey and to tell the Turks
+personally that India was with them in their righteous struggle. He was
+not free to do so. If I had a truly national legislative I would answer
+Hindu insolence by creating special and better wells for the exclusive
+use of suppressed classes and by erecting better and more numerous
+schools for them, so that there would be not a single member of the
+suppressed classes left without a school to teach their children. But I
+must wait for that better day.
+
+Meanwhile are the depressed classes to be loft to their own resources?
+Nothing of the sort. In my own humble manner I have done and am doing
+all I can for my Panchama brother.
+
+There are three courses open to those downtrodden members of the nation.
+For their impatience they may call in the assistance of the slave owning
+Government. They will get it but they will fall from the frying pan into
+the fire. To-day they are slaves of slaves. By seeking Government aid,
+they will be used for suppressing their kith and kin. Instead of being
+sinned against, they will themselves be the sinners. The Mussalmans
+tried it and failed. They found that they were worse off than before.
+The Sikhs did it unwittingly and failed. To-day there is no more
+discontented community in India than the Sikhs. Government aid is
+therefore no solution.
+
+The second is rejection of Hinduism and wholesale conversion to Islam or
+Christianity. And if a change of religion could be justified for worldly
+betterment, I would advise it without hesitation. But religion is a
+matter of the heart. No physical inconvenience can warrant abandonment
+of one's own religion. If the inhuman treatment of the Panchamas were a
+part of Hinduism, its rejection would be a paramount duty both for them
+and for those like me who would not make a fetish even of religion and
+condone every evil in its sacred name. But, I believe that
+untouchability is no part of Hinduism. It is rather its excrescence to
+be removed by every effort. And there is quite an army of Hindu
+reformers who have set their heart upon ridding Hinduism of this blot.
+Conversion, therefore, I hold, is no remedy whatsoever.
+
+Then there remains, finally, self-help and self-dependence, with such
+aid as the non-Panchama Hindus will render of their own motion, not as a
+matter of patronage but as a matter of duty. And herein comes the use of
+non-co-operation. My correspondent was correctly informed by Mr.
+Rajagopaluchari and Mr. Hanumantarao that I would favour well-regulated
+non-co-operation for this acknowledged evil. But non-co-operation means
+independence of outside help, it means effort from within. It would not
+be non-co-operation to insist on visiting prohibited areas. That may be
+civil disobedience if it is peacefully carried out. But I have found to
+my cost that civil disobedience requires far greater preliminary
+training and self-control. All can non-co-operate, but few only can
+offer civil disobedience. Therefore, by way of protest against Hinduism,
+the Panchamas can certainly stop all contact and connection with the
+other Hindus so long as special grievances are maintained. But this
+means organised intelligent effort. And so far as I can see, there is no
+leader among the Panchamas who can lead them to victory through
+non-co-operation.
+
+The better way, therefore, perhaps, is for the Panchamas heartily to
+join the great national movement that is now going on for throwing off
+the slavery of the present Government. It is easy enough for the
+Panchama friends to see that non-co-operation against this evil
+government presupposes co-operation between the different sections
+forming the Indian nation. The Hindus must realise that if they wish to
+offer successful non-co-operation against the Government, they must make
+common cause with the Panchamas, even as they have made common cause
+with the Mussalmans. Non-co-operation with it is free from violence, is
+essentially a movement of intensive self-purification. That process has
+commenced and whether the Panchamas deliberately take part in it or
+not, the rest of the Hindus dare not neglect them without hampering
+their own progress. Hence though the Panchama problem is as dear to me
+as life itself, I rest satisfied with the exclusive attention to
+national non-co-operation. I feel sure that the greater includes
+the less.
+
+Closely allied to this question is the non-Brahmin question. I wish I
+had studied it more closely than I have been able to. A quotation from
+my speech delivered at a private meeting in Madras has been torn from
+its context and misused to further the antagonism between the so-called
+Brahmins and the so-called non-Brahmins. I do not wish to retract a word
+of what I said at that meeting, I was appealing to those who are
+accepted as Brahmins. I told them that in my opinion the treatment of
+non-Brahmins by the Brahmins was as satanic as the treatment of us by
+the British. I added that the non-Brahmins should be placated without
+any ado or bargaining. But my remarks were never intended to encourage
+the powerful non-Brahmins of Maharashira or Madras, or the mischievous
+element among them, to overawe the so-called Brahmins. I use the word
+'so-called' advisedly. For the Brahmins who have freed themselves from
+the thraldom of superstitious orthodoxy have not only no quarrel with
+non-Brahmins as such, but are in every way eager to advance
+non-Brahmins wherever they are weak. No lover of his country can
+possibly achieve its general advance if he dared to neglect the least of
+his countrymen. Those non-Brahmins therefore who are coqueting with the
+Government are selling themselves and the nation to which they belong.
+By all means let those who have faith in the Government help to sustain
+it, but let no Indian worthy of his birth cut off his nose to spite
+the face.
+
+
+AMELIORATION OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES
+
+The resolution of the Senate of the Gujarat National University in
+regard to Mr. Andrews' question about the admission of children of the
+'depressed' classes to the schools affiliated to that University is
+reported to have raised a flutter in Ahmedabad. Not only has the flutter
+given satisfaction to a 'Times of India' correspondent, but the occasion
+has led to the discovery by him of another defect in the constitution of
+the Senate in that it does not contain a single Muslim member. The
+discovery, however, I may inform the reader, is no proof of the want of
+national character of the University. The Hindu-Muslim unity is no mere
+lip expression. It requires no artificial proofs. The simple reason why
+there is no Mussalman representative on the Senate is that no higher
+educated Mussalman, able to give his time, has been found to take
+sufficient interest in the national education movement. I merely refer
+to this matter to show that we must reckon with attempts to discredit
+the movement even misinterpretation of motives. That is a difficulty
+from without and easier to deal with.
+
+The 'depressed' classes difficulty is internal and therefore far more
+serious because it may give rise to a split and weaken the cause--no
+cause can survive internal difficulties if they are indefinitely
+multiplied. Yet there can be no surrender in the matter of principles
+for the avoidance of splits. You cannot promote a cause when you are
+undermining it by surrendering its vital parts. The depressed classes
+problem is a vital part of the cause. _Swaraj_ is as inconceivable
+without full reparation to the 'depressed' classes as it is impossible
+without real Hindu-Muslim unity. In my opinion we have become 'pariahs
+of the Empire' because we have created 'pariahs' in our midst. The slave
+owner is always more hurt than the slave. We shall be unfit to gain
+Swaraj so long as we would keep in bondage a fifth of the population of
+Hindustan. Have we not made the 'pariah' crawl on his belly? Have we not
+segregated him? And if it is religion so to treat the 'pariah.' It is
+the religion of the white race to segregate us. And if it is no argument
+for the white races to say that we are satisfied with the badge of our
+inferiority, it is less for us to say that the 'pariah' is satisfied
+with his. Our slavery is complete when we begin to hug it.
+
+The Gujarat Senate therefore counted the cost when it refused to bend
+before the storm. This non-co-operation is a process of
+self-purification. We may not cling to putrid customs and claim the pure
+boon of _Swaraj_. Untouchability I hold is a custom, not an integral
+part of Hinduism. The world advanced in thought, though it is still
+barbarous in action. And no religion can stand that which is not based
+on fundamental truths. Any glorification of error will destroy a
+religion as surely as disregard of a disease is bound to destroy a body.
+
+This government of ours is an unscrupulous corporation. It has ruled by
+dividing Mussalmans from Hindus. It is quite capable of taking advantage
+of the internal weaknesses of Hinduism. It will set the 'depressed'
+classes against the rest of the Hindus, non-Brahmins against Brahmins.
+The Gujarat Senate resolution does not end the trouble. It merely points
+out the difficulty. The trouble will end only when the masses and
+classes of Hindus have rid themselves of the sin of untouchability. A
+Hindu lover of Swaraj will as assiduously work for the amelioration of
+the lot of the 'depressed' classes as he works for Hindu-Muslim unity.
+We must treat them as our brothers and give them the same rights that we
+claim for ourselves.
+
+
+THE SIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY
+
+It is worthy of note that the subjects Committee accepted without any
+opposition the clause regarding the sin of untouchability. It is well
+that the National assembly passed the resolution stating that the
+removal of this blot on Hinduism was necessary for the attainment of
+Swaraj. The Devil succeeds only by receiving help from his fellows. He
+always takes advantage of the weakest spots in our natures in order to
+gain mastery over us. Even so does the Government retain its control
+over us through our weaknesses or vices. And if we would render
+ourselves proof against its machination, we must remove our weaknesses.
+It is for that reason that I have called non-co-operation a process of
+purification. As soon as that process is completed, this government must
+fall to pieces for want of the necessary environment, just as mosquitos
+cease to haunt a place whose cess-pools are filled up and dried.
+
+Has not a just Nemesis overtaken us for the crime of untouchability?
+Have we not reaped as we have sown? Have we not practised Dwyerism and
+O'Dwyerism on our own kith and kin? We have segregated the 'pariah' and
+we are in turn segregated in the British Colonies. We deny him the use
+of public wells; we throw the leavings of our plates at him. His very
+shadow pollutes us. Indeed there is no charge that the 'pariah' cannot
+fling in our faces and which we do not fling in the faces of Englishmen.
+
+How is this blot on Hinduism to be removed? 'Do unto others as you would
+that others should do unto you.' I have often told English officials
+that, if they are friends and servants of India, they should come down
+from their pedestal, cease to be patrons, demonstrate by their loving
+deeds that they are in every respect our friends, and believe us to be
+equals in the same sense they believe fellow Englishmen to be their
+equals. After the experiences of the Punjab and the Khilafat, I have
+gone a step further and asked them to repent and to change their hearts.
+Even so is it necessary for us Hindus to repent of the wrong we have
+done, to alter our behaviour towards those whom we have 'suppressed' by
+a system as devilish as we believe the English system of the Government
+of India to be. We must not throw a few miserable schools at them; we
+must not adopt the air of superiority towards them. We must treat them
+as our blood brothers as they are in fact. We must return to them the
+inheritance of which we have robbed them. And this must not be the act
+of a few English-knowing reformers merely, but it must be a conscious
+voluntary effort on the part of the masses. We may not wait till
+eternity for this much belated reformation. We must aim at bringing it
+about within this year of grace, probation, preparation and _tapasya_.
+It is a reform not to follow _Swaraj_ but to precede it.
+
+Untouchability is not a sanction of religion, it is a devise of Satan.
+The devil has always quoted scriptures. But scriptures cannot transcend
+reason and truth. They are intended to purify reason and illuminate
+truth. I am not going to burn a spotless horse because the Vedas are
+reported to have advised, tolerated, or sanctioned the sacrifice. For me
+the Vedas are divine and unwritten. 'The letter killeth.' It is the
+spirit that giveth the light. And the spirit of the Vedas is purity,
+truth, innocence, chastity, humility, simplicity, forgiveness,
+godliness, and all that makes a man or woman noble and brave. There is
+neither nobility nor bravery in treating the great and uncomplaining
+scavengers of the nation as worse than dogs to be despised and spat
+upon. Would that God gave us the strength and the wisdom to become
+voluntary scavengers of the nation as the 'suppressed' classes are
+forced to be. There are Augean stables enough and to spare for us to
+clean.
+
+
+
+
+VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD
+
+
+INDIANS ABROAD
+
+The prejudice against Indian settlers outside India is showing itself in
+a variety of ways: Under the impudent suggestion of sedition the Fiji
+Government has deported Mr. Manilal Doctor who with his brave and
+cultured wife has been rendering assistance to the poor indentured
+Indians of Fiji in a variety of ways. The whole trouble has arisen over
+the strike of the labourers in Fiji. Indentures have been canceled, but
+the spirit of slavery is by no means dead. We do not know the genesis of
+the strike; we do not know that the strikers have done no wrong. But we
+do know what is behind when a charge of sedition is brought against the
+strikers and their friends. The readers must remember that the
+Government that has scented sedition in the recent upheaval in Fiji is
+the Government that had the hardihood to libel Mr. Andrew's character.
+What can be the meaning of sedition in connection with the Fiji strikers
+and Mr. Manilal Doctor? Did they and he want to seize the reins of
+Government? Did they want any power in that country? They struck for
+elementary freedom. And it is a prostitution of terms to use the word
+sedition in such connection. The strikers may have been overhasty. Mr.
+Manilal Doctor may have misled them. If his advice bordered on the
+criminal he should have been tried. The information in our possession
+goes to show that he has been strictly constitutional. Our point,
+however, is that it is an abuse of power for the Fiji Government to have
+deported Mr. Manilal Doctor without a trial. It is wrong in principle to
+deprive a person of his liberty on mere suspicion and without giving him
+an opportunity of clearing his character. Mr. Manilal Doctor, be it
+remembered, has for years past made Fiji his home. He has, we believe,
+bought property there. He has children born in Fiji. Have the children
+no rights? Has the wife none? May a promising career be ruined at the
+bidding of a lawless Government? Has Mr. Manilal Doctor been compensated
+for the losses he must sustain? We trust that the Government of India
+which has endeavoured to protect the rights of Indian settlers abroad
+will take up the question of Mr. Doctor's deportation.
+
+Nor is Fiji the only place where the spirit of lawlessness among the
+powerful has come to the surface. Indians of (the late) German East
+Africa find themselves in a worse position than heretofore. They state
+that even their property is not safe. They have to pay all kinds of dues
+on passports. They are hampered in their trade. They are not able even
+to send money orders.
+
+In British East Africa the cloud is perhaps the thickest. The European
+settlers there are doing their utmost to deprive the Indian settlers of
+practically every right they have hitherto possessed. An attempt is
+being made to compass their ruin both by legislative enactment and
+administrative action.
+
+In South Africa every Indian who has anything to do with that part of
+the British Dominions is watching with bated breath the progress of
+commission that is now sitting.
+
+The Government of India have no easy job in protecting the interests of
+Indian settlers in these various parts of His Majesty's dominions. They
+will be able to do so only by following the firmest and the most
+consistent policy. Justice is admittedly on the side of the Indian
+settlers. But they are the weak party. A strong agitation in India
+followed by strong action by the Government of India can alone save the
+situation.
+
+
+INDIANS OVERSEAS
+
+The meeting held at the Excelsior Theatre in Bombay to pass resolutions
+regarding East Africa and Fiji, and presided over by Sir Narayan
+Chandavarkar, was an impressive gathering. The Theatre was filled to
+overflowing. Mr. Andrews' speech made clear what is needed. Both the
+political and the civil rights of Indians of East Africa are at stake.
+Mr. Anantani, himself an East African settler, showed in a forceful
+speech that the Indians were the pioneer settlers. An Indian sailor
+named Kano directed the celebrated Vasco De Gama to India. He added amid
+applause that Stanley's expedition for the search and relief of Dr.
+Livingstone was also fitted out by Indians. Indian workmen had built the
+Uganda Railway at much peril to their lives. An Indian contractor had
+taken the contract. Indian artisans had supplied the skill. And now
+their countrymen were in danger of being debarred from its use.
+
+The uplands of East Africa have been declared a Colony and the lowlands
+a Protectorate. There is a sinister significance attached to the
+declaration. The Colonial system gives the Europeans larger powers. It
+will tax all the resources of the Government of India to prevent the
+healthy uplands from becoming a whiteman's preserve and the Indians
+from being relegated to the swampy lowlands.
+
+The question of franchise will soon become a burning one. It will be
+suicidal to divide the electorate or to appoint Indians by nomination.
+There must be one general electoral roll applying the same
+qualifications to all the voters. This principle, as Mr. Andrews
+reminded the meeting, had worked well at the Cape.
+
+The second part of the East African resolution shows the condition of
+our countrymen in the late German East Africa. Indian soldiers fought
+there and now the position of Indians is worse than under German rule.
+H.H. the Agakhan suggested that German East Africa should be
+administered from India. Sir Theodore Morison would have couped up all
+Indians in German East Africa. The result was that both the proposals
+went by the board and the expected has happened. The greed of the
+English speculator has prevailed and he is trying to squeeze out the
+Indian. What will the Government of India protect? Has it the will to do
+so? Is not India itself being exploited? Mr. Jehangir Petit recalled the
+late Mr. Gokhale's views that we were not to expect a full satisfaction
+regarding the status of our countrymen across the seas until we had put
+our own house in order. Helots in our own country, how could we do
+better outside? Mr. Petit wants systematic and severe retaliation. In
+my opinion, retaliation is a double-edged weapon. It does not fail to
+hurt the user if it also hurts the party against whom it is used. And
+who is to give effect to retaliation? It is too much to expect an
+English Government to adopt effective retaliation against their own
+people. They will expostulate, they will remonstrate, but they will not
+go to war with their own Colonies. For the logical outcome of
+retaliation must mean war, if retaliation will not answer.
+
+Let us face the facts frankly. The problem is difficult alike for
+Englishmen and for us. The Englishmen and Indians do not agree in the
+Colonies. The Englishmen do not want us where they can live. Their
+civilisation is different from ours. The two cannot coalesce until there
+is mutual respect. The Englishman considers himself to belong to the
+ruling race. The Indian struggles to think that he does not belong to
+the subject race and in the very act of thinking admits his subjection.
+We must then attain equality at home before we can make any real
+impression abroad.
+
+This is not to say that we must not strive to do better abroad whilst we
+are ill at ease in our own home. We must preserve, we must help our
+countrymen who have settled outside India. Only if we recognise the true
+situation, we and our countrymen abroad will learn to be patient and
+know that our chief energy must be concentrated on a betterment of our
+position at home. If we can raise our status here to that of equal
+partners not in name but in reality so that every Indian might feel it,
+all else must follow as a matter of course.
+
+
+PARIAHS OF THE EMPIRE
+
+The memorable Conference at Gujrat in its resolution on the status of
+Indians abroad has given it as its opinion that even this question may
+become one more reason for non-co-operation. And so it may. Nowhere has
+there been such open defiance of every canon of justice and propriety as
+in the shameless decision of confiscation of Indian rights in the Kenia
+Colony announced by its Governor. This decision has been supported by
+Lord Milnor and Mr. Montagu. And his Indian colleagues are satisfied
+with the decision. Indians, who have made East Africa, who out-number
+the English, are deprived practically of the right of representation on
+the Council. They are to be segregated in parts not habitable by the
+English. They are to have neither the political nor the material
+comfort. They are to become 'Pariahs' in a country made by their own
+labour, wealth and intelligence. The Viceroy is pleased to say that he
+does not like the outlook and is considering the steps to be taken to
+vindicate the justice. He is not met with a new situation. The Indians
+of East Africa had warned him of the impending doom. And if His
+Excellency has not yet found the means of ensuring redress, he is not
+likely to do it in future. I would respectfully ask his Indian
+colleagues whether they can stand this robbery of their
+countrymen rights.
+
+In South Africa the situation is not less disquieting. My misgivings
+seem to be proving true, and repatriation is more likely to prove
+compulsory than voluntary. It is a response to the anti-Asiatic
+agitation, not a measure of relief for indigent Indians. It looks very
+like a trap laid for the unwary Indian. The Union Government appears to
+be taking an unlawful advantage of a section of a relieving law designed
+for a purpose totally different from the one now intended.
+
+As for Fiji, the crime against humanity is evidently to be hushed up. I
+do hope that unless an inquiry is to be made into the Fiji Martial Law
+doings, no Indian member will undertake to go to Fiji. The Government of
+India appear to have given an undertaking to send Indian labour to Fiji
+provided the commission that was to proceed there in order to
+investigate the condition on the spot returns with a favourable report.
+
+For British Guiana I observe from the papers received from that
+quarter, that the mission that came here is already declaring that
+Indian labour will be forthcoming from India. There seems to me to be no
+real prospect for Indian enterprise in that part of the world. We are
+not wanted in any part of the British Dominion except as Pariahs to do
+the scavenging for the European settlers.
+
+The situation is clear. We are Pariahs in our own home. We get only what
+Government intend to give, not what we demand and have a right to. We
+may get the crumbs, never the loaf. I have seen large and tempting
+crumbs from a lavish table. And I have seen the eyes of our Pariahs--the
+shame of Hinduism--brightening to see those heavy crumbs filling their
+baskets. But the superior Hindu, who is filling the basket from a safe
+distance, knows that they are unfit for his own consumption. And so we
+in our turn may receive even Governorships which the real rulers no
+longer require or which they cannot retain with safety for their
+material interest--the political and material hold on India. It is time
+we realised our true status.
+
+
+
+
+VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+A writer in the "Times of India," the Editor of that wonderful daily and
+Mrs. Besant have all in their own manner condemned non-co-operation
+conceived in connection with the Khilafat movement. All the three
+writings naturally discuss many side issues which I shall omit for the
+time being. I propose to answer two serious objections raised by the
+writers. The sobriety with which they are stated entitles them to a
+greater consideration than if they had been given in violent language.
+In non-co-operation, the writers think, it would be difficult if not
+impossible to avoid violence. Indeed violence, the "Times of India"
+editorial says, has already commenced in that ostracism has been
+resorted to in Calcutta and Delhi. Now I fear that ostracism to a
+certain extent is impossible to avoid. I remember in South Africa in the
+initial stages of the passive resistance campaign those who had fallen
+away were ostracised. Ostracism is violent or peaceful in according to
+the manner in which it is practised. A congregation may well refuse to
+recite prayers after a priest who prizes his title above his honour. But
+the ostracism will become violent if the individual life of a person is
+made unbearable by insults innuendoes or abuse. The real danger of
+violence lies in the people resorting to non-co-operation becoming
+impatient and revengeful. This may happen, if, for instance, payment of
+taxes is suddenly withdrawn or if pressure is put upon soldiers to lay
+down their arms. I however do not fear any evil consequences, for the
+simple reason that every responsible Mahomedan understands that
+non-co-operation to be successful must be totally unattended with
+violence. The other objection raised is that those who may give up their
+service may have to starve. That is just a possibility but a remote one,
+for the committee will certainly make due provision for those who may
+suddenly find themselves out of employment. I propose however to examine
+the whole of the difficult question much more fully in a future issue
+and hope to show that if Indian-Mahomedan feeling is to be respected,
+there is nothing left but non-co-operation if the decision arrived at
+is adverse.
+
+
+MR. MONTAGU ON THE KHILAFAT AGITATION
+
+Mr. Montagu does not like the Khilafat agitation that is daily gathering
+force. In answer to questions put in the House of Commons, he is
+reported to have said that whilst he acknowledged that I had rendered
+distinguished services to the country in the past, he could not look
+upon my present attitude with equanimity and that it was not to be
+expected that I could now be treated as leniently as I was during the
+Rowlatt Act agitation. He added that he had every confidence in the
+central and the local Governments, that they were carefully watching the
+movement and that they had full power to deal with the situation.
+
+This statement of Mr. Montagu has been regarded in some quarters as a
+threat. It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the
+Government of India to re-establish the reign of terror if they chose.
+It is certainly inconsistent with his desire to base the Government on
+the goodwill of the people. At the same time if the Hunter Committee's
+finding be true and if I was the cause of the disturbances last year, I
+was undoubtedly treated with exceptional leniency, I admit too that my
+activity this year is fraught with greater peril to the Empire as it is
+being conducted to-day than was last year's activity. Non-co-operation
+in itself is more harmless than civil disobedience, but in its effect it
+is far more dangerous for the Government than civil disobedience.
+Non-co-operation is intended so far to paralyse the Government, as to
+compel justice from it. If it is carried to the extreme point, it can
+bring the Government to a standstill.
+
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I
+did not come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though
+I had not fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and
+that I could not plead 'not guilty' if I was charged under it. For I
+must admit that I can pretend to no 'affection' for the present
+Government. And my speeches are intended to create 'disaffection' such
+that the people might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a
+Government that had forfeited all title to confidence, respect
+or support.
+
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government.
+The latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by
+the former. And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of
+terrorism and emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter.
+British ministers have broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded
+the feelings of the seventy million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men
+and women were insulted by the insolent officers of the Punjab
+Government. Their wrongs not only unrighted but the very officers who so
+cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain office under the
+Government.
+
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could
+command for co-operation with the Government and for response to the
+wishes expressed in the Royal Proclamation; I did so because I honestly
+believed that a new era was about to begin, and that the old spirit of
+fear, distrust and consequent terrorism was about to give place to the
+new spirit of respect, trust and good-will. I sincerely believed that
+the Mussalman sentiment would be placated and that the officers that had
+misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the Punjab would be at least
+dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to feel that a
+Government that had always been found quick (and rightly) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents' misdeeds. But to
+my amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present
+representatives of the Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous.
+They have no real regard for the wishes of the people of India and they
+count Indian honour as of little consequence.
+
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it
+is now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be
+a witness to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly
+right in threatening me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in
+endangering the existence of the Government. For that must be the result
+if my activity bears fruit. My only regret is that inasmuch as Mr.
+Montagu admits my past services, he might have perceived that there
+must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a well-wisher
+like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussulmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated.
+Indeed I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting
+disaffection towards an unjust Government I have rendered greater
+services to the Empire than I am already credited with.
+
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve of my
+activity is clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of
+my liberty, should the Government of India deem it to be their duty to
+take it away. A citizen has no right to resist such restriction imposed
+in accordance with the laws of the State to which he belongs. Much less
+have those who sympathize with him. In my case there can be no question
+of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the Government to the extent of
+trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For my supporters,
+therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It means the
+beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to
+stop the progress of non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest,
+the Government must imprison others or grant the people's wish in order
+to gain their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the
+people even under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore
+it is I or any one else who is arrested during the campaign, the first
+condition of success is that there must be no resentment shown against
+it. We cannot imperil the very existence of a Government and quarrel
+with its attempt to save itself by punishing those who place it
+in danger.
+
+
+AT THE CALL OF THE COUNTRY
+
+Dr. Sapru delivered before the Khilafat Conference at Allahabad an
+impassioned address sympathising with the Mussulmans in their trouble
+but dissuaded them from embarking on non-co-operation. He was frankly
+unable to suggest a substitute but was emphatically of opinion that
+whether there was a substitute or not non-co-operation was a remedy
+worse than the disease. He said further that Mussulmans will be taking
+upon their shoulders, a serious responsibility, if whilst they appealed
+to the ignorant masses to join them, they could not appeal to the Indian
+judges to resign and if they did they would not succeed.
+
+I acknowledge the force of Dr. Sapru's last argument. At the back of
+Dr. Sapru's mind is the fear that non-co-operation by the ignorant
+people would lead to distress and chaos and would do no good. In my
+opinion any non-co-operation is bound to do some good. Even the
+Viceragal door-keeper saying, 'Please Sir, I can serve the Government no
+longer because it has hurt my national honour' and resigning is a step
+mightier and more effective than the mightiest speech declaiming against
+the Government for its injustice.
+
+Nevertheless it would be wrong to appeal to the door-keeper until one
+has appealed to the highest in the land. And as I propose, if the
+necessity arose, to ask the door-keepers of the Government to dissociate
+themselves from an unjust Government I propose now to address, an appeal
+to the Judges and the Executive Councillors to join the protest that is
+rising from all over India against the double wrong done to India, on
+the Khilafat and the Punjab question. In both, national honour
+is involved.
+
+I take it that these gentlemen have entered upon their high offices not
+for the sake of emolument, nor I hope for the sake of fame, but for the
+sake of serving their country. It was not for money, for they were
+earning more than they do now. It must not be for fame, for they cannot
+buy fame at the cost of national honour. The only consideration, that
+can at the present moment keep them in office must be service of the
+country.
+
+When the people have faith in the government, when it represents the
+popular will, the judges and the executive officials possibly serve the
+country. But when that government does not represent the will of the
+people, when it supports dishonesty and terrorism, the judges and the
+executive officials by retaining office become instrument of dishonesty
+and terrorism. And the least therefore that these holders of high
+offices can do is to cease to become agents of a dishonest and
+terrorising government.
+
+For the judges, the objection will be raised that they are above
+politics, and so they are and should be. But the doctrine is true only
+in so far as the government is on the whole for the benefit of the
+people and at least represents the will of the majority. Not to take
+part in politics means not to take sides. But when a whole country has
+one mind, one will, when a whole country has been denied justice, it is
+no longer a question of party politics, it is a matter of life and
+death. It then becomes the duty of every citizen to refuse to serve a
+government which misbehaves and flouts national wish. The judges are at
+that moment bound to follow the nation if they are ultimately
+its servants.
+
+There remains another argument to be examined. It applies to both the
+judges and the members of the executive. It will be urged that my appeal
+could only be meant for the Indians and what good can it do by Indians
+renouncing offices which have been won for the nation by hard struggle.
+I wish that I could make an effective appeal to the English as well as
+the Indians. But I confess that I have written with the mental
+reservation that the appeal is addressed only to the Indians. I must
+therefore examine the argument just stated. Whilst it is true that these
+offices have been secured after a prolonged struggle, they are of use
+not because of the struggle, but because they are intended to serve the
+nation. The moment they cease to possess that quality, they become
+useless and as in the present case harmful, no matter how hard-earned
+and therefore valuable they may have been at the outset.
+
+I would submit too to our distinguished countrymen who occupy high
+offices that their giving up will bring the struggle to a speedy end and
+would probably obviate the danger attendant upon the masses being called
+upon to signify their disapproval by withdrawing co-operation. If the
+titleholders gave up their titles, if the holders of honorary offices
+gave up their appointment and if the high officials gave up their posts,
+and the would-be councillors boycotted the councils, the Government
+would quickly come to its senses and give effect to the people's will.
+For the alternative before the Government then would be nothing but
+despotic rule pure and simple. That would probably mean military
+dictatorship. The world's opinion has advanced so far that Britain dare
+not contemplate such dictatorship with equanimity. The taking of the
+steps suggested by me will constitute the peacefullest revolution the
+world has ever seen. Once the infallibility of non-co-operation is
+realised, there is an end to all bloodshed and violence in any shape
+or form.
+
+Undoubtedly a cause must be grave to warrant the drastic method of
+national non-co-operation. I do say that the affront such as has been
+put upon Islam cannot be repeated for a century. Islam must rise now or
+'be fallen' if not for ever, certainly for a century. And I cannot
+imagine a graver wrong than the massacre of Jallianwalla and the
+barbarity that followed it, the whitewash by the Hunter Committee, the
+dispatch of the Government of India, Mr. Montagu's letter upholding the
+Viceroy and the then Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab, the refusal to
+remove officials who made of the lives of the Punjabis 'a hell' during
+the Martial Law period. These act constitute a complete series of
+continuing wrongs against India which if India has any sense of honour,
+she must right at the sacrifice of all the material wealth she
+possesses. If she does not, she will have bartered her soul for a 'mess
+of pottage.'
+
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION EXPLAINED
+
+   A representative of Madras Mail called on Mr. M.K. Gandhi at his
+   temporary residence in the Pursewalkam High road for an interview on
+   the subject of non-co-operation. Mr. Gandhi, who has come to Madras
+   on a tour to some of the principal Muslim centres in Southern India,
+   was busy with a number of workers discussing his programme; but he
+   expressed his readiness to answer questions on the chief topic which
+   is agitating Muslims and Hindus.
+
+"After your experience of the Satyagraha agitation last year, Mr.
+Gandhi, are you still hopeful and convinced of the wisdom of advising
+non-co-operation?"--"Certainly."
+
+"How do you consider conditions have altered since the Satyagraha
+movement of last year?"--"I consider that people are better disciplined
+now than they were before. In this I include even the masses who I have
+had opportunities of seeing in large numbers in various parts of
+the country."
+
+"And you are satisfied that the masses understand the spirit of
+Satyagraha?"--"Yes."
+
+"And that is why you are pressing on with the programme of
+non-co-operation?"--"Yes. Moreover, the danger that attended the civil
+disobedience part of Satyagraha does not apply to non-co-operation,
+because in non-co-operation we are not taking up civil disobedience of
+laws as a mass movement. The result hitherto has been most encouraging.
+For instance, people in Sindh and Delhi in spite of the irritating
+restrictions upon their liberty by the authorities have carried out the
+Committee's instructions in regard to the Seditious Meetings
+Proclamation and to the prohibition of posting placards on the walls
+which we hold to be inoffensive but which the authorities consider to be
+offensive."
+
+"What is the pressure which you expect to bring to bear on the
+authorities if co-operation is withdrawn?"--"I believe, and everybody
+must grant, that no Government can exist for a single moment without the
+co-operation of the people, willing or forced, and if people suddenly
+withdraw their co-operation in every detail, the Government will come to
+a stand-still."
+
+"But is there not a big 'If' in it?"--"Certainly there is."
+
+"And how do you propose to succeed against the big 'If'?"--"In my plan
+of campaign expediency has no room. If the Khilafat movement has really
+permeated the masses and the classes, there must be adequate response
+from the people."
+
+"But are you not begging the question?"--"I am not begging the question,
+because so far as the data before me go, I believe that the Muslims
+keenly feel the Khilafat grievance. It remains to be seen whether their
+feeling is intense enough to evoke in them the measure of sacrifice
+adequate for successful non-co-operation."
+
+"That is, your survey of the conditions, you think, justifies your
+advising non-co-operation in the full conviction that you have behind
+you the support of the vast masses of the Mussalman population?"--"Yes."
+
+"This non-co-operation, you are satisfied, will extend to complete
+severance of co-operation with the Government?"--No; nor is it at the
+present moment my desire that it should. I am simply practising
+non-co-operation to the extent that is necessary to make the Government
+realise the depth of popular feeling in the matter and the
+dissatisfaction with the Government that all that could be done has not
+been done either by the Government of India or by the Imperial
+Government, whether on the Khilafat question or on the "Punjab
+question."
+
+"Do you Mr. Gandhi, realise that even amongst Mahomedans there are
+sections of people who are not enthusiastic over non-co-operation
+however much they may feel the wrong that has been done to their
+community?"--"Yes. But their number is smaller than those who are
+prepared to adopt non-co-operation."
+
+"And yet does not the fact that there has not been an adequate response
+to your appeal for resignation of titles and offices and for boycott of
+elections of the Councils indicate that you may be placing more faith
+in their strength of conviction than is warranted?"--"I think not; for
+the reason that the stage has only just come into operation and our
+people are always most cautious and slow to move. Moreover, the first
+stage largely affects the uppermost strata of society, who represent a
+microscopic minority though they are undoubtedly an influential body
+of people."
+
+"This upper class, you think, has sufficiently responded to your
+appeal?"--"I am unable to say either one way or the other at present. I
+shall be able to give a definite answer at the end of this month."...
+
+"Do you think that without one's loyalty to the King and the Royal
+Family being questioned, one can advocate non-co-operation in connection
+with the Royal visit?" "Most decidedly; for the simple reason that if
+there is any disloyalty about the proposed boycott of the Prince's
+visit, it is disloyalty to the Government of the day and not to the
+person of His Royal highness."
+
+"What do you think is to be gained by promoting this boycott in
+connection with the Royal visit?"--"Because I want to show that the
+people of India are not in sympathy with the Government of the day and
+that they strongly disapprove of the policy of the Government in regard
+to the Punjab and Khilafat, and even in respect of other important
+administrative measures. I consider that the visit of the Prince of
+Wales is a singularly good opportunity to the people to show their
+disapproval of the present Government. After all, the visit is
+calculated to have tremendous political results. It is not to be a
+non-political event, and seeing that the Government of India and the
+Imperial Government want to make the visit a political event of first
+class importance, namely, for the purpose of strengthening their hold
+upon India, I for one, consider that it is the bounden duty of the
+people to boycott the visit which is being engineered by the two
+Governments in their own interest which at the present moment is totally
+antagonistic to the people."
+
+"Do you mean that you want this boycott promoted because you feel that
+the strengthening of the hold upon India is not desirable in the best
+interests of the country?"--"Yes. The strengthening of the hold of a
+Government so wicked as the present one is not desirable for the best
+interests of the people. Not that I want the bond between England and
+India to become loosened for the sake of loosening it but I want that
+bond to become strengthened only in so far as it adds to the welfare
+of India."
+
+"Do you think that non-co-operation and the non-boycott of the
+Legislative Councils consistent?"--"No; because a person who takes up
+the programme of non-co-operation cannot consistently stand for
+Councils."
+
+"Is non-co-operation, in your opinion, an end in itself or a means to an
+end, and if so, what is the end?" "It is a means to an end, the end
+being to make the present Government just, whereas it has become mostly
+unjust. Co-operation with a just Government is a duty; non-co-operation
+with an unjust Government is equally a duty."
+
+"Will you look with favour upon the proposal to enter the Councils and
+to carry on either obstructive tactics or to decline to take the oath of
+allegiance consistent with your non-co-operation?"--"No; as an accurate
+student of non-co-operation, I consider that such a proposal is
+inconsistent with the true spirit of non-co-operation. I have often said
+that a Government really thrives on obstruction and so far as the
+proposal not to take the oath of allegiance is concerned, I can really
+see no meaning in it; it amounts to a useless waste of valuable time
+and money."
+
+"In other words, obstruction is no stage in non-co-operation?"
+--"No,"....
+
+"Are you satisfied that all efforts at constitutional agitation have
+been exhausted and that non-co-operation is the only course left us?" "I
+do not consider non-co-operation to be unconstitutional remedies now
+left open to us, non-co-operation is the only one left for us." "Do you
+consider it constitutional to adopt it with a view merely to paralyse
+Government?"--"Certainly, it is not unconstitutional, but a prudent man
+will not take all the steps that are constitutional if they are
+otherwise undesirable, nor do I advise that course. I am resorting to
+non-co-operation in progressive stages because I want to evolve true
+order out of untrue order. I am not going to take a single step in
+non-co-operation unless I am satisfied that the country is ready for
+that step, namely, non-co-operation will not be followed by anarchy or
+disorder."
+
+"How will you satisfy yourself anarchy will not follow?"
+
+"For instance, if I advise the police to lay down their arms, I shall
+have satisfied myself that we are able by voluntary assistance to
+protect ourselves against thieves and robbers. That was precisely what
+was done in Lahore and Amritsar last year by the citizens by means of
+volunteers when the Military and the police had withdrawn. Even where
+Government had not taken such measures in a place, for want of adequate
+force, I know people have successfully protected themselves."
+
+"You have advised lawyers to non-co-operate by suspending their
+practice. What is your experience? Has the lawyers' response to your
+appeal encouraged you to hope that you will be able to carry through
+all stages of non-co-operation with the help of such people?"
+
+"I cannot say that a large number has yet responded to my appeal. It is
+too early to say how many will respond. But I may say that I do not rely
+merely upon the lawyer class or highly educated men to enable the
+Committee to carry out all the stages of non-co-operation. My hope lies
+more with the masses so far as the later stages of non-co-operation are
+concerned."
+
+_August 1920_.
+
+
+RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY FOR NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+It is not without the greatest reluctance that I engage in a controversy
+with so learned a leader like Sir Narayan Chandavarkar. But in view of
+the fact that I am the author of the movement of non-co-operation, it
+becomes my painful duty to state my views even though they are opposed
+to those of the leaders whom I look upon with respect. I have just read
+during my travels in Malabar Sir Narayan's rejoinder to my answer to the
+Bombay manifesto against non-co-operation. I regret to have to say that
+the rejoinder leaves me unconvinced. He and I seem to read the teachings
+of the Bible, the Gita and the Koran from different standpoints or we
+put different interpretations on them. We seem to understand the words
+Ahimsa, politics and religion differently. I shall try my best to make
+clear my meaning of the common terms and my reading of the different
+religious.
+
+At the outset let me assure Sir Narayan that I have not changed my views
+on Ahimsa. I still believe that man not having been given the power of
+creation does not possess the right of destroying the meanest creature
+that lives. The prerogative of destruction belongs solely to the creator
+of all that lives. I accept the interpretation of Ahimsa, namely, that
+it is not merely a negative State of harmlessness, but it is a positive
+state of love, of doing good even to the evil-doer. But it does not mean
+helping the evil-doer to continue the wrong or tolerating it by passive
+acquiescence. On the contrary love, the active state of Ahimsa, requires
+you to resist the wrong-doer by dissociating yourself from him even
+though it may offend him or injure him physically. Thus if my son lives
+a life of shame, I may not help him to do so by continuing to support
+him; on the contrary, my love for him requires me to withdraw all
+support from him although it may mean even his death. And the same love
+imposes on me the obligation of welcoming him to my bosom when he
+repents. But I may not by physical force compel my son to become good.
+That in my opinion is the moral of the story of the Prodigal Son.
+
+Non-co-operation is not a passive state, it is an intensely active
+state--more active than physical resistance or violence. Passive
+resistance is a misnomer. Non-co-operation in the sense used by me must
+be non-violent and therefore neither punitive nor vindictive nor based
+on malice ill-will or hatred. It follows therefore that it would be sin
+for me to serve General Dyer and co-operate with him to shoot innocent
+men. But it will be an exercise of forgiveness or love for me to nurse
+him back to life, if he was suffering from a physical malady. I cannot
+use in this context the word co-operation as Sir Narayan would perhaps
+use it. I would co-operate a thousand times with this Government to wean
+it from its career of crime but I will not for a single moment
+co-operate with it to continue that career. And I would be guilty of
+wrong doing if I retained a title from it or "a service under it or
+supported its law-courts or schools." Better for me a beggar's bowl
+than the richest possession from hands stained with the blood of the
+innocents of Jallianwala. Better by far a warrant of imprisonment than
+honeyed words from those who have wantonly wounded the religious
+sentiment of my seventy million brothers.
+
+My reading of the Gita is diametrically opposed to Sir Narayan's. I do
+not believe that the Gita teaches violence for doing good. It is
+pre-eminently a description of the duel that goes on in our own hearts.
+The divine author has used a historical incident for inculcating the
+lesson of doing one's duty even at the peril of one's life. It
+inculcates performance of duty irrespective of the consequences, for, we
+mortals, limited by our physical frames, are incapable of controlling
+actions save our own. The Gita distinguishes between the powers of light
+and darkness and demonstrates their incompatibility.
+
+Jesus, in my humble opinion, was a prince among politicians. He did
+render unto Caesar that which was Caesar's. He gave the devil his due.
+He ever shunned him and is reported never once to have yielded to his
+incantations. The politics of his time consisted in securing the welfare
+of the people by teaching them not to be seduced by the trinkets of the
+priests and the pharisees. The latter then controlled and moulded the
+life of the people. To-day the system of government is so devised as to
+affect every department of our life. It threatens our very existence. If
+therefore we want to conserve the welfare of the nation, we must
+religiously interest ourselves in the doing of the governors and exert a
+moral influence on them by insisting on their obeying the laws of
+morality. General Dyer did produce a 'moral effect' by an act of
+butchery. Those who are engaged in forwarding the movement of
+non-co-operation, hope to produce a moral effect by a process of
+self-denial, self-sacrifice and self-purification. It surprises me that
+Sir Narayan should speak of General Dyer's massacre in the same breath
+as acts of non-co-operation. I have done my best to understand his
+meaning, but I am sorry to confess that I have failed.
+
+
+THE INWARDNESS OF NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I commend to the attention of the readers the thoughtful letter received
+from Miss Anne Marie Peterson. Miss Peterson is a lady who has been in
+India for some years and has closely followed Indian affairs. She is
+about the sever her connection with her mission for the purpose of
+giving herself to education that is truly national.
+
+I have not given the letter in full. I have omitted all personal
+references. But her argument has been left entirely untouched. The
+letter was not meant to be printed. It was written just after my Vellore
+speech. But it being intrinsically important, I asked the writer for her
+permission, which she gladly gave, for printing it.
+
+I publish it all the more gladly in that it enables me to show that the
+movement of non-co-operation is neither anti-Christian nor anti-English
+nor anti-European. It is a struggle between religion and irreligion,
+powers of light and powers of darkness.
+
+It is my firm opinion that Europe to-day represents not the spirit of
+God or Christianity but the spirit of Satan. And Satan's successes are
+the greatest when he appears with the name of God on his lips. Europe is
+to-day only nominally Christian. In reality it is worshipping Mammon.
+'It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a
+rich man to enter the kingdom.' Thus really spoke Jesus Christ. His
+so-called followers measure their moral progress by their material
+possessions. The very national anthem of England is anti-Christian.
+Jesus who asked his followers to love their enemies even as themselves,
+could not have sung of his enemies, 'confound his enemies frustrate
+their knavish tricks.' The last book that Dr. Wallace wrote set forth
+his deliberate conviction that the much vaunted advance of science had
+added not an inch to the moral stature of Europe. The last war however
+has shown, as nothing else has, the Satanic nature of the civilization
+that dominates Europe to day. Every canon of public morality has been
+broken by the victors in the name of virtue. No lie has been considered
+too foul to be uttered. The motive behind every crime is not religious
+or spiritual but grossly material. But the Mussalmans and the Hindus who
+are struggling against the Government have religion and honour as their
+motive. Even the cruel assassination which has just shocked the country
+is reported to have a religious motive behind it. It is certainly
+necessary to purge religion of its excrescences, but it is equally
+necessary to expose the hollowness of moral pretensions on the part of
+those who prefer material wealth to moral gain. It is easier to wean an
+ignorant fanatic from his error than a confirmed scoundrel from his
+scoundrelism.
+
+This however is no indictment against individuals or even nations.
+Thousands of individual Europeans are rising above their environment. I
+write of the tendency in Europe as reflected in her present leaders.
+England through her leaders is insolently crushing Indian religious and
+national sentiment under her heels. England under the false plea of
+self-determination is trying to exploit the oil fields of Mesopotamia
+which she is almost to leave because she has probably no choice. France
+through her leaders is lending her name to training Cannibals as
+soldiers and is shamelessly betraying her trust as a mandatory power by
+trying to kill the spirit of the Syrians. President Wilson has thrown on
+the scrap heap his precious fourteen points.
+
+It is this combination of evil forces which India is really fighting
+through non-violent non-cooperation. And those like Miss Peterson
+whether Christian or European, who feel that this error must be
+dethroned can exercise the privilege of doing so by joining the
+non-co-operation movement. With the honour of Islam is bound up the
+safety of religion itself and with the honour of India is bound up the
+honour of every nation known to be weak.
+
+
+A MISSIONARY ON NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+   The following letter has been received by Mr. Gandhi from Miss Anne
+   Marie Peterson of the Danish Mission in Madras:--
+
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+
+I cannot thank you enough for your kindness and the way in which you
+received me and I feel that meeting more or less decided my future. I
+have thrown myself at the feet of India. At the same time I know that in
+Christ alone is my abode and I have no longing and no desire but to live
+Him, my crucified Saviour, and reveal Him for those with whom I come in
+contact. I just cling to his feet and pray with tears that I may not
+disgrace him as we Christians have been doing by our behaviour in India.
+We go on crucifying Christ while we long to proclaim the Power of His
+resurrection by which He has conquered untruth and unrighteousness. If
+we who bear His name were true to Him, we would never bow ourselves
+before the Powers of this world, but we would always be on the side of
+the poor, the suffering and the oppressed. But we are not and therefore
+I feel myself under obligation and only to Christ but to India for His
+sake at this time of momentous importance for her future.
+
+Truly it matters little what I, a lonely and insignificant person, may
+say or do. What is my protest against the common current, the race to
+which I belong is taking and (what grieves me more), which the
+missionary societies seem to follow? Even if a respectable number
+protested it would not be of any use. Yet were I alone against the whole
+world, I must follow my conscience and my God.
+
+I therefore cannot but smile when I see people saying, you should have
+awaited the decision of the National Congress before starting the
+non-co-operation movement. You have a message for the country, and the
+Congress is the voice of the nation--its servant and not its master. A
+majority has no right simply because it is a majority.
+
+But we must try to win the majority. And it is easy to see that now that
+Congress is going to be with you. Would it have done so if you had kept
+quiet and not lent your voice to the feelings of the people? Would the
+Congress have known its mind? I think not.
+
+I myself was in much doubt before I heard you. But you convinced me. Not
+that I can feel much on the question of the Khilafat. I cannot. I can
+see what service you are doing to India, if you can prevent the
+Mahomedans from using the sword in order to take revenge and get their
+rights. I can see that if you unite the Hindus and the Mahomedans, it
+will be a master stroke. How I wish the Christian would also come
+forward and unite with you for the sake of their country and the honour
+not only of their Motherland but of Christ. I may not feel much for
+Turkey, but I feel for India, and I can see she (India) has no other way
+to protest against being trampled down and crushed than
+non-co-operation.
+
+I also want you to know that many in Denmark and all over the world,
+yes, I am sure every true Christian, will feel with and be in sympathy
+with India in the struggle which is now going on. God forbid that in the
+struggle between might and right, truth and untruth, the spirit and the
+flesh, there should be a division of races. There is not. The same
+struggle is going on all over the world. What does it matter then that
+we are a few? God is on our side.
+
+Brute force often seems to get the upper hand but righteousness always
+has and always shall conquer, be it even through much suffering, and
+what may even appear to be a defeat. Christ conquered, when the world
+crucified Him. Blessed are the meek; they shall inherit the earth.
+
+When I read your speech given at Madras it struck me that it should be
+printed as a pamphlet in English, Tamil, Hindustani and all the most
+used languages and then spread to every nook and corner of India.
+
+The non-co-operation movement once started must be worked so as to
+become successful. If it is not, I dread to think of the consequences.
+But you cannot expect it to win in a day or two. It must take time and
+you will not despair if you do not reach your goal in a hurry. For those
+who have faith there is no haste.
+
+Now for the withdrawal of the children and students from Government
+schools, I think, it a most important step. Taking the Government help
+(even if it be your money they pay you back), we must submit to its
+scheme, its rules and regulation. India and we who love her have come to
+the conclusion that the education the foreign Government has given you
+is not healthy for India and can certainly never make for her real
+growth. This movement would lead to a spontaneous rise of national
+schools. Let them be a few but let them spring up through
+self-sacrifice. Only by indigenous education can India be truly
+uplifted. Why this appeals so much to me is perhaps because I belong to
+the part of the Danish people who started their own independent,
+indigenous national schools. The Danish Free Schools and
+Folk-High-Schools, of which you may have heard, were started against
+the opposition and persecution of the State. The organisers won and
+thus have regenerated the nation. With my truly heartfelt thanks and
+prayers for you.
+
+I am,
+Your sincerely,
+Anne Marie.
+
+
+HOW TO WORK NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+Perhaps the best way of answering the fears and criticism as to
+non-co-operation is to elaborate more fully the scheme of
+non-co-operation. The critics seem to imagine that the organisers
+propose to give effect to the whole scheme at once. The fact however is
+that the organisers have fixed definite, progressive four stages. The
+first is the giving up of titles and resignation of honorary posts. If
+there is no response or if the response received is not effective,
+recourse will be had to the second stage. The second stage involves much
+previous arrangement. Certainly not a single servant will be called out
+unless he is either capable of supporting himself and his dependents or
+the Khilafat Committee is able to bear the burden. All the classes of
+servants will not be called out at once and never will any pressure be
+put upon a single servant to withdraw himself from the Government
+service. Nor will a single private employee be touched for the simple
+reason that the movement is not anti-English. It is not even
+anti-Government. Co-operation is to be withdrawn because the people must
+not be party to a wrong--a broken pledge--a violation of deep religious
+sentiment. Naturally, the movement will receive a check, if there is any
+undue influence brought to bear upon any Government servant or if any
+violence is used or countenanced by any member of the Khilafat
+Committee. The second stage must be entirely successful, if the response
+is at all on an adequate scale. For no Government--much less the Indian
+Government--can subsist if the people cease to serve it. The withdrawal
+therefore of the police and the military--the third stage--is a distant
+goal. The organisers however wanted to be fair, open and above
+suspicion. They did not want to keep back from the Government or the
+public a single step they had in contemplation even as a remote
+contingency. The fourth, _i.e.,_ suspension of taxes is still more
+remote. The organisers recognise that suspension of general taxation is
+fraught with the greatest danger. It is likely to bring a sensitive
+class in conflict with the police. They are therefore not likely to
+embark upon it, unless they can do so with the assurance that there will
+be no violence offered by the people.
+
+I admit as I have already done that non-co-operation is not unattended
+with risk, but the risk of supineness in the face of a grave issue is
+infinitely greater than the danger of violence ensuing form organizing
+non-co-operation. To do nothing is to invite violence for a certainty.
+
+It is easy enough to pass resolutions or write articles condemning
+non-co-operation. But it is no easy task to restrain the fury of a
+people incensed by a deep sense of wrong. I urge those who talk or work
+against non-co-operation to descend from their chairs and go down to the
+people, learn their feelings and write, if they have the heart against
+non-co-operation. They will find, as I have found that the only way to
+avoid violence is to enable them to give such expression to their
+feelings as to compel redress. I have found nothing save
+non-co-operation. It is logical and harmless. It is the inherent right
+of a subject to refuse to assist a Government that will not listen
+to him.
+
+Non-co-operation as a voluntary movement can only succeed, if the
+feeling is genuine and strong enough to make people suffer to the
+utmost. If the religious sentiment of the Mahomedans is deeply hurt and
+if the Hindus entertain neighbourly regard towards their Muslim
+brethren, they will both count no cost too great for achieving the end.
+Non-co-operation will not only be an effective remedy but will also be
+an effective test of the sincerity of the Muslim claim and the Hindu
+profession of friendship.
+
+There is however one formidable argument urged by friends against my
+joining the Khilafat movement. They say that it ill-becomes me, a friend
+of the English and an admirer of the British constitution, to join hands
+with those who are to-day filled with nothing but ill-will against the
+English. I am sorry to have to confess that the ordinary Mahomedan
+entertains to-day no affection for Englishmen. He considers, not without
+some cause, that they have not played the game. But if I am friendly
+towards Englishmen, I am no less so towards my countrymen, the
+Mahomedans. And as such they have a greater claim upon my attention than
+Englishmen. My personal religion however enables me to serve my
+countrymen without hurting Englishmen or for that matter anybody else.
+What I am not prepared to do to my blood-brother I would not do to an
+Englishman, I would not injure him to gain a kingdom. But I would
+withdraw co-operation from him if it becomes necessary as I had
+withdrawn from my own brother (now deceased) when it became necessary. I
+serve the Empire by refusing to partake in its wrong. William Stead
+offered public prayers for British reverses at the time of the Boer war
+because he considered that the nation to which he belonged was engaged
+in an unrighteous war. The present Prime Minister risked his life in
+opposing that war and did everything he could to obstruct his own
+Government in its prosecution. And to-day if I have thrown in my lot
+with the Mahomedans, a large number of whom, bear no friendly feelings
+towards the British, I have done so frankly as a friend of the British
+and with the object of gaining justice and of thereby showing the
+capacity of the British constitution to respond to every honest
+determination when it is coupled with suffering, I hope by my 'alliance'
+with the Mahomedans to achieve a threefold end--to obtain justice in the
+face of odds with the method of Satyagrah and to show its efficacy over
+all other methods, to secure Mahomedan friendship for the Hindus and
+thereby internal peace also, and last but not least to transform
+ill-will into affection for the British and their constitution which in
+spite of the imperfections weathered many a storm. I may fail in
+achieving any of the ends. I can but attempt. God alone can grant
+success. It will not be denied that the ends are all worthy. I invite
+Hindus and Englishman to join me in a full-hearted manner in shouldering
+the burden the Mahomedans of India are carrying. Theirs is admittedly a
+just fight. The Viceroy, the Secretary of State, the Maharaja of
+Bikuner and Lord Sinha have testified to it. Time has arrived to make
+good the testimony. People with a just cause are never satisfied with a
+mere protest. They have been known to die for it. Are a high-spirited
+people like the Mahomedans expected to do less?
+
+
+SPEECH AT MADRAS
+
+   Addressing a huge concourse of people of the city of Madras Hindus
+   and Mahomedans numbering over 50,000, assembled on the South Beach
+   opposite to the Presidency College, Madras, on the 12th August 1920,
+   Mahatma Gandhi spoke as follows:--
+
+Mr. Chairman and Friends,--Like last year, I have to ask your
+forgiveness that I should have to speak being seated. Whilst my voice
+has become stronger than it was last year, my body is still weak; and if
+I were to attempt to speak to you standing, I could not hold on for very
+many minutes before the whole frame would shake. I hope, therefore, that
+you will grant me permission to speak seated. I have sat here to address
+you on a most important question, probably a question whose importance
+we have not measured up to now.
+
+LOKAMANYA TILAK
+
+But before I approach that question on this dear old beach of Madras,
+you will expect me--you will want me--to offer my tribute to the great
+departed, Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj (loud and prolonged cheers). I would
+ask this great assembly to listen to me in silence. I have come to make
+an appeal to your hearts and to your reason and I could not do so unless
+you were prepared to listen to whatever I have to say in absolute
+silence. I wish to offer my tribute to the departed patriot and I think
+that I cannot do better than say that his death, as his life, has poured
+new vigour into the country. If you were present as I was present at
+that great funeral procession, you would realise with me the meaning of
+my words. Mr. Tilak lived for his country. The inspiration of his life
+was freedom for his country which he called Swaraj the inspiration of
+his death-bed was also freedom for his country. And it was that which
+gave him such marvellous hold upon his countrymen; it was that which
+commanded the adoration not of a few chosen Indians belonging to the
+upper strata of society but of millions of his countrymen. His life was
+one long sustained piece of self-sacrifice. He began that life of
+discipline and self-sacrifice in 1879 and he continued that life up to
+the end of his day, and that was the secret of his hold upon his
+country. He not only knew what he wanted for his country but also how to
+live for his country and how to die for his country. I hope then that
+whatever I say this evening to this vast mass of people, will bear fruit
+in that same sacrifice for which the life of Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj
+stands. His life, if it teaches us anything whatsoever, teaches one
+supreme lesson: that if we want to do anything whatsoever for our
+country we can do so not by speeches, however grand, eloquent and
+convincing they may be, but only by sacrifice at the back of every act
+of our life. I have come to ask everyone of you whether you are ready
+and willing to give sufficiently for your country's sake for country's
+honour and for religion. I have boundless faith in you, the citizens of
+Madras, and the people of this great presidency, a faith which I began
+to cultivate in the year 1903 when I first made acquaintance with the
+Tamil labourers in South Africa; and I hope that in these hours of our
+trial, this province will not be second to any other in India, and that
+it will lead in this spirit of self-sacrifice and will translate every
+word into action.
+
+NEED FOR NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+What is this non-co-operation, about which you have heard so much, and
+why do we want to offer this non-co-operation? I wish to go for the time
+being into the why. Here are two things before this country: the first
+and the foremost is the Khilafat question. On this the heart of the
+Mussalmans of India has become lascerated. British pledges given after
+the greatest deliberation by the Prime Minister of England in the name
+of the English nation, have been dragged into the mire. The promises
+given to Moslem India on the strength of which, the consideration that
+was expected by the British nation was exacted, have been broken, and
+the great religion of Islam has been placed in danger. The Mussalmans
+hold--and I venture to think they rightly hold--that so long as British
+promises remain unfulfilled, so long is it impossible for them to tender
+whole-hearted fealty and loyalty to the British connection; and if it is
+to be a choice for a devout Mussalman between loyalty to the British
+connection and loyalty to his Code and Prophet, he will not require a
+second to make his choice,--and he has declared his choice. The
+Mussalmans say frankly openly and honourably to the whole world that if
+the British Ministers and the British nation do not fulfil the pledges
+given to them and do not wish to regard with respect the sentiments of
+70 millions of the inhabitants of India who profess the faith of Islam,
+it will be impossible for them to retain Islamic loyalty. It is a
+question, then for the rest of the Indian population to consider whether
+they want to perform a neighbourly duty by their Mussalman countrymen,
+and if they do, they have an opportunity of a lifetime which will not
+occur for another hundred years, to show their good-will, fellowship and
+friendship and to prove what they have been saying for all these long
+years that the Mussalman is the brother of the Hindu. If the Hindu
+regards that before the connection with the British nation comes his
+natural connection with his Moslem brother, then I say to you that if
+you find that the Moslem claim is just, that it is based upon real
+sentiment, and that at its back ground is this great religious feeling,
+you cannot do otherwise than help the Mussalman through and through, so
+long as their cause remains just, and the means for attaining the end
+remains equally just, honourable and free from harm to India. These are
+the plain conditions which the Indian Mussalmans have accepted; and it
+was when they saw that they could accept the proferred aid of the
+Hindus, that they could always justify the cause and the means before
+the whole world, that they decided to accept the proferred hand of
+fellowship. It is then for the Hindus and Mahomedans to offer a united
+front to the whole of the Christian powers of Europe and tell them that
+weak as India is, India has still got the capacity of preserving her
+self-respect, she still knows how to die for her religion and for her
+self-respect.
+
+That is the Khilafat in a nut-shell; but you have also got the Punjab.
+The Punjab has wounded the heart of India as no other question has for
+the past century. I do not exclude from my calculation the Mutiny of
+1857. Whatever hardships India had to suffer during the Mutiny, the
+insult that was attempted to be offered to her during the passage of the
+Rowlatt legislation and that which was offered after its passage were
+unparalleled in Indian history. It is because you want justice from the
+British nation in connection with the Punjab atrocities: you have to
+devise, ways and means as to how you can get this justice. The House of
+Commons, the House of Lords, Mr. Montagu, the Viceroy of India, everyone
+of them know what the feeling of India is on this Khilafat question and
+on that of the Punjab; the debates in both the Houses of Parliament, the
+action of Mr. Montagu and that of the Viceroy have demonstrated to you
+completely that they are not willing to give the justice which is
+India's due and which she demands. I suggest that our leaders have got
+to find a way out of this great difficulty and unless we have made
+ourselves even with the British rulers in India and unless we have
+gained a measure of self-respect at the hands of the British rulers in
+India, no connection, and no friendly intercourse is possible between
+them and ourselves. I, therefore, venture to suggest this beautiful and
+unanswerable method of non-co-operation.
+
+IS IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
+
+I have been told that non-co-operation is unconstitutional. I venture to
+deny that it is unconstitutional. On the contrary, I hold that
+non-co-operation is a just and religious doctrine; it is the inherent
+right of every human being and it is perfectly constitutional. A great
+lover of the British Empire has said that under the British constitution
+even a successful rebellion is perfectly constitutional and he quotes
+historical instances, which I cannot deny, in support of his claim. I
+do not claim any constitutionality for a rebellion successful or
+otherwise, so long as that rebellion means in the ordinary sense of the
+term, what it does mean namely wresting justice by violent means. On the
+contrary, I have said it repeatedly to my countrymen that violence
+whatever end it may serve in Europe, will never serve us in India. My
+brother and friend Shaukat Ali believes in methods of violence; and if
+it was in his power to draw the sword against the British Empire, I know
+that he has got the courage of a man and he has got also the wisdom to
+see that he should offer that battle to the British Empire. But because
+he recognises as a true soldier that means of violence are not open to
+India, he sides with me accepting my humble assistance and pledges his
+word that so long as I am with him and so long as he believes in the
+doctrine, so long will he not harbour even the idea of violence against
+any single Englishman or any single man on earth. I am here to tell you
+that he has been as true as his word and has kept it religiously. I am
+here to bear witness that he has been following out this plan of
+non-violent Non-co-operation to the very letter and I am asking India to
+follow this non-violent non-co-operation. I tell you that there is not a
+better soldier living in our ranks in British India than Shaukat Ali.
+When the time for the drawing of the sword comes, if it ever comes, you
+will find him drawing that sword and you will find me retiring to the
+jungles of Hindustan. As soon as India accepts the doctrine of the
+sword, my life as an Indian is finished. It is because I believe in a
+mission special to India and it is because I believe that the ancients
+of India after centuries of experience have found out that the true
+thing for any human being on earth is not justice based on violence but
+justice based on sacrifice of self, justice based on Yagna and
+Kurbani,--I cling to that doctrine and I shall cling to it for ever,--it
+is for that reason I tell you that whilst my friend believes also in the
+doctrine of violence and has adopted the doctrine of non-violence as a
+weapon of the weak, I believe in the doctrine of non-violence as a
+weapon of the strongest. I believe that a man is the strongest soldier
+for daring to die unarmed with his breast bare before the enemy. So much
+for the non-violent part of non-co-operation. I therefore, venture to
+suggest to my learned countrymen that so long as the doctrine of
+non-co-operation remains non-violent, so long there is nothing
+unconstitutional in that doctrine.
+
+I ask further, is it unconstitutional for me to say to the British
+Government 'I refuse to serve you?' Is it unconstitutional for our
+worthy Chairman to return with every respect all the titles that he has
+ever held from the Government? Is it unconstitutional for any parent to
+withdraw his children from a Government or aided school? Is it
+unconstitutional for a lawyer to say 'I shall no longer support the arm
+of the law so long as that arm of law is used not to raise me but to
+debase me'? Is it unconstitutional for a civil servant or for a judge to
+say, 'I refuse to serve a Government which does not wish to respect the
+wishes of the whole people?' I ask, is it unconstitutional for a
+policeman or for a soldier to tender his resignation when he knows that
+he is called to serve a Government which traduces his own countrymen? Is
+it unconstitutional for me to go to the 'krishan,' to the agriculturist,
+and say to him 'it is not wise for you to pay any taxes if these taxes
+are used by the Government not to raise you but to weaken you?' I hold
+and I venture to submit, that there is nothing unconstitutional in it.
+What is more, I have done every one of these things in my life and
+nobody has questioned the constitutional character of it. I was in Kaira
+working in the midst of 7 lakhs of agriculturists. They had all
+suspended the payment of taxes and the whole of India was at one with
+me. Nobody considered that it was unconstitutional. I submit that in the
+whole plan of non-co-operation, there is nothing unconstitutional. But
+I do venture to suggest that it will be highly unconstitutional in the
+midst of this unconstitutional Government,--in the midst of a nation
+which has built up its magnificent constitution,--for the people of
+India to become weak and to crawl on their belly--it will be highly
+unconstitutional for the people of India to pocket every insult that is
+offered to them; it is highly unconstitutional for the 70 millions of
+Mohamedans of India to submit to a violent wrong done to their religion;
+it is highly unconstitutional for the whole of India to sit still and
+co-operate with an unjust Government which has trodden under its feet
+the honour of the Punjab. I say to my countrymen so long as you have a
+sense of honour and so long as you wish to remain the descendants and
+defenders of the noble traditions that have been handed to you for
+generations after generations, it is unconstitutional for you not to
+non-co-operate and unconstitutional for you to co-operate with a
+Government which has become so unjust as our Government has become. I am
+not anti-English; I am not anti-British; I am not anti any Government;
+but I am anti-untruth--anti-humbug and anti-injustice. So long as the
+Government spells injustice, it may regard me as its enemy, implacable
+enemy. I had hoped at the Congress at Amritsar--I am speaking God's
+truth before you--when I pleaded on bended knees before some of you for
+co-operation with the Government. I had full hope that the British
+ministers who are wise, as a rule, would placate the Mussalman sentiment
+that they would do full justice in the matter of the Punjab atrocities;
+and therefore, I said:--let us return good-will to the hand of
+fellowship that has been extended to us, which I then believed was
+extended to us through the Royal Proclamation. It was on that account
+that I pleaded for co-operation. But to-day that faith having gone and
+obliterated by the acts of the British ministers, I am here to plead not
+for futile obstruction in the Legislative council but for real
+substantial non-co-operation which would paralyse the mightiest
+Government on earth. That is what I stand for to-day. Until we have
+wrung justice, and until we have wrung our self-respect from unwilling
+hands and from unwilling pens there can be no co-operation. Our Shastras
+say and I say so with the greatest deference to all the greatest
+religious preceptors of India but without fear of contradiction, that
+our Shastras teach us that there shall be no co-operation between
+injustice and justice, between an unjust man and a justice-loving man,
+between truth and untruth. Co-operation is a duty only so long as
+Government protects your honour, and non-co-operation is an equal duty
+when the Government instead of protecting robs you of your honour. That
+is the doctrine of non-co-operation.
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION AND THE SPECIAL CONGRESS
+
+I have been told that I should have waited for the declaration of the
+special Congress which is the mouth piece of the whole nation. I know
+that it is the mouthpiece of the whole nation. If it was for me,
+individual Gandhi, to wait, I would have waited for eternity. But I had
+in my hands a sacred trust. I was advising my Mussalman countrymen and
+for the time being I hold their honour in my hands. I dare not ask them
+to wait for any verdict but the verdict of their own Conscience. Do you
+suppose that Mussalmans can eat their own words, can withdraw from the
+honourable position they have taken up? If perchance--and God forbid
+that it should happen--the Special Congress decides against them, I
+would still advise my countrymen the Mussalmans to stand single handed
+and fight rather than yield to the attempted dishonour to their
+religion. It is therefore given to the Mussalmans to go to the Congress
+on bended knees and plead for support. But support or no support, it was
+not possible for them to wait for the Congress to give them the lead.
+They had to choose between futile violence, drawing of the naked sword
+and peaceful non-violent but effective non-co-operation, and they have
+made their choice. I venture further to say to you that if there is any
+body of men who feel as I do, the sacred character of non-co-operation,
+it is for you and me not to wait for the Congress but to act and to make
+it impossible for the Congress to give any other verdict. After all what
+is the Congress? The Congress is the collected voice of individuals who
+form it, and if the individuals go to the Congress with a united voice,
+that will be the verdict you will gain from the Congress. But if we go
+to the Congress with no opinion because we have none or because we are
+afraid to express it, then naturally we wait the verdict of the
+Congress. To those who are unable to make up their mind I say by all
+means wait. But for those who have seen the clear light as they see the
+lights in front of them, for them to wait is a sin. The Congress does
+not expect you to wait but it expects you to act so that the Congress
+can gauge properly the national feeling. So much for the Congress.
+
+BOYCOTT OF THE COUNCILS
+
+Among the details of non-co-operation I have placed in the foremost rank
+the boycott of the councils. Friends have quarrelled with me for the use
+of the word boycott, because I have disapproved--as I disapprove even
+now--boycott of British goods or any goods for that matter. But there,
+boycott has its own meaning and here boycott has its own meaning. I not
+only do not disapprove but approve of the boycott of the councils that
+are going to be formed next year. And why do I do it? The people--the
+masses,--require from us, the leaders, a clear lead. They do not want
+any equivocation from us. The suggestion that we should seek election
+and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance, would only make the
+nation distrust the leaders. It is not a clear lead to the nation. So I
+say to you, my countrymen, not to fall into this trap. We shall sell our
+country by adopting the method of seeking election and then not taking
+the oath of allegiance. We may find it difficult, and I frankly confess
+to you that I have not that trust in so many Indians making that
+declaration and standing by it. To-day I suggest to those who honestly
+hold the view--_viz_. that we should seek election and then refuse to
+take the oath of allegiance--I suggest to them that they will fall into
+a trap which they are preparing for themselves and for the nation. That
+is my view. I hold that if we want to give the nation the clearest
+possible lead, and if we want not to play with this great nation we must
+make it clear to this nation that we cannot take any favours, no matter
+how great they may be so long as those favours are accompanied by an
+injustice a double wrong, done to India not yet redressed. The first
+indispensable thing before we can receive any favours from them is that
+they should redress this double wrong. There is a Greek proverb which
+used to say "Beware of the Greek but especially beware of them when they
+bring gifts to you." To-day from those ministers who are bent upon
+perpetuating the wrong to Islam and to the Punjab, I say we cannot
+accept gifts but we should be doubly careful lest we may not fall into
+the trap that they may have devised. I therefore suggest that we must
+not coquet with the council and must not have anything whatsoever to do
+with them. I am told that if we, who represent the national sentiment do
+not seek election, the Moderates who do not represent that sentiment
+will. I do not agree. I do not know what the Moderates represent and I
+do not know what the Nationalists represent. I know that there are good
+sheep and black sheep amongst the Moderates. I know that there are good
+sheep and black sheep amongst the Nationalists. I know that many
+Moderates hold honestly the view that it is a sin to resort to
+non-co-operation. I respectfully agree to differ from them. I do say to
+them also that they will fall into a trap which they will have devised
+if they seek election. But that does not affect my situation. If I feel
+in my heart of hearts that I ought not to go to the councils I ought at
+least to abide by this decision and it does not matter if ninety-nine
+other countrymen seek election. That is the only way in which public
+work can be done, and public opinion can be built. That is the only way
+in which reforms can be achieved and religion can be conserved. If it is
+a question of religious honour, whether I am one or among many I must
+stand upon my doctrine. Even if I should die in the attempt, it is worth
+dying for, than that I should live and deny my own doctrine. I suggest
+that it will be wrong on the part of any one to seek election to these
+Councils. If once we feel that we cannot co-operate with this
+Government, we have to commence from the top. We are the natural leaders
+of the people and we have acquired the right and the power to go to the
+nation and speak to it with the voice of non-co-operation. I therefore
+do suggest that it is inconsistent with non-co-operation to seek
+election to the Councils on any terms whatsoever.
+
+LAWYERS AND NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have suggested another difficult matter, _viz._, that the lawyers
+should suspend their practice. How should I do otherwise knowing so well
+how the Government had always been able to retain this power through the
+instrumentality of lawyers. It is perfectly true that it is the lawyers
+of to-day who are leading us, who are fighting the country's battles,
+but when it comes to a matter of action against the Government, when it
+comes to a matter of paralysing the activity of the Government I know
+that the Government always look to the lawyers, however fine fighters
+they may have been to preserve their dignity and their self-respect. I
+therefore suggest to my lawyer friends that it is their duty to suspend
+their practice and to show to the Government that they will no longer
+retain their offices, because lawyers are considered to be honorary
+officers of the courts and therefore subject to their disciplinary
+jurisdiction. They must no longer retain these honorary offices if they
+want to withdraw on operation from Government. But what will happen to
+law and order? We shall evolve law and order through the instrumentality
+of these very lawyers. We shall promote arbitration courts and dispense
+justice, pure, simple home-made justice, swadeshi justice to our
+countrymen. That is what suspension of practice means.
+
+PARENTS AND NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have suggested yet another difficulty--to withdraw our children from
+the Government schools and to ask collegiate students to withdraw from
+the College and to empty Government aided schools. How could I do
+otherwise? I want to gauge the national sentiment. I want to know
+whether the Mahomodans feel deeply. If they feel deeply they will
+understand in the twinkling of an eye, that it is not right for them to
+receive schooling from a Government in which they have lost all faith;
+and which they do not trust at all. How can I, if I do not want to help
+this Government, receive any help from that Government. I think that the
+schools and colleges are factories for making clerks and Government
+servants. I would not help this great factory for manufacturing clerks
+and servants if I want to withdraw co-operation from that Government.
+Look at it from any point of view you like. It is not possible for you
+to send your children to the schools and still believe in the doctrine
+of non-co-operation.
+
+THE DUTY OF TITLE HOLDERS
+
+I have gone further. I have suggested that our title holders should give
+up their titles. How can they hold on to the titles and honour bestowed
+by the Government? They were at one time badges of honours when we
+believed that national honour was safe in their hands. But now they are
+no longer badges of honour but badges of dishonour and disgrace when we
+really believe that we cannot get justice from this Government. Every
+title holder holds his titles and honours as trustee for the nation and
+in this first step in the withdrawal of co-operation from the Government
+they should surrender their titles without a moment's consideration. I
+suggest to my Mahomedan countrymen that if they fail in this primary
+duty they will certainly fail in non-co-operation unless the masses
+themselves reject the classes and take up non-co-operation in their own
+hands and are able to fight that battle even as the men of the French
+Revolution were able to take the reins of Government in their own hands
+leaving aside the leaders and marched to the banner of victory. I want
+no revolution. I want ordered progress. I want no disordered order. I
+want no chaos. I want real order to be evolved out of this chaos which
+is misrepresented to me as order. If it is order established by a tyrant
+in order to get hold of the tyrannical reins of Government I say that it
+is no order for me but it is disorder. I want to evolve justice out of
+this injustice. Therefore, I suggest to you the passive
+non-co-operation. If we would only realise the secret of this peaceful
+and infallible doctrine you will know and you will find that you will
+not want to use even an angry word when they lift the sword at you and
+you will not want even to lift your little finger, let alone a stick
+or a sword.
+
+NON-CO-OPERATION--SERVICE TO THE EMPIRE
+
+You may consider that I have spoken these words in anger because I have
+considered the ways of this Government immoral, unjust, debasing and
+untruthful. I use these adjectives with the greatest deliberation. I
+have used them for my own true brother with whom I was engaged in battle
+of non-co-operation for full 13 years and although the ashes cover the
+remains of my brother I tell you that I used to tell him that he was
+unjust when his plans were based upon immoral foundation. I used to tell
+him that he did not stand for truth. There was no anger in me, I told
+him this home truth because I loved him. In the same manner, I tell the
+British people that I love them, and that I want their association but I
+want that association on conditions well defined. I want my self-respect
+and I want my absolute equality with them. If I cannot gain that
+equality from the British people, I do not want that British connection.
+If I have to let the British people go and import temporary disorder and
+dislocation of national business, I will favour that disorder and
+dislocation than that I should have injustice from the hands of a great
+nation such as the British nation. You will find that by the time the
+whole chapter is closed that the successors of Mr. Montagu will give me
+the credit for having rendered the most distinguished service that I
+have yet rendered to the Empire, in having offered this non-co-operation
+and in having suggest the boycott, not of His Royal Highness the
+principle of Wales, but of boycott of a visit engineered by Government
+in order to tighten its hold on the national neck. I will not allow it
+even if I stand alone, if I cannot persuade this nation not to welcome
+that visit but will boycott that visit with all the power at my command.
+It is for that reason I stand before you and implore you to offer this
+religious battle, but it is not a battle offered to you by a visionary
+or a saint. I deny being a visionary. I do not accept the claim of
+saintliness. I am of the earth, earthy, a common gardener man as much as
+any one of you, probably much more than you are. I am prone to as many
+weaknesses as you are. But I have seen the world. I have lived in the
+world with my eyes open. I have gone through the most fiery ordeals that
+have fallen to the lot of man. I have gone through this discipline. I
+have understood the secret of my own sacred Hinduism. I have learnt the
+lesson that non-co-operation is the duty not merely of the saint but it
+is the duty of every ordinary citizen, who not know much, not caring to
+know much but wants to perform his ordinary household functions. The
+people of Europe touch even their masses, the poor people the doctrine
+of the sword. But the Rishis of India, those who have held the tradition
+of India have preached to the masses of India this doctrine, not of the
+sword, not of violence but of suffering, of self-suffering. And unless
+you and I am prepared to go through this primary lesson we are not
+ready even to offer the sword and that is the lesson my brother Shaukal
+Ali has imbibed to teach and that is why he to-day accepts my advice
+tendered to him in all prayerfulness and in all humility and says 'long
+live non-co-operation.' Please remember that even in England the little
+children were withdrawn from the schools; and colleges in Cambridge and
+Oxford were closed. Lawyers had left their desks and were fighting in
+the trenches. I do not present to you the trenches but I do ask you to
+go through the sacrifice that the men, women and the brave lads of
+England went through. Remember that you are offering battle to a nation
+which is saturated with their spirit of sacrifice whenever the occasion
+arises. Remember that the little band of Boers offered stubborn
+resistance to a mighty nation. But their lawyers had left their desks.
+Their mothers had withdrawn their children from the schools and colleges
+and the children had become the volunteers of the nation, I have seen
+them with these naked eyes of mine. I am asking my countrymen in India
+to follow no other gospel than the gospel of self-sacrifice which
+precedes every battle. Whether you belong to the school of violence or
+non-violence you will still have to go through the fire of sacrifice,
+and of discipline. May God grant you, may God grant our leaders the
+wisdom, the courage and the true knowledge to lead the nation to its
+cherished goal. May God grant the people of India the right path, the
+true vision and the ability and the courage to follow this path,
+difficult and yet easy, of sacrifice.
+
+
+SPEECH AT TRICHINOPOLY
+
+   Mahatma Gandhi made the following speech at Trichinopoly on the 18th
+   August 1920:--
+
+I think you on behalf of my brother Shaukat Ali and myself for the
+magnificent reception that the citizens of Trichinopoly have given to
+us. I thank you also for the many addresses that you have been good
+enough to present to us, but I must come to business.
+
+It is a great pleasure to me to renew your acquaintance for reasons that
+I need not give you. I expect great things from Trichinopoly, Madura and
+a few places I could name. I take it that you have read my address on
+the Madras Beach on non-co-operation. Without taking up your time in
+this great assembly, I wish to deal with one or two matters that arise
+out of Mr. S. Kasturiranga Iyongar's speech. He says in effect that I
+should have waited for the Congress mandate on Non-co-operation. That
+was impossible, because the Mussulmans had and still have a duty,
+irrespective of the Hindus, to perform in reference to their own
+religion. It was impossible for them to wait for any mandate save the
+mandate of their own religion in a matter that vitally concerned the
+honour of Islam. It is therefore possible for them only to go to the
+Congress on bended knees with a clear cut programme of their own and ask
+the Congress to pronounce its blessings upon that programme and if they
+are not so fortunate as to secure the blessings of the National Assembly
+without meaning any disrespect to that assembly, it is their bounden
+duty to go on with their programme, and so it is the duty of every Hindu
+who considers his Mussalman brother as a brother who has a just cause
+which he wishes to vindicate, to throw in his lot with his Mussalman
+brother. Our leader does not quarrel with the principle of
+non-co-operation by itself, but he objects to the three principal
+details of non-co-operation.
+
+COUNCIL ELECTIONS
+
+He considers that it is our duty to seek election to the Councils and
+fight our battle on the floor of the Council hall. I do not deny the
+possibility of a fight and a royal fight on the Council floor. We have
+done it for the last 35 years, but I venture to suggest to you and to
+him, with all due respect, that it is not non-co-operation and it is not
+half as successful as non-co-operation can be. You cannot go to a class
+of people with a view to convince them by any fight--call it even
+obstruction--who have got a settled conviction and a settled policy to
+follow. It is in medical language an incompatible mixture out of which
+you can gain nothing, but if you totally boycott the Council, you create
+a public opinion in the country with reference to the Khilafat wrong and
+the Punjab wrong which will become totally irresistible. The first
+advantage of going to the Councils must be good-will on the part of the
+rulers. It is absolutely lacking. In the place of good-will you have got
+nothing but injustice but I must move on.
+
+LAWYERS' PRACTICE
+
+I come now to the second objection of Mr. Kasturiranga Iyengar with
+reference to the suspension by lawyers of their practice. Milk is good
+in itself but it comes absolutely poisonous immediately a little bit of
+arsenic is added to it. Law courts are similarly good when justice is
+distilled through them on behalf of a Sovereign power which wants to do
+justice to its people. Law courts are one of the greatest symbols of
+power and in the battle of non-co-operation, you may not leave law
+courts untouched and claim to offer non-co-operation, but if you will
+read that objection carefully, you will find in that objection the great
+fear that the lawyers will not respond to the call that the country
+makes upon them, and it is just there that the beauty of
+non-co-operation comes in. If one lawyer alone suspends practice, it is
+so much to the good of the country and so if we are sure to deprive the
+Government of the power that it possess through its law courts, whether
+one lawyer takes it up or many, we must adopt that step.
+
+GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS
+
+He objects also to the plan of boycotting Government schools. I can only
+say what I have said with reference to lawyers that if we mean
+non-co-operation, we may not receive any favours from the Government, no
+matter how advantageous by themselves they may be. In a great struggle
+like this, it is not open to us to count how many schools will respond
+and how many parents will respond and just as a geometrical problem is
+difficult, because it does not admit of easy proof, so also because a
+certain stage in national evolution is difficult, you may not avoid that
+step without making the whole of the evolution a farce.
+
+       *       *       *       *       *
+
+We have had a great lesson in non-co-operation and co-operation. We had
+a lesson in non-co-operation when some young men began to fight there
+and it is a dangerous weapon. I have not the slightest doubt about it.
+One man with a determined will to non-co-operate can disturb a whole
+meeting and we had a physical demonstration of it to night but ours is
+non-violent, non-co-operation in which there can be no mistake
+whatsoever in the fundamental conditions are observed. If
+non-co-operation fails, it will not be for want of any inherent strength
+in it, but it will fall because there is no response to it, or because
+people have not sufficiently grasped its simple principles. You had also
+a practical demonstration of co-operation just now; that heavy chair
+went over the heads of so many people, because all wanted to lift their
+little hand to move that chair away from them and so was that heavier
+dome also removed from our sight by co-operation of man, woman and
+child. Everybody believes and knows that this Government of our exists
+only by the co-operation of the people and not by the force of arms it
+can wield and everyman with a sense of logic will tell you that the
+converse of that also is equally true that Government cannot stand if
+this co-operation on which it exists is withdrawn. Difficulties
+undoubtedly there are, we have hitherto learned how to sacrifice our
+voice and make speeches. We must also learn to sacrifice ease, money,
+comfort and that, we may learn form the Englishmen themselves. Every one
+who has studied English history knows that we are now engaged in a
+battle with a nation which is capable of great sacrifice and the three
+hundred millions of India cannot make their mark upon the world, or gain
+their self-respect without an adequate measure of sacrifice.
+
+BOYCOTT OF BRITISH GOODS
+
+Our friend has suggested the boycott of British or foreign goods.
+Boycott of all foreign goods is another name for Swadeshi. He thinks
+that there will be a greater response in the boycott of all foreign
+goods. With the experience of years behind me and with an intimate
+knowledge of the mercantile classes, I venture to tell you that boycott
+of foreign goods, or boycott of merely British goods is more
+impracticable than any of the stops I have suggested. Whereas in all the
+steps that I have ventured to suggest there is practically no sacrifice
+of money involved, in the boycott of British or foreign goods you are
+inviting your merchant princes to sacrifice their millions. It has got
+to be done, but it is an exceedingly low process. The same may be said
+of the steps that I have ventured to suggest, I know, but boycott of
+goods in conceived as a punishment and the punishment is only effective
+when it is inflicted. What I have ventured to suggest is not a
+punishment, but the performance of a sacred duty, a measure of
+self-denial from ourselves, and therefore it is effective from its very
+inception when it is undertaken even by one man and a substantial duty
+performed even by one single man lays the foundation of nations liberty.
+
+CONCLUSION
+
+I am most anxious for my nation, for my Mussalman brethren also, to
+understand that if they want to vindicate national honour or the honour
+of Islam, it will be vindicated without a shadow of doubt, not be
+conceiving a punishment or a series of punishments, but by an adequate
+measure of self-sacrifice. I wish to speak of all our leaders in terms
+of the greatest respect, but whatever respect we wish to pay them may
+not stop or arrest the progress of the country, and I am most anxious
+that the country at this very critical period of its history should make
+its choice. The choice clearly does not lie before you and me in
+wresting by force of arms the sceptre form the British nation, but the
+choice lies in suffering this double wrong of the Khilafat and the
+Punjab, in pocketing humiliation and in accepting national emasculation
+or vindication of India's honour by sacrifice to-day by every man, woman
+and child and those who feel convinced of the rightness of things, we
+should make that choice to-night. So, citizens of Trichinopoly, you may
+not wait for the whole of India but you can enforce the first step of
+non-co-operation and begin your operations even from to-morrow, if you
+have not done so already. You can surrender all your titles to-morrow
+all the lawyers may surrender their practice to-morrow; those who cannot
+sustain body and soul by any other means can be easily supported by the
+Khilafat Committee, if they will give their whole time and attention to
+the work of that Committee and if the layers will kindly do that, you
+will find that there is no difficulty in settling your disputes by
+private arbitration. You can nationalise your schools from to-morrow if
+you have got the will and the determination. It is difficult, I know,
+when only a few of you think these things. It is as easy as we are
+sitting here when the whole of this vast audience is of one mind and as
+it was easy for you to carry that chair so is it easy for you to enforce
+this programme from to-morrow if you have one will, one determination
+and love for your country, love for the honour of your country and
+religion. (Loud and prolonged cheers.)
+
+
+SPEECH AT CALICUT
+
+Mr. Chairman and friends.--On behalf of my brother Shaukut Ali and
+myself I wish to thank you most sincerely for the warm welcome you have
+extended to us. Before I begin to explain the purpose of our mission I
+have to give you the information that Pir Mahboob Shah who was being
+tried in Sindh for sedition has been sentenced to two years' simple
+imprisonment. I do not know exactly what the offence was with which the
+Pir was charged. I do not know whether the words attributed to him were
+ever spoken by him. But I do know that the Pirsaheb declined to offer
+any defence and with perfect resignation he has accepted his penalty.
+For me it is a matter of sincere pleasure that the Pirsaheb who
+exercises great influence over his followers has understood the spirit
+of the struggle upon which we have embarked. It is not by resisting the
+authority of Government that we expect to succeed in the great task
+before us. But I do expect that we shall succeed if we understand the
+spirit of non-co-operation. The Lieutenant-Governor of Burma himself has
+told us that the British retain their hold on India not by the force of
+arms but by the force of co-operation of the people. Thus he has given
+us the remedy for any wrong that the Government may do to the people,
+whether knowingly or unknowingly. And so long as we co-operate with the
+Government, so long as we support that Government, we become to that
+extent sharers in the wrong. I admit that in ordinary circumstances a
+wise subject will tolerate the wrongs of a Government, but a wise
+subject never tolerates a wrong that a Government imposes on the
+declared will of a people. And I venture to submit to this great meeting
+that the Government of India and the Imperial Government have done a
+double wrong to India, and if we are a nation of self-respecting people
+conscious of its dignity, conscious of its right, it is not just and
+proper that we should stand the double humiliation that the Government
+has heaped upon us. By shaping and by becoming a predominant partner in
+the peace terms imposed on the helpless Sultan of Turkey, the Imperial
+Government have intentionally flouted the cherished sentiment of the
+Mussalman subjects of the Empire. The present Prime Minister gave a
+deliberate pledge after consultation with his colleagues when it was
+necessary for him to conciliate the Mussalmans of India. I claim to have
+studied this Khilafat question in a special manner. I claim to
+understand the Mussalman feeling on the Khilafat question and I am here
+to declare for the tenth time that on the Khilafat matter the Government
+has wounded the Mussalman sentiment as they had never done before. And I
+say without fear of contradiction that if the Mussalmans of India had
+not exercised great self-restraint and if there was not the gospel of
+non-co-operation preached to them and if they had not accepted it, there
+would have been bloodshed in India by this time. I am free to confess
+that spilling of blood would not have availed their cause. But a man
+who is in a state of rage whose heart has become lacerated does not
+count the cost of his action. So much for the Khilafat wrong.
+
+I propose to take you for a minute to the Punjab, the northern end of
+India. And what have both Governments done for the Punjab? I am free to
+confess again that the crowds in Amritsar went mad for a moment. They
+were goaded to madness by a wicked administration. But no madness on the
+part of a people can justify the shedding of innocent blood, and what
+have they paid for it? I venture to submit that no civilised Government
+could ever have made the people pay the penalty and retribution that
+they have paid. Innocent men were tried through mock-tribunals and
+imprisoned for life. Amnesty granted to them after; I count of no
+consequence. Innocent, unarmed men, who knew nothing of what was to
+happen, were butchered in cold blood without the slightest notice.
+Modesty of women in Manianwalla, women who had done no wrong to any
+individual, was outraged by insolent officers. I want you to understand
+what I mean by outrage of their modesty. Their veils were opened with
+his stick by an officer. Men who were declared to be utterly innocent by
+the Hunter Committee were made to crawl on their bellies. And all these
+wrongs totally undeserved remain unavenged. If it was the duty of the
+Government of India to punish those who were guilty of incendiarism and
+murder, as I hold it was their duty, it was doubly their duty to punish
+officers who insulted and oppressed innocent people. But in the face of
+these official wrongs we have the debate in the house of lords
+supporting official terrorism, it is this double wrong, the affront to
+Islam and the injury to the manhood of the Punjab, that we feel bound to
+wipe out by non-co-operation. We have prayed, petitioned, agitated, we
+have passed resolutions. Mr. Mahomed Ali supported by his friends is now
+waiting on the British public. He has pleaded the cause of Islam in a
+most manful manner, but his pleading has fallen on deaf ears and we have
+his word for it that whilst France and Italy have shown great sympathy
+for the cause of Islam, it is the British Ministers who have shown no
+sympathy. This shows which way the British Ministers and the present
+holders of office in India mean to deal by the people. There is no
+goodwill, there is no desire to placate the people of India. The people
+of India must therefore have a remedy to redress the double wrong. The
+method of the west is violence. Wherever the people of the west have
+felt a wrong either justly or unjustly, they have rebelled and shed
+blood. As I have said in my letter to the Viceroy of India, half of
+India does not believe in the remedy of violence. The other half is too
+weak to offer it. But the whole of India is deeply hurt and stirred by
+this wrong, and it is for that reason that I have suggested to the
+people of India the remedy of non-co-operation. I consider it perfectly
+harmless, absolutely constitutional and yet perfectly efficacious. It is
+a remedy in which, if it is properly adopted, victory is certain, and it
+is the age-old remedy of self-sacrifice. Are the Mussalmans of India who
+feel the great wrong done to Islam ready to make an adequate
+self-sacrifice? All the scriptures of the world teach us that there can
+be no compromise between justice and injustice. Co-operation on the part
+of a justice-loving man with an unjust man is a crime. And if we desire
+to compel this great Government to the will of the people, as we must,
+we must adopt this great remedy of non-co-operation. And if the
+Mussalmans of India offer non-co-operation to Government in order to
+secure justice in the Khilafat matter, I believe it is duty of the
+Hindus to help them so long as their moans are just. I consider the
+eternal friendship between the Hindus and Mussalmans is more important
+than the British connection. I would prefer any day anarchy and chaos in
+India to an armed peace brought about by the bayonet between the Hindus
+and Mussalmans. I have therefore ventured to suggest to my Hindu
+brethren that if they wanted to live at peace with Mussalmans, there is
+an opportunity which is not going to recur for the next hundred years.
+And I venture to assure you that if the Government of India and the
+Imperial Government come to know that there is a determination on the
+part of the people to redress this double wrong they would not hesitate
+to do what is needed. But in the Mussalmans of India will have to take
+the lead in the matter. You will have to commence the first stage of
+non-co-operation in right earnest. And if you may not help this
+Government, you may not receive help from it. Titles which were the
+other day titles of honour are to-day in my opinion badges of our
+disgrace. We must therefore surrender all titles of honour, all honorary
+offices. It will constitute an emphatic demonstration of the disapproval
+by the leaders of the people of the acts of the Government. Lawyers must
+suspend their practice and must resist the power of the Government which
+has chosen to flout public opinion. Nor may we receive instruction from
+schools controlled by Government and aided by it. Emptying of the
+schools will constitute a demonstration of the will of the middle class
+of India. It is far better for the nation even to neglect the literary
+instruction of the children than to co-operate with a Government that
+has striven to maintain an injustice and untruth on the Khilafat and
+Punjab matters. Similarly have I ventured to suggest a complete boycott
+of reformed councils. That will be an emphatic declaration of the part
+of the representatives of the people that they do not desire to
+associate with the Government so long as the two wrongs continue. We
+must equally decline to offer ourselves as recruits for the police or
+the military. It is impossible for us to go to Mesopotamia or to offer
+to police that country or to offer military assistance and to help the
+Government in that blood guiltiness. The last plank in the first stage is
+Swadeshi. Swadeshi is intended not so much to bring pressure upon the
+Government as to demonstrate the capacity for sacrifice on the part of
+the men and women of India. When one-fourth of India has its religion at
+stake and when the whole of India has its honour at stake, we can be in
+no mood to bedeck ourselves with French calico or silks from Japan. We
+must resolve to be satisfied with cloth woven by the humble weavers of
+India in their own cottages out of yarn spun by their sisters in their
+own homes. When a hundred years ago our tastes were not debased and we
+were not lured by all the fineries from the foreign countries, we were
+satisfied with the cloth produced by the men and women in India, and if
+I could but in a moment revolutionize the tastes of India and make it
+return to its original simplicity, I assure you that the Gods would
+descent to rejoice at the great act of renunciation. That is the first
+stage in non-co-operation. I hope it is as easy for you as it is easy
+for me to see that if India is capable of taking the first step in
+anything like a full measure that step will bring the redress we want. I
+therefore do not intend to take you to the other stages of
+non-co-operation. I would like you to rivet your attention upon the
+plans in the first stage. You will have noticed that but two things are
+necessary in going through the first stage: (1) Prefect spirit of
+non-violence is indispensable for non-co-operation, (2) only a little
+self-sacrifice, I pray to God that He will give the people of India
+sufficient courage and wisdom and patience to go through this experiment
+of non-co-operation. I think you for the great reception that you have
+given us. And I also thank you for the great patience and exemplary
+silence with which you have listened to my remarks.
+
+_August_ 1920.
+
+
+SPEECH AT MANGALORE
+
+Mr. Chairman and friends,--To my brother Shaukat Ali and me it was a
+pleasure to go through this beautiful garden of India. The great
+reception that you gave us this afternoon, and this great assembly are
+most welcome to us, if they are a demonstration of your sympathy with
+the cause which you have the honour to represent. I assure you that we
+have not undertaken this incessant travelling in order to have
+receptions and addresses, no matter how cordial they may be. But we have
+undertaken this travelling throughout the length and breadth of this
+dear Motherland to place before you the position that faces us to-day.
+It is our privilege, as it is our duty, to place that position before
+the country and let her make the choice.
+
+Throughout our tour we have received many addresses, but in my humble
+opinion no address was more truly worded than the address that was
+presented to us at Kasargod. It addressed both of us as 'dear revered
+brothers.' I am unable to accept the second adjective 'revered.' The
+word 'dear' is dear to me I must confess. But dearer than that is the
+expression 'brothers.' The signatories to that address recognized the
+true significance of this travel. No blood brothers can possibly be more
+intimately related, can possibly be more united in one purpose, one aim
+than my brother Shaukat Ali and I. And I considered it a proud privilege
+and honour to be addressed as blood brother to Shaukat Ali. The contents
+of that address were as equally significant. It stated that in our
+united work was represented the essence of the unity between the
+Mussalmans and Hindus in India. If we two cannot represent that very
+desirable unity, if we two cannot cement the relation between the two
+communities, I do not know who can. Then without any rhetoric and
+without any flowery language the address went on to describe the
+inwardness of the Punjab and the Khilafat struggle; and then in simple
+and beautiful language it described the spiritual significance of
+Satyagrah and Non-co-operation. This was followed by a frank and simple
+promise. Although the signatories to the address realised the momentous
+nature of the struggle on which we have embarked, and although they
+sympathise with the struggle with their whole heart, they wound up by
+saying that even if they could not follow non-co-operation in all its
+details, they would do as much as they could to help the struggle. And
+lastly, in eloquent, and true language, they said 'if we cannot rise
+equal to the occasion it will not be due to want of effort but to want
+of ability.' I can desire no better address, no better promise, and if
+you, the citizens of Mangalore, can come up to the level of the
+signatories, and give us just the assurance that you consider the
+struggle to be right and that it commands your entire approval, I am
+certain you will make all sacrifice that lies in your power. For we are
+face to face with a peril greater than plagues, greater than influenza,
+greater than earthquakes and mighty floods, which sometimes overwhelm
+this land. These physical calamities can rob us of so many Indian
+bodies. But the calamity that has at the present moment overtaken India
+touches the religious honour of a fourth of her children and the
+self-respect of the whole nation. The Khilafat wrong affects the
+Mussalmans of India, and the Punjab calamity very nearly overwhelms the
+manhood of India. Shall we in the face of this danger be weak or rise to
+our full height. The remedy for both the wrongs is the spiritual solvent
+of non-co-operation. I call it a spiritual weapon, because it demands
+discipline and sacrifice from us. It demands sacrifice from every
+individual irrespective of the rest. And the promise that is behind this
+performance of duty, the promise given by every religion that I have
+studied is sure and certain. It is that there is no spotless sacrifice
+that has been yet offered on earth, which has not carried with it its
+absolute adequate reward. It is a spiritual weapon, because it waits for
+no mandate from anybody except one's own conscience. It is a spiritual
+weapon, because it brings out the best in the nation and it absolutely
+satisfies individual honour if a single individual takes it, and it will
+satisfy national honour if the whole nation takes it up. And therefore
+it is that I have called non-co-operation in opposition to the opinion
+of many of my distinguished countrymen and leaders--a weapon that is
+infallible and absolutely practicable. It is infallible and practicable,
+because it satisfies the demands of individual conscience. God above
+cannot, will not expect Maulana Shaukat Ali to do more than he has been
+doing, for he has surrendered and placed at the disposal of God whom he
+believes to be the Almighty ruler of everyone, he has delivered all in
+the service of God. And we stand before the citizens of Mangalore and
+ask them to make their choice either to accept this precious gift that
+we lay at their feet or to reject it. And after having listened to my
+message if you come to the come to the conclusion that you have no other
+remedy than non-co-operation for the conservation of Islam and the
+honour of India, you will accept that remedy. I ask you not to be
+confused by so many bewildering issues that are placed before you, nor
+to be shaken from your purpose because you see divided counsels amongst
+your leaders. This is one of the necessary limitations of any spiritual
+or any other struggle that has ever been fought on this earth. It is
+because it comes so suddenly that it confuses the mind if the heart is
+not tuned properly. And we would be perfect human beings on this earth
+if in all of us was found absolutely perfect correspondence between the
+mind and the heart. But those of you who have been following the
+newspaper controversy, will find that no matter what division of opinion
+exists amongst our journals and leaders there is unanimity that the
+remedy is efficacious if it can be kept free from violence, and if it is
+adopted on a large scale. I admit the difficulty the virtue however lies
+in surmounting it. We cannot possibly combine violence with a spiritual
+weapon like non-co-operation. We do not offer spotless sacrifice if we
+take the lives of others in offering our own. Absolute freedom from
+violence is therefore it condition precedent to non-co-operation. But I
+have faith in my country to know that when it has assimilated the
+principle of the doctrine In the fullest extent, it will respond to it.
+And in no case will India make any headway whatsoever until she has
+learnt the lesson of self-sacrifice. Even if this country were to take
+up the doctrine of the sword, which God forbid, it will have to learn
+the lesson of self-sacrifice. The second difficulty suggested is the
+want of solidarity of the nation. I accept it too. But that difficulty I
+have already answered by saying that it is a remedy that can be taken up
+by individuals for individual and by the nation for national
+satisfaction; and therefore even if the whole nation does not take up
+non-co-operation, the individual successes, which may be obtained by
+individuals taking up non-co-operation will stand to their own credit as
+of the nation to which they belong.
+
+The first stage in my humble opinion is incredibly easy inasmuch as it
+does not involve any very great sacrifice. If your Khan bahadurs and
+other title-holders were to renounce their titles I venture to submit
+that whilst the renunciation will stand to the credit and honour of the
+nation it will involve a little or no sacrifice. On the contrary, they
+will not only have surrendered no earthly riches but they will have
+gained the applause of the nation. Let us see what it means, this first
+step. The able editor of _Hindu_, Mr. Kastariranga Iyengar, and almost
+every journalist in the country are agreed that the renunciation of
+titles is a necessary and a desirable step. And if these chosen people
+of the Government were without exception to surrender their titles to
+Government giving notice that the heart of India is doubly wounded in
+that the honour of India and of muslim religion is at stake and that
+therefore they can no longer retain their titles, I venture to suggest,
+that this their step which costs not a single penny either to them or to
+the nation will be an effective demonstration of the national will.
+
+Take the second step or the second item of non-co-operation. I know
+there is strong opposition to the boycott of councils. The opposition
+when you begin to analyse it means not that the step is faulty or that
+it is not likely to succeed, but it is due to the belief that the whole
+country will not respond to it and that the Moderates will steal into
+the councils. I ask the citizens of Mangalore to dispel that fear from
+your hearts. United the voters of Mangalore can make it impossible for
+either a moderate or an extremist or any other form of leader to enter
+the councils as your representative. This step involves no sacrifice of
+money, no sacrifice of honour but the gaining of prestige for the whole
+nation. And I venture to suggest to you that this one step alone if it
+is taken with any degree of unanimity even by the extremists can bring
+about the desired relief, but if all do not respond the individual need
+not be afraid. He at least will have laid the foundation for true self
+progress, let him have the comfort that he at least has washed his hands
+clean of the guilt of the Government.
+
+Then I come to the members of the profession which one time I used to
+carry on. I have ventured to ask the lawyers of India to suspend their
+practice and withdraw their support from a Government which no longer
+stands for justice, pure and unadulterated, for the nation. And the step
+is good for the individual lawyer who takes it and is good for the
+nation if all the lawyers take it.
+
+And so for the Government and the Government aided schools, I must
+confess that I cannot reconcile my conscience to my children going to
+Government schools and to the programme of non-co-operation is intended
+to withdraw all support from Government, and to decline all help
+from it.
+
+I will not tax your patience by taking you through the other items of
+non-co-operation important as they are. But I have ventured to place
+before you four very important and forcible steps any one of which if
+fully taken up contains in it possibilities of success. Swadeshi is
+preached as an item of non-co-operation, as a demonstration of the
+spirit of sacrifice, and it is an item which every man, woman and child
+can take up.
+
+_August_ 1920.
+
+
+SPEECH AT BEZWADA
+
+As I said this morning one essential condition for the progress of India
+is Hindu-Muslim Unity. I understand that there was a little bit of
+bickering between Hindus and Mussalmans to-day in Bezwada. My brother
+Maulana Shaukat Ali adjusted the dispute between the two communities and
+he illustrated in his own person the entire efficacy of one item in the
+first stage of Non-co-operation. He sat without any vakils appearing
+before him for either parties to arbitrate on the dispute between them.
+He required no postponement for the consideration of the question from
+time to time. His fees consisted in a broken lead pencil. That is what
+we should do, if all the lawyers suspended practice and set up
+arbitration for the settlement of private disputes. But why was there
+any quarrel at all? It is laughable in the extreme when you come to
+think of it. Because the Hindus seem to have played music whilst passing
+the mosque. I think it was improper for them to do so. Hindu Moslem
+Unity does not mean that Hindus should cease to respect the prejudices
+and sentiments cherished by Mussalmans. And as this question of music
+has given rise to many a quarrel between the two communities it behoves
+the Hindus, if they want to cultivate true Hindu-Moslem Unity, to
+refrain from acts which they know injure the sentiments of their
+Mussalman brethren. We may not take undue advantage of the great spirit
+of toleration that is developing in Mussalmans and do things likely to
+irritate them. It is never a matter of principle for a Hindu procession
+to continue playing music before mosques. And now that we desire
+voluntarily to respect Mussalman sentiment, we should be doubly careful
+at a time when Hindus are offering assistance to Mussalmans in their
+troubles. That assistance should be given in all humility and without
+any arrogation of rights. To my Mussalman brethren I would say that it
+would become their dignity to restrain themselves and not feel irritated
+when any Hindu had done anything to irritate their religious sentiment.
+But in any event, you have today presented to you a remedy for the
+settlement of any such issue. We must settle our disputes by arbitration
+as was done this after-noon. You cannot always get a Moulana Shankat
+Ali, exercising unrivalled influence on the community. But we can always
+get people enough in our own villages, towns and districts who exercise
+influence over such villages and towns and command the confidence of
+both the communities. The offended party should consider it its duty to
+approach them and not to take the law in its own hands.
+
+It gives me much pleasure to announce to you that, Mr. Kaleswar Rao has
+consented to refrain from standing for election to the new Legislative
+Councils. You will be also pleased to know that Mr. Gulam Nohiuddin has
+resigned his Honorary Magistrateship, I hope that both these patriots
+will not consider that they have done their last duty by their acts of
+renunciation, but I hope they will regard their acts as a prelude to
+acts of greater purpose and greater energy and I hope they will take in
+hand the work of educating the electorate in their districts regarding
+boycott of councils. I have said elsewhere that never for another
+century will India be faced with a conjunction of events that faces it
+to-day. The cloud that has descended upon Islam has solidified the
+Moslem world as nothing else could have. It has awakened the men and
+women of Mussulman India from their deep sleep. Inasmuch as a single
+Panjabi was made to crawl on his belly in the famous street of Amitsar,
+I hold that the whole of was made to crawl on its belly. And if we want
+to straighten up ourselves from that crawling position and stand erect
+before the whole world, it requires, a tremendous effort. H.E. the
+Viceroy in his Viceregal pronouncement at the opening of the Council was
+pleased to say that he did not desire to make any remarks on the Punjab
+events. He treated them as a closed chapter and referred us to the
+future verdict of history. I venture to tell you the citizens of Bezwada
+that India will have deserved to crawl in that lane if she accepts this
+pronouncement as the final answer, and if we want to stand erect before
+the whole world, it is impossible for a single child, man or woman in
+India to rest until fullest reparation has been done for the Punjab
+wrong. Similarly with reference to the Khilafat grievance the Mussalmans
+of India in my humble opinion will forfeit all title to consider
+themselves the followers of the great Prophet in whose name they recite
+the Kalama, day in and day out, they will forfeit their title if they do
+not put their shoulders to the wheel and lift this cloud that is hanging
+on them. But we shall make a serious blunder. India will commit suicide,
+if we do not understand and appreciate the forces that are arrayed
+against us. We have got to face a mighty Government with all its power
+ranged against us. This composed of men who are able, courageous,
+capable of making sacrifices. It is a Government which does not scruple
+to use means, fair or foul, in order to gain its end. No craft is above
+that Government. It resorts to frightfulness, terrorism. It resorts to
+bribery, in the shape of titles, honour and high offices. It administers
+opiates in the shape of Reforms. In essence then it is an autocracy
+double distilled in the guise of democracy. The greatest gift of a
+crafty cunning man are worthless so long as cunning resides in his
+heart. It is a Government representing a civilisation which is purely
+material and godless. I have given to you these qualities of this
+government in order not to excite your angry passions, but in order that
+you may appreciate the forces that are matched against you. Anger will
+serve no purpose. We shall have to meet ungodliness by godliness. We
+shall have to meet their untruth by truth; we shall have to meet their
+cunning and their craft by openness and simplicity; we shall have to
+meet their terrorism and frightfulness by bravery. And it is an
+unbending bravery which is demanded of every man, woman and child. We
+must meet their organisation by greater organising ability. We must meet
+their discipline by grater discipline, and we must meet their sacrifices
+by infinitely greater sacrifices, and if we are in a position to show
+these qualities in a full measure I have not the slightest doubt that we
+shall win this battle. If really we have fear of God in us, our prayers
+will give us the strength to secure victory. God has always come to the
+help of the helpless and we need not go before any earthly power for
+help.
+
+You heard this morning of the bravery of the sword, and the bravery of
+suffering. For me personally I have forever rejected the bravery of the
+sword. But, to-day it is not my purpose to demonstrate to you the final
+ineffectiveness of the sword. But he who runs may see that before India
+possesses itself a sword which will be more than a match for the forces
+of Europe, it will he generations. India may resort to the destruction
+of life and property here and there but such destructive cases serve no
+purpose. I have therefore presented to you a weapon called the bravery
+of suffering, otherwise called Non-co-operation. It is a bravery which
+is open to the weakest among the weak. It is open to women and children.
+The power of suffering is the prerogative of nobody, and if only 300
+millions of Indians could show the power of suffering in order to
+redress a grievous wrong done to the nation or to its religion, I make
+bold to say that, India will never require to draw the sword. And unless
+we are able to show an adequate measure of sacrifice we shall lose this
+battle. No one need tell me that India has not got this power of
+suffering. Every father and mother is witness to what I am about to say,
+viz., that every father and mother have shown in the domestic affairs
+matchless power of suffering. And if we have only developed national
+consciousness, if we have developed sufficient regard for our religion,
+we shall have developed power of suffering in the national and religious
+field. Considered in these terms the first stage in Non-co-operation is
+the simplest and the easiest state. If the title-holders of India
+consider that India is suffering from a grievous wrong both as regards
+the Punjab and the Khilafat is it any suffering on their part to
+renounce their titles to-day? What is the measure of the suffering
+awaiting the lawyers who are called upon to suspend practice when
+compared to the great benefit which is in store for the nation? And if
+thy parents of India will summon up courage to sacrifice secular
+education, they will have given their children the real education of a
+life-time. For they will have learnt the value of religion and national
+honour. And I ask you, the citizens of Bezwada, to think well before you
+accept the loaves and fishes in the form of Government offices set them
+on one side and set national honour on the other and make your service.
+What sacrifice is there involved in the individual renouncing his
+candidature for legislative councils. The councils are a tempting bait.
+All kinds of arguments are being advanced in favour of joining the
+councils. India will sacrifice the opportunity of gaining her liberty if
+she touches them. It passes comprehension how we, who have known this
+Government, who have read the Viceregal pronouncement, how we who have
+known their determination not to give justice in the Punjab and the
+Khilafat matters, can gain any benefit by co-operation, constructive or
+obstructive, with this Government? But the Nationalists, belonging to a
+great popular party, tell us that if they do not contest these scats,
+the moderates will get in. Surely, it is nothing but an exhibition of
+want of courage and faith in our own cause to feel that we must enter
+the councils lest moderates should get in. Moderates believe in the
+possibility of obtaining justice at the hands of the Government.
+Nationalists have on the other hand filled the platforms with
+denunciations of the Government and its measures. How can the
+Nationalists ever hope to gain anything by entering the councils,
+holding the belief that they do? They will better represent the popular
+will if they wring justice from the Government by means of
+Non-co-operation. A calculating spirit at the present moment in the
+history of India will prove its ruin. I, therefore, tender my hearty
+congratulation to those who have announced their resignations of
+candidature or honorary offices, and I hope that their example will
+prove infectious. I have been told, and I believe it myself from what I
+have seen, that the Andhrus are a brave, courageous and
+spiritually-inclined people. I venture therefore to ask my Andhra
+brethren whether they have understood the spirituality of this beautiful
+doctrine of Non-co-operation. If they have, I hope they will not wait
+for a single moment for a mandate from the Congress or the Moslem
+League. They will understand that a spiritual weapon is god whether it
+is wielded by one or many. I, therefore, invite you to go to Calcutta
+with a united will and a united purpose, sanctified by a spirit of
+sacrifice, with a will of your own to convert those who are still
+undecided about the spirituality or the practicability of the weapon.
+
+I thank you for the attention and patience with which you have listened
+to me. I pray to the Almighty that He may give you wisdom and courage
+that are so necessary at the present moment.--
+
+_August 1920_.
+
+
+THE CONGRESS
+
+The largest and the most important Congress ever held has come and gone,
+It was the biggest demonstration ever held against the present system of
+Government. The President uttered the whole truth when he said that it
+was a Congress in which, instead of the President and the leaders
+driving the people, the people drove him and the latter. It was clear to
+every one on the platform that the people had taken the reins in their
+own hands. The platform would gladly have moved at a slower pace.
+
+The Congress gave one day to a full discussion of the creed and voted
+solidly for it with but two dissentients after two nights' sleep over
+the discussion. It gave one day to a discussion of non-co-operation
+resolution and voted for it with unparalleled enthusiasm. It gave the
+last day to listening to the whole of the remaining thirty-two Articles
+of the Constitution which were read and translated word for word by
+Maulana Mahomed Ali in a loud and clear voice. It showed that it was
+intelligently following the reading of it, for there was dissent when
+Article Eight was reached. It referred to non-interference by the
+Congress in the internal affairs of the Native States. The Congress
+would not have passed the proviso if it had meant that it could even
+voice the feelings of the people residing in the territories ruled by
+the princes. Happily it resolution suggesting the advisability of
+establishing Responsible Government in their territories enabled me to
+illustrate to the audience that the proviso did not preclude the
+Congress from ventilating the grievances and aspirations of the subjects
+of these states, whilst it clearly prevented the Congress from taking
+any executive action in connection with them; as for instance holding a
+hostile demonstration in the Native States against any action of theirs.
+The Congress claims to dictate to the Government but it cannot do so by
+the very nature of its constitution in respect of the Native States.
+
+Thus the Congress has taken three important steps after the greatest
+deliberation. It has expressed its determination in the clearest
+possible terms to attain complete null-government, if possible still in
+association with the British people, but even without, if necessary. It
+proposes to do so only by means that are honourable and non-violent. It
+has introduced fundamental changes in the constitution regulating its
+activities and has performed an act of self-denial in voluntarily
+restricting the number of delegates to one for every fifty thousand of
+the population of India and has insisted upon the delegates being the
+real representatives of those who want to take any part in the political
+life of the country. And with a view to ensuring the representation of
+all political parties it has accepted the principle of "single
+transferable vote." It has reaffirmed the non-co-operation resolution of
+the Special Session and amplified it in every respect. It has emphasised
+the necessity of non-violence and laid down that the attainment of
+Swaraj is conditional upon the complete harmony between the component
+parts of India, and has therefore inculcated Hindu-Muslim unity. The
+Hindu delegates have called upon their leaders to settle disputes
+between Brahmins and non-Brahmins and have urged upon the religious
+heads the necessity of getting rid of the poison of untouchability. The
+Congress has told the parents of school-going children, and the lawyers
+that they have not responded sufficiently to the call of the nation and
+and that they must make greater effort in doing so. It therefore follows
+that the lawyers who do not respond quickly to the call for suspension
+and the parents who persist in keeping their children in Government and
+aided institutions must find themselves dropping out from the public
+life of the country. The country calls upon every man and woman in India
+to do their full share. But of the details of the non-co-operation
+resolution I must write later.
+
+
+WHO IS DISLOYAL?
+
+Mr. Montagu has discovered a new definition of disloyalty. He considers
+my suggestion to boycott the visit of the Prince of Wales to be disloyal
+and some newspapers taking the cue from him have called persons who have
+made the suggestion 'unmannerly'. They have even attributed to these
+'unmannerly' persons the suggestion of boycotting the Prince. I draw a
+sharp and fundamental distinction between boycotting the Prince and
+boycotting any welcome arranged for him. Personally I would extend the
+heartiest welcome to His Royal Highness if he came or could come without
+official patronage and the protecting wings of the Government of the
+day. Being the heir to a constitutional monarch, the Prince's movements
+are regulated and dictated by the ministers, no matter how much the
+dictation may be concealed beneath diplomatically polite language. In
+suggesting the boycott therefore the promoters have suggested boycott of
+an insolent bureaucracy and dishonest ministers of his Majesty.
+
+You cannot have it both ways. It is true that under a constitutional
+monarchy, the royalty is above politics. But you cannot send the Prince
+on a political visit for the purpose of making political capital out of
+him, and then complain that those who will not play your game and in
+order to checkmate you, proclaim boycott of the Royal visit do not know
+constitutional usage. For the Prince's visit is not for pleasure. His
+Royal Highness is to come in Mr. Lloyd George's words, as the
+"ambassador of the British nation," in other words, his own ambassador
+in order to issue a certificate of merit to him and possibly to give the
+ministers a new lease of life. The wish is designed to consolidate and
+strengthen a power that spells mischief for India. Even us it is, Mr.
+Montagu has foreseen, that the welcome will probably be excelled by any
+hitherto extended to Royalty, meaning that the people are not really and
+deeply affected and stirred by the official atrocities in the Punjab and
+the manifestly dishonest breach of official declarations on the
+Khilafat. With the knowledge that India was bleeding at heart, the
+Government of India should have told His Majesty's ministers that the
+moment was inopportune for sending the Prince. I venture to submit that
+it is adding insult to injury to bring the Prince and through his visit
+to steal honours and further prestige for a Government that deserves to
+be dismissed with disgrace. I claim that I prove my loyalty by saying
+that India is in no mood, is too deeply in mourning, to take part in and
+to welcome His Royal Highness, and that the ministers and the Indian
+Government show their disloyalty by making the Prince a catspaw of their
+deep political game. If they persist, it is the clear duty of India to
+have nothing to do with the visit.
+
+
+CRUSADE AGAINST NON-CO-OPERATION
+
+I have most carefully read the manifesto addressed by Sir Narayan
+Chandavarkar and others dissuading the people from joining the non
+co-operation movement. I had expected to find some solid argument
+against non-co-operation, but to my great regret I have found in it
+nothing but distortion (no doubt unconscious) of the great religions and
+history. The manifesto says that 'non-co-operation is deprecated by the
+religious tenets and traditions of our motherland, nay, of all the
+religions that have saved and elevated the human race.' I venture to
+submit that the Bhagwad Gita is a gospel of non-co-operation between
+forces of darkness and those of light. If it is to be literally
+interpreted Arjun representing a just cause was enjoined to engage in
+bloody warfare with the unjust Kauravas. Tulsidas advises the Sant (the
+good) to shun the Asant (the evil-doers). The Zendavesta represents a
+perpetual dual between Ormuzd and Ahriman, between whom there is no
+compromise. To say of the Bible that it taboos non-co-operation is not
+to know Jesus, a Prince among passive resisters, who uncompromisingly
+challenged the might of the Sadducees and the Pharisees and for the sake
+of truth did not hesitate to divide sons from their parents. And what
+did the Prophet of Islam do? He non-co-operated in Mecca in a most
+active manner so long as his life was not in danger and wiped the dust
+of Mecca off his feet when he found that he and his followers might have
+uselessly to perish, and fled to Medina and returned when he was strong
+enough to give battle to his opponents. The duty of non-co-operation
+with unjust men and kings is as strictly enjoined by all the religions
+as is the duty of co-operation with just men and kings. Indeed most of
+the scriptures of the world seem even to go beyond non-co-operation and
+prefer a violence to effeminate submission to a wrong. The Hindu
+religious tradition of which the manifesto speaks, clearly proves the
+duty of non-co-operation. Prahlad dissociated himself from his father,
+Meerabai from her husband, Bibhishan from his brutal brother.
+
+The manifesto speaking of the secular aspect says, 'The history of
+nations affords no instance to show that it (meaning non-co-operation)
+has, when employed, succeeded and done good,' One most recent instance
+of brilliant success of non-co-operation is that of General Botha who
+boycotted Lord Milner's reformed councils and thereby procured a perfect
+constitution for his country. The Dukhobours of Russia offered
+non-co-operation, and a handful though they were, their grievances so
+deeply moved the civilized world that Canada offered them a home where
+they form a prosperous community. In India instances can be given by the
+dozen, in which in little principalities the raiyats when deeply grieved
+by their chiefs have cut off all connection with them and bent them to
+their will. I know of no instance in history where well-managed
+non-co-operation has failed.
+
+Hitherto I have given historical instances of bloodless
+non-co-operation, I will not insult the intelligence of the reader by
+citing historical instances of non-co-operation combined with,
+violence, but I am free to confess that there are on record as many
+successes as failures in violent non-co-operation. And it is because I
+know this fact that I have placed before the country a non-violent
+scheme in which, if at all worked satisfactorily, success is a certainty
+and in which non-response means no harm. For if even one man
+non-co-operates, say, by resigning some office, he has gained, not lost.
+That is its ethical or religious aspect. For its political result
+naturally it requires polymerous support. I fear therefore no disastrous
+result from non-co-operation save for an outbreak of violence on the
+part of the people whether under provocation or otherwise. I would risk
+violence a thousand times than risk the emasculation of a whole race.
+
+
+SPEECH AT MUZAFFARABAD
+
+Before a crowded meeting of Mussalmans in the Muzaffarabad, Bombay, held
+on the 29th July 1920, speaking on the impending non-co-operation which
+commenced on the 1st of August, Mr. Gandhi said: The time for speeches
+on non-co-operation was past and the time for practice had arrived. But
+two things were needful for complete success. An environment free from
+any violence on the part of the people and a spirit of self-sacrifice.
+Non-co-operation, as the speaker had conceived it, was an impossibility
+in an atmosphere surcharged with the spirit of violence. Violence was an
+exhibition of anger and any such exhibition was dissipation of valuable
+energy. Subduing of one's anger was a storing up of national energy,
+which, when set free in an ordered manner, would produce astounding
+results. His conception of non-co-operation did not involve rapine,
+plunder, incendiarism and all the concomitants of mass madness. His
+scheme presupposed ability on their part to control all the forces of
+evil. If, therefore, any disorderliness was found on the part of the
+people which they could not control, he for one would certainly help the
+Government to control them. In the presence of disorder it would be for
+him a choice of evil, and evil through he considered the present
+Government to be, he would not hesitate for the time being to help the
+Government to control disorder. But he had faith in the people. He
+believed that they knew that the cause could only be won by non-violent
+methods. To put it at the lowest, the people had not the power, even if
+they had the will, to resist with brute strength the unjust Governments
+of Europe who had, in the intoxication of their success disregarding
+every canon of justice dealt so cruelly by the only Islamic Power
+in Europe.
+
+In non-co-operation they had a matchless and powerful weapon. It was a
+sign of religious atrophy to sustain an unjust Government that supported
+an injustice by resorting to untruth and camouflage. So long therefore
+as the Government did not purge itself of the canker of injustice and
+untruth, it was their duty to withdraw all help from it consistently
+with their ability to preserve order in the social structure. The first
+stage of non-co-operation was therefore arranged so as to involve
+minimum of danger to public peace and minimum of sacrifice on the part
+of those who participated in the movement. And if they might not help an
+evil Government nor receive any favours from it, it followed that they
+must give up all titles of honour which were no longer a proud
+possession. Lawyers, who were in reality honorary officers of the Court,
+should cease to support Courts that uphold the prestige of an unjust
+Government and the people must be able to settle their disputes and
+quarrels by private arbitration. Similarly parents should withdraw their
+children from the public schools and they must evolve a system of
+national education or private education totally independent of the
+Government. An insolent Government conscious of its brute strength,
+might laugh at such withdrawals by the people especially as the Law
+courts and schools were supposed to help the people, but he had not a
+shadow of doubt that the moral effect of such a step could not possibly
+be lost even upon a Government whose conscience had become stifled by
+the intoxication of power.
+
+He had hesitation in accepting Swadeshi as a plank in non-co-operation.
+To him Swadeshi was as dear as life itself. But he had no desire to
+smuggle in Swadeshi through the Khilafat movement, if it could not
+legitimately help that movement, but conceived as non-co-operation was,
+in a spirit of self-sacrifice, Swadeshi had a legitimate place in the
+movement. Pure Swadeshi meant sacrifice of the liking for fineries. He
+asked the nation to sacrifice its liking for the fineries of Europe and
+Japan and be satisfied with the coarse but beautiful fabrics woven on
+their handlooms out of yarns spun by millions of their sisters. If the
+nation had become really awakened to a sense of the danger to its
+religions and its self-respect, it could not but perceive the absolute
+and immediate necessity of the adoption of Swadeshi in its intense form
+and if the people of India adopted Swadeshi with the religious zeal he
+begged to assure them that its adoption would arm them with a new power
+and would produce an unmistakable impression throughout the whole world.
+He, therefore, expected the Mussalmans to give the lead by giving up all
+the fineries they were so fond of and adopt the simple cloth that could
+be produced by the manual labour of their sisters and brethren in their
+own cottages. And he hoped that the Hindus would follow suit. It was a
+sacrifice in which the whole nation, every man, woman and child could
+take part.
+
+RIDICULE REPLACING REPRESSION
+
+Had His Excellency the Viceroy not made it impossible by his defiant
+attitude on the Punjab and the Khilafat, I would have tendered him
+hearty congratulations for substituting ridicule for repression in order
+to kill a movement distasteful to him. For, torn from its context and
+read by itself His Excellency's discourse on non-co-operation is
+unexceptionable. It is a symptom of translation from savagery to
+civilization. Pouring ridicule on one's opponent is an approved method
+in civilised politics. And if the method is consistently continued, it
+will mark an important improvement upon the official barbarity of the
+Punjab. His interpretation of Mr. Montagu's statement about the movement
+is also not open to any objection whatsoever. Without doubt a government
+has the right to use sufficient force to put down an actual outbreak
+of violence.
+
+But I regret to have to confess that this attempt to pour ridicule on
+the movement, read in conjunction with the sentiments on the Punjab and
+the Khilafat, preceding the ridicule, seems to show that His Excellency
+has made it a virtue of necessity. He has not finally abandoned the
+method of terrorism and frightfulness, but he finds the movement being
+conducted in such an open and truthful manner that any attempt to kill
+it by violent repression would not expose him not only to ridicule but
+contempt of all right-thinking men.
+
+Let us however examine the adjectives used by His Excellency to kill the
+movement by laughing at it. It is 'futile,' 'ill-advised,'
+'intrinsically insane,' 'unpractical,' 'visionary.' He has rounded off
+the adjectives by describing the movement as 'most foolish of all
+foolish schemes.' His Excellency has become so impatient of it that he
+has used all his vocabulary for showing the magnitude of the ridiculous
+nature of non-co-operation.
+
+Unfortunately for His Excellency the movement is likely to grow with
+ridicule as it is certain to flourish on repression. No vital movement
+can be killed except by the impatience, ignorance or laziness of its
+authors. A movement cannot be 'insane' that is conducted by men of
+action as I claim the members of the Non-co-operation Committee are. It
+is hardly 'unpractical,' seeing that if the people respond, every one
+admits that it will achieve the end. At the same time it is perfectly
+true that if there is no response from the people, the movement will be
+popularly described as 'visionary.' It is for the nation to return an
+effective answer by organised non-co-operation and change ridicule into
+respect. Ridicule is like repression. Both give place to respect when
+they fail to produce the intended effect.
+
+THE VICEREGAL PRONOUNCEMENT
+
+It may be that having lost faith in His Excellency's probity and
+capacity to hold the high office of Viceroy of India, I now read his
+speeches with a biased mind, but the speech His Excellency delivered at
+the time of opening of the council shows to me a mental attitude which
+makes association with him or his Government impossible for
+self-respecting men.
+
+The remarks on the Punjab mean a flat refusal to grant redress. He would
+have us to 'concentrate on the problems of the immediate future!' The
+immediate future is to compel repentance on the part of the Government
+on the Punjab matter. Of this there is no sign. On the contrary, His
+Excellency resists the temptation to reply to his critics, meaning
+thereby that he has not changed his opinion on the many vital matters
+affecting the honour of India. He is 'content to leave the issues to the
+verdict of history.' Now this kind of language, in my opinion, is
+calculated further to inflame the Indian mind. Of what use can a
+favourable verdict of history be to men who have been wronged and who
+are still under the heels of officers who have shown themselves utterly
+unfit to hold offices of trust and responsibility? The plea for
+co-operation is, to say the least, hypocritical in the face of the
+determination to refuse justice to the Punjab. Can a patient who is
+suffering from an intolerable ache be soothed by the most tempting
+dishes placed before him? Will he not consider it mockery on the part of
+the physician who so tempted him without curing him of his pain?
+
+His Excellency is, if possible, even less happy on the Khilafat. "So far
+as any Government could," says this trustee for the nation, "we pressed
+upon the Peace Conference the views of Indian Moslems. But
+notwithstanding our efforts on their behalf we are threatened with a
+campaign of non-co-operation because, forsooth, the allied Powers found
+themselves unable to accept the contentions advanced by Indian Moslems."
+This is most misleading if not untruthful. His Excellency knows that the
+peace terms are not the work of the allied Powers. He knows that Mr.
+Lloyd George is the prime author of terms and that the latter has never
+repudiated his responsibility for them. He has with amazing audacity
+justified them in spite of his considered pledge to the Moslems of India
+regarding Constantinople, Thrace and the rich and renowned lands of Asia
+minor. It is not truthful to saddle responsibility for the terms on the
+allied Powers when Great Britain alone has promoted them. The offence of
+the Viceroy becomes greater when we remember that he admits the justness
+of the Muslim claim. He could not have 'pressed' it if he did not admit
+its justice.
+
+I venture to think that His Excellency by his pronouncement on the
+Punjab has strengthened the nation in its efforts to seek a remedy to
+compel redress of the two wrongs before it can make anything of the
+so-called Reforms.
+
+FROM RIDICULE, TO--?
+
+It will be admitted that non-co-operation has passed the stage ridicule.
+Whether it will now be met by repression or respect remains to be seen.
+Opinion has already been expressed in these columns that ridicule is an
+approved and civilized method of opposition. The viceregal ridicule
+though expressed in unnecessarily impolite terms was not open to
+exception.
+
+But the testing time has now arrived. In a civilized country when
+ridicule fails to kill a movement it begins to command respect.
+Opponents meet it by respectful and cogent argument and the mutual
+behaviour of rival parties never becomes violent. Each party seeks to
+convert the other or draw the uncertain element towards its side by pure
+argument and reasoning.
+
+There is little doubt now that the boycott of the councils will be
+extensive if it is not complete. The students have become disturbed.
+Important institutions may any day become truly national. Pandit Motilal
+Nehru's great renunciation of a legal practice which was probably second
+to nobody's is by itself an event calculated to change ridicule into
+respect. It ought to set people thinking seriously about their own
+attitude. There must be something very wrong about our Government--to
+warrant the step Pundit Motilal Nehru has taken. Post graduate students
+have given up their fellowships. Medical students have refused to appear
+for their final examination. Non-co-operation in these circumstances
+cannot be called an inane movement.
+
+Either the Government must bend to the will of the people which is being
+expressed in no unmistakable terms through non-co-operation, or it must
+attempt to crush the movement by repression.
+
+Any force used by a government under any circumstance is not repression.
+An open trial of a person accused of having advocated methods of
+violence is not repression. Every State has the right to put down or
+prevent violence by force. But the trial of Mr. Zafar Ali Khan and two
+Moulvis of Panipat shows that the Government is seeking not to put down
+or prevent violence but to suppress expression of opinion, to prevent
+the spread of disaffection. This is repression. The trials are the
+beginning of it. It has not still assumed a virulent form but if these
+trials do not result in stilling the propaganda, it is highly likely
+that severe repression will be resorted to by the Government.
+
+The only other way to prevent the spread of disaffection is to remove
+the causes thereof. And that would be to respect the growing response of
+the country to the programme of non-co-operation. It is too much to
+expect repentance and humility from a government intoxicated with
+success and power.
+
+We must therefore assume that the second stage in the Government
+programme will be repression growing in violence in the same ratio as
+the progress of non-co-operation. And if the movement survives
+repression, the day of victory of truth is near. We must then be
+prepared for prosecutions, punishments even up to deportations. We must
+evolve the capacity for going on with our programme without the leaders.
+That means capacity for self-government. And as no government in the
+world can possibly put a whole nation in prison, it must yield to its
+demand or abdication in favour of a government suited to that nation.
+
+It is clear that abstention from violence and persistence in the
+programme are our only and surest chance of attaining our end.
+
+The government has its choice, either to respect the movement or to try
+to repress it by barbarous methods. Our choice is either to succumb to
+repression or to continue in spite of repression.
+
+
+TO EVERY ENGLISHMAN IN INDIA
+
+Dear Friend,
+
+I wish that every Englishman will see this appeal and give thoughtful
+attention to it.
+
+Let me introduce myself to you. In my humble opinion no Indian has
+co-operated with the British Government more than I have for an unbroken
+period of twenty-nine years of public life in the face of circumstances
+that might well have turned any other man into a rebel. I ask you to
+believe me when I tell you that my co-operation was not based on the
+fear of the punishments provided by your laws or any other selfish
+motives. It was free and voluntary co-operation based on the belief that
+the sum total of the activity of the British Government was for the
+benefit of India. I put my life in peril four times for the sake of the
+Empire,--at the time of the Boer war when I was in charge of the
+Ambulance corps whose work was mentioned in General Buller's dispatches,
+at the time of the Zulu revolt in Natal when I was in charge of a
+similar corps at the time of the commencement of the late war when I
+raised an Ambulance corps and as a result of the strenuous training had
+a severe attack of pleurisy, and lastly, in fulfilment of my promise to
+Lord Chelmsford at the War Conference in Delhi. I threw myself in such
+an active recruiting campaign in Kuira District involving long and
+trying marches that I had an attack of dysentry which proved almost
+fatal. I did all this in the full belief that acts such as mine must
+gain for my country an equal status in the Empire. So late as last
+December I pleaded hard for a trustful co-operation, I fully believed
+that Mr. Lloyd George would redeem his promise to the Mussalmans and
+that the revelations of the official atrocities in the Punjab would
+secure full reparation for the Punjabis. But the treachery of Mr. Lloyd
+George and its appreciation by you, and the condonation of the Punjab
+atrocities have completely shattered my faith in the good intentions of
+the Government and the nation which is supporting it.
+
+But though, my faith in your good intentions is gone, I recognise your
+bravery and I know that what you will not yield to justice and reason,
+you will gladly yield to bravery.
+
+_See what this Empire means to India_
+
+Exploitation of India's resources for the benefit of Great Britain.
+
+An ever-increasing military expenditure, and a civil service the most
+expensive in the world.
+
+Extravagant working of every department in utter disregard of India's
+poverty.
+
+Disarmament and consequent emasculation of a whole nation lest an armed
+nation might imperil the lives of a handful of you in our midst.
+Traffic in intoxicating liquors and drugs for the purposes of
+sustaining a top heavy administration.
+
+Progressively representative legislation in order to suppress an
+evergrowing agitation seeking to give expression to a nation's agony.
+
+Degrading treatment of Indians residing in your dominions, and
+
+You have shown total disregard of our feelings by glorifying the Punjab
+administration and flouting the Mosulman sentiment.
+
+I know you would not mind if we could fight and wrest the sceptre form
+your hands. You know that we are powerless to do that, for you have
+ensured our incapacity to fight in open and honourable battle. Bravery
+on the battlefield is thus impossible for us. Bravery of the soul still
+remains open to us. I know you will respond to that also. I am engaged
+in evoking that bravery. Non-co-operation means nothing less than
+training in self-sacrifice. Why should we co-operate with you when we
+know that by your administration of this great country we are lifting
+daily enslaved in an increasing degree. This response of the people to
+my appeal is not due to my personality. I would like you to dismiss me,
+and for that matter the Ali Brothers too, from your consideration. My
+personality will fail to evoke any response to anti-Muslim cry if I were
+foolish enough to rise it, as the magic name of the Ali Brothers would
+fail to inspire the Mussalmans with enthusiasm if they were madly to
+raise in anti-Hindu cry. People flock in their thousands to listen to us
+because we to-day represent the voice of a nation groaning under iron
+heels. The Ali Brothers were your friends as I was, and still am. My
+religion forbids me to bear any ill-will towards you. I would not raise
+my hand against you even if I had the power. I expect to conquer you
+only by my suffering. The Ali Brothers will certainly draw the sword, if
+they could, in defence of their religion and their country. But they and
+I have made common cause with the people of India in their attempt to
+voice their feelings and to find a remedy for their distress.
+
+You are in search of a remedy to suppress this rising ebullition of
+national feeling. I venture to suggest to you that the only way to
+suppress it is to remove the causes. You have yet the power. You can
+repent of the wrongs done to Indians. You can compel Mr. Lloyd George to
+redeem his promises. I assure you he has kept many escape doors. You can
+compel the Viceroy to retire in favour of a better one, you can revise
+your ideas about Sir Michael O'Dwyer and General Dyer. You can compel
+the Government to summon a conference of the recognised lenders of the
+people, duly elected by them and representing all shades of opinion so
+as to devise means for granting _Swaraj_ in accordance with the wishes
+of the people of India. But this you cannot do unless you consider
+every Indian to be in reality your equal and brother. I ask for no
+patronage, I merely point out to you, as a friend, as honourable
+solution of a grave problem. The other solution, namely repression is
+open to YOU. I prophesy that it will fail. It has begun already. The
+Government has already imprisoned two brave men of Panipat for holding
+and expressing their opinions freely. Another is on his trial in Lahore
+for having expressed similar opinion. One in the Oudh District is
+already imprisoned. Another awaits judgment. You should know what is
+going on in your midst. Our propaganda is being carried on in
+anticipation of repression. I invite you respectfully to choose the
+better way and make common cause with the people of India whose salt you
+are eating. To seek to thwart their inspirations is disloyalty to
+the country.
+
+I am,
+Your faithful friend,
+M. K. GANDHI
+
+
+ONE STEP ENOUGH FOR ME
+
+Mr. Stokes is a Christian, who wants to follow the light that God gives
+him. He has adopted India as his home. He is watching the
+non-co-operation movement from the Kotgarh hills where he is living in
+isolation from the India of the plains and serving the hillmen. He has
+contributed three articles on non-co-operation to the columns of the
+Servant of Calcutta and other papers. I had the pleasure of reading them
+during my Bengal tour. Mr. Stokes approves of non-co-operation but
+dreads the consequences that may follow complete success _i.e.,_
+evacuation of India by the British. He conjures up before his mind a
+picture of India invaded by the Afghans from the North-West, plundered
+by the Gurkhas from the Hills. For me I say with Cardinal Newman: 'I do
+not ask to see the distant scene; one step enough for me.' The movement
+is essentially religious. The business of every god-fearing man is to
+dissociate himself from evil in total disregard of consequences. He must
+have faith in a good deed producing only a good result: that in my
+opinion is the Gita doctrine of work without attachment. God does not
+permit him to peep into the future. He follows truth although the
+following of it may endanger his very life. He knows that it is better
+to die in the way of God than to live in the way of Satan. Therefore who
+ever is satisfied that this Government represents the activity of Satan
+has no choice left to him but to dissociate himself from it.
+
+However, let us consider the worst that can happen to India on a sudden
+evacuation of India by the British. What does it matter that the Gurkhas
+and the Pathans attack us? Surely we would be better able to deal with
+their violence than we are with the continued violence, moral and
+physical, perpetrated by the present Government. Mr. Stokes does not
+seem to eschew the use of physical force. Surely the combined labour of
+the Rajput, the Sikh and the Mussalman warriors in a united India may be
+trusted to deal with plunderers from any or all the sides. Imagine
+however the worst: Japan overwhelming us from the Bay of Bengal, the
+Gurkhas from the Hills, and the Pathans from the North-West. If we not
+succeed in driving them out we make terms with them and drive them at
+the first opportunity. This will be a more manly course than a hopeless
+submission to an admittedly wrongful State.
+
+But I refuse to contemplate the dismal out-look. If the movement
+succeeds through non-violent non-co-operation, and that is the
+supposition Mr. Stokes has started with, the English whether they remain
+or retire, they will do so as friends and under a well-ordered agreement
+as between partners. I still believe in the goodness of human nature,
+whether it is English or any other. I therefore do not believe that the
+English will leave in a night.
+
+And do I consider the Gurkha and the Afghan being incorrigible thieves
+and robbers without ability to respond to purifying influences? I do
+not. If India returns to her spirituality, it will react upon the
+neighbouring tribes, she will interest herself in the welfare of these
+hardy but poor people, and even support them if necessary, not out of
+fear but as a matter of neighbourly duty. She will have dealt with Japan
+simultaneously with the British. Japan will not want to invade India, if
+India has learnt to consider it a sin to use a single foreign article
+that she can manufacture within her own borders. She produces enough to
+eat and her men and women can without difficulty manufacture enough to
+clothe to cover their nakedness and protect themselves from heat and
+cold. We become prey to invasion if we excite the greed of foreign
+nation, by dealing with them under a feeling dependence on them. We must
+learn to be independent of every one of them.
+
+Whether therefore we finally succeed through violence or non-violence in
+my opinion, the prospect is by no means so gloomy as Mr. Stokes has
+imagined. Any conceivable prospect is, in my opinion, less black than
+the present unmanly and helpless condition. And we cannot do better than
+following out fearlessly and with confidence the open and honourable
+programme of non-violence and sacrifice that we have mapped for
+ourselves.
+
+
+THE NEED FOR HUMILITY
+
+The spirit of non-violence necessarily leads to humility. Non-violence
+means reliance on God, the Rocks of ages. If we would seek His aid, we
+must approach Him with a humble and a contrite heart.
+Non-co-operationists may not trade upon their amazing success at the
+Congress. We must act, even as the mango tree which drops as it bears
+fruit. Its grandeur lies in its majestic lowliness. But one hears of
+non-co-operationists being insolent and intolerant in their behaviour
+towards those who differ from them. I know that they will lose all their
+majesty and glory, if they betray any inflation. Whilst we may not be
+dissatisfied with the progress made so far, we have little to our
+credit to make us feel proud. We have to sacrifice much more than we
+have done to justify pride, much less elation. Thousands, who flocked to
+the Congress pandal, have undoubtedly given their intellectual assent to
+the doctrine but few have followed it out in practice. Leaving aside the
+pleaders, how many parents have withdrawn their children from schools?
+How many of those who registered their vote in favour of
+non-co-operation have taken to hand-spinning or discarded the use of all
+foreign cloth?
+
+Non-co-operation is not a movement of brag, bluster, or bluff. It is a
+test of our sincerity. It requires solid and silent self-sacrifice. It
+challenges our honesty and our capacity for national work. It is a
+movement that aims at translating ideas into action. And the more we do,
+the more we find that much more must be done than we have expected. And
+this thought of our imperfection must make us humble.
+
+A non-co-operationist strives to compel attention and to set an example
+not by his violence but by his unobtrusive humility. He allows his solid
+action to speak for his creed. His strength lies in his reliance upon
+the correctness of his position. And the conviction of it grows most in
+his opponent when he least interposes his speech between his action and
+his opponent. Speech, especially when it is haughty, betrays want of
+confidence and it makes one's opponent sceptical about the reality of
+the act itself. Humility therefore is the key to quick success. I hope
+that every non-co-operationist will recognise the necessity of being
+humble and self-restrained. It is because so little is really required
+to be done because all of that little depends entirely upon ourselves
+that I have ventured the belief that Swaraj is attainable in less
+than one year.
+
+
+SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED
+
+"I write to thank you for yours of the 7th instant and especially for
+your request that I should after reading your writings in "Young India"
+on non-co-operation, give a full and frank criticism of them. I know
+that your sole desire is to find out the truth and to act accordingly,
+and hence I venture to make the following remarks. In the issue of May
+5th you say that non-co-operation is "not even anti-Government." But
+surely to refuse to have anything to do with the Government to the
+extent of not serving it and of not paying its taxes is actually, if not
+theoretically anti-Government; and such a course must ultimately make
+all Government impossible. Again, you say, "It is the inherent right of
+a subject to refuse to assist a government that will not listen to him."
+Leaving aside the question of the ethical soundness of this
+proposition, may I ask which Government, in the present case? Has not
+the Indian Government done all it possibly can in the matter? Then if
+its attempts to voice the request of India should fail, would it be fair
+and just to do anything against it? Would not the proper course be
+non-co-operation with the Supreme Council of the Allies, including Great
+Britain, if it be found that the latter has failed properly to support
+the demand of the Indian Government and people? It seems to me that in
+all your writings and speeches you forget that in the present question
+both Government and people are as one, and if they fail to get what they
+justly want, how does the question of non-co-operation arise? Hindus
+and Englishmen and the Government are all at present "shouldering in a
+full-hearted manner the burden that Muhomedans of India are carrying
+etc. etc." But supposing we fail of our object--what then? Are we all to
+refuse to co-operate and with whom?
+
+Might I recommend the consideration of the following course of conduct?
+
+(1) "Wait and see" what the actual terms of the Treaty with Turkey are?
+
+(2) If they are not in accordance with the aspirations and
+recommendations of the Government and the people of India, the every
+legitimate effort should be made to have the terms revised.
+
+(3) To the bitter end, co-operate with a Government that co-operates
+with us, and only when it refuses co-operation, go in for
+non-co-operation.
+
+So far I personally see no reason whatsoever for non-co-operation with
+the Indian Government, and till it fails to voice the needs and demands
+of India as a whole there can be no reason. The Indian Government does
+some times make mistakes, but in the Khilafat matter it is sound and
+therefore deserves or ought to have the sympathetic and whole-hearted
+co-operation of every one in India. I hope that you will kindly consider
+the above and perhaps you will be able to find time for a reply in
+_Young India_."
+
+I gladly make room for the above letter and respond to the suggestion
+to give a public reply as no doubt the difficulty experienced by the
+English friend is experienced by many. Causes are generally lost, not
+owing to the determined opposition of men who will not see the truth as
+they want to perpetuate an injustice but because they are able to enlist
+in their favour the allegiance of those who are anxious to understand a
+particular cause and take sides after mature judgment. It is only by
+patient argument with such honest men that one is able to check oneself,
+correct one's own errors of judgment and at times to wean them from
+their error and bring them over to one's side. This Khilafat question is
+specially difficult because there are so many side-issues. It is
+therefore no wonder that many have more or less difficulty in making up
+their minds. It is further complicated because the painful necessity for
+some direct action has arisen in connection with it. But whatever the
+difficulty, I am convinced that there is no question so important as
+this one if we want harmony and peace in India.
+
+My friend objects to my statement that non-co-operation is not
+anti-Government, because he considers that refusal to serve it and pay
+its taxes is actually anti-Government. I respectfully dissent from the
+view. If a brother has fundamental differences with his brother, and
+association with the latter involves his partaking of what in his
+opinion is an injustice. I hold that it is brotherly duty to refrain
+from serving his brother and sharing his earnings with him. This happens
+in everyday life. Prahalad did not act against his father, when he
+declined to associate himself with the latter's blasphemies. Nor was
+Jesus anti-Jewish when he declaimed against the Pharisees and the
+hypocrites, and would have none of them. In such matters, is it not
+intention that determines the character of a particular act? It is
+hardly correct as the friend suggests that withdrawal of association
+under general circumstances would make all government impossible. But it
+is true that such withdrawal would make all injustice impossible.
+
+My correspondent considers that the Government of India having done all
+it possibly could, non-co-operation could not be applicable to that
+Government. In my opinion, whilst it is true that the Government of
+India has done a great deal, it has not done half as much as it might
+have done, and might even now do. No Government can absolve itself from
+further action beyond protesting, when it realises that the people whom
+it represents feel as keenly as do lakhs of Indian Mussalmans in the
+Khilafat question. No amount of sympathy with a starving man can possibly
+avail. He must have bread or he dies, and what is wanted at that
+critical moment is some exertion to fetch the wherewithal to feed the
+dying man. The Government of India can to-day heed the agitation and
+ask, to the point of insistence for full vindication of the pledged word
+of a British Minister. Has the Government of India resigned by way of
+protest against the threatened, shameful betrayal of trust on the part
+of Mr. Lloyd George? Why does the Government of India hide itself behind
+secret despatches? At a less critical moment Lord Hardiage committed a
+constitutional indiscretion, openly sympathised with South African
+Passive Resistance movement and stemmed the surging tide of public
+indignation in India, though at the same time he incurred the wrath of
+the then South African Cabinet and some public men in Great Britain.
+After all, the utmost that the Government of India has done is on its
+own showing to transmit and press the Mahomedan claim. Was that not the
+least it could have done? Could it have done anything less without
+covering itself with disgrace? What Indian Mahomedans and the Indian
+public expect the Government of India to do at this critical juncture is
+not the least, but the utmost that it could do. Viceroys have been known
+to tender resignations for much smaller causes. Wounded pride brought
+forth not very long ago the resignation of a Lieutenant Governor. On the
+Khilafat question, a sacred cause dear to the hearts of several million
+Mahomedans is in danger of being wounded. I would therefore invite the
+English friend, and every Englishman in India, and every Hindu, be he
+moderate or extremist, to make common cause with the Mahomedans and
+thereby compel the Government of India to do its duty, and thereby
+compel His Majesty's Ministers to do theirs.
+
+There has been much talk of violence ensuing from active
+non-co-operation. I venture to suggest that the Mussalmans of India, if
+they had nothing in the shape of non-co-operation in view, would have
+long ago yielded to counsels of despair. I admit that non-co-operation
+is not unattended with danger. But violence is a certainty without,
+violence is only a possibility with non-co-operation. And it will he a
+greater possibility if all the important men, English, Hindu and others
+of the country discountenance it.
+
+I think, that the recommendation made by the friend is being literally
+followed by the Mahomedans. Although they practically know the fate,
+they are waiting for the actual terms of the treaty with Turkey. They
+are certainly going to try every means at their disposal to have the
+terms revised before beginning non-co-operation. And there will
+certainly be no non-co-operation commenced so long as there is even hope
+of active co-operation on the part of the Government of India with the
+Mahomedans, that is, co-operation strong enough to secure a revision of
+the terms should they be found to be in conflict with the pledges of
+British statesmen. But if all these things fail, can Mahomedans as men
+of honour who hold their religion dearer than their lives do anything
+less than wash their hands clean of the guilt of British Ministers and
+the Government of India by refusing to co-operate with them? And can
+Hindus and Englishmen, if they value Mahomedan friendship, and if they
+admit then full justice of the Mahomaden friendship and if they admit
+the full justice of the Mahomedan claim do otherwise than heartily
+support the Mahomedans by word and deed.
+
+
+PLEDGES BROKEN
+
+After the forgoing was printed the long-expected peace terms regarding
+Turkey were received. In my humble opinion they are humiliating to the
+Supreme Council, to the British ministers, and if as a Hindu with deep
+reverence for Christianity I may say so, a denial of Christ's teachings.
+Turkey broken down and torn with dissentions within may submit to the
+arrogant disposal of herself, and Indian Mahomedans may out of fear do
+likewise. Hindus out of fear, apathy or want of appreciation of the
+situation, may refuse to help their Mahomedan brethren in their hour of
+peril. The fact remains that a solemn promise of the Prime Minister of
+England has been wantonly broken. I will say nothing about President
+Wilson's fourteen points, for they seem now to be entirely forgotten as
+a day's wonder. It is a matter of deep sorrow that the Government of
+India _communique_ offers a defence of the terms, calls them a
+fulfilment of Mr. Lloyd George's pledge of 5th January 1918 and yet
+apologises for their defective nature and appeals to the Mahomedans of
+India as if to mock them that they would accept the terms with quiet
+resignation. The mask that veils the hypocrisy is too thin to deceive
+anybody. It would have been dignified if the _communique_ had boldly
+admitted Mr. Lloyd George's mistake in having made the promise referred
+to. As it is, the claim of fulfilment of the promise only adds to the
+irritation caused by its glaring breach. What is the use of the Viceroy
+saying, "The question of the Khilafat is one for the Mahomedans and
+Mahomedans only and that with their free choice in the matter Government
+have no desire to interfere," while the Khalif's dominions are
+ruthlessly dismembered, his control of the Holy places of Islam
+shamelessly taken away from him and he himself reduced to utter
+impotence in his own palace which can no longer be called a palace but
+which can he more fitly described us a prison? No wonder, His Excellency
+fears that the peace includes "terms which must be painful to all
+Moslems." Why should he insult Muslim intelligence by sending the
+Mussalmans of India a of encouragement and sympathy? Are they expected
+to find encouragement in the cruel recital of the arrogant terms or in a
+remembrance of 'the splendid response' made by them to the call of the
+King 'in the day of the Empire's need.' It ill becomes His Excellency to
+talk of the triumph of those ideals of justice and humanity for which
+the Allies fought. Indeed, the terms of the so called peace with Turkey
+if they are to last, will be a monument of human arrogance and man-made
+injustice. To attempt to crush the spirit of a brave and gallant race,
+because it has lost in the fortunes of war, is a triumph not of humanity
+but a demonstration of inhumanity. And if Turkey enjoyed the closest
+ties of friendship with Great Britain before the war, Great Britain has
+certainly made ample reparation for her mistake by having made the
+largest contribution to the humiliation of Turkey. It is insufferable
+therefore when the Viceroy feels confident that with the conclusion of
+this new treaty that friendship will quickly take life again and a
+Turkey regenerate full of hope and strength, will stand forth in the
+future as in the past a pillar of the Islamic faith. The Viceregal
+message audaciously concludes, "This thought will I trust strengthen you
+to accept the peace terms with resignation, courage and fortitude and to
+keep your loyalty towards the Crown bright and untarnished as it has
+been for so many generations." If Muslim loyalty remains untarnished it
+will certainly not be for want of effort on the part of the Government
+of India to put the heaviest strain upon it, but it will remain so
+because the Mahomedans realise their own strength--the strength in the
+knowledge that their cause is just and that they have got the power to
+vindicate justice in spite of the aberration suffered by Great Britain
+under a Prime Minister whom continued power has made as reckless in
+making promises as in breaking them.
+
+Whilst therefore I admit that there is nothing either in the peace terms
+or in the Viceregal message covering them to inspire the Mahomedans and
+Indians in general with confidence or hope, I venture to suggest that
+there is no cause for despair and anger. Now is the time for Mahomedans
+to retain absolute self-control, to unite their forces and, weak though
+they are, with firm faith in God to carry on the struggle with redoubled
+vigour till justice is done. If India--both Hindu and Mahomedan--can act
+as one man and can withdraw her partnership in this crime against
+humanity which the peace terms represent, she will soon secure a
+revision of the treaty and give herself and the Empire at least, if not
+the world, a lasting peace. There is no doubt that the struggle would be
+bitter sharp and possibly prolonged, but it is worth all the sacrifice
+that it is likely to call forth. Both the Mussalmans and the Hindus are
+on their trial. Is the humiliation of the Khilafat a matter of concern
+to the former? And if it is, are they prepared to exercise restraint,
+religiously refrain from violence and practise non-co-operation without
+counting the material loss it may entail upon the community? Do the
+Hindus honestly feel for their Mahomedan brethren to the extent of
+sharing their sufferings to the fullest extent? The answer to these
+questions and not the peace terms, will finally decide the fate of
+the Khilafat.
+
+
+MORE OBJECTIONS ANSWERED
+
+_Swadeshmitran_ is one of the most influential Tamil dailies of Madras.
+It is widely read. Everything appearing in its columns is entitled to
+respect. The Editor has suggested some practical difficulty in the way
+of non-co-operation. I would therefore like, to the best of my ability,
+to deal with them.
+
+I do not know where the information has been derived from that I have
+given up the last two stages of non-co-operation. What I have said is
+that they are a distant goal. I abide by it. I admit that all the stages
+are fraught with some danger, but the last two are fraught with the
+greatest--the last most of all. The stages have been fixed with a view
+to running the least possible risk. The last two stages will not be
+taken up unless the committee has attained sufficient control over the
+people to warrant the beliefs that the laying down of arms or suspension
+of taxes will, humanly speaking, be free from an outbreak of violence on
+the part of the people. I do entertain the belief that it is possible
+for the people to attain the discipline necessary for taking the two
+steps. When once they realise that violence is totally unnecessary to
+bend an unwilling government to their will and that the result can be
+obtained with certainty by dignified non-co-operation, they will cease
+to think of violence even by way of retaliation. The fact is that
+hitherto we have not attempted to take concerted and disciplined action
+from the masses. Some day, if we are to become truly a self-governing
+nation, that attempt has to be made. The present, in my opinion, is a
+propitious movement. Every Indian feels the insult to the Punjab as a
+personal wrong, every Mussalman resents the wrong done to the Khilafat.
+There is therefore a favourable atmosphere for expecting cohesive and
+restrained movement on the part of the masses.
+
+So far as response is concerned, I agree with the Editor that the
+quickest and the largest response is to be expected in the matter of
+suspension of payment of taxes, but as I have said so long as the masses
+are not educated to appreciate the value of non-violence even whilst
+their holding are being sold, so long must it be difficult to take up
+the last stage into any appreciable extent.
+
+I agree too that a sudden withdrawal of the military and the police will
+be a disaster if we have not acquired the ability to protect ourselves
+against robbers and thieves. But I suggest that when we are ready to
+call out the military and the police on an extensive scale we would find
+ourselves in a position to defend ourselves. If the police and the
+military resign from patriotic motives, I would certainly expect them to
+perform the same duty as national volunteers, not has hirelings but as
+willing protectors of the life and liberty of their countrymen. The
+movement of non-co-operation is one of automatic adjustment. If the
+Government schools are emptied, I would certainly expect national
+schools to come into being. If the lawyers as a whole suspended
+practice, they would devise arbitration courts and the nation will have
+expeditions and cheaper method of setting private disputes and awarding
+punishment to the wrong-doer. I may add that the Khilafat Committee is
+fully alive to the difficulty of the task and is taking all the
+necessary steps to meet the contingencies as they arise.
+
+Regarding the leaving of civil employment, no danger is feared, because
+no one will leave his employment, unless he is in a position to find
+support for himself and family either through friends or otherwise.
+
+Disapproval of the proposed withdrawal of students betrays, in my
+humble opinion, lack of appreciation of the true nature of
+non-co-operation. It is true enough that we pay the money wherewith our
+children are educated. But, when the agency imparting the education has
+become corrupt, we may not employ it without partaking of the agents,
+corruption. When students leave schools or colleges I hardly imagine
+that the teachers will fail to perceive the advisability of themselves
+resigning. But even if they do not, money can hardly be allowed to count
+where honour or religion are at the stake.
+
+As to the boycott of the councils, it is not the entry of the Moderates
+or any other persons that matters so much as the entry of those who
+believe in non-co-operation. You may not co-operate at the top and
+non-co-operate at the bottom. A councillor cannot remain in the council
+and ask the _gumasta_ who cleans the council-table to resign.
+
+
+MR. PENNINGTON'S OBJECTIONS ANSWERED
+
+I gladly publish Mr. Pennington's letter with its enclosure just as I
+have received them. Evidently Mr. Pennington is not a regular reader of
+'Young India,' or he would have noticed that no one has condemned mob
+outrages more than I have. He seems to think that the article he has
+objected to was the only thing I have ever written on General Dyer. He
+does not seem to know that I have endeavoured with the utmost
+impartiality to examine the Jallianwala massacre. And he can see any day
+all the proof adduced by my fellow-commissioners and myself in support
+of our findings on the massacre. The ordinary readers of 'Young India'
+knew all the facts and therefore it was unnecessary for me to support my
+assertion otherwise. But unfortunately Mr. Pennington represents the
+typical Englishman. He does not want to be unjust, nevertheless he is
+rarely just in his appreciation of world events because he has no time
+to study them except cursorily and that through a press whose business
+is to air only party views. The average Englishman therefore except in
+parochial matters is perhaps the least informed though he claims to be
+well-informed about every variety of interest. Mr. Pennington's
+ignorance is thus typical of the others and affords the best reason for
+securing control of our own affairs in our own hands. Ability will come
+with use and not by waiting to be trained by those whose natural
+interest is to prolong the period of tutelage as much as possible.
+
+But to return to Mr. Pennington's letter he complains that there has
+been no 'proper trial of any one.' The fault is not ours. India has
+consistently and insistently demanded a trial of all the officers
+concerned in the crimes against the Punjab.
+
+He next objects to be 'violence' of my language. If truth is violent, I
+plead guilty to the charge of violence of language. But I could not,
+without doing violence to truth, refrain from using the language, I
+have, regarding General Dyer's action. It has been proved out of his own
+mouth or hostile witnesses:
+
+(1) That the crowd was unarmed.
+
+(2) That it contained children.
+
+(3) That the 13th was the day of Vaisakhi fair.
+
+(4) That thousands had come to the fair.
+
+(5) That there was no rebellion.
+
+(6) That during the intervening two days before the 'massacre' there was
+peace in Amritsar.
+
+(7) That the proclamation of the meeting was made the same day as
+General Dyer's proclamation.
+
+(8) That General Dyer's proclamation prohibited not meetings but
+processions or gatherings of four men on the streets and not in private
+or public places.
+
+(9) That General Dyer ran no risk whether outside or inside the city.
+
+(10) That he admitted himself that many in the crowd did not know
+anything of his proclamation.
+
+(11) That he fired without warning the crowd and even after it had
+begun to disperse. He fired on the backs of the people who were
+in flight.
+
+(12) That the men were practically penned in an enclosure.
+
+In the face of these admitted facts I do call the deed a 'massacre.' The
+action amounted not to 'an error of judgment' but its 'paralysis in the
+face of fancied danger.'
+
+I am sorry to have to say that Mr. Pennington's notes, which too the
+reader will find published elsewhere, betray as much ignorance as
+his letter.
+
+Whatever was adopted on paper in the days of Canning was certainly not
+translated into action in its full sense. 'Promises made to the ear were
+broken to the hope,' was said by a reactionary Viceroy. Military
+expenditure has grown enormously since the days of Canning.
+
+The demonstration in favour of General Dyer is practically a myth.
+
+No trace was found of the so-called Danda Fauj dignified by the name of
+bludgeon-army by Mr. Pennington. There was no rebel army in Amritsar.
+The crown that committed the horrible murders and incendiarism contained
+no one community exclusively. The sheet was found posted only in Lahore
+and not in Amritsar. Mr. Pennington should moreover have known by this
+time that the meeting held on the 13th was held, among other things, for
+the purpose of condemning mob excesses. This was brought out at the
+Amritsar trial. Those who surrounded him could not stop General Dyer. He
+says he made up his mind to shoot in a moment. He consulted nobody. When
+the correspondent says that the troops would have objected to being
+concerned in 'what might in that case be not unfairly called a
+'massacre,' he writes as if he had never lived in India. I wish the
+Indian troops had the moral courage to refuse to shoot innocent, unarmed
+men in full flight. But the Indian troops have been brought in too
+slavish an atmosphere to dare do any such correct act.
+
+I hope Mr. Pennington will not accuse me again of making unverified
+assertions because I have not quoted from the books. The evidence is
+there for him to use. I can only assure him that the assertions are
+based on positive proofs mostly obtained from official sources.
+
+Mr. Pennington wants me to publish an exact account of what happened on
+the 10th April. He can find it in the reports, and if he will patiently
+go through them he will discover that Sir Michael O'Dwyer and his
+officials goaded the people into frenzied fury--a fury which nobody, as
+I have already said, has condemned more than I have. The account of the
+following days is summed up in one word, _viz._ 'peace' on the part of
+the crowd disturbed by indiscriminate arrests, the massacre and the
+series of official crimes that followed.
+
+I am prepared to give Mr. Pennington credit for seeking after the truth.
+But he has gone about it in the wrong manner. I suggest his reading the
+evidence before the Hunter Committee and the Congress Committee. He need
+not read the reports. But the evidence will convince him that I have
+understated the case against General Dyer.
+
+When however I read his description of himself as "for 12 years Chief
+Magistrate of Districts in the South of India before reform, by
+assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable." I despair of his
+being able to find the truth. An angry or a biased man renders himself
+incapable of finding it. And Mr. Pennington is evidently both angry and
+biased. What does he mean by saying, "before reform by assassination and
+otherwise became so fashionable?" It ill becomes him to talk of
+assassination when the school of assassination seems happily to have
+become extinct. Englishmen will never see the truth so long as they
+permit their vision to be blinded by arrogant assumption of superiority
+or ignorant assumptions of infallibility.
+
+
+MR. PENNINGTON'S LETTER TO MR. GANDHI
+
+   Dear Sir,
+
+   I do not like your scheme for "boycotting" the Government of India
+   under what seems to be the somewhat less offensive (though more
+   cumbrous) name of non-co-operation; but have always given you credit
+   for a genuine desire to carry out revolution by peaceful means and am
+   astonished at the violence of the language you use in describing
+   General Dyer on page 4 of your issue of the 14th July last. You begin
+   by saying that he is "by no means the worst offender," and, so far, I
+   am inclined to agree, though as there has been no proper trial of
+   anyone it is impossible to apportion their guilt; but then you say
+   "his brutality is unmistakable," "his abject and unsoldierlike
+   cowardice is apparent, he has called an _unarmed crowd_ of men and
+   children--mostly holiday makers--a rebel army." "He believes himself
+   to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot down
+   like rabbits men who were _penned_ in an enclosure; such a man is
+   unworthy to be considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his
+   action. He ran no risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and
+   without warning. This is not an error of judgement. It is paralysis
+   of it in the face of _fancied_ danger. It is proof of criminal
+   incapacity and heartlessness," etc.
+
+   You must excuse me for saying that all this is mere rhetoric
+   unsupported by any proof, even where proof was possible. To begin
+   with, neither you nor I were present at the Jallianwalla Bagh on that
+   dreadful day--dreadful especially for General Dyer for whom you show
+   no sympathy,--and therefore cannot know for certain whether the crowd
+   was or was not unarmed.' That it was an 'illegal,' because a
+   'prohibited,' assembly is evident; for it is absurd to suppose that
+   General Dyer's 4-1/2 hours march, through the city that very morning,
+   during the whole of which he was warning the inhabitants against the
+   danger of any sort of gathering, was not thoroughly well-known. You
+   say they were 'mostly holiday makers,' but you give nor proof; and
+   the idea of holiday gathering in Amritsar just then in incredible. I
+   cannot understand your making such a suggestion. General Dyer was not
+   the only officer present on the occasion and it is impossible to
+   suppose that he would have been allowed to go on shooting into an
+   innocent body of holiday-makers. Even the troops would have refused
+   to carry out what might then have been not unfairly called a
+   "massacre."
+
+   I notice that you never even allude to the frightful brutality of the
+   mob which was immediately responsible for the punitive measure
+   reluctantly adopted by General Dyer. Your sympathies seem to be only
+   with the murderers, and I am not sanguine enough to suppose that my
+   view of the case will have much influence with you. Still I am bound
+   to do what I can to get at the truth, and enclose a copy of some
+   notes I have had occasion to make. If you can publish an _exact_
+   account of what happened at Amritsar on the 10th of April, 1919 and
+   the following days, especially on the 13th, including the
+   demonstration in favour of General Dyer, (if there was one), I for
+   one, as a mere seeker after the truth, should be very much obliged to
+   you. Mere abuse is not convincing, as you so often observe in your
+   generally reasonable paper,
+
+   Yours faithfully,
+   J. R. PENNINGTON, I.O.S. (Retd.)
+   35, VICTORIA ROAD, WORTHING, SUSSEX
+   27th Aug. 1920.
+
+   For 12 years Chief Magistrate of Districts in the south of India
+   before reform, by assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable.
+
+   P.S. Let us get the case in this way. General Dyer, acting as the
+   only representative of Government on the spot shot some hundreds of
+   people (some of them _perhaps_ innocently mixed up in an illegal
+   assembly), in the _bona fide_ belief that he was dealing with the
+   remains of a very dangerous rebellion and was thereby saving the
+   lives of very many thousands, and in the opinion of a great many
+   people did actually save the city from falling in the hands of a
+   dangerous mob.
+
+
+SOME DOUBTS
+
+Babu Janakdhari Prasad was a staunch coworker with me in Champaran. He
+has written a long letter setting forth his reasons for his belief that
+India has a great mission before her, and that she can achieve her
+purpose only by non-violent non-co-operation. But he has doubts which he
+would have me answer publicly. The letter being long, I am withholding.
+But the doubts are entitled to respect and I must endeavour to answer
+them. Here they are us framed by Bubu Janakdhari Prasad.
+
+(a) Is not the non-co-operation movement creating a sort of race-hatred
+between Englishmen and Indians, and is it in accordance with the Divine
+plan of universal love and brotherhood?
+
+(b) Does not the use of words "devilish," "satanic," etc., savour of
+unbrotherly sentiment and incite feelings of hatred?
+
+(c) Should not the non-co-operation movement be conducted on strictly
+non-violent and non-emotional lines both in speech and action?
+
+(d) Is there no danger of the movement going out of control and lending
+to violence?
+
+As to (a), I must say that the movement is not 'creating' race-hatred.
+It certainly gives, as I have already said, disciplined expression to
+it. You cannot eradicate evil by ignoring it. It is because I want to
+promote universal brotherhood that I have taken up non-co-operation so
+that, by self-purification, India may make the world better than it is.
+
+As to (b), I know that the words 'satanic' and 'devilish' are strong,
+but they relate the exact truth. They describe a system not persons: We
+are bound to hate evil, if we would shun it. But by means of
+non-co-operation we are able to distinguish between the evil and the
+evil-doer. I have found no difficulty in describing a particular
+activity of a brother of mine to be devilish, but I am not aware of
+having harboured any hatred about him. Non-co-operation teaches us to
+love our fellowmen in spite of their faults, not by ignoring or
+over-looking them.
+
+As to (c), the movement is certainly being conducted on strictly
+non-violent lines. That all non-co-operators have not yet thoroughly
+imbibed the doctrine is true. But that just shows what an evil legacy we
+have inherited. Emotion there is in the movement. And it will remain. A
+man without emotion is a man without feeling.
+
+As to (d), there certainly is danger of the movement becoming violent.
+But we may no more drop non-violent non-co-operation because of its
+dangers, than we may stop freedom because of the danger of its abuse.
+
+
+REJOINDER
+
+Messrs. Popley and Philips have been good enough to reply to my letter
+"To Every Englishman in India." I recognise and appreciate the friendly
+spirit of their letter. But I see that there are fundamental differences
+which must for the time being divide them and me. So long as I felt
+that, in spite of grievous lapses the British Empire represented an
+activity for the worlds and India's good, I clung to it like a child to
+its mother's breast. But that faith is gone. The British nation has
+endorsed the Punjab and Khilsfat crimes. The is no doubt a dissenting
+minority. But a dissenting minority that satisfies itself with a mere
+expression of its opinion and continues to help the wrong-doer partakes
+in wrong-doing.
+
+And when the sum total of his energy represents a minus quantity one may
+not pick out the plus quantities, hold them up for admiration, and ask
+an admiring public to help regarding them. It is a favourite design of
+Satan to temper evil with a show of good and thus lure the unwary into
+the trap. The only way the world has known of defeating Satan is by
+shunning him. I invite Englishmen, who could work out the ideal the
+believe in, to join the ranks of the non-co-operationists. W.T. Stead
+prayed for the reverse of the British arms during the Boer war. Miss
+Hobbhouse invited the Boers to keep up the fight. The betrayal of India
+is much worse than the injustice done to the Boers. The Boers fought and
+bled for their rights. When therefore, we are prepared to bleed, the
+right will have become embodied, and idolatrous world will perceive it
+and do homage to it.
+
+But Messers. Popley and Phillips object that I have allied myself with
+those who would draw the sword if they could. I see nothing wrong in
+it. They represent the right no less than I do. And is it not worth
+while trying to prevent an unsheathing of the sword by helping to win
+the bloodless battle? Those who recognise the truth of the Indian
+position can only do God's work by assisting this non-violent campaign.
+
+The second objection raised by these English friends is more to the
+point. I would be guilty of wrong-doing myself if the Muslim cause was
+not just. The fact is that the Muslim claim is not to perpetuate foreign
+domination of non-Muslim or Turkish races. The Indian Mussalmans do not
+resist self-determination, but they would fight to the last the
+nefarious plan of exploiting Mesopotamia under the plea of
+self-determination. They must resist the studied attempt to humiliate
+Turkey and therefore Islam, under the false pretext of ensuring Armenian
+independence.
+
+The third objection has reference to schools. I do object to missionary
+or any schools being carried on with Government money. It is true that
+it was at one time our money. Will these good missionaries be justified
+in educating me with funds given to them by a robber who has robbed me
+of my money, religion and honour because the money was originally mine.
+
+I personally tolerated the financial robbery of India, but it would
+have been a sin to have tolerated the robbery of honour through the
+Punjab, and of religion through Turkey. This is strong language. But
+nothing less would truly describe my deep conviction. Needless to add
+that the emptying of Government aided, or affiliated, schools does not
+mean starving the young mind National Schools are coming into being as
+fast as the others are emptied.
+
+Messrs. Popley and Phillips think that my sense of justice has been
+blurred by the knowledge of the Punjab and the Khilafat wrongs. I hope
+not. I have asked friends to show me some good fruit (intended and
+deliberately produced) of the British occupation of India. And I assure
+them that I shall make the amplest amends if I find that I have erred in
+my eagerness about the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs.
+
+
+TWO ENGLISHMEN REPLY
+
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+
+Thank you for your letter to every Englishman in India, with its
+hard-hitting and its generous tone. Something within us responds to the
+note which you have struck. We are not representatives of any corporate
+body, but we think that millions of our countrymen in England, and not
+a few in India, feel as we do. The reading of your letter convinces us
+that you and we cannot be real enemies.
+
+May we say at once that in so far as the British Empire stands for the
+domination and exploitation of other races for Britain's benefit, for
+degrading treatment of any, for traffic in intoxicating liquors, for
+repressive legislation, for administration such as that which to the
+Amritsar incidents, we desire the end of it as much as you do? We quite
+understand that in the excitement of the present crisis, owing to
+certain acts of the British Administration, which we join with you in
+condemning, the Empire presents itself to you under this aspect along.
+But from personal contact with our countrymen, we know that working like
+leaven in the midst of such tendencies, as you and we deplore, is the
+faith in a better ideal--the ideal of a commonwealth of free peoples
+voluntarily linked together by the ties of common experience in the past
+and common aspirations for the future, a commonwealth which may hope to
+spread liberty and progress through the whole earth. With vast numbers
+of our countrymen we value the British Empire mainly as affording the
+possibility of the realization of such an idea and on the ground give it
+our loyal allegiance.
+
+Meanwhile we do repent of that arrogant attitude to Indians which has
+been all too common among our countrymen, we do hold Indians to be our
+brothers and equals, many of them our superiors, and we would rather be
+servants than rulers of India. We desire an administration which cannot
+he intimated either by the selfish element in Anglo-Indian political
+opinion or by any other sectional interest and which shall govern in
+accordance with the best democratic principles. We should welcome the
+convening of a National assembly of recognized leaders of the people,
+representing all shades of political opinion of every caste, race and
+creed, to frame a constitution for Swaraj. In all the things that matter
+most we are with you. Surely you and we can co-operate in the service of
+India, in such matters for example as education. It seems to us nothing
+short of a tragedy that you should be rallying Indian Patriotism to
+inaugurate a new era of good will under a watchword that divides,
+instead of uniting all.
+
+We have spoken of the large amount of common ground upon which you and
+we can stand. But frankness demands that we express our anxiety about
+some items in your programme. Leaving aside smaller questions on which
+your letter seems to us to do the British side less than justice, may we
+mention three main points? Your insistence on spiritual forces alone we
+deeply respect and desire to emulate, but we cannot understand your
+combining into it with a close alliance with those who, as you frankly
+say, would draw the sword as soon as they could.
+
+Your desire for an education truly national commands our whole-hearted
+approval. But instead of Indianizing the present system, as you could
+begin to do from the beginning of next year, or instead of creating a
+hundred institutions such as that at Bolpur and turning into them the
+stream of India's young intellectual life, you appear to be turning that
+stream out of its present channel into open sands where it may dry up.
+In other words, you seem to us to be risking the complete cessation, for
+a period possibly, of years, of all education, for a large number of
+boys and young men. Is it best, for those young men or for India that
+the present imperfect education should cease before a better education
+is ready to take its place?
+
+Your desire to unite Mohammedan and Hindu and to share with your
+Mohammedan brethren in seeking the satisfaction of Mohammedan
+aspirations, we can understand and sympathize with. But is there no
+danger, in the course which some of your party have urged upon the
+Government, that certain races in the former Ottoman Empire might be
+fixed under a foreign yoke, for worse than that which you hold the
+English yoke to be? You could not wish to purchase freedom in India at
+the price of enslavement in the middle East.
+
+To sum up, we thank you for the spirit of your letter, to which we have
+tried to respond in the same spirit. We are with you in the desire for
+an India genuinely free to develop the best that is in her and in the
+belief that best is something wonderful of which the world to-day
+stands in need.
+
+We are ready to co-operate with you and with every other man of any race
+or nationality who will help India to realize her best. Are you going to
+insist that you can have nothing to do with us if we receive a
+government grant (i.e., Indian money), for an Indian School. Surely some
+more inspiring battle cry than non-co-operation can be discovered. We
+have ventured quite frankly to point out three items in your present
+programme, which seem to us likely to hinder the attainment of your true
+ideals for Indian greatness. But those ideals themselves command our
+warm sympathy, and we desire to work, so far as we have opportunity, for
+their attainment. In fact, it is only thus that we can interpret our
+British citizenship.
+
+Yours sincerely,
+(Sd.) H.A. POPLEY,
+(Sd.) G.E. PHILLIPS.
+Bangalore,
+November 15, 1920.
+
+
+RENUNCIATION OF MEDALS
+
+Mr. Gandhi has addressed the following letter to the Viceroy:--
+
+It is not without a pang that I return the Kaisar-i-Hind gold medal
+granted to me by your predecessor for my humanitarian work in South
+Africa, the Zulu war medal granted in South Africa for my services as
+officer in charge of the Indian volunteer ambulance corps in 1906 and
+the Boer war medal fur my services as assistant superintendent of the
+Indian volunteer stretcher bearer corps during the Boer war of
+1899-1900. I venture to return these medals in pursuance of the scheme
+of non-co-operation inaugurated to-day in connection with the Khilafat
+movement. Valuable as those honours have been to me, I cannot wear them
+with an easy conscience so long as my Mussalman countrymen have to
+labour under a wrong done to their religious sentiment. Events that have
+happened during the past month have confirmed me in the opinion that the
+Imperial Government have acted in the Khilafat matter in an
+unscrupulous, immoral and unjust manner and have been moving from wrong
+to wrong in order to defend their immorality. I can retain neither
+respect nor affection for such a Government.
+
+The attitude of the Imperial and Your Excellency's Governments on the
+Punjab question has given me additional cause for grave dissatisfaction.
+I had the honour, as Your Excellency is aware, as one of the congress
+commissioners to investigate the causes of the disorders in the Punjab
+during the April of 1919. And it is my deliberate conviction that Sir
+Michael O'Dwyer was totally unfit to hold the office of Lieutenant
+Governor of Punjab and that his policy was primarily responsible for
+infuriating the mob at Amritsar. No doubt the mob excesses were
+unpardonable; incendiarism, murder of five innocent Englishmen and the
+cowardly assault on Miss Sherwood were most deplorable and uncalled for.
+But the punitive measures taken by General Dyer, Col. Frank Johnson,
+Col. O'Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram Sud, Mr. Malik Khan and
+other officers were out of all proportional to the crime of the people
+and amounted to wanton cruelty and inhumanity and almost unparalleled in
+modern times. Your excellency's light-hearted treatment of the official
+crime, your, exoneration of Sir Michael O'Dwyer, Mr. Montagu's dispatch
+and above all the shameful ignorance of the Punjab events and callous
+disregard of the feelings of Indians betrayed by the House of Lords,
+have filled me with the gravest misgivings regarding the future of the
+Empire, have estranged me completely from the present Government and
+have disabled me from tendering, as I have hitherto whole-heartedly
+tendered, my loyal co-operation.
+
+In my humble opinion the ordinary method of agitating by way of
+petitions, deputations and the like is no remedy for moving to
+repentence a Government so hopelessly indifferent to the welfare of its
+charges as the Government of India has proved to me. In European
+countries, condonation of such grievous wrongs as the Khilafat and the
+Punjab would have resulted in a bloody revolution by the people. They
+would have resisted at all costs national emasculation such as the said
+wrongs imply. But half of India is to weak to offer violent resistance
+and the other half is unwilling to do so.
+
+I have therefore ventured to suggest the remedy of non-co-operation which
+enables those who wish, to dissociate themselves from the Government and
+which, if it is unattended by violence and undertaken in an ordered
+manner, must compel it to retrace its steps and undo the wrongs
+committed. But whilst I shall pursue the policy of non-co-operation in
+so far as I can carry the people with me, I shall not lose hope that you
+will yet see your way to do justice. I therefore respectfully ask Your
+Excellency to summon a conference of the recognised leaders of the
+people and in consultation with them find a way that would placate the
+Mussalmans and do reparation to the unhappy Punjab.
+
+_August 4, 1920._
+
+
+MAHATMA GANDHI'S LETTER TO H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT
+
+The following letter has been addressed by Mr. Gandhi to his Royal
+Highness the Duke of Connaught;--
+
+Sir,
+
+Your Royal Highness must have heard a great deal about non-co-operation,
+non-co-operationists and their methods and incidentally of me its humble
+author. I fear that the information given to Your Royal Highness must
+have been in its nature one-sided. I owe it to you and to my friends and
+myself that I should place before you what I conceive to be the scope of
+non-co-operation as followed not only be me but my closest associates
+such as Messrs. Shaukat Ali and Mahomed Ali.
+
+For me it is no joy and pleasure to be actively associated in the
+boycott of your Royal Highness' visit--I have tendered loyal and
+voluntary association to the Government for an unbroken period of nearly
+30 years in the full belief that through that way lay the path of
+freedom for my country. It was therefore no slight thing for me to
+suggest to my countrymen that we should take no part in welcoming Your
+Royal Highness. Not one among us has anything against you as an English
+gentleman. We hold your person as sacred as that of a dearest friend. I
+do not know any of my friends who would not guard it with his life, if
+he found it in danger. We are not at war with individual Englishmen we
+seek not to destroy English life. We do desire to destroy a system that
+has emasculated our country in body, mind and soul. We are determined to
+battle with all our might against that in the English nature which has
+made O'Dwyerism and Dyerism possible in the Punjab and has resulted in a
+wanton affront upon Islam a faith professed by seven crores of our
+countrymen. The affront has been put in breach of the letter and the
+spirit of the solemn declaration of the Prime Minister. We consider it
+to be inconsistent with our self respect any longer to brook the spirit
+of superiority and dominance which has systematically ignored and
+disregarded the sentiments of thirty crores of the innocent people of
+India on many a vital matter. It is humiliating to us, it cannot be a
+matter of pride to you, that thirty crores of Indians should live day in
+and day out in the fear of their lives from one hundred thousand
+Englishmen and therefore be under subjection to them.
+
+Your Royal Highness has come not to end the system I have described but
+to sustain it by upholding its prestige. Your first pronouncement was a
+laudation of Lord Wellingdon. I have the privilege of knowing him. I
+believe him to be an honest and amiable gentleman who will not willingly
+hurt even a fly. But, he has certainly failed as a ruler. He allowed
+himself to be guided by those whose interest it was to support their
+power. He is reading the mind of the Dravidian province. Here in Bengal
+you are issuing a certificate of merit to a Governor who is again from
+all I have heard an estimable gentleman. But he knows nothing of the
+heart of Bengal and its yearnings. Bengal is not Calcutta. Fort William
+and the palaces of Calcutta represent an insolent exploitation of the
+unmurmuring and highly cultured peasantry of this fair province.
+Non-co-operationists have come to the conclusion that they must not be
+deceived by the reforms that tinker with the problem of India's distress
+and humiliation. Nor must they be impatient and angry. We must not in
+our impatient anger resort, to stupid violence. We freely admit that we
+must take our due share of the blame for the existing state. It is not
+so much the British guns that are responsible fur our subjection, as our
+voluntary co-operation. Our non-participation in a hearty welcome to
+your Royal Highness is thus in no sense a demonstration against your
+high personage but it is against the system you have come to uphold. I
+know that individual Englishmen cannot even if they will alter the
+English nature all of a sudden. If we would be equals of Englishmen we
+must cast off fear. We must learn to be self-reliant and independent of
+the schools, courts, protection, and patronage of a Government, we seek
+to end, if it will not mend. Hence this non-violent non-co-operation. I
+know that we have not all yet become non-violent in speech and deed. But
+the results so far achieved have I assure Your Royal Highness, been
+amazing. The people have understood the secret and the value of
+non-violence as they have never done before. He who runs may see that
+this a religious, purifying movement. We are leaving off drink, we are
+trying to rid India of the curse of untouchability. We are trying to
+throw off foreign tinsel splendour and by reverting to the spinning
+wheel reviving the ancient and the poetic simplicity of life. We hope
+thereby to sterilize the existing harmful institution. I ask Your Royal
+Highness as an Englishman to study this movement and its possibilities
+for the Empire and the world. We are at war with nothing that is good in
+the world. In protecting Islam in the manner we are, we are protecting
+all religions. In protecting the honour of India we are protecting the
+honour of humanity. For our means are hurtful to none. We desire to live
+on terms of friendship with Englishmen but that friendship must be
+friendship of equals in both theory and practice. And we must continue
+to non-co-operate, i.e. to purify ourselves till the goal is achieved.
+
+I ask Your Royal Highness and through you every Englishman to
+appreciate the view-point of the non-co-operationists.
+
+I beg to remain,
+Your Royal Highness's faithful servant,
+(Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+_February_, 1921
+
+
+THE GREATEST THING
+
+It is to be wished that non-co-operationists will clearly recognise that
+nothing can stop the onward march of the nation as violence. Ireland may
+gain its freedom by violence. Turkey may regain her lost possessions by
+violence within measurable distance of time. But India cannot win her
+freedom by violence for a century, because her people are not built in
+the manner of other nations. They have been nurtured in the traditions
+of suffering. Rightly or wrongly, for good or ill, Islam too has evolved
+along peaceful lines in India. And I make bold to say that, if the
+honour of Islam is to be vindicated through its followers in India, it
+will only be by methods of peaceful, silent, dignified, conscious, and
+courageous suffering. The more I study that wonderful faith, the more
+convinced I become that the glory of Islam is due not to the sword but
+to the sufferings, the renunciation, and the nobility of its early
+Caliphs. Islam decayed when its followers, mistaking the evil for the
+good, dangled the sword in the face of man, and lost sight of the
+godliness, the humility, and austerity of its founder and his disciples.
+But, I am not at the present moment, concerned with showing that the
+basis of Islam, as of all religions, is not violence but suffering not
+the taking of life but the giving of it.
+
+What I am anxious to show is that non-co-operationists must be true as
+well to the spirit as to the letter of their vow if they would gain
+Swaraj within one year. They may forget non-co-operation but they dare
+not forget non-violence. Indeed, non-co-operation is non-violence. We
+are violent when we sustain a government whose creed is violence. It
+bases itself finally not on right but on might. Its last appeal is not
+to reason, nor the heart, but to the sword. We are tired of this creed
+and we have risen against it. Let us not ourselves belie our profession
+by being violent. Though the English are very few, they are organised
+for violence. Though we are many we cannot be organised for violence for
+a long time to come. Violence for us is a gospel or despair.
+
+I have seen a pathetic letter from a god-fearing English woman who
+defends Dyerism for she thinks that, if General Dyer had not enacted
+Jallianwala, women and children would have been murdered by us. If we
+are such brutes as to desire the blood of innocent women and children,
+we deserve to be blotted out from the face of the earth. There is the
+other side. It did not strike this good lady that, if we were friends,
+the price that her countrymen paid at Jallianwala for buying their
+safety was too great. They gained their safety at the cost of their
+humanity. General Dyer has been haltingly blamed, and his evil genius
+Sir Michael O'Dwyer entirely exonerated because Englishmen do not want
+to leave this country of fields even if everyone of us has to be killed.
+If we go mad again as we did at Amritsar, let there be no mistake that a
+blacker Jallianwala will be enacted.
+
+Shall we copy Dyerism and O'Dwyerism even whilst we are condemning it?
+Let not our rock be violence and devilry. Our rock must be non-violence
+and godliness. Let us, workers, be clear as to what we are about.
+_Swaraj depends upon our ability to control all the forces of violence
+on our side._ Therefore there is no Swaraj within one year, if there is
+violence on the part of the people.
+
+We must then refrain from sitting _dhurna_, we must refrain from crying
+'shame, shame' to anybody, we must not use any coercion to persuade our
+people to adopt our way. We must guarantee to them the same freedom we
+claim for ourselves. We must not tamper with the masses. It is dangerous
+to make political use of factory labourers or the peasantry--not that we
+are not entitled to do so, but we are not ready for it. We have
+neglected their political (as distinguished from literary) education all
+these long years. We have not got enough honest, intelligent, reliable,
+and brave workers to enable us to act upon these countrymen of ours.
+
+
+
+
+IX. MAHATMA GANDHI'S STATEMENT
+
+
+[The following is the Statement of Mahatma Gandhi made before the Court
+during his Trial in Ahmedabad on the 18th March 1921.]
+
+Before reading his written statement Mahatma Gandhi spoke a few words as
+introductory remarks to the whole statement. He said: Before I read this
+statement, I would like to state that I entirely endorse the learned
+Advocate-General's remarks in connection with my humble self. I think
+that he was entirely fair to me in all the statements that he has made,
+because it is very true and I have no desire whatsoever to conceal from
+this Court the fact that to preach disaffection towards the existing
+system of Government has become almost a passion with me. And the
+learned Advocate-General is also entirely in the right when he says that
+my preaching of disaffection did not commence with my connection with
+"Young India" but that it commenced much earlier and in the statement
+that I am about to read it will be my painful duty to admit before this
+Court that it commenced much earlier than the period stated by the
+Advocate-General. It is the most painful duty with me but I have to
+discharge that duty knowing the responsibility that rested upon my
+shoulders. And I wish to endorse all the blame that the
+Advocate-General has thrown on my shoulders in connection with the
+Bombay occurrence, Madras occurrences, and the Chouri Choura occurrences
+thinking over these things deeply, and sleeping over them night after
+night and examining my heart I have come to the conclusion that it is
+impossible for me to dissociate myself from the diabolical crimes of
+Chouri Choura or the mad outrages of Bombay. He is quite right when he
+says that as a man of responsibility, a man having received a fair share
+of education, having had a fair share of experience of this world, I
+should know them. I knew that I was playing with fire. I ran the risk
+and if I was set free I would still do the same. I would be failing in
+my duty if I do not do so. I have felt it this morning that I would have
+failed in my duty if I did not say all what I said here just now. I
+wanted to avoid violence. Non-violence is the first article of my faith.
+It is the last article of my faith. But I had to make my choice. I had
+either to submit to a system which I considered has done an irreparable
+harm to my country or incur the risk of the mad fury of my people
+bursting forth when they understood the truth from my lips. I know that
+my people have sometimes gone mad. I am deeply sorry for it; and I am,
+therefore, here to submit not to a light penalty but to the highest
+penalty. I do not ask for mercy. I do not plead any extenuating act. I
+am here, therefore, to invite and submit to the highest penalty that can
+be inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what
+appears to me to be the highest duty of a citizen. The only course open
+to you, Mr. Judge, is, as I am just going to say in my statement, either
+to resign your post or inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe
+that the system and law you are assisting to administer are good for the
+people. I do not expect that kind of conversion. But by the time I have
+finished with my statement you will, perhaps, have a glimpse of what is
+raging within my breast to run this maddest risk which a sane man
+can run.
+
+WRITTEN STATEMENT
+
+I owe it perhaps to the Indian public and to the public in England to
+placate which this prosecution is mainly taken up that I should explain
+why from a staunch loyalist and co-operator I have become an
+uncompromising disaffectionist and non-co-operator. To the Court too I
+should say why I plead guilty to the charge of promoting disaffection
+towards the Government established by law in India. My public life
+began in 1893 in South Africa in troubled weather. My first contact with
+British authority in that country was not of a happy character. I
+discovered that as a man and as an Indian I had no rights. On the
+contrary I discovered that I had no rights as a man because I was
+an Indian.
+
+But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of Indians was an
+excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically and mainly good. I gave
+the Government my voluntary and hearty co-operation, criticising it
+fully where I felt it was faulty but never wishing its destruction.
+
+Consequently when the existence of the Empire was threatened in 1899 by
+the Boer challenge, I offered my services to it, raised a volunteer
+ambulance corps and served at several actions that took place for the
+relief of Ladysmith. Similarly in 1906 at the time of the Zulu revolt I
+raised a stretcher-bearer party and served till the end of the
+'rebellion'. On both these occasions I received medals and was even
+mentioned in despatches. For my work in South Africa I was given by Lord
+Hardinge a Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal. When the war broke out in 1914
+between England and Germany I raised a volunteer ambulance corps in
+London consisting of the then resident Indians in London, chiefly
+students. Its work was acknowledged by the authorities to be valuable.
+Lastly in India when a special appeal was made at the War Conference
+in Delhi in 1917 by Lord Chelmsford for recruits, I struggled at the
+cost of my health to raise a corps in Kheda and the response was being
+made when the hostilities ceased and orders were received that no more
+recruits were wanted. In all those efforts at service I was actuated by
+the belief that it was possible by such services to gain a status of
+full equality in the Empire for my countrymen.
+
+The first shock came in the shape of the Rowlalt Act a law designed to
+rob the people of all real freedom. I felt called upon to lead an
+intensive agitation against it. Then followed the Punjab horrors
+beginning with the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh and culminating in
+brawling orders, public floggings and other indescribable humiliations,
+I discovered too that the plighted word of the Prime Minister to the
+Mussalmans of India regarding the integrity of Turkey and the holy
+places of Islam was not likely to be fulfilled. But in spite of the
+foreboding and the grave warnings of friends, at the Amritsar Congress
+in 1919 I fought for co-operation and working the Montagu-Chelmsford
+reforms, hoping that the Prime Minister would redeem his promise to the
+Indian Mussalmans, that the Punjab wound would be healed and that the
+reforms inadequate and unsatisfactory though they were, marked a new era
+of hope in the life of India. But all that hope was shattered. The
+Khilafat promise was not to be redeemed. The Punjab crime was
+white-washed and most culprits went not only unpunished but remained in
+service and some continued to draw pensions from the Indian revenue, and
+in some cases were even rewarded. I saw too that not only did the
+reforms not mark a change of heart, but they were only a method of
+further draining India of her wealth and of prolonging her servitude.
+
+I came reluctantly to the conclusion that the British connection had
+made India more helpless than she ever was before, politically and
+economically. A disarmed India has no power of resistance against any
+aggressor if she wanted to engage in an armed conflict with him. So much
+is this the case that some of our best men consider that India must take
+generations before she can achieve the Dominion status. She has become
+so poor that she has little power of resisting famines. Before the
+British advent India spun and wove in her millions of cottages just the
+supplement she needed for adding to her meagre agricultural resources.
+The cottage industry, so vital for India's existence, has been ruined by
+incredibly heartless and inhuman processes as described by English
+witnesses. Little do town-dwellers know how the semi-starved masses of
+Indians are slowly sinking to lifelessness. Little do they know that
+their miserable comfort represents the brokerage they get for the work
+they do for the foreign exploiter, that the profits and the brokerage
+are sucked from the masses. Little do they realise that the Government
+established by law in British India is carried on for this exploitation
+of the masses. No sophistry, no jugglery in figures can explain away the
+evidence the skeletons in many villages present to the naked eye. I have
+no doubt whatsoever that both England and the town dwellers of India
+will have to answer, if there is a God above, for this crime against
+humanity which is perhaps unequalled in history. The law itself in this
+country has been used to serve the foreign exploiter. My unbiased,
+examination of the Punjab Martial Law cases had led me to believe that
+at least ninety-five per cent. of convictions were wholly bad. My
+experience of political cases in India leads me to the conclusion that
+in nine out of every ten the condemned men were totally innocent. Their
+crime consisted in love of their country. In ninety-nine cases out of
+hundred justice has been denied to Indians as against Europeans in the
+Court of India. This is not an exaggerated picture. It is the experience
+of almost every Indian who has had anything to do such cases. In my
+opinion the administration of the law is thus prostituted consciously or
+unconsciously for the benefit of the exploiter. The greatest misfortune
+is that Englishmen and their Indian associates in the administration of
+the country do not know that they are engaged in the crime I have
+attempted to describe. I am satisfied that many English and Indian
+officials honestly believe that they are administering one of the best
+systems devised in the world and that India is making steady though slow
+progress. They do not know that a subtle but effective system of
+terrorism and an organised display of force on the one hand and the
+deprivation of all powers of retaliation of self-defence on the other
+have emasculated the people and induced in them the habit of simulation.
+This awful habit has added to the ignorance and the self-deception of
+the administrators. Section 124-A under which I am happily charged is
+perhaps the prince among the political sections of the Indian Penal Code
+designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen. Affection cannot be
+manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection for a person
+or thing one should be free to give the fullest expression to his
+disaffection so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite to
+violence. But the section under which mere promotion of disaffection is
+a crime. I have studied some of the cases tried under it, and I know
+that some of the most loved of India's patriots have been convicted
+under it. I consider it a privilege therefore, to be charged under it.
+I have endeavoured to give in their briefest outline the reasons for my
+disaffection. I have no personal ill-will against any single
+administrator, much less can I have any disaffection towards the King's
+person. But I hold it to be a virtue to be disaffected towards a
+Government which in its totality has done more harm to India than any
+previous system. India is less manly under the British rule than she
+ever was before. Holding such a belief, I consider it to be a sin to
+have affection for the system. And it has been a precious privilege for
+me to be able to write what I have in the various articles tendered in
+evidence against me.
+
+In fact I believe that I have rendered a service to India and England by
+showing in non-co-operation the way out of the unnatural state in which
+both are living. In my humble opinion, non-co-operation with evil is as
+much a duty as is co-operation with good. But in the past,
+non-co-operation has been deliberately expressed in violence to the evil
+doer. I am endeavouring to show to my countrymen that violent
+non-co-operation only multiplies evil and that as evil can only be
+sustained by violence, withdrawal of support of evil requires complete
+abstention from violence. Non-violent implies voluntary submission to
+the penalty for non-co-operation with evil. I am here, therefore, to
+invite and submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can he
+inflicted upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears
+to me to be the highest duty of a citizen. The only course open to you,
+the Judge and the Assessors, is either to resign your posts and thus
+dissociate yourselves from evil if you feel that the law you are called
+upon to administer is an evil and that in reality I am innocent, or to
+inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe that the system and
+the law you are assisting to administer are good for the people of this
+country and that my activity is therefore injurious to the public weal.
+
+M. K. GHANDI.
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***
diff --git a/old/10366-h/10366-h.htm b/old/10366-h/10366-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1430aeb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/10366-h/10366-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,8169 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
+<title>Freedom’s battle | Project Gutenberg</title>
+
+<style type="text/css">
+
+body { margin-left: 20%;
+       margin-right: 20%;
+       text-align: justify; }
+
+h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 {text-align: center; font-style: normal; font-weight:
+normal; line-height: 1.5; margin-top: .5em; margin-bottom: .5em;}
+
+h1 {font-size: 300%;
+    margin-top: 0.6em;
+    margin-bottom: 0.6em;
+    letter-spacing: 0.12em;
+    word-spacing: 0.2em;
+    text-indent: 0em;}
+h2 {font-size: 150%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em;}
+h3 {font-size: 130%; margin-top: 1em;}
+h4 {font-size: 120%;}
+h5 {font-size: 110%;}
+
+.no-break {page-break-before: avoid;} /* for epubs */
+
+div.chapter {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em;}
+
+hr {width: 80%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;}
+
+p {text-indent: 1em;
+   margin-top: 0.25em;
+   margin-bottom: 0.25em; }
+
+p.letter {text-indent: 0%;
+          margin-left: 10%;
+          margin-right: 10%;
+          margin-top: 1em;
+          margin-bottom: 1em; }
+
+p.noindent {text-indent: 0% }
+
+p.center  {text-align: center;
+           text-indent: 0em;
+           margin-top: 1em;
+           margin-bottom: 1em; }
+
+a:link {color:blue; text-decoration:none}
+a:visited {color:blue; text-decoration:none}
+a:hover {color:red}
+
+</style>
+</head>
+<body>
+<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***</div>
+
+<p>
+[Transcriber’s Note: The inconsistent spelling of the original has been
+preserved in this etext.]
+</p>
+
+<h1>FREEDOM’S BATTLE</h1>
+
+<h3>BEING A COMPREHENSIVE COLLECTION OF WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ON THE PRESENT
+SITUATION</h3>
+
+<h2 class="no-break">BY MAHATMA GANDHI</h2>
+
+<hr />
+
+<h3>Second Edition</h3>
+
+<h3>1922</h3>
+
+<p class="center">
+The Publishers express their indebtedness to the Editor and Publisher of the
+“Young India” for allowing the free use of the articles appeared in that
+journal under the name of Mahatma Gandhi, and also to Mr. C. Rajagopalachar for
+the valuable introduction and help rendered in bringing out the book.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2>CONTENTS</h2>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap01">I. INTRODUCTION</a></h3>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap02">II. THE KHILAFAT</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Why I have joined the Khilafat Movement<br/>
+The Turkish Treaty<br/>
+Turkish Peace Terms<br/>
+The Suzerainty over Arabia<br/>
+Further Questions Answered<br/>
+Mr. Candler’s Open Letter<br/>
+In process of keeping<br/>
+Appeal to the Viceroy<br/>
+The Premier’s reply<br/>
+The Muslim Representation<br/>
+Criticism of the Manifesto<br/>
+The Mahomedan Decision<br/>
+Mr. Andrew’s Difficulty<br/>
+The Khilafat Agitation<br/>
+Hijarat and its Meaning
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap03">III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Political Freemasonry<br/>
+The Duty of the Punjabec<br/>
+General Dyer<br/>
+The Punjab Sentences
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap04">IV. SWARAJ</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Swaraj in one year<br/>
+British Rule an evil<br/>
+A movement of purification<br/>
+Why was India lost<br/>
+Swaraj my ideal<br/>
+On the wrong track<br/>
+The Congress Constitution<br/>
+Swaraj in nine months<br/>
+The Attainment of Swaraj
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap05">V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+The Hindus and the Mahomedans<br/>
+Hindu Mahomedan unity<br/>
+Hindu Muslim unity
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap06">VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Depressed Classes<br/>
+Amelioration of the depressed classes<br/>
+The Sin of Untouchability
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap07">VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Indians abroad<br/>
+Indians overseas<br/>
+Pariahs of the Empire
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap08">VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION</a></h3>
+
+<p class="noindent">
+Non-co-operation<br/>
+Mr. Montagu on the Khilafat Agitation<br/>
+At the call of the country<br/>
+Non-co-operation explained<br/>
+Religious Authority for non-co-operation<br/>
+The inwardness of non-co-operation<br/>
+A missionary on non-co-operation<br/>
+How to work non-co-operation<br/>
+Speech at Madras<br/>
+” Trichinopoly<br/>
+” Calicut<br/>
+” Mangalore<br/>
+” Bexwada<br/>
+The Congress<br/>
+Who is disloyal<br/>
+Crusade against non-co-operation<br/>
+Speech at Muxafarbail<br/>
+Ridicule replacing Repression<br/>
+The Viceregal pronouncement<br/>
+From Ridicule to—?<br/>
+To every Englishman In India<br/>
+One step enough for me<br/>
+The need for humility<br/>
+Some Questions Answered<br/>
+Pledges broken<br/>
+More Objections answered<br/>
+Mr. Pennington’s Objections Answered<br/>
+Some doubts<br/>
+Rejoinder<br/>
+Two Englishmen Reply<br/>
+Letter to the Viceroy—Renunciation of Medals<br/>
+Letter to H.R.H. The Duke of Connaught<br/>
+The Greatest thing
+</p>
+
+<h3><a href="#chap09">IX. MAHATMA GANDHI’S STATEMENT</a></h3>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap01"></a>I. INTRODUCTION</h2>
+
+<p>
+After the great war it is difficult, to point out a single nation that is
+happy; but this has come out of the war, that there is not a single nation
+outside India, that is not either free or striving to be free.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is said that we, too, are on the road to freedom, that it is better to be on
+the certain though slow course of gradual unfoldment of freedom than to take
+the troubled and dangerous path of revolution whether peaceful or violent, and
+that the new Reforms are a half-way house to freedom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The new constitution granted to India keeps all the military forces, both in
+the direction and in the financial control, entirely outside the scope of
+responsibility to the people of India. What does this mean? It means that the
+revenues of India are spent away on what the nation does not want. But after
+the mid-Eastern complications and the fresh Asiatic additions to British
+Imperial spheres of action. This Indian military servitude is a clear danger to
+national interests.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The new constitution gives no scope for retrenchment and therefore no scope for
+measures of social reform except by fresh taxation, the heavy burden of which
+on the poor will outweigh all the advantages of any reforms. It maintains all
+the existing foreign services, and the cost of the administrative machinery
+high as it already is, is further increased.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The reformed constitution keeps all the fundamental liberties of person,
+property, press, and association completely under bureaucratic control. All
+those laws which give to the irresponsible officers of the Executive Government
+of India absolute powers to override the popular will, are still unrepealed. In
+spite of the tragic price paid in the Punjab for demonstrating the danger of
+unrestrained power in the hands of a foreign bureaucracy and the inhumanity of
+spirit by which tyranny in a panic will seek to save itself, we stand just
+where we were before, at the mercy of the Executive in respect of all our
+fundamental liberties.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Not only is Despotism intact in the Law, but unparalleled crimes and cruelties
+against the people have been encouraged and even after boastful admissions and
+clearest proofs, left unpunished. The spirit of unrepentant cruelty has thus
+been allowed to permeate the whole administration.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MUSSALMAN AGONY</h3>
+
+<p>
+To understand our present condition it is not enough to realise the general
+political servitude. We should add to it the reality and the extent of the
+injury inflicted by Britain on Islam, and thereby on the Mussalmans of India.
+The articles of Islamic faith which it is necessary to understand in order to
+realise why Mussalman India, which was once so loyal is now so strongly moved
+to the contrary are easily set out and understood. Every religion should be
+interpreted by the professors of that religion. The sentiments and religious
+ideas of Muslims founded on the traditions of long generations cannot be
+altered now by logic or cosmopolitanism, as others understand it. Such an
+attempt is the more unreasonable when it is made not even as a bonafide and
+independent effort of proselytising logic or reason, but only to justify a
+treaty entered into for political and worldly purposes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Khalifa is the authority that is entrusted with the duty of defending
+Islam. He is the successor to Muhammad and the agent of God on earth. According
+to Islamic tradition he must possess sufficient temporal power effectively to
+protect Islam against non-Islamic powers and he should be one elected or
+accepted by the Mussalman world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is the area bounded by the Red Sea, the Arabian Sea, the
+Persian Gulf, and the waters of the Tigris and the Euphrates. It is the sacred
+Home of Islam and the centre towards which Islam throughout the world turns in
+prayer. According to the religious injunctions of the Mussalmans, this entire
+area should always be under Muslim control, its scientific border being
+believed to be a protection for the integrity of Islamic life and faith. Every
+Mussalman throughout the world is enjoined to sacrifice his all, if necessary,
+for preserving the Jazirat-ul-Arab under complete Muslim control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The sacred places of Islam should be in the possession of the Khalifa. They
+should not merely be free for the entry of the Mussalmans of the world by the
+grace or the license of non-Muslim powers, but should be the possession and
+property of Islam in the fullest degree.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is a religions obligation, on every Mussalman to go forth and help the
+Khalifa in every possible way where his unaided efforts in the defence of the
+Khilifat have failed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The grievance of the Indian Mussalmans is that a government that pretends to
+protect and spread peace and happiness among them has no right to ignore or set
+aside these articles of their cherished faith.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+According to the Peace Treaty imposed on the nominal Government at
+Constantinople, the Khalifa far from having the temporal authority or power
+needed to protect Islam, is a prisoner in his own city. He is to have no real
+fighting force, army or navy, and the financial control over his own
+territories is vested in other Governments. His capital is cut off from the
+rest of his possessions by an intervening permanent military occupation. It is
+needless to say that under these conditions he is absolutely incapable of
+protecting Islam as the Mussulmans of the world understand it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Jazirat-ul-Arab is split up; a great part of it given to powerful
+non-Muslim Powers, the remnant left with petty chiefs dominated all round by
+non-Muslim Governments.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Holy places of Islam are all taken out of the Khalifa’s kingdom, some left
+in the possession of minor Muslim chiefs of Arabia entirely dependent on
+European control, and some relegated to newly-formed non-Muslim states.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In a word, the Mussalman’s free choice of a Khalifa such as Islamic tradition
+defines is made an unreality.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE HINDU DHARMA</h3>
+
+<p>
+The age of misunderstanding and mutual warfare among religions is gone. If
+India has a mission of its own to the world, it is to establish the unity and
+the truth of all religions. This unity is established by mutual help and
+understanding between the various religions. It has come as a rare privilege to
+the Hindus in the fulfilment of this mission of India to stand up in defence of
+Islam against the onslaught of the earth-greed of the military powers of the
+west.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Dharma of Hinduism in this respect is placed beyond all doubt by the
+Bhagavat Gita.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Those who are the votaries of other Gods and worship them with faith—even they,
+O Kaunteya, worship me alone, though not as the Shastra requires—IX, 23.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whoever being devoted wishes in perfect faith to worship a particular form, of
+such a one I maintain the same faith unshaken,—VII 21.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Hinduism will realise its fullest beauty when in the fulfilment of this
+cardinal tenet, its followers offer themselves as sacrifice for the protection
+of the faith of their brothers, the Mussalmans.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If Hindus and Mussalmans attain the height of courage and sacrifice that is
+needed for this battle on behalf of Islam against the greed of the West, a
+victory will be won not alone for Islam, but for Christianity itself.
+Militarism has robbed the crucified God of his name and his very cross and the
+World has been mistaking it to be Christianity. After the battle of Islam is
+won, Islam and Hinduism together can emancipate Christianity itself from the
+lust for power and wealth which have strangled it now and the true Christianity
+of the Gospels will be established. This battle of non-cooperation with its
+suffering and peaceful withdrawal of service will once for all establish its
+superiority over the power of brute force and unlimited slaughter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What a glorious privilege it is to play our part in this history of the world,
+when Hinduism and Christianity will unite on behalf of Islam, and in that
+strife of mutual love and support each religion will attain its own truest
+shape and beauty.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AN ENDURING TREATY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Swaraj for India has two great problems, one internal and the other external.
+How can Hindus and Mussalmans so different from each other form a strong and
+united nation governing themselves peacefully? This was the question for years,
+and no one could believe that the two communities could suffer for each other
+till the miracle was actually worked. The Khilafat has solved the problem. By
+the magic of suffering, each has truly touched and captured the other’s heart,
+and the Nation now is strong and united.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Not internal strength and unity alone has the Khilafat brought to India. The
+great block in the way of Indian aspiration for full freedom was the problem of
+external defence. How is India, left to herself defend her frontiers against
+her Mussalman neighbours? None but emasculated nations would accept such
+difficulties and responsibilities as an answer to the demand for freedom. It is
+only a people whose mentality has been perverted that can soothe itself with
+the domination by one race from a distant country, as a preventative against
+the aggression of another, a permanent and natural neighbour. Instead of
+developing strength to protect ourselves against those near whom we are
+permanently placed, a feeling of incurable impotence has been generated. Two
+strong and brave nations can live side by side, strengthening each other
+through enforcing constant vigilance, and maintain in full vigour each its own
+national strength, unity, patriotism and resources. If a nation wishes to be
+respected by its neighbours it has to develop and enter into honourable
+treaties. These are the only natural conditions of national liberty; but not a
+surrender to distant military powers to save oneself from one’s neighbours.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat has solved the problem of distrust of Asiatic neighbours out of
+our future. The Indian struggle for the freedom of Islam has brought about a
+more lasting <i>entente</i> and a more binding treaty between the people of
+India and the people of the Mussalman states around it than all the ententes
+and treaties among the Governments of Europe. No wars of aggression are
+possible where the common people on the two sides have become grateful friends.
+The faith of the Mussulman is a better sanction than the seal of the European
+Diplomats and plenipotentiaries. Not only has this great friendship between
+India and the Mussulman States around it removed for all time the fear of
+Mussulman aggression from outside, but it has erected round India, a solid wall
+of defence against all aggression from beyond against all greed from Europe,
+Russia or elsewhere. No secret diplomacy could establish a better
+<i>entente</i> or a stronger federation than what this open and
+non-governmental treaty between Islam and India has established. The Indian
+support of the Khilafat has, as if by a magic wand, converted what Was once the
+Pan-Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship and defence for
+India.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE BRITISH CONNECTION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Every nation like every individual is born free. Absolute freedom is the
+birthright of every people. The only limitations are those which a people may
+place over themselves. The British connection is invaluable as long as it is a
+defence against any worse connection sought to be imposed by violence. But it
+is only a means to an end, not a mandate of Providence of Nature. The alliance
+of neighbours, born of suffering for each other’s sake, for ends that purify
+those that suffer, is necessarily a more natural and more enduring bond than
+one that has resulted from pure greed on the one side and weakness on the
+other. Where such a natural and enduring alliance has been accomplished among
+Asiatic peoples and not only between the respective governments, it may truly
+be felt to be more valuable than the British connection itself, after that
+connection has denied freedom or equality, and even justice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE ALTERNATIVE</h3>
+
+<p>
+Is violence or total surrender the only choice open to any people to whom
+Freedom or Justice is denied? Violence at a time when the whole world has
+learnt from bitter experience the futility of violence is unworthy of a country
+whose ancient people’s privilege, it was, to see this truth long ago.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Violence may rid a nation of its foreign masters but will only enslave it from
+inside. No nation can really be free which is at the mercy of its army and its
+military heroes. If a people rely for freedom on its soldiers, the soldiers
+will rule the country, not the people. Till the recent awakening of the workers
+of Europe, this was the only freedom which the powers of Europe really enjoyed.
+True freedom can exist only when those who produce, not those who destroy or
+know only to live on other’s labour, are the masters.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Even were violence the true road to freedom, is violence possible to a nation
+which has been emasculated and deprived of all weapons, and the whole world is
+hopelessly in advance of all our possibilities in the manufacture and the
+wielding of weapons of destruction.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Submission or withdrawal of co-operation is the real and only alternative
+before India. Submission to injustice puts on the tempting garb of peace and,
+gradual progress, but there is no surer way to death than submission to wrong.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE FIFTH UPAYA</h3>
+
+<p>
+Our ancients classified the arts of conquest into four well-known
+<i>Upayas</i>. Sama, Dana, Uheda, and Danda. A fifth Upuya was recognised
+sometimes by our ancients, which they called <i>Upeshka</i>. It is this
+<i>Punchamopaya</i> that is placed by Mahatma Gandhi before the people of India
+in the form of Non-cooperation as an alternative, besides violence, to
+surrender.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Where in any case negotiations have failed and the enemy is neither corruptible
+nor incapable of being divided, and a resort to violence has failed or would
+certainly be futile the method of <i>Upeshka</i> remains to be applied to the
+case. Indeed, when the very existence of the power we seek to defeat really
+depends on our continuous co-operation with it, and where our <i>Upeskha</i>
+its very life, our <i>Upeskha</i> or non-co-operation is the most natural and
+most effective expedient that we can employ to bend it to our will.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+No Englishman believes that his nation can rule or keep India for a day unless
+the people of India actively co-operate to maintain that rule. Whether the
+co-operation be given willingly or through ignorance, cupidity, habit or fear,
+the withdrawal of that co-operation means impossibility of foreign rule in
+India. Some of us may not realise this, but those who govern us have long ago
+known and are now keenly alive to this truth. The active assistance of the
+people of this country in the supply of the money, men, and knowledge of the
+languages, customs and laws of the land, is the main-spring of the continuous
+life of the foreign administration. Indeed the circumstances of British rule in
+this country are such that but for a double supply of co-operation on the part
+of the governed, it must have broken down long ago. Any system of race
+domination is unnatural, and can be kept up only by active coercion through a
+foreign-recruited public, service invested with large powers, however much it
+may be helped by the perversion of mentality shaping the education of the youth
+of the country. The foreign recruited service must necessarily be very highly
+paid. This creates a wrong standard for the Indian recruited officials also.
+Military expenditure has to cover not only the needs of defence against foreign
+aggression, but also the possibilities of internal unrest and rebellion. Police
+charges have to go beyond the prevention and deletion of ordinary crime, for
+though this would be the only expenditure over the police of a self-governing
+people where any nation governs anther, a large chapter of artificial crime has
+to be added to the penal code, and the work of the police extended accordingly.
+The military and public organisations must also be such as not only to result
+in outside efficiency, but also at the same time guarantee internal impotency.
+This is to be achieved by the adjustment and careful admixture of officers and
+units from different races. All this can be and is maintained only by extra
+cost and extra-active co-operation on the part of the people. The slightest
+withdrawal of assistance must put such machinery out of gear. This is the basis
+of the programme of progressive non violent non-co-operation that has been
+adopted by the National Congress.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME OBJECTIONS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The powerful character of the measure, however, leads some to object to
+non-co-operation because of that very reason. Striking as it does at the very
+root of Government in India, they fear that non-co-operation must lead to
+anarchy, and that the remedy is worse than the disease. This is an objection
+arising out of insufficient allowance for human nature. It is assumed that the
+British people will allow their connection with India to cease rather than
+remedy the wrongs for which we seek justice. If this assumption be correct, no
+doubt it must lead to separation and possibly also anarchy for a time. If the
+operatives in a factory have grievances, negotiations having failed, a strike
+would on a similar argument be never admissible. Unyielding obstinacy being
+presumed, it must end in the closing down of the factory and break up of the
+men. But if in ninety-nine out of a hundred cases it is not the case that
+strikes end in this manner, it is more unlikely that, instead of righting the
+manifest wrongs that India complains about, the British people will value their
+Indian Dominion so low as to prefer to allow us to non-co-operate up to the
+point of separation. It would be a totally false reading of British character
+and British history. But if such wicked obstinacy be ultimately shown by a
+government, far be it from us to prefer peace at the price of abject surrender
+to wrong. There is no anarchy greater than the moral anarchy of surrender to
+unrepentant wrong. We may, however, be certain that if we show the strength and
+unity necessary for non-co-operation, long before we progress with it far, we
+shall have developed true order and true self-government wherein there is no
+place for anarchy.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Another fear sometimes expressed that, if non-co-operation were to succeed, the
+British would have to go, leaving us unable to defend ourselves against foreign
+aggression. If we have the self-respect, the patriotism, the tenacious purpose,
+and the power of organisation that are necessary to drive the British out from
+their entrenched position, no lesser foreign power will dare after that,
+undertake the futile task of conquering or enslaving us.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is sometimes said that non-co-operation is negative and destructive of the
+advantages which a stable government has conferred on us. That non-co-operation
+is negative is merely a half-truth. Non-co-operation with the government means
+greater co-operation among ourselves, greater mutual dependence among the many
+different castes and classes of our country. Non-co-operation is not mere
+negation. It will lead to the recovery of the lost art of co-operation among
+ourselves. Long dependence on an outside government which by its interference
+suppressed or prevented the consequences of our differences has made us forget
+the duty of mutual trust and the art of friendly adjustment. Having allowed
+Government to do everything for us, we have gradually become incapable of doing
+anything for ourselves. Even if we had no grievance against this Government,
+non-co-operation with it for a time would be desirable so far as it would
+perforce lead us to trusting and working with one another and thereby
+strengthen the bonds of national unity.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The most tragic consequence of dependence on the complex machinery of a foreign
+government is the atrophy of the communal sense. The direct touch with
+administrative cause and effect is lost. An outside protector performs all the
+necessary functions of the community in a mysterious manner, and communal
+duties are not realised by the people. The one reason addressed by those who
+deny to us the capacity for self-rule is the insufficient appreciation by the
+people of communal duties and discipline. It is only by actually refraining for
+a time from dependence on Government that we can regain self-reliance, learn
+first-hand the value of communal duties and build up true national
+co-operation. Non-co-operation is a practical and positive training in
+Swadharma, and Swadharma alone can lead up to Swaraj.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The negative is the best and most impressive method of enforcing the value of
+the positive. Few outside government circles realise in the present police
+anything but tyranny and corruption. But if the units of the present police
+were withdrawn we would soon perforce set about organising a substitute, and
+most people would realise the true social value of a police force. Few realise
+in the present taxes anything but coercion and waste, but most people would
+soon see that a share of every man’s income is due for common purposes and that
+there are many limitations to the economical management of public institutions;
+we would begin once again to contribute directly, build up and maintain
+national institutions in the place of those that now mysteriously spring up and
+live under Government orders.
+</p>
+
+<h3>EMANCIPATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Freedom is a priceless thing. But it is a stable possession only when it is
+acquired by a nation’s strenuous effort. What is not by chance or outward
+circumstance, or given by the generous impulse of a tyrant prince or people is
+not a reality. A nation will truly enjoy freedom only when in the process of
+winning or defending its freedom, it has been purified and consolidated through
+and through, until liberty has become a part of its very soul. Otherwise it
+would be but a change of the form of government, which might please the fancy
+of politicians, or satisfy the classes in power, but could never emancipate a
+people. An Act of Parliament can never create citizens in Hindustan. The
+strength, spirit, and happiness of a people who have fought and won their
+liberty cannot be got by Reform Acts. Effort and sacrifice are the necessary
+conditions of real stable emancipation. Liberty unacquired, merely found, will
+on the test fail like the Dead-Sea-apple or the magician’s plenty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The war that the people of India have declared and which will purify and
+consolidate India, and forge for her a true and stable liberty is a war with
+the latest and most effective weapon. In this war, what has hitherto been in
+the world an undesirable but necessary incident in freedom’s battles, the
+killing of innocent men, has been eliminated; and that which is the true
+essential for forging liberty, the self-purification and self-strengthening of
+men and women has been kept pure and unalloyed. It is for men, women and youth,
+every one of them that lives in and loves India, to do his bit in this battle,
+not waiting for others, not calculating the chances of his surviving the battle
+to enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice. Soldiers in the old-world wars did not
+insure their lives before going to the front. The privilege of youth in special
+is for country’s sake to exercise their comparative freedom and give up the
+yearning for lives and careers built on the slavery of the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That on which a foreign government truly rests whatever may be the illusions on
+their or our part is not the strength of its armed forces, but our own
+co-operation. Actual service on the part of one generation, and educational
+preparation for future service on the part of the next generation are the two
+main branches of this co-operation of slaves in the perpetuation of slavery.
+The boycott of government service and the law-courts is aimed at the first, the
+boycott of government controlled schools is to stop the second. If either the
+one or the other of these two branches of co-operation is withdrawn in
+sufficient measure, there will be an automatic and perfectly peaceful change
+from slavery to liberty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The beat preparation for any one who desires to take part in the great battle
+now going on is a silent study of the writings and speeches collected herein,
+and proposed to be completed in a supplementary volume to be soon issued.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+C. RAJAGOPALACHAR
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap02"></a>II. THE KHILAFAT</h2>
+
+<h3>WHY I HAVE JOINED THE KHILAFAT MOVEMENT</h3>
+
+<p>
+An esteemed South African friend who is at present living in England has
+written to me a letter from which I make the following excerpts:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“You will doubtless remember having met me in South Africa at the time when the
+Rev. J.J. Doke was assisting you in your campaign there and I subsequently
+returned to England deeply impressed with the rightness of your attitude in
+that country. During the months before war I wrote and lectured and spoke on
+your behalf in several places which I do not regret. Since returning from
+military service, however, I have noticed from the papers that you appear to be
+adopting a more militant attitude... I notice a report in “The Times” that you
+are assisting and countenancing a union between the Hindus and Moslems with a
+view of embarrassing England and the Allied Powers in the matter of the
+dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire or the ejection of the Turkish Government
+from Constantinople. Knowing as I do your sense of justice and your humane
+instincts I feel that I am entitled, in view of the humble part that I have
+taken to promote your interests on this side, to ask you whether this latter
+report is correct. I cannot believe that you have wrongly countenanced a
+movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government
+above the interests of humanity, for if any country has crippled these
+interests in the East it has surely been Turkey. I am personally familiar with
+the conditions in Syria and Armenia and I can only suppose that if the report,
+which “The Times” has published is correct, you have thrown to one side, your
+moral responsibilities and allied yourself with one of the prevailing
+anarchies. However, until I hear that this is not your attitude I cannot
+prejudice my mind. Perhaps you will do me the favour of sending me a reply.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have sent a reply to the writer. But as the views expressed in the quotation
+are likely to be shared by many of my English friends and as I do not wish, if
+I can possibly help it, to forfeit their friendship or their esteem I shall
+endeavour to state my position as clearly as I can on the Khilafat question.
+The letter shows what risk public men run through irresponsible journalism. I
+have not seen <i>The Times</i> report, referred to by my friend. But it is
+evident that the report has made the writer to suspect my alliance with “the
+prevailing anarchies” and to think that I have “thrown to one side” my “moral
+responsibilities.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is just my sense of moral responsibilities which has made me take up the
+Khilafat question and to identify myself entirely with the Mahomedans. It is
+perfectly true that I am assisting and countenancing the union between Hindus
+and Muslims, but certainly not with “a view of embarrassing England and the
+Allied Powers in the matter of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire,” it is
+contrary to my creed to embarrass governments or anybody else. This does not
+how ever mean that certain acts of mine may not result in embarrassment. But I
+should not hold myself responsible for having caused embarrassment when I
+resist the wrong of a wrong-doer by refusing assistance in his wrong-doing. On
+the Khilafat question I refuse to be party to a broken pledge. Mr. Lloyd
+George’s solemn declaration is practically the whole of the case for Indian
+Mahomedans and when that case is fortified by scriptural authority it becomes
+unanswerable. Moreover, it is incorrect to say that I have “allied myself to
+one of the prevailing anarchies” or that I have wrongly countenanced the
+movement to place the cruel and unjust despotism of the Stamboul Government
+above the interests of humanity. In the whole of the Mahomedan demand there is
+no insistance on the retention of the so-called unjust despotism of the
+Stamboul Government; on the contrary the Mahomedans have accepted the principle
+of taking full guarantees from that Government for the protection of non-Muslim
+minorities. I do not know how far the condition of Armenia and Syria may be
+considered an ‘anarchy’ and how far the Turkish Government may be held
+responsible for it. I much suspect that the reports from these quarters are
+much exaggerated and that the European powers are themselves in a measure
+responsible for what misrule there may be in Armenia and Syria. But I am in no
+way interested in supporting Turkish or any other anarchy. The Allied Powers
+can easily prevent it by means other than that of ending Turkish rule or
+dismembering and weakening the Ottoman Empire. The Allied Powers are not
+dealing with a new situation. If Turkey was to be partitioned, the position
+should have been made clear at the commencement of the war. There would then
+have been no question of a broken pledge. As it is, no Indian Mahomedan has any
+regard for the promises of British Ministers. In his opinion, the cry against
+Turkey is that of Christianity <i>vs.</i> Islam with England as the louder in
+the cry. The latest cablegram from Mr. Mahomed Ali strengthens the impression,
+for he says that unlike as in England his deputation is receiving much support
+from the French Government and the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus, if it is true, as I hold it is true that the Indian Mussalmans have a
+cause that is just and is supported by scriptural authority, then for the
+Hindus not to support them to the utmost would be a cowardly breach of
+brotherhood and they would forfeit all claim to consideration from their
+Mahomedan countrymen. As a public-server therefore, I would be unworthy of the
+position I claim, if I did not support Indian Mussalmans in their struggle to
+maintain the Khilafat in accordance with their religious belief. I believe that
+in supporting them I am rendering a service to the Empire, because by assisting
+my Mahomedan countrymen to give a disciplined expression to their sentiment it
+becomes possible to make the agitation thoroughly, orderly and even successful.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE TURKISH TREATY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Turkish treaty will be out on the 10th of May. It is stated to provide for
+the internationalisation of the Straits, the occupation of Gallipoli by the
+Allies, the maintenance of Allied contingents in Constantinople and the
+appointment of a Commission of Control over Turkish finances. The San Remo
+Conference has entrusted Britain with Mandates for Mesopotamia and Palestine
+and France with the Mandate for Syria. As regards Smyrna the accounts so far
+received inform that Turkish suzerainty over Smyrna will be indicated by the
+fact that the population will not be entitled to send delegates to the Greek
+Parliament but at the end of five years local Smyrna Parliament will have the
+right of voting in favour of union with Greece and in such an event Turkish
+suzerainty will cease. Turkish suzerainty will be confined to the area within
+the Chatalja lines. With regard to Emir Foisul’s position there is no news
+except that the Mandates of Britain and France transform his military title
+into a civil title.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+We have given above the terms of the Turkish treaty as indicated in Router’s
+messages. These reports are incomplete and all of them are not equally
+authenticated. But if these terms are true, they are a challenge to the Muslim
+demands. Turkish Sovereignty is confined to the Chatalja lines. This means that
+the Big Three of the Supreme Council have cut off Thrace from Turkish
+dominions. This is a distinct breach of the pledge given by one of these Three,
+<i>viz.</i>, the Premier of the British Empire. To remain within the Chatalja
+lines and, we are afraid, as a dependent of the Allies, is for the Sultan a
+humiliating position inconsistent with the Koranic injunctions. Such a
+restricted position of the Turks is virtually a success of the bag and baggage
+school.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not yet known how the Supreme Council disposed of the rich and renowned
+lands of Asia Minor. If Mr. Lloyd George’s views recently expressed in this
+respect have received the Allies’ sanction—it is probable—nothing less than a
+common control is expected. The decision in the case of Smyrna will be
+satisfying to none, though the Allies seem to have made by their arrangement a
+skillful attempt to please all the parties concerned. Mr. Lloyd George, in his
+reply to the Khilafat Deputation, had talked about the careful investigations
+by an impartial committee and had added; “The great majority of the population
+undoubtedly prefer Greek rule to Turkish rule, so I understand” But the
+decision postpones to carry out his understanding till a period of five years.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+When we come to the question of mandates, the Allied Powers’ motives come out
+more distinctly. The Arabs’ claim of independence was used as a difficulty
+against keeping Turkish Sovereignty. This was defended in the of
+self-determination and by pointing out parallels of Transylvania and other
+provinces. When the final moment came, the Allies have ventured to divide the
+spoils amongst themselves. Britain is given the mandate over Mesopotamia and
+Palestine and France has the mandate over Syria. The Arab delegation complains
+in their note lately issued expressing their disappointment at the Supreme
+Council’s decision with regard to the Arab liberated countries, which, it
+declares, is contrary to the principle of self-determination.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+So what little news has arrived about the Turkish treaty, is uniformly
+disquieting. The Moslems have found sufficient ground to honour Russia, more
+than the Allies. Russia has recognised the freedom of Khiva and Bokhara. The
+Moslem world, as H. M. the Amir of Afghanistan said in his speech, will feel
+grateful towards Russia in spite of all the rumours abroad about its anarchy
+and disorder, whereas the whole Moslem world will resent the action of the
+other European nations who have allied with each other to carry out a joint
+coercion and extinction of Turkey in the name of self-determination and partly
+in the guise of the interest of civilization.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+The terms of the Turkish treaty are not only a breach of the Premier’s pledge,
+not only a sin against the principle of self-determination, but they also show
+a reckless indifference of the Allied Powers towards the Koranic injunctions.
+The terms point out that Mr. Lloyd George’s misinformed ideas of Khilafat have
+prevailed in the Council. Like Mr. Lloyd George other statesmen also at San
+Remo have compared Caliphate with Popedom and ignored the Koronic idea of
+associating spiritual power with temporal power. These misguided statesmen were
+too much possessed by haughtiness and so they refused to receive any
+enlightenment on the question of Khilafat from the Deputation. They could have
+corrected themselves had they heard Mr. Mahomed Ali on this point. Speaking at
+the Essex Hall meeting Mr. Mahomed Ali distinguished between Popedom and
+Caliphate and clearly explained what Caliphate means. He said:
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“Islam is supernational and not national, the basis of Islamic sympathy is a
+common outlook on life and common culture.... And it has two centres. The
+personal centre is the island of Arabia. The Khalifa is the Commander of the
+Faithful and his orders must be obeyed by all Muslims so long and so long only,
+as they are not at variance with the Commandments of God and the Traditions of
+the Prophet. But since there is no lacerating distinction between things
+temporal and things spiritual, the Khalifa is something more than a Pope and
+cannot be “Vaticanised.” But he is also less than a Pope for he is not
+infallible. If he persists in un-Islamic conduct we can depose him. And we have
+deposed him more than once. But so long as he orders only that which Islam
+demands we must support him. He and no other ruler is the Defender of
+<i>our</i> faith.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+These few words could have removed the mis-undertakings rooted in the minds of
+those that at San Remo, if they were in earnest for a just solution. But Mr.
+Mahomed Ali’s deputation was not given any hearing by the Peace Conference.
+They were told that the Peace Conference had already heard the official
+delegation of India on this question. But the wrong notions the Allies still
+entertain about Caliphate are a sufficient indication of the effects of the
+work of this official delegation. The result of these wrong notions is the
+present settlement and this unjust settlement will unsettle the world. They
+know not what they do.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TURKISH PEACE TERMS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The question of question to-day is the Khilafat question, otherwise known as
+that of the Turkish peace terms. His Excellency the Viceroy deserves our thanks
+for receiving the joint deputation even at this late hour, especially when he
+was busy preparing to receive the head of the different provinces. His
+Excellency must be thanked for the unfailing courtesy with which he received
+the deputation and the courteous language in which his reply was couched. But
+mere courtesy, valuable as it is at all times, never so valuable as at this, is
+not enough at this critical moment. ‘Sweet words butter no parsnips’ is a
+proverb more applicable to-day than ever before. Behind the courtesy there was
+the determination to punish Turkey. Punishment of Turkey is a thing which
+Muslim sentiment cannot tolerate for a moment. Muslim soldiers are as
+responsible for the result of the war as any others. It was to appease them
+that Mr. Asquith said when Turkey decided to join the Central Powers that the
+British Government had no designs on Turkey and that His Majesty’s Government
+would never think of punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish
+Committee. Examined by that standard the Viceregal reply is not only
+disappointing but it is a fall from truth and justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What is this British Empire? It is as much Mahomedan and Hindu as it is
+Christian. Its religious neutrality is not a virtue, or if it is, it is a
+virtue of necessity. Such a mighty Empire could not be held together on any
+other terms. British ministers are therefore bound to protect Mahomedan
+interests as any other. Indeed as the Muslim rejoinder says, they are bound to
+make the cause their own. What is the use of His Excellency having presented
+the Muslim claim before the Conference? If the cause is lost the Mahomedans
+will be entitled to think that Britain did not do her duty by them. And the
+Viceregal reply confirms the view. When His Excellency says that Turkey must
+suffer for her having joined the Central Powers he but expresses the opinion of
+British ministers. We hope, therefore, with the framers of the Muslim rejoinder
+that His Majesty’s ministers will mend the mistakes if any have been committed
+and secure a settlement that would satisfy Mahomedan sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What does the sentiment demand? The preservation of the Khilafat with such
+guarantee as may be necessary for the protection of the interests of the
+non-Muslim races living under Turkish rule and the Khalif’s control over Arabia
+and the Holy Places with such arrangement as may be required for guaranteeing
+Arab self-rule, should the Arabs desire it. It is hardly possible to state the
+claim more fairly than has been done. It is a claim backed by justice, by the
+declarations of British ministers and by the unanimous Hindu and Muslim
+opinion. It would be midsummer madness to reject or whittle down a claim so
+backed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE SUZERAINTY OVER ARABIA</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“As I told you in my last letter I think Mr. Gandhi has made a serious mistake
+in the Kailafat business. The Indian Mahomedans base their demand on the
+assertion that their religion requires the Turkish rule over Arabia: but when
+they have against them in this matter, the Arabs themselves, it is impossible
+to regard the theory of the Indian Mahomedans as essential to Islam. After all
+if the Arabs do not represent Islam, who does? It is as if the German Roman
+Catholics made a demand in the name of Roman Catholicism with Rome and the
+Italians making a contrary demand. But even if the religion of the Indian
+Mahomedans did require that Turkish rule should be imposed upon the Arabs
+against their will, one could not, now-a-days, recognise as a really religious
+demand, one which required the continued oppression of one people by another.
+When an assurance was given at the beginning of the war to the Indian
+Mahomedans that the Mahomedan religion would be respected, that could never
+have meant that a temporal sovereignty which violated the principles of
+self-determination would be upheld. We could not now stand by and see the Turks
+re-conquer the Arabs (for the Arabs would certainly fight against them) without
+grossly betraying the Arabs to whom we have given pledges. It is not true that
+the Arab hostility to the Turks was due simply to European suggestion. No
+doubt, during the war we availed ourselves of the Arab hostility to the Turks
+to get another ally, but the hostility had existed long before the war. The
+Non-Turkish Mahomedan subjects of the Sultan in general wanted to get rid of
+his rule. It is the Indian Mahomedans who have no experience of that rule who
+want to impose it on others. As a matter of fact the idea of any restoration of
+Turkish rule in Syria or Arabia, seems so remote from all possibilities that to
+discuss it seems like discussing a restoration of the Holy Roman Empire. I
+cannot conceive what series of events could bring it about. The Indian
+Mahomedans certainly could not march into Arabia themselves and conquer the
+Arabs for the Sultan. And no amount of agitation and trouble in India would
+ever induce England to put back Turkish rule in Arabia. In this matter it is
+not English Imperialism which the Indian Mahomedans are up against, but the
+mass of English Liberal and Humanitarian opinion, the mass of the better
+opinion of England, which wants self-determination to go forward in India.
+Supposing the Indian Mahomedans could stir up an agitation so violent in India
+as to sever the connection between India and the British Crown, still they
+would not be any nearer to their purpose. For to-day they do have considerable
+influence on British world-policy. Even if in this matter of the Turkish
+question their influence has not been sufficient to turn the scale against the
+very heavy weights on the other side, it has weighed in the scale. But apart
+from the British connection, Indian Mahomedans would have no influence at all
+outside India. They would not count for more in world politics than the
+Mahomedans of China. I think it is likely (apart from the pressure of America
+on the other side. I should say certain) that the influence of the Indian
+Mahomedans may at any rate avail to keep the Sultan in Constantinople. But I
+doubt whether they will gain any advantage by doing so. For a Turkey cut down
+to the Turkish parts of Asia-Minor, Constantinople would be a very inconvenient
+capital. I think its inconvenience would more than outweigh the sentimental
+gratification of keeping up a phantom of the old Ottoman Empire. But if the
+Indian Mahomedans want the Sultan to retain his place in Constantinople I think
+the assurances given officially by the Viceroy in India now binds us to insist
+on his remaining there and I think he will remain there in spite of America.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This is an extract, from the letter of an Englishman enjoying a position in
+Great Britain, to a friend in India. It is a typical letter, sober, honest, to
+the point and put in such graceful language that whilst it challenges you, it
+commands your respect by its very gracefulness. But it is just this attitude
+based upon insufficient or false information which has ruined many a cause in
+the British Isles. The superficiality, the one-sidedness the inaccuracy and
+often even dishonesty that have crept into modern journalism, continuously
+mislead honest men who want to see nothing but justice done. Then there are
+always interested groups whose business it is to serve their ends by means of
+faul or food. And the honest Englishman wishing to vote for justice but swayed
+by conflicting opinions and dominated by distorted versions, often ends by
+becoming an instrument of injustice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The writer of the letter quoted above has built up convincing argument on
+imaginary data. He has successfully shown that the Mahomedan case, as it has
+been presented to him, is a rotten case. In India, where it is not quite easy
+to distort facts about the Khilafat, English friends admit the utter justice of
+the Indian-Mahomedan claim. But they plead helplessness and tell us that the
+Government of India and Mr. Montagu have done all it was humanly possible for
+them to do. And if now the judgment goes against Islam, Indian Mahomedans
+should resign themselves to it. This extraordinary state of things would not be
+possible except under this modern rush and preoccupations of all responsible
+people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us for a moment examine the case as it has been imagined by the writer. He
+suggests that Indian Mahomedans want Turkish rule in Arabia in spite of the
+opposition of the Arabs themselves, and that, if the Arabs do not want Turkish
+rule, the writer argues, no false religions sentiment can be permitted to
+interfere with self-determination of the Arabs when India herself has been
+pleading for that very status. Now the fact is that the Mahomedans, as is known
+to everybody who has at all studied the case, have never asked for Turkish rule
+in Arabia in opposition to the Arabs. On the contrary, they have said that they
+have no intention of resisting Arabian self-government. All they ask for is
+Turkish suzerainty over Arabia which would guarantee complete self-rule for the
+Arabs. They want Khalif’s control of the Holy Places of Islam. In other words
+they ask for nothing more than what was guaranteed by Mr. Lloyd George and on
+the strength of which guarantee Mahomedan soldiers split their blood on behalf
+of the Allied Powers. All the elaborate argument therefore and the cogent
+reasoning of the above extract fall to pieces based as they are upon a case
+that has never existed. I have thrown myself heart and soul into this question
+because British pledges abstract justice, and religious sentiment coincide. I
+can conceive the possibility of a blind and fanatical religious sentiment
+existing in opposition to pure justice. I should then resist the former and
+fight for the latter. Nor would I insist upon pledges given dishonestly to
+support an unjust cause as has happened with England in the case of the secret
+treaties. Resistance there becomes not only lawful but obligatory on the part
+of a nation that prides itself on its righteousness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is unnecessary for me to examine the position imagined by the English
+friend, viz., how India would have fared had she been an independent power. It
+is unnecessary because Indian Mahomedans, and for that matter India, are
+fighting for a cause that is admittedly just; a cause in aid of which they are
+invoking the whole-hearted support of the British people. I would however
+venture to suggest that this is a cause in which mere sympathy will not
+suffice. It is a cause which demands support that is strong enough to bring
+about substantial justice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>FURTHER QUESTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+I have been overwhelmed with public criticism and private advice and even
+anonymous letters telling me exactly what I should do. Some are impatient that
+I do not advise immediate and extensive non-co-operation; others tell me what
+harm I am doing the country by throwing it knowingly in a tempest of violence
+on either side. It is difficult for me to deal with the whole of the criticism,
+but I would summarize some of the objections and endeavour to answer them to
+the best of my ability. These are in addition to those I have already
+answered:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) Turkish claim is immoral or unjust and how can I, a lover of truth and
+justice, support it? (2) Even if the claim be just in theory, the Turk is
+hopelessly incapable, weak and cruel. He does not deserve any assistance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) Even if Turkey deserves all that is claimed for her, why should I land
+India in an international struggle?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) It is no part of the Indian Mahomedans’ business to meddle in this affair.
+If they cherish any political ambition, they have tried, they have failed and
+they should now sit still. If it is a religious matter with them, it cannot
+appeal to the Hindu reason in the manner it is put and in any case Hindus ought
+not to identify themselves with Mahomedans in their religious quarrel with
+Christendom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) In no case should I advocate non-co-operation which in its extreme sense is
+nothing but a rebellion, no matter how peaceful it may be.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) Moreover, my experience of last year must show me that it is beyond the
+capacity of any single human being to control the forces of violence that are
+lying dormant in the land.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) Non-co-operation is futile because people will never respond in right
+earnest, and reaction that might afterwards set in will be worse than the state
+of hopefulness we are now in.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) Non-co-operation will bring about cessation of all other activities, even
+working of the Reforms, thus set back the clock of progress. (9) However pure
+my motives may be, those of the Mussalmans are obviously revengeful.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I shall now answer the objections in the order in which they are stated—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) In my opinion the Turkish claim is not only not immoral and unjust, but it
+is highly equitable, if only because Turkey wants to retain what is her own.
+And the Mahomedan manifesto has definitely declared that whatever guarantees
+may be necessary to be taken for the protection of non-Muslim and non-Turkish
+races, should be taken so as to give the Christians theirs and the Arabs their
+self-government under the Turkish suzerainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) I do not believe the Turk to be weak, incapable or cruel. He is certainly
+disorganised and probably without good generalship. He has been obliged to
+fight against heavy odds. The argument of weakness, incapacity and cruelty one
+often hears quoted in connection with those from whom power is sought to be
+taken away. About the alleged massacres a proper commission has been asked for,
+but never granted. And in any case security can be taken against oppression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) I have already stated that if I were not interested in the Indian
+Mahomedans, I would not interest myself in the welfare of the Turks any more
+than I am in that of the Austrians or the Poles. But I am bound as an Indian to
+share the sufferings and trial of fellow-Indians. If I deem the Mahomedan to be
+my brother. It is my duty to help him in his hour of peril to the best of my
+ability, if his cause commends itself to me as just.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) The fourth refers to the extent Hindus should join hands with the
+Mahomedans. It is therefore a matter of feeling and opinion. It is expedient to
+suffer for my Mahomedan brother to the utmost in a just cause and I should
+therefore travel with him along the whole road so long as the means employed by
+him are as honourable as his end. I cannot regulate the Mahomedan feeling. I
+must accept his statement that the Khilafat is with him a religious question in
+the sense that it binds him to reach the goal even at the cost of his own life.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) I do not consider non-co-operation to be a rebellion, because it is free
+from violence. In a larger sense all opposition to a Government measure is a
+rebellion. In that sense, rebellion in a just cause is a duty, the extent of
+opposition being determined by the measure of the injustice done and felt.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) My experience of last year shows me that in spite of aberrations in some
+parts of India, the country was entirely under control that the influence of
+Satyagraha was profoundly for its good and that where violence did break out
+there were local causes that directly contributed to it. At the same time I
+admit that even the violence that did take place on the part of the people and
+the spirit of lawlessness that was undoubtedly shown in some parts should have
+remained under check. I have made ample acknowledgment of the miscalculation I
+then made. But all the painful experience that I then gained did not any way
+shake my belief in Satyagraha or in the possibility of that matchless force
+being utilised in India. Ample provision is being made this time to avoid the
+mistakes of the past. But I must refuse to be deterred from a clear course;
+because it may be attended by violence totally unintended and in spite of
+extraordinary efforts that are being made to prevent it. At the same time I
+must make my position clear. Nothing can possibly prevent a Satyagrahi from
+doing his duty because of the frown of the authorities. I would risk, if
+necessary, a million lives so long as they are voluntary sufferers and are
+innocent, spotless victims. It is the mistakes of the people that matter in a
+Satyagraha campaign. Mistakes, even insanity must be expected from the strong
+and the powerful, and the moment of victory has come when there is no retort to
+the mad fury of the powerful, but a voluntary, dignified and quiet submission
+but not submission to the will of the authority that has put itself in the
+wrong. The secret of success lies therefore in holding every English life and
+the life of every officer serving the Government as sacred as those of our own
+dear ones. All the wonderful experience I have gained now during nearly 40
+years of conscious existence, has convinced me that there is no gift so
+precious as that of life. I make bold to say that the moment the Englishmen
+feel that although they are in India in a hopeless minority, their lives are
+protected against harm not because of the matchless weapons of destruction
+which are at their disposal, but because Indians refuse to take the lives even
+of those whom they may consider to be utterly in the wrong that moment will see
+a transformation in the English nature in its relation to India and that moment
+will also be the moment when all the destructive cutlery that is to be had in
+India will begin to rust. I know that this is a far-off vision. That cannot
+matter to me. It is enough for me to see the light and to act up to it, and it
+is more than enough when I gain companions in the onward march. I have claimed
+in private conversations with English friends that it is because of my
+incessant preaching of the gospel of non-violence and my having successfully
+demonstrated its practical utility that so far the forces of violence, which
+are undoubtedly in existence in connection with the Khilafat movement, have
+remained under complete control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) From a religious standpoint the seventh objection is hardly worth
+considering. If people do not respond to the movement of non-co-operation, it
+would be a pity, but that can be no reason for a reformer not to try. It would
+be to me a demonstration that the present position of hopefulness is not
+dependent on any inward strength or knowledge, but it is hope born of ignorance
+and superstition.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) If non-co-operation is taken up in earnest, it must bring about a cessation
+of all other activities including the Reforms, but I decline to draw therefore
+the corollary that it will set back the clock of progress. On the contrary, I
+consider non-co-operation to be such a powerful and pure instrument, that if it
+is enforced in an earnest spirit, it will be like seeking first the Kingdom of
+God and everything else following as a matter of course. People will have then
+realised their true power. They would have learnt the value of discipline,
+self-control, joint action, non-violence, organisation and everything else that
+goes to make a nation great and good, and not merely great.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(9) I do not know that I have a right to arrogate greater purity for myself
+than for our Mussalman brethren. But I do admit that they do not believe in my
+doctrine of non-violence to the full extent. For them it is a weapon of the
+weak, an expedient. They consider non-co-operation without violence to be the
+only thing open to them in the war of direct action. I know that if some of
+them could offer successful violence, they would do to-day. But they are
+convinced that humanly speaking it is an impossibility. For them, therefore,
+non-co-operation is a matter not merely of duty but also of revenge. Whereas I
+take up non-co-operation against the Government as I have actually taken it up
+in practice against members of my own family. I entertain very high regard for
+the British constitution, I have not only no enmity against Englishmen but I
+regard much in English character as worthy of my emulation. I count many as my
+friends. It is against my religion to regard any one as an enemy. I entertain
+similar sentiments with respect to Mahomedans. I find their cause to be just
+and pure. Although therefore their viewpoint is different from mine I do not
+hesitate to associate with them and invite them to give my method a trial, for,
+I believe that the use of a pure weapon even from a mistaken motive does not
+fail to produce some good, even as the telling of truth if only because for the
+time being it is the best policy, is at least so much to the good.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. CANDLER’S OPEN LETTER</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler has favoured me with an open letter on this question of questions.
+The letter has already appeared in the Press. I can appreciate Mr. Candler’s
+position as I would like him and other Englishmen to appreciate mine and that
+of hundreds of Hindus who feel as I do. Mr. Candler’s letter is an attempt to
+show that Mr. Lloyd George’s pledge is not in any way broken by the peace
+terms. I quite agree with him that Mr. Lloyd George’s words ought not to be
+torn from their context to support the Mahomedan claim. These are Mr. Lloyd
+George’s words as quoted in the recent Viceregal message: “Nor are we fighting
+to destroy Austria-Hungary or to deprive Turkey of its capital or of the rich
+and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly Turkish in
+race.” Mr. Candler seems to read ‘which’, as if it meant ‘if they,’ whereas I
+give the pronoun its natural meaning, namely, that the Prime Minister knew in
+1918, that the lands referred to by him were “predominantly Turkish in race.”
+And if this is the meaning I venture to suggest that the pledge has been broken
+in a most barefaced manner, for there is practically nothing left to the Turk
+of ‘the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have already my view of the retention of the Sultan in Constantinople. It is
+an insult to the intelligence of man to suggest that ‘the maintenance of the
+Turkish Empire in the homeland of the Turkish race with its capital at
+Constantinople has been left unimpaired by the terms of peace. This is the
+other passage from the speech which I presume Mr. Candler wants me to read
+together with the one already quoted:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“While we do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in the
+home-land of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople, the passage
+between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea being inter-nationalised, Armenia,
+Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine are in our judgment entitled to a recognition
+of their separate national condition.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Did that mean entire removal of Turkish influence, extinction of Turkish
+suzerainty and the introduction of European-Christian influence under the guise
+of Mandates? Have the Moslems of Arabia, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Syria and
+Palestine been committed, or is the new arrangement being superimposed upon
+them by Powers conscious of their own brute-strength rather than of justice of
+their action? I for one would nurse by every legitimate means the spirit of
+independence in the brave Arabs, but I shudder to think what will happen to
+them under the schemes of exploitation of their country by the greedy
+capitalists protected as they will be by the mandatory Powers. If the pledge is
+to be fulfilled, let these places have full self-government with suzerainty to
+be retained with Turkey as has been suggested by the <i>Times of India</i>. Let
+there be all the necessary guarantees taken from Turkey about the internal
+independence of the Arabs. But to remove that suzerainty, to deprive the Khalif
+of the wardenship of the Holy Places is to render Khilafat a mockery which no
+Mahomedan can possibly look upon with equanimity, I am not alone in my
+interpretation of the pledge. The Right Hon’ble Ameer Ali calls the peace terms
+a breach of faith. Mr. Charles Roberts reminds the British public that the
+Indian Mussalman sentiment regarding the Turkish Treaty is based upon the Prime
+Minister’s pledge “regarding Thrace, Constantinople and Turkish lands in Asia
+Minor, repeated on February 26 last with deliberation by Mr. Lloyd George. Mr.
+Roberts holds that the pledge must be treated as a whole, not as binding only
+regarding Constantinople but also binding as regards Thrace and Asia Minor. He
+describes the pledge as binding upon the nation as a whole and its breach in
+any part as a gross breach of faith on the part of the British Empire. He
+demands that if there is an unanswerable reply to the charge of breach of faith
+it ought to be given and adds the Prime Minister may regard his own word
+lightly if he chooses, but he has no right to break a pledge given on behalf of
+the nation. He concludes that it is incredible that such pledge should not have
+been kept in the letter and in the spirit.” He adds: “I have reason to believe
+that these views are fully shared by prominent members of the Cabinet.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I wonder if Mr. Candler knows what is going on to-day in England. Mr. Pickthall
+writing in <i>New Age</i> says: “No impartial international enquiry into the
+whole question of the Armenian massacres has been instituted in the ample time
+which has elapsed since the conclusion of armistice with Turkey. The Turkish
+Government has asked for such enquiry. But the Armenian organisations and the
+Armenian partisans refuse to hear of such a thing, declaring that the Bryce and
+Lepssens reports are quite sufficient to condemn the Turks. In other words the
+judgment should be given on the case for prosecution alone. The inter-allied
+commission which investigated the unfortunate events in Smyrna last year, made
+a report unfavourable to Greek claims. Therefore, that report has not been
+published here in England, though in other countries it has long been public
+property.” He then goes on to show how money is being scattered by Armenian and
+Greek emissaries in order to popularise their cause and adds: “This conjunction
+of dense ignorance and cunning falsehood is fraught with instant danger to the
+British realm,” and concludes: “A Government and people which prefer propaganda
+to fact as the ground of policy—and foreign policy at that—is self-condemned.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have reproduced the above extract in order to show that the present British
+policy has been affected by propaganda of an unscrupulous nature. Turkey which
+was dominant over two million square miles of Asia, Africa and Europe in the
+17th century, under the terms of the treaty, says the <i>London Chronicle</i>,
+has dwindled down to little more than 1,000 square miles. It says, “All
+European Turkey could now be accommodated comfortably between the Landsend and
+the Tamar, Cornawal alone exceeding its total area and but for its alliance
+with Germany, Turkey could have been assured of retaining at least sixty
+thousand square miles of the Eastern Balkans.” I do not know whether the
+<i>Chronicle</i> view is generally shared. Is it by way of punishment that
+Turkey is to undergo such shrinkage, or is it because justice demands it? If
+Turkey had not made the mistake of joining Germany, would the principle of
+nationality have been still applied to Armenia, Arabia, Mesopotamia and
+Palestine?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let me now remind those who think with Mr. Candler that the promise was not
+made by Mr. Lloyd George to the people of India in anticipation of the supply
+of recruits continuing. In defending his own statement Mr. Lloyd George is
+reported to have said:
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+“The effect of the statement in India was that recruiting went up appreciably
+from that very moment. They were not all Mahomedans but there were many
+Mahomedans amongst them. Now we are told that was an offer to Turkey. But they
+rejected it, and therefore we were absolutely free. It was not. It is too often
+forgotten that we are the greatest Mahomedan power in the world and one-fourth
+of the population of the British Empire is Mahomedan. There have been no more
+loyal adherents to the throne and no more effective and loyal supporters of the
+Empire in its hour of trial. <i>We gave a solemn pledge and they accepted
+it</i>. They are disturbed by the prospect of our not abiding by it.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Who shall interpret that pledge and how? How did the Government of India itself
+interpret it? Did it or did it not energetically support the claim for the
+control of the Holy Places of Islam vesting in the Khalif? Did the Government
+of India suggest that the whole of Jazirat-ul-Arab could be taken away
+consistently with that pledge from the sphere of influence of the Khalif, and
+given over to the Allies as mandatory Powers? Why does the Government of India
+sympathise with the Indian Mussalmans if the terms are all they should be? So
+much for the pledge. I would like to guard myself against being understood that
+I stand or fall absolutely by Mr. Lloyd George’s declaration. I have advisedly
+used the adverb ‘practically’ in connection with it. It is an important
+qualification.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler seems to suggest that my goal is something more than merely
+attaining justice on the Khilafat. If so, he is right. Attainment of justice is
+undoubtedly the corner-stone, and if I found that I was wrong in my conception
+of justice on this question, I hope I shall have the courage immediately to
+retrace my steps. But by helping the Mahomedans of India at a critical moment
+in their history, I want to buy their friendship. Moreover, if I can carry the
+Mahomedans with me I hope to wean Great Britain from the downward path along
+which the Prime Minister seems to me to be taking her. I hope also to show to
+India and the Empire at large that given a certain amount of capacity for
+self-sacrifice, justice can be secured by peacefullest and cleanest means
+without sowing or increasing bitterness between English and Indians. For,
+whatever may be the temporary effect of my methods, I know enough of them to
+feel certain that they alone are immune from lasting bitterness. They are
+untainted with hatred, expedience or untruth.
+</p>
+
+<h3>IN PROCESS OF KEEPING</h3>
+
+<p>
+The writer of ‘Current Topics’ in the “Times of India” has attempted to
+challenge the statement made in my Khilafat article regarding ministerial
+pledges, and in doing so cites Mr. Asquith’s Guild-Hall speech of November 10,
+1914. When I wrote the articles, I had in mind Mr. Asquith’s speech. I am sorry
+that he ever made that speech. For, in my humble opinion, it betrayed to say
+the least, a confusion of thought. Could he think of the Turkish people as
+apart from the Ottoman Government? And what is the meaning of the death-knell
+of Ottoman Dominion in Europe and Asia if it be not the death knell of Turkish
+people as a free and governing race? Is it, again, true historically that the
+Turkish rule has always been a blight that ‘has withered some of the fairest
+regions of the earth?’ And what is the meaning of his statement that followed,
+viz., “Nothing is further from our thoughts than to imitate or encourage a
+crusade against their belief?” If words have any meaning, the qualifications
+that Mr. Asquith introduced in his speech should have meant a scrupulous regard
+for Indian Muslim feeling. And if that be the meaning of his speech, without
+anything further to support me I would claim that even Mr. Asquith’s assurance
+is in danger of being set at nought if the resolutions of the San Remo
+Conference are to be crystallised into action. But I base remarks on a
+considered speech made by Mr. Asquith’s successor two years later when things
+had assumed a more threatening shape than in 1914 and when the need for Indian
+help was much greater than in 1914. His pledge would bear repetition till it is
+fulfilled. He said: “Nor are we fighting to deprive Turkey of its capital or of
+the rich and renowned lands of Asia Minor and Thrace which are predominantly
+Turkish in race. We do not challenge the maintenance of the Turkish Empire in
+the homelands of the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople.” If only
+every word of this pledge is fulfilled both in letter and in spirit, there
+would be little left for quarrelling about. In so far as Mr. Asquith’s
+declaration can be considered hostile to the Indian Muslim claim, it its
+superseded by the later and more considered declaration of Mr. Lloyd George—a
+declaration made irrevocable by fulfilment of the consideration it expected,
+viz. the enlistment of the brave Mahomedan soldiery which fought in the very
+place which is now being partitioned in spite of the pledge. But the writer of
+‘Current Topics’ says Mr. Lloyd George “is now in process of keeping his
+pledge” I hope he is right. But what has already happened gives little ground
+for any such hope. For, imprisonment or internment of the Khalif in his own
+capital will be not only a mockery of fulfilment but it would he adding injury
+to insult. Either the Turkish Empire is to be maintained in the homelands of
+the Turkish race with its capital at Constantinople or it is not. If it is, let
+the Indian Mahomedans feel the full glow of it or if the Empire is to be broken
+up, let the mask of hypocrisy be lifted and India see the truth in its
+nakedness. To join the Khilafat movement then means to join a movement to keep
+inviolate the pledge of a British minister. Surely, such a movement is worth
+much greater sacrifice than may be involved in non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>APPEAL TO THE VICEROY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As one who has enjoyed a certain measure of your Excellency’s confidence, and
+as one who claims to be a devoted well-wisher of the British Empire, I owe it
+to your Excellency, and through your Excellency to His Majesty’s Ministers, to
+explain my connection with and my conduct in the Khilafat question.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the very earliest stages of the war, even whilst I was in London organising
+the Indian Volunteer Ambulance Corps, I began to interest myself in the
+Khilafat question. I perceived how deeply moved the little Mussalman World in
+London was when Turkey decided to throw in her lot with Germany. On my arrival
+in India in the January of 1915, I found the same anxiousness and earnestness
+among the Mussalmans with whom I came in contact. Their anxiety became intense
+when the information about the Secret Treaties leaked out. Distrust of British
+intentions filled their minds, and despair took possession of them. Even at
+that moment I advised my Mussalman friends not to give way to despair, but to
+express their fear and their hopes in a disciplined manner. It will be admitted
+that the whole of Mussalman India has behaved in a singularly restrained manner
+during the past five years and that the leaders have been able to keep the
+turbulent sections of their community under complete control.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The peace terms and your Excellency’s defence of them have given the Mussalmans
+of India a shock from which it will be difficult for them to recover. The terms
+violate ministerial pledges and utterly disregard Mussalman sentiment. I
+consider that as a staunch Hindu wishing to live on terms of the closest
+friendship with my Mussalman countrymen. I should be an unworthy son of India
+if I did not stand by them in their hour of trial. In my humble opinion their
+cause is just. They claim that Turkey must be <i>punished</i> if their
+sentiment is to be respected. Muslim soldiers did fight to inflict punishment
+on their own Khalifa or to deprive him of his territories. The Mussalman
+attitude has been consistent, throughout these five years.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My duty to the Empire to which I owe my loyalty requires me to resist the cruel
+violence that has been done to the Mussalman sentiment. So far as I am aware,
+Mussulmans and Hindus have as a whole lost faith in British justice and honour.
+The report of the majority of the Hunter Committee, Your Excellency’s despatch
+thereon and Mr. Montagu’s reply have only aggravated the distrust.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In these circumstances the only course open to one like me is either in despair
+to sever all connection with British rule, or, if I still retained faith in the
+inherent superiority of the British constitution to all others at present in
+vogue to adopt such means as will rectify the wrong done, and thus restore
+confidence. I have not lost faith in such superiority and I am not without hope
+that somehow or other justice will yet be rendered if we show the requisite
+capacity for suffering. Indeed, my conception of that constitution is that it
+helps only those who are ready to help themselves. I do not believe that it
+protects the weak. It gives free scope to the strong to maintain their strength
+and develop it. The weak under it go to the wall.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is, then, because I believe in the British constitution that I have advised
+my Mussalman friends to withdraw their support from your Excellency’s
+Government and the Hindus to join them, should the peace terms not be revised
+in accordance with the solemn pledges of Ministers and the Muslim sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Three courses were open to the Mahomedans in order to mark their emphatic
+disapproval of the utter injustice to which His Majesty’s Ministers have become
+party, if they have not actually been the prime perpetrators of it. They are:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) To resort to violence,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) To advise emigration on a wholesale scale,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) Not to be party to the injustice by ceasing to co-operate with the
+Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency must be aware that there was a time when the boldest, though
+the most thoughtless among the Mussulmans favoured violence, and the “Hijrat”
+(emigration) has not yet ceased to be the battle-cry. I venture to claim that I
+have succeeded by patient reasoning in weaning the party of violence from its
+ways. I confess that I did not—I did not attempt to succeed in weaning them
+from violence on moral grounds, but purely on utilitarian grounds. The result,
+for the time being at any has, however, been to stop violence. The School of
+“Hijrat” has received a check, if it has not stopped its activity entirely. I
+hold that no repression could have prevented a violent eruption, if the people
+had not had presented to them a form of direct action involving considerable
+sacrifice and ensuring success if such direct action was largely taken up by
+the public. Non-co-operation was the only dignified and constitutional form of
+such direct action. For it is the right recognised from times immemorial of the
+subject to refuse to assist a ruler who misrules.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the same time I admit that non-co-operation practised by the mass of people
+is attended with grave risks. But, in a crisis such as has overtaken the
+Mussalmans of India, no step that is unattended with large risks, can possibly
+bring about the desired change. Not to run some risks now will be to court much
+greater risks if not virtual destruction of Law and Order.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But there is yet an escape from non-co-operation. The Mussalman representation
+has requested your Excellency to lead the agitation yourself, as did your
+distinguished predecessor at the time of the South African trouble. But if you
+cannot see your way to do so, and non-co-operation becomes a dire necessity, I
+hope that your Excellency will give those who have accepted my advice and
+myself the credit for being actuated by nothing less than a stern sense of
+duty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have the honour to remain,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Excellency’s faithful servant, (Sd.) M.K. GANDHI. Laburnam Road, Gamdevi,
+Bombay 22nd June 1920
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE PREMIER’S REPLY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The English mail has brought us a full and official report of the Premier’s
+speech which he recently made when he received the Khilafat deputation. Mr.
+Lloyd George’s speech is more definite and therefore more disappointing than
+H.E. the Viceroy’s reply to the deputation here. He draws quite unwarranted
+deductions from the same high principles on which he had based his own pledge
+only two years ago. He declares that Turkey must pay the penalty of defeat.
+This determination to punish Turkey does not become one whose immediate
+predecessor had, in order to appease Muslim soldiers, promised that the British
+Government had no designs on Turkey and that His Majesty’s Government would
+never think of punishing the Sultan for the misdeeds of the Turkish Committee.
+Mr. Lloyd George has expressed his belief that the majority of the population
+of Turkey did not really want to quarrel with Great Britain and that their
+rulers misled the country. In spite of this conviction and in spite of Mr.
+Asquith’s promise, he is out to punish Turkey and punish it in the name of
+justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He expounds the principle of self-determination and justifies the scheme of
+depriving Turkey of its territories one after another. While justifying this
+scheme he does not exclude even Thrace and this strikes the reader most,
+because this very Thrace he had mentioned in his pledge as predominantly
+Turkish. Now we are told by him that both the Turkish census and the Greek
+census agree in pointing out the Mussulman population in Thrace is in a
+considerable minority! Mr. Yakub Hussain speaking at the Madras Khilafat
+conference has challenged the truth of this statement. The Prime Minister cites
+among others also the example of Smyrna where, he says, we had a most careful
+investigation by a very impartial committee in the whole of the question of
+Smyrna and it was found that considerable majority was non-Turkish.’ Who will
+believe the one-sided “impartial committee’s” investigations until it is
+disproved that thousands of Musselmans have been murdered and hundreds of
+thousands have been driven away from their hearths and homes? Strangely enough
+Mr. Lloyd George, believes in the necessity of fresh investigations by a
+purposely appointed committee in Smyrna as the most authenticated and
+up-to-date report, whereas he would not accept Mr. Mahomed Ali’s proposal for
+an impartial commission in regard to Armenian massacre! Doubtful and one-sided
+facts and figures suffice for him even to conclude that the Turkish Government
+is incapable of protecting its subjects. And he proceeds to suggest foreign
+interference in ruling over Asia Minor in the interests of civilization. Here
+he cuts at the root of the Sultan’s independence. This proposal of
+appropriating supervision is distinctly unlike the treatment meted out to other
+enemy powers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This detraction of the Sultan’s suzerainty is only a corollary of the Premier’s
+indifference towards the Muslim idea of the Caliphate. The premier’s injustice
+in treating the Turkish question becomes graver when he thus lightly handles
+the Khilafat question. There had been occasions when the British have used to
+their advantage the Muslim idea of associating the Caliph’s spiritual power
+with temporal power. Now this very association is treated as a controversial
+question by the great statesman.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Will this raise the reputation of Great Britain or stain it? Can this be
+tolerated by those who fought against Turkey with full faith in British
+honesty? Mere receipts of gratitude cannot console the wounded Mussalmans.
+There lies the alternative for England to choose between two mandates—a mandate
+over some Turkish territories which is sure to lead to chaos all over the world
+and a mandate over the hearts of the Muhomedans which will redeem the pledged
+honour of Britain. The prime minister has an unwise choice. This narrow view
+registers the latest temperature of British diplomacy.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MUSSULMAN REPRESENTATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Slowly but surely the Mussulmans are preparing for the battle before them. They
+have to fight against odds that are undoubtedly heavy but not half as heavy as
+the prophet had against him. How often did he not put his life in danger? But
+his faith in God was unquenchable. He went forward with a light heart, for God
+was on his side, for he represented truth. If his followers have half the
+prophet’s faith and half his spirit of sacrifice, the odds will be presently
+even and will in little while turn against the despoilers of Turkey. Already
+the rapacity of the Allies is telling against themselves. France finds her task
+difficult. Greece cannot stomach her ill-gotten gains. And England finds
+Mesopotamia a tough job. The oil of Mosul may feed the fire she has so wantonly
+lighted and burn her fingers badly. The newspapers say the Arabs do not like
+the presence of the Indian soldiery in their midst. I do not wonder. They are a
+fierce and a brave people and do not understand why Indian soldiers should find
+themselves in Mesopotamia. Whatever the fate of non-co-operation, I wish that
+not a single Indian will offer his services for Mesopotamia whether for the
+civil or the military department. We must learn to think for ourselves and
+before entering upon any employment find out whether thereby we may not make
+ourselves instruments of injustice. Apart from the question of Khilafat and
+from the point of abstract justice the English have no right to hold
+Mesopotamia. It is no part of our loyalty to help the Imperial Government in
+what is in plain language daylight robbery. If therefore we seek civil or
+military employment in Mesopotamia we do so for the sake of earning a
+livelihood. It is our duty to see that the source is not tainted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It surprises me to find so many people shirking over the mention of
+non-co-operation. There is no instrument so clean, so harmless and yet so
+effective as non-co-operation. Judiciously hauled it need not produce any evil
+consequences. And its intensity will depend purely on the capacity of the
+people for sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The chief thing is to prepare the atmosphere of non-co-operation. “We are not
+going to co-operate with you in your injustice,” is surely the right and the
+duty of every intelligent subject to say. Were it not for our utter servility,
+helplessness and want of confidence in ourselves, we would certainly grasp this
+clean weapon and make the most effective use of it. Even the most despotic
+government cannot stand except for the consent of the governed which consent is
+often forcibly procured by the despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear
+the despotic force his power is gone. But the British government is never and
+nowhere entirely or laid upon force. It does make an honest attempt to secure
+the goodwill of the governed. But it does not hesitate to adopt unscrupulous
+means to compel the consent of the governed. It has not gone beyond the
+‘Honesty is the best policy’ idea. It therefore bribes you into consenting its
+will by awarding titles, medals and ribbons, by giving you employment, by its
+superior financial ability to open for its employees avenues for enriching
+themselves and finally when these fail, it resorts to force. That is what Sir
+Michael O’Dwyer did and that is almost every British administrator will
+certainly do if he thought it necessary. If then we would not be greedy, if we
+would not run after titles and medals and honorary posts which do the country
+no good, half the battle is won.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My advisers are never tired of telling me that even if the Turkish peace terms
+are revised it will not be due to non-co-operation. I venture to suggest to
+them that non-co-operation has a higher purpose than mere revision of the
+terms. If I cannot compel revision I must at least cease to support a
+government that becomes party to the usurpation. And if I succeed in pushing
+non-co-operation to the extreme limit, I do compel the Government to choose
+between India and the usurpation. I have faith enough in England to know that
+at that moment England will expel her present jaded ministers and put in others
+who will make a clean sweep of the terms in consultation with an awakened
+India, draft terms that will be honourable to her, to Turkey and acceptable to
+India. But I hear my critics say “India has not the strength of purpose and the
+capacity for the sacrifice to achieve such a noble end. They are partly right.
+India has not these qualities now, because we have not—shall we not evolve them
+and infect the nation with them? Is not the attempt worth making? Is my
+sacrifice too great to gain such a great purpose?”
+</p>
+
+<h3>CRITICISM OF THE MUSLIM MANIFESTO</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat representation addressed to the Viceroy and my letter on the same
+subject have been severely criticised by the Anglo-Indian press. <i>The Times
+of India</i> which generally adopts an impartial attitude has taken strong
+exception to certain statements made in the Muslim manifesto and has devoted a
+paragraph of its article to an advance criticism of my suggestion that His
+Excellency should resign if the peace terms are not revised.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>The Times of India</i> excepts to the submission that the British Empire may
+not treat Turkey like a departed enemy. The signatories have, I think, supplied
+the best of reasons. They say “We respectfully submit that in the treatment of
+Turkey the British Government are bound to respect Indian Muslim sentiment in
+so far as it is neither unjust nor unreasonable.” If the seven crore Mussulmans
+are partners in the Empire, I submit that their wish must be held to be all
+sufficient for refraining from punishing Turkey. It is beside the point to
+quote what Turkey did during the war. It has suffered for it. <i>The Times</i>
+inquires wherein Turkey has been treated worse than the other Powers. I thought
+that the fact was self-evident. Neither Germany nor Austria and Hungary has
+been treated in the same way that Turkey has been. The whole of the Empire has
+been reduced to the retention of a portion of its capital, as it were, to mock
+the Sultan and that too has been done under terms so humiliating that no
+self-respecting person much less a reigning sovereign can possibly accept.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>The Times</i> has endeavoured to make capital out of the fact that the
+representation does not examine the reason for Turkey not joining the Allies.
+Well there was no mystery about it. The fact of Russia being one of the Allies
+was enough to warn Turkey against joining them. With Russia knocking at the
+gate at the time of the war it was not an easy matter for Turkey to join the
+Allies. But Turkey had cause to suspect Great Britain herself. She knew that
+England had done no friendly turn to her during the Bulgarian War. She was
+hardly well served at the time of the war with Italy. It was still no doubt a
+bad choice. With the Musssalmans of India awakened and ready to support her,
+her statesmen might have relied upon Britain not being allowed to damage Turkey
+if she had remained with the Allies. But this is all wisdom after event. Turkey
+made a bad choice and she was punished for it. To humiliate her now is to
+ignore the Indian Mussulman sentiment. Britain may not do it and retain the
+loyalty of the awakened Mussulmans of India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For “The Times” to say that the peace terms strictly follow the principle of
+self-determination is to throw dust in the eyes of its readers. Is it the
+principle of self-determination that has caused the cessation of Adrianople and
+Thrace to Greece? By what principle of self-determination has Smyrna been
+handed to Greece? Have the inhabitants of Thrace and Smyrna asked for Grecian
+tutelege?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I decline to believe that the Arabs like the disposition that has been made of
+them. Who is the King of Hedjaj and who is Emir Feisul? Have the Arabs elected
+these kings and chiefs? Do the Arabs like the Mandate being taken by England?
+By the time the whole thing is finished, the very name self-determination will
+stink in one’s nostrils. Already signs are not wanting to show that the Arabs,
+the Thracians and the Smyrnans are resenting their disposal. They may not like
+Turkish rule but they like the present arrangement less. They could have made
+their own honourable terms with Turkey but these self-determining people will
+now be held down by the ‘matchless might’ of the allied <i>i.e.</i>, British
+forces. Britain had the straight course open to her of keeping the Turkish
+Empire intact and taking sufficient guarantees for good government. But her
+Prime Minister chose the crooked course of secret treaties, duplicity and
+hypocritical subterfuges.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is still a way out. Let her treat India as a real partner. Let her call
+the true representatives of the Mussalmans. Let them go to Arabia and the other
+parts of the Turkish Empire and let her devise a scheme that would not
+humiliate Turkey, that would satisfy the just Muslim sentiment and that will
+secure honest self-determination for the races composing that Empire. If it was
+Canada, Australia or South Africa that had to be placated, Mr. Lloyd George
+would not have dared to ignore them. They have the power to secede. India has
+not. Let him no more insult India by calling her a partner, if her feelings
+count for naught. I invite <i>The Times of India</i> to reconsider its position
+and join an honourable agitation in which a high-souled people are seeking
+nothing but justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do with all deference still suggest that the least that Lord Chelmsford can
+do is to resign if the sacred feelings of India’s sons are not to be consulted
+and respected by the Ministers. <i>The Times</i> is over-taxing the
+constitution when it suggests that as a constitutional Viceroy it is not open
+to Lord Chelmsford to go against the decision of his Majesty’s Ministers. It is
+certainly not open to a Viceroy to retain office and oppose ministerial
+decisions. But the constitution does allow a Viceroy to resign his high office
+when he is called upon to carry out decisions that are immoral as the peace
+terms are or like these terms are calculated to stir to their very depth the
+feelings of those whose affair he is administering for the time being.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE MAHOMEDAN DECISION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Khilafat meeting at Allahabad has unanimously reaffirmed the principle of
+non-co-operation and appointed an executive committee to lay down and enforce a
+detailed programme. This meeting was preceded by a joint Hindu-Mahomedan
+meeting at which Hindu leaders were invited to give their views. Mrs. Beasant,
+the Hon’ble Pandit Malaviyuji, the Hon’ble Dr. Sapru Motilal Nehru Chintamani
+and others were present at the meeting. It was a wise step on the part of the
+Khilafat Committee to invite Hindus representing all shades of thought to give
+them the benefit of their advice. Mrs. Besant and Dr. Sapru strongly dissuaded
+the Mahomedans present from the policy of non-co-operation. The other Hindu
+speakers made non-committal speeches. Whilst the other Hindu speakers approved
+of the principle of non-co-operation in theory, they saw many practical
+difficulties and they feared also complications arising from Mahomedans
+welcoming an Afghan invasion of India. The Mahomedan speakers gave the fullest
+and frankest assurances that they would fight to a man any invader who wanted
+to conquer India, but were equally frank in asserting that any invasion from
+without undertaken with a view to uphold the prestige of Islam and to vindicate
+justice would have their full sympathy if not their actual support. It is easy
+enough to understand and justify the Hindu caution. It is difficult to resist
+Mahomedan position. In my opinion, the best way to prevent India from becoming
+the battle ground between the forces of Islam and those of the English is for
+Hindus to make non-co-operation a complete and immediate success, and I have
+little doubt that if the Mahomedans remain true to their declared intention and
+are able to exercise self-restraint, and make sacrifices the Hindus will “play
+the game” and join them in the campaign of non-co-operation. I feel equally
+certain that the Hindus will not assist Mahomedans in promoting or bringing
+about an armed conflict between the British Government and their allies, and
+Afghanistan. British forces are too well organised to admit of any successful
+invasion of the Indian frontier. The only way, therefore, the Mahomedans can
+carry on an effective struggle on behalf of the honour of Islam is to take up
+non-co-operation in real earnest. It will not only be completely effective if
+it is adopted by the people on an extensive scale, but it will also provide
+full scope for individual conscience. If I cannot bear an injustice done by an
+individual or a corporation, and if I am directly or indirectly instrumental in
+upholding that individual or corporation, I must answer for it before my Maker,
+but I have done all it is humanly possible for me to do consistently with the
+moral code that refuses to injure even the wrong-doer, if I cease to support
+the injustice in the manner described above. In applying therefore such a great
+force there should be no haste, there should be no temper shown.
+Non-co-operation must be and remain absolutely a voluntary effort. The whole
+thing then depends upon Mahomedans themselves. If they will but help themselves
+Hindu help will come and the Government, great and mighty though it is, will
+have to bend before this irresistible force. No Government can possibly
+withstand the bloodless opposition of a whole nation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. ANDREWS’ DIFFICULTY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews whose love for India is equalled only by his love for England and
+whose mission in life is to serve God, i.e., humanity through India, has
+contributed remarkable articles to the ‘Bombay Chronicle’ on the Khilafat
+movement. He has not spared England, France or Italy. He has shown how Turkey
+has been most unjustly dealt with and how the Prime Minister’s pledge has been
+broken. He has devoted the last article to an examination of Mr. Mahomed Ali’s
+letter to the Sultan and has come to the conclusion that Mr. Mahomed Ali’s
+statement of claim is at variance with the claim set forth in the latest
+Khilafat representation to the Viceroy which he wholly approves.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews and I have discussed the question as fully as it was possible. He
+asked me publicly to define my own position more fully than I have done. His
+sole object in inviting discussion is to give strength to a cause which he
+holds as intrinsically just, and to gather round it the best opinion of Europe
+so that the allied powers and especially England may for very shame be obliged
+to revise the terms.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I gladly respond to Mr. Andrew’s invitation. I should clear the ground by
+stating that I reject any religious doctrine that does not appeal to reason and
+is in conflict with morality. I tolerate unreasonable religious sentiment when
+it is not immoral. I hold the Khilafat claim to be both just and reasonable and
+therefore it derives greater force because it has behind it the religious
+sentiment of the Mussalman world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my opinion Mr. Mahomed Ali’s statement is unexceptionable. It is no doubt
+clothed in diplomatic language. But I am not prepared to quarrel with the
+language so long as it is sound in substance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Andrews considers that Mr. Mahomed Ali’s language goes to show that he
+would resist Armenian independence against the Armenians and the Arabian
+against the Arabs. I attach no such meaning to it. What he, the whole of
+Mussalmans and therefore I think also the Hindus resist is the shameless
+attempt of England and the other Powers under cover of self-determination to
+emasculate and dismember Turkey. If I understand the spirit of Islam properly,
+it is essentially republican in the truest sense of the term. Therefore if
+Armenia or Arabia desired independence of Turkey they should have it. In the
+case of Arabia, complete Arabian independence would mean transference of the
+Khilafat to an Arab chieftain. Arabia in that sense is a Mussulman trust, not
+purely Arabian. And the Arabs without ceasing to be Mussulman, could not hold
+Arabia against Muslim opinion. The Khalifa must be the custodian of the Holy
+places and therefore also the routes to them. He must be able to defend them
+against the whole world. And if an Arab chief arose who could better satisfy
+that test than the Sultan of Turkey, I have no doubt that he would be
+recognised as the Khalifa.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have thus discussed the question academically. The fact is that neither the
+Mussulmans nor the Hindus believe in the English Ministerial word. They do not
+believe that the Arabs or the Armenians want complete independence of Turkey.
+That they want self-government is beyond doubt. Nobody disputes that claim. But
+nobody has ever ascertained that either the Arabs or the Armenians desire to do
+away with all connection, even nominal, with Turkey.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The solution of the question lies not in our academic discussion of the ideal
+position, it lies in an honest appointment of a mixed commission of absolutely
+independent Indian Mussulmans and Hindus and independent Europeans to
+investigate the real wish of the Armenians and the Arabs and then to come to a
+<i>modus vivendi</i> where by the claims of the nationality and those of Islam
+may be adjusted and satisfied.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is common knowledge that Smyrna and Thrace including Adrianople have been
+dishonestly taken away from Turkey and that mandates have been unscrupulously
+established in Syria and Mesopotamia and a British nominee has been set up in
+Hedjaj under the protection of British guns. This is a position that is
+intolerable and unjust. Apart therefore from the questions of Armenia and
+Arabia, the dishonesty and hypocrisy that pollute the peace terms require to be
+instantaneously removed. It paves the way to an equitable solution of the
+question of Armenian and Arabian independence which in theory no one denies and
+which in practice may be easily guaranteed if only the wishes of the people
+concerned could with any degree of certainty be ascertained.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE KHILAFAT AGITATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I did not
+come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though I had not
+fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and that I could not
+plead ‘not guilty’ if I was charged under it. For I must admit that I can
+pretend to no ‘affection’ for the present Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And my speeches are intended to create ‘dis-affection’ such that the people
+might consider it a shame to assist or co-operate with a Government that had
+forfeited all title to confidence, respect or support.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government. The
+latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by the former.
+And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of terrorism and
+emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter. British ministers have
+broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded the feelings of the seventy
+million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men and women were insulted by the
+insolent officers of the Punjab Government. Their wrongs not only remain
+unrighted but the very officers who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous
+humiliation retain office under the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could command
+for co-operation with the Government and for response to the wishes expressed
+in the Royal Proclamation. I did so because I honestly believed that, a new era
+was about to begin, and that the old spirit of fear, distrust and consequent
+terrorism was about to give place to the new spirit of respect, trust and
+goodwill. I sincerely believed that the Mussulman sentiment would be placated
+and that the officers that had misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the
+Punjab would be at least dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to
+feel that a Government that had always been found quick (and mighty) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents’ misdeeds. But to my
+amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present representatives of the
+Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous. They have no real regard for the
+wishes of the people of India and they count Indian honour as of little
+consequence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it is
+now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be witness
+to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right in threatening
+me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in endangering the existence of
+the Government. For that must be the result if my activity bears fruit. My only
+regret is that inasmuch as Mr. Montagu admits my past services, he might have
+perceived that there must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a
+well-wisher like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussalmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed
+I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection towards an
+unjust Government I had rendered greater services to the Empire than I am
+already credited with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve my activity is
+clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of my liberty, should
+the Government of India deem it to be their duty to take it away. A citizen has
+no right to resist such restriction imposed in accordance with the laws of the
+State to which he belongs. Much less have those who sympathise with him. In my
+case there can be no question of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the
+Government to the extent of trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For
+my supporters, therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It
+means the beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to stop
+the progress of Non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+Non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest, the
+Government must imprison others or grant the people’s wish in order to gain
+their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the people even
+under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore it is I or any one
+else who is arrested during the campaign, the first condition of success is
+that there must be no resentment shown against it. We cannot imperil the very
+existence of a Government and quarrel with its attempt to save itself by
+punishing those who place it in danger.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HIJARAT AND ITS MEANING</h3>
+
+<p>
+India is a continent. Its articulate thousands know what its inarticulate
+millions are doing or thinking. The Government and the educated Indians may
+think that the Khilafat movement is merely a passing phase. The millions of
+Mussalmans think otherwise. The flight of the Mussalmans is growing apace. The
+newspapers contain paragraphs in out of the way corners informing the readers
+that a special train containing a barrister with sixty women, forty children
+including twenty sucklings, all told 765, have left for Afghanistan. They were
+cheered <i>en route</i>. They were presented with cash, edibles and other
+things, and were joined by more Muhajarins on the way. No fanatical preaching
+by Shaukatali can make people break up and leave their homes for an unknown
+land. There must be an abiding faith in them. That it is better for them to
+leave a State which has no regard for their religious sentiment and face a
+beggar’s life than to remain in it even though it may be in a princely manner.
+Nothing but pride of power can blind the Government of India to the scene that
+is being enacted before it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But there is yet another side to the movement. Here are the facts as stated in
+the following Government <i>Communique</i> dated 10th July 1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p class="letter">
+An unfortunate affair in connection with the Mahajarin occurred on the 8th
+instant at Kacha Garhi between Peshawar and Jamrud. The following are the facts
+as at present reported. Two members of a party of the Mahajarins proceeding by
+train to Jamrud were detected by the British military police travelling without
+tickets. Altercation ensued at Islamia College Station, but the train proceeded
+to Kacha Garhi. An attempt was made to evict these Mahajarins, whereupon the
+military police were attacked by a crowd of some forty Mahajarins and the
+British officer who intervened was seriously wounded with a spade. A detachment
+of Indian troops at Kacha Garhi thereupon fired two or three shots at the
+Mahajarin for making murderous assault on the British officer. One Mahajarin
+was killed and one wounded and three arrested. Both the military and the police
+were injured. The body of the Mahajarin was despatched to Peshawar and buried
+on the morning of the 9th. This incident has caused considerable excitement in
+Peshawar City, and the Khilafat Hijrat Committee are exercising restraining
+influence. Shops were closed on the morning of the 9th. A full enquiry has been
+instituted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Now Peshawar to Jamrud is a matter of a few miles. It was clearly the duty of
+the military not to attempt to pull out the ticketless Mahajarins for the sake
+of a few annas. But they actually attempted force. Intervention by the rest of
+the party was a foregone conclusion. An altercation ensued. A British officer
+was attacked with a spade. Firing and a death of a Mahajarin was the result.
+Has British prestige been enhanced by the episode? Why have not the Government
+put tactful officers in charge at the frontier, whilst a great religious
+emigration is in progress? The action of the military will pass from tongue to
+tongue throughout India and the Mussalman world around, will not doubt be
+unconsciously and even consciously exaggerated in the passage and the feeling
+bitter as it already is will grow in bitterness. The <i>Communique</i> says
+that the Government are making further inquiry. Let us hope that it will be
+full and that better arrangements will be made to prevent a repetition of what
+appears to have been a thoughtless act on the part of the military.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And may I draw the attention of those who are opposing non-co-operation that
+unless they find out a substitute they should either join the non-co-operation
+movement or prepare to face a disorganised subterranean upheaval whose effect
+no one can foresee and whose spread it would be impossible to check or
+regulate?
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap03"></a>III. THE PUNJAB WRONGS</h2>
+
+<h3>POLITICAL FREEMASONRY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Freemasonry is a secret brotherhood which has more by its secret and iron rules
+than by its service to humanity obtained a hold upon some of the best minds.
+Similarly there seems to be some secret code of conduct governing the official
+class in India before which the flower of the great British nation fall
+prostrate and unconsciously become instruments of injustice which as private
+individuals they would be ashamed of perpetrating. In no other way is it
+possible for one to understand the majority report of the Hunter Committee, the
+despatch of the Government of India, and the reply thereto of the Secretary of
+State for India. In spite of the energetic protests of a section of the Press
+to the personnel of the committee, it might be said that on the whole the
+public were prepared to trust it especially as it contained three Indian
+members who could fairly be claimed to be independent. The first rude shock to
+this confidence was delivered by the refusal of Lord Hunter’s Committee to
+accept the very moderate and reasonable demand of the Congress Committee that
+the imprisoned Punjab leaders might be allowed to appear before it to instruct
+Counsel. Any doubt that might have been left in the mind of any person has been
+dispelled by the report of the majority of that committee. The result has
+justified the attitude of the Congress Committee. The evidence collected by it
+shows what lord Hunter’s Committee purposely denied itself.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The minority report stands out like an oasis in a desert. The Indian members
+deserve the congratulation of their countrymen for having dared to do their
+duty in the face of heavy odds. I wish that they had refused to associate
+themselves even in a modified manner with the condemnation of the civil
+disobedience form of Satyagraha. The defiant spirit of the Delhi mob on the
+30th March 1919 can hardly be used for condemning a great spiritual movement
+which is admittedly and manifestly intended to restrain the violent tendencies
+of mobs and to replace criminal lawlessness by civil disobedience of authority,
+when it has forfeited all title to respect. On the 30th March civil
+disobedience had not even been started. Almost every great popular
+demonstration has been hitherto attended all the world over by a certain amount
+of lawlessness. The demonstration of 30th March and 6th April could have been
+held under any other aegis us under that of Satyagrah. I hold that without the
+advent of the spirit of civility and orderliness the disobedience would have
+taken a much more violent form than it did even at Delhi. It was only the
+wonderfully quick acceptance by the people of the principle of Satyagrah that
+effectively checked the spread of violence throughout the length and breadth of
+India. And even to-day it is not the memory of the black barbarity of General
+Dyer that is keeping the undoubted restlessness among the people from breaking
+forth into violence. The hold that Satyagrah has gained on the people—it may be
+even against their will—is curbing the forces of disorder and violence. But I
+must not detain the reader on a defence of Satyagrah against unjust attacks. If
+it has gained a foothold in India, it will survive much fiercer attacks than
+the one made by the majority of the Hunter Committee and somewhat supported by
+the minority. Had the majority report been defective only in this direction and
+correct in every other there would have been nothing but praise for it. After
+all Satyagrah is a new experiment in political field. And a hasty attributing
+to it of any popular disorder would have been pardonable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The universally pronounced adverse judgment upon the report and the despatches
+rests upon far more painful revelations. Look at the manifestly laboured
+defence of every official act of inhumanity except where condemnation could not
+be avoided through the impudent admissions made by the actors themselves; look
+at the special pleading introduced to defend General Dyer even against himself;
+look at the vain glorification of Sir Michael O’Dwyer although it was his
+spirit that actuated every act of criminality on the part of the subordinates;
+look at the deliberate refusal to examine his wild career before the events of
+April. His acts were an open book of which the committee ought to have taken
+judicial notices. Instead of accepting everything that the officials had to
+say, the Committee’s obvious duty was to tax itself to find out the real cause
+of the disorders. It ought to have gone out of its way to search out the
+inwardness of the events. Instead of patiently going behind the hard crust of
+official documents, the Committee allowed itself to be guided with criminal
+laziness by mere official evidence. The report and the despatches, in my humble
+opinion, constitute an attempt to condone official lawlessness. The cautious
+and half-hearted condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer’s massacre and the
+notorious crawling order only deepens the disappointment of the reader as he
+goes through page after page of thinly disguised official whitewash. I need,
+however, scarcely attempt any elaborate examination of the report or the
+despatches which have been so justly censured by the whole national press
+whether of the moderate or the extremist hue. The point to consider is how to
+break down this secret—be the secrecy over so unconscious—conspiracy to uphold
+official iniquity. A scandal of this magnitude cannot be tolerated by the
+nation, if it is to preserve its self-respect and become a free partner in the
+Empire. The All-India Congress Committee has resolved upon convening a special
+session of the Congress for the purpose of considering, among other things, the
+situation arising from the report. In my opinion the time has arrived when we
+must cease to rely upon mere petition to Parliament for effective action.
+Petitions will have value, when the nation has behind it the power to enforce
+its will. What power then have we? When we are firmly of opinion that grave
+wrong has been done us and when after an appeal to the highest authority we
+fail to secure redress, there must be some power available to us for undoing
+the wrong. It is true that in the vast majority of cases it is the duty of a
+subject to submit to wrongs on failure of the usual procedure, so long as they
+do not affect his vital being. But every nation and every individual has the
+right and it is their duty, to rise against an intolerable wrong. I do not
+believe in armed risings. They are a remedy worse than the disease sought to be
+cured. They are a token of the spirit of revenge and impatience and anger. The
+method of violence cannot do good in the long run. Witness the effect of the
+armed rising of the allied powers against Germany. Have they not become even
+like the Germans, as the latter have been depicted to us by them?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We have a better method. Unlike that of violence it certainly involves the
+exercise of restraint and patience: but it requires also resoluteness of will.
+This method is to refuse to be party to the wrong. No tyrant has ever yet
+succeeded in his purpose without carrying the victim with him, it may be, as it
+often is, by force. Most people choose rather to yield to the will of the
+tyrant than to suffer for the consequences of resistance. Hence does terrorism
+form part of the stock-in-trade of the tyrant. But we have instances in history
+where terrorism has failed to impose the terrorist’s will upon his victim.
+India has the choice before her now. If then the acts of the Punjab Government
+be an insufferable wrong, if the report of Lord Hunter’s Committee and the two
+despatches be a greater wrong by reason of their grievous condonation of those
+acts, it is clear that we must refuse to submit to this official violence.
+Appeal the Parliament by all means, if necessary, but if the Parliament fails
+us and if we are worthy to call ourselves a nation, we must refuse to uphold
+the Government by withdrawing co-operation from it.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE DUTY OF THE PUNJABEE</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Allahabad <i>Leader</i> deserves to be congratulated for publishing the
+correspondence on Mr. Bosworth Smith who was one of the Martial Law officers
+against whom the complaints about persistent and continuous ill-treatment were
+among the bitterest. It appears from the correspondence that Mr. Bosworth Smith
+has received promotion instead of dismissal. Sometime before Martial Law Mr.
+Smith appears to have been degraded. “He has since been restored,” says the
+<i>Leader</i> correspondent, “to his position of a Deputy Commissioner of the
+second grade from which he was degraded and also been invested with power under
+section 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Since his arrival, the poor Indian
+population of the town of Amhala Cantonment has been living under a regime of
+horror and tyranny.” The correspondent adds: “I use both these words
+deliberately for conveying precisely what they mean.” I cull a few passage from
+this illuminating letter to illustrate the meaning of horror and tyranny. “In
+private complaints he never takes the statement of the complainant. It is taken
+down by the reader when the court rises and got signed by the magistrate the
+following day. Whether the report received (upon such complaints) is favourable
+to the complainant or unfavourable to him, it is never ready by the magistrate,
+and complaints are dismissed without proper trial. This is the fate of private
+complaints. Now as regards police chellans. Pleaders for the accused are not
+allowed to interview under trial prisoners in police custody. They are not
+allowed to cross-examine prosecution witnesses.... Prosecution witnesses are
+examined with leading questions.... Thus a whole prosecution story is put into
+the mouth of police, witnesses for the defence though called in are not allowed
+to be examined by the defence counsel.... The accused is silenced if he picks
+up courage to say anything in defence.... Any Cantonment servant can write down
+the name of any citizen of the Cantonment on a chit of paper and ask him to
+appear the next day in court. This is a summons.... If any one does not appear
+in court who is thus ordered, criminal warrants of arrest are issued against
+him.” There is much more of this style in the letter which is worth producing,
+but I have given enough to illustrate the writer’s meaning. Let me turn for a
+while to this official’s record during Martial Law. He is the official who
+tried people in batches and convicted them after a farcical trial. Witnesses
+have deposed to his having assembled people, having asked them to give false
+evidence, having removed women’s veils, called them ‘flies, bitches, she-asses’
+and having spat upon them. He it was who subjected the innocent pleaders of
+Shokhupura indescribable persecution. Mr. Andrews personally investigated
+complaints against this official and came to the conclusion that no official
+had behaved worse than Mr. Smith. He gathered the people of Shokhupura,
+humiliated them in a variety of ways, called them ‘suvarlog,’ ‘gandi mukkhi.’
+His evidence before the Hunter Commission betrays his total disregard for truth
+and this is the officer who, if the correspondent in question has given correct
+facts, has been promoted. The question however is why, he is at all in
+Government service and why he has not been tried for assaulting and abusing
+innocent men and women.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I notice a desire for the impeachment of General Dyer and Sir Michael O’Dwyer.
+I will not stop to examine whether the course is feasible. I was sorry to find
+Mr. Shastriar joining this cry for the prosecution of General Dyer. If the
+English people will willingly do so, I would welcome such prosecution as a sign
+of their strong disapproval of the Jallianwalla Bagh atrocity, but I would
+certainly not spend a single farthing in a vain pursuit after the conviction of
+this man. Surely the public has received sufficient experience of the English
+mind. Practically the whole English Press has joined the conspiracy to screen
+these offenders against humanity. I would not be party to make heroes of them
+by joining the cry for prosecution private or public. If I can only persuade
+India to insist upon their complete dismissal, I should be satisfied. But more
+than the dismissal, of Sir Michael O’Dwyer and General Dyer, is necessary the
+peremptory dismissal, if not a trial, of Colonel O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith,
+Rai Shri Ram and others mentioned in the Congress Sub-Committee’s Report. Bad
+as General Dyer is I consider Mr. Smith to be infinitely worse and his crimes
+to be far more serious than the massacre of Jallianwalla Bugh. General Dyer
+sincerely believed that it was a soldierly act to terrorise people by shooting
+them. But Mr. Smith was wantonly cruel, vulgar and debased. If all the facts
+that have been deposed to against him are true, there is not a spark of
+humanity about him. Unlike General Dyer he lacks the courage to confirm what he
+has done and he wriggles when challenged. This officer remains free to inflict
+himself upon people who have done no wrong to him, and who is permitted to
+disgrace the rule he represents for the time being.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What is the Punjab doing? Is it not the duty of the Punjabis not to rest until
+they have secured the dismissal of Mr. Smith and the like? The Punjab leaders
+have been discharged in vain if they will not utilise the liberty they have
+received, in order to purge the administration of Messrs. Bosworth Smith and
+Company. I am sure that if they will only begin a determined agitation they
+will have the whole India by their side. I venture to suggest to them that the
+best way to qualify for sending General Dyer to the gallows is to perform the
+easier and the more urgent duty of arresting the mischief still continued by
+the officials against whom they have assisted in collecting overwhelming
+evidence.
+</p>
+
+<h3>GENERAL DYER</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Army Council has found General Dyer guilty of error of judgment and advised
+that he should not receive any office under the Crown. Mr. Montagu has been
+unsparing in his criticism of General Dyer’s conduct. And yet somehow or other
+I cannot help feeling that General Dyer is by no means the worst offender. His
+brutality is unmistakable. His abject and unsoldier-like cowardice is apparent
+in every line of his amazing defence before the Army Council. He has called an
+unarmed crowd of men and children—mostly holiday-makers—‘a rebel army.’ He
+believes himself to be the saviour of the Punjab in that he was able to shoot
+down like rabbits men who were penned in an inclosure. Such a man is unworthy
+of being considered a soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran no
+risk. He shot without the slightest opposition and without warning. This is not
+an ‘error of judgement.’ It is paralysis of it in the face of fancied danger.
+It is proof of criminal incapacity and heartlessness. But the fury that has
+been spent upon General Dyer is, I am sure, largely misdirected. No doubt the
+shooting was ‘frightful,’ the loss of innocent life deplorable. But the slow
+torture, degradation and emasculation that followed was much worse, more
+calculated, malicious and soul-killing, and the actors who performed the deeds
+deserve greater condemnation that General Dyer for the Jallianwalla Bagh
+massacre. The latter merely destroyed a few bodies but the others tried to kill
+the soul of a nation. Who ever talks of Col. Frank Johnson who was by far the
+worst offender? He terrorised guiltless Lahore, and by his merciless orders set
+the tone to the whole of the Martial Law officers. But what I am concerned with
+is not even Col. Johnson. The first business of the people of the Punjab and of
+India is to rid the service of Col O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram
+and Mr. Malik Khan. They are still retained in the service. Their guilt is as
+much proved as that of General Dyer. We shall have failed in our duty if the
+condemnation pronounced upon General Dyer produces a sense of satisfaction and
+the obvious duty of purging the administration in the Punjab is neglected. That
+task will not be performed by platform rhetoric or resolutions merely. Stern
+action is required on out part if we are to make any headway with ourselves and
+make any impression upon the officials that they are not to consider themselves
+as masters of the people but as their trusties and servants who cannot hold
+office if they misbehave themselves and prove unworthy of the trust reposed in
+them.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE PUNJAB SENTENCES</h3>
+
+<p>
+The commissioners appointed by the Congress Punjab Sub Committee have in their
+report accused His Excellency the Viceroy of criminal want of imagination. His
+Excellency’s refusal to commute two death sentences out of five is a fine
+illustration of the accusation. The rejection of the appeal by the Privy
+Council no more proves the guilt of the condemned than their innocence would
+have been proved by quashing the proceedings before the Martial Law Tribunal.
+Moreover, these cases clearly come under the Royal Proclamation in accordance
+with its interpretation by the Punjab Government. The murders in Amritsar were
+not due to any private quarrel between the murderers and their victims. The
+offence grave, though it was, was purely political and committed under
+excitement. More than full reparation has been taken for the murders and arson.
+In the circumstances commonsense dictates reduction of the death sentences. The
+popular belief favours the view that the condemned men are innocent and have
+not had a fair trial. The execution has been so long delayed that hanging at
+this stage would give a rude shock to Indian society. Any Viceroy with
+imagination would have at once announced commutation of the death sentences—not
+so Lord Chelmsford. In his estimation, evidently, the demands of justice will
+not be satisfied if at least some of the condemned men are not hanged. Public
+feeling with him counts for nothing. We shall still hope that, either the
+Viceroy or Mr. Montagu will commute the death sentences.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But if the Government will grievously err, if they carry out the sentences, the
+people will equally err if they give way to anger or grief over the hanging if
+it has unfortunately to take plane. Before we become a nation possessing an
+effective voice in the councils of nations, we must be prepared to contemplate
+with equanimity, not a thousand murders of innocent men and women but many
+thousands before we attain a status in the world that, shall not be surpassed
+by any nation. We hope therefore that all concerned will take rather than lose
+heart and treat hanging as an ordinary affair of life.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+[Since the above was in type, we have received cruel news. At last H.E. the
+Viceroy has mercilessly given the rude shock to Indian society. It is now for
+the latter to take heart in spite of the unkindest cut.—Ed. Y.I.]
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap04"></a>IV. SWARAJ</h2>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ IN ONE YEAR</h3>
+
+<p>
+Much laughter has been indulged in at my expense for having told the Congress
+audience at Calcutta that if there was sufficient response to my programme of
+non-co-operation Swaraj would be attained in one year. Some have ignored my
+condition and laughed because of the impossibility of getting Swaraj anyhow
+within one year. Others have spelt the ‘if’ in capitals and suggested that if
+‘ifs’ were permissible in argument, any absurdity could be proved to be a
+possibility. My proposition however is based on a mathematical calculation. And
+I venture to say that true Swaraj is a practical impossibility without due
+fulfilment of my conditions. Swaraj means a state such that we can maintain our
+separate existence without the presence of the English. If it is to be a
+partnership, it must be partnership at will. There can be no Swaraj without our
+feeling and being the equals of Englishmen. To-day we feel that we are
+dependent upon them for our internal and external security, for an armed peace
+between the Hindus and the Mussulmans, for our education and for the supply of
+daily wants, nay, even for the settlement of our religious squabbles. The
+Rajahs are dependent upon the British for their powers and the millionaires for
+their millions. The British know our helplessness and Sir Thomas Holland cracks
+jokes quite legitimately at the expense of non-co-operationists. To get Swaraj
+then is to get rid of our helplessness. The problem is no doubt stupendous even
+as it is for the fabled lion who having been brought up in the company of goats
+found it impossible to feel that he was a lion. As Tolstoy used to put it,
+mankind often laboured under hypnotism. Under its spell continuously we feel
+the feeling of helplessness. The British themselves cannot be expected to help
+us out of it. On the contrary, they din into our ears that we shall be fit to
+govern ourselves only by slow educative processes. The “Times” suggested that
+if we boycott the councils we shall lose the opportunity of a training in
+Swaraj. I have no doubt that there are many who believe what the “Times” says.
+It even resorts to a falsehood. It audaciously says that Lord Milner’s Mission
+listened to the Egyptians only when they were ready to lift the boycott of the
+Egyptian Council. For me the only training in Swaraj we need is the ability to
+defend ourselves against the whole world and to live our natural life in
+perfect freedom even though it may be full of defects. Good Government is no
+substitute for self-Government. The Afghans have a bad Government but it is
+self-Government. I envy them. The Japanese learnt the art through a sea of
+blood. And if we to-day had the power to drive out the English by superior
+brute force, we would be counted their superiors, and in spite of our
+inexperience in debating at the Council table or in holding executive offices,
+we would be held fit to govern ourselves. For brute force is the only test the
+west has hitherto recognised. The Germans were defeated not because they were
+necessarily in the wrong, but because the allied Powers were found to possess
+greater brute strength. In the end therefore India must either learn the art of
+war which the British will not teach her or, she must follow her own way of
+discipline and self-sacrifice through non-co-operation. It is as amazing as it
+is humiliating that less than one hundred-thousand white men should be able to
+rule three hundred and fifteen million Indians. They do so somewhat undoubtedly
+by force, but more by securing our co-operation in a thousand ways and making
+us more and more helpless and dependent on them as time goes forward. Let us
+not mistake reformed councils, more lawcourts and even governorships for real
+freedom or power. They are but subtler methods of emasculation. The British
+cannot rule us by mere force. And so they resort to all means, honourable and
+dishonourable, in order to retain their hold on India. They want India’s
+billions and they want India’s man power for their imperialistic greed. If we
+refuse to supply them with men and money, we achieve our goal, namely, Swaraj,
+equality, manliness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The cup of our humiliation was filled during the closing scenes in the
+Viceregal Council. Mr. Shustri could not move his resolution on the Punjab. The
+Indian victims of Jullianwala received Rs. 1,250, the English victims of
+mob-frenzy received lakhs. The officials who were guilty of crimes against
+those whose servants they were, were reprimanded. And the councillors were
+satisfied. If India were powerful, India would not have stood this addition of
+insult, to her injury.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not blame the British. If we were weak in numbers as they are, we too
+would perhaps have resorted to the same methods as they are now employing.
+Terrorism and deception are weapons not of the strong but of the weak. The
+British are weak in numbers we are weak in spite of our numbers. The result is
+that each is dragging the other down. It is common experience that Englishmen
+lose in character after residence in India and that Indians lose in courage and
+manliness by contact with Englishmen. This process of weakening is good neither
+for us, two nations, nor for the world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But if we Indians take care of ourselves the English and the rest of the world
+would take care of themselves. Our contributions to the world’s progress must
+therefore consist in setting our own house in order.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Training in arms for the present is out of the question. I go a step further
+and believe that India has a better mission for the world. It is within her to
+show that she can achieve her destiny by pure self-sacrifice, i.e.,
+self-purification. This can be done only by non-co-operation. And
+non-co-operation is possible only when those who commenced to co-operate being
+the process of withdrawal. If we can but free ourselves from the threefold
+<i>maya</i> of Government-controlled schools, Government law-courts and
+legislative councils, and truly control our own education regulate our disputes
+and be indifferent to their legislation, we are ready to govern ourselves and
+we are only then ready to ask the government servants, whether civil or
+military, to resign, and the tax-payers to suspend payment of taxes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And is it such an impracticable proposition to expect parents to withdraw their
+children from schools and colleges and establish their own institutions or to
+ask lawyers to suspend their practice and devote their whole time attention to
+national service against payment where necessary, of their maintenance, or to
+ask candidates for councils not to enter councils and lend their passive or
+active assistance to the legislative machinery through which all control is
+exercised. The movement of non-co-operation is nothing but an attempt to
+isolate the brute force of the British from all the trappings under which it is
+hidden and to show that brute force by itself cannot for one single moment hold
+India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I frankly confess that, until the three conditions mentioned by me are
+fulfilled, there is no Swaraj. We may not go on taking our college degrees,
+taking thousands of rupees monthly from clients for cases which can be finished
+in five minutes and taking the keenest delight in wasting national time on the
+council floor and still expect to gain national self-respect.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The last though not the least important part of the Maya still remains to be
+considered. That is Swadeshi. Had we not abandoned Swadeshi, we need not have
+been in the present fallen state. If we would get rid of the economic slavery,
+we must manufacture our own cloth and at the present moment only by
+hand-spinning and hand weaving.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+All this means discipline, self-denial, self-sacrifice, organising ability,
+confidence and courage. If we show this in one year among the classes that
+to-day count, and make public opinion, we certainly gain Swaraj within one
+year. If I am told that even we who lead have not these qualities in us, there
+certainly will never be Swaraj for India, but then we shall have no right to
+blame the English for what they are doing. Our salvation and its time are
+solely dependent upon us.
+</p>
+
+<h3>BRITISH RULE—AN EVIL</h3>
+
+<p>
+The <i>Interpreter</i> is however more to the point in asking, “Does Mr. Gandhi
+hold without hesitation or reserve that British rule in India is altogether an
+evil and that the people of India are to be taught so to regard it? He must
+hold it to be so evil that the wrongs it does outweigh the benefit it confers,
+for only so is non-co-operation to be justified at the bar of conscience or of
+Christ.” My answer is emphatically in the affirmative. So long as I believed
+that the sum total of the energy of the British Empire was good, I clung to it
+despite what I used to regard as temporary aberrations. I am not sorry for
+having done so. But having my eyes opened, it would be sin for me to associate
+myself with the Empire unless it purges itself of its evil character. I write
+this with sorrow and I should be pleased if I discovered that I was in error
+and that my present attitude was a reaction. The continuous financial drain,
+the emasculation of the Punjab and the betrayal of the Muslim sentiment
+constitute, in my humble opinion, a threefold robbery of India. ‘The blessings
+of <i>pax Britanica</i>’ I reckon, therefore, to be a curse. We would have at
+least remained like the other nations brave men and women, instead of feeling
+as we do so utterly helpless, if we had no British Rule imposing on us an armed
+peace. ‘The blessing’ of roads and railways is a return no self-respecting
+nation would accept for its degradation. ‘The blessing’ of education is proving
+one of the greatest obstacles in our progress towards freedom.
+</p>
+
+<h3>A MOVEMENT OF PURIFICATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The fact is that non-co-operation by reason of its non-violence has become a
+religious and purifying movement. It is daily bringing strength to the nation,
+showing it its weak spots and the remedy for removing them. It is a movement of
+self-reliance. It is the mightiest force for revolutionising opinion and
+stimulating thought. It is a movement of self-imposed suffering and therefore
+possesses automatic checks against extravagance or impatience. The capacity of
+the nation for suffering regulates its advance towards freedom. It isolates the
+force of evil by refraining from participation in it, in any shape or form.
+</p>
+
+<h3>WHY WAS INDIA LOST?</h3>
+
+<p>
+[A dialog between the Reader and Editor,—<i>Indian Home Rule</i>].
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: You have said much about civilisation—enough to make me ponder over it.
+I do not know what I should adopt and what I should avoid from the nations of
+Europe. but one question comes to my lips immediately. If civilisation is a
+disease, and if it has attacked England why has she been able to take India,
+and why is she able to retain it?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: Your question is not very difficult to answer, and we shall presently
+be able to examine the true nature of Swaraj; for I am aware that I have still
+to answer that question. I will, however, take up your previous question. The
+English have not taken India; we have given it to them. They are not in India
+because of their strength, but because we keep them. Let us now see whether
+these positions can be sustained. They came to our country originally for the
+purpose of trade. Recall the Company Bahadur. Who made it Bahadur? They had not
+the slightest intention at the time of establishing a kingdom. Who assisted the
+Company’s officers? Who was tempted at the sight of their silver? Who bought
+their goods? History testifies that we did all this. In order to become rich
+all at once, we welcomed the Company’s officers with open arms. We assisted
+them. If I am in the habit of drinking Bhang, and a seller thereof sells it to
+me, am I to blame him or myself? By blaming the seller shall I be able to avoid
+the habit? And, if a particular retailer is driven away will not another take
+his place? A true servant of India will have to go to the root of the matter.
+If an excess of food has caused me indigestion I will certainly not avoid it by
+blaming water. He is a true physician who probes the cause of disease and, if
+you pose as a physician for the disease of India, you will have to find out its
+true cause.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: You are right. Now, I think you will not have to argue much with me to
+drive your conclusions home. I am impatient to know your further views. We are
+now on a most interesting topic. I shall, therefore, endeavour to follow your
+thought, and stop you when I am in doubt.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: I am afraid that, in spite of your enthusiasm, as we proceed further we
+shall have differences of opinion. Nevertheless, I shall argue only when you
+will stop me. We have already seen that the English merchants were able to get
+a footing in India because we encouraged them. When our princes fought among
+themselves, they sought the assistance of Company Bahadar. That corporation was
+versed alike in commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality.
+Its object was to increase its commerce and to make money. It accepted our
+assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the latter
+it employed an army which was utilised by us also. Is it not then useless to
+blame the English for what we did at that time? The Hindus and the Mahomedans
+were at daggers drawn. This, too, gave the Company its opportunity, and thus we
+created the circumstances that gave the Company its control over India. Hence
+it is truer to say that we gave India to the English than that India was lost.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Reader: Will you now tell me how they are able to retain India?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Editor: The causes that gave them India enable them to retain it. Some
+Englishmen state that they took, and they hold, India by the sword. Both these
+statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding India. We alone
+keep them. Napoleon is said to have described the English as a nation of shop
+keepers. It is a fitting description. They hold whatever dominions they have
+for the sake of their commerce. Their army and their navy are intended to
+protect it. When the Transvaal offered no such attractions, the late Mr.
+Gladstone discovered that it was no right for the English to hold it. When it
+became a paying proposition, resistance led to war. Mr. Chamberlain soon
+discovered that England enjoyed a suzerainty over the Transvaal. It is related
+that some one asked the late President Kruger whether there was gold in the
+moon? He replied that it was highly unlikely, because, if there were, the
+English would have annexed it. Many problems can be solved by remembering that
+money is their God. Then it follows that we keep the English in India for our
+base self-interest. We like their commerce, they please us by their subtle
+methods, and get what they want from us. To blame them for this is to
+perpetuate their power. We further strengthen their hold by quarrelling amongst
+ourselves. If you accept the above statements, it is proved that the English
+entered India for the purposes of trade. They remain in it for the same
+purpose, and we help them to do so. Their arms and ammunition are perfectly
+useless. In this connection, I remind you that it is the British flag which is
+waving in Japan, and not the Japanese. The English have a treaty with Japan for
+the sake of their commerce and you will see that, if they can manage it, their
+commerce will greatly expand in that country. They wish to convert the whole
+word into a vast market for their goods. That they cannot do so is true, but
+the blame will not be theirs. They will leave no stone unturned to reach the
+goal.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ MY IDEAL</h3>
+
+<p>
+The following is a fairly full report of Mr. Gandhi’s important speech at
+Calcutta on the 13th December 1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The very fact, that so many of you cannot understand Hindi which is bound to be
+the National medium of expression throughout Hindustan in gatherings of Indians
+belonging to different parts of the land, shows the depth of the degradation to
+which we have sunk, and points to the supreme necessity of the non-co-operation
+movement which is intended to lift us out of that condition. This Government
+has been instrumental in degrading this great nation in various ways, and it is
+impossible to be free from it without co-operation amongst ourselves which is
+in turn impossible without a national medium of expression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I am not here to day to plead for the medium. I am to plead for the
+acceptance by the country of the programme of non-violent, progressive
+non-co-operation. Now all the words that I have used here are absolutely
+necessary and the two adjectives ‘progressive’ and ‘non-violent’ are integral
+part of a whole. With me non-violence is part of my religion, a matter of
+creed. But with the great number of Mussalmans non-violence is a policy, with
+thousand, if not millions of Hindus, it is equally a matter of policy. But
+whether it is a creed or a policy, it is utterly impossible for you to finish
+the programme for the enfranchisement of the millions of India, without
+recognising the necessity and the value of non-violence. Violence may for a
+moment avail to secure a certain measure of success but it could not in the
+long run achieve any appreciable result. On the other hand all violence would
+prove destructive to the honour and self-respect of the nation. The blue books
+issued by the Government of India show that inasmuch as we have used violence,
+military expenditure has gone up, not proportionately but in geometrical
+progression. The bonds of our slavery have been forged all the stronger for our
+having offered violence. And the whole history of British rule in India is a
+demonstration of the fact that we have never been able to offer successful
+violence. Whilst therefore I say that rather than have the yoke of a Government
+that has so emasculated us, I would welcome violence. I would urge with all the
+emphasis that I can command that India will never be able to regain her own by
+methods of violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Lord Ronaldshay who has done me the honour of reading my booklet on Home Rule
+has warned my countrymen against engaging themselves in a struggle for a Swaraj
+such as is described in that booklet. Now though I do not want to withdraw a
+single word of it, I would say to you on this occasion that I do not ask India
+to follow out to-day the methods prescribed in my booklet. If they could do
+that they would have Home Rule not in a year but in a day, and India by
+realising that ideal wants to acquire an ascendancy over the rest of the world.
+But it must remain a day dream more or less for the time being. What I am doing
+to-day is that I am giving the country a pardonable programme not the abolition
+of law courts, posts, telegraphs and of railways but for the attainment of
+Parliamentary Swarja. I am telling you to do that so long as we do not isolate
+ourselves from this Government, we are co-operating with it through schools,
+law courts and councils, through service civil and military and payment of
+taxes and foreign trade.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The moment this fact is realised and non-co-operation is effected, this
+Government must totter to pieces. If I know that the masses were prepared for
+the whole programme at once, I would not delay in putting it at once to work.
+It is not possible at the present moment, to prevent the masses from bursting
+out into wrath against those who come to execute the law, it is not possible,
+that the military would lay down their arms without the slightest violence. If
+that were possible to-day, I would propose all the stages of non-co-operation
+to be worked simultaneously. But we have not secured that control over the
+masses, we have uselessly frittered away precious years of the nation’s life in
+mastering a language which we need least for winning our liberty; we have
+frittered away all those years in learning liberty from Milton and Shakespeare,
+in deriving inspiration from the pages of Mill, whilst liberty could be learnt
+at our doors. We have thus succeeded in isolating ourselves from the masses: we
+have been westernised. We have failed these 35 years to utilise our education
+in order to permeate the masses. We have sat upon the pedestal and from there
+delivered harangues to them in a language they do not understand and we see
+to-day that we are unable to conduct large gatherings in a disciplined manner.
+And discipline is the essence of success. Here is therefore one reason why I
+have introduced the word ‘progressive’ in the non-co-operation Resolution.
+Without any impertinence I may say that I understand the mass mind better than
+any one amongst the educated Indians. I contend that the masses are not ready
+for suspension of payment of taxes. They have not yet learnt sufficient
+self-control. If I was sure of non-violence on their part I would ask them to
+suspend payment to-day and not waste a single moment of the nations time. With
+me the liberty of India has become a passion. Liberty of Islam is as dear to
+me. I would not therefore delay a moment if I found that the whole of the
+programme could be enforced at once.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It grieves me to miss the faces of dear and revered leaders in this assembly.
+We miss here the trumpet voice of Surendranath Banorji, who has rendered
+inestimable service to the country. And though we stand as poles asunder
+to-day, though we may have sharp differences with him, we must express them
+with becoming restraint. I do not ask you to give up a single iota of
+principle. I urge non-violence in language and in deed. If non-violence is
+essential in our dealings with Government, it is more essential in our dealings
+with our leaders. And it grieves me deeply to hear of recent instances of
+violence reported to have been used in East Bongal against our own people. I
+was pained to hear that the ears of a man who had voted at the recent elections
+had been cut, and night soil had been thrown into the bed of a man who had
+stood as a candidate. Non-co-operation is never going to succeed in this way.
+It will not succeed unless we create an atmosphere of perfect freedom, unless
+we prize our opponents liberty as much as our own. The liberty of faith,
+conscience, thought and action which we claim for ourselves must be conceded
+equally to others. Non co-operation is a process of purification and we must
+continually try to touch the hearts of those who differ from us, their minds,
+and their emotions, but never their bodies. Discipline and restraint are the
+cardinal principles of our conduct and I warn you against any sort of
+tyrannical social ostracism. I was deeply grieved therefore to hear of the
+insult offered to a dead body in Delhi and feel that if it was the action of
+non-co-operators they have disgraced themselves and their creed. I repeat we
+cannot deliver our land through violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It was not a joke when I said on the congress platform that Swaraj could be
+established in one year if there was sufficient response from the nation. Three
+months of this year are gone. If we are true to our salt, true to our nation,
+true to the songs we sing, if we are true to the Bhagwad Gita and the Koran, we
+would finish the programme in the remaining nine months and deliver Islam the
+Punjab and India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have proposed a limited programme workable within one year, having a special
+regard to the educated classes. We seem to be labouring under the illusion that
+we cannot possibly live without Councils, law courts and schools provided by
+the Government. The moment we are disillusioned we have Swaraj. It is
+demoralising both for Government and the governed that a hundred thousand
+pilgrims should dictate terms to a nation composed of three hundred millions.
+And how is it they can thus dictate terms. It is because we have been divided
+and they have ruled. I have never forgotten Humes’ frank confession that the
+British Government was sustained by the policy of “Divide and Rule.” Therefore
+it is that I have laid stress upon Hindu Muslim Unity as one of the important
+essentials for the success of Non-co-operation. But, it should be no lip unity,
+nor bunia unity it should be a unity broad based on a recognition of the heart.
+If we want to save Hinduism, I say for Gods sake, do not seek to bargain with
+the Mussalmans. I have been going about with Maulana Shaukat Ali all these
+months, but I have not so much as whispered anything about the protection of
+the cow. My alliance with the Ali Brothers is one of honour. I feel that I am
+on my honour, the whole of Hinduism is on its honour, and if it will not be
+found wanting, it will do its duty towards the Mussalmans of India. Any
+bargaining would be degrading to us. Light brings light not darkness, and
+nobility done with a noble purpose will be twice rewarded. It will be God alone
+who can protect the cow. Ask me not to-day—‘what about the cow,’ ask me after
+Islam is vindicated through India. Ask the Rajas what they do to entertain
+their English guests. Do they not provide beef and champagne for their guests.
+Persuade them first to stop cow killing and then think of bargaining with
+Mussalmans. And how are we Hindus behaving ourselves towards the cow and her
+progeny! Do we treat her as our religion requires us? Not till we have set our
+own house in order and saved the cow from the Englishmen have we the right to
+plead on her behalf with the Mussalmans. And the best way of saving the cow
+from them is to give them unconditional help in their hour of trouble.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Similarly what do we owe the Punjab? The whole of India was made to crawl on
+her belly in as much as a single Punjabi was made to crawl in that dirty lane
+in Amritsar, the whole womanhood of India was unveiled in as much as the
+innocent woman of Manianwalla were unveiled by an insolent office; and Indian
+childhood was dishonoured in that, that school children of tender age were made
+to walk four times a day to stated places within the martial area in the Punjab
+and to salute the Union Jack, through the effect of which order two children,
+seven years old died of sunstroke having been made to wait in the noonday sun.
+In my opinion it is a sin to attend the schools and colleges conducted under
+the aegis of this Government so long as it has not purged itself of these
+crimes by proper repentance. We may not with any sense of self-respect plead
+before the courts of the Government when we remember that it was through the
+Punjab Courts that innocent men were sentenced to be imprisoned and hanged. We
+become participators in the crime of the Government by voluntarily helping it
+or being helped by it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The women of India have intuitively understood the spiritual nature of the
+struggle. Thousands have attended to listen to the message of non-violent
+non-co-operation and have given me their precious ornaments for the purpose of
+advancing the cause of Swaraj. Is it any wonder if I believe the possibility of
+gaining Swaraj within a year after all these wonderful demonstrations? I would
+be guilty of want of faith in God if I under-rated the significance of the
+response from the women of India. I hope that the students will do their duty.
+The country certainly expects the lawyers who have hitherto led public
+agitation to recognise the new awakening.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have used strong language but I have done so with the greatest deliberation,
+I am not actuated by any feeling of revenge. I do not consider Englishmen as my
+enemy. I recognise the worth of many. I enjoy the privilege of having many
+English friends, but I am a determined enemy of the English rule as is
+conducted at present and if the power—tapasya—of one man could destroy it, I
+would certainly destroy it, if it could not be mended. An Empire that stands
+for injustice and breach of faith does not deserve to stand if its custodians
+will not repent and non-co-operation has been devised in order to enable the
+nation to compel justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hope that Bengal will take her proper place in this movement of
+self-purification. Bengal began Swadeshi and national education when the rest
+of India was sleeping. I hope that Bengal will come to the front in this
+movement for gaining Swaraj and gaining justice for the Khilafat and the Punjab
+through purification and self-sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>ON THE WRONG TRACK</h3>
+
+<p>
+Lord Ronaldshay has been doing me the favour of reading my booklet on Indian
+Home Rule which is a translation of Hind Swaraj. His Lordship told his audience
+that if Swaraj meant what I had described it to be in the booklet, the Bengalis
+would have none of it. I am sorry that Swaraj of the Congress resolution does
+not mean the Swaraj depicted in the booklet; Swaraj according to the Congress
+means Swaraj that the people of India want, not what the British Government may
+condescend to give. In so far as I can see, Swaraj will be a Parliament chosen
+by the people with the fullest power over the finance, the police, the
+military, the navy, the courts, and the educational institutions.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am free to confess that the Swaraj I expect to gain within one year, if India
+responds will be such Swaraj as will make practically impossible the repetition
+of the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs, and will enable the nation to do good or
+evil as it chooses, and not he ‘good’ at the dictation of an irresponsible,
+insolent, and godless bureaucracy. Under that Swaraj the nation will have the
+power to impose a heavy protective tariff on such foreign goods as are capable
+of being manufactured in India, as also the power to refuse to send a single
+soldier outside India for the purpose of enslaving the surrounding or remote
+nationalities. The Swaraj that I dream of will be a possibility only, when the
+nation is free to make its choice both of good and evil.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+I adhere to all I have said in that booklet and I would certainly recommend it
+to the reader. Government over self is the truest Swaraj, it is synonymous with
+<i>moksha</i> or salvation, and I have seen nothing to alter the view that
+doctors, lawyers, and railways are no help, and are often a hindrance, to the
+one thing worth striving after. But I know that association, a satanic
+activity, such as the Government is engaged in, makes even an effort for such
+freedom a practical impossibility. I cannot tender allegiance to God and Satan
+at the same time.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+The surest sign of the satanic nature of the present system is that even a
+nobleman of the type of Lord Ronaldshay is obliged to put us off the track. He
+will not deal with the one thing needful. Why is he silent about the Punjab?
+Why does he evade the Khilafat? Can ointments soothe a patient who is suffering
+from corroding consumption? Does his lordship not see that it is not the
+inadequacy of the reforms that has set India aflame but that it is the
+infliction of the two wrongs and the wicked attempt to make us forget them?
+Does he not see that a complete change of heart is required before
+reconciliation?
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+But it has become the fashion nowadays to ascribe hatred to
+non-co-operationism. And I regret to find that even Col. Wedgewood has fallen
+into the trap. I make bold to say that the only way to remove hatred is to give
+it disciplined vent. No man can—I cannot—perform the impossible task of
+removing hatred so long as contempt and despise for the feelings of India are
+sedulously nursed. It is a mockery to ask India not to hate when in the same
+breath India’s most sacred feelings are contemptuously brushed aside. India
+feels weak and helpless and so expresses her helplessness by hating the tyrant
+who despises her and makes her crawl on the belly, lifts the veils of her
+innocent women and compels her tender children to acknowledge his power by
+saluting his flag four times a day. The gospel of Non-co-operation addresses
+itself to the task of making the people strong and self-reliant. It is an
+attempt to transform hatred into pity. A strong and self-reliant India will
+cease to hate Bosworth Smiths and Frank Johnsons, for she will have the power
+to punish them and therefore the power also to pity and forgive them. To-day
+she can neither punish nor forgive, and therefore helplessly nurses hatred. If
+the Mussalmans were strong, they would not hate the English but would fight and
+wrest from them the dearest possessions of Islam. I know that the Ali Brothers
+who live only for the honour and the prestige of Islam, and are prepared any
+moment to die for it, will to-day make friends with the latter Englishmen, if
+they were to do justice to the Khilafat which it is in their power to do.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+I am positively certain that there is no personal element in this fight. Both
+the Hindus and the Mahomedans would to-day invoke blessings on the English if
+they would but give proof positive of their goodness, faithfulness, and loyalty
+to India. Non-co-operation then is a godsend; it will purify and strengthen
+India; and a strong India will be a strength to the world as an Indian weak and
+helpless is a curse to mankind. Indian soldiers have involuntarily helped to
+destroy Turkey and are now destroying the flower of the Arabian nation. I
+cannot recall a single campaign in which the Indian soldier has been employed
+by the British Government for the good of mankind. And yet, (Oh! the shame of
+it!) Indian Maharajas are never tired of priding themselves on the loyal help
+they have rendered the English! Could degradation sink any lower?
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE CONGRESS CONSTITUTION</h3>
+
+<p>
+The belated report of the Congress Constitution Committee has now been
+published for general information and opinion has been invited from all public
+bodies in order to assist the deliberations of the All India Congress
+Committee. It is a pity that, small though the Constitution Committee was, all
+the members never met at any one time in spite of efforts, to have a meeting of
+them all. It is perhaps no body’s fault that all the members could not meet. At
+the same time the draft report has passed through the searching examination of
+all but one member and the report represents the mature deliberations of four
+out of the five members. It must be stated at the same time that it does not
+pretend to be the unanimous opinion of the members. Rather than present a
+dissenting minute, a workable scheme has been brought out leaving each member
+free to press his own views on the several matters in which they are not quite
+unanimous. The most important part of the constitution, however, is the
+alteration of the creed. So far as I am aware there is no fundamental
+difference of opinion between the members. In my opinion the altered creed
+represents the exact feeling of the country at the present moment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I know that the proposed alteration has been subjected to hostile criticism in
+several newspapers of note. But the extraordinary situation that faces the
+country is that popular opinion is far in advance of several newspapers which
+have hitherto commanded influence and have undoubtedly moulded public opinion.
+The fact is that the formation of opinion to-day is by no means confined to the
+educated classes, but the masses have taken it upon themselves not only to
+formulate opinion but to enforce it. It would be a mistake to belittle or
+ignore this opinion, or to ascribe it to a temporary upheaval. It would be
+equally a mistake to suppose that this awakening amongst the masses is due
+either to the activity of the Ali Brothers or myself. For the time being we
+have the ear of the masses because we voice their sentiments. The masses are by
+no means so foolish or unintelligent as we sometimes imagine. They often
+perceive things with their intuition, which we ourselves fail to see with our
+intellect. But whilst the masses know what they want, they often do not know
+how to express their wants and, less often, how to get what they want. Herein
+comes the use of leadership, and disastrous results can easily follow a bad,
+hasty, or what is worse, selfish lead.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first part of the proposed creed expresses the present desire of the
+nation, and the second shows the way that desire can be fulfilled. In my humble
+opinion the Congress creed with the proposed alteration is but an extension of
+the original. And so long as no break with the British connection is attempted,
+it is strictly within even the existing article that defines the Congress
+creed. The extension lies in the contemplated possibility of a break with the
+British connection. In my humble opinion, if India is to make unhampered
+progress, we must make it clear to the British people that whilst we desire to
+retain the British connection, if we can rise to our full height with it we are
+determined to dispense with, and even to get rid of that connection, if that is
+necessary for full national development. I hold that it is not only derogatory
+to national dignity but it actually impedes national progress superstitiously
+to believe that our progress towards our goal is impossible without British
+connection. It is this superstition which makes some of the best of us tolerate
+the Punjab wrong and the Khilafat insult. This blind adherence to that
+connection makes us feel helpless. The proposed alteration in the creed enables
+us to rid ourselves of our helpless condition. I personally hold that it is
+perfectly constitutional openly to strive after independence, but lest there
+may be dispute as to the constitutional character of any movement for complete
+independence, the doubtful and highly technical adjective “constitutional” has
+been removed from the altered creed in the draft. Surely it should be enough to
+ensure that the methods for achieving our end are legitimate, honourable, and
+peaceful, I believe that this was the reasoning that guided my colleagues in
+accepting the proposed creed. In any case, such was certainly my view of the
+whole alteration. There is no desire on my part to adopt any means that are
+subversive of law and order. I know, however, that I am treading on delicate
+ground when I write about law and order for, to some of our distinguished
+leaders even my present methods appear to be lawless and conducive to disorder.
+But even they will perhaps grant that the retention of the word
+‘constitutional’ cannot protect the country against methods such as I am
+employing. It gives rise, no doubt, to a luminous legal discussion, but any
+such discussion is fruitless when the nation means business. The other
+important alteration refers to the limitation of the number of delegates. I
+believe that the advantages of such a limitation are obvious. We are fast
+reaching a time when without any such limitation the Congress will become an
+unwieldy body. It is difficult even to have an unlimited number of visitors; it
+is impossible to transact national business if we have an unlimited number of
+delegates.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The next important alteration is about the election of the members of the
+All-India Congress Committee, making that committee practically the Subjects
+Committee, and the redistribution of India for the purposes of the Congress on
+a linguistic basis. It is not necessary to comment on these alterations, but I
+wish to add that if the Congress accepts the principle of limiting the number
+of delegates it would be advisable to introduce the principle of proportional
+representation. That would enable all parties who wish to be represented at the
+Congress.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I observe that <i>the Servant of India</i> sees an inconsistency between my
+implied acceptance of the British Committee, so far as the published draft
+constitution is concerned, and my recent article in <i>Young India</i> on that
+Committee and the newspaper <i>India</i>. But it is well known that for several
+years I have held my present views about the existence of that body. It would
+have been irrelevant for me, perhaps, to suggest to my colleagues the
+extinction of that committee. It was not our function to report on the
+usefulness or otherwise of the Committee. We were commissioned only for
+preparing a new constitution. Moreover I knew that my colleagues were not
+averse to the existence of the British Committee. And the drawing up of a new
+constitution enabled me to show that where there was no question of principle I
+was desirous of agreeing quickly with my opponents in opinions. But I propose
+certainly to press for abolition of the committee as it is at present
+continued, and the stopping of its organ <i>India</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SWARAJ IN NINE MONTHS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Asked by the <i>Times</i> representative as to his impressions formed as a
+result of his activities during the last three months, Mr. Gandhi said:—“My own
+impression of these three months’ extensive experience is that this movement of
+non-co-operation has come to stay, and it is most decidedly a purifying
+movement, in spite of isolated instances of rowdyism, as for instance at Mrs.
+Besant’s meeting in Bombay, at some places in Delhi, Bengal, and even in
+Gujarat. The people are assimilating day after day the spirit of non-violence,
+not necessarily as a creed, but as an inevitable policy. I expect most
+startling results, more startling than, say, the discoveries of Sir J.C. Bose,
+or the acceptance by the people of non-violence. If the Government could be
+assured beyond any possibility of doubt that no violence would ever be offered
+by us the Government would from that moment alter its character, unconsciously
+and involuntarily, but nonetheless surely on that account.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Alter its character,—in what, direction?” asked the <i>Times</i>
+representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Certainly in the direction which we ask it should move—that being in the
+direction of Government becoming responsive to every call of the nation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Will you kindly explain further?” asked the representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“By that I mean,” said Mr. Gandhi, “people will be able by asserting themselves
+through fixed determination and self-sacrifice to gain the redress of the
+Khilafat wrong, the Punjab wrong, and attain the Swaraj of their choice.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But what is your Swaraj, and where does the Government come in there—the
+Government which, you say will alter its character unconsciously?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“My Swaraj,” said Mr. Gandhi, “is the Parliamentary Government of India in the
+modern sense of the term for the time being, and that Government would be
+secured to us either through the friendly offices of the British people or
+without them.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What do you mean by the phrase, ‘without them!’” questioned the interviewer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This movement,” continued Mr. Gandhi, “is an endeavour to purge the present
+Government of selfishness and greed which determine almost every one of their
+activities. Suppose that we have made it impossible by disassociation from them
+to feed their greed. They might not wish to remain in India, as happened in the
+case of Somaliland, where the moment its administration ceased to be a paying
+proposition they evacuated it.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How do you think,” queried the representative, “in practice this will work
+out?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What I have sketched before you,” said Mr. Gandhi, “is the final possibility.
+What I expect is that nothing of that kind will happen. In so far as I
+understand the British people I will recognise the force of public opinion when
+it has become real and patent. Then, and only then, will they realise the
+hideous injustice which in their name the Imperial ministers and their
+representatives in India have perpetrated. They will therefore remedy the two
+wrongs in accordance with the wishes of the people, and they will also offer a
+constitution exactly in accordance with the wishes of the people of India, as
+represented by their chosen leaders.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Supposing that the British Government wish to retire because India is not a
+paying concern, what do you think will then be the position of India?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi answered: “At that stage surely it is easy to understand that India
+will then have evolved either outstanding spiritual height or the ability to
+offer violence, against violence. She will have evolved an organising ability
+of a high order, and will therefore be in every way able to cope with any
+emergency that might arise.” “In other words,” observed the <i>Times</i>
+representative, “you expect the moment of the British evacuation, if such a
+contingency arises, will coincide with the moment of India’s preparedness and
+ability and conditions favourable for India to take over the Indian
+administration as a going concern and work it for the benefit and advancement
+of the Nation?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi answered the question with an emphatic affirmative. “My experience
+during the last months fills me with the hope,” continued Mr. Gandhi, “that
+within the nine months that remain of the year in which I have expected Swaraj
+for India we shall redress the two wrongs and we shall see Swaraj established
+in accordance with the wishes of the people of India.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Where will the present Government be at the end of the nine months?” Asked the
+<i>Times</i> representative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi, with a significant smile, said: “The lion will then lie with the
+lamb.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>Young India, December, 1920.</i>
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE ATTAINMENT OF SWARAJ</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi in moving his resolution on the creed before the Congress, said,
+“The resolution which I have the honour to move is as follows: The object of
+the Indian National Congress is the attainment of Swarajya by the people of
+India by all legitimate and peaceful means.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There are only two kinds of objections, so far as I understand, that will be
+advanced from this platform. One is that we may not to-day think of dissolving
+the British connection. What I say is that it is derogatory to national dignity
+to think of permanence of British connection at any cost. We are labouring
+under a grievous wrong, which it is the personal duty of every Indian to get
+redressed. This British Government not only refused to redress the wrong, but
+it refuses to acknowledge <i>its</i> mistake and so long as it retains its
+attitude, it is not possible for us to say all that we want to be or all that
+we want to get, retaining British connection. No matter what difficulties be in
+our path, we must make the clearest possible declaration to the world and to
+the whole of India, that we may not possibly have British connection, if the
+British people will not do this elementary justice. I do not, for one moment,
+suggest that we want to end at the British connection at all costs,
+unconditionally. If the British connection is for the advancement of India, we
+do not want to destroy it. But if it is inconsistent with our national self
+respect, then it is our bounden duty to destroy it. There is room in this
+resolution for both—those who believe that, by retaining British connection, we
+can purify ourselves and purify British people, and those who have no belief.
+As for instance, take the extreme case of Mr. Andrews. He says all hope for
+India is gone for keeping the British connection. He says there must be
+complete severance—complete independence. There is room enough in this creed
+for a man like Mr. Andrews also. Take another illustration, a man like myself
+or my brother Shaukat Ali. There is certainly no room for us, if we have
+eternally to subscribe to the doctrine, whether these wrongs are redressed or
+not, we shall have to evolve ourselves within the British Empire; there is no
+room for me in that creed. Therefore this creed is elastic enough to take in
+both shades of opinions and the British people will have to beware that, if
+they do not want to do justice, it will be the bounden duty of every Indian to
+destroy the Empire.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I want just now to wind up my remarks with a personal appeal, drawing your
+attention to an object lesson that was presented in the Bengal camp yesterday.
+If you want Swaraj, you have got a demonstration of how to get Swaraj. There
+was a little bit of skirmish, a little bit of squabble, and a little bit of
+difference in the Bengal camp, as there will always be differences so long as
+the world lasts. I have known differences between husband and wife, because I
+am still a husband; I have noticed differences between parents and children,
+because I am still a father of four boys, and they are all strong enough to
+destroy their father so far as bodily struggle is concerned; I possess that
+varied experience of husband and parent; I know that we shall always have
+squabbles, we shall always have differences but the lesson that I want to draw
+your attention to is that I had the honour and privilege of addressing both the
+parties. They gave me their undivided attention and what is more they showed
+their attachment, their affection and their fellowship for me by accepting the
+humble advice that I had the honour of tendering to them, and I told them I am
+not here to distribute justice that can be awarded only through our worthy
+president. But I ask you not to go to the president, you need not worry him. If
+you are strong, if you are brave, if you are intent upon getting Swaraj, and if
+you really want to revise the creed, then you will bottle up your rage, you
+will bottle up all the feelings of injustice that may rankle in your hearts and
+forget these things here under this very roof and I told them to forget their
+differences, to forgot the wrongs. I don’t want to tell you or go into the
+history of that incident. Probably most of you know. I simply want to invite
+your attention to the fact. I don’t say they have settled up their differences.
+I hope they have but I do know that they undertook to forget the differences.
+They undertook not to worry the President, they undertook not to make any
+demonstration here or in the Subjects Committee. All honour to those who
+listened to that advice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I only wanted my Bengali friends and all the other friends who have come to
+this great assembly with a fixed determination to seek nothing but the
+settlement of their country, to seek nothing but the advancement of their
+respective rights, to seek nothing but the conservation of the national honour.
+I appeal to every one of you to copy the example set by those who felt
+aggrieved and who felt that their heads were broken. I know, before we have
+done with this great battle on which we have embarked at the special sessions
+of the Congress, we have to go probably, possibly through a sea of blood, but
+let it not be said of us or any one of us that we are guilty of shedding blood,
+but let it be said by generations yet to be born that we suffered, that we shed
+not somebody’s blood but our own, and so I have no hesitation in saying that I
+do not want to show much sympathy for those who had their heads broken or who
+were said to be even in danger of losing their lives. What does it matter? It
+is much better to die at the hands, at least, of our own countrymen. What is
+there to revenge ourselves about or upon. So I ask everyone of you that if at
+any time there is blood-boiling within you against some fellow countrymen of
+yours, even though he may be in the employ of Government, though he may be in
+the Secret Service, you will take care not to be offended and not to return
+blow for blow. Understand that the very moment you return the blow from the
+detective, your cause is lost. This is your non-violent campaign. And so I ask
+everyone of you not to retaliate but to bottle up all your rage, to dismiss
+your rage from you and you will rise graver men. I am here to congratulate
+those who have restrained themselves from going to the President and bringing
+the dispute before him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Therefore I appeal to those who feel aggrieved to feel that they have done the
+right thing in forgetting it and if they have not forgotten I ask them to try
+to forget the thing; and that is the object lesson to which I wanted to draw
+your attention if you want to carry this resolution. Do not carry this
+resolution only by an acclamation for this resolution, but I want you to
+accompany the carrying out of this resolution with a faith and resolve which
+nothing on earth can move. That you are intent upon getting Swaraj at the
+earliest possible moment and that you are intent upon getting Swaraj by means
+that are legitimate, that are honourable and by means that are non-violent,
+that are peaceful, you have resolved upon, so far you can say to-day. We cannot
+give battle to this Government by means of steel, but we can give battle by
+exercising, what I have so often called, “soul force” and soul force is not the
+prerogative of one man of a Sanyasi or even a so-called saint. Soul force is
+the prerogative of every human being, female or male and therefore I ask my
+countrymen, if they want to accept this resolution, to accept it with that firm
+determination and to understand that it is inaugurated under such good and
+favourable auspices as I have described to you.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my humble opinion, the Congress will have done the rightest thing, if it
+unanimously adopts this resolution. May God grant that you will pass this
+resolution unanimously, may God grant that you will also have the courage and
+the ability to carry out the resolution and that within one year.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap05"></a>V. HINDU MOSLEM UNITY</h2>
+
+<p>
+[A dialogue between Editor and reader on the Hindu-Moslem Unity—<i>Indian Home
+Rule</i>.]
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE HINDUS AND THE MAHOMEDANS.</h3>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: Your last question is a serious one, and yet, on careful consideration,
+it will be found to be easy of solution. The question arises because of the
+presence of the railways of the lawyers, and of the doctors. We shall presently
+examine the last two. We have already considered the railways. I should,
+however, like to add that man is so made by nature as to require him to
+restrict his movements as far as his hands and feet will take him. If we did
+not rush about from place to place by means of railways such other maddening
+conveniences, much of the confusion that arises would be obviated. Our
+difficulties are of our own creation. God set a limit to a man’s locomotive
+ambition in the construction of his body. Man immediately proceeded to discover
+means of overriding the limit. God gifted man with intellect that he might know
+his Maker. Man abused it, so that he might forget his Maker. I am so
+constructed that I can only serve my immediate neighbours, but, in my conceit,
+I pretend to have discovered that I must with my body serve every individual in
+the Universe. In thus attempting the impossible, man comes in contact with
+different natures, different religions, and is utterly confounded. According to
+this reasoning, it must be apparent to you that railways are a most dangerous
+institution. Man has therefore gone further away from his Maker.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But I am impatient to hear your answer to my question. Has the
+introduction of Mahomedanism not unmade the nation?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: India cannot cease to be one nation because people belonging to
+different religions live in it. The introduction of foreigners does not
+necessarily destroy the nation, they merge in it. A country is one nation only
+when such a condition obtains in it. That country must have a faculty for
+assimilation. India has ever been such a country. In reality, there are as many
+religions as there are individuals, but those who are conscious of the spirit
+of nationality do not interfere with one another’s religion. If they do, they
+are not fit to be considered a nation. If the Hindus believe that India should
+be peopled only by Hindus, they are living in dreamland. The Hindus, the
+Mahomedans, the Parsees and the Christians who have made India their country
+are fellow countrymen, and they will have to live in unity if only for their
+own interest. In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion
+synonymous terms: nor has it ever been so in India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But what about the inborn enmity between Hindus and Mahomedans?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: That phrase has been invented by our mutual enemy. When the Hindus and
+Mahomedans fought against one another, they certainly spoke in that strain.
+They have long since ceased to fight. How, then, can there be any inborn
+enmity? Pray remember this, too, that we did not cease to fight only after
+British occupation. The Hindus flourished under Moslem sovereigns, and Moslems
+under the Hindu. Each party recognised that mutual fighting was suicidal, and
+that neither party would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both parties,
+therefore, decided to live in peace. With the English advent the quarrels
+recommenced.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The proverbs you have quoted were coined when both were fighting; to quote them
+now is obviously harmful. Should we not remember that many Hindus and
+Mahomedans own the same ancestors, and the same blood runs through their veins?
+Do people become enemies because they change their religion? Is the God of the
+Mahomedan different from the God of the Hindu? Religions are different roads
+converging to the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads,
+so long as we reach the same goal? Wherein is the cause for quarrelling?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Moreover, there are deadly proverbs as between the followers of Shiva and those
+of Vishnu, yet nobody suggests that these two do not belong to the same nation.
+It is said that the Vedic religion is different from Jainism, but the followers
+of the respective faiths are not different nations. The fact is that we have
+become enslaved, and, therefore, quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided
+by a third party. There are Hindu iconoclasts as there are Mahomedan. The more
+we advance in true knowledge, the better we shall understand that we need not
+be at war with those whose religion we may not follow.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: Now I would like to know your views about cow protection.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: I myself respect the cow, that is, I look upon her with affectionate
+reverence. The cow is the protector of India, because, it being an agricultural
+country, is dependent on the cow’s progeny. She is a most useful animal in
+hundreds of ways. Our Mahomedan brethren will admit this.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But, just as I respect the cow so do I respect my fellow-men. A man is just as
+useful as a cow, no matter whether he be a Mahomedan or a Hindu. Am I, then to
+fight with or kill a Mahomedan in order to save a cow? In doing so, I would
+become an enemy as well of the cow as of the Mahomedan. Therefore, the only
+method I know of protecting the cow is that I should approach my Mahomedan
+brother and urge him for the sake of the country to join me in protecting her.
+If he would not listen to me, I should let the cow go for the simple reason
+that the matter is beyond my ability. If I were over full of pity for the cow,
+I should sacrifice my life to save her, but not take my brother’s. This, I
+hold, is the law of our religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When men become obstinate, it is a difficult thing. If I pull one way, my
+Moslem brother will pull another. If I put on a superior air, he will return
+the compliment. If I bow to him gently, he will do it much, more so, and if he
+does not, I shall not be considered to have done wrong in having bowed. When
+the Hindus became insistent, the killing of cows increased. In my opinion, cow
+protection societies may be considered cow killing societies. It is a disgrace
+to us that we should need such societies. When we forgot how to protect cows, I
+suppose we needed such societies.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What am I to do when a blood-brother is on the point of killing a cow? Am I to
+kill him, or to fall down at his feet and implore him? If you admit that I
+should adopt the latter course I must do the same to my Moslem brother. Who
+protects the cow from destruction by Hindus when they cruelly ill-treat her?
+Whoever reasons with the Hindus when they mercilessly belabour the progeny of
+the cow with their sticks? But this has not prevented us from remaining one
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Lastly, if it be true that the Hindus believe in the doctrine of non-killing,
+and the Mahomedans do not, what, I pray, is the duty of the former? It is not
+written that a follower of the religion of Ahimsa (non-killing) may kill a
+fellow-man. For him the way is straight. In order to save one being, he may not
+kill another. He can only plead—therein lies his sole duty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But does every Hindu believe in Ahimsa? Going to the root of the matter, not
+one man really practises such a religion, because we do destroy life. We are
+said to follow that religion because we want to obtain freedom from liability
+to kill any kind of life. Generally speaking, we may observe that many Hindus
+partake of meat and are not, therefore, followers of Ahimsa. It is, therefore,
+preposterous to suggest that the two cannot live together amicably because the
+Hindus believe in Ahimsa and the Mahomedans do not.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+These thoughts are put into our minds by selfish and false religious teachers.
+The English put the finishing touch. They have a habit of writing history; they
+pretend to study the manners and customs of all peoples, God has given us a
+limited mental capacity, but they usurp the function of the Godhead and indulge
+in novel experiments. They write about their own researches in most laudatory
+terms and hypnotise us into believing them. We in our ignorance, then fall at
+their feet.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Those who do not wish to misunderstand things may read up the Koran, and will
+find therein hundreds of passages acceptable to the Hindus; and the Bhagavad
+Gita contains passages to which not a Mahomedan can take exception. Am I to
+dislike a Mahomedan because there are passages in the Koran I do not understand
+or like? It takes two to make a quarrel. If I do not want to quarrel with a
+Mahomedan, the latter will be powerless to foist a quarrel on me, and,
+similarly, I should be powerless if a Mahomedan refuses his assistance to
+quarrel with me. An arm striking the air will become disjointed. If everyone
+will try to understand the core of his own religion and adhere to it, and will
+not allow false teachers to dictate to him, there will be no room left for
+quarrelling.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+READER: But, will the English ever allow the two bodies to join hands?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+EDITOR: This question arises out of your timidity. It betrays our shallowness.
+If two brothers want to live in peace, is it possible for a third party to
+separate them? If they were to listen to evil counsels, we would consider them
+to be foolish. Similarly, we Hindus and Mahomedans would have to blame our
+folly rather than the English, if we allowed them to put asunder. A clay pot
+would break through impact; if not with one stone, thou with another. The way
+to save the pot is not to keep it away from the danger point, but to bake it so
+that no stone would break it. We have then to make our hearts of perfectly
+baked clay. Then we shall be steeled against all danger. This can be easily
+done by the Hindus. They are superior in numbers, they pretend that they are
+more educated, they are, therefore, better able to shield themselves from
+attack on their amicable relations with the Mahomedans.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is a mutual distrust between the two communities. The Mahomedans,
+therefore, ask for certain concessions from Lord Morley. Why should the Hindus
+oppose this? If the Hindus desisted, the English would notice it, the
+Mahomedans would gradually begin to trust the Hindus, and brotherliness would
+be the outcome. We should be ashamed to take our quarrels to the English.
+Everyone can find out for himself that the Hindus can lose nothing be
+desisting. The man who has inspired confidence in another has never lost
+anything in this world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not suggest that the Hindus and the Mahomedans will never fight. Two
+brothers living together often do so. We shall sometimes have our heads broken.
+Such a thing ought not to be necessary, but all men are not equi-minded. When
+people are in a rage, they do many foolish things. These we have to put up
+with. But, when we do quarrel, we certainly do not want to engage counsel and
+to resort to English or any law-courts. Two men fight; both have their heads
+broken, or one only. How shall a third party distribute justice amongst them?
+Those who fight may expect to be injured.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HINDU-MAHOMEDAN UNITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Candler some time ago asked me in an imaginary interview whether if I was
+sincere in my professions of Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. I would eat and drink with
+a Mahomedean and give my daughter in marriage to a Mahomedan. This question has
+been asked again by some friends in another form. Is it necessary for Hindu
+Mahomedan Unity that there should he interdining and intermarrying? The
+questioners say that if the two are necessary, real unity can never take place
+because crores of <i>Sanatanis</i> would never reconcile themselves to
+interdining, much less to intermarriage.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am one of those who do not consider caste to be a harmful institution. In its
+origin caste was a wholesome custom and promoted national well-being. In my
+opinion the idea that interdining or intermarrying is necessary for national
+growth, is a superstition borrowed from the West. Eating is a process just as
+vital as the other sanitary necessities of life. And if mankind had not, much
+to its harm, made of eating a fetish and indulgence we would have performed the
+operation of eating in private even as one performs the other necessary
+functions of life in private. Indeed the highest culture in Hinduism regards
+eating in that light and there are thousands of Hindus still living who will
+not eat their food in the presence of anybody. I can recall the names of
+several cultured men and women who ate their food in entire privacy but who
+never had any illwill against anybody and who lived on the friendliest terms
+with all.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Intermarriage is a still more difficult question. If brothers and sisters can
+live on the friendliest footing without ever thinking of marrying each other, I
+can see no difficulty in my daughter regarding every Mahomedan brother and
+<i>vice versa</i>. I hold strong views on religion and on marriage. The greater
+the restraint we exercise with regard to our appetites whether about eating or
+marrying, the better we become from a religious standpoint. I should despair of
+ever cultivating amicable relations with the world, if I had to recognise the
+right or the propriety of any young man offering his hand in marriage to my
+daughter or to regard it as necessary for me to dine with anybody and
+everybody. I claim that I am living on terms of friendliness with the whole
+world. I have never quarrelled with a single Mahomedan or Christian but for
+years I have taken nothing but fruit in Mahomedan or Christian households. I
+would most certainly decline to eat food cooked from the same plate with my son
+or to drink water out of a cup which his lips have touched and which has not
+been washed. But the restraint or the exclusiveness exercised in these matters
+by me has never affected the closest companionship with the Mahomedan or the
+Christian friends or my sons.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But interdining and intermarriage have never been a bar to disunion, quarrels
+and worse. The Pandavas and the Kauravas flew at one another’s throats without
+compunction although they interdined and intermarried. The bitterness between
+the English and the Germans has not yet died out.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The fact is that intermarriage and interdining are not necessary factors in
+friendship and unity though they are often emblems thereof. But insistence on
+either the one or the other can easily become and is to-day a bar to
+Hindu-Mahomedan Unity. If we make ourselves believe that Hindus and Mahomedans
+cannot be one unless they interdine or intermarry, we would be creating an
+artificial barrier between us which it might be almost impossible to remove.
+And it would seriously interfere with the flowing unity between Hindus and
+Mahomedans if, for example, Mahomedan youths consider it lawful to court Hindu
+girls. The Hindu parents will not, even if they suspected any such thing,
+freely admit Mahomedans to their homes as they have begun to do now. In my
+opinion it is necessary for Hindu and Mahomedan young men to recognise this
+limitation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hold it to be utterly impossible for Hindus and Mahomedans to intermarry and
+yet retain intact each other’s religion. And the true beauty of Hindu-Mahomedan
+Unity lies in each remaining true to his own religion and yet being true to
+each other. For, we are thinking of Hindus and Mahomedans even of the most
+orthodox type being able to regard one another as natural friends instead of
+regarding one another as natural enemies as they have done hitherto.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What then does the Hindu-Mahomedan Unity consist in and how can it be best
+promoted? The answer is simple. It consists in our having a common purpose, a
+common goal and common sorrows. It is best promoted by co-operating to reach
+the common goal, by sharing one another’s sorrow and by mutual toleration. A
+common goal we have. We wish this great country of ours to be greater and
+self-governing.[4] We have enough sorrows to share and to-day seeing that the
+Mahomedans are deeply touched on the question of Khilafat and their case is
+just, nothing can be so powerful for winning Mahomedans friendship for the
+Hindu as to give his whole-hearted support to the Mahomedan claim. No amount of
+drinking out of the same cup or dining out of the same bowl can bind the two as
+this help in the Khilafat question.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And mutual toleration is a necessity for all time and for all races. We cannot
+live in peace if the Hindu will not tolerate the Mahomedan form of worship of
+God and his manners and customs or if the mahomedans will be impatient of Hindu
+idolatory, cow-worship. It is not necessary for toleration that I must approve
+of what I tolerate. I heartily dislike drinking, meat eating and smoking, but I
+tolerate all these in Hindus, Mahomedans and Christians even as I expect them
+to tolerate my abstinence from all these, although they may dislike it. All the
+quarrels between the Hindus and the Mahomedans have arisen from each wanting to
+<i>force</i> the other his view.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HINDU-MUSLIM UNITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+There can be no doubt that successful non-co-operation depends as much on
+Hindu-Muslim Unity as on non-violence. Greatest strain will be put upon both in
+the course of the struggle and if it survives that strain, victory is a
+certainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A severe strain was put upon it in Agra and it has been stated that when either
+party went to the authorities they were referred to Maulana Shaukat Ali and me.
+Fortunately there was a far better man at hand. Hakimji Ajmal khan is a devout
+Muslim who commands the confidence and the respect of both the parties. He with
+his band of workers hastened to Agra, settled the dispute and the parties
+became friends as they were never before. An incident occurred nearer Delhi and
+the same influence worked successfully to avoid what might have become an
+explosion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But Hakimji Ajmal khan cannot be everywhere appearing at the exact hour as an
+angel of peace. Nor can Maulana Shankat Ali or I go everywhere. And yet perfect
+peace must be observed between the two communities in spite of attempts to
+divide them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Why was there any appeal made to the authorities at all at Agra? If we are to
+work out non-co-operation with any degree of success we must be able to
+dispense with the protection of the Government when we quarrel among ourselves.
+The whole scheme of non-co-operation must break to pieces, if our final
+reliance is to be upon British intervention for the adjustment of our quarrels
+or the punishment of the guilty ones. In every village and hamlet there must be
+at least one Hindu and one Muslim, whose primary business must be to prevent
+quarrels between the two. Some times however, even blood-brothers come to
+blows. In the initial stages we are bound to do so here and there.
+Unfortunately we who are public workers have made little attempt to understand
+and influence the masses and least of all the most turbulent among them. During
+the process of insinuating ourselves in the estimation of the masses and until
+we have gained control over the unruly, there are bound to be exhibitions of
+hasty temper now and then. We must learn at such times to do without an appeal
+to the Government. Hakimji Ajmal Khan has shown us how to do it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The union that we want is not a patched up thing but a union of hearts based
+upon a definite recognition of the indubitable proposition that Swaraj for
+India must be an impossible dream without an indissoluble union between the
+Hindus and the Muslims of India. It must not be a mere truce. It cannot be
+based upon mutual fear. It must be a partnership between equals each respecting
+the religion of the other.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I would frankly despair of reaching such union if there was anything in the
+holy Quran enjoining upon the followers of Islam to treat Hindus as their
+natural enemies or if there was anything in Hinduism to warrant a belief in the
+eternal enmity between the two.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We would ill learn our history if we conclude that because we have quarrelled
+in the past, we are destined so to continue unless some such strong power like
+the British keep us by force of arms from flying at each other’s throats. But I
+am convinced that there is no warrant in Islam or Hinduism for any such belief.
+True it is that interested fanatical priests in both religions have set the one
+against the other. It is equally true that Muslim rulers like Christian rulers
+have used the sword for the propagation of their respective faiths. But in
+spite of many dark things of the modern times, the world’s opinion to-day will
+as little tolerate forcible conversions as it will tolerate forcible slavery.
+That probably is the most effective contribution of the scientific spirit of
+the age. That spirit has revolutionised many a false notion about Christianity
+as it has about Islam. I do not know a single writer on Islam who defends the
+use of force in the proselytising process. The influences exerted in our times
+are far more subtle than that of the sword.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I believe that in the midst of all the bloodshed, chicane and fraud being
+resorted to on a colossal scale in the west, the whole humanity is silently but
+surely making progress towards a better age. And India by finding true
+independence and self-expression through an imperishable Hindu-Muslim unity and
+through non-violent means, i.e., unadulterated self sacrifice can point a way
+out of the prevailing darkness.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap06"></a>VI. TREATMENT OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</h2>
+
+<h3>DEPRESSED CLASSES</h3>
+
+<p>
+Vivekanand used to call the Panchamas ‘suppressed classes.’ There is no doubt
+that Vivekanand’s is a more accurate adjective. We have suppressed them and
+have consequently become ourselves depressed. That we have become the ‘Pariahs
+of the Empire’ is, in Gokhale’s language, the retributive justice meted out to
+us by a just God. A correspondent indignantly asks me in a pathetic letter
+reproduced elsewhere, what I am doing for them. I have given the letter with
+the correspondent’s own heading. Should not we the Hindus wash our bloodstained
+hands before we ask the English to wash theirs? This is a proper question
+reasonably put. And if a member of a slave nation could deliver the suppressed
+classes from their slavery without freeing myself from my own, I would do so to
+day. But it is an impossible task. A slave has not the freedom even to do the
+right thing. It is a right for me to prohibit the importation of foreign goods,
+but I have no power to bring it about. It was right for Maulana Mahomed Ali to
+go to Turkey and to tell the Turks personally that India was with them in their
+righteous struggle. He was not free to do so. If I had a truly national
+legislative I would answer Hindu insolence by creating special and better wells
+for the exclusive use of suppressed classes and by erecting better and more
+numerous schools for them, so that there would be not a single member of the
+suppressed classes left without a school to teach their children. But I must
+wait for that better day.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Meanwhile are the depressed classes to be loft to their own resources? Nothing
+of the sort. In my own humble manner I have done and am doing all I can for my
+Panchama brother.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There are three courses open to those downtrodden members of the nation. For
+their impatience they may call in the assistance of the slave owning
+Government. They will get it but they will fall from the frying pan into the
+fire. To-day they are slaves of slaves. By seeking Government aid, they will be
+used for suppressing their kith and kin. Instead of being sinned against, they
+will themselves be the sinners. The Mussalmans tried it and failed. They found
+that they were worse off than before. The Sikhs did it unwittingly and failed.
+To-day there is no more discontented community in India than the Sikhs.
+Government aid is therefore no solution.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second is rejection of Hinduism and wholesale conversion to Islam or
+Christianity. And if a change of religion could be justified for worldly
+betterment, I would advise it without hesitation. But religion is a matter of
+the heart. No physical inconvenience can warrant abandonment of one’s own
+religion. If the inhuman treatment of the Panchamas were a part of Hinduism,
+its rejection would be a paramount duty both for them and for those like me who
+would not make a fetish even of religion and condone every evil in its sacred
+name. But, I believe that untouchability is no part of Hinduism. It is rather
+its excrescence to be removed by every effort. And there is quite an army of
+Hindu reformers who have set their heart upon ridding Hinduism of this blot.
+Conversion, therefore, I hold, is no remedy whatsoever.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Then there remains, finally, self-help and self-dependence, with such aid as
+the non-Panchama Hindus will render of their own motion, not as a matter of
+patronage but as a matter of duty. And herein comes the use of
+non-co-operation. My correspondent was correctly informed by Mr.
+Rajagopaluchari and Mr. Hanumantarao that I would favour well-regulated
+non-co-operation for this acknowledged evil. But non-co-operation means
+independence of outside help, it means effort from within. It would not be
+non-co-operation to insist on visiting prohibited areas. That may be civil
+disobedience if it is peacefully carried out. But I have found to my cost that
+civil disobedience requires far greater preliminary training and self-control.
+All can non-co-operate, but few only can offer civil disobedience. Therefore,
+by way of protest against Hinduism, the Panchamas can certainly stop all
+contact and connection with the other Hindus so long as special grievances are
+maintained. But this means organised intelligent effort. And so far as I can
+see, there is no leader among the Panchamas who can lead them to victory
+through non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The better way, therefore, perhaps, is for the Panchamas heartily to join the
+great national movement that is now going on for throwing off the slavery of
+the present Government. It is easy enough for the Panchama friends to see that
+non-co-operation against this evil government presupposes co-operation between
+the different sections forming the Indian nation. The Hindus must realise that
+if they wish to offer successful non-co-operation against the Government, they
+must make common cause with the Panchamas, even as they have made common cause
+with the Mussalmans. Non-co-operation with it is free from violence, is
+essentially a movement of intensive self-purification. That process has
+commenced and whether the Panchamas deliberately take part in it or not, the
+rest of the Hindus dare not neglect them without hampering their own progress.
+Hence though the Panchama problem is as dear to me as life itself, I rest
+satisfied with the exclusive attention to national non-co-operation. I feel
+sure that the greater includes the less.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Closely allied to this question is the non-Brahmin question. I wish I had
+studied it more closely than I have been able to. A quotation from my speech
+delivered at a private meeting in Madras has been torn from its context and
+misused to further the antagonism between the so-called Brahmins and the
+so-called non-Brahmins. I do not wish to retract a word of what I said at that
+meeting, I was appealing to those who are accepted as Brahmins. I told them
+that in my opinion the treatment of non-Brahmins by the Brahmins was as satanic
+as the treatment of us by the British. I added that the non-Brahmins should be
+placated without any ado or bargaining. But my remarks were never intended to
+encourage the powerful non-Brahmins of Maharashira or Madras, or the
+mischievous element among them, to overawe the so-called Brahmins. I use the
+word ‘so-called’ advisedly. For the Brahmins who have freed themselves from the
+thraldom of superstitious orthodoxy have not only no quarrel with non-Brahmins
+as such, but are in every way eager to advance non-Brahmins wherever they are
+weak. No lover of his country can possibly achieve its general advance if he
+dared to neglect the least of his countrymen. Those non-Brahmins therefore who
+are coqueting with the Government are selling themselves and the nation to
+which they belong. By all means let those who have faith in the Government help
+to sustain it, but let no Indian worthy of his birth cut off his nose to spite
+the face.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AMELIORATION OF THE DEPRESSED CLASSES</h3>
+
+<p>
+The resolution of the Senate of the Gujarat National University in regard to
+Mr. Andrews’ question about the admission of children of the ‘depressed’
+classes to the schools affiliated to that University is reported to have raised
+a flutter in Ahmedabad. Not only has the flutter given satisfaction to a ‘Times
+of India’ correspondent, but the occasion has led to the discovery by him of
+another defect in the constitution of the Senate in that it does not contain a
+single Muslim member. The discovery, however, I may inform the reader, is no
+proof of the want of national character of the University. The Hindu-Muslim
+unity is no mere lip expression. It requires no artificial proofs. The simple
+reason why there is no Mussalman representative on the Senate is that no higher
+educated Mussalman, able to give his time, has been found to take sufficient
+interest in the national education movement. I merely refer to this matter to
+show that we must reckon with attempts to discredit the movement even
+misinterpretation of motives. That is a difficulty from without and easier to
+deal with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The ‘depressed’ classes difficulty is internal and therefore far more serious
+because it may give rise to a split and weaken the cause—no cause can survive
+internal difficulties if they are indefinitely multiplied. Yet there can be no
+surrender in the matter of principles for the avoidance of splits. You cannot
+promote a cause when you are undermining it by surrendering its vital parts.
+The depressed classes problem is a vital part of the cause. <i>Swaraj</i> is as
+inconceivable without full reparation to the ‘depressed’ classes as it is
+impossible without real Hindu-Muslim unity. In my opinion we have become
+‘pariahs of the Empire’ because we have created ‘pariahs’ in our midst. The
+slave owner is always more hurt than the slave. We shall be unfit to gain
+Swaraj so long as we would keep in bondage a fifth of the population of
+Hindustan. Have we not made the ‘pariah’ crawl on his belly? Have we not
+segregated him? And if it is religion so to treat the ‘pariah.’ It is the
+religion of the white race to segregate us. And if it is no argument for the
+white races to say that we are satisfied with the badge of our inferiority, it
+is less for us to say that the ‘pariah’ is satisfied with his. Our slavery is
+complete when we begin to hug it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Gujarat Senate therefore counted the cost when it refused to bend before
+the storm. This non-co-operation is a process of self-purification. We may not
+cling to putrid customs and claim the pure boon of <i>Swaraj</i>.
+Untouchability I hold is a custom, not an integral part of Hinduism. The world
+advanced in thought, though it is still barbarous in action. And no religion
+can stand that which is not based on fundamental truths. Any glorification of
+error will destroy a religion as surely as disregard of a disease is bound to
+destroy a body.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This government of ours is an unscrupulous corporation. It has ruled by
+dividing Mussalmans from Hindus. It is quite capable of taking advantage of the
+internal weaknesses of Hinduism. It will set the ‘depressed’ classes against
+the rest of the Hindus, non-Brahmins against Brahmins. The Gujarat Senate
+resolution does not end the trouble. It merely points out the difficulty. The
+trouble will end only when the masses and classes of Hindus have rid themselves
+of the sin of untouchability. A Hindu lover of Swaraj will as assiduously work
+for the amelioration of the lot of the ‘depressed’ classes as he works for
+Hindu-Muslim unity. We must treat them as our brothers and give them the same
+rights that we claim for ourselves.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE SIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is worthy of note that the subjects Committee accepted without any
+opposition the clause regarding the sin of untouchability. It is well that the
+National assembly passed the resolution stating that the removal of this blot
+on Hinduism was necessary for the attainment of Swaraj. The Devil succeeds only
+by receiving help from his fellows. He always takes advantage of the weakest
+spots in our natures in order to gain mastery over us. Even so does the
+Government retain its control over us through our weaknesses or vices. And if
+we would render ourselves proof against its machination, we must remove our
+weaknesses. It is for that reason that I have called non-co-operation a process
+of purification. As soon as that process is completed, this government must
+fall to pieces for want of the necessary environment, just as mosquitos cease
+to haunt a place whose cess-pools are filled up and dried.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Has not a just Nemesis overtaken us for the crime of untouchability? Have we
+not reaped as we have sown? Have we not practised Dwyerism and O’Dwyerism on
+our own kith and kin? We have segregated the ‘pariah’ and we are in turn
+segregated in the British Colonies. We deny him the use of public wells; we
+throw the leavings of our plates at him. His very shadow pollutes us. Indeed
+there is no charge that the ‘pariah’ cannot fling in our faces and which we do
+not fling in the faces of Englishmen.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+How is this blot on Hinduism to be removed? ‘Do unto others as you would that
+others should do unto you.’ I have often told English officials that, if they
+are friends and servants of India, they should come down from their pedestal,
+cease to be patrons, demonstrate by their loving deeds that they are in every
+respect our friends, and believe us to be equals in the same sense they believe
+fellow Englishmen to be their equals. After the experiences of the Punjab and
+the Khilafat, I have gone a step further and asked them to repent and to change
+their hearts. Even so is it necessary for us Hindus to repent of the wrong we
+have done, to alter our behaviour towards those whom we have ‘suppressed’ by a
+system as devilish as we believe the English system of the Government of India
+to be. We must not throw a few miserable schools at them; we must not adopt the
+air of superiority towards them. We must treat them as our blood brothers as
+they are in fact. We must return to them the inheritance of which we have
+robbed them. And this must not be the act of a few English-knowing reformers
+merely, but it must be a conscious voluntary effort on the part of the masses.
+We may not wait till eternity for this much belated reformation. We must aim at
+bringing it about within this year of grace, probation, preparation and
+<i>tapasya</i>. It is a reform not to follow <i>Swaraj</i> but to precede it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Untouchability is not a sanction of religion, it is a devise of Satan. The
+devil has always quoted scriptures. But scriptures cannot transcend reason and
+truth. They are intended to purify reason and illuminate truth. I am not going
+to burn a spotless horse because the Vedas are reported to have advised,
+tolerated, or sanctioned the sacrifice. For me the Vedas are divine and
+unwritten. ‘The letter killeth.’ It is the spirit that giveth the light. And
+the spirit of the Vedas is purity, truth, innocence, chastity, humility,
+simplicity, forgiveness, godliness, and all that makes a man or woman noble and
+brave. There is neither nobility nor bravery in treating the great and
+uncomplaining scavengers of the nation as worse than dogs to be despised and
+spat upon. Would that God gave us the strength and the wisdom to become
+voluntary scavengers of the nation as the ‘suppressed’ classes are forced to
+be. There are Augean stables enough and to spare for us to clean.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap07"></a>VII. TREATMENT OF INDIANS ABROAD</h2>
+
+<h3>INDIANS ABROAD</h3>
+
+<p>
+The prejudice against Indian settlers outside India is showing itself in a
+variety of ways: Under the impudent suggestion of sedition the Fiji Government
+has deported Mr. Manilal Doctor who with his brave and cultured wife has been
+rendering assistance to the poor indentured Indians of Fiji in a variety of
+ways. The whole trouble has arisen over the strike of the labourers in Fiji.
+Indentures have been canceled, but the spirit of slavery is by no means dead.
+We do not know the genesis of the strike; we do not know that the strikers have
+done no wrong. But we do know what is behind when a charge of sedition is
+brought against the strikers and their friends. The readers must remember that
+the Government that has scented sedition in the recent upheaval in Fiji is the
+Government that had the hardihood to libel Mr. Andrew’s character. What can be
+the meaning of sedition in connection with the Fiji strikers and Mr. Manilal
+Doctor? Did they and he want to seize the reins of Government? Did they want
+any power in that country? They struck for elementary freedom. And it is a
+prostitution of terms to use the word sedition in such connection. The strikers
+may have been overhasty. Mr. Manilal Doctor may have misled them. If his advice
+bordered on the criminal he should have been tried. The information in our
+possession goes to show that he has been strictly constitutional. Our point,
+however, is that it is an abuse of power for the Fiji Government to have
+deported Mr. Manilal Doctor without a trial. It is wrong in principle to
+deprive a person of his liberty on mere suspicion and without giving him an
+opportunity of clearing his character. Mr. Manilal Doctor, be it remembered,
+has for years past made Fiji his home. He has, we believe, bought property
+there. He has children born in Fiji. Have the children no rights? Has the wife
+none? May a promising career be ruined at the bidding of a lawless Government?
+Has Mr. Manilal Doctor been compensated for the losses he must sustain? We
+trust that the Government of India which has endeavoured to protect the rights
+of Indian settlers abroad will take up the question of Mr. Doctor’s
+deportation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nor is Fiji the only place where the spirit of lawlessness among the powerful
+has come to the surface. Indians of (the late) German East Africa find
+themselves in a worse position than heretofore. They state that even their
+property is not safe. They have to pay all kinds of dues on passports. They are
+hampered in their trade. They are not able even to send money orders.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In British East Africa the cloud is perhaps the thickest. The European settlers
+there are doing their utmost to deprive the Indian settlers of practically
+every right they have hitherto possessed. An attempt is being made to compass
+their ruin both by legislative enactment and administrative action.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In South Africa every Indian who has anything to do with that part of the
+British Dominions is watching with bated breath the progress of commission that
+is now sitting.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Government of India have no easy job in protecting the interests of Indian
+settlers in these various parts of His Majesty’s dominions. They will be able
+to do so only by following the firmest and the most consistent policy. Justice
+is admittedly on the side of the Indian settlers. But they are the weak party.
+A strong agitation in India followed by strong action by the Government of
+India can alone save the situation.
+</p>
+
+<h3>INDIANS OVERSEAS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The meeting held at the Excelsior Theatre in Bombay to pass resolutions
+regarding East Africa and Fiji, and presided over by Sir Narayan Chandavarkar,
+was an impressive gathering. The Theatre was filled to overflowing. Mr.
+Andrews’ speech made clear what is needed. Both the political and the civil
+rights of Indians of East Africa are at stake. Mr. Anantani, himself an East
+African settler, showed in a forceful speech that the Indians were the pioneer
+settlers. An Indian sailor named Kano directed the celebrated Vasco De Gama to
+India. He added amid applause that Stanley’s expedition for the search and
+relief of Dr. Livingstone was also fitted out by Indians. Indian workmen had
+built the Uganda Railway at much peril to their lives. An Indian contractor had
+taken the contract. Indian artisans had supplied the skill. And now their
+countrymen were in danger of being debarred from its use.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The uplands of East Africa have been declared a Colony and the lowlands a
+Protectorate. There is a sinister significance attached to the declaration. The
+Colonial system gives the Europeans larger powers. It will tax all the
+resources of the Government of India to prevent the healthy uplands from
+becoming a whiteman’s preserve and the Indians from being relegated to the
+swampy lowlands.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The question of franchise will soon become a burning one. It will be suicidal
+to divide the electorate or to appoint Indians by nomination. There must be one
+general electoral roll applying the same qualifications to all the voters. This
+principle, as Mr. Andrews reminded the meeting, had worked well at the Cape.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second part of the East African resolution shows the condition of our
+countrymen in the late German East Africa. Indian soldiers fought there and now
+the position of Indians is worse than under German rule. H.H. the Agakhan
+suggested that German East Africa should be administered from India. Sir
+Theodore Morison would have couped up all Indians in German East Africa. The
+result was that both the proposals went by the board and the expected has
+happened. The greed of the English speculator has prevailed and he is trying to
+squeeze out the Indian. What will the Government of India protect? Has it the
+will to do so? Is not India itself being exploited? Mr. Jehangir Petit recalled
+the late Mr. Gokhale’s views that we were not to expect a full satisfaction
+regarding the status of our countrymen across the seas until we had put our own
+house in order. Helots in our own country, how could we do better outside? Mr.
+Petit wants systematic and severe retaliation. In my opinion, retaliation is a
+double-edged weapon. It does not fail to hurt the user if it also hurts the
+party against whom it is used. And who is to give effect to retaliation? It is
+too much to expect an English Government to adopt effective retaliation against
+their own people. They will expostulate, they will remonstrate, but they will
+not go to war with their own Colonies. For the logical outcome of retaliation
+must mean war, if retaliation will not answer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us face the facts frankly. The problem is difficult alike for Englishmen
+and for us. The Englishmen and Indians do not agree in the Colonies. The
+Englishmen do not want us where they can live. Their civilisation is different
+from ours. The two cannot coalesce until there is mutual respect. The
+Englishman considers himself to belong to the ruling race. The Indian struggles
+to think that he does not belong to the subject race and in the very act of
+thinking admits his subjection. We must then attain equality at home before we
+can make any real impression abroad.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This is not to say that we must not strive to do better abroad whilst we are
+ill at ease in our own home. We must preserve, we must help our countrymen who
+have settled outside India. Only if we recognise the true situation, we and our
+countrymen abroad will learn to be patient and know that our chief energy must
+be concentrated on a betterment of our position at home. If we can raise our
+status here to that of equal partners not in name but in reality so that every
+Indian might feel it, all else must follow as a matter of course.
+</p>
+
+<h3>PARIAHS OF THE EMPIRE</h3>
+
+<p>
+The memorable Conference at Gujrat in its resolution on the status of Indians
+abroad has given it as its opinion that even this question may become one more
+reason for non-co-operation. And so it may. Nowhere has there been such open
+defiance of every canon of justice and propriety as in the shameless decision
+of confiscation of Indian rights in the Kenia Colony announced by its Governor.
+This decision has been supported by Lord Milnor and Mr. Montagu. And his Indian
+colleagues are satisfied with the decision. Indians, who have made East Africa,
+who out-number the English, are deprived practically of the right of
+representation on the Council. They are to be segregated in parts not habitable
+by the English. They are to have neither the political nor the material
+comfort. They are to become ‘Pariahs’ in a country made by their own labour,
+wealth and intelligence. The Viceroy is pleased to say that he does not like
+the outlook and is considering the steps to be taken to vindicate the justice.
+He is not met with a new situation. The Indians of East Africa had warned him
+of the impending doom. And if His Excellency has not yet found the means of
+ensuring redress, he is not likely to do it in future. I would respectfully ask
+his Indian colleagues whether they can stand this robbery of their countrymen
+rights.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In South Africa the situation is not less disquieting. My misgivings seem to be
+proving true, and repatriation is more likely to prove compulsory than
+voluntary. It is a response to the anti-Asiatic agitation, not a measure of
+relief for indigent Indians. It looks very like a trap laid for the unwary
+Indian. The Union Government appears to be taking an unlawful advantage of a
+section of a relieving law designed for a purpose totally different from the
+one now intended.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As for Fiji, the crime against humanity is evidently to be hushed up. I do hope
+that unless an inquiry is to be made into the Fiji Martial Law doings, no
+Indian member will undertake to go to Fiji. The Government of India appear to
+have given an undertaking to send Indian labour to Fiji provided the commission
+that was to proceed there in order to investigate the condition on the spot
+returns with a favourable report.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For British Guiana I observe from the papers received from that quarter, that
+the mission that came here is already declaring that Indian labour will be
+forthcoming from India. There seems to me to be no real prospect for Indian
+enterprise in that part of the world. We are not wanted in any part of the
+British Dominion except as Pariahs to do the scavenging for the European
+settlers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The situation is clear. We are Pariahs in our own home. We get only what
+Government intend to give, not what we demand and have a right to. We may get
+the crumbs, never the loaf. I have seen large and tempting crumbs from a lavish
+table. And I have seen the eyes of our Pariahs—the shame of
+Hinduism—brightening to see those heavy crumbs filling their baskets. But the
+superior Hindu, who is filling the basket from a safe distance, knows that they
+are unfit for his own consumption. And so we in our turn may receive even
+Governorships which the real rulers no longer require or which they cannot
+retain with safety for their material interest—the political and material hold
+on India. It is time we realised our true status.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap08"></a>VIII. NON-CO-OPERATION</h2>
+
+<p>
+A writer in the “Times of India,” the Editor of that wonderful daily and Mrs.
+Besant have all in their own manner condemned non-co-operation conceived in
+connection with the Khilafat movement. All the three writings naturally discuss
+many side issues which I shall omit for the time being. I propose to answer two
+serious objections raised by the writers. The sobriety with which they are
+stated entitles them to a greater consideration than if they had been given in
+violent language. In non-co-operation, the writers think, it would be difficult
+if not impossible to avoid violence. Indeed violence, the “Times of India”
+editorial says, has already commenced in that ostracism has been resorted to in
+Calcutta and Delhi. Now I fear that ostracism to a certain extent is impossible
+to avoid. I remember in South Africa in the initial stages of the passive
+resistance campaign those who had fallen away were ostracised. Ostracism is
+violent or peaceful in according to the manner in which it is practised. A
+congregation may well refuse to recite prayers after a priest who prizes his
+title above his honour. But the ostracism will become violent if the individual
+life of a person is made unbearable by insults innuendoes or abuse. The real
+danger of violence lies in the people resorting to non-co-operation becoming
+impatient and revengeful. This may happen, if, for instance, payment of taxes
+is suddenly withdrawn or if pressure is put upon soldiers to lay down their
+arms. I however do not fear any evil consequences, for the simple reason that
+every responsible Mahomedan understands that non-co-operation to be successful
+must be totally unattended with violence. The other objection raised is that
+those who may give up their service may have to starve. That is just a
+possibility but a remote one, for the committee will certainly make due
+provision for those who may suddenly find themselves out of employment. I
+propose however to examine the whole of the difficult question much more fully
+in a future issue and hope to show that if Indian-Mahomedan feeling is to be
+respected, there is nothing left but non-co-operation if the decision arrived
+at is adverse.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. MONTAGU ON THE KHILAFAT AGITATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Montagu does not like the Khilafat agitation that is daily gathering force.
+In answer to questions put in the House of Commons, he is reported to have said
+that whilst he acknowledged that I had rendered distinguished services to the
+country in the past, he could not look upon my present attitude with equanimity
+and that it was not to be expected that I could now be treated as leniently as
+I was during the Rowlatt Act agitation. He added that he had every confidence
+in the central and the local Governments, that they were carefully watching the
+movement and that they had full power to deal with the situation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This statement of Mr. Montagu has been regarded in some quarters as a threat.
+It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the Government of India to
+re-establish the reign of terror if they chose. It is certainly inconsistent
+with his desire to base the Government on the goodwill of the people. At the
+same time if the Hunter Committee’s finding be true and if I was the cause of
+the disturbances last year, I was undoubtedly treated with exceptional
+leniency, I admit too that my activity this year is fraught with greater peril
+to the Empire as it is being conducted to-day than was last year’s activity.
+Non-co-operation in itself is more harmless than civil disobedience, but in its
+effect it is far more dangerous for the Government than civil disobedience.
+Non-co-operation is intended so far to paralyse the Government, as to compel
+justice from it. If it is carried to the extreme point, it can bring the
+Government to a standstill.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A friend who has been listening to my speeches once asked me whether I did not
+come under the sedition section of the Indian Penal Code. Though I had not
+fully considered it, I told him that very probably I did and that I could not
+plead ‘not guilty’ if I was charged under it. For I must admit that I can
+pretend to no ‘affection’ for the present Government. And my speeches are
+intended to create ‘disaffection’ such that the people might consider it a
+shame to assist or co-operate with a Government that had forfeited all title to
+confidence, respect or support.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I draw no distinction between the Imperial and the Indian Government. The
+latter has accepted, on the Khilafat, the policy imposed upon it by the former.
+And in the Punjab case the former has endorsed the policy of terrorism and
+emasculation of a brave people initiated by the latter. British ministers have
+broken their pledged word and wantonly wounded the feelings of the seventy
+million Mussulmans of India. Innocent men and women were insulted by the
+insolent officers of the Punjab Government. Their wrongs not only unrighted but
+the very officers who so cruelly subjected them to barbarous humiliation retain
+office under the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When at Amritsar last year I pleaded with all the earnestness I could command
+for co-operation with the Government and for response to the wishes expressed
+in the Royal Proclamation; I did so because I honestly believed that a new era
+was about to begin, and that the old spirit of fear, distrust and consequent
+terrorism was about to give place to the new spirit of respect, trust and
+good-will. I sincerely believed that the Mussalman sentiment would be placated
+and that the officers that had misbehaved during the Martial Law regime in the
+Punjab would be at least dismissed and the people would be otherwise made to
+feel that a Government that had always been found quick (and rightly) to punish
+popular excesses would not fail to punish its agents’ misdeeds. But to my
+amazement and dismay I have discovered that the present representatives of the
+Empire have become dishonest and unscrupulous. They have no real regard for the
+wishes of the people of India and they count Indian honour as of little
+consequence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I can no longer retain affection for a Government so evilly manned as it is
+now-a-days. And for me, it is humiliating to retain my freedom and be a witness
+to the continuing wrong. Mr. Montagu however is certainly right in threatening
+me with deprivation of my liberty if I persist in endangering the existence of
+the Government. For that must be the result if my activity bears fruit. My only
+regret is that inasmuch as Mr. Montagu admits my past services, he might have
+perceived that there must be something exceptionally bad in the Government if a
+well-wisher like me could no longer give his affection to it. It was simpler to
+insist on justice being done to the Mussulmans and to the Punjab than to
+threaten me with punishment so that the injustice might be perpetuated. Indeed
+I fully expect it will be found that even in promoting disaffection towards an
+unjust Government I have rendered greater services to the Empire than I am
+already credited with.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the present moment, however, the duty of those who approve of my activity is
+clear. They ought on no account to resent the deprivation of my liberty, should
+the Government of India deem it to be their duty to take it away. A citizen has
+no right to resist such restriction imposed in accordance with the laws of the
+State to which he belongs. Much less have those who sympathize with him. In my
+case there can be no question of sympathy. For I deliberately oppose the
+Government to the extent of trying to put its very existence in jeopardy. For
+my supporters, therefore, it must be a moment of joy when I am imprisoned. It
+means the beginning of success if only the supporters continue the policy for
+which I stand. If the Government arrest me, they would do so in order to stop
+the progress of non-co-operation which I preach. It follows that if
+non-co-operation continues with unabated vigour, even after my arrest, the
+Government must imprison others or grant the people’s wish in order to gain
+their co-operation. Any eruption of violence on the part of the people even
+under provocation would end in disaster. Whether therefore it is I or any one
+else who is arrested during the campaign, the first condition of success is
+that there must be no resentment shown against it. We cannot imperil the very
+existence of a Government and quarrel with its attempt to save itself by
+punishing those who place it in danger.
+</p>
+
+<h3>AT THE CALL OF THE COUNTRY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dr. Sapru delivered before the Khilafat Conference at Allahabad an impassioned
+address sympathising with the Mussulmans in their trouble but dissuaded them
+from embarking on non-co-operation. He was frankly unable to suggest a
+substitute but was emphatically of opinion that whether there was a substitute
+or not non-co-operation was a remedy worse than the disease. He said further
+that Mussulmans will be taking upon their shoulders, a serious responsibility,
+if whilst they appealed to the ignorant masses to join them, they could not
+appeal to the Indian judges to resign and if they did they would not succeed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I acknowledge the force of Dr. Sapru’s last argument. At the back of Dr.
+Sapru’s mind is the fear that non-co-operation by the ignorant people would
+lead to distress and chaos and would do no good. In my opinion any
+non-co-operation is bound to do some good. Even the Viceragal door-keeper
+saying, ‘Please Sir, I can serve the Government no longer because it has hurt
+my national honour’ and resigning is a step mightier and more effective than
+the mightiest speech declaiming against the Government for its injustice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nevertheless it would be wrong to appeal to the door-keeper until one has
+appealed to the highest in the land. And as I propose, if the necessity arose,
+to ask the door-keepers of the Government to dissociate themselves from an
+unjust Government I propose now to address, an appeal to the Judges and the
+Executive Councillors to join the protest that is rising from all over India
+against the double wrong done to India, on the Khilafat and the Punjab
+question. In both, national honour is involved.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I take it that these gentlemen have entered upon their high offices not for the
+sake of emolument, nor I hope for the sake of fame, but for the sake of serving
+their country. It was not for money, for they were earning more than they do
+now. It must not be for fame, for they cannot buy fame at the cost of national
+honour. The only consideration, that can at the present moment keep them in
+office must be service of the country.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When the people have faith in the government, when it represents the popular
+will, the judges and the executive officials possibly serve the country. But
+when that government does not represent the will of the people, when it
+supports dishonesty and terrorism, the judges and the executive officials by
+retaining office become instrument of dishonesty and terrorism. And the least
+therefore that these holders of high offices can do is to cease to become
+agents of a dishonest and terrorising government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For the judges, the objection will be raised that they are above politics, and
+so they are and should be. But the doctrine is true only in so far as the
+government is on the whole for the benefit of the people and at least
+represents the will of the majority. Not to take part in politics means not to
+take sides. But when a whole country has one mind, one will, when a whole
+country has been denied justice, it is no longer a question of party politics,
+it is a matter of life and death. It then becomes the duty of every citizen to
+refuse to serve a government which misbehaves and flouts national wish. The
+judges are at that moment bound to follow the nation if they are ultimately its
+servants.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There remains another argument to be examined. It applies to both the judges
+and the members of the executive. It will be urged that my appeal could only be
+meant for the Indians and what good can it do by Indians renouncing offices
+which have been won for the nation by hard struggle. I wish that I could make
+an effective appeal to the English as well as the Indians. But I confess that I
+have written with the mental reservation that the appeal is addressed only to
+the Indians. I must therefore examine the argument just stated. Whilst it is
+true that these offices have been secured after a prolonged struggle, they are
+of use not because of the struggle, but because they are intended to serve the
+nation. The moment they cease to possess that quality, they become useless and
+as in the present case harmful, no matter how hard-earned and therefore
+valuable they may have been at the outset.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I would submit too to our distinguished countrymen who occupy high offices that
+their giving up will bring the struggle to a speedy end and would probably
+obviate the danger attendant upon the masses being called upon to signify their
+disapproval by withdrawing co-operation. If the titleholders gave up their
+titles, if the holders of honorary offices gave up their appointment and if the
+high officials gave up their posts, and the would-be councillors boycotted the
+councils, the Government would quickly come to its senses and give effect to
+the people’s will. For the alternative before the Government then would be
+nothing but despotic rule pure and simple. That would probably mean military
+dictatorship. The world’s opinion has advanced so far that Britain dare not
+contemplate such dictatorship with equanimity. The taking of the steps
+suggested by me will constitute the peacefullest revolution the world has ever
+seen. Once the infallibility of non-co-operation is realised, there is an end
+to all bloodshed and violence in any shape or form.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Undoubtedly a cause must be grave to warrant the drastic method of national
+non-co-operation. I do say that the affront such as has been put upon Islam
+cannot be repeated for a century. Islam must rise now or ‘be fallen’ if not for
+ever, certainly for a century. And I cannot imagine a graver wrong than the
+massacre of Jallianwalla and the barbarity that followed it, the whitewash by
+the Hunter Committee, the dispatch of the Government of India, Mr. Montagu’s
+letter upholding the Viceroy and the then Lieutenant Governor of the Punjab,
+the refusal to remove officials who made of the lives of the Punjabis ‘a hell’
+during the Martial Law period. These act constitute a complete series of
+continuing wrongs against India which if India has any sense of honour, she
+must right at the sacrifice of all the material wealth she possesses. If she
+does not, she will have bartered her soul for a ‘mess of pottage.’
+</p>
+
+<h3>NON-CO-OPERATION EXPLAINED</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+A representative of Madras Mail called on Mr. M.K. Gandhi at his temporary
+residence in the Pursewalkam High road for an interview on the subject of
+non-co-operation. Mr. Gandhi, who has come to Madras on a tour to some of the
+principal Muslim centres in Southern India, was busy with a number of workers
+discussing his programme; but he expressed his readiness to answer questions on
+the chief topic which is agitating Muslims and Hindus.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“After your experience of the Satyagraha agitation last year, Mr. Gandhi, are
+you still hopeful and convinced of the wisdom of advising
+non-co-operation?”—“Certainly.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How do you consider conditions have altered since the Satyagraha movement of
+last year?”—“I consider that people are better disciplined now than they were
+before. In this I include even the masses who I have had opportunities of
+seeing in large numbers in various parts of the country.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And you are satisfied that the masses understand the spirit of
+Satyagraha?”—“Yes.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And that is why you are pressing on with the programme of
+non-co-operation?”—“Yes. Moreover, the danger that attended the civil
+disobedience part of Satyagraha does not apply to non-co-operation, because in
+non-co-operation we are not taking up civil disobedience of laws as a mass
+movement. The result hitherto has been most encouraging. For instance, people
+in Sindh and Delhi in spite of the irritating restrictions upon their liberty
+by the authorities have carried out the Committee’s instructions in regard to
+the Seditious Meetings Proclamation and to the prohibition of posting placards
+on the walls which we hold to be inoffensive but which the authorities consider
+to be offensive.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What is the pressure which you expect to bring to bear on the authorities if
+co-operation is withdrawn?”—“I believe, and everybody must grant, that no
+Government can exist for a single moment without the co-operation of the
+people, willing or forced, and if people suddenly withdraw their co-operation
+in every detail, the Government will come to a stand-still.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But is there not a big ‘If’ in it?”—“Certainly there is.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And how do you propose to succeed against the big ‘If’?”—“In my plan of
+campaign expediency has no room. If the Khilafat movement has really permeated
+the masses and the classes, there must be adequate response from the people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“But are you not begging the question?”—“I am not begging the question, because
+so far as the data before me go, I believe that the Muslims keenly feel the
+Khilafat grievance. It remains to be seen whether their feeling is intense
+enough to evoke in them the measure of sacrifice adequate for successful
+non-co-operation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“That is, your survey of the conditions, you think, justifies your advising
+non-co-operation in the full conviction that you have behind you the support of
+the vast masses of the Mussalman population?”—“Yes.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This non-co-operation, you are satisfied, will extend to complete severance of
+co-operation with the Government?”—No; nor is it at the present moment my
+desire that it should. I am simply practising non-co-operation to the extent
+that is necessary to make the Government realise the depth of popular feeling
+in the matter and the dissatisfaction with the Government that all that could
+be done has not been done either by the Government of India or by the Imperial
+Government, whether on the Khilafat question or on the “Punjab question.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you Mr. Gandhi, realise that even amongst Mahomedans there are sections of
+people who are not enthusiastic over non-co-operation however much they may
+feel the wrong that has been done to their community?”—“Yes. But their number
+is smaller than those who are prepared to adopt non-co-operation.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“And yet does not the fact that there has not been an adequate response to your
+appeal for resignation of titles and offices and for boycott of elections of
+the Councils indicate that you may be placing more faith in their strength of
+conviction than is warranted?”—“I think not; for the reason that the stage has
+only just come into operation and our people are always most cautious and slow
+to move. Moreover, the first stage largely affects the uppermost strata of
+society, who represent a microscopic minority though they are undoubtedly an
+influential body of people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“This upper class, you think, has sufficiently responded to your appeal?”—“I am
+unable to say either one way or the other at present. I shall be able to give a
+definite answer at the end of this month.”...
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you think that without one’s loyalty to the King and the Royal Family being
+questioned, one can advocate non-co-operation in connection with the Royal
+visit?” “Most decidedly; for the simple reason that if there is any disloyalty
+about the proposed boycott of the Prince’s visit, it is disloyalty to the
+Government of the day and not to the person of His Royal highness.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“What do you think is to be gained by promoting this boycott in connection with
+the Royal visit?”—“Because I want to show that the people of India are not in
+sympathy with the Government of the day and that they strongly disapprove of
+the policy of the Government in regard to the Punjab and Khilafat, and even in
+respect of other important administrative measures. I consider that the visit
+of the Prince of Wales is a singularly good opportunity to the people to show
+their disapproval of the present Government. After all, the visit is calculated
+to have tremendous political results. It is not to be a non-political event,
+and seeing that the Government of India and the Imperial Government want to
+make the visit a political event of first class importance, namely, for the
+purpose of strengthening their hold upon India, I for one, consider that it is
+the bounden duty of the people to boycott the visit which is being engineered
+by the two Governments in their own interest which at the present moment is
+totally antagonistic to the people.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you mean that you want this boycott promoted because you feel that the
+strengthening of the hold upon India is not desirable in the best interests of
+the country?”—“Yes. The strengthening of the hold of a Government so wicked as
+the present one is not desirable for the best interests of the people. Not that
+I want the bond between England and India to become loosened for the sake of
+loosening it but I want that bond to become strengthened only in so far as it
+adds to the welfare of India.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Do you think that non-co-operation and the non-boycott of the Legislative
+Councils consistent?”—“No; because a person who takes up the programme of
+non-co-operation cannot consistently stand for Councils.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Is non-co-operation, in your opinion, an end in itself or a means to an end,
+and if so, what is the end?” “It is a means to an end, the end being to make
+the present Government just, whereas it has become mostly unjust. Co-operation
+with a just Government is a duty; non-co-operation with an unjust Government is
+equally a duty.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Will you look with favour upon the proposal to enter the Councils and to carry
+on either obstructive tactics or to decline to take the oath of allegiance
+consistent with your non-co-operation?”—“No; as an accurate student of
+non-co-operation, I consider that such a proposal is inconsistent with the true
+spirit of non-co-operation. I have often said that a Government really thrives
+on obstruction and so far as the proposal not to take the oath of allegiance is
+concerned, I can really see no meaning in it; it amounts to a useless waste of
+valuable time and money.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“In other words, obstruction is no stage in non-co-operation?” —“No,”....
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“Are you satisfied that all efforts at constitutional agitation have been
+exhausted and that non-co-operation is the only course left us?” “I do not
+consider non-co-operation to be unconstitutional remedies now left open to us,
+non-co-operation is the only one left for us.” “Do you consider it
+constitutional to adopt it with a view merely to paralyse
+Government?”—“Certainly, it is not unconstitutional, but a prudent man will not
+take all the steps that are constitutional if they are otherwise undesirable,
+nor do I advise that course. I am resorting to non-co-operation in progressive
+stages because I want to evolve true order out of untrue order. I am not going
+to take a single step in non-co-operation unless I am satisfied that the
+country is ready for that step, namely, non-co-operation will not be followed
+by anarchy or disorder.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“How will you satisfy yourself anarchy will not follow?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“For instance, if I advise the police to lay down their arms, I shall have
+satisfied myself that we are able by voluntary assistance to protect ourselves
+against thieves and robbers. That was precisely what was done in Lahore and
+Amritsar last year by the citizens by means of volunteers when the Military and
+the police had withdrawn. Even where Government had not taken such measures in
+a place, for want of adequate force, I know people have successfully protected
+themselves.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“You have advised lawyers to non-co-operate by suspending their practice. What
+is your experience? Has the lawyers’ response to your appeal encouraged you to
+hope that you will be able to carry through all stages of non-co-operation with
+the help of such people?”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+“I cannot say that a large number has yet responded to my appeal. It is too
+early to say how many will respond. But I may say that I do not rely merely
+upon the lawyer class or highly educated men to enable the Committee to carry
+out all the stages of non-co-operation. My hope lies more with the masses so
+far as the later stages of non-co-operation are concerned.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August 1920</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY FOR NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is not without the greatest reluctance that I engage in a controversy with
+so learned a leader like Sir Narayan Chandavarkar. But in view of the fact that
+I am the author of the movement of non-co-operation, it becomes my painful duty
+to state my views even though they are opposed to those of the leaders whom I
+look upon with respect. I have just read during my travels in Malabar Sir
+Narayan’s rejoinder to my answer to the Bombay manifesto against
+non-co-operation. I regret to have to say that the rejoinder leaves me
+unconvinced. He and I seem to read the teachings of the Bible, the Gita and the
+Koran from different standpoints or we put different interpretations on them.
+We seem to understand the words Ahimsa, politics and religion differently. I
+shall try my best to make clear my meaning of the common terms and my reading
+of the different religious.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+At the outset let me assure Sir Narayan that I have not changed my views on
+Ahimsa. I still believe that man not having been given the power of creation
+does not possess the right of destroying the meanest creature that lives. The
+prerogative of destruction belongs solely to the creator of all that lives. I
+accept the interpretation of Ahimsa, namely, that it is not merely a negative
+State of harmlessness, but it is a positive state of love, of doing good even
+to the evil-doer. But it does not mean helping the evil-doer to continue the
+wrong or tolerating it by passive acquiescence. On the contrary love, the
+active state of Ahimsa, requires you to resist the wrong-doer by dissociating
+yourself from him even though it may offend him or injure him physically. Thus
+if my son lives a life of shame, I may not help him to do so by continuing to
+support him; on the contrary, my love for him requires me to withdraw all
+support from him although it may mean even his death. And the same love imposes
+on me the obligation of welcoming him to my bosom when he repents. But I may
+not by physical force compel my son to become good. That in my opinion is the
+moral of the story of the Prodigal Son.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation is not a passive state, it is an intensely active state—more
+active than physical resistance or violence. Passive resistance is a misnomer.
+Non-co-operation in the sense used by me must be non-violent and therefore
+neither punitive nor vindictive nor based on malice ill-will or hatred. It
+follows therefore that it would be sin for me to serve General Dyer and
+co-operate with him to shoot innocent men. But it will be an exercise of
+forgiveness or love for me to nurse him back to life, if he was suffering from
+a physical malady. I cannot use in this context the word co-operation as Sir
+Narayan would perhaps use it. I would co-operate a thousand times with this
+Government to wean it from its career of crime but I will not for a single
+moment co-operate with it to continue that career. And I would be guilty of
+wrong doing if I retained a title from it or “a service under it or supported
+its law-courts or schools.” Better for me a beggar’s bowl than the richest
+possession from hands stained with the blood of the innocents of Jallianwala.
+Better by far a warrant of imprisonment than honeyed words from those who have
+wantonly wounded the religious sentiment of my seventy million brothers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My reading of the Gita is diametrically opposed to Sir Narayan’s. I do not
+believe that the Gita teaches violence for doing good. It is pre-eminently a
+description of the duel that goes on in our own hearts. The divine author has
+used a historical incident for inculcating the lesson of doing one’s duty even
+at the peril of one’s life. It inculcates performance of duty irrespective of
+the consequences, for, we mortals, limited by our physical frames, are
+incapable of controlling actions save our own. The Gita distinguishes between
+the powers of light and darkness and demonstrates their incompatibility.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Jesus, in my humble opinion, was a prince among politicians. He did render unto
+Caesar that which was Caesar’s. He gave the devil his due. He ever shunned him
+and is reported never once to have yielded to his incantations. The politics of
+his time consisted in securing the welfare of the people by teaching them not
+to be seduced by the trinkets of the priests and the pharisees. The latter then
+controlled and moulded the life of the people. To-day the system of government
+is so devised as to affect every department of our life. It threatens our very
+existence. If therefore we want to conserve the welfare of the nation, we must
+religiously interest ourselves in the doing of the governors and exert a moral
+influence on them by insisting on their obeying the laws of morality. General
+Dyer did produce a ‘moral effect’ by an act of butchery. Those who are engaged
+in forwarding the movement of non-co-operation, hope to produce a moral effect
+by a process of self-denial, self-sacrifice and self-purification. It surprises
+me that Sir Narayan should speak of General Dyer’s massacre in the same breath
+as acts of non-co-operation. I have done my best to understand his meaning, but
+I am sorry to confess that I have failed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE INWARDNESS OF NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+I commend to the attention of the readers the thoughtful letter received from
+Miss Anne Marie Peterson. Miss Peterson is a lady who has been in India for
+some years and has closely followed Indian affairs. She is about to sever her
+connection with her mission for the purpose of giving herself to education that
+is truly national.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have not given the letter in full. I have omitted all personal references.
+But her argument has been left entirely untouched. The letter was not meant to
+be printed. It was written just after my Vellore speech. But it being
+intrinsically important, I asked the writer for her permission, which she
+gladly gave, for printing it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I publish it all the more gladly in that it enables me to show that the
+movement of non-co-operation is neither anti-Christian nor anti-English nor
+anti-European. It is a struggle between religion and irreligion, powers of
+light and powers of darkness.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is my firm opinion that Europe to-day represents not the spirit of God or
+Christianity but the spirit of Satan. And Satan’s successes are the greatest
+when he appears with the name of God on his lips. Europe is to-day only
+nominally Christian. In reality it is worshipping Mammon. ‘It is easier for a
+camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the
+kingdom.’ Thus really spoke Jesus Christ. His so-called followers measure their
+moral progress by their material possessions. The very national anthem of
+England is anti-Christian. Jesus who asked his followers to love their enemies
+even as themselves, could not have sung of his enemies, ‘confound his enemies
+frustrate their knavish tricks.’ The last book that Dr. Wallace wrote set forth
+his deliberate conviction that the much vaunted advance of science had added
+not an inch to the moral stature of Europe. The last war however has shown, as
+nothing else has, the Satanic nature of the civilization that dominates Europe
+to day. Every canon of public morality has been broken by the victors in the
+name of virtue. No lie has been considered too foul to be uttered. The motive
+behind every crime is not religious or spiritual but grossly material. But the
+Mussalmans and the Hindus who are struggling against the Government have
+religion and honour as their motive. Even the cruel assassination which has
+just shocked the country is reported to have a religious motive behind it. It
+is certainly necessary to purge religion of its excrescences, but it is equally
+necessary to expose the hollowness of moral pretensions on the part of those
+who prefer material wealth to moral gain. It is easier to wean an ignorant
+fanatic from his error than a confirmed scoundrel from his scoundrelism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This however is no indictment against individuals or even nations. Thousands of
+individual Europeans are rising above their environment. I write of the
+tendency in Europe as reflected in her present leaders. England through her
+leaders is insolently crushing Indian religious and national sentiment under
+her heels. England under the false plea of self-determination is trying to
+exploit the oil fields of Mesopotamia which she is almost to leave because she
+has probably no choice. France through her leaders is lending her name to
+training Cannibals as soldiers and is shamelessly betraying her trust as a
+mandatory power by trying to kill the spirit of the Syrians. President Wilson
+has thrown on the scrap heap his precious fourteen points.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is this combination of evil forces which India is really fighting through
+non-violent non-cooperation. And those like Miss Peterson whether Christian or
+European, who feel that this error must be dethroned can exercise the privilege
+of doing so by joining the non-co-operation movement. With the honour of Islam
+is bound up the safety of religion itself and with the honour of India is bound
+up the honour of every nation known to be weak.
+</p>
+
+<h3>A MISSIONARY ON NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+The following letter has been received by Mr. Gandhi from Miss Anne Marie
+Peterson of the Danish Mission in Madras:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I cannot thank you enough for your kindness and the way in which you received
+me and I feel that meeting more or less decided my future. I have thrown myself
+at the feet of India. At the same time I know that in Christ alone is my abode
+and I have no longing and no desire but to live Him, my crucified Saviour, and
+reveal Him for those with whom I come in contact. I just cling to his feet and
+pray with tears that I may not disgrace him as we Christians have been doing by
+our behaviour in India. We go on crucifying Christ while we long to proclaim
+the Power of His resurrection by which He has conquered untruth and
+unrighteousness. If we who bear His name were true to Him, we would never bow
+ourselves before the Powers of this world, but we would always be on the side
+of the poor, the suffering and the oppressed. But we are not and therefore I
+feel myself under obligation and only to Christ but to India for His sake at
+this time of momentous importance for her future.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Truly it matters little what I, a lonely and insignificant person, may say or
+do. What is my protest against the common current, the race to which I belong
+is taking and (what grieves me more), which the missionary societies seem to
+follow? Even if a respectable number protested it would not be of any use. Yet
+were I alone against the whole world, I must follow my conscience and my God.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I therefore cannot but smile when I see people saying, you should have awaited
+the decision of the National Congress before starting the non-co-operation
+movement. You have a message for the country, and the Congress is the voice of
+the nation—its servant and not its master. A majority has no right simply
+because it is a majority.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But we must try to win the majority. And it is easy to see that now that
+Congress is going to be with you. Would it have done so if you had kept quiet
+and not lent your voice to the feelings of the people? Would the Congress have
+known its mind? I think not.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I myself was in much doubt before I heard you. But you convinced me. Not that I
+can feel much on the question of the Khilafat. I cannot. I can see what service
+you are doing to India, if you can prevent the Mahomedans from using the sword
+in order to take revenge and get their rights. I can see that if you unite the
+Hindus and the Mahomedans, it will be a master stroke. How I wish the Christian
+would also come forward and unite with you for the sake of their country and
+the honour not only of their Motherland but of Christ. I may not feel much for
+Turkey, but I feel for India, and I can see she (India) has no other way to
+protest against being trampled down and crushed than non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I also want you to know that many in Denmark and all over the world, yes, I am
+sure every true Christian, will feel with and be in sympathy with India in the
+struggle which is now going on. God forbid that in the struggle between might
+and right, truth and untruth, the spirit and the flesh, there should be a
+division of races. There is not. The same struggle is going on all over the
+world. What does it matter then that we are a few? God is on our side.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Brute force often seems to get the upper hand but righteousness always has and
+always shall conquer, be it even through much suffering, and what may even
+appear to be a defeat. Christ conquered, when the world crucified Him. Blessed
+are the meek; they shall inherit the earth.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When I read your speech given at Madras it struck me that it should be printed
+as a pamphlet in English, Tamil, Hindustani and all the most used languages and
+then spread to every nook and corner of India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The non-co-operation movement once started must be worked so as to become
+successful. If it is not, I dread to think of the consequences. But you cannot
+expect it to win in a day or two. It must take time and you will not despair if
+you do not reach your goal in a hurry. For those who have faith there is no
+haste.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Now for the withdrawal of the children and students from Government schools, I
+think, it a most important step. Taking the Government help (even if it be your
+money they pay you back), we must submit to its scheme, its rules and
+regulation. India and we who love her have come to the conclusion that the
+education the foreign Government has given you is not healthy for India and can
+certainly never make for her real growth. This movement would lead to a
+spontaneous rise of national schools. Let them be a few but let them spring up
+through self-sacrifice. Only by indigenous education can India be truly
+uplifted. Why this appeals so much to me is perhaps because I belong to the
+part of the Danish people who started their own independent, indigenous
+national schools. The Danish Free Schools and Folk-High-Schools, of which you
+may have heard, were started against the opposition and persecution of the
+State. The organisers won and thus have regenerated the nation. With my truly
+heartfelt thanks and prayers for you.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am, Your sincerely, Anne Marie.
+</p>
+
+<h3>HOW TO WORK NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+Perhaps the best way of answering the fears and criticism as to
+non-co-operation is to elaborate more fully the scheme of non-co-operation. The
+critics seem to imagine that the organisers propose to give effect to the whole
+scheme at once. The fact however is that the organisers have fixed definite,
+progressive four stages. The first is the giving up of titles and resignation
+of honorary posts. If there is no response or if the response received is not
+effective, recourse will be had to the second stage. The second stage involves
+much previous arrangement. Certainly not a single servant will be called out
+unless he is either capable of supporting himself and his dependents or the
+Khilafat Committee is able to bear the burden. All the classes of servants will
+not be called out at once and never will any pressure be put upon a single
+servant to withdraw himself from the Government service. Nor will a single
+private employee be touched for the simple reason that the movement is not
+anti-English. It is not even anti-Government. Co-operation is to be withdrawn
+because the people must not be party to a wrong—a broken pledge—a violation of
+deep religious sentiment. Naturally, the movement will receive a check, if
+there is any undue influence brought to bear upon any Government servant or if
+any violence is used or countenanced by any member of the Khilafat Committee.
+The second stage must be entirely successful, if the response is at all on an
+adequate scale. For no Government—much less the Indian Government—can subsist
+if the people cease to serve it. The withdrawal therefore of the police and the
+military—the third stage—is a distant goal. The organisers however wanted to be
+fair, open and above suspicion. They did not want to keep back from the
+Government or the public a single step they had in contemplation even as a
+remote contingency. The fourth, <i>i.e.,</i> suspension of taxes is still more
+remote. The organisers recognise that suspension of general taxation is fraught
+with the greatest danger. It is likely to bring a sensitive class in conflict
+with the police. They are therefore not likely to embark upon it, unless they
+can do so with the assurance that there will be no violence offered by the
+people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I admit as I have already done that non-co-operation is not unattended with
+risk, but the risk of supineness in the face of a grave issue is infinitely
+greater than the danger of violence ensuing form organizing non-co-operation.
+To do nothing is to invite violence for a certainty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is easy enough to pass resolutions or write articles condemning
+non-co-operation. But it is no easy task to restrain the fury of a people
+incensed by a deep sense of wrong. I urge those who talk or work against
+non-co-operation to descend from their chairs and go down to the people, learn
+their feelings and write, if they have the heart against non-co-operation. They
+will find, as I have found that the only way to avoid violence is to enable
+them to give such expression to their feelings as to compel redress. I have
+found nothing save non-co-operation. It is logical and harmless. It is the
+inherent right of a subject to refuse to assist a Government that will not
+listen to him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation as a voluntary movement can only succeed, if the feeling is
+genuine and strong enough to make people suffer to the utmost. If the religious
+sentiment of the Mahomedans is deeply hurt and if the Hindus entertain
+neighbourly regard towards their Muslim brethren, they will both count no cost
+too great for achieving the end. Non-co-operation will not only be an effective
+remedy but will also be an effective test of the sincerity of the Muslim claim
+and the Hindu profession of friendship.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is however one formidable argument urged by friends against my joining
+the Khilafat movement. They say that it ill-becomes me, a friend of the English
+and an admirer of the British constitution, to join hands with those who are
+to-day filled with nothing but ill-will against the English. I am sorry to have
+to confess that the ordinary Mahomedan entertains to-day no affection for
+Englishmen. He considers, not without some cause, that they have not played the
+game. But if I am friendly towards Englishmen, I am no less so towards my
+countrymen, the Mahomedans. And as such they have a greater claim upon my
+attention than Englishmen. My personal religion however enables me to serve my
+countrymen without hurting Englishmen or for that matter anybody else. What I
+am not prepared to do to my blood-brother I would not do to an Englishman, I
+would not injure him to gain a kingdom. But I would withdraw co-operation from
+him if it becomes necessary as I had withdrawn from my own brother (now
+deceased) when it became necessary. I serve the Empire by refusing to partake
+in its wrong. William Stead offered public prayers for British reverses at the
+time of the Boer war because he considered that the nation to which he belonged
+was engaged in an unrighteous war. The present Prime Minister risked his life
+in opposing that war and did everything he could to obstruct his own Government
+in its prosecution. And to-day if I have thrown in my lot with the Mahomedans,
+a large number of whom, bear no friendly feelings towards the British, I have
+done so frankly as a friend of the British and with the object of gaining
+justice and of thereby showing the capacity of the British constitution to
+respond to every honest determination when it is coupled with suffering, I hope
+by my ‘alliance’ with the Mahomedans to achieve a threefold end—to obtain
+justice in the face of odds with the method of Satyagrah and to show its
+efficacy over all other methods, to secure Mahomedan friendship for the Hindus
+and thereby internal peace also, and last but not least to transform ill-will
+into affection for the British and their constitution which in spite of the
+imperfections weathered many a storm. I may fail in achieving any of the ends.
+I can but attempt. God alone can grant success. It will not be denied that the
+ends are all worthy. I invite Hindus and Englishman to join me in a
+full-hearted manner in shouldering the burden the Mahomedans of India are
+carrying. Theirs is admittedly a just fight. The Viceroy, the Secretary of
+State, the Maharaja of Bikuner and Lord Sinha have testified to it. Time has
+arrived to make good the testimony. People with a just cause are never
+satisfied with a mere protest. They have been known to die for it. Are a
+high-spirited people like the Mahomedans expected to do less?
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MADRAS</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Addressing a huge concourse of people of the city of Madras Hindus and
+Mahomedans numbering over 50,000, assembled on the South Beach opposite to the
+Presidency College, Madras, on the 12th August 1920, Mahatma Gandhi spoke as
+follows:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and Friends,—Like last year, I have to ask your forgiveness that I
+should have to speak being seated. Whilst my voice has become stronger than it
+was last year, my body is still weak; and if I were to attempt to speak to you
+standing, I could not hold on for very many minutes before the whole frame
+would shake. I hope, therefore, that you will grant me permission to speak
+seated. I have sat here to address you on a most important question, probably a
+question whose importance we have not measured up to now.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LOKAMANYA TILAK</h4>
+
+<p>
+But before I approach that question on this dear old beach of Madras, you will
+expect me—you will want me—to offer my tribute to the great departed, Lokamanya
+Tilak Maharaj (loud and prolonged cheers). I would ask this great assembly to
+listen to me in silence. I have come to make an appeal to your hearts and to
+your reason and I could not do so unless you were prepared to listen to
+whatever I have to say in absolute silence. I wish to offer my tribute to the
+departed patriot and I think that I cannot do better than say that his death,
+as his life, has poured new vigour into the country. If you were present as I
+was present at that great funeral procession, you would realise with me the
+meaning of my words. Mr. Tilak lived for his country. The inspiration of his
+life was freedom for his country which he called Swaraj the inspiration of his
+death-bed was also freedom for his country. And it was that which gave him such
+marvellous hold upon his countrymen; it was that which commanded the adoration
+not of a few chosen Indians belonging to the upper strata of society but of
+millions of his countrymen. His life was one long sustained piece of
+self-sacrifice. He began that life of discipline and self-sacrifice in 1879 and
+he continued that life up to the end of his day, and that was the secret of his
+hold upon his country. He not only knew what he wanted for his country but also
+how to live for his country and how to die for his country. I hope then that
+whatever I say this evening to this vast mass of people, will bear fruit in
+that same sacrifice for which the life of Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj stands. His
+life, if it teaches us anything whatsoever, teaches one supreme lesson: that if
+we want to do anything whatsoever for our country we can do so not by speeches,
+however grand, eloquent and convincing they may be, but only by sacrifice at
+the back of every act of our life. I have come to ask everyone of you whether
+you are ready and willing to give sufficiently for your country’s sake for
+country’s honour and for religion. I have boundless faith in you, the citizens
+of Madras, and the people of this great presidency, a faith which I began to
+cultivate in the year 1903 when I first made acquaintance with the Tamil
+labourers in South Africa; and I hope that in these hours of our trial, this
+province will not be second to any other in India, and that it will lead in
+this spirit of self-sacrifice and will translate every word into action.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NEED FOR NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+What is this non-co-operation, about which you have heard so much, and why do
+we want to offer this non-co-operation? I wish to go for the time being into
+the why. Here are two things before this country: the first and the foremost is
+the Khilafat question. On this the heart of the Mussalmans of India has become
+lascerated. British pledges given after the greatest deliberation by the Prime
+Minister of England in the name of the English nation, have been dragged into
+the mire. The promises given to Moslem India on the strength of which, the
+consideration that was expected by the British nation was exacted, have been
+broken, and the great religion of Islam has been placed in danger. The
+Mussalmans hold—and I venture to think they rightly hold—that so long as
+British promises remain unfulfilled, so long is it impossible for them to
+tender whole-hearted fealty and loyalty to the British connection; and if it is
+to be a choice for a devout Mussalman between loyalty to the British connection
+and loyalty to his Code and Prophet, he will not require a second to make his
+choice,—and he has declared his choice. The Mussalmans say frankly openly and
+honourably to the whole world that if the British Ministers and the British
+nation do not fulfil the pledges given to them and do not wish to regard with
+respect the sentiments of 70 millions of the inhabitants of India who profess
+the faith of Islam, it will be impossible for them to retain Islamic loyalty.
+It is a question, then for the rest of the Indian population to consider
+whether they want to perform a neighbourly duty by their Mussalman countrymen,
+and if they do, they have an opportunity of a lifetime which will not occur for
+another hundred years, to show their good-will, fellowship and friendship and
+to prove what they have been saying for all these long years that the Mussalman
+is the brother of the Hindu. If the Hindu regards that before the connection
+with the British nation comes his natural connection with his Moslem brother,
+then I say to you that if you find that the Moslem claim is just, that it is
+based upon real sentiment, and that at its back ground is this great religious
+feeling, you cannot do otherwise than help the Mussalman through and through,
+so long as their cause remains just, and the means for attaining the end
+remains equally just, honourable and free from harm to India. These are the
+plain conditions which the Indian Mussalmans have accepted; and it was when
+they saw that they could accept the proferred aid of the Hindus, that they
+could always justify the cause and the means before the whole world, that they
+decided to accept the proferred hand of fellowship. It is then for the Hindus
+and Mahomedans to offer a united front to the whole of the Christian powers of
+Europe and tell them that weak as India is, India has still got the capacity of
+preserving her self-respect, she still knows how to die for her religion and
+for her self-respect.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That is the Khilafat in a nut-shell; but you have also got the Punjab. The
+Punjab has wounded the heart of India as no other question has for the past
+century. I do not exclude from my calculation the Mutiny of 1857. Whatever
+hardships India had to suffer during the Mutiny, the insult that was attempted
+to be offered to her during the passage of the Rowlatt legislation and that
+which was offered after its passage were unparalleled in Indian history. It is
+because you want justice from the British nation in connection with the Punjab
+atrocities: you have to devise, ways and means as to how you can get this
+justice. The House of Commons, the House of Lords, Mr. Montagu, the Viceroy of
+India, everyone of them know what the feeling of India is on this Khilafat
+question and on that of the Punjab; the debates in both the Houses of
+Parliament, the action of Mr. Montagu and that of the Viceroy have demonstrated
+to you completely that they are not willing to give the justice which is
+India’s due and which she demands. I suggest that our leaders have got to find
+a way out of this great difficulty and unless we have made ourselves even with
+the British rulers in India and unless we have gained a measure of self-respect
+at the hands of the British rulers in India, no connection, and no friendly
+intercourse is possible between them and ourselves. I, therefore, venture to
+suggest this beautiful and unanswerable method of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>IS IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL?</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have been told that non-co-operation is unconstitutional. I venture to deny
+that it is unconstitutional. On the contrary, I hold that non-co-operation is a
+just and religious doctrine; it is the inherent right of every human being and
+it is perfectly constitutional. A great lover of the British Empire has said
+that under the British constitution even a successful rebellion is perfectly
+constitutional and he quotes historical instances, which I cannot deny, in
+support of his claim. I do not claim any constitutionality for a rebellion
+successful or otherwise, so long as that rebellion means in the ordinary sense
+of the term, what it does mean namely wresting justice by violent means. On the
+contrary, I have said it repeatedly to my countrymen that violence whatever end
+it may serve in Europe, will never serve us in India. My brother and friend
+Shaukat Ali believes in methods of violence; and if it was in his power to draw
+the sword against the British Empire, I know that he has got the courage of a
+man and he has got also the wisdom to see that he should offer that battle to
+the British Empire. But because he recognises as a true soldier that means of
+violence are not open to India, he sides with me accepting my humble assistance
+and pledges his word that so long as I am with him and so long as he believes
+in the doctrine, so long will he not harbour even the idea of violence against
+any single Englishman or any single man on earth. I am here to tell you that he
+has been as true as his word and has kept it religiously. I am here to bear
+witness that he has been following out this plan of non-violent
+Non-co-operation to the very letter and I am asking India to follow this
+non-violent non-co-operation. I tell you that there is not a better soldier
+living in our ranks in British India than Shaukat Ali. When the time for the
+drawing of the sword comes, if it ever comes, you will find him drawing that
+sword and you will find me retiring to the jungles of Hindustan. As soon as
+India accepts the doctrine of the sword, my life as an Indian is finished. It
+is because I believe in a mission special to India and it is because I believe
+that the ancients of India after centuries of experience have found out that
+the true thing for any human being on earth is not justice based on violence
+but justice based on sacrifice of self, justice based on Yagna and Kurbani,—I
+cling to that doctrine and I shall cling to it for ever,—it is for that reason
+I tell you that whilst my friend believes also in the doctrine of violence and
+has adopted the doctrine of non-violence as a weapon of the weak, I believe in
+the doctrine of non-violence as a weapon of the strongest. I believe that a man
+is the strongest soldier for daring to die unarmed with his breast bare before
+the enemy. So much for the non-violent part of non-co-operation. I therefore,
+venture to suggest to my learned countrymen that so long as the doctrine of
+non-co-operation remains non-violent, so long there is nothing unconstitutional
+in that doctrine.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I ask further, is it unconstitutional for me to say to the British Government
+‘I refuse to serve you?’ Is it unconstitutional for our worthy Chairman to
+return with every respect all the titles that he has ever held from the
+Government? Is it unconstitutional for any parent to withdraw his children from
+a Government or aided school? Is it unconstitutional for a lawyer to say ‘I
+shall no longer support the arm of the law so long as that arm of law is used
+not to raise me but to debase me’? Is it unconstitutional for a civil servant
+or for a judge to say, ‘I refuse to serve a Government which does not wish to
+respect the wishes of the whole people?’ I ask, is it unconstitutional for a
+policeman or for a soldier to tender his resignation when he knows that he is
+called to serve a Government which traduces his own countrymen? Is it
+unconstitutional for me to go to the ‘krishan,’ to the agriculturist, and say
+to him ‘it is not wise for you to pay any taxes if these taxes are used by the
+Government not to raise you but to weaken you?’ I hold and I venture to submit,
+that there is nothing unconstitutional in it. What is more, I have done every
+one of these things in my life and nobody has questioned the constitutional
+character of it. I was in Kaira working in the midst of 7 lakhs of
+agriculturists. They had all suspended the payment of taxes and the whole of
+India was at one with me. Nobody considered that it was unconstitutional. I
+submit that in the whole plan of non-co-operation, there is nothing
+unconstitutional. But I do venture to suggest that it will be highly
+unconstitutional in the midst of this unconstitutional Government,—in the midst
+of a nation which has built up its magnificent constitution,—for the people of
+India to become weak and to crawl on their belly—it will be highly
+unconstitutional for the people of India to pocket every insult that is offered
+to them; it is highly unconstitutional for the 70 millions of Mohamedans of
+India to submit to a violent wrong done to their religion; it is highly
+unconstitutional for the whole of India to sit still and co-operate with an
+unjust Government which has trodden under its feet the honour of the Punjab. I
+say to my countrymen so long as you have a sense of honour and so long as you
+wish to remain the descendants and defenders of the noble traditions that have
+been handed to you for generations after generations, it is unconstitutional
+for you not to non-co-operate and unconstitutional for you to co-operate with a
+Government which has become so unjust as our Government has become. I am not
+anti-English; I am not anti-British; I am not anti any Government; but I am
+anti-untruth—anti-humbug and anti-injustice. So long as the Government spells
+injustice, it may regard me as its enemy, implacable enemy. I had hoped at the
+Congress at Amritsar—I am speaking God’s truth before you—when I pleaded on
+bended knees before some of you for co-operation with the Government. I had
+full hope that the British ministers who are wise, as a rule, would placate the
+Mussalman sentiment that they would do full justice in the matter of the Punjab
+atrocities; and therefore, I said:—let us return good-will to the hand of
+fellowship that has been extended to us, which I then believed was extended to
+us through the Royal Proclamation. It was on that account that I pleaded for
+co-operation. But to-day that faith having gone and obliterated by the acts of
+the British ministers, I am here to plead not for futile obstruction in the
+Legislative council but for real substantial non-co-operation which would
+paralyse the mightiest Government on earth. That is what I stand for to-day.
+Until we have wrung justice, and until we have wrung our self-respect from
+unwilling hands and from unwilling pens there can be no co-operation. Our
+Shastras say and I say so with the greatest deference to all the greatest
+religious preceptors of India but without fear of contradiction, that our
+Shastras teach us that there shall be no co-operation between injustice and
+justice, between an unjust man and a justice-loving man, between truth and
+untruth. Co-operation is a duty only so long as Government protects your
+honour, and non-co-operation is an equal duty when the Government instead of
+protecting robs you of your honour. That is the doctrine of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NON-CO-OPERATION AND THE SPECIAL CONGRESS</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have been told that I should have waited for the declaration of the special
+Congress which is the mouth piece of the whole nation. I know that it is the
+mouthpiece of the whole nation. If it was for me, individual Gandhi, to wait, I
+would have waited for eternity. But I had in my hands a sacred trust. I was
+advising my Mussalman countrymen and for the time being I hold their honour in
+my hands. I dare not ask them to wait for any verdict but the verdict of their
+own Conscience. Do you suppose that Mussalmans can eat their own words, can
+withdraw from the honourable position they have taken up? If perchance—and God
+forbid that it should happen—the Special Congress decides against them, I would
+still advise my countrymen the Mussalmans to stand single handed and fight
+rather than yield to the attempted dishonour to their religion. It is therefore
+given to the Mussalmans to go to the Congress on bended knees and plead for
+support. But support or no support, it was not possible for them to wait for
+the Congress to give them the lead. They had to choose between futile violence,
+drawing of the naked sword and peaceful non-violent but effective
+non-co-operation, and they have made their choice. I venture further to say to
+you that if there is any body of men who feel as I do, the sacred character of
+non-co-operation, it is for you and me not to wait for the Congress but to act
+and to make it impossible for the Congress to give any other verdict. After all
+what is the Congress? The Congress is the collected voice of individuals who
+form it, and if the individuals go to the Congress with a united voice, that
+will be the verdict you will gain from the Congress. But if we go to the
+Congress with no opinion because we have none or because we are afraid to
+express it, then naturally we wait the verdict of the Congress. To those who
+are unable to make up their mind I say by all means wait. But for those who
+have seen the clear light as they see the lights in front of them, for them to
+wait is a sin. The Congress does not expect you to wait but it expects you to
+act so that the Congress can gauge properly the national feeling. So much for
+the Congress.
+</p>
+
+<h4>BOYCOTT OF THE COUNCILS</h4>
+
+<p>
+Among the details of non-co-operation I have placed in the foremost rank the
+boycott of the councils. Friends have quarrelled with me for the use of the
+word boycott, because I have disapproved—as I disapprove even now—boycott of
+British goods or any goods for that matter. But there, boycott has its own
+meaning and here boycott has its own meaning. I not only do not disapprove but
+approve of the boycott of the councils that are going to be formed next year.
+And why do I do it? The people—the masses,—require from us, the leaders, a
+clear lead. They do not want any equivocation from us. The suggestion that we
+should seek election and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance, would only
+make the nation distrust the leaders. It is not a clear lead to the nation. So
+I say to you, my countrymen, not to fall into this trap. We shall sell our
+country by adopting the method of seeking election and then not taking the oath
+of allegiance. We may find it difficult, and I frankly confess to you that I
+have not that trust in so many Indians making that declaration and standing by
+it. To-day I suggest to those who honestly hold the view—<i>viz</i>. that we
+should seek election and then refuse to take the oath of allegiance—I suggest
+to them that they will fall into a trap which they are preparing for themselves
+and for the nation. That is my view. I hold that if we want to give the nation
+the clearest possible lead, and if we want not to play with this great nation
+we must make it clear to this nation that we cannot take any favours, no matter
+how great they may be so long as those favours are accompanied by an injustice
+a double wrong, done to India not yet redressed. The first indispensable thing
+before we can receive any favours from them is that they should redress this
+double wrong. There is a Greek proverb which used to say “Beware of the Greek
+but especially beware of them when they bring gifts to you.” To-day from those
+ministers who are bent upon perpetuating the wrong to Islam and to the Punjab,
+I say we cannot accept gifts but we should be doubly careful lest we may not
+fall into the trap that they may have devised. I therefore suggest that we must
+not coquet with the council and must not have anything whatsoever to do with
+them. I am told that if we, who represent the national sentiment do not seek
+election, the Moderates who do not represent that sentiment will. I do not
+agree. I do not know what the Moderates represent and I do not know what the
+Nationalists represent. I know that there are good sheep and black sheep
+amongst the Moderates. I know that there are good sheep and black sheep amongst
+the Nationalists. I know that many Moderates hold honestly the view that it is
+a sin to resort to non-co-operation. I respectfully agree to differ from them.
+I do say to them also that they will fall into a trap which they will have
+devised if they seek election. But that does not affect my situation. If I feel
+in my heart of hearts that I ought not to go to the councils I ought at least
+to abide by this decision and it does not matter if ninety-nine other
+countrymen seek election. That is the only way in which public work can be
+done, and public opinion can be built. That is the only way in which reforms
+can be achieved and religion can be conserved. If it is a question of religious
+honour, whether I am one or among many I must stand upon my doctrine. Even if I
+should die in the attempt, it is worth dying for, than that I should live and
+deny my own doctrine. I suggest that it will be wrong on the part of any one to
+seek election to these Councils. If once we feel that we cannot co-operate with
+this Government, we have to commence from the top. We are the natural leaders
+of the people and we have acquired the right and the power to go to the nation
+and speak to it with the voice of non-co-operation. I therefore do suggest that
+it is inconsistent with non-co-operation to seek election to the Councils on
+any terms whatsoever.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LAWYERS AND NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have suggested another difficult matter, <i>viz.</i>, that the lawyers should
+suspend their practice. How should I do otherwise knowing so well how the
+Government had always been able to retain this power through the
+instrumentality of lawyers. It is perfectly true that it is the lawyers of
+to-day who are leading us, who are fighting the country’s battles, but when it
+comes to a matter of action against the Government, when it comes to a matter
+of paralysing the activity of the Government I know that the Government always
+look to the lawyers, however fine fighters they may have been to preserve their
+dignity and their self-respect. I therefore suggest to my lawyer friends that
+it is their duty to suspend their practice and to show to the Government that
+they will no longer retain their offices, because lawyers are considered to be
+honorary officers of the courts and therefore subject to their disciplinary
+jurisdiction. They must no longer retain these honorary offices if they want to
+withdraw on operation from Government. But what will happen to law and order?
+We shall evolve law and order through the instrumentality of these very
+lawyers. We shall promote arbitration courts and dispense justice, pure, simple
+home-made justice, swadeshi justice to our countrymen. That is what suspension
+of practice means.
+</p>
+
+<h4>PARENTS AND NON-CO-OPERATION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have suggested yet another difficulty—to withdraw our children from the
+Government schools and to ask collegiate students to withdraw from the College
+and to empty Government aided schools. How could I do otherwise? I want to
+gauge the national sentiment. I want to know whether the Mahomodans feel
+deeply. If they feel deeply they will understand in the twinkling of an eye,
+that it is not right for them to receive schooling from a Government in which
+they have lost all faith; and which they do not trust at all. How can I, if I
+do not want to help this Government, receive any help from that Government. I
+think that the schools and colleges are factories for making clerks and
+Government servants. I would not help this great factory for manufacturing
+clerks and servants if I want to withdraw co-operation from that Government.
+Look at it from any point of view you like. It is not possible for you to send
+your children to the schools and still believe in the doctrine of
+non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>THE DUTY OF TITLE HOLDERS</h4>
+
+<p>
+I have gone further. I have suggested that our title holders should give up
+their titles. How can they hold on to the titles and honour bestowed by the
+Government? They were at one time badges of honours when we believed that
+national honour was safe in their hands. But now they are no longer badges of
+honour but badges of dishonour and disgrace when we really believe that we
+cannot get justice from this Government. Every title holder holds his titles
+and honours as trustee for the nation and in this first step in the withdrawal
+of co-operation from the Government they should surrender their titles without
+a moment’s consideration. I suggest to my Mahomedan countrymen that if they
+fail in this primary duty they will certainly fail in non-co-operation unless
+the masses themselves reject the classes and take up non-co-operation in their
+own hands and are able to fight that battle even as the men of the French
+Revolution were able to take the reins of Government in their own hands leaving
+aside the leaders and marched to the banner of victory. I want no revolution. I
+want ordered progress. I want no disordered order. I want no chaos. I want real
+order to be evolved out of this chaos which is misrepresented to me as order.
+If it is order established by a tyrant in order to get hold of the tyrannical
+reins of Government I say that it is no order for me but it is disorder. I want
+to evolve justice out of this injustice. Therefore, I suggest to you the
+passive non-co-operation. If we would only realise the secret of this peaceful
+and infallible doctrine you will know and you will find that you will not want
+to use even an angry word when they lift the sword at you and you will not want
+even to lift your little finger, let alone a stick or a sword.
+</p>
+
+<h4>NON-CO-OPERATION—SERVICE TO THE EMPIRE</h4>
+
+<p>
+You may consider that I have spoken these words in anger because I have
+considered the ways of this Government immoral, unjust, debasing and
+untruthful. I use these adjectives with the greatest deliberation. I have used
+them for my own true brother with whom I was engaged in battle of
+non-co-operation for full 13 years and although the ashes cover the remains of
+my brother I tell you that I used to tell him that he was unjust when his plans
+were based upon immoral foundation. I used to tell him that he did not stand
+for truth. There was no anger in me, I told him this home truth because I loved
+him. In the same manner, I tell the British people that I love them, and that I
+want their association but I want that association on conditions well defined.
+I want my self-respect and I want my absolute equality with them. If I cannot
+gain that equality from the British people, I do not want that British
+connection. If I have to let the British people go and import temporary
+disorder and dislocation of national business, I will favour that disorder and
+dislocation than that I should have injustice from the hands of a great nation
+such as the British nation. You will find that by the time the whole chapter is
+closed that the successors of Mr. Montagu will give me the credit for having
+rendered the most distinguished service that I have yet rendered to the Empire,
+in having offered this non-co-operation and in having suggest the boycott, not
+of His Royal Highness the principle of Wales, but of boycott of a visit
+engineered by Government in order to tighten its hold on the national neck. I
+will not allow it even if I stand alone, if I cannot persuade this nation not
+to welcome that visit but will boycott that visit with all the power at my
+command. It is for that reason I stand before you and implore you to offer this
+religious battle, but it is not a battle offered to you by a visionary or a
+saint. I deny being a visionary. I do not accept the claim of saintliness. I am
+of the earth, earthy, a common gardener man as much as any one of you, probably
+much more than you are. I am prone to as many weaknesses as you are. But I have
+seen the world. I have lived in the world with my eyes open. I have gone
+through the most fiery ordeals that have fallen to the lot of man. I have gone
+through this discipline. I have understood the secret of my own sacred
+Hinduism. I have learnt the lesson that non-co-operation is the duty not merely
+of the saint but it is the duty of every ordinary citizen, who not know much,
+not caring to know much but wants to perform his ordinary household functions.
+The people of Europe touch even their masses, the poor people the doctrine of
+the sword. But the Rishis of India, those who have held the tradition of India
+have preached to the masses of India this doctrine, not of the sword, not of
+violence but of suffering, of self-suffering. And unless you and I am prepared
+to go through this primary lesson we are not ready even to offer the sword and
+that is the lesson my brother Shaukal Ali has imbibed to teach and that is why
+he to-day accepts my advice tendered to him in all prayerfulness and in all
+humility and says ‘long live non-co-operation.’ Please remember that even in
+England the little children were withdrawn from the schools; and colleges in
+Cambridge and Oxford were closed. Lawyers had left their desks and were
+fighting in the trenches. I do not present to you the trenches but I do ask you
+to go through the sacrifice that the men, women and the brave lads of England
+went through. Remember that you are offering battle to a nation which is
+saturated with their spirit of sacrifice whenever the occasion arises. Remember
+that the little band of Boers offered stubborn resistance to a mighty nation.
+But their lawyers had left their desks. Their mothers had withdrawn their
+children from the schools and colleges and the children had become the
+volunteers of the nation, I have seen them with these naked eyes of mine. I am
+asking my countrymen in India to follow no other gospel than the gospel of
+self-sacrifice which precedes every battle. Whether you belong to the school of
+violence or non-violence you will still have to go through the fire of
+sacrifice, and of discipline. May God grant you, may God grant our leaders the
+wisdom, the courage and the true knowledge to lead the nation to its cherished
+goal. May God grant the people of India the right path, the true vision and the
+ability and the courage to follow this path, difficult and yet easy, of
+sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT TRICHINOPOLY</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Mahatma Gandhi made the following speech at Trichinopoly on the 18th August
+1920:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I thank you on behalf of my brother Shaukat Ali and myself for the magnificent
+reception that the citizens of Trichinopoly have given to us. I thank you also
+for the many addresses that you have been good enough to present to us, but I
+must come to business.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is a great pleasure to me to renew your acquaintance for reasons that I need
+not give you. I expect great things from Trichinopoly, Madura and a few places
+I could name. I take it that you have read my address on the Madras Beach on
+non-co-operation. Without taking up your time in this great assembly, I wish to
+deal with one or two matters that arise out of Mr. S. Kasturiranga Iyongar’s
+speech. He says in effect that I should have waited for the Congress mandate on
+Non-co-operation. That was impossible, because the Mussulmans had and still
+have a duty, irrespective of the Hindus, to perform in reference to their own
+religion. It was impossible for them to wait for any mandate save the mandate
+of their own religion in a matter that vitally concerned the honour of Islam.
+It is therefore possible for them only to go to the Congress on bended knees
+with a clear cut programme of their own and ask the Congress to pronounce its
+blessings upon that programme and if they are not so fortunate as to secure the
+blessings of the National Assembly without meaning any disrespect to that
+assembly, it is their bounden duty to go on with their programme, and so it is
+the duty of every Hindu who considers his Mussalman brother as a brother who
+has a just cause which he wishes to vindicate, to throw in his lot with his
+Mussalman brother. Our leader does not quarrel with the principle of
+non-co-operation by itself, but he objects to the three principal details of
+non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<h4>COUNCIL ELECTIONS</h4>
+
+<p>
+He considers that it is our duty to seek election to the Councils and fight our
+battle on the floor of the Council hall. I do not deny the possibility of a
+fight and a royal fight on the Council floor. We have done it for the last 35
+years, but I venture to suggest to you and to him, with all due respect, that
+it is not non-co-operation and it is not half as successful as non-co-operation
+can be. You cannot go to a class of people with a view to convince them by any
+fight—call it even obstruction—who have got a settled conviction and a settled
+policy to follow. It is in medical language an incompatible mixture out of
+which you can gain nothing, but if you totally boycott the Council, you create
+a public opinion in the country with reference to the Khilafat wrong and the
+Punjab wrong which will become totally irresistible. The first advantage of
+going to the Councils must be good-will on the part of the rulers. It is
+absolutely lacking. In the place of good-will you have got nothing but
+injustice but I must move on.
+</p>
+
+<h4>LAWYERS’ PRACTICE</h4>
+
+<p>
+I come now to the second objection of Mr. Kasturiranga Iyengar with reference
+to the suspension by lawyers of their practice. Milk is good in itself but it
+comes absolutely poisonous immediately a little bit of arsenic is added to it.
+Law courts are similarly good when justice is distilled through them on behalf
+of a Sovereign power which wants to do justice to its people. Law courts are
+one of the greatest symbols of power and in the battle of non-co-operation, you
+may not leave law courts untouched and claim to offer non-co-operation, but if
+you will read that objection carefully, you will find in that objection the
+great fear that the lawyers will not respond to the call that the country makes
+upon them, and it is just there that the beauty of non-co-operation comes in.
+If one lawyer alone suspends practice, it is so much to the good of the country
+and so if we are sure to deprive the Government of the power that it possess
+through its law courts, whether one lawyer takes it up or many, we must adopt
+that step.
+</p>
+
+<h4>GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS</h4>
+
+<p>
+He objects also to the plan of boycotting Government schools. I can only say
+what I have said with reference to lawyers that if we mean non-co-operation, we
+may not receive any favours from the Government, no matter how advantageous by
+themselves they may be. In a great struggle like this, it is not open to us to
+count how many schools will respond and how many parents will respond and just
+as a geometrical problem is difficult, because it does not admit of easy proof,
+so also because a certain stage in national evolution is difficult, you may not
+avoid that step without making the whole of the evolution a farce.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+We have had a great lesson in non-co-operation and co-operation. We had a
+lesson in non-co-operation when some young men began to fight there and it is a
+dangerous weapon. I have not the slightest doubt about it. One man with a
+determined will to non-co-operate can disturb a whole meeting and we had a
+physical demonstration of it to night but ours is non-violent, non-co-operation
+in which there can be no mistake whatsoever in the fundamental conditions are
+observed. If non-co-operation fails, it will not be for want of any inherent
+strength in it, but it will fall because there is no response to it, or because
+people have not sufficiently grasped its simple principles. You had also a
+practical demonstration of co-operation just now; that heavy chair went over
+the heads of so many people, because all wanted to lift their little hand to
+move that chair away from them and so was that heavier dome also removed from
+our sight by co-operation of man, woman and child. Everybody believes and knows
+that this Government of our exists only by the co-operation of the people and
+not by the force of arms it can wield and everyman with a sense of logic will
+tell you that the converse of that also is equally true that Government cannot
+stand if this co-operation on which it exists is withdrawn. Difficulties
+undoubtedly there are, we have hitherto learned how to sacrifice our voice and
+make speeches. We must also learn to sacrifice ease, money, comfort and that,
+we may learn form the Englishmen themselves. Every one who has studied English
+history knows that we are now engaged in a battle with a nation which is
+capable of great sacrifice and the three hundred millions of India cannot make
+their mark upon the world, or gain their self-respect without an adequate
+measure of sacrifice.
+</p>
+
+<h4>BOYCOTT OF BRITISH GOODS</h4>
+
+<p>
+Our friend has suggested the boycott of British or foreign goods. Boycott of
+all foreign goods is another name for Swadeshi. He thinks that there will be a
+greater response in the boycott of all foreign goods. With the experience of
+years behind me and with an intimate knowledge of the mercantile classes, I
+venture to tell you that boycott of foreign goods, or boycott of merely British
+goods is more impracticable than any of the stops I have suggested. Whereas in
+all the steps that I have ventured to suggest there is practically no sacrifice
+of money involved, in the boycott of British or foreign goods you are inviting
+your merchant princes to sacrifice their millions. It has got to be done, but
+it is an exceedingly low process. The same may be said of the steps that I have
+ventured to suggest, I know, but boycott of goods in conceived as a punishment
+and the punishment is only effective when it is inflicted. What I have ventured
+to suggest is not a punishment, but the performance of a sacred duty, a measure
+of self-denial from ourselves, and therefore it is effective from its very
+inception when it is undertaken even by one man and a substantial duty
+performed even by one single man lays the foundation of nations liberty.
+</p>
+
+<h4>CONCLUSION</h4>
+
+<p>
+I am most anxious for my nation, for my Mussalman brethren also, to understand
+that if they want to vindicate national honour or the honour of Islam, it will
+be vindicated without a shadow of doubt, not be conceiving a punishment or a
+series of punishments, but by an adequate measure of self-sacrifice. I wish to
+speak of all our leaders in terms of the greatest respect, but whatever respect
+we wish to pay them may not stop or arrest the progress of the country, and I
+am most anxious that the country at this very critical period of its history
+should make its choice. The choice clearly does not lie before you and me in
+wresting by force of arms the sceptre form the British nation, but the choice
+lies in suffering this double wrong of the Khilafat and the Punjab, in
+pocketing humiliation and in accepting national emasculation or vindication of
+India’s honour by sacrifice to-day by every man, woman and child and those who
+feel convinced of the rightness of things, we should make that choice to-night.
+So, citizens of Trichinopoly, you may not wait for the whole of India but you
+can enforce the first step of non-co-operation and begin your operations even
+from to-morrow, if you have not done so already. You can surrender all your
+titles to-morrow all the lawyers may surrender their practice to-morrow; those
+who cannot sustain body and soul by any other means can be easily supported by
+the Khilafat Committee, if they will give their whole time and attention to the
+work of that Committee and if the layers will kindly do that, you will find
+that there is no difficulty in settling your disputes by private arbitration.
+You can nationalise your schools from to-morrow if you have got the will and
+the determination. It is difficult, I know, when only a few of you think these
+things. It is as easy as we are sitting here when the whole of this vast
+audience is of one mind and as it was easy for you to carry that chair so is it
+easy for you to enforce this programme from to-morrow if you have one will, one
+determination and love for your country, love for the honour of your country
+and religion. (Loud and prolonged cheers.)
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT CALICUT</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and friends.—On behalf of my brother Shaukut Ali and myself I wish
+to thank you most sincerely for the warm welcome you have extended to us.
+Before I begin to explain the purpose of our mission I have to give you the
+information that Pir Mahboob Shah who was being tried in Sindh for sedition has
+been sentenced to two years’ simple imprisonment. I do not know exactly what
+the offence was with which the Pir was charged. I do not know whether the words
+attributed to him were ever spoken by him. But I do know that the Pirsaheb
+declined to offer any defence and with perfect resignation he has accepted his
+penalty. For me it is a matter of sincere pleasure that the Pirsaheb who
+exercises great influence over his followers has understood the spirit of the
+struggle upon which we have embarked. It is not by resisting the authority of
+Government that we expect to succeed in the great task before us. But I do
+expect that we shall succeed if we understand the spirit of non-co-operation.
+The Lieutenant-Governor of Burma himself has told us that the British retain
+their hold on India not by the force of arms but by the force of co-operation
+of the people. Thus he has given us the remedy for any wrong that the
+Government may do to the people, whether knowingly or unknowingly. And so long
+as we co-operate with the Government, so long as we support that Government, we
+become to that extent sharers in the wrong. I admit that in ordinary
+circumstances a wise subject will tolerate the wrongs of a Government, but a
+wise subject never tolerates a wrong that a Government imposes on the declared
+will of a people. And I venture to submit to this great meeting that the
+Government of India and the Imperial Government have done a double wrong to
+India, and if we are a nation of self-respecting people conscious of its
+dignity, conscious of its right, it is not just and proper that we should stand
+the double humiliation that the Government has heaped upon us. By shaping and
+by becoming a predominant partner in the peace terms imposed on the helpless
+Sultan of Turkey, the Imperial Government have intentionally flouted the
+cherished sentiment of the Mussalman subjects of the Empire. The present Prime
+Minister gave a deliberate pledge after consultation with his colleagues when
+it was necessary for him to conciliate the Mussalmans of India. I claim to have
+studied this Khilafat question in a special manner. I claim to understand the
+Mussalman feeling on the Khilafat question and I am here to declare for the
+tenth time that on the Khilafat matter the Government has wounded the Mussalman
+sentiment as they had never done before. And I say without fear of
+contradiction that if the Mussalmans of India had not exercised great
+self-restraint and if there was not the gospel of non-co-operation preached to
+them and if they had not accepted it, there would have been bloodshed in India
+by this time. I am free to confess that spilling of blood would not have
+availed their cause. But a man who is in a state of rage whose heart has become
+lacerated does not count the cost of his action. So much for the Khilafat
+wrong.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I propose to take you for a minute to the Punjab, the northern end of India.
+And what have both Governments done for the Punjab? I am free to confess again
+that the crowds in Amritsar went mad for a moment. They were goaded to madness
+by a wicked administration. But no madness on the part of a people can justify
+the shedding of innocent blood, and what have they paid for it? I venture to
+submit that no civilised Government could ever have made the people pay the
+penalty and retribution that they have paid. Innocent men were tried through
+mock-tribunals and imprisoned for life. Amnesty granted to them after; I count
+of no consequence. Innocent, unarmed men, who knew nothing of what was to
+happen, were butchered in cold blood without the slightest notice. Modesty of
+women in Manianwalla, women who had done no wrong to any individual, was
+outraged by insolent officers. I want you to understand what I mean by outrage
+of their modesty. Their veils were opened with his stick by an officer. Men who
+were declared to be utterly innocent by the Hunter Committee were made to crawl
+on their bellies. And all these wrongs totally undeserved remain unavenged. If
+it was the duty of the Government of India to punish those who were guilty of
+incendiarism and murder, as I hold it was their duty, it was doubly their duty
+to punish officers who insulted and oppressed innocent people. But in the face
+of these official wrongs we have the debate in the house of lords supporting
+official terrorism, it is this double wrong, the affront to Islam and the
+injury to the manhood of the Punjab, that we feel bound to wipe out by
+non-co-operation. We have prayed, petitioned, agitated, we have passed
+resolutions. Mr. Mahomed Ali supported by his friends is now waiting on the
+British public. He has pleaded the cause of Islam in a most manful manner, but
+his pleading has fallen on deaf ears and we have his word for it that whilst
+France and Italy have shown great sympathy for the cause of Islam, it is the
+British Ministers who have shown no sympathy. This shows which way the British
+Ministers and the present holders of office in India mean to deal by the
+people. There is no goodwill, there is no desire to placate the people of
+India. The people of India must therefore have a remedy to redress the double
+wrong. The method of the west is violence. Wherever the people of the west have
+felt a wrong either justly or unjustly, they have rebelled and shed blood. As I
+have said in my letter to the Viceroy of India, half of India does not believe
+in the remedy of violence. The other half is too weak to offer it. But the
+whole of India is deeply hurt and stirred by this wrong, and it is for that
+reason that I have suggested to the people of India the remedy of
+non-co-operation. I consider it perfectly harmless, absolutely constitutional
+and yet perfectly efficacious. It is a remedy in which, if it is properly
+adopted, victory is certain, and it is the age-old remedy of self-sacrifice.
+Are the Mussalmans of India who feel the great wrong done to Islam ready to
+make an adequate self-sacrifice? All the scriptures of the world teach us that
+there can be no compromise between justice and injustice. Co-operation on the
+part of a justice-loving man with an unjust man is a crime. And if we desire to
+compel this great Government to the will of the people, as we must, we must
+adopt this great remedy of non-co-operation. And if the Mussalmans of India
+offer non-co-operation to Government in order to secure justice in the Khilafat
+matter, I believe it is duty of the Hindus to help them so long as their moans
+are just. I consider the eternal friendship between the Hindus and Mussalmans
+is more important than the British connection. I would prefer any day anarchy
+and chaos in India to an armed peace brought about by the bayonet between the
+Hindus and Mussalmans. I have therefore ventured to suggest to my Hindu
+brethren that if they wanted to live at peace with Mussalmans, there is an
+opportunity which is not going to recur for the next hundred years. And I
+venture to assure you that if the Government of India and the Imperial
+Government come to know that there is a determination on the part of the people
+to redress this double wrong they would not hesitate to do what is needed. But
+in the Mussalmans of India will have to take the lead in the matter. You will
+have to commence the first stage of non-co-operation in right earnest. And if
+you may not help this Government, you may not receive help from it. Titles
+which were the other day titles of honour are to-day in my opinion badges of
+our disgrace. We must therefore surrender all titles of honour, all honorary
+offices. It will constitute an emphatic demonstration of the disapproval by the
+leaders of the people of the acts of the Government. Lawyers must suspend their
+practice and must resist the power of the Government which has chosen to flout
+public opinion. Nor may we receive instruction from schools controlled by
+Government and aided by it. Emptying of the schools will constitute a
+demonstration of the will of the middle class of India. It is far better for
+the nation even to neglect the literary instruction of the children than to
+co-operate with a Government that has striven to maintain an injustice and
+untruth on the Khilafat and Punjab matters. Similarly have I ventured to
+suggest a complete boycott of reformed councils. That will be an emphatic
+declaration of the part of the representatives of the people that they do not
+desire to associate with the Government so long as the two wrongs continue. We
+must equally decline to offer ourselves as recruits for the police or the
+military. It is impossible for us to go to Mesopotamia or to offer to police
+that country or to offer military assistance and to help the Government in that
+blood guiltiness. The last plank in the first stage is Swadeshi. Swadeshi is
+intended not so much to bring pressure upon the Government as to demonstrate
+the capacity for sacrifice on the part of the men and women of India. When
+one-fourth of India has its religion at stake and when the whole of India has
+its honour at stake, we can be in no mood to bedeck ourselves with French
+calico or silks from Japan. We must resolve to be satisfied with cloth woven by
+the humble weavers of India in their own cottages out of yarn spun by their
+sisters in their own homes. When a hundred years ago our tastes were not
+debased and we were not lured by all the fineries from the foreign countries,
+we were satisfied with the cloth produced by the men and women in India, and if
+I could but in a moment revolutionize the tastes of India and make it return to
+its original simplicity, I assure you that the Gods would descent to rejoice at
+the great act of renunciation. That is the first stage in non-co-operation. I
+hope it is as easy for you as it is easy for me to see that if India is capable
+of taking the first step in anything like a full measure that step will bring
+the redress we want. I therefore do not intend to take you to the other stages
+of non-co-operation. I would like you to rivet your attention upon the plans in
+the first stage. You will have noticed that but two things are necessary in
+going through the first stage: (1) Prefect spirit of non-violence is
+indispensable for non-co-operation, (2) only a little self-sacrifice, I pray to
+God that He will give the people of India sufficient courage and wisdom and
+patience to go through this experiment of non-co-operation. I think you for the
+great reception that you have given us. And I also thank you for the great
+patience and exemplary silence with which you have listened to my remarks.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August</i> 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MANGALORE</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Chairman and friends,—To my brother Shaukat Ali and me it was a pleasure to
+go through this beautiful garden of India. The great reception that you gave us
+this afternoon, and this great assembly are most welcome to us, if they are a
+demonstration of your sympathy with the cause which you have the honour to
+represent. I assure you that we have not undertaken this incessant travelling
+in order to have receptions and addresses, no matter how cordial they may be.
+But we have undertaken this travelling throughout the length and breadth of
+this dear Motherland to place before you the position that faces us to-day. It
+is our privilege, as it is our duty, to place that position before the country
+and let her make the choice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Throughout our tour we have received many addresses, but in my humble opinion
+no address was more truly worded than the address that was presented to us at
+Kasargod. It addressed both of us as ‘dear revered brothers.’ I am unable to
+accept the second adjective ‘revered.’ The word ‘dear’ is dear to me I must
+confess. But dearer than that is the expression ‘brothers.’ The signatories to
+that address recognized the true significance of this travel. No blood brothers
+can possibly be more intimately related, can possibly be more united in one
+purpose, one aim than my brother Shaukat Ali and I. And I considered it a proud
+privilege and honour to be addressed as blood brother to Shaukat Ali. The
+contents of that address were as equally significant. It stated that in our
+united work was represented the essence of the unity between the Mussalmans and
+Hindus in India. If we two cannot represent that very desirable unity, if we
+two cannot cement the relation between the two communities, I do not know who
+can. Then without any rhetoric and without any flowery language the address
+went on to describe the inwardness of the Punjab and the Khilafat struggle; and
+then in simple and beautiful language it described the spiritual significance
+of Satyagrah and Non-co-operation. This was followed by a frank and simple
+promise. Although the signatories to the address realised the momentous nature
+of the struggle on which we have embarked, and although they sympathise with
+the struggle with their whole heart, they wound up by saying that even if they
+could not follow non-co-operation in all its details, they would do as much as
+they could to help the struggle. And lastly, in eloquent, and true language,
+they said ‘if we cannot rise equal to the occasion it will not be due to want
+of effort but to want of ability.’ I can desire no better address, no better
+promise, and if you, the citizens of Mangalore, can come up to the level of the
+signatories, and give us just the assurance that you consider the struggle to
+be right and that it commands your entire approval, I am certain you will make
+all sacrifice that lies in your power. For we are face to face with a peril
+greater than plagues, greater than influenza, greater than earthquakes and
+mighty floods, which sometimes overwhelm this land. These physical calamities
+can rob us of so many Indian bodies. But the calamity that has at the present
+moment overtaken India touches the religious honour of a fourth of her children
+and the self-respect of the whole nation. The Khilafat wrong affects the
+Mussalmans of India, and the Punjab calamity very nearly overwhelms the manhood
+of India. Shall we in the face of this danger be weak or rise to our full
+height. The remedy for both the wrongs is the spiritual solvent of
+non-co-operation. I call it a spiritual weapon, because it demands discipline
+and sacrifice from us. It demands sacrifice from every individual irrespective
+of the rest. And the promise that is behind this performance of duty, the
+promise given by every religion that I have studied is sure and certain. It is
+that there is no spotless sacrifice that has been yet offered on earth, which
+has not carried with it its absolute adequate reward. It is a spiritual weapon,
+because it waits for no mandate from anybody except one’s own conscience. It is
+a spiritual weapon, because it brings out the best in the nation and it
+absolutely satisfies individual honour if a single individual takes it, and it
+will satisfy national honour if the whole nation takes it up. And therefore it
+is that I have called non-co-operation in opposition to the opinion of many of
+my distinguished countrymen and leaders—a weapon that is infallible and
+absolutely practicable. It is infallible and practicable, because it satisfies
+the demands of individual conscience. God above cannot, will not expect Maulana
+Shaukat Ali to do more than he has been doing, for he has surrendered and
+placed at the disposal of God whom he believes to be the Almighty ruler of
+everyone, he has delivered all in the service of God. And we stand before the
+citizens of Mangalore and ask them to make their choice either to accept this
+precious gift that we lay at their feet or to reject it. And after having
+listened to my message if you come to the come to the conclusion that you have
+no other remedy than non-co-operation for the conservation of Islam and the
+honour of India, you will accept that remedy. I ask you not to be confused by
+so many bewildering issues that are placed before you, nor to be shaken from
+your purpose because you see divided counsels amongst your leaders. This is one
+of the necessary limitations of any spiritual or any other struggle that has
+ever been fought on this earth. It is because it comes so suddenly that it
+confuses the mind if the heart is not tuned properly. And we would be perfect
+human beings on this earth if in all of us was found absolutely perfect
+correspondence between the mind and the heart. But those of you who have been
+following the newspaper controversy, will find that no matter what division of
+opinion exists amongst our journals and leaders there is unanimity that the
+remedy is efficacious if it can be kept free from violence, and if it is
+adopted on a large scale. I admit the difficulty the virtue however lies in
+surmounting it. We cannot possibly combine violence with a spiritual weapon
+like non-co-operation. We do not offer spotless sacrifice if we take the lives
+of others in offering our own. Absolute freedom from violence is therefore it
+condition precedent to non-co-operation. But I have faith in my country to know
+that when it has assimilated the principle of the doctrine In the fullest
+extent, it will respond to it. And in no case will India make any headway
+whatsoever until she has learnt the lesson of self-sacrifice. Even if this
+country were to take up the doctrine of the sword, which God forbid, it will
+have to learn the lesson of self-sacrifice. The second difficulty suggested is
+the want of solidarity of the nation. I accept it too. But that difficulty I
+have already answered by saying that it is a remedy that can be taken up by
+individuals for individual and by the nation for national satisfaction; and
+therefore even if the whole nation does not take up non-co-operation, the
+individual successes, which may be obtained by individuals taking up
+non-co-operation will stand to their own credit as of the nation to which they
+belong.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first stage in my humble opinion is incredibly easy inasmuch as it does not
+involve any very great sacrifice. If your Khan bahadurs and other title-holders
+were to renounce their titles I venture to submit that whilst the renunciation
+will stand to the credit and honour of the nation it will involve a little or
+no sacrifice. On the contrary, they will not only have surrendered no earthly
+riches but they will have gained the applause of the nation. Let us see what it
+means, this first step. The able editor of <i>Hindu</i>, Mr. Kastariranga
+Iyengar, and almost every journalist in the country are agreed that the
+renunciation of titles is a necessary and a desirable step. And if these chosen
+people of the Government were without exception to surrender their titles to
+Government giving notice that the heart of India is doubly wounded in that the
+honour of India and of muslim religion is at stake and that therefore they can
+no longer retain their titles, I venture to suggest, that this their step which
+costs not a single penny either to them or to the nation will be an effective
+demonstration of the national will.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Take the second step or the second item of non-co-operation. I know there is
+strong opposition to the boycott of councils. The opposition when you begin to
+analyse it means not that the step is faulty or that it is not likely to
+succeed, but it is due to the belief that the whole country will not respond to
+it and that the Moderates will steal into the councils. I ask the citizens of
+Mangalore to dispel that fear from your hearts. United the voters of Mangalore
+can make it impossible for either a moderate or an extremist or any other form
+of leader to enter the councils as your representative. This step involves no
+sacrifice of money, no sacrifice of honour but the gaining of prestige for the
+whole nation. And I venture to suggest to you that this one step alone if it is
+taken with any degree of unanimity even by the extremists can bring about the
+desired relief, but if all do not respond the individual need not be afraid. He
+at least will have laid the foundation for true self progress, let him have the
+comfort that he at least has washed his hands clean of the guilt of the
+Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Then I come to the members of the profession which one time I used to carry on.
+I have ventured to ask the lawyers of India to suspend their practice and
+withdraw their support from a Government which no longer stands for justice,
+pure and unadulterated, for the nation. And the step is good for the individual
+lawyer who takes it and is good for the nation if all the lawyers take it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And so for the Government and the Government aided schools, I must confess that
+I cannot reconcile my conscience to my children going to Government schools and
+to the programme of non-co-operation is intended to withdraw all support from
+Government, and to decline all help from it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I will not tax your patience by taking you through the other items of
+non-co-operation important as they are. But I have ventured to place before you
+four very important and forcible steps any one of which if fully taken up
+contains in it possibilities of success. Swadeshi is preached as an item of
+non-co-operation, as a demonstration of the spirit of sacrifice, and it is an
+item which every man, woman and child can take up.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August</i> 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT BEZWADA</h3>
+
+<p>
+As I said this morning one essential condition for the progress of India is
+Hindu-Muslim Unity. I understand that there was a little bit of bickering
+between Hindus and Mussalmans to-day in Bezwada. My brother Maulana Shaukat Ali
+adjusted the dispute between the two communities and he illustrated in his own
+person the entire efficacy of one item in the first stage of Non-co-operation.
+He sat without any vakils appearing before him for either parties to arbitrate
+on the dispute between them. He required no postponement for the consideration
+of the question from time to time. His fees consisted in a broken lead pencil.
+That is what we should do, if all the lawyers suspended practice and set up
+arbitration for the settlement of private disputes. But why was there any
+quarrel at all? It is laughable in the extreme when you come to think of it.
+Because the Hindus seem to have played music whilst passing the mosque. I think
+it was improper for them to do so. Hindu Moslem Unity does not mean that Hindus
+should cease to respect the prejudices and sentiments cherished by Mussalmans.
+And as this question of music has given rise to many a quarrel between the two
+communities it behoves the Hindus, if they want to cultivate true Hindu-Moslem
+Unity, to refrain from acts which they know injure the sentiments of their
+Mussalman brethren. We may not take undue advantage of the great spirit of
+toleration that is developing in Mussalmans and do things likely to irritate
+them. It is never a matter of principle for a Hindu procession to continue
+playing music before mosques. And now that we desire voluntarily to respect
+Mussalman sentiment, we should be doubly careful at a time when Hindus are
+offering assistance to Mussalmans in their troubles. That assistance should be
+given in all humility and without any arrogation of rights. To my Mussalman
+brethren I would say that it would become their dignity to restrain themselves
+and not feel irritated when any Hindu had done anything to irritate their
+religious sentiment. But in any event, you have today presented to you a remedy
+for the settlement of any such issue. We must settle our disputes by
+arbitration as was done this after-noon. You cannot always get a Moulana
+Shankat Ali, exercising unrivalled influence on the community. But we can
+always get people enough in our own villages, towns and districts who exercise
+influence over such villages and towns and command the confidence of both the
+communities. The offended party should consider it its duty to approach them
+and not to take the law in its own hands.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It gives me much pleasure to announce to you that, Mr. Kaleswar Rao has
+consented to refrain from standing for election to the new Legislative
+Councils. You will be also pleased to know that Mr. Gulam Nohiuddin has
+resigned his Honorary Magistrateship, I hope that both these patriots will not
+consider that they have done their last duty by their acts of renunciation, but
+I hope they will regard their acts as a prelude to acts of greater purpose and
+greater energy and I hope they will take in hand the work of educating the
+electorate in their districts regarding boycott of councils. I have said
+elsewhere that never for another century will India be faced with a conjunction
+of events that faces it to-day. The cloud that has descended upon Islam has
+solidified the Moslem world as nothing else could have. It has awakened the men
+and women of Mussulman India from their deep sleep. Inasmuch as a single
+Panjabi was made to crawl on his belly in the famous street of Amitsar, I hold
+that the whole of was made to crawl on its belly. And if we want to straighten
+up ourselves from that crawling position and stand erect before the whole
+world, it requires, a tremendous effort. H.E. the Viceroy in his Viceregal
+pronouncement at the opening of the Council was pleased to say that he did not
+desire to make any remarks on the Punjab events. He treated them as a closed
+chapter and referred us to the future verdict of history. I venture to tell you
+the citizens of Bezwada that India will have deserved to crawl in that lane if
+she accepts this pronouncement as the final answer, and if we want to stand
+erect before the whole world, it is impossible for a single child, man or woman
+in India to rest until fullest reparation has been done for the Punjab wrong.
+Similarly with reference to the Khilafat grievance the Mussalmans of India in
+my humble opinion will forfeit all title to consider themselves the followers
+of the great Prophet in whose name they recite the Kalama, day in and day out,
+they will forfeit their title if they do not put their shoulders to the wheel
+and lift this cloud that is hanging on them. But we shall make a serious
+blunder. India will commit suicide, if we do not understand and appreciate the
+forces that are arrayed against us. We have got to face a mighty Government
+with all its power ranged against us. This composed of men who are able,
+courageous, capable of making sacrifices. It is a Government which does not
+scruple to use means, fair or foul, in order to gain its end. No craft is above
+that Government. It resorts to frightfulness, terrorism. It resorts to bribery,
+in the shape of titles, honour and high offices. It administers opiates in the
+shape of Reforms. In essence then it is an autocracy double distilled in the
+guise of democracy. The greatest gift of a crafty cunning man are worthless so
+long as cunning resides in his heart. It is a Government representing a
+civilisation which is purely material and godless. I have given to you these
+qualities of this government in order not to excite your angry passions, but in
+order that you may appreciate the forces that are matched against you. Anger
+will serve no purpose. We shall have to meet ungodliness by godliness. We shall
+have to meet their untruth by truth; we shall have to meet their cunning and
+their craft by openness and simplicity; we shall have to meet their terrorism
+and frightfulness by bravery. And it is an unbending bravery which is demanded
+of every man, woman and child. We must meet their organisation by greater
+organising ability. We must meet their discipline by grater discipline, and we
+must meet their sacrifices by infinitely greater sacrifices, and if we are in a
+position to show these qualities in a full measure I have not the slightest
+doubt that we shall win this battle. If really we have fear of God in us, our
+prayers will give us the strength to secure victory. God has always come to the
+help of the helpless and we need not go before any earthly power for help.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You heard this morning of the bravery of the sword, and the bravery of
+suffering. For me personally I have forever rejected the bravery of the sword.
+But, to-day it is not my purpose to demonstrate to you the final
+ineffectiveness of the sword. But he who runs may see that before India
+possesses itself a sword which will be more than a match for the forces of
+Europe, it will he generations. India may resort to the destruction of life and
+property here and there but such destructive cases serve no purpose. I have
+therefore presented to you a weapon called the bravery of suffering, otherwise
+called Non-co-operation. It is a bravery which is open to the weakest among the
+weak. It is open to women and children. The power of suffering is the
+prerogative of nobody, and if only 300 millions of Indians could show the power
+of suffering in order to redress a grievous wrong done to the nation or to its
+religion, I make bold to say that, India will never require to draw the sword.
+And unless we are able to show an adequate measure of sacrifice we shall lose
+this battle. No one need tell me that India has not got this power of
+suffering. Every father and mother is witness to what i am about to say, viz.,
+that every father and mother have shown in the domestic affairs matchless power
+of suffering. And if we have only developed national consciousness, if we have
+developed sufficient regard for our religion, we shall have developed power of
+suffering in the national and religious field. Considered in these terms the
+first stage in Non-co-operation is the simplest and the easiest state. If the
+title-holders of India consider that India is suffering from a grievous wrong
+both as regards the Punjab and the Khilafat is it any suffering on their part
+to renounce their titles to-day? What is the measure of the suffering awaiting
+the lawyers who are called upon to suspend practice when compared to the great
+benefit which is in store for the nation? And if thy parents of India will
+summon up courage to sacrifice secular education, they will have given their
+children the real education of a life-time. For they will have learnt the value
+of religion and national honour. And I ask you, the citizens of Bezwada, to
+think well before you accept the loaves and fishes in the form of Government
+offices set them on one side and set national honour on the other and make your
+service. What sacrifice is there involved in the individual renouncing his
+candidature for legislative councils. The councils are a tempting bait. All
+kinds of arguments are being advanced in favour of joining the councils. India
+will sacrifice the opportunity of gaining her liberty if she touches them. It
+passes comprehension how we, who have known this Government, who have read the
+Viceregal pronouncement, how we who have known their determination not to give
+justice in the Punjab and the Khilafat matters, can gain any benefit by
+co-operation, constructive or obstructive, with this Government? But the
+Nationalists, belonging to a great popular party, tell us that if they do not
+contest these scats, the moderates will get in. Surely, it is nothing but an
+exhibition of want of courage and faith in our own cause to feel that we must
+enter the councils lest moderates should get in. Moderates believe in the
+possibility of obtaining justice at the hands of the Government. Nationalists
+have on the other hand filled the platforms with denunciations of the
+Government and its measures. How can the Nationalists ever hope to gain
+anything by entering the councils, holding the belief that they do? They will
+better represent the popular will if they wring justice from the Government by
+means of Non-co-operation. A calculating spirit at the present moment in the
+history of India will prove its ruin. I, therefore, tender my hearty
+congratulation to those who have announced their resignations of candidature or
+honorary offices, and I hope that their example will prove infectious. I have
+been told, and I believe it myself from what I have seen, that the Andhrus are
+a brave, courageous and spiritually-inclined people. I venture therefore to ask
+my Andhra brethren whether they have understood the spirituality of this
+beautiful doctrine of Non-co-operation. If they have, I hope they will not wait
+for a single moment for a mandate from the Congress or the Moslem League. They
+will understand that a spiritual weapon is god whether it is wielded by one or
+many. I, therefore, invite you to go to Calcutta with a united will and a
+united purpose, sanctified by a spirit of sacrifice, with a will of your own to
+convert those who are still undecided about the spirituality or the
+practicability of the weapon.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I thank you for the attention and patience with which you have listened to me.
+I pray to the Almighty that He may give you wisdom and courage that are so
+necessary at the present moment.—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>August 1920</i>.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE CONGRESS</h3>
+
+<p>
+The largest and the most important Congress ever held has come and gone, It was
+the biggest demonstration ever held against the present system of Government.
+The President uttered the whole truth when he said that it was a Congress in
+which, instead of the President and the leaders driving the people, the people
+drove him and the latter. It was clear to every one on the platform that the
+people had taken the reins in their own hands. The platform would gladly have
+moved at a slower pace.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Congress gave one day to a full discussion of the creed and voted solidly
+for it with but two dissentients after two nights’ sleep over the discussion.
+It gave one day to a discussion of non-co-operation resolution and voted for it
+with unparalleled enthusiasm. It gave the last day to listening to the whole of
+the remaining thirty-two Articles of the Constitution which were read and
+translated word for word by Maulana Mahomed Ali in a loud and clear voice. It
+showed that it was intelligently following the reading of it, for there was
+dissent when Article Eight was reached. It referred to non-interference by the
+Congress in the internal affairs of the Native States. The Congress would not
+have passed the proviso if it had meant that it could even voice the feelings
+of the people residing in the territories ruled by the princes. Happily it
+resolution suggesting the advisability of establishing Responsible Government
+in their territories enabled me to illustrate to the audience that the proviso
+did not preclude the Congress from ventilating the grievances and aspirations
+of the subjects of these states, whilst it clearly prevented the Congress from
+taking any executive action in connection with them; as for instance holding a
+hostile demonstration in the Native States against any action of theirs. The
+Congress claims to dictate to the Government but it cannot do so by the very
+nature of its constitution in respect of the Native States.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus the Congress has taken three important steps after the greatest
+deliberation. It has expressed its determination in the clearest possible terms
+to attain complete null-government, if possible still in association with the
+British people, but even without, if necessary. It proposes to do so only by
+means that are honourable and non-violent. It has introduced fundamental
+changes in the constitution regulating its activities and has performed an act
+of self-denial in voluntarily restricting the number of delegates to one for
+every fifty thousand of the population of India and has insisted upon the
+delegates being the real representatives of those who want to take any part in
+the political life of the country. And with a view to ensuring the
+representation of all political parties it has accepted the principle of
+“single transferable vote.” It has reaffirmed the non-co-operation resolution
+of the Special Session and amplified it in every respect. It has emphasised the
+necessity of non-violence and laid down that the attainment of Swaraj is
+conditional upon the complete harmony between the component parts of India, and
+has therefore inculcated Hindu-Muslim unity. The Hindu delegates have called
+upon their leaders to settle disputes between Brahmins and non-Brahmins and
+have urged upon the religious heads the necessity of getting rid of the poison
+of untouchability. The Congress has told the parents of school-going children,
+and the lawyers that they have not responded sufficiently to the call of the
+nation and that they must make greater effort in doing so. It therefore follows
+that the lawyers who do not respond quickly to the call for suspension and the
+parents who persist in keeping their children in Government and aided
+institutions must find themselves dropping out from the public life of the
+country. The country calls upon every man and woman in India to do their full
+share. But of the details of the non-co-operation resolution I must write
+later.
+</p>
+
+<h3>WHO IS DISLOYAL?</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Montagu has discovered a new definition of disloyalty. He considers my
+suggestion to boycott the visit of the Prince of Wales to be disloyal and some
+newspapers taking the cue from him have called persons who have made the
+suggestion ‘unmannerly’. They have even attributed to these ‘unmannerly’
+persons the suggestion of boycotting the Prince. I draw a sharp and fundamental
+distinction between boycotting the Prince and boycotting any welcome arranged
+for him. Personally I would extend the heartiest welcome to His Royal Highness
+if he came or could come without official patronage and the protecting wings of
+the Government of the day. Being the heir to a constitutional monarch, the
+Prince’s movements are regulated and dictated by the ministers, no matter how
+much the dictation may be concealed beneath diplomatically polite language. In
+suggesting the boycott therefore the promoters have suggested boycott of an
+insolent bureaucracy and dishonest ministers of his Majesty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You cannot have it both ways. It is true that under a constitutional monarchy,
+the royalty is above politics. But you cannot send the Prince on a political
+visit for the purpose of making political capital out of him, and then complain
+that those who will not play your game and in order to checkmate you, proclaim
+boycott of the Royal visit do not know constitutional usage. For the Prince’s
+visit is not for pleasure. His Royal Highness is to come in Mr. Lloyd George’s
+words, as the “ambassador of the British nation,” in other words, his own
+ambassador in order to issue a certificate of merit to him and possibly to give
+the ministers a new lease of life. The wish is designed to consolidate and
+strengthen a power that spells mischief for India. Even us it is, Mr. Montagu
+has foreseen, that the welcome will probably be excelled by any hitherto
+extended to Royalty, meaning that the people are not really and deeply affected
+and stirred by the official atrocities in the Punjab and the manifestly
+dishonest breach of official declarations on the Khilafat. With the knowledge
+that India was bleeding at heart, the Government of India should have told His
+Majesty’s ministers that the moment was inopportune for sending the Prince. I
+venture to submit that it is adding insult to injury to bring the Prince and
+through his visit to steal honours and further prestige for a Government that
+deserves to be dismissed with disgrace. I claim that I prove my loyalty by
+saying that India is in no mood, is too deeply in mourning, to take part in and
+to welcome His Royal Highness, and that the ministers and the Indian Government
+show their disloyalty by making the Prince a catspaw of their deep political
+game. If they persist, it is the clear duty of India to have nothing to do with
+the visit.
+</p>
+
+<h3>CRUSADE AGAINST NON-CO-OPERATION</h3>
+
+<p>
+I have most carefully read the manifesto addressed by Sir Narayan Chandavarkar
+and others dissuading the people from joining the non co-operation movement. I
+had expected to find some solid argument against non-co-operation, but to my
+great regret I have found in it nothing but distortion (no doubt unconscious)
+of the great religions and history. The manifesto says that ‘non-co-operation
+is deprecated by the religious tenets and traditions of our motherland, nay, of
+all the religions that have saved and elevated the human race.’ I venture to
+submit that the Bhagwad Gita is a gospel of non-co-operation between forces of
+darkness and those of light. If it is to be literally interpreted Arjun
+representing a just cause was enjoined to engage in bloody warfare with the
+unjust Kauravas. Tulsidas advises the Sant (the good) to shun the Asant (the
+evil-doers). The Zendavesta represents a perpetual dual between Ormuzd and
+Ahriman, between whom there is no compromise. To say of the Bible that it
+taboos non-co-operation is not to know Jesus, a Prince among passive resisters,
+who uncompromisingly challenged the might of the Sadducees and the Pharisees
+and for the sake of truth did not hesitate to divide sons from their parents.
+And what did the Prophet of Islam do? He non-co-operated in Mecca in a most
+active manner so long as his life was not in danger and wiped the dust of Mecca
+off his feet when he found that he and his followers might have uselessly to
+perish, and fled to Medina and returned when he was strong enough to give
+battle to his opponents. The duty of non-co-operation with unjust men and kings
+is as strictly enjoined by all the religions as is the duty of co-operation
+with just men and kings. Indeed most of the scriptures of the world seem even
+to go beyond non-co-operation and prefer a violence to effeminate submission to
+a wrong. The Hindu religious tradition of which the manifesto speaks, clearly
+proves the duty of non-co-operation. Prahlad dissociated himself from his
+father, Meerabai from her husband, Bibhishan from his brutal brother.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The manifesto speaking of the secular aspect says, ‘The history of nations
+affords no instance to show that it (meaning non-co-operation) has, when
+employed, succeeded and done good,’ One most recent instance of brilliant
+success of non-co-operation is that of General Botha who boycotted Lord
+Milner’s reformed councils and thereby procured a perfect constitution for his
+country. The Dukhobours of Russia offered non-co-operation, and a handful
+though they were, their grievances so deeply moved the civilized world that
+Canada offered them a home where they form a prosperous community. In India
+instances can be given by the dozen, in which in little principalities the
+raiyats when deeply grieved by their chiefs have cut off all connection with
+them and bent them to their will. I know of no instance in history where
+well-managed non-co-operation has failed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Hitherto I have given historical instances of bloodless non-co-operation, I
+will not insult the intelligence of the reader by citing historical instances
+of non-co-operation combined with, violence, but I am free to confess that
+there are on record as many successes as failures in violent non-co-operation.
+And it is because I know this fact that I have placed before the country a
+non-violent scheme in which, if at all worked satisfactorily, success is a
+certainty and in which non-response means no harm. For if even one man
+non-co-operates, say, by resigning some office, he has gained, not lost. That
+is its ethical or religious aspect. For its political result naturally it
+requires polymerous support. I fear therefore no disastrous result from
+non-co-operation save for an outbreak of violence on the part of the people
+whether under provocation or otherwise. I would risk violence a thousand times
+than risk the emasculation of a whole race.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SPEECH AT MUZAFFARABAD</h3>
+
+<p>
+Before a crowded meeting of Mussalmans in the Muzaffarabad, Bombay, held on the
+29th July 1920, speaking on the impending non-co-operation which commenced on
+the 1st of August, Mr. Gandhi said: The time for speeches on non-co-operation
+was past and the time for practice had arrived. But two things were needful for
+complete success. An environment free from any violence on the part of the
+people and a spirit of self-sacrifice. Non-co-operation, as the speaker had
+conceived it, was an impossibility in an atmosphere surcharged with the spirit
+of violence. Violence was an exhibition of anger and any such exhibition was
+dissipation of valuable energy. Subduing of one’s anger was a storing up of
+national energy, which, when set free in an ordered manner, would produce
+astounding results. His conception of non-co-operation did not involve rapine,
+plunder, incendiarism and all the concomitants of mass madness. His scheme
+presupposed ability on their part to control all the forces of evil. If,
+therefore, any disorderliness was found on the part of the people which they
+could not control, he for one would certainly help the Government to control
+them. In the presence of disorder it would be for him a choice of evil, and
+evil through he considered the present Government to be, he would not hesitate
+for the time being to help the Government to control disorder. But he had faith
+in the people. He believed that they knew that the cause could only be won by
+non-violent methods. To put it at the lowest, the people had not the power,
+even if they had the will, to resist with brute strength the unjust Governments
+of Europe who had, in the intoxication of their success disregarding every
+canon of justice dealt so cruelly by the only Islamic Power in Europe.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In non-co-operation they had a matchless and powerful weapon. It was a sign of
+religious atrophy to sustain an unjust Government that supported an injustice
+by resorting to untruth and camouflage. So long therefore as the Government did
+not purge itself of the canker of injustice and untruth, it was their duty to
+withdraw all help from it consistently with their ability to preserve order in
+the social structure. The first stage of non-co-operation was therefore
+arranged so as to involve minimum of danger to public peace and minimum of
+sacrifice on the part of those who participated in the movement. And if they
+might not help an evil Government nor receive any favours from it, it followed
+that they must give up all titles of honour which were no longer a proud
+possession. Lawyers, who were in reality honorary officers of the Court, should
+cease to support Courts that uphold the prestige of an unjust Government and
+the people must be able to settle their disputes and quarrels by private
+arbitration. Similarly parents should withdraw their children from the public
+schools and they must evolve a system of national education or private
+education totally independent of the Government. An insolent Government
+conscious of its brute strength, might laugh at such withdrawals by the people
+especially as the Law courts and schools were supposed to help the people, but
+he had not a shadow of doubt that the moral effect of such a step could not
+possibly be lost even upon a Government whose conscience had become stifled by
+the intoxication of power.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He had hesitation in accepting Swadeshi as a plank in non-co-operation. To him
+Swadeshi was as dear as life itself. But he had no desire to smuggle in
+Swadeshi through the Khilafat movement, if it could not legitimately help that
+movement, but conceived as non-co-operation was, in a spirit of self-sacrifice,
+Swadeshi had a legitimate place in the movement. Pure Swadeshi meant sacrifice
+of the liking for fineries. He asked the nation to sacrifice its liking for the
+fineries of Europe and Japan and be satisfied with the coarse but beautiful
+fabrics woven on their handlooms out of yarns spun by millions of their
+sisters. If the nation had become really awakened to a sense of the danger to
+its religions and its self-respect, it could not but perceive the absolute and
+immediate necessity of the adoption of Swadeshi in its intense form and if the
+people of India adopted Swadeshi with the religious zeal he begged to assure
+them that its adoption would arm them with a new power and would produce an
+unmistakable impression throughout the whole world. He, therefore, expected the
+Mussalmans to give the lead by giving up all the fineries they were so fond of
+and adopt the simple cloth that could be produced by the manual labour of their
+sisters and brethren in their own cottages. And he hoped that the Hindus would
+follow suit. It was a sacrifice in which the whole nation, every man, woman and
+child could take part.
+</p>
+
+<h4>RIDICULE REPLACING REPRESSION</h4>
+
+<p>
+Had His Excellency the Viceroy not made it impossible by his defiant attitude
+on the Punjab and the Khilafat, I would have tendered him hearty
+congratulations for substituting ridicule for repression in order to kill a
+movement distasteful to him. For, torn from its context and read by itself His
+Excellency’s discourse on non-co-operation is unexceptionable. It is a symptom
+of translation from savagery to civilization. Pouring ridicule on one’s
+opponent is an approved method in civilised politics. And if the method is
+consistently continued, it will mark an important improvement upon the official
+barbarity of the Punjab. His interpretation of Mr. Montagu’s statement about
+the movement is also not open to any objection whatsoever. Without doubt a
+government has the right to use sufficient force to put down an actual outbreak
+of violence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I regret to have to confess that this attempt to pour ridicule on the
+movement, read in conjunction with the sentiments on the Punjab and the
+Khilafat, preceding the ridicule, seems to show that His Excellency has made it
+a virtue of necessity. He has not finally abandoned the method of terrorism and
+frightfulness, but he finds the movement being conducted in such an open and
+truthful manner that any attempt to kill it by violent repression would not
+expose him not only to ridicule but contempt of all right-thinking men.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let us however examine the adjectives used by His Excellency to kill the
+movement by laughing at it. It is ‘futile,’ ‘ill-advised,’ ‘intrinsically
+insane,’ ‘unpractical,’ ‘visionary.’ He has rounded off the adjectives by
+describing the movement as ‘most foolish of all foolish schemes.’ His
+Excellency has become so impatient of it that he has used all his vocabulary
+for showing the magnitude of the ridiculous nature of non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Unfortunately for His Excellency the movement is likely to grow with ridicule
+as it is certain to flourish on repression. No vital movement can be killed
+except by the impatience, ignorance or laziness of its authors. A movement
+cannot be ‘insane’ that is conducted by men of action as I claim the members of
+the Non-co-operation Committee are. It is hardly ‘unpractical,’ seeing that if
+the people respond, every one admits that it will achieve the end. At the same
+time it is perfectly true that if there is no response from the people, the
+movement will be popularly described as ‘visionary.’ It is for the nation to
+return an effective answer by organised non-co-operation and change ridicule
+into respect. Ridicule is like repression. Both give place to respect when they
+fail to produce the intended effect.
+</p>
+
+<h4>THE VICEREGAL PRONOUNCEMENT</h4>
+
+<p>
+It may be that having lost faith in His Excellency’s probity and capacity to
+hold the high office of Viceroy of India, I now read his speeches with a biased
+mind, but the speech His Excellency delivered at the time of opening of the
+council shows to me a mental attitude which makes association with him or his
+Government impossible for self-respecting men.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The remarks on the Punjab mean a flat refusal to grant redress. He would have
+us to ‘concentrate on the problems of the immediate future!’ The immediate
+future is to compel repentance on the part of the Government on the Punjab
+matter. Of this there is no sign. On the contrary, His Excellency resists the
+temptation to reply to his critics, meaning thereby that he has not changed his
+opinion on the many vital matters affecting the honour of India. He is ‘content
+to leave the issues to the verdict of history.’ Now this kind of language, in
+my opinion, is calculated further to inflame the Indian mind. Of what use can a
+favourable verdict of history be to men who have been wronged and who are still
+under the heels of officers who have shown themselves utterly unfit to hold
+offices of trust and responsibility? The plea for co-operation is, to say the
+least, hypocritical in the face of the determination to refuse justice to the
+Punjab. Can a patient who is suffering from an intolerable ache be soothed by
+the most tempting dishes placed before him? Will he not consider it mockery on
+the part of the physician who so tempted him without curing him of his pain?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+His Excellency is, if possible, even less happy on the Khilafat. “So far as any
+Government could,” says this trustee for the nation, “we pressed upon the Peace
+Conference the views of Indian Moslems. But notwithstanding our efforts on
+their behalf we are threatened with a campaign of non-co-operation because,
+forsooth, the allied Powers found themselves unable to accept the contentions
+advanced by Indian Moslems.” This is most misleading if not untruthful. His
+Excellency knows that the peace terms are not the work of the allied Powers. He
+knows that Mr. Lloyd George is the prime author of terms and that the latter
+has never repudiated his responsibility for them. He has with amazing audacity
+justified them in spite of his considered pledge to the Moslems of India
+regarding Constantinople, Thrace and the rich and renowned lands of Asia minor.
+It is not truthful to saddle responsibility for the terms on the allied Powers
+when Great Britain alone has promoted them. The offence of the Viceroy becomes
+greater when we remember that he admits the justness of the Muslim claim. He
+could not have ‘pressed’ it if he did not admit its justice.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I venture to think that His Excellency by his pronouncement on the Punjab has
+strengthened the nation in its efforts to seek a remedy to compel redress of
+the two wrongs before it can make anything of the so-called Reforms.
+</p>
+
+<h4>FROM RIDICULE, TO—?</h4>
+
+<p>
+It will be admitted that non-co-operation has passed the stage ridicule.
+Whether it will now be met by repression or respect remains to be seen. Opinion
+has already been expressed in these columns that ridicule is an approved and
+civilized method of opposition. The viceregal ridicule though expressed in
+unnecessarily impolite terms was not open to exception.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But the testing time has now arrived. In a civilized country when ridicule
+fails to kill a movement it begins to command respect. Opponents meet it by
+respectful and cogent argument and the mutual behaviour of rival parties never
+becomes violent. Each party seeks to convert the other or draw the uncertain
+element towards its side by pure argument and reasoning.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is little doubt now that the boycott of the councils will be extensive if
+it is not complete. The students have become disturbed. Important institutions
+may any day become truly national. Pandit Motilal Nehru’s great renunciation of
+a legal practice which was probably second to nobody’s is by itself an event
+calculated to change ridicule into respect. It ought to set people thinking
+seriously about their own attitude. There must be something very wrong about
+our Government—to warrant the step Pundit Motilal Nehru has taken. Post
+graduate students have given up their fellowships. Medical students have
+refused to appear for their final examination. Non-co-operation in these
+circumstances cannot be called an inane movement.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Either the Government must bend to the will of the people which is being
+expressed in no unmistakable terms through non-co-operation, or it must attempt
+to crush the movement by repression.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Any force used by a government under any circumstance is not repression. An
+open trial of a person accused of having advocated methods of violence is not
+repression. Every State has the right to put down or prevent violence by force.
+But the trial of Mr. Zafar Ali Khan and two Moulvis of Panipat shows that the
+Government is seeking not to put down or prevent violence but to suppress
+expression of opinion, to prevent the spread of disaffection. This is
+repression. The trials are the beginning of it. It has not still assumed a
+virulent form but if these trials do not result in stilling the propaganda, it
+is highly likely that severe repression will be resorted to by the Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The only other way to prevent the spread of disaffection is to remove the
+causes thereof. And that would be to respect the growing response of the
+country to the programme of non-co-operation. It is too much to expect
+repentance and humility from a government intoxicated with success and power.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We must therefore assume that the second stage in the Government programme will
+be repression growing in violence in the same ratio as the progress of
+non-co-operation. And if the movement survives repression, the day of victory
+of truth is near. We must then be prepared for prosecutions, punishments even
+up to deportations. We must evolve the capacity for going on with our programme
+without the leaders. That means capacity for self-government. And as no
+government in the world can possibly put a whole nation in prison, it must
+yield to its demand or abdication in favour of a government suited to that
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is clear that abstention from violence and persistence in the programme are
+our only and surest chance of attaining our end.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The government has its choice, either to respect the movement or to try to
+repress it by barbarous methods. Our choice is either to succumb to repression
+or to continue in spite of repression.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TO EVERY ENGLISHMAN IN INDIA</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dear Friend,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I wish that every Englishman will see this appeal and give thoughtful attention
+to it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Let me introduce myself to you. In my humble opinion no Indian has co-operated
+with the British Government more than I have for an unbroken period of
+twenty-nine years of public life in the face of circumstances that might well
+have turned any other man into a rebel. I ask you to believe me when I tell you
+that my co-operation was not based on the fear of the punishments provided by
+your laws or any other selfish motives. It was free and voluntary co-operation
+based on the belief that the sum total of the activity of the British
+Government was for the benefit of India. I put my life in peril four times for
+the sake of the Empire,—at the time of the Boer war when I was in charge of the
+Ambulance corps whose work was mentioned in General Buller’s dispatches, at the
+time of the Zulu revolt in Natal when I was in charge of a similar corps at the
+time of the commencement of the late war when I raised an Ambulance corps and
+as a result of the strenuous training had a severe attack of pleurisy, and
+lastly, in fulfilment of my promise to Lord Chelmsford at the War Conference in
+Delhi. I threw myself in such an active recruiting campaign in Kuira District
+involving long and trying marches that I had an attack of dysentry which proved
+almost fatal. I did all this in the full belief that acts such as mine must
+gain for my country an equal status in the Empire. So late as last December I
+pleaded hard for a trustful co-operation, I fully believed that Mr. Lloyd
+George would redeem his promise to the Mussalmans and that the revelations of
+the official atrocities in the Punjab would secure full reparation for the
+Punjabis. But the treachery of Mr. Lloyd George and its appreciation by you,
+and the condonation of the Punjab atrocities have completely shattered my faith
+in the good intentions of the Government and the nation which is supporting it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But though, my faith in your good intentions is gone, I recognise your bravery
+and I know that what you will not yield to justice and reason, you will gladly
+yield to bravery.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<i>See what this Empire means to India</i>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Exploitation of India’s resources for the benefit of Great Britain.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+An ever-increasing military expenditure, and a civil service the most expensive
+in the world.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Extravagant working of every department in utter disregard of India’s poverty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Disarmament and consequent emasculation of a whole nation lest an armed nation
+might imperil the lives of a handful of you in our midst. Traffic in
+intoxicating liquors and drugs for the purposes of sustaining a top heavy
+administration.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Progressively representative legislation in order to suppress an evergrowing
+agitation seeking to give expression to a nation’s agony.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Degrading treatment of Indians residing in your dominions, and
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You have shown total disregard of our feelings by glorifying the Punjab
+administration and flouting the Mosulman sentiment.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I know you would not mind if we could fight and wrest the sceptre form your
+hands. You know that we are powerless to do that, for you have ensured our
+incapacity to fight in open and honourable battle. Bravery on the battlefield
+is thus impossible for us. Bravery of the soul still remains open to us. I know
+you will respond to that also. I am engaged in evoking that bravery.
+Non-co-operation means nothing less than training in self-sacrifice. Why should
+we co-operate with you when we know that by your administration of this great
+country we are lifting daily enslaved in an increasing degree. This response of
+the people to my appeal is not due to my personality. I would like you to
+dismiss me, and for that matter the Ali Brothers too, from your consideration.
+My personality will fail to evoke any response to anti-Muslim cry if I were
+foolish enough to rise it, as the magic name of the Ali Brothers would fail to
+inspire the Mussalmans with enthusiasm if they were madly to raise in
+anti-Hindu cry. People flock in their thousands to listen to us because we
+to-day represent the voice of a nation groaning under iron heels. The Ali
+Brothers were your friends as I was, and still am. My religion forbids me to
+bear any ill-will towards you. I would not raise my hand against you even if I
+had the power. I expect to conquer you only by my suffering. The Ali Brothers
+will certainly draw the sword, if they could, in defence of their religion and
+their country. But they and I have made common cause with the people of India
+in their attempt to voice their feelings and to find a remedy for their
+distress.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You are in search of a remedy to suppress this rising ebullition of national
+feeling. I venture to suggest to you that the only way to suppress it is to
+remove the causes. You have yet the power. You can repent of the wrongs done to
+Indians. You can compel Mr. Lloyd George to redeem his promises. I assure you
+he has kept many escape doors. You can compel the Viceroy to retire in favour
+of a better one, you can revise your ideas about Sir Michael O’Dwyer and
+General Dyer. You can compel the Government to summon a conference of the
+recognised lenders of the people, duly elected by them and representing all
+shades of opinion so as to devise means for granting <i>Swaraj</i> in
+accordance with the wishes of the people of India. But this you cannot do
+unless you consider every Indian to be in reality your equal and brother. I ask
+for no patronage, I merely point out to you, as a friend, as honourable
+solution of a grave problem. The other solution, namely repression is open to
+YOU. I prophesy that it will fail. It has begun already. The Government has
+already imprisoned two brave men of Panipat for holding and expressing their
+opinions freely. Another is on his trial in Lahore for having expressed similar
+opinion. One in the Oudh District is already imprisoned. Another awaits
+judgment. You should know what is going on in your midst. Our propaganda is
+being carried on in anticipation of repression. I invite you respectfully to
+choose the better way and make common cause with the people of India whose salt
+you are eating. To seek to thwart their inspirations is disloyalty to the
+country.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am, Your faithful friend, M. K. GANDHI
+</p>
+
+<h3>ONE STEP ENOUGH FOR ME</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Stokes is a Christian, who wants to follow the light that God gives him. He
+has adopted India as his home. He is watching the non-co-operation movement
+from the Kotgarh hills where he is living in isolation from the India of the
+plains and serving the hillmen. He has contributed three articles on
+non-co-operation to the columns of the Servant of Calcutta and other papers. I
+had the pleasure of reading them during my Bengal tour. Mr. Stokes approves of
+non-co-operation but dreads the consequences that may follow complete success
+<i>i.e.,</i> evacuation of India by the British. He conjures up before his mind
+a picture of India invaded by the Afghans from the North-West, plundered by the
+Gurkhas from the Hills. For me I say with Cardinal Newman: ‘I do not ask to see
+the distant scene; one step enough for me.’ The movement is essentially
+religious. The business of every god-fearing man is to dissociate himself from
+evil in total disregard of consequences. He must have faith in a good deed
+producing only a good result: that in my opinion is the Gita doctrine of work
+without attachment. God does not permit him to peep into the future. He follows
+truth although the following of it may endanger his very life. He knows that it
+is better to die in the way of God than to live in the way of Satan. Therefore
+who ever is satisfied that this Government represents the activity of Satan has
+no choice left to him but to dissociate himself from it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+However, let us consider the worst that can happen to India on a sudden
+evacuation of India by the British. What does it matter that the Gurkhas and
+the Pathans attack us? Surely we would be better able to deal with their
+violence than we are with the continued violence, moral and physical,
+perpetrated by the present Government. Mr. Stokes does not seem to eschew the
+use of physical force. Surely the combined labour of the Rajput, the Sikh and
+the Mussalman warriors in a united India may be trusted to deal with plunderers
+from any or all the sides. Imagine however the worst: Japan overwhelming us
+from the Bay of Bengal, the Gurkhas from the Hills, and the Pathans from the
+North-West. If we not succeed in driving them out we make terms with them and
+drive them at the first opportunity. This will be a more manly course than a
+hopeless submission to an admittedly wrongful State.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I refuse to contemplate the dismal out-look. If the movement succeeds
+through non-violent non-co-operation, and that is the supposition Mr. Stokes
+has started with, the English whether they remain or retire, they will do so as
+friends and under a well-ordered agreement as between partners. I still believe
+in the goodness of human nature, whether it is English or any other. I
+therefore do not believe that the English will leave in a night.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And do I consider the Gurkha and the Afghan being incorrigible thieves and
+robbers without ability to respond to purifying influences? I do not. If India
+returns to her spirituality, it will react upon the neighbouring tribes, she
+will interest herself in the welfare of these hardy but poor people, and even
+support them if necessary, not out of fear but as a matter of neighbourly duty.
+She will have dealt with Japan simultaneously with the British. Japan will not
+want to invade India, if India has learnt to consider it a sin to use a single
+foreign article that she can manufacture within her own borders. She produces
+enough to eat and her men and women can without difficulty manufacture enough
+to clothe to cover their nakedness and protect themselves from heat and cold.
+We become prey to invasion if we excite the greed of foreign nation, by dealing
+with them under a feeling dependence on them. We must learn to be independent
+of every one of them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whether therefore we finally succeed through violence or non-violence in my
+opinion, the prospect is by no means so gloomy as Mr. Stokes has imagined. Any
+conceivable prospect is, in my opinion, less black than the present unmanly and
+helpless condition. And we cannot do better than following out fearlessly and
+with confidence the open and honourable programme of non-violence and sacrifice
+that we have mapped for ourselves.
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE NEED FOR HUMILITY</h3>
+
+<p>
+The spirit of non-violence necessarily leads to humility. Non-violence means
+reliance on God, the Rocks of ages. If we would seek His aid, we must approach
+Him with a humble and a contrite heart. Non-co-operationists may not trade upon
+their amazing success at the Congress. We must act, even as the mango tree
+which drops as it bears fruit. Its grandeur lies in its majestic lowliness. But
+one hears of non-co-operationists being insolent and intolerant in their
+behaviour towards those who differ from them. I know that they will lose all
+their majesty and glory, if they betray any inflation. Whilst we may not be
+dissatisfied with the progress made so far, we have little to our credit to
+make us feel proud. We have to sacrifice much more than we have done to justify
+pride, much less elation. Thousands, who flocked to the Congress pandal, have
+undoubtedly given their intellectual assent to the doctrine but few have
+followed it out in practice. Leaving aside the pleaders, how many parents have
+withdrawn their children from schools? How many of those who registered their
+vote in favour of non-co-operation have taken to hand-spinning or discarded the
+use of all foreign cloth?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Non-co-operation is not a movement of brag, bluster, or bluff. It is a test of
+our sincerity. It requires solid and silent self-sacrifice. It challenges our
+honesty and our capacity for national work. It is a movement that aims at
+translating ideas into action. And the more we do, the more we find that much
+more must be done than we have expected. And this thought of our imperfection
+must make us humble.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A non-co-operationist strives to compel attention and to set an example not by
+his violence but by his unobtrusive humility. He allows his solid action to
+speak for his creed. His strength lies in his reliance upon the correctness of
+his position. And the conviction of it grows most in his opponent when he least
+interposes his speech between his action and his opponent. Speech, especially
+when it is haughty, betrays want of confidence and it makes one’s opponent
+sceptical about the reality of the act itself. Humility therefore is the key to
+quick success. I hope that every non-co-operationist will recognise the
+necessity of being humble and self-restrained. It is because so little is
+really required to be done because all of that little depends entirely upon
+ourselves that I have ventured the belief that Swaraj is attainable in less
+than one year.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+“I write to thank you for yours of the 7th instant and especially for your
+request that I should after reading your writings in “Young India” on
+non-co-operation, give a full and frank criticism of them. I know that your
+sole desire is to find out the truth and to act accordingly, and hence I
+venture to make the following remarks. In the issue of May 5th you say that
+non-co-operation is “not even anti-Government.” But surely to refuse to have
+anything to do with the Government to the extent of not serving it and of not
+paying its taxes is actually, if not theoretically anti-Government; and such a
+course must ultimately make all Government impossible. Again, you say, “It is
+the inherent right of a subject to refuse to assist a government that will not
+listen to him.” Leaving aside the question of the ethical soundness of this
+proposition, may I ask which Government, in the present case? Has not the
+Indian Government done all it possibly can in the matter? Then if its attempts
+to voice the request of India should fail, would it be fair and just to do
+anything against it? Would not the proper course be non-co-operation with the
+Supreme Council of the Allies, including Great Britain, if it be found that the
+latter has failed properly to support the demand of the Indian Government and
+people? It seems to me that in all your writings and speeches you forget that
+in the present question both Government and people are as one, and if they fail
+to get what they justly want, how does the question of non-co-operation arise?
+Hindus and Englishmen and the Government are all at present “shouldering in a
+full-hearted manner the burden that Muhomedans of India are carrying etc. etc.”
+But supposing we fail of our object—what then? Are we all to refuse to
+co-operate and with whom?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Might I recommend the consideration of the following course of conduct?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) “Wait and see” what the actual terms of the Treaty with Turkey are?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) If they are not in accordance with the aspirations and recommendations of
+the Government and the people of India, the every legitimate effort should be
+made to have the terms revised.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) To the bitter end, co-operate with a Government that co-operates with us,
+and only when it refuses co-operation, go in for non-co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+So far I personally see no reason whatsoever for non-co-operation with the
+Indian Government, and till it fails to voice the needs and demands of India as
+a whole there can be no reason. The Indian Government does some times make
+mistakes, but in the Khilafat matter it is sound and therefore deserves or
+ought to have the sympathetic and whole-hearted co-operation of every one in
+India. I hope that you will kindly consider the above and perhaps you will be
+able to find time for a reply in <i>Young India</i>.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I gladly make room for the above letter and respond to the suggestion to give a
+public reply as no doubt the difficulty experienced by the English friend is
+experienced by many. Causes are generally lost, not owing to the determined
+opposition of men who will not see the truth as they want to perpetuate an
+injustice but because they are able to enlist in their favour the allegiance of
+those who are anxious to understand a particular cause and take sides after
+mature judgment. It is only by patient argument with such honest men that one
+is able to check oneself, correct one’s own errors of judgment and at times to
+wean them from their error and bring them over to one’s side. This Khilafat
+question is specially difficult because there are so many side-issues. It is
+therefore no wonder that many have more or less difficulty in making up their
+minds. It is further complicated because the painful necessity for some direct
+action has arisen in connection with it. But whatever the difficulty, I am
+convinced that there is no question so important as this one if we want harmony
+and peace in India.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My friend objects to my statement that non-co-operation is not anti-Government,
+because he considers that refusal to serve it and pay its taxes is actually
+anti-Government. I respectfully dissent from the view. If a brother has
+fundamental differences with his brother, and association with the latter
+involves his partaking of what in his opinion is an injustice. I hold that it
+is brotherly duty to refrain from serving his brother and sharing his earnings
+with him. This happens in everyday life. Prahalad did not act against his
+father, when he declined to associate himself with the latter’s blasphemies.
+Nor was Jesus anti-Jewish when he declaimed against the Pharisees and the
+hypocrites, and would have none of them. In such matters, is it not intention
+that determines the character of a particular act? It is hardly correct as the
+friend suggests that withdrawal of association under general circumstances
+would make all government impossible. But it is true that such withdrawal would
+make all injustice impossible.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+My correspondent considers that the Government of India having done all it
+possibly could, non-co-operation could not be applicable to that Government. In
+my opinion, whilst it is true that the Government of India has done a great
+deal, it has not done half as much as it might have done, and might even now
+do. No Government can absolve itself from further action beyond protesting,
+when it realises that the people whom it represents feel as keenly as do lakhs
+of Indian Mussalmans in the Khilafat question. No amount of sympathy with a
+starving man can possibly avail. He must have bread or he dies, and what is
+wanted at that critical moment is some exertion to fetch the wherewithal to
+feed the dying man. The Government of India can to-day heed the agitation and
+ask, to the point of insistence for full vindication of the pledged word of a
+British Minister. Has the Government of India resigned by way of protest
+against the threatened, shameful betrayal of trust on the part of Mr. Lloyd
+George? Why does the Government of India hide itself behind secret despatches?
+At a less critical moment Lord Hardiage committed a constitutional
+indiscretion, openly sympathised with South African Passive Resistance movement
+and stemmed the surging tide of public indignation in India, though at the same
+time he incurred the wrath of the then South African Cabinet and some public
+men in Great Britain. After all, the utmost that the Government of India has
+done is on its own showing to transmit and press the Mahomedan claim. Was that
+not the least it could have done? Could it have done anything less without
+covering itself with disgrace? What Indian Mahomedans and the Indian public
+expect the Government of India to do at this critical juncture is not the
+least, but the utmost that it could do. Viceroys have been known to tender
+resignations for much smaller causes. Wounded pride brought forth not very long
+ago the resignation of a Lieutenant Governor. On the Khilafat question, a
+sacred cause dear to the hearts of several million Mahomedans is in danger of
+being wounded. I would therefore invite the English friend, and every
+Englishman in India, and every Hindu, be he moderate or extremist, to make
+common cause with the Mahomedans and thereby compel the Government of India to
+do its duty, and thereby compel His Majesty’s Ministers to do theirs.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There has been much talk of violence ensuing from active non-co-operation. I
+venture to suggest that the Mussalmans of India, if they had nothing in the
+shape of non-co-operation in view, would have long ago yielded to counsels of
+despair. I admit that non-co-operation is not unattended with danger. But
+violence is a certainty without, violence is only a possibility with
+non-co-operation. And it will he a greater possibility if all the important
+men, English, Hindu and others of the country discountenance it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I think, that the recommendation made by the friend is being literally followed
+by the Mahomedans. Although they practically know the fate, they are waiting
+for the actual terms of the treaty with Turkey. They are certainly going to try
+every means at their disposal to have the terms revised before beginning
+non-co-operation. And there will certainly be no non-co-operation commenced so
+long as there is even hope of active co-operation on the part of the Government
+of India with the Mahomedans, that is, co-operation strong enough to secure a
+revision of the terms should they be found to be in conflict with the pledges
+of British statesmen. But if all these things fail, can Mahomedans as men of
+honour who hold their religion dearer than their lives do anything less than
+wash their hands clean of the guilt of British Ministers and the Government of
+India by refusing to co-operate with them? And can Hindus and Englishmen, if
+they value Mahomedan friendship, and if they admit then full justice of the
+Mahomaden friendship and if they admit the full justice of the Mahomedan claim
+do otherwise than heartily support the Mahomedans by word and deed.
+</p>
+
+<h3>PLEDGES BROKEN</h3>
+
+<p>
+After the forgoing was printed the long-expected peace terms regarding Turkey
+were received. In my humble opinion they are humiliating to the Supreme
+Council, to the British ministers, and if as a Hindu with deep reverence for
+Christianity I may say so, a denial of Christ’s teachings. Turkey broken down
+and torn with dissentions within may submit to the arrogant disposal of
+herself, and Indian Mahomedans may out of fear do likewise. Hindus out of fear,
+apathy or want of appreciation of the situation, may refuse to help their
+Mahomedan brethren in their hour of peril. The fact remains that a solemn
+promise of the Prime Minister of England has been wantonly broken. I will say
+nothing about President Wilson’s fourteen points, for they seem now to be
+entirely forgotten as a day’s wonder. It is a matter of deep sorrow that the
+Government of India <i>communique</i> offers a defence of the terms, calls them
+a fulfilment of Mr. Lloyd George’s pledge of 5th January 1918 and yet
+apologises for their defective nature and appeals to the Mahomedans of India as
+if to mock them that they would accept the terms with quiet resignation. The
+mask that veils the hypocrisy is too thin to deceive anybody. It would have
+been dignified if the <i>communique</i> had boldly admitted Mr. Lloyd George’s
+mistake in having made the promise referred to. As it is, the claim of
+fulfilment of the promise only adds to the irritation caused by its glaring
+breach. What is the use of the Viceroy saying, “The question of the Khilafat is
+one for the Mahomedans and Mahomedans only and that with their free choice in
+the matter Government have no desire to interfere,” while the Khalif’s
+dominions are ruthlessly dismembered, his control of the Holy places of Islam
+shamelessly taken away from him and he himself reduced to utter impotence in
+his own palace which can no longer be called a palace but which can he more
+fitly described us a prison? No wonder, His Excellency fears that the peace
+includes “terms which must be painful to all Moslems.” Why should he insult
+Muslim intelligence by sending the Mussalmans of India a of encouragement and
+sympathy? Are they expected to find encouragement in the cruel recital of the
+arrogant terms or in a remembrance of ‘the splendid response’ made by them to
+the call of the King ‘in the day of the Empire’s need.’ It ill becomes His
+Excellency to talk of the triumph of those ideals of justice and humanity for
+which the Allies fought. Indeed, the terms of the so called peace with Turkey
+if they are to last, will be a monument of human arrogance and man-made
+injustice. To attempt to crush the spirit of a brave and gallant race, because
+it has lost in the fortunes of war, is a triumph not of humanity but a
+demonstration of inhumanity. And if Turkey enjoyed the closest ties of
+friendship with Great Britain before the war, Great Britain has certainly made
+ample reparation for her mistake by having made the largest contribution to the
+humiliation of Turkey. It is insufferable therefore when the Viceroy feels
+confident that with the conclusion of this new treaty that friendship will
+quickly take life again and a Turkey regenerate full of hope and strength, will
+stand forth in the future as in the past a pillar of the Islamic faith. The
+Viceregal message audaciously concludes, “This thought will I trust strengthen
+you to accept the peace terms with resignation, courage and fortitude and to
+keep your loyalty towards the Crown bright and untarnished as it has been for
+so many generations.” If Muslim loyalty remains untarnished it will certainly
+not be for want of effort on the part of the Government of India to put the
+heaviest strain upon it, but it will remain so because the Mahomedans realise
+their own strength—the strength in the knowledge that their cause is just and
+that they have got the power to vindicate justice in spite of the aberration
+suffered by Great Britain under a Prime Minister whom continued power has made
+as reckless in making promises as in breaking them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whilst therefore I admit that there is nothing either in the peace terms or in
+the Viceregal message covering them to inspire the Mahomedans and Indians in
+general with confidence or hope, I venture to suggest that there is no cause
+for despair and anger. Now is the time for Mahomedans to retain absolute
+self-control, to unite their forces and, weak though they are, with firm faith
+in God to carry on the struggle with redoubled vigour till justice is done. If
+India—both Hindu and Mahomedan—can act as one man and can withdraw her
+partnership in this crime against humanity which the peace terms represent, she
+will soon secure a revision of the treaty and give herself and the Empire at
+least, if not the world, a lasting peace. There is no doubt that the struggle
+would be bitter sharp and possibly prolonged, but it is worth all the sacrifice
+that it is likely to call forth. Both the Mussalmans and the Hindus are on
+their trial. Is the humiliation of the Khilafat a matter of concern to the
+former? And if it is, are they prepared to exercise restraint, religiously
+refrain from violence and practise non-co-operation without counting the
+material loss it may entail upon the community? Do the Hindus honestly feel for
+their Mahomedan brethren to the extent of sharing their sufferings to the
+fullest extent? The answer to these questions and not the peace terms, will
+finally decide the fate of the Khilafat.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MORE OBJECTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+<i>Swadeshmitran</i> is one of the most influential Tamil dailies of Madras. It
+is widely read. Everything appearing in its columns is entitled to respect. The
+Editor has suggested some practical difficulty in the way of non-co-operation.
+I would therefore like, to the best of my ability, to deal with them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not know where the information has been derived from that I have given up
+the last two stages of non-co-operation. What I have said is that they are a
+distant goal. I abide by it. I admit that all the stages are fraught with some
+danger, but the last two are fraught with the greatest—the last most of all.
+The stages have been fixed with a view to running the least possible risk. The
+last two stages will not be taken up unless the committee has attained
+sufficient control over the people to warrant the beliefs that the laying down
+of arms or suspension of taxes will, humanly speaking, be free from an outbreak
+of violence on the part of the people. I do entertain the belief that it is
+possible for the people to attain the discipline necessary for taking the two
+steps. When once they realise that violence is totally unnecessary to bend an
+unwilling government to their will and that the result can be obtained with
+certainty by dignified non-co-operation, they will cease to think of violence
+even by way of retaliation. The fact is that hitherto we have not attempted to
+take concerted and disciplined action from the masses. Some day, if we are to
+become truly a self-governing nation, that attempt has to be made. The present,
+in my opinion, is a propitious movement. Every Indian feels the insult to the
+Punjab as a personal wrong, every Mussalman resents the wrong done to the
+Khilafat. There is therefore a favourable atmosphere for expecting cohesive and
+restrained movement on the part of the masses.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+So far as response is concerned, I agree with the Editor that the quickest and
+the largest response is to be expected in the matter of suspension of payment
+of taxes, but as I have said so long as the masses are not educated to
+appreciate the value of non-violence even whilst their holding are being sold,
+so long must it be difficult to take up the last stage into any appreciable
+extent.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I agree too that a sudden withdrawal of the military and the police will be a
+disaster if we have not acquired the ability to protect ourselves against
+robbers and thieves. But I suggest that when we are ready to call out the
+military and the police on an extensive scale we would find ourselves in a
+position to defend ourselves. If the police and the military resign from
+patriotic motives, I would certainly expect them to perform the same duty as
+national volunteers, not has hirelings but as willing protectors of the life
+and liberty of their countrymen. The movement of non-co-operation is one of
+automatic adjustment. If the Government schools are emptied, I would certainly
+expect national schools to come into being. If the lawyers as a whole suspended
+practice, they would devise arbitration courts and the nation will have
+expeditions and cheaper method of setting private disputes and awarding
+punishment to the wrong-doer. I may add that the Khilafat Committee is fully
+alive to the difficulty of the task and is taking all the necessary steps to
+meet the contingencies as they arise.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Regarding the leaving of civil employment, no danger is feared, because no one
+will leave his employment, unless he is in a position to find support for
+himself and family either through friends or otherwise.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Disapproval of the proposed withdrawal of students betrays, in my humble
+opinion, lack of appreciation of the true nature of non-co-operation. It is
+true enough that we pay the money wherewith our children are educated. But,
+when the agency imparting the education has become corrupt, we may not employ
+it without partaking of the agents, corruption. When students leave schools or
+colleges I hardly imagine that the teachers will fail to perceive the
+advisability of themselves resigning. But even if they do not, money can hardly
+be allowed to count where honour or religion are at the stake.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to the boycott of the councils, it is not the entry of the Moderates or any
+other persons that matters so much as the entry of those who believe in
+non-co-operation. You may not co-operate at the top and non-co-operate at the
+bottom. A councillor cannot remain in the council and ask the <i>gumasta</i>
+who cleans the council-table to resign.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. PENNINGTON’S OBJECTIONS ANSWERED</h3>
+
+<p>
+I gladly publish Mr. Pennington’s letter with its enclosure just as I have
+received them. Evidently Mr. Pennington is not a regular reader of ‘Young
+India,’ or he would have noticed that no one has condemned mob outrages more
+than I have. He seems to think that the article he has objected to was the only
+thing I have ever written on General Dyer. He does not seem to know that I have
+endeavoured with the utmost impartiality to examine the Jallianwala massacre.
+And he can see any day all the proof adduced by my fellow-commissioners and
+myself in support of our findings on the massacre. The ordinary readers of
+‘Young India’ knew all the facts and therefore it was unnecessary for me to
+support my assertion otherwise. But unfortunately Mr. Pennington represents the
+typical Englishman. He does not want to be unjust, nevertheless he is rarely
+just in his appreciation of world events because he has no time to study them
+except cursorily and that through a press whose business is to air only party
+views. The average Englishman therefore except in parochial matters is perhaps
+the least informed though he claims to be well-informed about every variety of
+interest. Mr. Pennington’s ignorance is thus typical of the others and affords
+the best reason for securing control of our own affairs in our own hands.
+Ability will come with use and not by waiting to be trained by those whose
+natural interest is to prolong the period of tutelage as much as possible.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But to return to Mr. Pennington’s letter he complains that there has been no
+‘proper trial of any one.’ The fault is not ours. India has consistently and
+insistently demanded a trial of all the officers concerned in the crimes
+against the Punjab.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+He next objects to be ‘violence’ of my language. If truth is violent, I plead
+guilty to the charge of violence of language. But I could not, without doing
+violence to truth, refrain from using the language, I have, regarding General
+Dyer’s action. It has been proved out of his own mouth or hostile witnesses:
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(1) That the crowd was unarmed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(2) That it contained children.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(3) That the 13th was the day of Vaisakhi fair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(4) That thousands had come to the fair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(5) That there was no rebellion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(6) That during the intervening two days before the ‘massacre’ there was peace
+in Amritsar.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(7) That the proclamation of the meeting was made the same day as General
+Dyer’s proclamation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(8) That General Dyer’s proclamation prohibited not meetings but processions or
+gatherings of four men on the streets and not in private or public places.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(9) That General Dyer ran no risk whether outside or inside the city.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(10) That he admitted himself that many in the crowd did not know anything of
+his proclamation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(11) That he fired without warning the crowd and even after it had begun to
+disperse. He fired on the backs of the people who were in flight.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(12) That the men were practically penned in an enclosure.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the face of these admitted facts I do call the deed a ‘massacre.’ The action
+amounted not to ‘an error of judgment’ but its ‘paralysis in the face of
+fancied danger.’
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am sorry to have to say that Mr. Pennington’s notes, which too the reader
+will find published elsewhere, betray as much ignorance as his letter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whatever was adopted on paper in the days of Canning was certainly not
+translated into action in its full sense. ‘Promises made to the ear were broken
+to the hope,’ was said by a reactionary Viceroy. Military expenditure has grown
+enormously since the days of Canning.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The demonstration in favour of General Dyer is practically a myth.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+No trace was found of the so-called Danda Fauj dignified by the name of
+bludgeon-army by Mr. Pennington. There was no rebel army in Amritsar. The crown
+that committed the horrible murders and incendiarism contained no one community
+exclusively. The sheet was found posted only in Lahore and not in Amritsar. Mr.
+Pennington should moreover have known by this time that the meeting held on the
+13th was held, among other things, for the purpose of condemning mob excesses.
+This was brought out at the Amritsar trial. Those who surrounded him could not
+stop General Dyer. He says he made up his mind to shoot in a moment. He
+consulted nobody. When the correspondent says that the troops would have
+objected to being concerned in ‘what might in that case be not unfairly called
+a ‘massacre,’ he writes as if he had never lived in India. I wish the Indian
+troops had the moral courage to refuse to shoot innocent, unarmed men in full
+flight. But the Indian troops have been brought in too slavish an atmosphere to
+dare do any such correct act.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I hope Mr. Pennington will not accuse me again of making unverified assertions
+because I have not quoted from the books. The evidence is there for him to use.
+I can only assure him that the assertions are based on positive proofs mostly
+obtained from official sources.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Pennington wants me to publish an exact account of what happened on the
+10th April. He can find it in the reports, and if he will patiently go through
+them he will discover that Sir Michael O’Dwyer and his officials goaded the
+people into frenzied fury—a fury which nobody, as I have already said, has
+condemned more than I have. The account of the following days is summed up in
+one word, <i>viz.</i> ‘peace’ on the part of the crowd disturbed by
+indiscriminate arrests, the massacre and the series of official crimes that
+followed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I am prepared to give Mr. Pennington credit for seeking after the truth. But he
+has gone about it in the wrong manner. I suggest his reading the evidence
+before the Hunter Committee and the Congress Committee. He need not read the
+reports. But the evidence will convince him that I have understated the case
+against General Dyer.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+When however I read his description of himself as “for 12 years Chief
+Magistrate of Districts in the South of India before reform, by assassination
+and otherwise, became so fashionable.” I despair of his being able to find the
+truth. An angry or a biased man renders himself incapable of finding it. And
+Mr. Pennington is evidently both angry and biased. What does he mean by saying,
+“before reform by assassination and otherwise became so fashionable?” It ill
+becomes him to talk of assassination when the school of assassination seems
+happily to have become extinct. Englishmen will never see the truth so long as
+they permit their vision to be blinded by arrogant assumption of superiority or
+ignorant assumptions of infallibility.
+</p>
+
+<h3>MR. PENNINGTON’S LETTER TO MR. GANDHI</h3>
+
+<p class="letter">
+Dear Sir,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not like your scheme for “boycotting” the Government of India under what
+seems to be the somewhat less offensive (though more cumbrous) name of
+non-co-operation; but have always given you credit for a genuine desire to
+carry out revolution by peaceful means and am astonished at the violence of the
+language you use in describing General Dyer on page 4 of your issue of the 14th
+July last. You begin by saying that he is “by no means the worst offender,”
+and, so far, I am inclined to agree, though as there has been no proper trial
+of anyone it is impossible to apportion their guilt; but then you say “his
+brutality is unmistakable,” “his abject and unsoldierlike cowardice is
+apparent, he has called an <i>unarmed crowd</i> of men and children—mostly
+holiday makers—a rebel army.” “He believes himself to be the saviour of the
+Punjab in that he was able to shoot down like rabbits men who were
+<i>penned</i> in an enclosure; such a man is unworthy to be considered a
+soldier. There was no bravery in his action. He ran no risk. He shot without
+the slightest opposition and without warning. This is not an error of
+judgement. It is paralysis of it in the face of <i>fancied</i> danger. It is
+proof of criminal incapacity and heartlessness,” etc.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+You must excuse me for saying that all this is mere rhetoric unsupported by any
+proof, even where proof was possible. To begin with, neither you nor I were
+present at the Jallianwalla Bagh on that dreadful day—dreadful especially for
+General Dyer for whom you show no sympathy,—and therefore cannot know for
+certain whether the crowd was or was not unarmed.’ That it was an ‘illegal,’
+because a ‘prohibited,’ assembly is evident; for it is absurd to suppose that
+General Dyer’s 4-1/2 hours march, through the city that very morning, during
+the whole of which he was warning the inhabitants against the danger of any
+sort of gathering, was not thoroughly well-known. You say they were ‘mostly
+holiday makers,’ but you give nor proof; and the idea of holiday gathering in
+Amritsar just then in incredible. I cannot understand your making such a
+suggestion. General Dyer was not the only officer present on the occasion and
+it is impossible to suppose that he would have been allowed to go on shooting
+into an innocent body of holiday-makers. Even the troops would have refused to
+carry out what might then have been not unfairly called a “massacre.”
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I notice that you never even allude to the frightful brutality of the mob which
+was immediately responsible for the punitive measure reluctantly adopted by
+General Dyer. Your sympathies seem to be only with the murderers, and I am not
+sanguine enough to suppose that my view of the case will have much influence
+with you. Still I am bound to do what I can to get at the truth, and enclose a
+copy of some notes I have had occasion to make. If you can publish an
+<i>exact</i> account of what happened at Amritsar on the 10th of April, 1919
+and the following days, especially on the 13th, including the demonstration in
+favour of General Dyer, (if there was one), I for one, as a mere seeker after
+the truth, should be very much obliged to you. Mere abuse is not convincing, as
+you so often observe in your generally reasonable paper,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Yours faithfully, J. R. PENNINGTON, I.O.S. (Retd.) 35, VICTORIA ROAD, WORTHING,
+SUSSEX 27th Aug. 1920.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For 12 years Chief Magistrate of Districts in the south of India before reform,
+by assassination and otherwise, became so fashionable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P.S. Let us get the case in this way. General Dyer, acting as the only
+representative of Government on the spot shot some hundreds of people (some of
+them <i>perhaps</i> innocently mixed up in an illegal assembly), in the <i>bona
+fide</i> belief that he was dealing with the remains of a very dangerous
+rebellion and was thereby saving the lives of very many thousands, and in the
+opinion of a great many people did actually save the city from falling in the
+hands of a dangerous mob.
+</p>
+
+<h3>SOME DOUBTS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Babu Janakdhari Prasad was a staunch coworker with me in Champaran. He has
+written a long letter setting forth his reasons for his belief that India has a
+great mission before her, and that she can achieve her purpose only by
+non-violent non-co-operation. But he has doubts which he would have me answer
+publicly. The letter being long, I am withholding. But the doubts are entitled
+to respect and I must endeavour to answer them. Here they are us framed by Bubu
+Janakdhari Prasad.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(a) Is not the non-co-operation movement creating a sort of race-hatred between
+Englishmen and Indians, and is it in accordance with the Divine plan of
+universal love and brotherhood?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(b) Does not the use of words “devilish,” “satanic,” etc., savour of
+unbrotherly sentiment and incite feelings of hatred?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(c) Should not the non-co-operation movement be conducted on strictly
+non-violent and non-emotional lines both in speech and action?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+(d) Is there no danger of the movement going out of control and lending to
+violence?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (a), I must say that the movement is not ‘creating’ race-hatred. It
+certainly gives, as I have already said, disciplined expression to it. You
+cannot eradicate evil by ignoring it. It is because I want to promote universal
+brotherhood that I have taken up non-co-operation so that, by
+self-purification, India may make the world better than it is.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (b), I know that the words ‘satanic’ and ‘devilish’ are strong, but they
+relate the exact truth. They describe a system not persons: We are bound to
+hate evil, if we would shun it. But by means of non-co-operation we are able to
+distinguish between the evil and the evil-doer. I have found no difficulty in
+describing a particular activity of a brother of mine to be devilish, but I am
+not aware of having harboured any hatred about him. Non-co-operation teaches us
+to love our fellowmen in spite of their faults, not by ignoring or over-looking
+them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (c), the movement is certainly being conducted on strictly non-violent
+lines. That all non-co-operators have not yet thoroughly imbibed the doctrine
+is true. But that just shows what an evil legacy we have inherited. Emotion
+there is in the movement. And it will remain. A man without emotion is a man
+without feeling.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to (d), there certainly is danger of the movement becoming violent. But we
+may no more drop non-violent non-co-operation because of its dangers, than we
+may stop freedom because of the danger of its abuse.
+</p>
+
+<h3>REJOINDER</h3>
+
+<p>
+Messrs. Popley and Philips have been good enough to reply to my letter “To
+Every Englishman in India.” I recognise and appreciate the friendly spirit of
+their letter. But I see that there are fundamental differences which must for
+the time being divide them and me. So long as I felt that, in spite of grievous
+lapses the British Empire represented an activity for the worlds and India’s
+good, I clung to it like a child to its mother’s breast. But that faith is
+gone. The British nation has endorsed the Punjab and Khilsfat crimes. The is no
+doubt a dissenting minority. But a dissenting minority that satisfies itself
+with a mere expression of its opinion and continues to help the wrong-doer
+partakes in wrong-doing.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+And when the sum total of his energy represents a minus quantity one may not
+pick out the plus quantities, hold them up for admiration, and ask an admiring
+public to help regarding them. It is a favourite design of Satan to temper evil
+with a show of good and thus lure the unwary into the trap. The only way the
+world has known of defeating Satan is by shunning him. I invite Englishmen, who
+could work out the ideal the believe in, to join the ranks of the
+non-co-operationists. W.T. Stead prayed for the reverse of the British arms
+during the Boer war. Miss Hobbhouse invited the Boers to keep up the fight. The
+betrayal of India is much worse than the injustice done to the Boers. The Boers
+fought and bled for their rights. When therefore, we are prepared to bleed, the
+right will have become embodied, and idolatrous world will perceive it and do
+homage to it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But Messers. Popley and Phillips object that I have allied myself with those
+who would draw the sword if they could. I see nothing wrong in it. They
+represent the right no less than I do. And is it not worth while trying to
+prevent an unsheathing of the sword by helping to win the bloodless battle?
+Those who recognise the truth of the Indian position can only do God’s work by
+assisting this non-violent campaign.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The second objection raised by these English friends is more to the point. I
+would be guilty of wrong-doing myself if the Muslim cause was not just. The
+fact is that the Muslim claim is not to perpetuate foreign domination of
+non-Muslim or Turkish races. The Indian Mussalmans do not resist
+self-determination, but they would fight to the last the nefarious plan of
+exploiting Mesopotamia under the plea of self-determination. They must resist
+the studied attempt to humiliate Turkey and therefore Islam, under the false
+pretext of ensuring Armenian independence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The third objection has reference to schools. I do object to missionary or any
+schools being carried on with Government money. It is true that it was at one
+time our money. Will these good missionaries be justified in educating me with
+funds given to them by a robber who has robbed me of my money, religion and
+honour because the money was originally mine.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I personally tolerated the financial robbery of India, but it would have been a
+sin to have tolerated the robbery of honour through the Punjab, and of religion
+through Turkey. This is strong language. But nothing less would truly describe
+my deep conviction. Needless to add that the emptying of Government aided, or
+affiliated, schools does not mean starving the young mind National Schools are
+coming into being as fast as the others are emptied.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Messrs. Popley and Phillips think that my sense of justice has been blurred by
+the knowledge of the Punjab and the Khilafat wrongs. I hope not. I have asked
+friends to show me some good fruit (intended and deliberately produced) of the
+British occupation of India. And I assure them that I shall make the amplest
+amends if I find that I have erred in my eagerness about the Khilafat and the
+Punjab wrongs.
+</p>
+
+<h3>TWO ENGLISHMEN REPLY</h3>
+
+<p>
+Dear Mr. Gandhi,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thank you for your letter to every Englishman in India, with its hard-hitting
+and its generous tone. Something within us responds to the note which you have
+struck. We are not representatives of any corporate body, but we think that
+millions of our countrymen in England, and not a few in India, feel as we do.
+The reading of your letter convinces us that you and we cannot be real enemies.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+May we say at once that in so far as the British Empire stands for the
+domination and exploitation of other races for Britain’s benefit, for degrading
+treatment of any, for traffic in intoxicating liquors, for repressive
+legislation, for administration such as that which to the Amritsar incidents,
+we desire the end of it as much as you do? We quite understand that in the
+excitement of the present crisis, owing to certain acts of the British
+Administration, which we join with you in condemning, the Empire presents
+itself to you under this aspect along. But from personal contact with our
+countrymen, we know that working like leaven in the midst of such tendencies,
+as you and we deplore, is the faith in a better ideal—the ideal of a
+commonwealth of free peoples voluntarily linked together by the ties of common
+experience in the past and common aspirations for the future, a commonwealth
+which may hope to spread liberty and progress through the whole earth. With
+vast numbers of our countrymen we value the British Empire mainly as affording
+the possibility of the realization of such an idea and on the ground give it
+our loyal allegiance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Meanwhile we do repent of that arrogant attitude to Indians which has been all
+too common among our countrymen, we do hold Indians to be our brothers and
+equals, many of them our superiors, and we would rather be servants than rulers
+of India. We desire an administration which cannot he intimated either by the
+selfish element in Anglo-Indian political opinion or by any other sectional
+interest and which shall govern in accordance with the best democratic
+principles. We should welcome the convening of a National assembly of
+recognized leaders of the people, representing all shades of political opinion
+of every caste, race and creed, to frame a constitution for Swaraj. In all the
+things that matter most we are with you. Surely you and we can co-operate in
+the service of India, in such matters for example as education. It seems to us
+nothing short of a tragedy that you should be rallying Indian Patriotism to
+inaugurate a new era of good will under a watchword that divides, instead of
+uniting all.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We have spoken of the large amount of common ground upon which you and we can
+stand. But frankness demands that we express our anxiety about some items in
+your programme. Leaving aside smaller questions on which your letter seems to
+us to do the British side less than justice, may we mention three main points?
+Your insistence on spiritual forces alone we deeply respect and desire to
+emulate, but we cannot understand your combining into it with a close alliance
+with those who, as you frankly say, would draw the sword as soon as they could.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your desire for an education truly national commands our whole-hearted
+approval. But instead of Indianizing the present system, as you could begin to
+do from the beginning of next year, or instead of creating a hundred
+institutions such as that at Bolpur and turning into them the stream of India’s
+young intellectual life, you appear to be turning that stream out of its
+present channel into open sands where it may dry up. In other words, you seem
+to us to be risking the complete cessation, for a period possibly, of years, of
+all education, for a large number of boys and young men. Is it best, for those
+young men or for India that the present imperfect education should cease before
+a better education is ready to take its place?
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your desire to unite Mohammedan and Hindu and to share with your Mohammedan
+brethren in seeking the satisfaction of Mohammedan aspirations, we can
+understand and sympathize with. But is there no danger, in the course which
+some of your party have urged upon the Government, that certain races in the
+former Ottoman Empire might be fixed under a foreign yoke, for worse than that
+which you hold the English yoke to be? You could not wish to purchase freedom
+in India at the price of enslavement in the middle East.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To sum up, we thank you for the spirit of your letter, to which we have tried
+to respond in the same spirit. We are with you in the desire for an India
+genuinely free to develop the best that is in her and in the belief that best
+is something wonderful of which the world to-day stands in need.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We are ready to co-operate with you and with every other man of any race or
+nationality who will help India to realize her best. Are you going to insist
+that you can have nothing to do with us if we receive a government grant (i.e.,
+Indian money), for an Indian School. Surely some more inspiring battle cry than
+non-co-operation can be discovered. We have ventured quite frankly to point out
+three items in your present programme, which seem to us likely to hinder the
+attainment of your true ideals for Indian greatness. But those ideals
+themselves command our warm sympathy, and we desire to work, so far as we have
+opportunity, for their attainment. In fact, it is only thus that we can
+interpret our British citizenship.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Yours sincerely, (Sd.) H.A. POPLEY, (Sd.) G.E. PHILLIPS. Bangalore, November
+15, 1920.
+</p>
+
+<h3>RENUNCIATION OF MEDALS</h3>
+
+<p>
+Mr. Gandhi has addressed the following letter to the Viceroy:—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not without a pang that I return the Kaisar-i-Hind gold medal granted to
+me by your predecessor for my humanitarian work in South Africa, the Zulu war
+medal granted in South Africa for my services as officer in charge of the
+Indian volunteer ambulance corps in 1906 and the Boer war medal fur my services
+as assistant superintendent of the Indian volunteer stretcher bearer corps
+during the Boer war of 1899-1900. I venture to return these medals in pursuance
+of the scheme of non-co-operation inaugurated to-day in connection with the
+Khilafat movement. Valuable as those honours have been to me, I cannot wear
+them with an easy conscience so long as my Mussalman countrymen have to labour
+under a wrong done to their religious sentiment. Events that have happened
+during the past month have confirmed me in the opinion that the Imperial
+Government have acted in the Khilafat matter in an unscrupulous, immoral and
+unjust manner and have been moving from wrong to wrong in order to defend their
+immorality. I can retain neither respect nor affection for such a Government.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The attitude of the Imperial and Your Excellency’s Governments on the Punjab
+question has given me additional cause for grave dissatisfaction. I had the
+honour, as Your Excellency is aware, as one of the congress commissioners to
+investigate the causes of the disorders in the Punjab during the April of 1919.
+And it is my deliberate conviction that Sir Michael O’Dwyer was totally unfit
+to hold the office of Lieutenant Governor of Punjab and that his policy was
+primarily responsible for infuriating the mob at Amritsar. No doubt the mob
+excesses were unpardonable; incendiarism, murder of five innocent Englishmen
+and the cowardly assault on Miss Sherwood were most deplorable and uncalled
+for. But the punitive measures taken by General Dyer, Col. Frank Johnson, Col.
+O’Brien, Mr. Bosworth Smith, Rai Shri Ram Sud, Mr. Malik Khan and other
+officers were out of all proportional to the crime of the people and amounted
+to wanton cruelty and inhumanity and almost unparalleled in modern times. Your
+excellency’s light-hearted treatment of the official crime, your, exoneration
+of Sir Michael O’Dwyer, Mr. Montagu’s dispatch and above all the shameful
+ignorance of the Punjab events and callous disregard of the feelings of Indians
+betrayed by the House of Lords, have filled me with the gravest misgivings
+regarding the future of the Empire, have estranged me completely from the
+present Government and have disabled me from tendering, as I have hitherto
+whole-heartedly tendered, my loyal co-operation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In my humble opinion the ordinary method of agitating by way of petitions,
+deputations and the like is no remedy for moving to repentence a Government so
+hopelessly indifferent to the welfare of its charges as the Government of India
+has proved to me. In European countries, condonation of such grievous wrongs as
+the Khilafat and the Punjab would have resulted in a bloody revolution by the
+people. They would have resisted at all costs national emasculation such as the
+said wrongs imply. But half of India is to weak to offer violent resistance and
+the other half is unwilling to do so.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have therefore ventured to suggest the remedy of non-co-operation which
+enables those who wish, to dissociate themselves from the Government and which,
+if it is unattended by violence and undertaken in an ordered manner, must
+compel it to retrace its steps and undo the wrongs committed. But whilst I
+shall pursue the policy of non-co-operation in so far as I can carry the people
+with me, I shall not lose hope that you will yet see your way to do justice. I
+therefore respectfully ask Your Excellency to summon a conference of the
+recognised leaders of the people and in consultation with them find a way that
+would placate the Mussalmans and do reparation to the unhappy Punjab. <i>August
+4, 1920.</i>
+</p>
+
+<h3>MAHATMA GANDHI’S LETTER TO H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT</h3>
+
+<p>
+The following letter has been addressed by Mr. Gandhi to his Royal Highness the
+Duke of Connaught;—
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Sir,
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Royal Highness must have heard a great deal about non-co-operation,
+non-co-operationists and their methods and incidentally of me its humble
+author. I fear that the information given to Your Royal Highness must have been
+in its nature one-sided. I owe it to you and to my friends and myself that I
+should place before you what I conceive to be the scope of non-co-operation as
+followed not only be me but my closest associates such as Messrs. Shaukat Ali
+and Mahomed Ali.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For me it is no joy and pleasure to be actively associated in the boycott of
+your Royal Highness’ visit—I have tendered loyal and voluntary association to
+the Government for an unbroken period of nearly 30 years in the full belief
+that through that way lay the path of freedom for my country. It was therefore
+no slight thing for me to suggest to my countrymen that we should take no part
+in welcoming Your Royal Highness. Not one among us has anything against you as
+an English gentleman. We hold your person as sacred as that of a dearest
+friend. I do not know any of my friends who would not guard it with his life,
+if he found it in danger. We are not at war with individual Englishmen we seek
+not to destroy English life. We do desire to destroy a system that has
+emasculated our country in body, mind and soul. We are determined to battle
+with all our might against that in the English nature which has made O’Dwyerism
+and Dyerism possible in the Punjab and has resulted in a wanton affront upon
+Islam a faith professed by seven crores of our countrymen. The affront has been
+put in breach of the letter and the spirit of the solemn declaration of the
+Prime Minister. We consider it to be inconsistent with our self respect any
+longer to brook the spirit of superiority and dominance which has
+systematically ignored and disregarded the sentiments of thirty crores of the
+innocent people of India on many a vital matter. It is humiliating to us, it
+cannot be a matter of pride to you, that thirty crores of Indians should live
+day in and day out in the fear of their lives from one hundred thousand
+Englishmen and therefore be under subjection to them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Your Royal Highness has come not to end the system I have described but to
+sustain it by upholding its prestige. Your first pronouncement was a laudation
+of Lord Wellingdon. I have the privilege of knowing him. I believe him to be an
+honest and amiable gentleman who will not willingly hurt even a fly. But, he
+has certainly failed as a ruler. He allowed himself to be guided by those whose
+interest it was to support their power. He is reading the mind of the Dravidian
+province. Here in Bengal you are issuing a certificate of merit to a Governor
+who is again from all I have heard an estimable gentleman. But he knows nothing
+of the heart of Bengal and its yearnings. Bengal is not Calcutta. Fort William
+and the palaces of Calcutta represent an insolent exploitation of the
+unmurmuring and highly cultured peasantry of this fair province.
+Non-co-operationists have come to the conclusion that they must not be deceived
+by the reforms that tinker with the problem of India’s distress and
+humiliation. Nor must they be impatient and angry. We must not in our impatient
+anger resort, to stupid violence. We freely admit that we must take our due
+share of the blame for the existing state. It is not so much the British guns
+that are responsible fur our subjection, as our voluntary co-operation. Our
+non-participation in a hearty welcome to your Royal Highness is thus in no
+sense a demonstration against your high personage but it is against the system
+you have come to uphold. I know that individual Englishmen cannot even if they
+will alter the English nature all of a sudden. If we would be equals of
+Englishmen we must cast off fear. We must learn to be self-reliant and
+independent of the schools, courts, protection, and patronage of a Government,
+we seek to end, if it will not mend. Hence this non-violent non-co-operation. I
+know that we have not all yet become non-violent in speech and deed. But the
+results so far achieved have I assure Your Royal Highness, been amazing. The
+people have understood the secret and the value of non-violence as they have
+never done before. He who runs may see that this a religious, purifying
+movement. We are leaving off drink, we are trying to rid India of the curse of
+untouchability. We are trying to throw off foreign tinsel splendour and by
+reverting to the spinning wheel reviving the ancient and the poetic simplicity
+of life. We hope thereby to sterilize the existing harmful institution. I ask
+Your Royal Highness as an Englishman to study this movement and its
+possibilities for the Empire and the world. We are at war with nothing that is
+good in the world. In protecting Islam in the manner we are, we are protecting
+all religions. In protecting the honour of India we are protecting the honour
+of humanity. For our means are hurtful to none. We desire to live on terms of
+friendship with Englishmen but that friendship must be friendship of equals in
+both theory and practice. And we must continue to non-co-operate, i.e. to
+purify ourselves till the goal is achieved.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I ask Your Royal Highness and through you every Englishman to appreciate the
+view-point of the non-co-operationists.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I beg to remain, Your Royal Highness’s faithful servant, (Sd.) M.K. GANDHI.
+<i>February</i>, 1921
+</p>
+
+<h3>THE GREATEST THING</h3>
+
+<p>
+It is to be wished that non-co-operationists will clearly recognise that
+nothing can stop the onward march of the nation as violence. Ireland may gain
+its freedom by violence. Turkey may regain her lost possessions by violence
+within measurable distance of time. But India cannot win her freedom by
+violence for a century, because her people are not built in the manner of other
+nations. They have been nurtured in the traditions of suffering. Rightly or
+wrongly, for good or ill, Islam too has evolved along peaceful lines in India.
+And I make bold to say that, if the honour of Islam is to be vindicated through
+its followers in India, it will only be by methods of peaceful, silent,
+dignified, conscious, and courageous suffering. The more I study that wonderful
+faith, the more convinced I become that the glory of Islam is due not to the
+sword but to the sufferings, the renunciation, and the nobility of its early
+Caliphs. Islam decayed when its followers, mistaking the evil for the good,
+dangled the sword in the face of man, and lost sight of the godliness, the
+humility, and austerity of its founder and his disciples. But, I am not at the
+present moment, concerned with showing that the basis of Islam, as of all
+religions, is not violence but suffering not the taking of life but the giving
+of it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What I am anxious to show is that non-co-operationists must be true as well to
+the spirit as to the letter of their vow if they would gain Swaraj within one
+year. They may forget non-co-operation but they dare not forget non-violence.
+Indeed, non-co-operation is non-violence. We are violent when we sustain a
+government whose creed is violence. It bases itself finally not on right but on
+might. Its last appeal is not to reason, nor the heart, but to the sword. We
+are tired of this creed and we have risen against it. Let us not ourselves
+belie our profession by being violent. Though the English are very few, they
+are organised for violence. Though we are many we cannot be organised for
+violence for a long time to come. Violence for us is a gospel or despair.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I have seen a pathetic letter from a god-fearing English woman who defends
+Dyerism for she thinks that, if General Dyer had not enacted Jallianwala, women
+and children would have been murdered by us. If we are such brutes as to desire
+the blood of innocent women and children, we deserve to be blotted out from the
+face of the earth. There is the other side. It did not strike this good lady
+that, if we were friends, the price that her countrymen paid at Jallianwala for
+buying their safety was too great. They gained their safety at the cost of
+their humanity. General Dyer has been haltingly blamed, and his evil genius Sir
+Michael O’Dwyer entirely exonerated because Englishmen do not want to leave
+this country of fields even if everyone of us has to be killed. If we go mad
+again as we did at Amritsar, let there be no mistake that a blacker Jallianwala
+will be enacted.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Shall we copy Dyerism and O’Dwyerism even whilst we are condemning it? Let not
+our rock be violence and devilry. Our rock must be non-violence and godliness.
+Let us, workers, be clear as to what we are about. <i>Swaraj depends upon our
+ability to control all the forces of violence on our side.</i> Therefore there
+is no Swaraj within one year, if there is violence on the part of the people.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We must then refrain from sitting <i>dhurna</i>, we must refrain from crying
+‘shame, shame’ to anybody, we must not use any coercion to persuade our people
+to adopt our way. We must guarantee to them the same freedom we claim for
+ourselves. We must not tamper with the masses. It is dangerous to make
+political use of factory labourers or the peasantry—not that we are not
+entitled to do so, but we are not ready for it. We have neglected their
+political (as distinguished from literary) education all these long years. We
+have not got enough honest, intelligent, reliable, and brave workers to enable
+us to act upon these countrymen of ours.
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div class="chapter">
+
+<h2><a name="chap09"></a>IX. MAHATMA GANDHI’S STATEMENT</h2>
+
+<p>
+[The following is the Statement of Mahatma Gandhi made before the Court during
+his Trial in Ahmedabad on the 18th March 1921.]
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Before reading his written statement Mahatma Gandhi spoke a few words as
+introductory remarks to the whole statement. He said: Before I read this
+statement, I would like to state that I entirely endorse the learned
+Advocate-General’s remarks in connection with my humble self. I think that he
+was entirely fair to me in all the statements that he has made, because it is
+very true and I have no desire whatsoever to conceal from this Court the fact
+that to preach disaffection towards the existing system of Government has
+become almost a passion with me. And the learned Advocate-General is also
+entirely in the right when he says that my preaching of disaffection did not
+commence with my connection with “Young India” but that it commenced much
+earlier and in the statement that I am about to read it will be my painful duty
+to admit before this Court that it commenced much earlier than the period
+stated by the Advocate-General. It is the most painful duty with me but I have
+to discharge that duty knowing the responsibility that rested upon my
+shoulders. And I wish to endorse all the blame that the Advocate-General has
+thrown on my shoulders in connection with the Bombay occurrence, Madras
+occurrences, and the Chouri Choura occurrences thinking over these things
+deeply, and sleeping over them night after night and examining my heart I have
+come to the conclusion that it is impossible for me to dissociate myself from
+the diabolical crimes of Chouri Choura or the mad outrages of Bombay. He is
+quite right when he says that as a man of responsibility, a man having received
+a fair share of education, having had a fair share of experience of this world,
+I should know them. I knew that I was playing with fire. I ran the risk and if
+I was set free I would still do the same. I would be failing in my duty if I do
+not do so. I have felt it this morning that I would have failed in my duty if I
+did not say all what I said here just now. I wanted to avoid violence.
+Non-violence is the first article of my faith. It is the last article of my
+faith. But I had to make my choice. I had either to submit to a system which I
+considered has done an irreparable harm to my country or incur the risk of the
+mad fury of my people bursting forth when they understood the truth from my
+lips. I know that my people have sometimes gone mad. I am deeply sorry for it;
+and I am, therefore, here to submit not to a light penalty but to the highest
+penalty. I do not ask for mercy. I do not plead any extenuating act. I am here,
+therefore, to invite and submit to the highest penalty that can be inflicted
+upon me for what in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the
+highest duty of a citizen. The only course open to you, Mr. Judge, is, as I am
+just going to say in my statement, either to resign your post or inflict on me
+the severest penalty if you believe that the system and law you are assisting
+to administer are good for the people. I do not expect that kind of conversion.
+But by the time I have finished with my statement you will, perhaps, have a
+glimpse of what is raging within my breast to run this maddest risk which a
+sane man can run.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+WRITTEN STATEMENT
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I owe it perhaps to the Indian public and to the public in England to placate
+which this prosecution is mainly taken up that I should explain why from a
+staunch loyalist and co-operator I have become an uncompromising
+disaffectionist and non-co-operator. To the Court too I should say why I plead
+guilty to the charge of promoting disaffection towards the Government
+established by law in India. My public life began in 1893 in South Africa in
+troubled weather. My first contact with British authority in that country was
+not of a happy character. I discovered that as a man and as an Indian I had no
+rights. On the contrary I discovered that I had no rights as a man because I
+was an Indian.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of Indians was an
+excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically and mainly good. I gave the
+Government my voluntary and hearty co-operation, criticising it fully where I
+felt it was faulty but never wishing its destruction.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Consequently when the existence of the Empire was threatened in 1899 by the
+Boer challenge, I offered my services to it, raised a volunteer ambulance corps
+and served at several actions that took place for the relief of Ladysmith.
+Similarly in 1906 at the time of the Zulu revolt I raised a stretcher-bearer
+party and served till the end of the ‘rebellion’. On both these occasions I
+received medals and was even mentioned in despatches. For my work in South
+Africa I was given by Lord Hardinge a Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal. When the war
+broke out in 1914 between England and Germany I raised a volunteer ambulance
+corps in London consisting of the then resident Indians in London, chiefly
+students. Its work was acknowledged by the authorities to be valuable. Lastly
+in India when a special appeal was made at the War Conference in Delhi in 1917
+by Lord Chelmsford for recruits, I struggled at the cost of my health to raise
+a corps in Kheda and the response was being made when the hostilities ceased
+and orders were received that no more recruits were wanted. In all those
+efforts at service I was actuated by the belief that it was possible by such
+services to gain a status of full equality in the Empire for my countrymen.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The first shock came in the shape of the Rowlalt Act a law designed to rob the
+people of all real freedom. I felt called upon to lead an intensive agitation
+against it. Then followed the Punjab horrors beginning with the massacre at
+Jallianwala Bagh and culminating in brawling orders, public floggings and other
+indescribable humiliations, I discovered too that the plighted word of the
+Prime Minister to the Mussalmans of India regarding the integrity of Turkey and
+the holy places of Islam was not likely to be fulfilled. But in spite of the
+foreboding and the grave warnings of friends, at the Amritsar Congress in 1919
+I fought for co-operation and working the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, hoping
+that the Prime Minister would redeem his promise to the Indian Mussalmans, that
+the Punjab wound would be healed and that the reforms inadequate and
+unsatisfactory though they were, marked a new era of hope in the life of India.
+But all that hope was shattered. The Khilafat promise was not to be redeemed.
+The Punjab crime was white-washed and most culprits went not only unpunished
+but remained in service and some continued to draw pensions from the Indian
+revenue, and in some cases were even rewarded. I saw too that not only did the
+reforms not mark a change of heart, but they were only a method of further
+draining India of her wealth and of prolonging her servitude.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I came reluctantly to the conclusion that the British connection had made India
+more helpless than she ever was before, politically and economically. A
+disarmed India has no power of resistance against any aggressor if she wanted
+to engage in an armed conflict with him. So much is this the case that some of
+our best men consider that India must take generations before she can achieve
+the Dominion status. She has become so poor that she has little power of
+resisting famines. Before the British advent India spun and wove in her
+millions of cottages just the supplement she needed for adding to her meagre
+agricultural resources. The cottage industry, so vital for India’s existence,
+has been ruined by incredibly heartless and inhuman processes as described by
+English witnesses. Little do town-dwellers know how the semi-starved masses of
+Indians are slowly sinking to lifelessness. Little do they know that their
+miserable comfort represents the brokerage they get for the work they do for
+the foreign exploiter, that the profits and the brokerage are sucked from the
+masses. Little do they realise that the Government established by law in
+British India is carried on for this exploitation of the masses. No sophistry,
+no jugglery in figures can explain away the evidence the skeletons in many
+villages present to the naked eye. I have no doubt whatsoever that both England
+and the town dwellers of India will have to answer, if there is a God above,
+for this crime against humanity which is perhaps unequalled in history. The law
+itself in this country has been used to serve the foreign exploiter. My
+unbiased, examination of the Punjab Martial Law cases had led me to believe
+that at least ninety-five per cent. of convictions were wholly bad. My
+experience of political cases in India leads me to the conclusion that in nine
+out of every ten the condemned men were totally innocent. Their crime consisted
+in love of their country. In ninety-nine cases out of hundred justice has been
+denied to Indians as against Europeans in the Court of India. This is not an
+exaggerated picture. It is the experience of almost every Indian who has had
+anything to do such cases. In my opinion the administration of the law is thus
+prostituted consciously or unconsciously for the benefit of the exploiter. The
+greatest misfortune is that Englishmen and their Indian associates in the
+administration of the country do not know that they are engaged in the crime I
+have attempted to describe. I am satisfied that many English and Indian
+officials honestly believe that they are administering one of the best systems
+devised in the world and that India is making steady though slow progress. They
+do not know that a subtle but effective system of terrorism and an organised
+display of force on the one hand and the deprivation of all powers of
+retaliation of self-defence on the other have emasculated the people and
+induced in them the habit of simulation. This awful habit has added to the
+ignorance and the self-deception of the administrators. Section 124-A under
+which I am happily charged is perhaps the prince among the political sections
+of the Indian Penal Code designed to suppress the liberty of the citizen.
+Affection cannot be manufactured or regulated by law. If one has no affection
+for a person or thing one should be free to give the fullest expression to his
+disaffection so long as he does not contemplate, promote or incite to violence.
+But the section under which mere promotion of disaffection is a crime. I have
+studied some of the cases tried under it, and I know that some of the most
+loved of India’s patriots have been convicted under it. I consider it a
+privilege therefore, to be charged under it. I have endeavoured to give in
+their briefest outline the reasons for my disaffection. I have no personal
+ill-will against any single administrator, much less can I have any
+disaffection towards the King’s person. But I hold it to be a virtue to be
+disaffected towards a Government which in its totality has done more harm to
+India than any previous system. India is less manly under the British rule than
+she ever was before. Holding such a belief, I consider it to be a sin to have
+affection for the system. And it has been a precious privilege for me to be
+able to write what I have in the various articles tendered in evidence against
+me.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In fact I believe that I have rendered a service to India and England by
+showing in non-co-operation the way out of the unnatural state in which both
+are living. In my humble opinion, non-co-operation with evil is as much a duty
+as is co-operation with good. But in the past, non-co-operation has been
+deliberately expressed in violence to the evil doer. I am endeavouring to show
+to my countrymen that violent non-co-operation only multiplies evil and that as
+evil can only be sustained by violence, withdrawal of support of evil requires
+complete abstention from violence. Non-violent implies voluntary submission to
+the penalty for non-co-operation with evil. I am here, therefore, to invite and
+submit cheerfully to the highest penalty that can he inflicted upon me for what
+in law is a deliberate crime and what appears to me to be the highest duty of a
+citizen. The only course open to you, the Judge and the Assessors, is either to
+resign your posts and thus dissociate yourselves from evil if you feel that the
+law you are called upon to administer is an evil and that in reality I am
+innocent, or to inflict on me the severest penalty if you believe that the
+system and the law you are assisting to administer are good for the people of
+this country and that my activity is therefore injurious to the public weal.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+M. K. GHANDI.
+</p>
+
+</div><!--end chapter-->
+
+<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10366 ***</div>
+</body>
+
+</html>
+