diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 10366-0.txt | 7700 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 10366-h/10366-h.htm | 8169 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/10366-0.txt | 7701 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/10366-h/10366-h.htm | 8169 |
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> + |