Emergency Rule in Tamil Nadu from 1920 to 1947

International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

R. GANTHIMATHI Ph.D. Research Scholar(Reg. No.11258) Post Graduate and Research Department of History, Women’s Christian College, Nagercoil – 629 001. Affiliated to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Abishekapatti, Tirunelveli – 627 012, Tamil Nadu, India.

Abstract

The Government of India Act of 1919 had enlarged the Madras Legislature from 50 to 132. While 70 percent of the members of Legislative Council were elected, 30 percent were nominated. The electorate was restricted and there was no universal adult sufferage. The duration of the council became three years and powers of legislators were improved. It introduced direct election. Dyarchy or dual government was introduced in the province. It means rule by two authorities – British and Indians. This paper seeks to highlight the Emergency rule in Tamil Nadu during the period 1920-1947.

Key Words:Congress, Tamil Nadu, Policies, Election, Disintegration, Council, Coalition.

INTRODUCTION

Provincial Legislative Council was established by the Indian Council Act of 1861. In the provincial councils, less than six and not more than twelve members could be nominated. Half of them should be non-official. By appointing non-officials, the system of indirect election was introduced by this Act. By the Indian Councils Act of 1892, the nominated members should be not less than sixteen and not more than twenty. Further the Indian Councils Act of 1909 increased the number as fifty. In the Madras Legislative Council twenty-one were official members, others were nominated members. For the first time Indians got some responsibility in the administration of provinces. It introduced the system of communal and class representation and the system of election. The Government of India Act of 1919 had enlarged the Madras Legislature from 50 to 132. While 70 percent of the members of Legislative Council were elected, 30 percent were nominated. The electorate was restricted and there was no universal adult sufferage. The duration of the council became three years and powers of legislators were improved. It introduced direct election. Dyarchy or dual government was introduced in the province. It means rule by two authorities – British and Indians. 1920 Legislative Council Election The Government of India Act, 1919 provided for diarchy in provinces and as a result, a limited responsible Government was introduced in the Madras Presidency. The Congress Party refused to contest the election criticizing the 1919 Reform, but, the Justice Party welcomed the Reforms, contested the elections in November 1920. The Justice Party won a tremendous victory, it captured 63 seats out of 98 seats. A.

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1701 International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

SubbarayaluReddiar became the premier (Chief Minister) of the Madras Presidency on December 1920.The Chief Minister was in charge of Education, Public Works, Excise and Registration. The Independent Party got 18 seats. The justice party claimed the support of 18 independent party members bringing up its strength to 81 in the Council.

First Ministry of Justice Party – A. Subharayalu Ministry Perungavur Rajagopalachari was appointed as the President of the Legislative Council and Edwin Periyanayakam, ArcotRamasamyMudaliar andP. Subbarayan were made Council Secretaries. Ramarayaningar and KurmaVenkata Reddy Naidu, all Telugu members, became ministers. The Justice Government passed the first communal government order, thereby becoming the first elected body in the Indian legislative history to legislate reservations, which have since become standard policy in India. The mid-day meal scheme was first introduced in 1920 by the Madras Corporation with the approval of the Legislative Council, as a breakfast scheme in a corporation school at Thousand Lights, Madras. Later it was expanded to four more schools. The Government of India Act of 1919 had restricted women from becoming legislators. The first Government reversed this policy by moving a resolution in the Council on 1 April 1921. The qualifications for becoming a member of the Council were made gender neutral. This resolution cleared the day for Dr. MuthulakshmiReddi’s nomination to the Council in 1926, when she became the first woman to become a member of any legislature in India. However, A. Subbarayalu resigned on 11 July 1921 soon afterwards on grounds of health, then Ramarayuaningar of Panagal became the Chief Minister. Ramarayaningar Ministry in 1921 After A. Subharayulu resigned the ministry, Ramarayaningarfamiliarly known as Raja of Panagalformed the ministry on 11 July 1921. A.P. Patro, KurmaVenkata Reddy Naid, T.N. Sivagnanam Pillai were important leaders in his ministry. Sivagnanam Pillai was an ardent supporter of empowerment of the depressed classes. Ramarayaningar introduced a number of reforms during his tenure as Chief Minister. Second Ministry of Ramarayaningar – Raja of Panagal In the election held on 31 October 1923, twenty candidates were elected unopposed for seventeen constituencies of the Legislative Council. The Justice Party captured 98 seats and all the ministers the raja of Panagal, K.V. Reddi Naiduand A.P. Patro were elected. Immediately after the results of the election, the Raja of Panagal formed the ministry on 19th November 1923. The Swarajists contested 11 seats and they won all of them.In 1923, the British government bestowed upon Ramarayaningar. No-Confidence Motion After some days a split occurred in the party. Dr. C. Ramalinga Reddy, one of its members moved no-confidence motion against the ministry. On 27 November 1923, a no-confidence motion was moved against the government of the Raja of Panagal. The no-confidence motion was defeated by a margin of 65 votes to 44. The rapid growth of the population of Madras necessitated the expansion on the city and the creation of more residential colonies. To fulfil this requirement, the Madras Town Planning Act of 1920 was passed on 7thSeptember 1920 before the diarchy was established. As per the provision of this Act, numerous town planning measures were taken during the tenure of the Raja of Panagal. The 5 km (3.1 mile) long and 2 km (1.2 mile) broad Long Tank, which extended from Nungambakkam to Saidapet, forming an arc along the city’s western frontier, was drained out in 1923. The development of the

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1702 International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

tract to the west of the Long Tank had been initiated by the British Government in 1911 with the construction of a railway station at the village of Marmalan or Mambalam. Following the draining out of the Long Tank, the Justice Party Government of the Ramarayaningar conceived the creation of a residential colony adjoining this little village. The residential colony was named Thyagaraya Nagar after Justice Party stalwart Sir PittiThyagarayaChetty, who had died shortly before the township was inaugurated and was centredaround a park named Panagal Park after the Raja of Panagal. The streets in this new locality were named after prominent members of the Justice Party or officials in the Municipal administration. 1926 Madras Legislative Council Election In the election of 1926, Swaraj Party was outstandingly successful in the Legislative Council election. Swarajists won 41 seats, the Justice Party only 22, and Independent 36. The Swaraj Party had pledged itself to fulfil its principle of abstracting government business by not forming a ministry. C.V.S. Narasimha Raju, the Swaraj Party leader in the Council declined the Governor’s invitation to form a ministry. The Rajah of Panagal also declined to form a ministry on behalf of the Justice Party on the grounds that it would be unable to retain office in the face of Swaraj Party’s majority opposition. Finally, P. Subarayan, formerly of the Justice Party but elected as an Independent in 1927 accepted the office of Chief Minister. Coalition Ministry – P. Subbarayan P. Subbarayan served as the Chief Minister of Madras Presidency from 4 December 1926. A. RanganathaMudaliar, S. MuthaiahMudaliar, R.N. ArogyasamyMudaliar, M.R. SethuramanIyer, were ministers in the Subbarayan ministry. P.Subbarayan’s regime was appointed and largely controlled by the Governor, became the target of strong criticism both from the Justicites as well as the Swarajists. The Simon Commission was appointed by the British Parliament in 1927 to report on the working of the progress of the Montague Chelmsford Reforms. The Swaraj Party moved a resolution to boycott the Commission and this was passed sixty-one to fifty with twelve remaining neutral. Subbarayan opposed the resolution but his cabinet ministers RanganathaMudaliar and ArogyaswamyMudaliar supported it.To prevent the possibility of the formation of a coalition ministry of the Swaraj Party and Justice Party, the Governor stepped in to encourage differences amongst the opposition. However, the Subbarayan Government accorded the commission a warm reception. Third Ministry of Justice Party – B. Muniswamy Naidu In 1930 Justice Party formed the ministry while the Congress launched the Civil Disobedience Movement. In this election Justice Party easily obtained a majority and again formed a ministry. Justice Party won 35 seats. P. MunuswamiNaidu became the Chief Minister on 27 October 1930. During Naidu’s tenure, Madras was confronted with the great depression. He had rivalry with Zamindars and with the Raja of Bobli. Meanwhile, finding from the elections that the non-Brahmins had little to fear politically from the Brahmins, it threw open its membership to the Brahmins with a view to strengthening its organization. Raja of Bobli Ministry, 1932 When P.T. Rajan and S. KumaraswamyReddiar resigned their posts, Munuswamy Naidu began to fear a no-confidence motion. He resigned before such a motion could be

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1703 International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

brought forth. Munuswamy Naidu was succeeded by the Raja of Bobbili as Chief Minister. The Raja of Bobli became the Chef Minister on 5 November 1932. During his tenure, Madras was in the grip of economic crisis. The Raja did introduce some measures in order to relieve the burden on the poor peasant. But by and large, the rapid depreciation of the economy remained unchecked and the government had no regard for the poor peasant. Second Ministry of Raja Bobli, 1934 By 1933, constitutional reforms were imminent and diarchy was expected to be abolished. The fourth Council’s term, which was to have ended on 5 November 1933, was extended by one year because it was believed a new Council would not serve out its full term before diarchy was abolished. But, after a year, the expected reforms had not materialized and fresh elections were held for a new Council. The INC and its electoral arm, the Swaraj Party decided to participate in the elections despite their opposition to diarchy. The Congress was greatly rejuvenated by its successful organization of the Salt Satyagraha and Civil Disobedience Movement of 1930-31. In the 1934 polls also the Justice Party faced a defeat but fortune favouredthem once again. The Justice Ministry was allowed to continue till the Act of 1935. Raja of Bobli formed his second ministry which continued in power until the election of 1937. First Congress Ministry - Rajagopalachari Ministry, 1937 The first Legislative Assembly election for the Madras Presidency was held in February 1937 under the new Act of 1935. The People’s Party and the Madras Provincial Scheduled Castes Party as well as the revival of the Madras Provincial branch of Muslim League were the new parties to enter into the election. The Indian National Congress obtained a majority by winning 159 of 215 seats in the Legislative Assembly and 27 out of 46 seats in the Legislative Council.Justice Party’s defeat reflected the growing natilonalist movement throughout India. The Justice reforms had been highly communal in character, reinforcing caste rigidity, the very tyranny that sought to destroy the society. The Justice Party was rooted out. The Raja of Pithapuram, founder of the People’s Party, was also defeated.This was the first electoral victory for the Congress in the Madras Presidency. Despite being the majority party in the Assembly and the Council, the Indian National Congress was hesitant to form a Government because of the veto powers given to the Governor. According to the Act of 1935, the Governor was given special responsibilities in the area of finance and control and absolute discretionary powers over the cabinet in certain other issues. The Governor had the power to overrule the Cabinet. The Congress refused to accept power (in all the six provinces where they had won) with such caveats. So, the Governor of Madras, Lord Erskine, decided to form an interim provisional Government with non-members and opposition members of the Lesiglative Assembly. V.S. SrinivasaSastri was first offered the Chief Ministership of the interim government but he refused to accept it. Then Erskine formed an interim government with KurmaVenkata Reddy Naidu as Chief Minister on 1 April 1937. Governor’s rule in Tamilnadu on 1939 After the resignation of the Congress government the Presidency came under the direct rule of the Governor on 30 October 1939, according to Section 93 of the Government of India Act of 1935. It was extended two times – on February 1943 and on

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1704 International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

29 September 1945 by the Proclamation of the Governor. Indian Viceroy Lord Wavell proposed a plan to break the constitutional deadlock called the Wavell Plan. It resulted in the release of all Congress political prisoners and called for the repeal of Section 93 and for fresh elections to be held. The Congress agreed to resume its participation in the electoral process and elections were scheduled for 1946. Second Congress Ministry – T. Prakasam After the end of the Second World War in 1946, elections were held in Tamil Nadu. Congress won and T. Prakasam an Andhra Brahmin formed the ministry.After seven years, once again the Congress came to power. Of the 215 constituencies, in 94 there was no contest at all. Madras was the only Presidency where such a large number of candidateswere returned unopposed. The following was the position of the Legislative Assembly after the elections in 1946: Congress 163, Muslim League 28, Communists 2, Europeans 7, Independents 6, Independent Party 7, and vacant seats 2. Though the Congress won an astounding victory in the Presidency, there was no leader to guide its destiny. It was feared that the reputation of the Congress in the Presidency was in jeopardy. The years after this election saw factionalism in Madras Congress Party with divisions across regional (mainly Tamil and Andhra) and communal (Brahman and non- Brahman) lines. Competition among T. Prakasam (Andhra Brahman),C. Rajagopalachari (Tamil Brahman) and K. Kamaraj (Tamil non-Brahman) resulted in the election of T. Prakasam as the Chief Minister initially.

OmandurRamaswamyReddiar – 1947 On 23 March 1947, OmandurRamaswamyReddiar was selected as the Chief Minister supported by K. Kamaraj. M. Baktavatsalam, P. Subbarayan, T.S.S. Rajanwho were important leaders in the Ministry of RamaswamyReddiarcabinet. In 1948, Prakasam sought re-election by contesting against Reddiar, who in addition to Kamaraj, was supported by other notable Andhra members such as N. Sanjeeva Reddy and Kala Venkata Rao Prakasam was defeated by a vote of 112 of 84. During his tenure, the Madras Temple Entry Authorization Act 1947 was passed. This Act was intended to give Dalits and other prohibited Hindus full and complete rights to enter Hindu temples. This was approved by the Governor on 11 May 1947 and passed by Madras Act 05 of 1947. The Devadasi Dedication Abolition Act of 1947 put an end to the devadasi system that was in vogue in many Hindu temples.

CONCLUSION Ramaswamy got success by K. Kamaraj, but he did not allow them special privileges. So during the 1949 Congress Legislative Party elections Kamaraj supported P.S. Kumaraswamy Raja. His premiership of Madras Presidency came to an end in April 1949. Kumaraswamy Raja ruled madras till the 1952 election when he lost his seat in Srivilliputhur constituency.

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1705 International Journal of Research ISSN NO:2236-6124

REFERENCES

[1] Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Quadrennial Review 1967-70, June 1971, Madras, p.1. [2] Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Quinquennial Review 1971-76, Madras, 1977, p.1. [3] Ilbert, Sir Courtenay Peregrine, The Government of India, Clarendon Press, 1922, p.125. [4] The Hindu, 15 & 17 December 1920. [5] S. Krishnaswamy, The Role of Madras Legislature in the Freedom Struggle, 1861-1947. Peoples Publication, Delhi, 1989, pp.72-73. [6] P. Rajaraman, The Justice Party: A Historical Perspective 1916-37, Poompozhil Publishers, 1988, pp.255-260. [7] G.O. No. 443 (Legislative) Dept, 9 August 1926, p.93. [8] KamaladeviChatopatya, The Awakening of Indian Women, Every Men Press, Madras, 1939, p.101. [9] Encyclopedia of Political Parties, p.181. [10] Geetha V. Rajadurai, Some non-Brahmin leaders, Revol – A Radical Weekly in Colonial Madras, 1928, p.176. [11] Govt. of Madras Legislative Department, G.O. No. 17, dated 17 January 1974. [12] Madras Legislative Council Proceedings, Vol. XV, November 1923, pp. 27-28. [13] Madras Town Planning Act 1920, Kerala Institute of Local Administration, 2008. [14] Eugene F. Irschick, Politics and Social Conflict in South India the Non-Brahmon Movement and Tamil Separation 1916-1929, Oxford University, 1969, p. 313. [15] The Indian Annual Registrar, Vol. 1, 1927, p.50. [16] Encyclopedia of Political Parties, pp.192-197. [17] Govt. of Madras Public (Confidential) G.O. No. 696 (MS), 4 June 1930. [18] Fortnightly Reports (Confidential), dated 16 July 1928. [19] Madras Administration Report, 1935, Madras, p. 40. [20] Madras Presidency Administration Report for 1935-36, pp. viii – ix. [21] Fortnightly Report (Confidential), dated 4 March 1937. [22] Robert L. Hardgrave, Essays in the Political Sociology of South India, Delhi, 1919, pp. 23-24. [23] Visalakshi Menon, From Movement to Government: The Congress in the United Provinces, 1937-42. 2003, p. 75. [24] Fortnightly Report (Confidential), dated 10 October 1939. [25] Tamil Nadu State Gazetteer of India, Kancheepuram and Tiruvalluvar, Vol. I, 2000, p.170. [26] Fortnightly Report, 5 April 1946. [27] Tamil Nadu SattamantraPavalavizha (Tamil), Chennai, 1997, p. 210. [28] Kandaswamy, P. The Political Career of K. Kamaraj, New Delhi, 2001, p.50. [29] Muthulakshmi Reddy, S. Autobiography of Mrs. S. Muthulakshmi Reddy, 1964, p.73.

Volume VIII, Issue II, February/2019 Page No:1706