1930 - 1937 India

314 Chapter X 1930 - 1937 INDIA In India the civil disobedience movement that had gathered momentum after the Dandi March careered along even as the First Round Table Conference convened in London. The severe reprisals that the Government inflicted upon the boycotters did not deter them, nor Gandhi’s imprisonment in the Yeravada Jail, Poona in May 1930 dilute the campaign. There was turmoil and commotion in Lahore, Calcutta, Bombay and martial law in Bombay and Sholapur. In the Frontier Province the army was mobilised and airforce put into action. Economic distress had added fuel to the political fire. There were strikes in the factories and a movement in Uttar Pradesh villages for non-pay of rents. In Gujarat a no-tax campaign was planned. Government resorted to coercive measures to realise revenue. Thousands of acres of land were confiscated, hundreds of village officials were dismissed. The aboriginals of the Central Provinces defied the forest laws and the peasants of Karnataka and Kanara vied with one another in 31:5 making sacrifices and inviting privalions and suffering. In fact the movement had greatly succeeded in both its aim to elevate the moral stature of the people and to destroy the political prestige of Government. It damaged British economic interests by reducing Indian imports - especially of textiles and yarn by 31 % - 45 %. By the end of 1930, the British had realised that without conciliating the Congress, whose influence proved to be all pervading, no settlement was possible. The Times’ correspondent had warned, "No Indian delegation without Gandhi, the two Nehrus, Malviya or Patel could possibly be looked on as representative." Wedgewood Benn had suggested to the Viceroy the desirability of inducing Gandhi to attend the Round Table Conference. Then the Viceroy made his persuasive speech to the Indian Legislative Assembly on the 17tii January 1931 thus opening a way to a rapproachment with Gandhi. On the 26th January 1931 the Mahatma and members of the Congress Working Committee were released. On 8th February the much awaited members of ti\e Round Table Conference - Sapru, Jaykar, Sastri arrived in Allabahad and discussions ensued until the 14th. Although they had nothing new to tell, it was on their suggestion that 316 the Mahatma sought on interview with the Viceroy Lord Irwin. On leaving the Yeravada Jail the previous month, Gandhi had said "I am hankering after peace, if it can be had with honour." On the 5th March an agreement was signed between Gandhi and Irwin. The Congress ratified the Gandhi- Irwin Pact at its Karachi session on 29th March that was presided by Vallabhai Patel.' The civil disobedience movement had ignited the entire fabric of the Indian polity. "It is needless for me to say that already there are signs of impatience. There is nothing unusual in this. When there is a declaration of war of independence in British India, these splinters are bound to cross the frontier. The stir in British India has been and is acting on the states and repercussions are visible. Good sen.se therefore requires to take time by forelock. Any delay however unintentional and unconsciously brought about may be open to comment. With a view therefore to avoid this feeling and to foster and keep up that atmosphere of good relations... I am placing these views for Your Highness’ consideration.- Already on the 7th April the Chief of Sangli, Chintamani Appasaheb Patwardhan had announced his intention to institute a Royal Assembly or an elected Legislative Assembly. 317 Although Abhyankar had been dismissed from the post of Public Prosecutor by the Sangli Durbar on grounds that his political activities were incompatible with the job, the Rajasaheb continued to look to him for guidance in matters of governance. Abhyankar proceeded to draw up the modalities and conditionalities that would govern the Sangli Rayat Assembly which was to have both a nominated and an elected component. The preparation of electoral rolls - on the basis of necessary residence in the Sangli State jurisdiction and educational status of both men and women was recommended. A detailed methodology of the officers required to conduct the preliminary preparations, the elections and past election formalities - their duties and responsibilities were outlined. Abhyankar suggested to the Rajasaheb that a committee be constituted to frame rules and bylaws for the Provincial Council with Rao Saheb Thombare, Prime Minister of the State, as chairman and two non-official members as advisors would do the trick. He especially suggested the name of A. V. Patwardhan who had enabled the framing of constitutions in the States of Bhor, Oundh and Phaltan. Abhyankar suggested that simultaneous elections be held of the Sangli Municipality, other municipalities in the state, the Sangli Chamber of 318 Commerce and the Cooperative Credit Societies in the Sangli State. He said special emphasis on strictly adhering to the publicly announced time schedule for the entire exercise. On the question of the nominated members in the Assembly, Abhyankar suggested that of the ten at least three should be outsiders and proceeded to suggest names of men who had experience in other state councils. These were Rao Bahadur Kale of Satara, Mr. Jog of Dharwad, Mr. N.C. Kelkar of Poona, Mr. Chikadi of the Bombay Council "representing sober non-brahmin opinion," and Mr. Wagbhat Deshpande of Bhor. "Their association would be of immense use in building up correct traditions and conventions, in shaping and guiding our procedure and in restraining botli the official and non-official elements of this assembly. I have made this suggestion with the object that no time should be lost when the elections are over to declare these three nominations. The rest of the seven nominations are entirely at the discretion of Your Highness. The interest of minorities, of untouchables and of women (I am sorry to bracket them with the remaining two) deserve Your Highness’ consideration in filling the seven nominations."^ Abhyankar suggested that to begin with the Rayat Assembly could be 319 housed in the Willingdon College buildings, "if the assembly develops in importance it would willingly vote for a spacious chamber for itself."'* Replying to the Rajasaheb’s suggestion that Abhyankar might consider joining the Assembly he said "I doubt whether my activities would leave me time and energy to be a member of this assem bly.Perhaps Abhyankar had been convinced that "one cannot serve two masters at once." Also the fact that official position would inevitably fetter his political activity. Yet he did not seize the chance offered by the civil disobedience movement. He did not unleash it within the states in Western Maharashtra surely knowing that these small states would not be able to sustain its onslaught. Instead true to his declared goal of "constitutional government under the aegis of the Indian Rulers" he paved the way and enabled the establishment of representative assemblies and forums on this region. At the all-India level when the Gandhi-Irwin talks were well under way and an agreement was imminent, the States leaders decided to explore possibilities of placing their views before the Second RTC through the Congress. It may be recalled that during the First RTC while the British government had consistently refused to accord the States Subjects any 320 representation, the few British Indian leaders who had been associated with the States Peoples Movement by virtue of their association with the Servants of India Society, backed out of the task of pleading the case at the Conference. Accordingly, on the 27th February 1931 the AISPC presented a memorandum to the Mahatma stating that "the Congress would be untrue to itself if it did not seek the protection of the States’ people in a new constitution for India." The memorandum^ was prepared for the AISPC by Abhyankar. Other members were Amritlal Thakkar, Rangildas Kapadia and Kakalbhai Kothari. Outlining the background of the States Peoples’ problems the memorandum stated that it was only in 1921 that the then Prime Minister Ramsay Mcdonald had used the "reslricting" word "British India" instead of the word "India" that the authors of the 1917 Reforms had mentioned as the political entity where there was to be a progressive realisation of responsible and self-governing institutions. The states leaders were unhappy that the 1931 declaration at the end of the 1st Round Table Conference was silent on this point. "The Princes have agitated for over four years to be separated from the Government of India as they believed 321 that democratization in British India would be the death knell of their autocratic power and control over their internal autonomy.’ Thus the princes forwarded the principle of direct relations with the Crown through the Viceroy and an alien bureaucracy. "This was upheld by the Butler Committee, favoured by the Simon Commission and supported by the dispatch of the Government of India and the present declaration puts the seal of approval of His Majesty’s Government on the Princes’ demand."** The First RTC had thus "given the Princes what they wanted". The princes had 1) saved themselves of any possibility of any encroachment by the All India Federation on their internal autonomy. 2) Their autocratic powers remained intact. 3) They were now vested with additional powers of influencing policies, legislature and administration of matters of common concern or federal subjects in the future. The British Imperialists, on their part were only too "eager to support the Princes in their endeavour to divide Paramountcy. The endless negotiations on this and other related questions gave the British enough opportunity 1) "to retain full control of Indian India as the Princes’ autonomy and autocracy would remain in tact only by sufferance and 322 support of the Paramount Power." 2) The British would dominate the Federal Legislative and Executive through the nominees of the Princes.

Load more