Civil Disobedience Suspended the Provincial Bureaucracy Both in Bombay and C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
82 Civil Disobedience Suspended The provincial bureaucracy both in Bombay and C. P. and Berar was in a bellicose mood to crush the Congress agitation, while the Viceroy Lord Irwin was more in favour of conciliation. It was hence, only the Home Government in London which could break the stalemate. The thrust of a mass civil disobedience movement, the strain on the police and a radical change in British willingness for a substantial constitutional advance, all put together forced the Prime Minister to publish a statement which contemplated a grant of considerable power to Indians (19th January 1931). The statement pronounced, "With a Legislature constituted on a federal basis His Majesty's Government will be prepared to recognise the principle of the responsibility of the Executive to the Legislature ". The Prime Minister's statement was followed by the Viceroy's parleys for allowing the Congress Working Committee to meet in Allahabad. On 24th January Lord Irwin made a public statement that all members of the Working Committee would be released unconditionally as an indication of Government's wish to create the conditions in which they could implement the Prime Minister's offer. In pursuance to this policy Government unilaterally released Gandhiji and all members of the CWC on 26th January 1931. This, however, did not mean a general amnesty or the release of all civil disobedience prisoners from jails. Gandhiji argued that since civil disobedience was a mass movement the leaders could not dictate a course of action, and the release of all satyagraha prisoners must coincide with peace parleys. Within the Congress opinions were divided on the continuance of civil disobedience. Motilal Nehru, who was of crucial importance at this juncture, died on the day the R.T.C. delegates landed at Bombay. Notwithstanding a partial peace in parts of India, there was an intensification of civil disobedience activity in Bombay, Gujarat towns and Karachi. Picketing in all forms increased in these areas and it was renewed in some places where it had disappeared. The Reports of Intelligence furnished below throw a light on the situation as it existed then. Editor 83 29 Collins to Emerson No. S. D.—817 Bombay, 12th February, 1931. / am desired to submit my report for the second half of January 1931. Political .—Although the publication of the statements of the Prime Minister on the 19th January, and of His Excellency the Viceroy on the 25th, and the release on the 26th of the members of the Working Committee of the Indian National Congress were on the whole received in a manner which augured well for the future, there has since been an intensification of civil disobedience activity. Picketing in all forms has increased in Bombay, Karachi and the large towns and had been renewed in some parts where it had disappeared; the salt laws (to anticipate my next report) have been broken in a few places, notably at Dandi on February 1st; and in Gujarat the no-tax campaign has continued unabated and there have, if anything, been a larger number of demonstrations and greater licence in the Press. While these symptoms can be explained by the similar developments in other parts of India, and can be attributed to Mr. Gandhi's insistence on the continuation of picketing and salt-making during the progress of negotiations, and the probability that instructions have been issued by the Congress to this effect, they can also to some extent be ascribed, at any rate in such places as Bombay, Ahmedabad and Karachi, to a desire on the part of the extremists among the followers of Congress to prevent the development of an " atmosphere " favourable for negotiations and to throw every possible obstacle in the way of a settlement which does not amount to a complete surrender on the side of Government on terms imposed by the congress. Ten persons in the Presidency were released on the evening of the 26th January, and, except in the case of Mr. Gandhi, their release caused much less excitement than might have been expected. Mr. Gandhi, accompanied by Mrs. Naidu and Piarelal (Pyarelal), who had been Mr. Gandhi's companion in Yeravada jail, was taken by motor to Chinchwad on the night of the 26th, and there entrained for Bombay. There was some mild excitement in Poona in anticipation of his release and a number of people who wished to go to Yeravada had to be turned back by the police at the Bund Bridge but no trouble ensued. On arrival in Bombay, Mr. Gandhi was met by a crowd of two or three thousand people which had collected in the early hours of the morning, and taken in procession to Dhobi Talao, where he managed to throw off the crowd and to drive to Gamdevi to the house of a friend with whom he usually stays in Bombay. Large crowds besieged the building throughout the day to receive his "darshan " and after he had repeatedly appeared in response to the clamour, the leaders decided to hold a meeting on the Esplanade Maidan in the evening at which everybody would have an opportunity of seeing him. A very large crowd assembled at the Maidan including a considerable number of women and children. In spite of the appeals of the leaders and the attempts of the volunteers to maintain order, scenes of wild confusion took place and soon after Mr. Gandhi had arrived and had been garlanded the excitement became so great that Mr. Gandhi 84 asked the President to tell the people to disperse. Thirty-three people were injured and one of them, a woman of 60, died during the night. Mr. Gandhi and the other members of the Working Committee left for Allahabad on the night of the 27th, Mr. Gandhi taking the precaution of entraining from Dadar in order to avoid demonstrations. His statement to the Press before his departure has already been given wide publicity. He was also interviewed by a large number of merchants during the day. The celebration of Independence day on the 26th January was by previous arrangement not interfered with by the police, and passed off quietly almost everywhere, the prior announcement by the Viceroy of an unconditional amnesty to members of the Working Committee being chiefly responsible for the lack of enthusiasm. In Bombay City, the largest gathering held in connection with the flag salutation ceremony in the morning attracted only about 300. The demeanour of the people was noticeably cheerful and orderly. The public meeting held under the auspices of the War Council on the Esplanade Maidan in the evening was attended by about 20,000 persons who quietly dispersed after the Independence resolution had been read out by the President and passed by the meeting. Picketing: In Bombay City picketing of cloth shops has again been accompanied by the scenes of violence to which I have referred in my recent reports. The Muhammadan foreign cloth merchants, however, have shown more unmistakeable signs of resistance to Congress tyranny (?) and this has been noticeable also at Karachi. Assaults by Muhammadans on Congress pickets attempting to prevent the removal of cloth are becoming more frequent, and communal trouble is not out of the question. On their side the Congress have started more intensive propaganda for sealing foreign cloth, and anonymous leaflets have been pasted up warning cloth-dealers and the landlords of buildings in which foreign cloth shops are located that their shops and buildings will be burned down. On the 29th two Parsi ladies, who had purchased foreign cloth, were molested (?) and subjected to a trying ordeal before they could get away. On the 30th a police officer was roughly handled by volunteers. On the 31st several packages which had been handed over by timid merchants to be sealed with the Congress seal were left lying in a side lane and were seized by the police as a unclaimed property. It has recently become not uncommon for such packages to be seized from handcarts or coolies in circumstances which virtually amount to robbery (?). The so-called Jamiat-ul-Ulema volunteer Corps ceased the picketing of liquor shops on the 17th January, and diverted its attention to the picketing of clothshops. Probably the chief reason for this was the action of the local branch of the real Jamiat-ul-Ulema in declaring that the volunteers, who were mostly Hindus with a leavening of riff-raff from the Muhammadan population had no connection whatever with the Jamiat. Since the end of the month, however, for reasons which I have already given, liquor shop picketing has been renewed with greater force and there are now daily 150-250 volunteers engaged in that form of activity. * * * 85 The Government of India have already been supplied with the facts relating to the dispersal of a number of processions of women which were organised at Borsad in the Kaira district on the 21st January to protest against the alleged ill-treatment of two women by the Borsad police— an incident which has been used for propaganda against Government both in India and abroad. Action under Ordinance X of 1930:— Security was demanded from the keepers of three presses and the publisher of one newspaper, and four persons were prosecuted under Section 18 of the Ordinance for publishing unauthorised news-sheets and newspapers. Prosecutions.—Sanction was accorded to the prosecution under Section 124-A, Indian Penal Code, of (1) Jamnadas Dwarkadas in connection with a speech delivered on the 12th January at a public meeting held at Bombay to express sympathy with the Sholapur convicts. He was sentenced on the 23rd January to nine months' rigorous imprisonment, (2) Professor D.