sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aga Khan III, Allahabad Address, East Bengal, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Indian Councils Act 1909, Lahore Resolution

M. A. II SEMESTER PAPER NAME – ’S STRUGGLE FOR INDEPENDENCE (PRE GANDHIAN ERA) PAPER CODE- MAHS CC IX (109) UNIT -3

DR DEEPTI JAISWAL

GUEST FACULTY

DEPT OF HISTORY

K.M.C. LANGUAGE UNIVERSITY

Partition of (1905)

Division of Bengal carried out by the British viceroy in India, Lord Curzon, despite strong Indian nationalist opposition. It began a transformation of the from a middle-class pressure group into a nationwide mass movement. Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa had formed a single province of British India since 1765. By 1900 the province had grown too large to handle under a single administration. , because of isolation and poor communications, had been neglected in favour of and Bihar. Curzon chose one of several schemes for partition: to unite Assam, which had been a part of the province until 1874, with 15 districts of east Bengal and thus form a new province with a population of 31 million. The capital was Dacca (now , Bangl.), and the people were mainly Muslim. The of west Bengal, who controlled most of Bengal’s commerce and professional and rural life, complained that the Bengali nation would be split in two, making them a minority in a province including the whole of Bihar and Orissa. They regarded the partition as an attempt to strangle nationalism in Bengal, where it was more developed than elsewhere. Agitation against the partition included mass meetings, rural unrest, and a swadeshi (native) movement to boycott the import of British goods. The partition was carried through despite the agitation, and the extreme opposition went underground to form a terrorist movement. In 1911, the year that the capital was shifted from Calcutta (now Kolkata) to Delhi, east and west Bengal were reunited; Assam again became a chief commissionership, while Bihar and Orissa were separated to form a new province. The aim was to combine appeasement of Bengali sentiment with administrative convenience. This end was achieved for a time, but the Bengali , having benefitted from partition, were angry and disappointed. This resentment remained throughout the rest of the British period. The final division of Bengal at the partitioning of the subcontinent in 1947, which split Bengal into India in the west and East (later ) in the east, was accompanied by intense violence.

Swadeshi movement

The , part of the Indian independence movement and the developing , was an economic strategy aimed at removing the British Empire from power and improving economic conditions in India by following the principles of swadeshi which had some success. Strategies of the Swadeshi movement involved boycotting British products and the revival of domestic products and production processes B.C Bhole identifies five phases of the Swadeshi movement.

 1850 to 1904: developed by leaders like , Gokhale, Ranade, Tilak, G. V. Joshi and Bhaswat K. Nigoni. This was also known as First Swadeshi Movement.

 1905 to 1917: Began in 1905, because of the partition of Bengal ordered by Lord Curzon.

 1918 to 1947: Swadeshi thought shaped by Gandhi, accompanied by the rise of Indian industrialists.

 1948 to 1991: Widespread curbs on international and inter-state trade. India became a bastion of obsolete technology during the licence-permit raj.

 1991 onwards: liberalization privatisation and globalization. Foreign capital, foreign technology, and many foreign goods are not excluded and doctrine of export-led growth resulted in modern industrialism.

The Swadeshi movement started with the partition of Bengal by the Viceroy of India, Lord Curzon in 1905 and continued up to 1911. It was the most successful of the pre-Gandhian movement. Its chief architects were Aurobindo Ghosh, Lokmanya , and , V. O. Chidambaram Pillai, Babu Genu. Swadeshi, as a strategy, was a key focus of , who described it as the soul of (self rule). It was strongest in Bengal and was also called the Vandemataram movement.

The word Swadeshi derives from Sanskrit and is a sandhi or conjunction of two Sanskrit words. Swa means "self" or "own" and desh means country, so Swadesh would be "own country", and Swadeshi, the adjectival form, would mean "of one's own country".

Introduction

Credit to starting the Swadeshi movement goes to Baba Ram Singh Kuka of the Sikh Namdhari sect, whose revolutionary movements which heightened around 1871 and 1872. Naamdharis were instructed by Baba Ram Singh to only wear clothes made in the country and boycott foreign goods. The Namdharis resolved conflict in the people’s court and totally avoided British law and British courts. They also boycotted the educational system as Baba Ram Singh prohibited children from attending British School, amongst other forms and measures he employed.

Swadeshi movement

The proposal of the partition of Bengal became publicly known in 1905, followed by immediate and spontaneous protests all over Bengal. Lord Curzon asked to partition Bengal in order to drive a wedge between the Hindus and Muslims. 500 meetings were held in East Bengal alone. 50,000 copies of pamphlets with a detailed critique of partition were distributed. This phase is marked by moderate techniques of protest such as petitions, public meetings, press campaigns, etc. to turn public opinion in India as well as in Britain against nothing else.

This movement also involved the boycott of British products. Western clothes were thrown onto bonfires and shops selling foreign goods were picketed.

To let the British know how unhappy the Indians were at the partition of Bengal, leaders of the anti-partition movement decided to use only Indian goods and to boycott British goods. People gathered at the crossroads and burnt the imported clothes that they had. People picketed the shops selling foreign goods, and imported sugar was boycotted. People also resolved to use things made only in India and this was called the Swadeshi movement.

The Swadeshi movement had genesis in the anti-partition movement which started to oppose the British decision to partition Bengal. There was no questioning the fact that Bengal with a population of 70 million had indeed become administratively unwieldy. Equally, there was no escaping the fact that the real motive for partitioning Bengal was political, as Indian nationalism was gaining in strength. The partition was expected to weaken what was perceived as the nerve center of Indian nationalism. Though affected in 1905, the partition proposals had come onto the public domain as early as 1903. Therefore, since 1903, the ground for the launch of the Swadeshi movement had been prepared. In the official note, Risley, the Home Secretary to the Government of India said, "Bengal united is power; Bengal divided will pull the national movement in several different ways".

The partition of the state intended to curb Bengali influence by not only placing under two administrations but by reducing them to a minority in Bengal itself. In the new proposal, Bengal proper was to have 17 million Bengali and 37 million Oriya and Hindi speaking people. Also, the partition was meant to foster another kind of division—this time based on religion, i.e. between the Muslims and the Hindus. The Indian Nationalists saw the design behind the partition and condemned it unanimously. The anti-partition and Swadeshi movement had begun.

The nature of the Swadeshi movement

The Bengalis adopted the boycott movement as the last resort after they had exhausted the armory of constitutional agitation known to them, namely vocal protests, appeals, petitions, and Conferences to coerce the British to concede the unanimous national demand.

The original conception of Boycott was mainly an economic one. It had two distinct, but allied purposes in view. The first was to bring pressure upon the British public by the pecuniary loss they would suffer by the boycott of British goods, particularly the Manchester cotton goods for which Bengal provided the richest market in India. Secondly, it was regarded as essential for the revival of an indigenous industry which being at its infant stage could never grow in the face of free competition with foreign countries that had a highly developed industry.

As the Boycott, the Swadeshi as a purely economic measure for the growth of the Indian Industry was not an altogether novel idea in India. It was preached by several eminent personalities in the 19th century, , better known as Lokahitawadi of Bombay, founder Dayanand Saraswati and Bholanath Chandra of Calcutta. But the seeds sown by them did not germinate till the soil was rendered fertile by the grim resolve of a united people, exasperated beyond measure; to forge the twin weapons of Boycott and Swadeshi in order to undo the great wrong which was inflicted upon them by an arrogant Government, callous to the voice of the people.

Later on, the economic boycott receded into the background with time and it developed into an idea of non-cooperation with the British in every field and the object aimed at was a political regeneration of the country with the distant goal of absolute freedom looming large before the eyes of the more advanced section. Similarly, Swadeshi completely outgrew the original conception of promoting the Indian industry.

The economic boycott and Swadeshi

In the economic sense, Swadeshi would represent both a positive and a negative element. These have been discussed as under:-

The positive element of economic swadeshi was the regeneration of indigenous goods. The boycott of foreign goods led to the increase in demand for indigenous goods especially clothes that felt short of supply. The mill-owners of Bombay and Ahmadabad came to its rescue. The Boycott movement in Bengal supplied a momentum and driving force to the cotton mills in India and the opportunity thus presented was exploited by the mill-owners. It complained at that time that the Bombay mill-owners made a huge profit at the expense of what they regarded as ‘Bengali Sentimentalism’, for buying indigenous cloth at any sacrifice. This was initiated by Mahatma Gandhi.

Bengal had to supplement the supply from Bombay mills by the coarse production of handlooms. The weaving industry in Bengal was a very flourishing one until the British ruined it after they had established their rule over the province in the 18th century. The economic boycott movement seemed to be a suitable opportunity for reviving that industry. The clothes produced were very coarse but were accepted by the Bengalis in the true spirit of the Swadeshi Movement. A song which became very popular all over the country urged upon the people to give the place of honor to the coarse cloth which is the gift of the Mother, too poor to offer a better one.

The negative element (this can be considered negative only about the British) of the economic swadeshi was the boycott and burning of foreign goods. Though Manchester cloth was the chief target of the attack, the movement was extended to other British manufacturers also, such as salt and sugar as well as luxury goods in general. The ideas of Swadeshi and economic boycott were kept alive and brought home to every door by articles in newspapers, processions, popular songs, enrollment of volunteers to keep vigilant watch and by occasion bonfires of foreign cloth, salt, and sugar. The old apparels of foreign-made belonging to sundry people were placed in a heap and then it was set on fire. The blazing flames were looked upon as a special mode of honoring noted public leaders and the bonfires greeting them were regarded as of great value as a means of infusing enthusiasm for Swadeshi.

Fines were inflicted on anyone found using foreign sugar. Foreign cigarettes were bought and burnt in the streets, Brahmins refused to assist any religious ceremonies in houses where European salt and sugar were used and Marwaris were warned of importing foreign articles.A man selling or buying foreign goods would be subjected to social boycott. All these bonfires however affected the economy of the people. To burn 'Manchester-made goods' bought at a high price affects the people. However, swept by national enthusiasm, people continued to eschew and burn foreign goods.

Swadeshi and Social Boycott

The main points are: The social boycott was an outcome of the economic swadeshi movement. It was preached to go against the repressive measures of the Government. The social boycott was a very powerful weapon. A man selling or buying foreign goods or in any way opposing the swadeshi Movement and helping Government in putting it down would be subjected to various degrees of humiliation. Such social ostracism would make a man quite unhappy, sometimes even very miserable and the Government could do very little to help him in his distress. But such non-violent ostracism was not the only form of persecution. Sometimes, the 'renegade' would suffer material loss and bodily or mental pain.

Swadeshi and National Education

Students were promoting the boycott and the swadeshi movement drew upon them the wrath and violence of the . Circulars were issued forbidding the students under threat of severe penalty to associate themselves in any way with the Boycott movement. Even the cry of in streets and other public places was declared to be a punishable offense. Schools or colleges whose students disobeyed the order was not only threatened with the withdrawal of Government grants and even with disaffiliation, but their students were to be declared ineligible for Government Service. The authorities of the educational institutions were asked to keep strict watch over their pupils, and if unable to control them, were to report the names to the Education Department for taking necessary disciplinary action. The magistrates were asked to inform the teachers and those connected with the management of educational institutions, that if necessary they might be enrolled as Special Constables. The Direction of Public Instruction asked the principals of colleges to show causes why their students who took part in the picketing should not be expelled.

All this produced a storm of indignation in the country and the Indian-owned Press denounced the circulars in the strongest language. The people of Bengal took up the challenge. The students of some colleges in Rangpur defied the Government orders and when they were fined, the guardians refused to pay the fine and stabled a national school for the boys who were expelled. Teachers were also asked to resign for not whipping the boys. The action of the authorities led to a movement among the students to boycott the Calcutta University which they described as Gulamkhana (House of manufacturing slaves). At a conference attended by a large number of very eminent men of Bengal in different walks of life held on 10 November 1905, it was decided to establish at once a National Council of Education to organize a system of education—literary, scientific and technical—on national lines and under national control. The number of national schools also grew apace with time.

The enthusiasm with which the two responded to the idea of national education shows how the swadeshi movement, like a mighty river, was overflowing its bed and inundating vast stretches of the country. It was no longer confined to its primary object of industrial regeneration and boycotting British goods. More important still, the movement with its extended connotation was no longer confined to Bengal but spread to the whole of India.

Swadeshi, culture and press

It was perhaps in the cultural sphere that the impact of the swadeshi movement was most marked. The songs composed at the time of , Rajani Kanta Sen, Dwijendralal Ray, Makunda Das, Syed Abu Mohammad and other later became the moving spirit for nationalist of all hues. Rabindranath's , written at that time, was to later inspire the liberation struggle of Bangladesh and was adopted as the National Anthem of the country on January 24, 1950. Similarly, there were great improvements in Indian art.

The writings of Vande Mataram revolutionize the political attitude of Bengal. The four leading newspapers of Calcutta — the Bengalee, the Amrita Bazaar Patrika, the Indian Mirror, and the Hindu Patriot — protested against the division of BengalApart from this, vernacular newspapers such as the Sanjivani and the Bangabashi expressed open hostility against the proposal. The Amrita Bazaar Patrika in its issue of 14 December 1903 called on the people of East Bengal to hold public meetings in every town and village to prepare petitions for submission to the government, which was signed by lakhs of people.

Repressive measures taken by the Government

Other than boycott and burning of foreign goods, people also resorted to 'peaceful picketing' which destined to become a normal feature in almost every type of political agitation in the future. All these gave the police a good opportunity to interfere. The volunteers were roughly handled and if they resisted, the police beat them with lathis. These 'Regulation Lathis', as they were called, were freely used by the police in the first instance to drive away from the picketers and to disperse crowds, whether rioters or peaceful, if they were supposed to be sympathetic to the picketing volunteers. The uttering of Vande Mataram was indisputable evidence of such sympathy and later it was made illegal to shout Vande Mataram in a public place.

The Government also issued instructions to the educational institutions to control their boys and prevent them from participating in the swadeshi movement. Rural markets were controlled bans were put on processions and meetings, leaders were put into confinement without any trial and loyal Muslims were made to go against the recalcitrant Hindus.

Effects and estimate of Swadeshi Movement

It is difficult to form an accurate estimate of the effect of the Boycott movement on the import of foreign goods in Bengal, as no exact statistics are available. It appears, however, from the official and confidential Police reports that for the first two or three years, there was a serious decline in the import of British goods, particularly cloth.

Passive resistance could not go for long and its ultimate result could never be in doubt. This was the genesis of the sudden emergence of a network of secret revolutionary organizations that were determined to meet the Government on equal terms, by collectively arms and opposing terrorism by terrorism.

The Swadeshi partition and the Government measures also finally led to the split of Hindus and Muslims and virtually the formation of the in 1906. This was opposed by Mahatma Gandhi as he was against Hindu- Muslim Divergence

Although Swadeshi was originally conceived as merely a handmade of a boycott of foreign goods and meant only to be an urge to use indigenous in preference to foreign goods, it soon attained a much more comprehensive character and became a concrete symbol of nationalism. No less significant was that Swadeshi in Bengal brought into the vortex of politics a class of people-the landed aristocracy—who had hitherto held studiously aloof from the congress or any other political organization. Outside Bengal, it gave a rude shock of disillusionment to the whole of India and stimulated the political thoughts of the people. Swadeshi emphasized "Aatma shakti" or soul force. One particular aspect of the Swadeshi movement which M.K. Gandhi prized above everything else should be specially emphasized. It taught the people to challenge and defy the authority of the Government openly in public and took away from the minds of even ordinary men the dread of police assault and prison as well as the sense of ignominy which hitherto attached to them. To go to prison or get a badge of honor and not as hitherto a brand of infancy.

The Swadeshi Movement had its genesis in the anti-partition movement which was started to oppose the British decision to partition Bengal. The Government's decision to partition Bengal had been made public in December 1903.

The official reason given for the decision was that Bengal with a population of 78 million (about a quarter of the population of British India) had become too big to be administered.

This was true to some extent, but the real motive behind the partition plan was the British desire to weaken Bengal, the nerve center of Indian nationalism.

Muslim League

The All-India Muslim League (popularised as the Muslim League) was a political party established in 1906 in British India. Its strong advocacy for the establishment of a separate Muslim-majority nation-state, Pakistan, successfully led to the in 1947 by the British Empire.

The party arose out of a literary movement begun at The Muslim University in which was a central figure. It remained an elitist organisation until 1937 when the leadership began mobilising the Muslim masses and the league then became a popular organisation.

In the 1930s, the idea of a separate nation-state and influential philosopher Sir Iqbal's vision of uniting the four provinces in North-West British India further supported the rationale of the two-nation theory. With global events leading up to World War II and the Congress party's effective protest against the United Kingdom unilaterally involving India in the war without consulting the Indian people, the Muslim League went on to support the British war efforts. The Muslim League played a decisive role in the 1940s, becoming a driving force behind the division of India along religious lines and the creation of Pakistan as a Muslim state in 1947.

After the partition and subsequent establishment of Pakistan, the Muslim League continued as a minor party in India where it was often part of the government. In Bangladesh, the Muslim League was revived in 1976 but it was reduced in size, rendering it insignificant in the political arena. In India, the Indian Union Muslim League and in Pakistan the Pakistan Muslim League became the original successors of the All-India Muslim League.

Despite severe efforts by the pioneers of the Congress to attract Muslims to their sessions the majority of the Muslim leadership, such as Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Syed Ameer , rejected the notion that India's "two distinct communities" could be represented by the Congress.

In 1886, Sir Syed founded the Muhammadan Educational Conference, but a self-imposed ban prevented it from discussing politics. Its original goal was to advocate for British education, especially science and literature, among India's Muslims. The conference, in addition to generating funds for Sir Syed's Aligarh Muslim University, motivated the Muslim upper class to propose an expansion of educational uplift elsewhere, known as the . In turn, this new awareness of Muslim needs helped stimulate a political consciousness among Muslim elites, who went on to form the All-India Muslim League.

The formation of a Muslim political party on the national level was seen as essential by 1901. The first stage of its formation was the meeting held at Lucknow in September 1906, with the participation of representatives from all over India. The decision for re-consideration to form the all-Indian Muslim political party was taken and further proceedings were adjourned until the next meeting of the All India Muhammadan Educational Conference. The Simla Deputation reconsidered the issue in October 1906 and decided to frame the objectives of the party on the occasion of the annual meeting of the Educational Conference, which was scheduled to be held in Dhaka. Meanwhile, Nawab Salimullah Khan published a detailed scheme through which he suggested the party to be named All-India Muslim Confederacy.

Pursuant upon the decisions taken earlier at the Lucknow meeting and later in Simla, the annual meeting of the All-India Muhammadan Educational Conference was held in Dhaka from 27 December until 30 December 1906.Three thousand delegates attended,[2] headed by both Nawab Waqar-ul-Mulk Kamboh and Nawab Muhasan-ul-Mulk (the Secretary of the Muhammaden Educational Conference), in which they explained its objectives and stressed the unity of Muslims under the banner of an association. It was formally proposed by Nawab Salimullah Khan and supported by , Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar, , Syed Nabiullah, a barrister from Lucknow, and Syed Zahur Ahmad, an eminent lawyer, as well as several others.

Separate electorates

The Muslim League's insistence on separate electorates and reserved seats in the Imperial Council were granted in the Indian Councils Act after the League held protests in India and lobbied London.

The draft proposals for the reforms communicated on 1 October 1908 provided Muslims with reserved seats in all councils, with nomination only being maintained in . The communication displayed how much the Government had accommodated Muslim demands and showed an increase in Muslim representation in the Imperial and provincial legislatures. But the Muslim League's demands were only fully met in UP and Madras. However, the Government did accept the idea of separate electorates. The idea had not been accepted by the Secretary of State, who proposed mixed electoral colleges, causing the Muslim League to agitate and the Muslim press to protest what they perceived to be a betrayal of the Viceroy's assurance to the Shimla deputation.

On 23 February Morley told the House of Lords that Muslims demanded separate representation and accepted them. This was the League's first victory. But the Indian Councils Bill did not fully satisfy the demands of the Muslim League. It was based on the October 1908 communique in which Muslims were only given a few reserved seats. The Muslim League's London branch opposed the bill and in a debate obtained the support of several parliamentarians. In 1909 the members of the Muslim League organised a Muslim protest. The Reforms Committee of Minto's council believed that Muslims had a point and advised Minto to discuss with some Muslim leaders. The Government offered a few more seats to Muslims in compromise but would not agree to fully satisfy the League's demand.

Minto believed that the Muslims had been given enough while Morley was still not certain because of the pressure Muslims could apply on the government. The Muslim League's central committee once again demanded separate electorates and more representation on 12 September 1909.While Minto was opposed, Morley feared that the Bill would not pass parliament without the League's support and he once again discussed Muslim representation with the League leadership. This was successful. The compromised so that Muslims would have two more reserved seats in the Imperial Council. The Muslim League hesitantly accepted the compromise.

Early years

Sir Sultan Muhammad Shah (Aga Khan III) was appointed the first honorary president of the Muslim League, though he did not attend the Dhaka inaugural session. There were also six vice-presidents, a secretary, and two joint secretaries initially appointed for a three-year term, proportionately from different provinces.[21] The League's constitution was framed in 1907, espoused in the "Green Book," written by Maulana Mohammad Ali.

Aga Khan III shared Ahmad Khan's belief that Muslims should first build up their social capital through advanced education before engaging in politics, but would later boldly tell the British Raj that Muslims must be considered a separate nation within India. Even after he resigned as president of the AIML in 1912, he still exerted a major influence on its policies and agendas.[22] In 1913, Mohammed Ali Jinnah joined the Muslim league.

Intellectual support and a cadre of young activists emerged from Aligarh Muslim University. Historian Mushirul Hasan writes that in the early 20th century, this Muslim institution, designed to prepare students for service to the British Raj, exploded into political activity. Until 1939, the faculty and students supported an all-India nationalist movement. After 1939, however, sentiment shifted dramatically toward a Muslim separatist movement, as students and faculty mobilised behind Jinnah and the Muslim League.

Communalism grows

Politically, there was a degree of unity between Muslim and Hindu leaders after World War I, as typified by the . Relationships cooled sharply after that campaign ended in 1922. Communalism grew rapidly, forcing the two groups apart. Major riots broke out in numerous cities, including 91 between 1923 and 1927 in alone. At the leadership level, the proportion of Muslims among delegates to the Congress party fell sharply, from 11% in 1921 to under 4% in 1923.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah became disillusioned with politics after the failure of his attempt to form a Hindu-Muslim alliance, and he spent most of the 1920s in Britain. The leadership of the League was taken over by Sir , who in 1930 first put forward the demand for a separate Muslim state in India. The "Two-Nation Theory", the belief that Hindus and Muslims were two different nations who could not live in one country, gained popularity among Muslims. The two-state solution was rejected by the Congress leaders, who favoured a united India based on composite national identity. Congress at all times rejected "communalism" — that is, basing politics on religious identity. Iqbal's policy of uniting the North-West Frontier Province, Baluchistan, Punjab, and into a new Muslim majority state became part of the League's political platform.

The League rejected the Committee report (the ), arguing that it gave too little representation (only one quarter) to Muslims, established Devanagari as the official writing system of the colony, and demanded that India turn into a de facto unitary state, with residuary powers resting at the centre – the League had demanded at least one-third representation in the legislature and sizeable autonomy for the Muslim provinces. Jinnah reported a "parting of the ways" after his requests for minor amendments to the proposal were denied outright, and relations between the Congress and the League began to sour.

Conception of Pakistan

On 29 December 1930, Sir Muhammad Iqbal delivered his monumental presidential address to the All-India Muslim League annual session. He said: I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province [modern-day ], Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.

Sir Muhammad Iqbal did not use the word "Pakistan" in his address. Some scholars argued that "Iqbal never pleaded for any kind of partition of the country. Rather he was an ardent proponent of a 'true' federal setup for India..., and wanted a consolidated Muslim majority within the Indian Federation".

Another Indian historian, Tara Chand, also held that Iqbal was not thinking in terms of partition of India, but in terms of a federation of autonomous states within India. Dr. Safdar Mehmood also asserted in a series of articles that in the address, Iqbal proposed a Muslim majority province within an Indian federation and not an independent state outside an Indian Federation.

On 28 January 1933, Choudhary Rahmat Ali, founder of the Pakistan National Movement, voiced his ideas in the pamphlet entitled "Now or Never;Are We to Live or Perish Forever?" In a subsequent book, Rehmat Ali discussed the etymology in further detail."Pakistan' is both a Persian and an word. It is composed of letters taken from the names of all our homelands; that is, Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh and Balochistan. It means the land of the Pure".

The British and the Indian Press vehemently criticized these two different schemes and created confusion about the authorship of the word "Pakistan" to such an extent that even had to write:

Iqbal was one of the early advocates of Pakistan and yet he appears to have realized its inherent danger and absurdity. Edward Thompson has written that in the course of a conversation, Iqbal told him that he had advocated Pakistan because of his position as President of Muslim League session, but he felt sure that it would be injurious to India as a whole and to Muslims especially.

Campaign for Pakistan

Until 1937, the Muslim League had remained an organisation of elite Indian Muslims. The Muslim League leadership then began mass mobilisation and it then became a popular party with the Muslim masses in the 1940s, especially after the Resolution.[4][37] Under Jinnah's leadership, its membership grew to over two million and became more religious and even separatist in its outlook.

The Muslim League's earliest base was the United Provinces, where they successfully mobilised the religious community in the late 1930s. Jinnah worked closely with local politicians, however, there was a lack of uniform political voice by the League during the 1938–1939 Madhe Sahaba riots in Lucknow.From 1937 onwards, the Muslim League and Jinnah attracted large crowds throughout India in its processions and strikes.

At a League conference in Lahore in 1940, Jinnah said:

Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, literature... It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes ... To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.

In Lahore, the Muslim League formally recommitted itself to creating an independent Muslim state which would include Sindh, Punjab, Baluchistan, the North West Frontier Province, and Bengal, and which would be "wholly autonomous and sovereign". The resolution guaranteed protection for non-Muslim religions. The , moved by the sitting Chief Minister of Bengal A. K. Fazlul Huq, was adopted on 23 March 1940, and its principles formed the foundation for Pakistan's first constitution. In the Constituent Assembly of India's elections of 1946, the Muslim League won 425 out of 476 seats reserved for Muslims (and about 89.2% of Muslim votes) on a policy of creating the independent state of Pakistan, and with an implied threat of secession if this was not granted. Congress, led by Gandhi and Nehru, remained adamantly opposed to dividing India.

In opposition to the Lahore Resolution, the All India Azad Muslim Conference gathered in Delhi in April 1940 to voice its support for a united India. Its members included several Islamic organisations in India, as well as 1400 nationalist Muslim delegates; the "attendance at the Nationalist meeting was about five times than the attendance at the League meeting." The All-India Muslim League worked to try to silence those Muslims who stood against the partition of India, often using "intimidation and coercion". For example, scholar Maulana Syed Husain Ahmad Madani traveled across British India, spreading the idea he wrote about in his book, and , which stood for Hindu- Muslim unity and opposed the concept of a partition of India; while he was doing this, members of the pro-separatist Muslim League attacked Madani and disturbed his rallies. The murder of the All India Azad Muslim Conference leader Allah Bakhsh Soomro also made it easier for the All-India Muslim League to demand the creation of Pakistan.

Role in communal violence

In the British Indian province of Sind, the historian Ayesha Jalal describes the actions that the pro-separatist Muslim League used in order to spread communal division and undermine the government of Allah Bakhsh Soomro, which stood for a united India:

Even before the 'Pakistan' demand was articulated, the dispute over the Manzilgah had been fabricated by provincial Leaguers to unsettle Allah Bakhsh Soomro's ministry which was dependent on support from the Congress and Independent Party. Intended as a way station for Mughal troops on the move, the Manzilgah included a small mosque which had been subsequently abandoned. On a small island in the near distance was the temple of Saad Bela, sacred space for the large number of Hindus settled on the banks of the Indus at Sukkur. The symbolic convergence of the identity and sovereignty over a forgotten mosque provided ammunition for those seeking office at the provincial level. Making an issue out of a non-issue, the Sind Muslim League in early June 1939 formally reclaimed the mosque. Once its deadline of 1 October 1939 for the restoration of the mosque to Muslims had passed, the League started an agitation.

In the few years before the partition, the Muslim League "monetarily subsidized" mobs that engaged in communal violence against Hindus and in the areas of Multan, , Campbellpur, and Sargodha, as well as in the Hazara District.The Muslim League paid assassins money for every Hindu and Sikh they murdered. As such, leaders of the Muslim League, including , issued no condemnation of the violence against Hindus and Sikhs in the Punjab.

Indian Councils Act 1909 (Morley Minto reforms) The Indian Councils Act 1909 or Morley-Minto Reforms or Minto-Morley Reforms was passed by British Parliament in 1909 in an attempt to widen the scope of legislative councils, placate the demands of moderates in Indian National Congress and to increase the participation of Indians the governance. This act got royal assent on 25 May 1909. Background

Though the Indian Councils Act of 1892 had introduced limited representation with indirect elections, it failed to placate the Indians who were much more conscious of their rights by now. There was a lot of resentment against reign of Lord Curzon, who had already irked the public by the foolish idea of partition of Bengal. There was a rise of extremism in the congress. Government, on one hand wanted to suppress the extremists but on other hand wanted to pacify the moderates. Meanwhile, Gopal Krishna Gokhale went to England and met Mr. Morley, the Secretary of State for India. Viceroy Lord Minto also emphasised the need of making some reforms. Both the Viceroy and the Secretary of State for India decided to work out some scheme to reform the Legislative councils. This culminated as Indian Councils act 1909. The idea was to give locals some more power in the legislative affairs. A provision was made for the expansion of legislative councils at the both the levels viz. central as well as provincial.

Salient Provisions

Expansion of the Legislative Councils The act enlarged the size of the legislative council both Central and Provincial. The number of members in the Central Legislative Council was raised from 16 to 60. The number in Provincial legislative council was not uniform. Legislative councils of Bengal, Bombay and Madras was increased to 50 members each. The provincial legislature of U.P. was to have 50, of Assam, Burma and Punjab 30 each. Communal Representation For the first time, the Indian Councils act gave recognition to elective principle for the appointment of nonofficial members to the councils. However, it introduced separate and discriminatory electorate. The electorate was decided on the basis of class & community. For the provincial councils a provision of three categories was made viz. general, special and chambers of commerce. However, for the central council, a fourth category Muslims was added. This was for the first time that, the seats in the legislative bodies were reserved on the basis of religion for Muslims. Separate constituencies were marked for the Muslims and only Muslim community members were given the right to elect their representatives. The separate electorate for Muslims had a long lasting impact on India’s polity. It recognized the Muslim community as a separate section of the India and triggered the cancer of Hindu- Muslim disharmony which ultimately culminated in the partition. Under the separate electorates, Muslims could vote exclusively for the Muslim candidates in constituencies specially reserved for them. The idea was to establish that the political, economic and cultural interests of the Hindus and Muslims were distinct. The unity between Hindus and Muslims is a illusion and this act sowed the seeds of the Muslim Communism. Other Features

 The act empowered the members to discuss the budget and move resolutions before it was approved finally. They were given rights to ask supplementary questions and move resolutions to on matters related toloans to the local bodies.

 The members given right to discuss matters of the public interest however, the house was not binding on the government. Rules were also framed under the act for the discussion of matters of general public interest in the legislative councils.

 No discussion was permitted on any subject not within legislative competence of the particular legislature any matter affecting the relations of the Government of India with a foreign power or a native state, and any matter under adjudication by a court of law.

Critical Analysis of the Act

The Minto-Morley Reforms of 19O9 could not come up to the expectations of the Indians. What the people of India demanded was that there should be set up a responsible government in the country. But the sacred heart of the reforms of 1909 was “benevolent despotism” and it was basically a subtle attempt to create a “constitutional autocracy”. Further, though non-official majority was given in the Provincial Councils, the practical result was nothing. The non-official majority was nullified by the fact that it included nominated members. There was no real majority of those who represented the people. A shadow rather than substance The reforms of 1909 afforded no answer and could afford no answer to the Indian political problem. The real political solution was lying in complete self-rule and accountable governance but the 1909 Act was only a face saving device. The position of the Governor- General remained unchanged and his veto power remained undiluted and the Act was successfully maintained relentless constitutional autocracy. Under such circumstances narrow franchises, indirect elections, limited powers of the Legislative Councils ushered a complete irresponsible government. The Act rather added new political problem with the introduction of the separate electorate system. While the parliamentary forms were introduced, no responsibility was conceded. At the same time there were no connection between the supposed primary voter and a man who sits as his representative on the Legislative Council. In such a situation, the political participation, awareness and education remained a distant dream. In nutshell, it can be said that 1909 Act was ‘the shadow rather than the substance’.

Merits of Minto-Morley Reforms

Nevertheless, the Minto-Morley Reforms had some of their merits. They mark an important stage in the growth of representative institution, and one step ahead towards the responsible association of elected Indians with the administration. Further, it also gave recognition to the elective principle as the basis of the composition of legislative council for the first time. It gave some further avenues to Indians to ventilate their grievances. They also got opportunity to criticise the executives and make suggestions for better administration. The enlargement of the legislatures furthered the demand of complete indianization of the legislature.