Earl Winter ton and Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]    

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Earl Winter ton and Mahatma Gandhi 

 

 

 

I have not been able to share his views on Hindu-Muslim questions. It was, therefore, a great joy to me that the Ali Brothers warmly acclaimed his great speech on the unity resolution. So long as Hindu and Mussalman leaders distrust one another’s motives, speeches and actions, there can be no real unity in spite of perfect resolutions. Let us hope that the trust generated at the meeting will continue and prove highly infectious. Maulana Mahomed Ali, in his joy over Malaviyaji’s speech, said that the Mussalmans no longer wanted protection of minorities from Earl Winter ton for it could be better secured by Malaviyaji. If there be one Hindu who can guarantee such protection on behalf of Hindus it is Malaviyaji. But whether he can ‘deliver goods’ or not, I would like the Maulana and the other Mussalmans and all minorities once for all to renounce the idea of expecting or getting protection from a third party. It were better, if such protection be not given voluntarily by the majority, to wrest it by force from unwilling hands than that a third party should be invited to intervene and should weaken and humiliate both and hold the nation under bondage. The greatest contribution of the Congress then to me was this apparent change of heart. 1 

They do in Earl Winter ton. The latest instance is to be found in his answers to the House of Commons in reply to questions on the burning of foreign cloth in Calcutta made world famous by the wanton interference of the Calcutta police. I give below the answers of the noble Earl and the correct version against each answer:

Gandhi was not arrested. I was arrested and released on signing a Personal recognizance bond. The Government of Bengal had intimated that the lighting of bonfire to burn foreign cloth was illegal. The Government of Bengal never intimated that the burning of foreign cloth was illegal. The Commissioner of Police at Calcutta notified that the burning of foreign cloth in or near thoroughfares or public streets in Calcutta was illegal in terms of the Police act. His (Mr. Gandhi’s) persistence led to a melee. My persistence did not lead to a melee. The wanton stupidity of the police was responsible for what happened in spite of my clearest possible statement made in their hearing that there was no intention to defy the law and that they could prosecute me if they chose and test the legality of my action in burning foreign cloth. The police brutally dispersed the crowd near the place of fire and sought to extinguish it after it had done its work. The prosecution should be postponed till Mr. Gandhi had returned from Burma on condition that there would be no similar bonfire in Calcutta in the mean time. The condition agreed to by me was that there would be no similar bonfire in the public squares of Calcutta. The bonfires continue on private premises in Calcutta.

The corrections can all be verified from the public Press. The misstatements made by the noble Earl are, it may be observed, important and made the police appear innocent of any guilt or error. The noble Earl crowned his answers by the following pronouncement: There is no new political situation and the House may rest assured that the Government of Bengal will enforce ordinary law against those attempting to break it whether political leaders or their dupes. He may out of his conceit which hides the truth from him declare that there is “no new political situation”. He who runs may see that a new political situation has undoubtedly arisen in India by reason of the high-handed action of the police. It will depend upon the public workers to demonstrate the strength of the new situation. This much is certain that the bonfire lighted in Shraddhanand Park will not be quenched by any amount of lathi display by the police force and any other exhibition of the “strong arm “of the Government. Only a complete boycott of foreign cloth can quench that fire.

The noble Earl’s assurance to the House about the enforcement of the ordinary law whether against “political leaders or their dupes “was a gratuitous insult offered to the leaders and the people. To this we are used. The only answer that self-respecting persons can offer to such insult is to accelerate the rate of their progress towards their goal. It is however necessary here to show that the Government of Bengal is not enforcing the mere ordinary law. It is enforcing lynch law. Ordinary law would have meant a mere prosecution for the breach of a police regulation. Only under extraordinary circumstances are the police allowed to take the law into their own hands, but of this more hereafter. I am writing this in Burma and in ignorance of the latest events. When may the police take the law into their own hands is a question which needs careful examination so long as one works within the law. 2  

I hope, therefore, the rumour is not true that the British Government are likely, at the instance of some Princes or their Diwans, to announce a change in the policy recently enunciated by Earl Winter ton, about the ability of the Princes to grant responsible government to their people. If any of them have asked the British Government to reverse the policy, they have undoubtedly done a disservice to themselves. And if the British Government responds to the unworthy wish, they will precipitate a first-class crisis whose magnitude it is difficult to foretell. I must refuse to believe that the British Government can commit such a blunder. Earl Winter ton’s announcement was but an endorsement of past practice. They are not known to have ever interfered with the States giving powers to their people, however wide they might be. I go a step further. Even as the British Government, as the Paramount Power, is bound to protect the Princes against harm from outside or within, they are equally or a fortiori bound to ensure just rule on the part of the Princes. Hence it is their bounden duty, when they supply the police or the military to any State, to see that there is a proper emergency justifying the request and that the military or the police will be used with becoming restraint. From Dhenkanal have come to me stories of fiendish cruelty exercised by the State myrmidons under the shadow of the police supplied by the Paramount Power.

I asked for evidence in support of some of the unnamable cruelties. And I have enough to inspire belief. Indeed, it is a question whether responsible Ministers in the provinces have not a moral responsibility in respect of the people of the States in their respective provinces. Under the Constitution, the Ministers have no power over them. The Governor is the agent of the Viceroy who is the representative of the Paramount Power. But the Ministers in autonomous provinces have surely a moral responsibility regarding what happens in the States. So long as the States and the people are satisfied, Ministers have no worry. But have they none if there is, say, a virulent epidemic in the States which, if neglected, may easily overtake the province in which they are situated? Have they none when there is a moral epidemic which seems to be raging in Dhenkanal? I understand that the persecuted people are taking refuge in British Orissa. Can the Ministers refuse them shelter? How many can they take charge of? Whatever happens in these States affects for better or for worse the province as a whole? I do believe, therefore, that the Ministers by reason of the heavy responsibility resting on their shoulders have the moral right, within strict limits, to assert themselves for the sake of internal peace and decency. They cannot look on with unconcern while the people of the States an arbitrary creation of the Paramount Power—are being ground to dust as they in Dhenkanal are reported to be. One reads in the papers that some concessions have been given to the people of Dhenkanal. I do not know whether the report is true and whether the relief answers the purpose for which the people of Dhenkanal are fighting and suffering. It is, however, irrelevant to the issue raised by me.

I feel that the Ministers in the provinces are morally bound to take notice of gross misrule in the States within their borders and to tender advice to the Paramount Power as to what, in their opinion, should be done. The Paramount Power, if it is to enjoy friendly relations with the provincial Ministers, is bound to give sympathetic ear to their advice. There is one other matter which demands the urgent attention of the States and their advisers. They fight shy of the very name Congress. They regard Congressmen as outsiders, foreigners and what not. They may be all that in law. But man-made law, if it is in conflict with the natural law, becomes a dead letter when the latter operates in full force. The people of the States look up to the Congress in all matters affecting their interest. Many of them are members of the Congress. Some like Shri Jamnalalji hold high offices in the Congress organization. In the eyes of the Congress there is no distinction between members from the States and from India called British. It is surely detrimental to the interests of the States to ignore the Congress or Congressmen, especially when it or they seek to render friendly assistance. They must recognize the fact that the people in the States are in many cases guided by the Congress. They know that I am responsible for the policy of non-interference hitherto followed by the Congress. But with the growing influence of the Congress it is impossible for me to defend it in the face of injustice perpetrated in the States. If the Congress feels that it has the power to offer effective interference, it will be bound to do so when the call comes. And if the Princes believe that the good of the people is also their good, they would gratefully seek and accept the Congress assistance. It is surely in their interest to cultivate friendly relations with an organization which bids fair in the future, not very distant, to replace the Paramount Power, let me hope, by friendly arrangement. Will they not read the handwriting on the wall? 3

 

References:

 

1. Young India, 5-1-1928
2. Young India, 21-3-1929  
3. Harijan, 3-12-1938