Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav's Posts - The Gandhi-King Community2024-03-28T09:38:29ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadavhttps://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/356398808?profile=RESIZE_48X48&width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1https://gandhiking.ning.com/profiles/blog/feed?user=1eb54y1zb1nv3&xn_auth=noCaste versus Class – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-12:2043530:BlogPost:767102014-08-12T12:29:34.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Caste versus Class – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi did…</p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Caste versus Class – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi did a beautiful comparison between caste and class. He told Man being a social being has to devise some method of social organization. We in India have evolved caste: They in Europe have organized class. Neither has the solidarity and naturalness of a family which perhaps is a God-ordained institution. If caste has produced certain evils, class has not been productive of anything less.</p>
<p>If class helps to conserve certain social virtues, caste does the same in equal, if not greater, degree. The beauty of the caste system is that it does not base itself upon distinctions of wealth-possessions.</p>
<p>Money, as history has proved, is the greatest disruptive force in the world. Even the sacredness of family ties is not safe against the pollution of wealth, says Shankaracharya. Caste is but an extension of the principle of the family. Both are governed by blood and heredity.</p>
<p>Western scientists are busy trying to prove that heredity is an illusion and that milieu is everything. The sole experience of many lands goes against the conclusion of these scientists; but even accepting their doctrine of milieu, it is easy to prove that milieu can be conserved and developed more through caste than through class. The Anglo-Saxon is temperamentally incapable of appreciating any outlook but his own. One can understand his violent opposition to everything that goes against his grain. But Indians, whether Hindus or Christians, ought to be able to see that the spirit behind caste is not one of arrogant superiority; it is the classification of different systems of self-culture. It is the best possible adjustment of social stability and progress. Just as the spirit of the family is inclusive of those who love each other and are wedded to each other by ties of blood and relation, caste also tries to include families of a particular way of purity of life (not standard of life, meaning by this term, economic standard of life).</p>
<p>Only, it does not leave the decision, whether a particular family belongs to a particular type, to the idiosyncrasies or interested judgment of a few individuals. It trusts to the principle of heredity, and being only a system of culture does not hold that any injustice is done if an individual or a family has to remain in a particular group in spite of their decision to change their mode of life for the better. As we all know, change comes very slowly in social life, and thus, as a matter of fact, caste has allowed new groupings to suit the changes in lives. But these changes are quiet and easy as a change in the shape of the clouds. It is difficult to imagine a better harmonious human adjustment.</p>
<p>Caste does not connote superiority or inferiority. It simply recognizes different outlooks and corresponding modes of life. But it is no use denying the fact that a sort of hierarchy has been evolved in the caste system, but it cannot be called the creation of the Brahmins. When all castes accept a common goal of life a hierarchy is inevitable, because all castes cannot realize the ideal in equal degree. If all the</p>
<p>castes believe that vegetarian diet is superior to animal diet, the vegetarian caste will naturally be looked up to. There are certain sub-castes in India that have ever stood on a par with each other, and yet have not interdined or intermarried. Just as a Hindu or a Mohammedan does not think himself an inferior of the other because</p>
<p>of his differences of faith, or just as a Brahmin or a Lingayat in Southern India mutually refuse to inter drink, all castes can confine their food and drink to their own caste. Only by accepting the standard of the Brahmin or the Vaishnavas as the best, have the other castes consented to dine at the hands of the ‘purer’ castes. Touch, drink, food and marriage are progressively private affairs. But by refusing to touch a man, you practically refuse all intercourse with him. He is thus denied all the fruits of social development. The touchable, for instance, can all attend the kathas, the kirtans (religious sermons). They can visit temples and thus get the</p>
<p>free education of religion, rituals and arts. In the temple, all the touchable exchange their love and service and the fruits of civilization. The ‘untouchables’ are automatically barred from all that. In many places, being required to live outside the village, they are deprived of even the protection of their life and property. In the social division of labour they do one of the most important duties to society, and they are deprived of the fruits of the great social life which is evolved by the family of castes. Untouchability has made the ‘depressed’ classes the Cinderella of Hindu society. The question of food and drink has or ought to have no social value. It is merely the satisfaction of physical wants. It is, on the other hand, an opportunity for the control of the senses. Inter dining has never been known to promote brotherhood in any special sense. But the restraints about inter dining have to a great extent helped the cultivation of will-power and the conservation of certain social virtues.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Young India, 29-12-1920</p>
<p> </p>Discussion Aboard The Gurkha with Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-12:2043530:BlogPost:769012014-08-12T09:38:33.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Discussion Aboard The Gurkha with Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>December 16, 1920</p>
<p>I: The…</p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Discussion Aboard The Gurkha with Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>December 16, 1920</p>
<p>I: The immediate aim of non-co-operation, then, is to protest against injustice, isn’t it?</p>
<p>G: No, it is not protest, but purification. Through self-purification, purification of the other party.</p>
<p>G. Quite so.</p>
<p>E. Well, do you feel that you have succeeded in bringing about such purification in any degree?</p>
<p>G. I have been touring the country these days and I am quite surprised to observe how people are learning self-restraint and self-reliance. Even the peasants are developing both these qualities and I feel that British officers, too, have not remained unaffected. Their minds, too, are being purified.</p>
<p>E. Through this purification, what would you have the British do? In what respect do you want their conduct to change?</p>
<p>G. I wish to bring about a state of affairs in which every Englishman would look upon every Indian as his equal. I want to bring down the Englishman from the superior heights from which he talks and to make him think of even the most ordinary Indian labourer as his equal. I want to create a state of affairs in which he</p>
<p>would not slight an Indian in any dealings with the latter, would, on the contrary, in all affairs deal with him as with an equal partner. On no other terms can the Englishman have a place in India. The moment the British and the Indians both come to feel this sense of equality, feel it as a reality, my country will have won its freedom. And to bring about this result, it will be enough if the fetish they make of prestige and dignity is destroyed. What do you find today on all sides? Indians</p>
<p>afraid of the British—Indians concealing their thoughts from others. What can be more degrading than this?</p>
<p>E. Don’t you think you are asking too much when you say that every Englishman should look upon even a labourer in India as his equal? Does every Indian gentleman do so? It would be reason if you merely asked that an Englishman should behave towards Indians as he would towards other Englishmen. He should behave towards an Indian labourer as any English squire would behave towards his farmers.</p>
<p>G. Wonderful. You have put it so much more beautifully than I. That is just what I mean.</p>
<p>I. So, then, you say even the immediate aim of non-co-operation with an unjust Government is purification irrespective of whether purification does or does not bring any material benefits?</p>
<p>G. When we have gone through a full measure of untainted self-suffering, material benefits will follow as a matter of course. For instance, nothing will then remain to be done in regard to the Punjab atrocities. Not only will none of those guilty of the Punjab crimes have any place in India, it will also be impossible to pay salary or</p>
<p>pension to any of them from our treasury.</p>
<p>E. Have you, then, reserved punishment only for the British? Crimes were committed even by Indians—common Indians. What about them?</p>
<p>G. This is an astonishing question. We have been punished for our crimes a thousand times more severely than we deserved. I assure you that not only have all the guilty been punished, but hundreds of innocent people also have been killed. Innocent people have had to suffer imprisonment. Even children suffered. Innocent women were humiliated. The victims of the Jallianwala massacre, too, were innocent people. What punishment more severe than this can you think of? However, I have said nothing about punishing British officers. All that I have suggested is that they should not still continue to receive Indian money and to hold any titles or posts. As for punishing them, the only punishment for some of them</p>
<p>can be hanging. My religion has no room for this. I do not know what India wants.</p>
<p>Talking of this subject, I remember an incident. When Mr. Andrews compared the Jallianwala Bagh massacre to the massacre of Glencoe1, I hastened to publish in Young India even an account of the latter. I did that only in order to show the revulsion Mr. Andrews must have felt at the cruelty of the Jallianwala massacre. But on rereading the account, I felt that Mr. Andrews had been a little unjust and I felt quite unhappy about the matter. I saw Principal Rudra2 had a talk with him; he also thought as I did. But I realize today the aptness of Mr. Andrews’ comparison. I now feel that the Jallianwala massacre was even more wicked, more reprehensible than the other one, for there is a whole world of difference between the state of civilization then and now.</p>
<p>I. Why do you say that the Government has attacked our religion? It was but one partner in the Grand Council of the victorious Allies.</p>
<p>G. I am surprised to hear a man like you asking such a question at this hour of the day. The leading part in planning the dismemberment of Turkey was taken by England. The Prime Minister’s actions are now recoiling on himself. Having outraged his nonconformist conscience, he has, in order to satisfy it, had to go back</p>
<p>on his promise5 and has hurt the Muslims thereby.</p>
<p>I. Well, let’s turn to another matter. You have been asking the students to leave their schools, but do you make any alternative arrangements for their education?</p>
<p>I. Is the present educational system bad, then?</p>
<p>G. The question doesn’t arise at all. But I have no objection to replying to it. I say, “Yes, it is bad.” The medium of education being English has doubled the load on the students’ brains. How should I explain to you what is in my mind? Men like Professor Jadunath Sarkar say that the class educated under the system of a foreign</p>
<p>medium has lost its intellectual vigour. Our imaginative and creative faculties have been completely destroyed. The whole of our time is taken up with learning the pronunciation and the idiom of a foreign tongue. From its very nature this is mere drudgery, and the result has been that we function like blotting-paper before Western civilization; instead of imbibing the best from it, we have become its superficial imitators. The second result is that a gulf has been created between us</p>
<p>and the masses. We cannot explain to them in a language which they will understand even the elements of hygiene and public health, let alone politics. We have become the modern counterparts of the Brahmins of old days; in fact, we are worse, for the Brahmins didn’t mean ill. They were the trustees of the nation’s culture. We are not even that. Actually, we have been misusing our education, behaving towards the common people as if we were superior. I should like you</p>
<p>to cross-examine me on this matter. Let me say, however, that these views of mine are not recent but are the fruit of many years’ experience.</p>
<p>E. We have never thought about this aspect of the matter, and so all we can say</p>
<p>is that we shall now think about it.</p>
<p>G. That’s right. I forgot one thing. I forgot to say that the system has killed us spiritually. Since you have been worshippers of secular education, the Hindus did not get any religious education. In England, the result has not been quite so bad. There the priests arrange to provide some religious education.</p>
<p>I. The thing is that you do not want your children to be educated with robbed</p>
<p>money; am I right?</p>
<p>G. Yes, not only not with robbed money, but not under the robber’s flag either. I have said that we should have nothing to do with schools controlled by a Government which has forfeited our loyalty and our love. I shall tell you a simple thing. There was a time when not only did I myself use to sing “God save the King” with the greatest fervour but had even got my sons, who did not know English, to learn it by heart. When I returned from Africa to Rajkot, I taught the anthem to the students of the Training College also, for I thought that every loyal citizen must know it. But what is the position today? I certainly cannot lay my hand on my heart and sing it or ask anyone else to sing it. I would say that as a good man, King George should live long. But I cannot bring myself to pray that an Empire which has debased itself before man and God should live a moment longer.</p>
<p>I. You said you did not care what the actual system of education was.</p>
<p>G. Yes, that is so.</p>
<p>I. Our universities are run by Indians; their policies are also determined by Indians.</p>
<p>G. Yes, that is true. If the people who run the universities would listen to me, I would simply ask them to tear up their charters. Then I would say that the universities were mine. If they protest that in that case Government grants would stop, I am prepared to give them a guarantee that I would get the funds. All that I am asking them to do is to make the universities national. What did I tell even Panditji? “Return the charter to the Viceroy and, if the Maharajas want their</p>
<p>money back, return even that. We shall meet the deficit by begging. If you have an incomparable gift of begging from Maharajas, I have some gift of begging from the common people.”</p>
<p>I. But what harm has the “charter” done?</p>
<p>G. Why, with the charter comes all that the Government means. It is because of its charter that the Hindu University will honour the Duke of Connaught. How can I stand this? No; I tell you the truth. Mrs. Besant was right when she once said that I wanted a political revolution. Only, the revolution should not be a simple revolution but an evolutionary revolution. But a revolution, I think, there must be.</p>
<p>There is no alternative. Just see how the Government has lost all sense of decency. Look at the shameless public statement it has issued recently. Weaving an elaborate web of big phrases, the Government say that at present they have given freedom to the Press, that they do not intend to gag anyone. But actually what are they doing? Why did they gag the silent worker of the Punjab, Aga Sufdar? He has nothing of the fanatic in him; I have not seen another silent worker like him in the Punjab. And only the other day, Babu Shyam Sunder Chakravarti of The Servant told me that he had received a warning from the Government. Why? Is it for reproducing Mr. Rajagopalachari’s article “Suggestion to Voters” published in Young India? This is an intolerable situation.</p>
<p>I. Let us now turn to courts. What do you have in mind when you ask lawyers to</p>
<p>leave courts and give up practice?</p>
<p>G. I want to shatter the Government’s prestige. It is these courts and schools that strengthen the foundation on which its prestige rests. It is with them that the Government has ensnared the people.</p>
<p>I. How will disputes be settled, then?</p>
<p>G. Shall I tell you my experience? In the course of my practice, I got 75 per cent of my cases settled out of court, and I was considered an expert in getting cases settled in this way. I had earned a name there for my impartiality. And, therefore, as soon as the party received a notice from me, he came running to me and requested a settlement. Many people felt obliged for this reason to engage two solicitors. If they did not get things their way with me, they would approach another solicitor to fight their case. I accepted only clean cases.</p>
<p>E. Do you think there will be many litigants who will have such trust?</p>
<p>G. If 50 per cent of the litigants avoid going to courts, the number of cases will be reduced by 50 per cent. I have been told that 50 per cent of the cases are created by touts. Mr. Das said that this was not so in Calcutta but others told me that he had no experience about this.</p>
<p>A Calcutta pleader who had been following the conversation intervened at this</p>
<p>point to remark that mofussil courts were full of touts.</p>
<p>I. Maybe, but I am talking about cities. The Bengal Chamber of Commerce has</p>
<p>set up an “Arbitration Tribunal”. The Chamber is said to be an influential body, bat</p>
<p>the number of business men’s cases going to courts has not gone down.</p>
<p>G. It is possible, for the number of lawyers has not decreased.</p>
<p>I. What effect will it have if a solitary individual gives up practice?</p>
<p>G. It is bound to have some; effect, relatively speaking. I would certainly say that the tottering structure of the Government’s prestige has received one more push by Pandit Motilal Nehru’s giving up practice. You may ask Sir Harcourt Butler.</p>
<p>E. You have been dissuading intending litigants, too, from going to courts; haven’t you?</p>
<p>G. Yes.</p>
<p>E. But how will that be? In your case, the litigants trusted you. You could only</p>
<p>settle the affairs of those who approached you with a clean conscience and with clean hands. You didn’t even look at others with unclean hands who might come to you. What will you do about such people? There will hardly be any cases in which both the parties have clean consciences and clean hands.</p>
<p>G. Without the least hesitation, I would make a gift of the unclean ones to the Government.</p>
<p>I. I hope you know that we have not come to you to quarrel with you, but only</p>
<p>to understand. We will ask only one more question. Isn’t it true that the</p>
<p>non-co-operation of your followers rests on malice and hatred?</p>
<p>G. Yes. An English friend from Madras has also written to me about this.</p>
<p>E. I understand your principle, but the tongues of your followers utter undiluted</p>
<p>poison.</p>
<p>G. Yes, yes, but my position is that a noble action, whether done with love or hatred, cannot but yield fruit. Whether truth is spoken out of fear or purposefully, it cannot but have its fruit.</p>
<p>I. Your principle is: hate the sin, but not the sinner. But that of your followers seems to be the reverse of this—hate the sinner; there is no need to hate sin.</p>
<p>G. Are you not being unjust? Some hate both sin and the sinner. It is because they hate sin that they have been renouncing so much, have come forward to make such heavy sacrifices. Do you think anyone who merely hated the sinner could make these sacrifices? Never.</p>
<p>E. Your fundamental principle is not to associate yourself with sinners. Then</p>
<p>how can you work with ungodly colleagues? How can a man working from the exalted position that you take work with impure instruments?</p>
<p>G. Will you compare the Government’s ungodliness with the imperfections of my colleagues? Consider a little further and you will understand. Any reformer—and I am a reformer—is bound to carry on with whatever instruments are available to him—not impure instruments, but, say, imperfect instruments.</p>
<p>I. We have given you so much trouble today. Kindly excuse us. I have been till now opposing non-co-operation, but today I realize that the non co-operation I opposed was not non-co-operation as I understand it from you today. We are both grateful to you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Navajivan, 29-12-1920</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Dyerism in Champaran – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-12:2043530:BlogPost:767072014-08-12T09:02:07.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> Dyerism in Champaran – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Champarn is that made famous to Mahatma Gandhi.…</p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b> Dyerism in Champaran – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Champarn is that made famous to Mahatma Gandhi. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi became Mahatma here. Everybody called him Mahatma during Styagraha. During Non-Co-Operation movement, he read this news by a paper, inquired about it, and then wrote this article.</p>
<p>India is a land full of tragedies. Champaran probably contributes the largest number of them. The Searchlight of Patna has just reported one such awful tragedy. It is being investigated by a local Congress Committee of which Mr. Mazharul Haq is the chairman. I do not propose to anticipate the verdict. I understand that the matter is also engaging the Bihar Government’s attention. But as I happened to be in Bettiah, together with Maulana Shaukat Ali in connection with our non-co-operation tour, I venture to give my own impressions gathered from a hurried visit to the spot.</p>
<p>The tragedy took place about fourteen miles from Bettiah, about the 30th November, 1920 last. I do not think that the Government, i.e., the high officials, had any part in its enactment nor had the English planters. This seems to have been peculiarly a police matter, in which the police have acted in an irresponsible manner and without the knowledge of the higher authorities.</p>
<p>Its origin lies in a petty dispute between villagers that resulted in a petty assault. In connection with it a local man of influence was arrested by the police. The villagers appear to have resented it and rescued the man, and even surrounded the constables who arrested him. This proved too much for the wounded dignity of the police. The local Daroga, i.e., Sub-Inspector of Police, is said to have organized a loot in which, under the guidance and direction of the police, men from a neighboring village also are said to have taken part. Houses were denuded of their contents—grain and ornaments.</p>
<p>Women are reported to have been molested and robbed of their jewellery. One woman told me that she was made naked and dust was thrown into her eyes. Another was equally grossly maltreated while she was in the act of easing herself. The villagers had fled in a cowardly manner. Houses were shown to us in which the grain kothis were found to be emptied and broken, grain scattered about, big</p>
<p>boxes unlocked and opened—with the contents removed. Needless to say that the rescued man was almost immediately rearrested and several other men, too, were arrested by the police.</p>
<p>Among them is a local brahmachari. He is a man of considerable influence. He has succeeded in organizing Panchayats settling local disputes. His activity bids fair to popularize the principle of arbitration among the villagers. The police, naturally wanting to undermine his influence and suspecting him of having had a hand in</p>
<p>inciting the people to defy their authority (so it appears from the evidence given to me), have arrested the brahmachari who is now out on bail.</p>
<p>I am unconcerned with the result of the trials that will now probably take place. Some of the arrested men will no doubt be convicted on concocted evidence. Of all the places in India, the most perjury committed on either side is in Champaran. Incredible as it may appear, the occurrence I have reported is not the first of its kind.</p>
<p>The Champaran peasantry is the most helpless and the most terror-stricken of all I have seen. They dread the approach of the police and leave their villages as soon as they appear on the scene. The police have become equally demoralized: bribery and corruption are rampant among them. And each time the people have resented the police treatment, as in the case in point, they have been reduced to greater helplessness by a system of terrorism, in which the magistracy has taken no mean part on behalf of the local Dyers. At times the police have been reprimanded by magistrates or the Government. That they do not mind. The lower police never even know anything about such reprimands; and they care less. The system of terrorism continues and flourishes.</p>
<p>How are the people to be helped? How is the corruption to be removed? Certainly not by courting an official inquiry. That must result in only strengthening the police. Already the police is fortifying its position. Certainly not by the villagers seeking the protection of the courts. It is my settled conviction, based on a study of the records of cases, that in the vast majority of them the people have lost both in</p>
<p>money and in power. An isolated discharge of an innocent man is all they can show as a result of paying fortunes to the lawyers and the bribe-takers.</p>
<p>This police, composed mainly of our own men, must be reformed and won over by non-resistance. We have unnecessarily vilified them instead of pitying them. They are victims of a vicious and even inglorious system. I decline to believe that the Indian policemen are inherently bad and that the Government are powerless to reform them. On the contrary, the system of the Government is such as to corrupt even the most honest of men. It is based upon the practice of securing the greatest immunity for itself. It has made of prestige a fetish and has arrogated to itself the position of infallibility and protection.</p>
<p>Local men everywhere must therefore befriend the police, and the best way of befriending them is to cease to fear them or their authority. In the present case, the village must be advised to forget the wrong. If they can recover stolen property by seeking the intervention of friends, they must do so. They must patiently suffer imprisonment. As defendants, they must resolutely decline to be represented by</p>
<p>pleaders. They must give an unvarnished version to the court. They must submit to misrepresentation, even to the taunt of having no case.</p>
<p>And in future, if and when such incidents happen, they must be prepared to defend themselves. It is better if they can manfully stand persecution and allow themselves to be robbed, instead of hitting in defence of their persons or property. That would indeed be their crowning triumph. But such forbearance can only be exercised out of strength and not out of weakness. Till that power is acquired, they must be prepared to resist the wrongdoer by force. When a policeman comes not to arrest but to molest, he travels beyond his authority. The citizen has then the inalienable right of treating him as a robber and dealing with him as such. He will therefore use sufficient force to prevent him from robbing. He will most decidedly use force in order to defend the honour of his womanhood. The doctrine of non-violence is not for the weak and the cowardly; it is meant for the brave and the strong. The bravest man allows himself to be killed without killing. And he desists from killing or injuring, because he knows that it is wrong to injure. Not so the villagers of Champaran.</p>
<p>They flee from the police. They would strike and even kill a policeman if they had no fear of the law. They gain no merit of non-violence but on the contrary incur the reproach of cowardice and unmanliness, they stand condemned before Government and man. But the workers among a people so fallen as in Champaran will have to be most careful about what they do. They and the people will put themselves in the wrong if they resist the police in the lawful execution of their office, even though the execution may prove or appear to them to be unlawful. The police must not be resisted if they arrest without a warrant. They must not take the law into their own</p>
<p>hands but scrupulously obey it. The safeguard against any serious blunder lies in the fact that on no account are they to seek the protection of the law. If, therefore, they are in the wrong, they will invariably suffer punishment. And when they are in the right, they will most probably not suffer punishment, and they will always have the satisfaction of having saved, or attempted to save, the property, or, what is infinitely better, the honour of their women. In the case in point, it was wrong to rescue the man who was arrested even though in the opinion of the villagers he was innocent. It was wrong because thepolice had the authority in law to effect arrests. It was cowardly on their part to have fled on the approach of the police; it would have been right for them to have defended their women and their goods. If they had not fled, they, being so numerous, would easily have saved their property and protected their women merely by standing their ground. In no case would the villagers have been justified in doing more bodily injury than was needed on the occasion. It is invariably a sign of cowardice and madness to use excessive force. A brave man does not kill a thief but arrests him and hands him to the police. A</p>
<p>braver man uses just enough force to drive him out and thinks no more about it. The bravest realizes that the thief knows no better, reasons with him, risks being thrashed and even killed, but does not retaliate. We must at any cost cease to be cowardly and unmanly.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Young India, 15-12-1920</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>On The Wrong Track – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-12:2043530:BlogPost:767052014-08-12T07:31:54.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>On The Wrong Track – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi was very busy during movement, but he was…</p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>On The Wrong Track – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi was very busy during movement, but he was aware to every activity of it. When he saw that there were some mistakes done by people of India, He told to everybody that our movement is going on wrong track. He wrote an article on it in Young India.</p>
<p>Lord Ronaldshay has been doing me the favor of reading my booklet on Indian Home Rule which is a translation of Hind Swaraj. His Lordship told his audience that if Swaraj meant what I had described it to be in the booklet, the Bengalis would have none of it. I am sorry that the Swaraj of the Congress resolution does not mean the Swaraj depicted in the booklet; Swaraj according to the Congress</p>
<p>Means the Swaraj that the people of India want, not what the British Government may condescend to give. In so far as I can see, Swaraj will be a parliament chosen by the people with the fullest power over the finance, the police, the military, the navy, the courts and the educational institutions.</p>
<p>I am free to confess that the Swaraj I expect to gain within one year, if India responds, will be such Swaraj as will make practically impossible the repetition of the Khilafat and the Punjab wrongs, and will enable the nation to do good or evil as it chooses, and not be ‘good’ at the dictation of an irresponsible, insolent, and godless bureaucracy. Under that Swaraj, the nation will have the power to impose a heavy protective tariff on such foreign goods as are capable of being manufactured in India, as also the power to refuse to send a single soldier outside India for the purpose of enslaving the surrounding or remote nationalities. The Swaraj that I dream of will be a possibility only when the nation is free to make its choice both of good and evil.</p>
<p>I adhere to all I have said in that booklet and I would certainly recommend it to the reader. Government over self is the truest Swaraj. It is synonymous with moksha or salvation, and I have seen nothing to alter the view that doctors, lawyers and railways are no help, and are often a hindrance to the one thing worth striving after. But I know that association with a satanic activity, such as the Government is engaged in, makes even an effort for such freedom a practical impossibility. I cannot tender allegiance to God and Satan at the same time.</p>
<p>The surest sign of the satanic nature of the present system is that even a nobleman of the type of Lord Ronaldshay is obliged to put us on a wrong track. He will not deal with the one thing needed. Why is he silent about the Punjab? Why does he evade the Khilafat? Can ointments soothe a patient who is suffering from corroding consumption? Does his Lordship not see that it is not the inadequacy?</p>
<p>of the reforms that has set India aflame but that it is the infliction of the two wrongs and the wicked attempt to make us forget them? Does he not see that a complete change of heart is required before reconciliation?</p>
<p>But it has become the fashion nowadays to ascribe hatred to non-co-operations. And I regret to find that even Colonel Wedgwood fallen into the trap. I make bold to say that the only way to remove hatred is to give it disciplined vent. No man can —I cannot—perform the impossible task of removing hatred so long as contempt and despise for the feelings of India are sedulously nursed. It is a mockery to ask India not to hate when in the same breath India’s most sacred feelings are contemptuously brushed aside. India feels weak and helpless and so expresses her helplessness by hating the tyrant who despises her and makes her crawl on the belly, lifts the veils of her innocent women and compels her tender children to acknowledge his power by saluting his flag four times a day. The gospel of non-co-operation addresses itself to the task of making the people strong and self-reliant. It is an attempt to transform hatred into pity.</p>
<p>A strong and self-reliant India will cease to hate Bosworth Smiths and Frank Johnsons, for she will have the power to punish them and therefore the power also to pity and forgive them. Today she can neither punishes nor forgive, and therefore helplessly nurses hatred. If the Mussulmans were strong, they would not hate the</p>
<p>English but would fight and wrest from them the dearest possessions of Islam. I know that the Ali Brothers, who live only for the honor and prestige of Islam and are prepared any moment to die for it, will today make friends with the hated Englishmen, if they were to do justice to the Khilafat, which it is in their power to do.</p>
<p>I am positively certain that there is no personal element in this fight. Both the Hindus and the Mohammedans would today invoke blessings on the English if they would but give proof positive of their goodness, faithfulness, and loyalty to India. Non-co-operation then is a godsend; it will purify and strengthen India; and a strong India will be strength to the world, as an India, weak and helpless, is a curse to mankind. Indian soldiers have involuntarily helped to destroy Turkey and are now destroying the flower of the great Arabian nation. I cannot recall a single campaign in which the Indian soldier has been employed by the British Government for the good of mankind and yet Indian Maharajas are never tired of priding themselves on the loyal help they have rendered the English! Could degradation sink any lower?</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Young India, 8-12-1920</p>
<p> </p>Save the Cow – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-10:2043530:BlogPost:768042014-08-10T10:06:49.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Save the Cow – Mahatma…</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Save the Cow – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy was based on villages of India. Main occupation of villages is farming and farming depends on son of cows. And there need depend on cow milk. They made many things by cow milk, So mahatma Gandhi always</p>
<p>Professor Vaswani has unfurled the banner of the cow’s freedom. The danger has come sooner that I had expected. I had hoped that it would come when India could regard it with equanimity. In my humble opinion, Professor Vaswani might have started the movement under better auspices. Any movement started by Hindus for protecting the cow, without whole-hearted Mussulman co-operation, is doomed to failure.</p>
<p>The Hindus’ participation in the Khilafat is the greatest and the best movement for cow-protection. I have therefore called Khilafat our Kamadhuk. The Mussulmans are striving their utmost to respect Hindu susceptibilities in this matter of life and death to the Hindu. The Muslim League under Hakin Ajmal Khan’s presidentship carried a cow-protection resolution at Amritsar two years ago. Maulana Abdul</p>
<p>Bari has written upon it. The Ali Brothers, for the sake of their Hindu countrymen, have given up the use of beef in their house. Mian Chhotani saved hundreds of cows in Bombay alone during the last Bakr-i-Id. We could not accuse our Mussulman countrymen of apathy in the matter.</p>
<p>The surest way of defeating our object is to rush Mussulmans. I do not know that Mussulman honour has ever been found wanting. With them, as with everyone, prejudices die hard. We have got enlightened Mussulman opinion with us. It must take time for it to react upon the Mussulman masses. The Hindus must therefore be</p>
<p>patient.</p>
<p>There is nothing strange about all the Shikarpur Hindus’ having voted unanimously in favour of the prohibiiton of cow-slaughter. Is there a Hindu who will not vote for it? The use of that unanimous opinion for bearing down Mussulman opposition is the way to stiffen it. The Hindu members must have known, must have ascertained, Mussulman feeling. And they should have refrained from going to a</p>
<p>division., so long as the Mussulman opinion was against them. Let us recognize that there is an interest actively working to keep us—Hindus and Mussulmans—divided. That very interest is quite capable of developing regard for Hindu susceptibilities in this respect. I should beware of it, and distrust it. I strongly advise the Shikarpur friends to wait for their Mussulman brethren.</p>
<p>Let them by all means abstain from all meat, so that their Mussulman brethren may have other meat cheaper than beef. Let them consider it a shame to have a single cow or her progeny in distress, or undergoing ill-treatment at the hands of Hindus themselves.</p>
<p>Let them develop their Goshala so as to make it a model dairy farm as well as a home for aged and infirm cattle. Let them breed the finest cattle in their Goshala. They will do real service to Gomata1. Let the Shikarpuris one and all beocme true non-co-operators, and hasten the redress of the Khilafat wrong. I promise they will save the cow when they have done their utmost to save the Khilafat. It must be an article of faith for every Hindu that the cow can only be saved by Mussulman friendship. Let us recognize frankly that complete protection of the cow depends purely upon Mussulman goodwill. It is as impossible to bend he Mussulmans to our will as it would be for them to bend us to theirs. We are evolving the doctrine of equal and free partnership. We are fighting Dyerism—the doctrine of frightfulness.</p>
<p>Cow-protection is the dearest possession of the Hindu heart. It is the one concrete belief common to all Hindus. No one who does not believe in cow-protection can possibly be a Hindu. It is a noble belief. I endorse every word of what Professor Vaswani has said in praise of the cow. Cow-worship means to me worship of innocence. For me the cow is the personification of innocence. Cow-protection</p>
<p>means the protection of the weak and the helpless. As Professor Vaswani truly remarks, cow-protection means brotherhood between man and beast. It is a noble sentiment that must grow by patient toil and tapasya. It cannot be imposed upon anyone. To carry cowprotection at the point of the sword is a contradiction in terms. Rishis of old are said to have performed penance for the sake of the cow. Let us follow in the footsteps of the rishis, and ourselves do penance, so that we may be pure enough to protect the cow and all that the doctrine means and implies.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Young India, 8-6-1921</p>
<p> </p>Swaraj is self-reliance – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-10:2043530:BlogPost:768012014-08-10T06:58:47.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Swaraj is self-reliance – Mahatma…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Swaraj is self-reliance – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi wanted Swaraj for India, not independent. It meant complete independent. He wanted to make it self-reliance also. He thought if it is not self reliance, it has no value - An esteemed friend, referring to the Viceregal interview, writes: In my humble opinion, these interviews by non-co-operation leaders are, in</p>
<p>the present circumstances, a political mistake, and may react on the movement. Back of the Punjab and the Khilafat wrongs is the question of Swaraj; and India's Swaraj means the death of the Empire. Such a death may, in happy circumstances, mean its rebirth as a commonwealth of nations. But where is the statesman today, with a free and generous view of world politics, to look beyond British interests to the deeper values of humanity? Victory of the Swaraj movement I conceive in terms of self-reliance, not of snatching some concessions from Lord Reading. As far as I can see, the hope for an escape from further confusion lies in escape from negotiations with the Government and becoming as a Nation strong in the will to suffer. A crucified India will be an India emancipated.</p>
<p>Whilst I do not agree with the writer that the interviews were a political mistake, the statement of our attitude is perfect. Our concern is not with what British statesmen will or will not do. Our business is always of endeavor to keep ourselves on the right track. Our aloofness must not be a sign of our haughtiness or disinclination to explain our view-points to our opponents. We must be prepared to</p>
<p>approach the world, if we are firm in our own purpose. But I recognize, too, the force of the objection that there is danger in these interviews. Not being in the habit of having always a reserve of minimum on which there can be no surrender, we may easily slip.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Young India, 8-6-1921</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Pilgrimage to Maharashtra – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-08-10:2043530:BlogPost:767022014-08-10T06:34:48.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Pilgrimage to Maharashtra – Mahatma…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact only on mail</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Pilgrimage to Maharashtra – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi spent a lot of time in Maharashtra. He did his maximum activities here. There are so many political leaders, who inspired him. He loved Maharashtra very much, So he gave pilgrimage to Maharashtra - A visit to the province in which Lokamanya Tilak Maharaj was born, the province which has produced heroes in the modern age, which gave Shivaji and in which Ramdas and Tukaram flourished, is for me nothing less than a pilgrimage. I have always believed that Maharashtra, if it wills, can do anything. Its skepticism, however, is</p>
<p>every a cause of grief to me. I always feel that he province in which the best work can be done has done the least. I gather that the workers in Maharashtra hold the same view. After leaving simla, I went to Kalka and then to Ambala. From there I proceeded to Khandwa in the Central Provinces and thence to Bhusaval, Sangamner and Yeola. I am writing these notes on my way to Kurduwadi. For going there, one has to go from Yeola to Dhond and change trains there. As our train arrived late at Dhond and the connecting train had already left, I got some experience of Dhond as well. I felt that the masses everywhere had the same faith but there were not enough workers. people lack capacity for organization, there is no end to noise and bustle and they get crowds of people to fill station platforms. As for the result, however, I found it poor in Bhusaval, Sangamner and Yeola at any rate, though he people who had invited me to these places were capable workers.</p>
<p>Where have we now the time for all this fuss and shouts of victory and bending to touch my feet in reverence? If we can spare time to go to station platforms, why not spend it in plying the spinning-wheet? Why not use it in collecting contributions to the National Fund? Do we not have to enrol a large number of Congress members? The position now is that we shall be able to complete the programme before the end of June, as decided, only if we work round the clock. Though two months have elapsed, we have not done even two-thirds of the work, not even one-half. If we fail to complete the programme of work by the end of June, it will only show that our will and capacity to win swaraj are not great.</p>
<p>The collections at Bhusaval and Sangamner could be taken as on the whole satisfactory, but at Yeola, I must say, the collections came almost to nothing. Yeola is a rich town. It has Gujarati business men settled there for the last 200 years and yet the amount collected there for the Tilak Swaraj Fund was the smallest. It is true, of course, that one person alone in Yeola gave Rs. 20,000 for a national school. But, then negotiations for the donation had been going on for a long time.</p>
<p>The donor, besides, is well known for his charitable disposition. For the Tilak Fund, however, contributions were to be collected from the general public. The total collections from all, men and women, must have come hardly to Rs. 300, while a small village near Yeola, which we passed on the way, gave the same amount.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p>Navajivan, 29-5-1921</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>We are habituated to pass resolutions without acting on them – Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2014-07-07:2043530:BlogPost:762032014-07-07T09:35:44.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>We are habituated…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>We are habituated to pass resolutions without acting on them – Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi declared to oppose Simon Commission. He went to every part of India for aware to the people. He reached Hardoi, one of the famous district of Uttar Pradesh on dated 11 October, 1929 and spoke at Political Conference that “We are habituated to pass resolutions without acting on them. I advise you to give up this mentality. This is one main obstacle in our path of progress. Had we fulfilled our promises of 1921, we should have attained swaraj long before. Another occasion is approaching on the people of this province as it is your province which has given the President of the next Congress. The responsibility is all the greater on the youth. Pandit Jawaharlal belongs to your province. At the same time, he is a youth. If you want to preserve your prestige and his too, you have to act as you say. You have already passed a resolution on untouchability. I hope you will pass similar resolutions on Hindu-Muslim unity and boycott of foreign cloth, which is possible only if you use khaddar. If you pass these resolutions, you have to abide by them. I hope and pray that you be prepared for the great struggle before us. 1</p>
<p>Next day Mahatma Gandhi spoke on subject Khaddar and Untouchability: Duty of Indian Municipalities on behalf of this question “What can Indian municipalities do in the matter of khaddar and untouchability?</p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi spoke:</p>
<ol>
<li>By prescribing the use of khaddar for the uniform of its employees. This will be effective only if the members will themselves wear khaddar.</li>
<li>By making all purchases of cloth for hospitals and the like in khaddar only.</li>
<li>By introducing the takli and carding-bow in all the schools under its control.</li>
<li>by removing all duty upon khaddar and by giving grants to khaddar depots within municipal limits.</li>
</ol>
<p>In the matter of untouchability a municipality can help…</p>
<ol>
<li> by promoting the reform by insisting upon inspectors of municipal schools securing admission therein of a minimum number of ‘untouchable’ boys and girls.</li>
<li> By opening model schools especially for the instruction of ‘untouchable’ children.</li>
<li>By opening night schools for grown-up ‘untouchables’ in its employ.</li>
<li> By inducing trustees of temples to open them to ‘untouchables’, and where this is not possible, by building attractive temples in suitable places, specially for the use of ‘untouchables’, but generally for public use, and encouraging the public to make use of these temples in common with the ‘untouchables’.</li>
<li> By giving grants to schools, temples and clubs, etc., that would specially cater for ‘untouchables’.</li>
</ol>
<p>But this untouchability will soon be a thing of past. Hindu society has become conscious of the hideous wrong done to man by this sinful doctrine. Hundreds of Hindu workers are devoting themselves to the uplift of these suppressed classes. Among them may be named late Swami Shraddhanandji and the late Lala Lajpat Rai. These, however, may not be regarded as orthodox. Pandit Madan Mohan Malviyaji, who is accepted by all Hindus as an orthodox Hindu, has thrown in the weight of his great influence on the side of reform. Everywhere one sees the process of emancipation silently but surely and steadily going on. The so called higher-class Hindus are conducting schools and building hostels for them, giving them medical relief and serving them in a variety of ways. The effort is absolutely independent of the Government and is part of the process of purification that Hinduism is undergoing. Lastly, the Indian National Congress adopted removal of untouchability as a vital part of its constructive programmed in 1920. It may not be superfluous to add that while untouchability is undoubtedly a grave social wrong, it has no legal sanction behind it. So far as I am aware, there is no legal disability against the ‘untouchables’.</p>
<p>The reformer has still a stiff task before him in having to convert the masses to his point of view. The masses give intellectual assent to the reformers’ plea, but are slow to grant equality in practice to their outcaste brethren. Nevertheless, untouchability is doomed, and Hinduism is saved. And, as I have indicated above, our municipalities can do much to bring about this salvation. 2</p>
<p>He honored in Regional High School and spoke to women also. He inaugurated Khadi Bhandar, Hardoi on same day.</p>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi wrote letters to Amal Hom – Editor of Kolkata Municipal Gadget, Fredrik Stuntmen – Austria, Hariji Govil – United State of America, Tag Vend Guard – Denmark, Eleanor M. Hug – Washington, USA, Hennery S. Salt – England, K. V. Swami – Parla khimedi, Edle Kaufman, C. Vijyaraghavachariyar – Selam, Chhaganlal Joshi – Ahmadabad. </p>
<p>References:</p>
<ol>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 14-10-1929</li>
<li>The Calcutta Municipal Gazette, Fifth Anniversary Number, Saturday, 23rd</li>
</ol>
<p>November, 1929</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Shiromani Gurudwara and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-27:2043530:BlogPost:744612013-10-27T01:55:24.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Shiromani Gurudwara and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I have also received and studied your resolution condemning the manner in which the Government enquiry into the Nankana tragedy is being conducted, expressing want of confidence in it and appointing an unofficial Committee of Enquiry. The resolution appoints me as Chairman of the Committee. Whilst I appreciate the honour done to me, I very much fear that I shall not be able to render any useful service to the Committee or the community so long as the appointment of the Committee is intended merely to counteract any mischievous effects that might be produced by the Government enquiry. The resolution of non-co-operation passed by the Sikh League and the other national organizations really precludes the Sikh community from taking part in or assisting any investigations by the Government. I should therefore have thought that you would dissociate yourself from the enquiries solely on the ground of non-co-operation, even though such investigations might be calculated to bring temporary or partial relief in special matters. To me your want of confidence in the Government enquiry is one more illustration of the hopelessness of any association with a Government which we are seeking to destroy, if it will not mend. I would therefore urge you to reconsider your resolution and come to a decision in terms of non-co-operation or relieve me from the responsibility you have imposed on me. 1</p>
<p>The Sikh cup of sorrow is evidently not yet full. Here is a wire from Amritsar: Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee has received harrowing details of beating not excluding pulling of bears and keshas of members 2nd Shahidi Jatha in Camp Jails Nabha on 16th April. Beating inflicted to exact apologies. Committee has also received some hair and beards pulled out. There are now in Nabha one hundred and fourteen cases of sufferers of this beating. Composition as under: serious seven, contusion of head two, face eight, arm ten, thigh seven, shin eight, private parts eight, back five, minor hurts fifty one. Kindly arrange immediate visit Nabha Camp Jail. Either the statement is true or it is untrue. If it is true, it calls for an open and impartial inquiry. The Government of India cannot plead neutrality. Their own officer is administering the State. To the Sikh friends I can only say every wrong has a remedy. And this wrong, if the allegations can be sustained, will not long remain without a remedy. As a journalist as well as President of the Congress, I plead my present helplessness to render aid beyond giving publicity and tendering my sympathy, but God willing I shall not remain long helpless. Every wound inflicted on innocence is a wound cut deep into every Congressman and every journalist. And these wounds are winged messengers who carry their own tale to the four corners of the earth, pierce through the heavens and reach the great white Throne of Justice. 2</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>The Tribune, 13-3-1921</li>
<li>Young India, 23-4-1925 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Scindia Steam Navigation and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-27:2043530:BlogPost:744572013-10-27T01:55:07.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Scindia Steam Navigation and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I shall read the Note as soon as I have energy enough for taking up my normal activities. For the time being what I have of it I devote to only those matters on which I must express an Christ cannot be different. The words and the forms can differ, but the living essence is the same. And there is nobody in this world today whose words and deeds could better express this truth than yours. In you I see the personification fo all truth which was ever given to mankind.” S.N. 8303 opinion without delay. I hope you have received my letter1 posted at Poona. At present I am in Mr. Narottam’s bungalow near Andheri. It is delightfully situated, faces the sea, and the waves wash its boundary. Narottam Morarji, Agent of Scindia Steam Navigation Company. 1 Very well done, indeed! May you live long, may your virtues grow from day to day, may you always do good deeds, and may you render ever greater service to the country. Shantikumar Narottam Morarji, a Gujarati businessman of Bombay connected with the Scindia Steam Navigation Company 2</p>
<p>The ceremony performed by Sjt. Vithalbhai Patel at the launching of Jalabala, the Scindia Steam Navigation Company’s new ship, does not evoke any feeling of national pride or rejoicing. It only serves as a reminder of our fallen state. What is the addition of one little ship to our microscopic fleet? The sadness of the reminder is heightened by the fact that our mercantile fleet may at any moment be turned into a fleet warring against our own liberty or against that of nations with which India has no quarrel and with whose aspirations India may even have every sympathy, as for instance, China. There is nothing to prevent the Government from commandeering any one of the ships belonging to the swadeshi companies for carrying soldiers to punish China for daring to fight for liberty. There is no wonder, therefore, that Vithalbhai Patel, who in spite of his being the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly cannot cease to be an ardent nationalist, recalled the history of the calculated destruction of India’s mercantile marine. He pointed out to his audience that “there was a time when first-rate vessels built, owned, manned and managed by Indians used to carry the rich products of India to distant lands.” “A combination of circumstances,” which the speaker did not think it worth while to mention, “made it extremely difficult for Indians to pursue it, killed that industry outright, and subsequently made it extremely difficult for Indians to revive their past glory.” Sjt. Vithalbhai went on : “It is again interesting to note that shipping companies were started during the last 50 years in India, but they were all wiped out of existence by the rate war and other methods, about which the less said the better.” But even as a patient derives comfort, if anything gives him a little hope and a little energy, and the whole family joins him rejoicing over the acquisition of slight unexpected strength, so did Vithalbhai Patel derive joy and hope from the launching of this new enterprise of the Scindia Steam Navigation Company. Let us hope that Jalabala will be a precursor of many other steamers and that in the near future it would be possible to revive the old ship-building trade of India, and for some patriot to perform the ceremony of launching an India-built ship on Indian waters free of the fear of its being used for warring against ourselves or any other nation and free from the greed of exploitation of any other country. 3</p>
<p>Gandhiji has your letter of the 8th instant. The contents surprised him, inasmuch as an educated man like you does not understand the reason why the price of khadi has slightly gone up. It has been increased in order to enable the poor spinner to have something like a living wage. We are far yet from giving him a real living wage, but the recent increase in khadi prices ensures him a wage just enough to secure him two full meals a day. Do you, poor as you are, grudge the little increase to the men and women who are much poorer than you? The addressee, a clerk of the Scindia Steam Navigation Company, had written to Gandhiji protesting against the increase in the price of khadi. In reply Mahadev Desai wrote to him. 4</p>
<p>Three representatives of the Scindia Steam Navigation Company had an interview with Gandhiji at Segaon.... They seemed to be worried by the following among a number of things:</p>
<p>(1) The discrimination clauses. They cited from Gandhiji’s article in Young India entitled “The Giant and the Dwarf” the following statements: “To talk of no discrimination between Indian interests and English or European is to perpetuate Indian helotage. What is equality of rights between a giant and a dwarf? . . .” And again: “In almost every walk of life the Englishman by reason of his belonging to the ruling class occupies a privileged position.... The cottage industries of India had to perish in order that Lancashire might flourish. The Indian shipping had to perish, so that British shipping might flourish.” Is the shipping not to revive and rise to its full height in a free India?</p>
<p>(2) What are Indian or swadeshi companies? It has become a fashion nowadays to bamboozle the unwary public by adding “(India) Limited” to full-blooded British concerns. Lever Brothers “(India) Limited” have their factories here now. They claim to produce swadeshi soap, and have already ruined several large and small soap factories in Bengal. Then there is the Imperial Chemicals (India) Ltd. which has received valuable concessions. This is dumping foreign industries instead of foreign goods on us!</p>
<p>(3) Then there are companies with Indian Directorate with British Managing Agents who direct the Directorate. Would you call a company with a large percentage of Indian capital and a large number of Indian Directors on the Board, but with a non-Indian Managing Director or non-lndian firm as Managing Agents, a swadeshi concern? Gandhiji dealt with these points fairly exhaustively in his reply which may be summarized below in his own words:</p>
<p>(1) On this point I am glad you have reminded me of my article written in 1931. I still hold the same views, and have no doubt that a free India will have the right to discriminate—if that word must be used—against foreign interests, wherever Indian interests need it.</p>
<p>(2) As regards the definition of a swadeshi company I would say that only those concerns can be regarded as swadeshi whose control, direction and management either by a Managing Director or by Managing Agents are in Indian hands.</p>
<p>I should have no objection to the use of foreign capital, or to the employment of foreign talent, when such are not available in India, or when we need them, but only on condition that such capital and such talents are exclusively under the control, direction and management of Indians and are used in the interests of India. But the use of foreign capital or talent is one thing, and the dumping of foreign industrial concerns is totally another thing. The concerns you have named cannot in the remotest sense of the term be called swadeshi. Rather than countenance these ventures, I would prefer the development of the industries in question to be delayed by a few years in order to permit national capital and enterprise to grow up and build such industries in future under the actual control, direction and management of Indians themselves. (3) Answer to this is contained in my answer on the second point. 5</p>
<p>I am in receipt of your letter. As Rajendra Babu is going [to Vishakhapatnam] there should be no necessity of a message from me. In view, however, of my old association with the late Sheth Narottam3, I can quite understand that you would expect my blessings on this occasion. May your enterprise succeed and may it benefit the whole country. Chairman, Board of Directors, Scindia Steam Navigation Company. 6</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Letter to H. S. L. Polak, March 15, 1924</li>
<li>Nore to Shanti Kumar Morarji, Before May 28, 1924</li>
<li>Young India, 4-8-1927 </li>
<li>The Hindu, 20-4-1936</li>
<li>Harijan, 26-3-1938</li>
<li>Letter to Walchand Hirachand, June 13, 1941</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Somnath Temple and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-27:2043530:BlogPost:748782013-10-27T01:54:46.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Somnath Temple and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>A gentleman writes to me about the renovation of the Somnath temple.1 This needs money and the Provisional Government at Junagadh, formed by Shamaldas Gandhi, has sanctioned Rs. 50,000 for it. One lakh is promised from Jamnagar. When the Sardar came here I asked him whether even though he was in the Government, he would acquiesce in its giving as much money as it liked for Hinduism from its treasury. After all, we have formed the Government for all. It is a ‘secular’ government, that is, it is not a theocratic government, rather, it does not belong to any particular religion. Hence it cannot spend money on the basis of communities. For it, the only thing that matters is that all are Indians. Individuals can follow their own religions. I have my religion and you have yours to follow. Another gentleman has written well in a note. He says that it would be gross adharma if either the Junagadh Government or the Union Government gives money for the renovation of the Somnath temple.</p>
<p>I think he has made an absolutely correct point. I then asked the Sardar if that was tue. He said that that was not possible so long as he was alive. He said not a single pie could be taken out from the treasury of Junagadh for the renovation of the Somnath temple. If he was not going to do it, he said, what could poor Shamaldas do alone? There were enough number of Hindus who could donate money for the Somnath temple. If they became miserly and did not part with money, let the temple remain in its present state. There were already a lakh and a half rupees and Jamsaheb had already given a lakh. They would be able to manage for more. I have learnt one thing more. You must have known that the Muslims in Pakistan have abducted our young girls. Attempts are being made and must be made to rescue them. Let us try to get back every abducted girl who is still alive there. If these girls have been raped, have they lost everything by it? At least, I do not think so. I had even talked about it yesterday. Coercion cannot make one change his religion. But I hear that there is some talk of making some payment to reclaim these girls. Some hoodlums come forward to bring back the girls if they are paid Rs. 1,000 per girl. Has this thing become a business then? If somebody kidnapped one of these three girls with me and then demanded at least a hundred if not a thousand rupees, I would tell him that he had better kill the girl. My daughter would return if God wished to save her. Why should he bargain with me for her? Not only did he abduct the girl but he also indulged in bullying. Having abandoned his own religion he had come to bully me because she was my daughter. I would refuse to give him even a cowrie. Similarly no parent should make such bargains for his daughter.</p>
<p>They must think that their daughters are with God and God is everywhere. If a girl loses her husband, where would she go? It is of course a different matter if the girl wants to come over from there and we give her the fare if she does not have it. But if a hoodlum comes and demands ransom money, his demand just cannot be accepted. I give such instances from there and also from here, because on our side too we have done such things and abducted Muslim girls. Would our Government indulge in such meanness? Should the East Punjab Government or the Union Government ask Jinnah Saheb to pay one lakh rupees for the return of Muslim girls in its custody? I would not give a single cowrie to the Government. How could it demand money as a reward for such abominable deeds? The Government should admit its mistake, make a solemn promise never to repeat it and return the girl along with a compensation. We are not going to achieve anything if we ourselves do not become pure and brave. I had discussed Kathiawar yesterday. I told you whatever I had read in the Pakistani newspapers and subsequently heard from some Hindus. But today I consulted the Sardar when he came to me. I told him that when he went there he had made big speeches assuring that no one would touch a single Muslim boy or girl there, but then I heard that Muslims were being looted and beaten up, their property was burnt and their young girls kidnapped. He said that as far as he was aware, certainly not a single Muslim was killed nor a single Muslim house looted or burnt.</p>
<p>All these things happened there in the chaos prevailing before he visited the place. There were some cases of looting and probably one house was burnt. But as for killing and abducting, these two things did not take place there even then. An agent of the central Government or some Commissioner was always present there. He had been ordered to see that such things were not allowed. He had been instructed to have perfect bandobast so that nobody even touched any Muslim, let alone robbing or killing. Subsequently, no such thing happened. I asked the Sardar if I could mention the thing in the prayer meeting in the evening. He said I could certainly do so. He said that if something had happened there, he would have pursued the matter. He also said that the Hindu Congressmen there at great risk to their lives saved the Muslims and their property. No hooliganism could persist there. The Sardar said that as long as he was there and was in charge of the Home Department, he would not allow such a thing to happen. I was very happy to hear all that and asked his permission to refer to it in public. He said that I could gladly do so and also mention his name. I was so happy that yesterday I had talked about it and today itself I got this information. 1</p>
<p>A correspondent wants money to be made available for the renovation of the Somnath temple. The Sardar had agreed that the temple should be renovated but that the money should not be taken from the Junagadh treasury or the treasury of the Government of India. The correspondent asks why the money should not thus be made available. I do not wish to go into the question in any detail. All I can say is that if money is taken from the Government for this purpose, then the same rule should apply to other cases also. It will have far-reaching consequences.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan—II, pp. 131-8</li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan—II, pp. 199</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Salaries and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-26:2043530:BlogPost:748742013-10-26T15:48:34.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Salaries and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The railways depend on the poor for their existence and you owe your salaries largely to the money received from them. Some booking clerks abuse the poor, address them slightingly, and on top of that delay issuing tickets to them as long as they can. This is no way of showing one’s importance. Issuing a ticket without delay to anyone asking for it saves the latter’s time and you lose nothing by doing so. 1 Yes, it is quite right to pay the salaries from the Ashram reserves. We shall see what to do when some one donates money for the school. The teachers’ quarters will also be constructed out of the Ashram funds. They should, if they can, pay rent at the rate of six per cent, or any other rate which may be considered reasonable, onthe cost of the land and all the other expenses. This answers all your points. 2</p>
<p>Childhood is the most important period of one’s life. Knowledge received during this period is never forgotten. But this is the period during which the child is allowed the least time for learning and is held prisoner in no matter what manner of school. I hold that, in our equipping high schools and colleges, we incur expense which this poor land can hardly bear. If, instead, primary education were to be given by well-educated and experienced teachers of high character, in surroundings which would reflect some regard for the beauty of Nature and safeguard the health of the pupils, we would see good results in a short time We would not succeed in bringing about the desired change even if we double the monthly salaries of the present teachers. Big results cannot be brought about through such small changes. The very pattern of primary education must change. I know that this is a difficult proposition and that there are several obstacles in the way. All the same, it should not be beyond the power of the Gujarat Kelavani Mandal to find a solution to this problem. 3</p>
<p>If you send a reply to this letter address it to Sabarmati. I write this from Bombay. The teachers’ salaries are undoubtedly low. But I do not know if you have taken the steps that ought to be taken before launching satyagraha. It is necessary moreover to know whether those who wish to experiment with Satyagraha have the requisite strength. It is better not to start a satyagraha thoughtlessly and without the strength for it than to abandon it in the middle out of cowardice and give it a bad name. I cannot find anything special or meritorious in teaching without a salary. Teachers do not teach for the sake of teaching but for earning a livelihood. If they do not get a salary at all or are inadequately paid, they can give up their jobs without bothering about what would become of the pupils. Normally a month’s notice should be given before quitting service for starting a satyagraha or for any other reason. If I take up only your two questions then I feel certain that you should tender your resignation after giving due notice. In a satyagraha of this kind, the result hoped for cannot be achieved without unity. Perhaps it would be better for you not to resign if a majority of the teachers are not of one mind. But before giving any positive opinion on the subject, I should know many more things. Before taking any step it would be better if as many of the teachers as possible could see me at the Ashram. 4</p>
<p>It is not suggested at all in our friend’s scheme that no salaries should be paid. It provides for the teacher’s livelihood, but a teacher who cannot fix a limit for his income cannot identify himself completely with the school. If anyone from the educated classes of Gujarat wish to devote their life to such education, they should write to the Secretary, the National Education Section. If we get teachers of the right kind, we shall shortly see in Ahmedabad such a school imparting national education. The children attending this school will live in their homes; they will attend school only during school hours. The same may be understood for the teachers. The National School running as part of the Satyagraha Ashram will have no connection with our friend’s scheme save that the same educational pattern will obtain in both. In the Satyagraha Ashram school, the aim is to obtain complete control of the pupils and train teachers from among them. The object of the school now under consideration will be merely to impart primary education to children in Ahmedabad. 5</p>
<p>Our teachers have indeed lost manhood. They do under force what, otherwise, they would not do. No physical force is used on them, but they are subjected to a subtle kind of pressure. Teachers get frightened by threats from their superiors, by threats or hints of cuts in their salaries or stoppage of increments. We are now faced with a situation in which teachers both men and women should risk their lives, their belongings and their salaries and, courageously, put the situation before the students as it is. If they cannot do so, they should give up teaching as their means of livelihood. My task for the day will be done when I have explained this to the teachers. A great teacher like Shri Shastriar is in the opposite camp. Even Pandit Malaviya, founder of an institution like the [Benares] Hindu University, is of the opinion that I am leading the public on the wrong path. Those who belong to the nationalist camp also have their doubts. Even so I believe I am right. Gujarat will be as good as free today if teachers come to be fired with heroism and feel that they cannot accept salaries from a Government which does not do justice and does not feel penitent for its misdeeds. If they courageously declare that they would impart only such education as is truly national, even though they may have to beg for the purpose, the very gods in heaven would come down to witness what they did and rain money on them. 6</p>
<p>Personally, I am convinced that the present salaries of primary school teachers are very low. All the same, I cannot at present advise them to agitate for higher salaries. Even if teachers were to be paid adequately, to my mind all schools run by the Government deserve to be shunned like poison, by both teachers and pupils. If, therefore, the primary school teachers have sufficient national consciousness and moral strength, they should leave, at any cost to themselves, these schools in which the pupils are educated, above everything else, for slavery and should work to educate the people, even begging for their maintenance, as teachers used to do in ancient times. But, personally, I am certain that, if teachers give up Government service in all sincerity and with full faith in themselves, the public will not fail to provide for them. 7 </p>
<p>And that brings me to the existing system of government. The country is the poorer for the Reforms. The annual expenditure has grown. A deeper study of the system has convinced me that no tinkering with it will do. A complete revolution is the greatest need of the time. The word revolution displeases you. What I plead for, however, is not a bloody revolution, but a revolution in the thoughtworld, such as would compel a radical revision of the standard of life in the higher services of the country. I must frankly confess to you that the ever-increasing rate of salaries paid to the higher branches of the Civil Service fairly frightens me, as I hope it would frighten you. Is there any correspondence between the life of the governors and of the governed millions who are groaning under their heels? The bruised bodies of the latter are a standing testimony to the truth of my statement. You now belong to the governing class. Let it not be said that your heels are no softer than your predecessors’ or your associates’. Must you also rule from Simla? Must you also follow the policy that, only a year ago, you criticized adversely? It is under your regime that a man has been sentenced to transportation for life for holding certain opinions. 8</p>
<p>On the basis of its capacity to pay, Gujarat’s share cannot be just 10 lakhs. If it has not contributed towards public work in the past, the reason is that it did not want to. It has had its eyes always fixed on Bombay and, therefore, lacks faith in itself. How can Viramgam rest satisfied with a contribution of Rs. 12,000? And Wadhwan with six or seven thousand? These figures are indications of our apathy towards public work. There was, however, a time when it wold have been difficult to collect even these amounts in Viramgam or Wadhwan. If it has been possible to collect them, it should be possible to collect even more in these two places and so too in other towns. Every big town should estimate its capacity and collect the amount falling to its share. In any case, the standards for collectiong which, after consulting friends, I have recommended to the public must be applied. No person wih a fixed salary should give less than 10 per cent of his monthly pay. People getting big salaries should of themselves give more and thus cover others whose salaries are low. Business men, lawyers, doctors and others like them should pay not less than 12 per cent. For top men among lawyers and doctors, though, how can there be a fixed percentage? 9</p>
<p>The councillors want their fares and extras, the ministers their salaries, the lawyers their fees, the suitors their decrees, the parents such education for their boys as would give them status in the present life, the millionaires want facilities for multiplying their millions and the rest their unmanly peace. The whole revolves beautifully round the central corporation. It is a giddy dance from which no one cares to free himself and so, as the speed increases, the exhilaration is the greater. But it is a death dance and the exhilaration is induced by the rapid heartbeat of a patient who is about to expire. 10</p>
<p>if we calculate the salaries of all of them at market rates. they will surely amount to at least Rs. 1,000 a month. That works out to Rs, 60,000 for five years. Now you will see that a saving of Rs. 50,000 is no very big achievement. If the number of subscribers to Navajivan were not as small as it is, if there were no loss in the publication of books as at present, if Young India and Hindi Navajivan were to pay their way, a sum larger than Rs. 50,000 could easily have been saved. If any profits should accrue hereafter, we intend to distribute them every year. Swami Anandanand does not like to deposit even a pie in the bank. He believes, and I agree with him, that public insti-tutions should accumulate no surpluses with them. He tries to act in obedience to God’s law, as far as possible. God always provides daily food for all created beings. If many people had not hoarded food in excess of their needs, no one would have died of hunger in this world. Moreover, public institutions have no right to subsist on reserves. A public institution ought to exist only as long as it is popular. When the people stop supporting it, it must close down. 11</p>
<p>The salaries paid to them are included in the sum of Rs. 3,50,000 I have mentioned. We nave two colleges, and also a Puratatva Mandir. I have heard in this connection that such work is being done nowhere else in the country. There are three living institutions which support us and are being supported by us. These are the Dakshinamurti Vidyarti Bhavan, the Charotar Kelavani Mandal and the Broach Kelavani Mandal. Their founders and managers will grant that, if those institutions have, by joining the Non-co-operation movement, added to its prestige, they have also gained vitality from it. I have been informed that the Navajivan Prakashan Mandir has brought out a number of books. People do not know that I am not its proprietor. It belongs to Swami Anandanand. He informs me only after everything has been printed off. I have received complaints that Anandanand has deceived Gujarat, that he has persuaded Navajivan to donate Rs. 50,000, but do I know, they ask me, how much he has swallowed? To that I shall reply that I have no such swindlers staying with me and that, if there are any, I do not know them. In this institution, some draw no salaries and some take as much as they need; if, however, I allow a reasonable rate of payment, I estimate that the figure would exceed Rs. 50,000. 12</p>
<p>If it is so, how can we expect that the teachers’ worth will ever rise? Can anyone raise the salaries of seven lakh teachers in seven lakh villages? If the salaries of so many teachers do not rise and if it is considered necessary to raise them, we should rest content with employing high-paid teachers in a few villages and allowing the rest to go without education. We have been doing this since the establishment of British rule. We realize that this practice is wrong. Hence let us find out a scheme which can cover all villages. Under this scheme, teachers will not be valued according to their salaries and work. Teachers themselves will place more value on their teaching work than on their salaries. In short, teaching should be regarded as the teachers’ dharma. The teacher who takes his food without performing that sacrifice should be looked upon as a thief. If that is done, there will be no shortage of teachers and yet they will be valued a million times higher than millionaires. By changing his outlook, every teacher can enjoy that position even today. 13 Salaries of the civil and military service should be brought down to a level compatible with the general condition of the country. 14</p>
<p>All these young men are educated. Many of them were professors and drew big salaries. They do not regret their sacrifice. On the contrary, they feel joy in it. Were it not so, they would not be able to keep up the extremely difficult sacrifice they have made. When I think of their sacrifice, Gujarat’s sacrifice, what little there has been, seems insignificant by comparison. The sacrifices which I see here made by the educated class can only be compared with similar sacrifices in Maharashtra. 15 I thank God for giving me the strength to attend this function. This is one of the few surviving national schools and I congratulate its teachers on their selfless dedication to the work. Just now I have learnt that the teachers have voluntarily reduced their salaries by fifteen per cent. It is also extremely gratifying that the principal works entirely gratis. I hope that the public will appreciate and encourage this school. 16</p>
<p>The teachers are inspired by a spirit of self-sacrifice. They have voluntarily agreed to a cut of fifteen per cent in their salaries. The head master himself serves in an honorary capacity There is an Educational Association too, with Shri Revashankar Jagjivan Jhaveri as its President. The accounts of the Association seem to be well maintained. It is but proper that people should help a school such as this in which the education is liberal, the teachers are patriotic and the accounts in proper order by giving it financial assistance and by enrolling pupils in it. 17 A sixth tells me that money is being freely used which can only be described as bribery. Men who were never worth much are today getting handsome salaries merely because they can speak and because they are supposed to wield some influence in their own districts. They have no opinions of their own. Some of them are brazen-faced enough to own that they are only acting as agents and that they would champion any policy, as a lawyer champions for money any cause that he gets, irrespective of morals. 18</p>
<p>The second question that came up for anxious consideration was that of remuneration. The Khadi Service is designed for meeting the need of paupers. It is impossible to hold out bright pecuniary prospects in such a service. I have no doubt whatsoever that the scale of salaries devised by the Government is out of all proportion to the condition of India’s masses. It has relation to the requirements of the inhabitants of a rich island and therefore means an almost unbearable burden upon the poor millions. Let no one, therefore, compare the remuneration offered under the Khadi Service with that obtainable under the Government service. At the same time, I make bold to say that the start offered is as good as that offered by the Government. Where the Khadi Service fails in comparison is in the ultimate prospect. The maximum attainable under the Government may reach four figures whereas Khadi Service offers an increase amounting to Rs. 20 at the most. For those, therefore, who have received an English education to enter this service is undoubtedly a sacrifice. But is it too much to ask the English-educated youths of the country to make what after all is a very small sacrifice? I consider it to be very small, for it should be remembered that they have received their English education at the expense of the masses. It is an exclusive education which the masses can never get. And it is an education which, if it has given us a few self-sacrificing patriots, has also produced many more men who have been willing accomplices with the Government in holding India in bondage. 19</p>
<p>My own reason refuses to work in this matter. You may therefore use your reason and come to a decision leaving the responsibility to me. About Gariyadhar, do what you think best on the whole. As regards the Panch Talavadi matter, if your reason does not approve of either Maneklal or Chhaganlal, pay them their due salaries and ask them to stand on their own feet. About Vajeram, do what you think proper. Draw the money that you may need from the khadi account in the Ashram. If the total amount exceeds Rs. 1,000, ask me. 20 In some cases, he says, the salaries of municipal teachers are in arrears. Their incomes are really inadequate for the work before them. Their sanitary measures have to be held in abeyance for want of funds. Compulsory education schemes are shelved for similar reasons. He adduces in support of many of his statements his own painful experience, and he severely criticizes the Government’s niggardly policy in connection with Municipalities. 21</p>
<p>If I was the editor-in-chief of your magazine, nine-tenth of what I read in the specimens you sent me I should score out, and I would require you to rewrite fortifying it with concrete facts, and then I would perhaps still further condense it. Just think what a saving of time it would mean for the busy reader and saving of expense in printer’s ink, compositors’ and proof-readers’ salaries, etc., and the matter thus printed would pass muster even in scientific scale and if it was reasonable, it would sell like hot cakes. 22 Let the defaulters please realize that each reminder costs at least half an anna over and above the salaries of men employed in attending to the writing and despatch of reminder cards. It has been suggested that some postpone sending their quota till several months’ contributions are collected, so as to save postage. The saving of postage is a proper consideration. But those who would save postage should send their contributions in advance. To spin 12,000 yards in a month’s time is not a very great strain as must be abundantly clear to every reader of these pages. And if after having sent one lot in advance, the spinners continue to give 30 minutes regularly to the wheel, they will never be in arrears, and they will never feel the strain of the work, no matter how busy they may be otherwise. And if punishment has any appeal to them, let them remember that at the end of the first five years of the existence of the All-India Spinners’ Association, it will descend surely and swiftly upon them, when the time comes for revising the constitution and conferring further privileges upon members. 23</p>
<p>Today I wish to write about one point in your previous letter. Why should Nimu not do independent work? You know that millions of our poor people work like that. We have become sweepers and scavengers! What about Ramjibhai and Gangabehn? In countless peasant families both husbands and wives earn. In factories both men and women work. Here both Anna and his wife Gomatibehn take salaries and also do the Hindi work. By following this practice your family life will become not difficult but smooth and you will become an ideal couple. Thousands of people have children while they work. Yes, it is true. that they are not able to live in comfort. But you must ask me for further clarification on this point. I wish you to have a happy, simple, useful and interesting life. The circumstances are also favourable. Everything depends on your education and Nimu’s. I wanted to train her but could not manage it. There were obstacles in the way. I fell ill and on returning to the Ashram could not cope with three obstacles at the same time. But Nimu is herself a good girl and hence I am not worried. The only question is how far your body will co-operate. 24</p>
<p>The salaries amount in all to Rs. 2,300 per month, the house rent is Rs. 425 per month. The total monthly expenditure is Rs. 4,800. The regular income, including boarding fees Rs. 1,300, is Rs. 2,700. There is thus a deficit of Rs. 2,100. This was somehow met whilst Hakim Saheb was alive. Before the teachers create for themselves a name and a prestige enough to command help, the deficit must be met by the public. And the memorial cannot be considered lasting till the Jamia has a building of its own. The subscribers will, therefore, in deciding the amount of donation bear in mind what is required. 25 In Government primary schools, their teachers, with the minimum amount of knowledge, are employed without regard to their character and on the minimum salaries possible, whereas in national primary schools, the teachers being self-sacrificing and persons of character and learning (and not because they are in in a sorry plight), should accept the smallest salaries. 26</p>
<p>All this amounts to a policy of bheda. I do not mean to say that anyone specifically plans this so. But a policy based on these four tactics operates by itself. All those who are in the Government’s service know that rise in their salaries and their position is implicit in their being amenable to the policy of the Government. Bhishma, Drona and others too had to point to their stomach before Yudhishthira. Hence, as the movement gathers momentum, the policy of alienation will be intensified. All satyagrahis should avoid this snare. They should give credence to no rumour. They should put before Sardar whatever they come to hear and should then forget all about it. A satyagrahi should have only one consolation. His task is accomplished when his pledge is fulfilled. More he should not ask for and with less he should not be satisfied. He should be resolved to sacrifice what is dearest to him at the altar of his pledge. What could such an individual have to do with rumours? Moreover, need he be misled or tempted by the words of anyone who has the audacity to make an outsider of their beloved Sardar? Sardar will tell them when a settlement is about to be made. 27</p>
<p>The main thing was to rid the agriculturists of their fear by making them realize that the officials were not the masters but the servants of the people, inasmuch as they received their salaries from the taxpayer. And then it seemed well nigh impossible to make them realize the duty of combining civility with fearlessness. Once they had shed the fear of the officials, how could they be stopped from returning their insults? And yet if they resorted to incivility it would spoil their satyagraha, like a drop of arsenic in milk. I realized later that they had less fully learnt the lesson of civility than I had expected. Experience has taught me that civility is the most difficult part of satyagraha. Civility does not here mean the mere outward gentleness of speech cultivated for the occasion, but an inborn gentleness and desire to do the opponent good. These should show themselves in every act of a satyagrahi. 28</p>
<p>As an old English adage says you cannot eat your cake and have it. Similarly you cannot leave off service in a mill and yet have your one hundred per mensem. A close scrutiny of all highly remunerative professions in India will reveal the fact that they are almost all of them essentially products of British rule in India, and aresuch as serve in a more or less degree to sustain that rule. A country where the average daily income per head is seven pice cannot afford to pay high salaries, for the simple reason, that it would mean so much additional burden upon the toiling millions of the land who are already well-nigh crushed by their poverty. It follows therefore that the only course for a person, who wants to escape from the system of exploitation which the mills represent, would be drastically to reduce his family budget. This can be done in two ways: by a radical simplification of one’s life and by reducing the number of dependants that one has to support. Every grown-up, able-bodied member of a family ought to be made to contribute his or her quota towards the upkeep of the family by honest industry. We have a number of domestic crafts that can be easily learnt and practised at home without the investment of any large capital. If he is not prepared to do any of these two things, he had better stick to the job in which he is engaged and do whatever service he can. Let him, if he is employed in a mill, try to make a close and sympathetic study of the hardships and miseries that are a mill-labourer’s lot and do whatever is possible in the circumstances to alleviate them. Let him cultivate an exemplary purity, honesty and uprightness of conduct, and infect his fellow-employees with his ideals. If the subordinate employees are all upright in their conduct, they will thereby create a pure atmosphere which is bound to tell on their masters in the end and enable them to obtain justice from them for the mill-labourers. 29 </p>
<p>As a result of the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, officers have increased their salaries, consolidated their own positions, added to the expenditure of the army and strengthened the roots of their own businessmen. Hence caution will be necessary to see to it that the hopes that the letter from the Government has raised in regard to reforms in the land revenue system are realized. Bardoli has shown the way and cleared it. Swaraj lies on that route alone and that alone is the cure for starvation. 30 I do think that the association of high salaries with efficiency and public honesty is an hypnotic effect produced by the rulers. The sooner we get out of it the better it will be for us. The present civil service is open to influences which are far more subtle and deadly than open bribery. Nor do I consider the administration to be efficient except in so far as it guarantees at the point of the bayonet safety for the lives of the European population but certainly not of the masses. I think that we have patriotic men and women enough in the country who, when we come to our own, will gladly give their services for maintenance money that will easily bear comparison with the average income of the toiling but starving millions. Poverty, if it is due to ignorance, is no less due to heartless unparalleled exploitation. 31</p>
<p>Complaints have come to me to the effect that the Spinners’ Association in Tamil Nadu has been monopolized by Brahmin employees. The unprejudiced sceptic may know that recruitment is never being made on grounds of caste but workers are employed purely on grounds of fitness. As things stand, there are 53 sale and production centres in Tamil Nadu. Of these the managers of 28 are non-Brahmins, as against 25 wherein the managers are Brahmins. Excluding servants drawing a monthly salary of less than Rs. 15 who are almost all non-Brahmins, the salaries paid by the A.I.S.A. in Tamil Nadu are shown below: Rs., 50 and above : 10 Brahmins; 5 non-Brahmins. Below Rs. 50 : 53 Brahmins; 121 non-Brahmins. Total : 63 Brahmins; 126 non-Brahmins. The total amount of the salaries distributed per month among Brahmins is Rs. 2,576; non-Brahmins: Rs. 3,102. The total amount disbursed to hands drawing less than Rs. 15 per month is Brahmins:Rs.31; non-Brahmins: Rs. 725. Of the ten Brahmin hands drawing salaries over Rs. 50, two have put in a service of over seven years and six have put in a service of five years and over. The other two have served three years. Of the five non-Brahmins drawing salaries over Rs. 50, three have put in five years’ service and two have put in three years’ service. But for the fact that there is the Brahmin-non-Brahmin question in the South, I should have declined to publish these statistics. The readers in the South should know, if it is of any consequence, that the Association is manned chiefly by non-Brahmins, for the chief workers it is a labour of love. What is more, it exists purely and simply to serve the dumb and starving millions who are overwhelmingly non Brahmins and include Mussalmans and Christians also. 32</p>
<p>This correspondent seems to have taken it for granted that, as high salaries will be reduced, the small ones also will go down. The existing position is that while the big salaries are excessively high, the small ones are too low for the employees’ livelihood. Under swaraj the low salaries will probably be raised, instead of being reduced. In one way at any rate they will seem to have increased. As a result of the reduction in salaries, there will be simplicity in people’s way of living. The effect of this will be felt universally and the earners of small salaries will feel a sense of contentment. The fear of increase in corruption expressed by the correspondent will not be shared by those who know the salary scales in Japan and other countries. There is very little connection between corruption and the size of salaries. When the consciousness of dharma spreads and people are inspired by a sense of public service, they do not demand or accept bribes. Giving high salaries for fear of spread of corruption would be, as the saying goes, like killing the buffalo for its skin. In other words, it means that for preventing a man from taking a bribe occasionally, he should be paid a permanent bribe in the form of a big salary! 33</p>
<p>No item of the Fundamental Rights resolution passed by the Congress at Karachi has come in for so much notice as the resolution limiting the salary of Government servants to not more than Rs. 500 per month or Rs. 6,000 per year. Had we not been accustomed by this foreign Government to high salaries for servants in the Public Department, the limit of Rs. 500 would not have produced any shock. There is no sanctity about the high-ruling salaries. All the 46 Congress Presidents and the 46 Congresses have mourned over the ever-growing public expenditure both military and civil. Many Presidents have laid special emphasis on the high salaries. The Karachi Congress gave concrete shape to the half-century old complaint. The way to examine the justness of the Congress conclusion is to find the proportion between the salaries and the average income of India’s millions, and secondly to compare both with the salaries and the average income of other countries. I have been trying to secure the figures for the principal countries of the world. The readers of Young India have had the average income of the principal countries but not the salaries. I have now before me some figures about the Japanese Public Service, both superior and subordinate. Its Governor-General gets less than Rs. 1,000 per month, that is to say, anything between Rs. 10,000 and 10,700 per year, a Governor less than Rs. 600 or Rs. 800 per month, the Secretariat staff anything between Rs. 150 and Rs. 500 per month, President of the Supreme Court less than Rs. 1,000 per month, other judges anything between Rs. 150 to Rs. 700 per month, Chief of Police slightly over Rs. 700 per month, subordinate services Rs. 250 to slightly over Rs. 300 per month, a Police Constable from Rs. 60 to Rs. 80 per month, a Police Sergeant from Rs. 70 to Rs. 80. The average daily income of the Japanese per head is about four annas. Compared then with the Japan figures, the Rs. 500 limit put by the Congress is over-generous. 34</p>
<p>So far as the salary is concerned, you will laugh, naturally, but the Congress does believe that it is an impossible thing for the Congress, which represents a nation of dwarfs, to vie with the English nation, which represents today giants in wealth. India, whose average income is 2d. per day, can ill afford to pay the high salaries that are commanded here. I feel that it is a thing which we will have to unlearn if we are going to have voluntary rule in India. It is all very well, so long as the British bayonet is there, to squeeze out of these poor people salaries of Rs. 10,000 a month or salaries of Rs. 5,000 a month or salaries of Rs. 20,000 a month. I do not consider, however, that my country has sunk to such an extent that it will not be able to produce sufficient men who will live somewhat in correspondence with the lives of the millions and still serve India nobly, truly and well. I do not believe for one moment that legal talent has to be bought if it is to remain honest. I recall the names of Motilal Nehru, C. R. Das, Manomohan Ghosh, Badruddin Tyabji and a host of others, who gave their legal talent absolutely free of charge and served their country faithfully and well. The taunt may be flung in my face that they did so because they were able to charge princely fees in their own professional work. I reject that argument, for the simple reason that I have known every one of them with the exception of Manomohan Ghosh. It was not that they had plenty of money and therefore gave freely of their talent when India required it. It had no connection with their ability to have ease and luxury. I have seen them living the life of poor people and in perfect contentment. I can point out to you several lawyers of distinction who, if they had not come to the national cause, would today be occupying seats on the High Court Benches in all parts of India. I have therefore absolute confidence that, when we come to conduct our own affairs and so on, we will do so in a patriotic spirit and taking account of the miserable state that the millions of India occupy. 35 </p>
<p>And now about the expenses on the salaries and travelling allowances of the workers engaged in propaganda activities. Most of such workers would be caste Hindus. They, however, would never ask for any payment. What effect can the speeches of paid workers have on the people? Their travelling expenses should not have to be borne by the institution employing them but should be met by the people. That is to say, the reception committees of the places which have invited them should bear the expenses. The permanent body may arrange these things but should not bear their expenses. And lastly about the office expenses, the salary of the accountant, the travelling expenses of the secretary, the rent for the building, etc. This expenditure should not exceed ten per cent of the total budget. Any institution whose administrative expenses total up to more than ten per cent should be looked upon as a self-destroying and useless organization. 36 The agent is of the opinion that the bhandar does not have the capacity to bear the burden of the number of workers employed there. The award I have given above does not preclude any changes in the bhandar, reduction in the number of workers engaged or in their present salaries. I myself wish to make some suggestions regarding the way in which all khadi bhandars are being run, and it has become necessary to state them now. 37</p>
<p>The best way is for those who have grown accustomed to the new policy to train workers from among villagers and persons who do not know English. We shall need innumerable workers if the policy of self-sufficing [khadi] is to be made widespread. This poor country cannot afford them salaries if these happen to be large. If workers are trained only from amongst the English-educated persons they would demand large salaries as their needs have increased. They no longer possess a hardy constitution. And, in a sphere where a knowledge of the English language is not essential they cannot be said to be particularly useful. Very often, their usefulness has indeed declined. For instance, they do not like living in villages and they try to import city-life into the villages. Their bodies are less supple and only in rare cases can they become skilled craftsmen. Even when they learn a craft, they can seldom compete with ordinary craftsmen. I only want to suggest here that we should give up the craze of looking for workers who know English. This does not mean that we should boycott or despise those who know English. We should welcome any such person who is available. They are all right where they belong. The only purpose of saying this is to rid ourselves of the false notion that only those who know English are fit to be workers. If a village worker’s services are available, he will bring in greater returns than the amount paid to him. An allowance of not more than Rs. 10 to 15 should be required for such a worker. And he can easily bring in by way of return that amount every month. Organizers should train such workers wherever there are khadi centres and to that extent enlarge their field of work. Workers should acquaint themselves with all the processes starting from growing cotton right up to making khadi. And if those who are in charge of these centres are themselves efficient, they can readily produce such workers at no cost. 38</p>
<p>Of course, we have not the staff of teachers who can cope with the new method. But that difficulty applies to every new venture. The existing staff of teachers, if they are willing to learn, should be given the opportunity of doing so, and should also have the immediate prospect of a substantial increase in their salaries if they will learn the necessary subjects. It is unthinkable that for all the new subjects that are to become part of primary education separate teachers should be provided. That would be a most expensive method and so wholly unnecessary. It may be that some of the primary school teachers are so ill-equipped that they cannot learn the new subjects within a short time. But a boy who has studied up to the matriculation standard should not take more than three months to learn the elements of music, drawing, physical drill and a handicraft. If he acquires a working knowledge of these, he will be able always to add to it while he is teaching. This presupposes, no doubt, eagerness and zeal on the part of the teachers to make themselves progressively fit for the task of national regeneration. 39</p>
<p>It is reported to me by persons of status that money is being spent like water in the name of the war. Men who have enjoyed fat salaries in their respective jobs are being taken up for the war at much higher salaries and given ranks to which they have never been used before. The largest number of these are said to be Europeans or Anglo-Indians. If patriotism is the deciding factor, these gentlemen should take, and be given, no more than just enough to keep them and their dependants. 40 Soldiers too are covered by the present programme. I do not ask them just now to resign their posts and leave the army. Soldiers come to me, Jawaharlal and to the Maulana and say: “We are wholly with you. We are tired of the governmental tyranny.” To these soldiers I would say: “You may say to the Government, ‘Our hearts are with the Congress. We are not going to leave our posts. We will serve you so long as we receive your salaries. We will obey your just orders, but will refuse to fire on our own people. 41</p>
<p>After finishing your training here you will go back to your respective Provinces to propagate this New Education. You will keep this ideal of devotion to Truth before you. Your work will be that of pioneers. There will be no one to help or guide you with his previous experience. You shall have to grope your way all by yourselves. It is, therefore, not an easy task that you have before you. Then this New Education will not help you to get big jobs carrying high salaries and emoluments. But yours will be the privilege to go among and serve the villagers in their villages. Palatial buildings and costly equipment can, therefore, have no place in your scheme of work. The school of my conception is one where classes are held in the open under the shade of a tree. I know that it cannot be realized at present. Some shelter will be necessary, perhaps always for protection against the sun, wind and rain. True education can only be given under conditions of utmost simplicity. 42</p>
<p>Ministers and members of the provincial assemblies are in their respective places as servants of the people in every sense of the term. The British scale of pay cannot be copied by them except at their cost. Nor need all draw payments because a certain scale is allowed. The scale fixes the limit up to which they may draw. It will be ludicrous for a monied man to draw the full or any payment. The payments are meant for those who cannot easily afford to render free service. They are representatives of the poorest people in the world. What they draw is paid by the poor. Let them remember this salient fact, and act and live accordingly. 43</p>
<p>I have to pay heavily for the caution with which I wrote the other day the paragraph in Harijan1 in regard to increase in ministerial salaries. I have to go through long letter bewailing my caution and arguing with me to revise my view. How can ministers make large increases in their own original fat salaries when the poor chaprasis and clerks get an increase which hardly meet the occasion? I have reread my note and I claim that the short note includes all that various correspondents desire. But, in order to avoid any misunderstanding, I expand my meaning. I have been twitted for not referring to the Karachi Resolution. The lower scale of ministers’ salaries rests on much higher ground than the authority of a resolution. In any event, so far as I am aware, the Congress has never varied that resolution. It is as binding today as it was when it was passed. I do not know that the increases in the salaries is justified. But I must not offhand condemn the increase without knowing the case of the ministers. Critics should know that I have no authority over them or anyone else except myself. Nor am I present at all the meetings of the Working Committee. I attend only when required by the President. I can only give my opinion for what it is worth. And, if it to have any weight, it must be well-conceived and based on ascertained facts. The question of the hideous inequality between the rich and the poor and the lower services and the higher is a separate subject requiring drastic and well-thought-out method and could not be merely incidental to the lowering of the salaries of the few ministers and their secretaries. Both subjects require to be dealt with on merits. The question of salaries could be and should be easily disposed of by the ministers concerned. The other is a much vaster subject requiring a thorough overhauling. I would any day agree that the ministers should tackle the subject in their provinces without delay and that the lower ranks should before everything else have their salaries fully considered and increased wherever necessary. 44</p>
<p>I personally feel that a barrister and a scavenger should get equal wages. But it is easier said than done. And it is not something that can be accomplished through strikes. We should for the time being accept and assimilate the rise in salaries recommended by the Pay Commission1 and then proceed to build up public opinion in favour of the principle of equality of wages. Strikes too are governed by a logic. Nothing is gained by indiscriminate strikes. Today unfortunately strikes are sweeping the country. There are strikes even where people have their own governments. I think that under British rule we did not have so many strikes. Today I have received a telegram from Calcutta and I also see from newspapers that the employees of the Accountant-General’s office have gone on a pendown strike. The strike includes the employees of the Post and Telegraph department which operates not for the good of any particular individual but for the good of the community. It is true that it has some big officers getting huge salaries and it is unjust that the members of the subordinate staff should be paid such low salaries. Why should the difference in salaries be so great as it is? This was started by the British and we liked it and continued it. But if people were to put down their pens, what would become of India? If through strikes they bring about a little rise in salaries it would not be a great thing. The method is wrong and is harmful to the country. The present plight of India brings to my mind the story of the goose that laid golden eggs. The owner of the goose wishing to have all the eggs at once killed her. As a result not only did he get no more eggs but he lost the goose as well. The administration that has come into our hands in somewhat like that goose. If we want to get out of it all the eggs together it will surely die and so shall we. 45</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Mahatma Gandhini Vicharsrishti</li>
<li>Letter to Maganlal Gandhi, June 1, 1917</li>
<li>Mahatma Gandhini Vicharsrishti</li>
<li>Letter to Bhimjibhai Naranji Nayak, February 7, 1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 21-9-1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 3-10-1920</li>
<li>Navajivan, 10-10-1920 </li>
<li>Young India, 8-6-1921</li>
<li>Navajivan, 12-6-1921</li>
<li>Young India, 9-3-1922</li>
<li>Navajivan, 6-4-1924</li>
<li>Navajivan, 3-8-1924</li>
<li>Navajivan, 10-8-1924</li>
<li>Young India, 26-12-1924</li>
<li>Navajivan, 24-5-1925 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 13-12-1925</li>
<li>Navajivan, 13-12-1925</li>
<li>Young India, 4-11-1926</li>
<li>Young India, 23-12-1926</li>
<li>Letter to Narandas Gandhi, After April 25, 1927</li>
<li>Young India, 21-7-1927</li>
<li>Letter to J. W. Petavel, July 24, 1927</li>
<li>Young India, 11-8-1927 </li>
<li>Letter to Ramdas Gandhi, December 22, 1927</li>
<li>Young India, 19-1-1928</li>
<li>Navajivan, 20-5-1928</li>
<li>Navajivan, 10-6-1928</li>
<li>Chaper XXIV : ‘The Onion Thief’</li>
<li>Young India, 1-8-1929</li>
<li>Navajivan, 21-7-1929 </li>
<li>Letter to Surendra Singh, April 26, 1931</li>
<li>Young India, 16-7-1931 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 26-7-1931 </li>
<li>Young India, 30-7-1931</li>
<li>Indian Round Table Conference: Proceedings of Federal Structure Committee and Minorities Committee, Vol. I, pp. 267-8 </li>
<li>Harijanbandhu, 26-3-1933</li>
<li>An Award, June 18, 1935</li>
<li>Harijanbandhu, 20-10-1935</li>
<li>Harijan, 11-9-1937</li>
<li>Letter to Lord Linlithgow, July 26, 1940</li>
<li>Mahatma, Vol. VI, pp. 164</li>
<li>The Hindu, 5-12-1944</li>
<li>Harijan, 14-4-1946 </li>
<li>Harijan, 9-6-1946 </li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan–I, pp. 281</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Salt Tax and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-26:2043530:BlogPost:746722013-10-26T15:48:07.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Salt Tax and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The recommending of the laws for civil disobedience is a most difficult task. In the present state of the country, when it is highly debatable whether the spirit of civil disobedience replacing and entirely superseding criminal disobedience has been understood by the masses, I am unable to advise civil disobedience of the revenue laws, i.e., the salt tax, land tax and the forest laws. I also feel that the satyagrahis may not disobey any orders issued by the Government regarding processions and mass meetings. 1 Why is there this chorus of condemnation of the doubling of the salt tax and other taxes on the necessaries of life? Wonder is expressed that now there is no apology even offered for the terrific military charges of sixty-two crores. The fact is, it is impossible to offer apology for the inevitable. The military charges must grow with the growing consciousness of the nation. The military is not required for the defiance of India. But it is required for the forcible imposition of the English exploiters upon India. That is naked truth. Mr. Montagu has bluntly but honestly stated it. The retiring President of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce has said it and so has the Governor of Bombay. They want to trade with us not upon our terms, but upon their terms. It is the same thing whether it is done with the kid glove on or without it. The Councils are the kid glove. We must pay for the glove. The reforms hang upon us like an incubus. They cover a multitude of defects including the blood-sucking salt tax. 2 </p>
<p>What are the workers of Kathiawar doing about this? Is not this one task enough to engage their energy produce khadi and see that people wear it? If they give up busying themselves with other activities, things will soon get right. If population of twenty-six lakhs spins, cards and weaves to the value of no more than Rs. 10 per head every year, even then its work would produce goods worth two crore and sixty lakhs rupees. This would come to less than two pice per head daily. But drop by drop the lake is filled, as they say; in like manner, the result which can be brought about by an increase of two pice in everyone’s earnings should be seen to be believed. A postcard costing a pice, a tax of two pies on a rupee-worth of salt, railway fares at the rate of three or four pies a mile, this is how Government’s Postal Department makes a profit and the Post Master General gets an annual salary of thousands, the salt tax yields crores and the railway company earns lakhs from railway fares calculated at the rate of a few pies a mile. 3</p>
<p>If we only think how much everyone will suffer by the increase of a pie in a rupee in the salt tax, we shall see no reason to be seriously upset. But when we calculate the total revenue yielded by this impost, we shall be astounded by the figures. Loss of this kind is like a prick by the cobbler’s needle. It is felt by the society as a whole. We can deduce from this the effect on every individual. 4 The supersession of Sir Abdur Rahim, the passage of the Supplementary Ordinance, the restoration of the salt tax, tell us in plainest language that the British rulers propose to rule in spite of our opposition. In fact, they tell us by their action as clearly as possible, that they can and will rule without our assistance. Shall we not have the negative courage of doing without their assistance? We have seen that we can, when we do not quarrel. It is possible, if we have some courage, to do without that assistance even if we quarrel. It is any day better to stand erect with a broken and bandaged head than to crawl on one’s belly in order to be able to save one’s head. I can see Hindu-Muslim unity issuing out of our street fights without Government intervention. I should despair of real unity if we would fight under the shadow of the British uniform and perjured evidence before British Courts. We must be men before we would rule ourselves. 5</p>
<p>Needless to say the hartal in Bombay was a complete success. Full preparation had been made for starting civil disobedience. Two or three things had been discussed in this connection. It was decided that civil disobedience might be offered in respect of such laws only asT3 easily lent them to being disobeyed by the masses. The salt tax was extremely unpopular and a powerful movement had been for some time past going on to secure its repeal. I therefore suggested that the people might prepare salt from sea-water in their own houses in disregard of the salt laws. My other suggestion was about the sale of proscribed literature. Two of my books, viz, Hind Swaraj and Sarvodaya (Gujarati adaptation of Ruskin’s Unto This Last), which had been already proscribed, came handy for this purpose. To print and sell them openly seemed to be the easiest way of offering civil disobedience. A sufficient number of copies of the books were therefore printed, and it was arranged to sell them at the end of the monster meeting that was to be held that evening after the breaking of the fast. 6</p>
<p>India has been ruined economically. The revenue derived from our people is out of all proportion to our income. Our average income is seven pice (less than 2 pence) per day. The taxes we pay are 2.5 pies per day and of these the land revenue derived from the peasantry is 20% and the salt tax, which falls heaviest on the poor, is 3% of the total. 7 A paragraph appeared in the Press that I would advise non-payment of the salt tax to begin with. The manufacturer of the canard did not know, perhaps, that the salt tax was so ingeniously devised that it would not yield to easy non-payment. Nevertheless there was this truth in it, that I was contemplating some method of attacking this nefarious monopoly. The garbled report has however resulted in most valuable information having been supplied to me by known and unknown writers. Among the publications thus received is the monograph issued by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce on salt. It is a valuable publication giving an authentic history of the process of killing by wicked methods salt manufacture in Bengal and dumping down Liverpool salt on a soil which could produce good salt for only a little labour. This history of the evolution of the salt tax furnishes by itself complete condemnation of the British Government. Next to air and water, salt is perhaps the greatest necessity of life. It is the only condiment of the poor. Cattle cannot live without salt. Salt is a necessary article in many manufactures. It is also rich manure.</p>
<p>There is no article like salt outside water by taxing which the State can reach even the starving millions, the sick, the maimed and the utterly helpless. The tax constitutes therefore the most inhuman poll tax that ingenuity of man can devise. The wholesale price per mound of 82 lbs. is according to Government publications as low as 10 pies, and the tax, say, twenty annas, i.e., 240 pies. This means 2,400 per cent on sale price! What this means to the poor can hardly be imagined by us. Salt production like cotton growing has been centralized for the sake of sustaining the inhuman monopoly. The necessary consequence of the willful destruction of the spinning-wheel was destruction of cottage cultivation of cotton. The necessary consequence of salt monopoly was the destruction, i.e., closing down of salt works in thousands of places where the poor people manufactured their own salt. A correspondent writes to me from Konkan, saying that if the people had freedom, they could pick up salt from the deposits made by the receding tides on the bountiful coast. But he sorrowfully adds that officers turn the salt over into the sea as fast as nature deposits it. He adds however, that those who can successfully evade the salt police do help themselves to this sea salt. Gujarat workers report the existence of many places where, but for the prohibition; people can get their salt as easily as they can dig out earth for many household purposes. Bengal free can today manufacture all the salt she can ever need. And yet she is forced to import all the salt she eats. Here is what a retired salt officer writes without disclosing his name:</p>
<p>Under the law the manufacture of salt includes every process by which salt is separated from brine or earth or any other liquid or solid substance and also every process for the purification or refinement of salt. Contraband salt means salt or salt earth which has not paid duty, Interior and retaining it. The people of the presidency or at least the men and women of the older generation firmly believe that locally manufactured sea salt is healthier than Kharaghoda salt, and they would love to have it, while everyone would like to have cheap salt. The poor people on the coast will join to get salt from Government salt-works without paying duty would be stealing or robbery, an act of First Class Himsa that would justify even shooting down of the offenders if they persisted in the act. I have given the letter as it was received. When salt can be manufactured much more easily than it can be taken from salt depots, I am not likely to advise people to help themselves to the article from salt pans or storehouses. But I do not share the salt officer’s characterization of such helping as first-class himsa. Both the helping from pans and manufacturing contraband salt are statutory crimes heavily punishable. Why is the manufacturing without license a virtue and taking salt from a manufacturing pan a vice? If the impost is wrong, it is wrong whether in connection with manufactured salt or the crude article. If a robber steals my grain and cooks some of it, I am entitled to both the raw and the cooked grain. I may draw a distinction for the sake of avoiding inconvenience between in the collection of salt spontaneously in these days of unemployment. Trying manufactured and crude salt, and adopt the easier method of manufacturing salt. But that does not alter the legal position in the slightest degree. When therefore the time comes, civil resisters will have an ample opportunity of their ability to conduct their campaign regarding the tax in a most effective manner. The illegality is in a Government that steals the people’s salt and makes them pay heavily for the stolen article. The people, when they become conscious of their power, will have every right to take possession of what belongs to them. 8</p>
<p>This seasonable item is from the public Press. Eight annas fine for poor people is no joke. The magistrate might have discharged the men with a caution or he might, as magistrates have done before now, have paid the fine from his own pocket, and if he felt that he was bound to impose a penalty. It is likely of course that in that case, he might have laid himself open to the charge of cowardice under the Salt Act. Be that as it may, the fact that the men “threw themselves at the mercy of the court,” and “submitted that they were too poor to buy salt,” and that the magistrate rejected the plea of the villagers, is eloquent testimony in favour of the civil disobedience campaign. No milder agitation would have answered the purpose. Moreover, the salt tax is but a sample from the mountain of such grievances, from which it is the duty of every Indian who knows the wrongs being done to India to strain every nerve to free her. A correspondent writes to say that there is no salt tax in Portuguese India, that Daman is quite near Pardi, that salt is sold at 2 annas per mound in Daman, and that any quantity may be imported from Daman and payment of tax refused on passing the British border. A similar suggestion has come too from Kathiawar. There also there is no tax, though there is the State monopoly which makes the salt dearer than the cost price. Nevertheless it is much cheaper than in the British territory. Thus a maund (cutcha) costs, I understand, Rs. 1-4 in Ranpur whereas the same quantity outside Ranpur will cost probably no more than 10 annas, if that. Anyway, when the instructions for civil disobedience on a mass scale are issued, there is no doubt that the salt law is the easiest to break. The Government is naturally preparing to combat the civil law breakers after its usual fashion. Every police officer above the rank of a constable in the Bombay Presidency except in Sind and Aden has been appointed a salt officer. These men, armed with new powers, may be fully expected to give a good account of them. And when they have stained their hands with innocent blood, there will be no doubt the usual inquiry followed by a repeal of the Salt Act. But this time the object of civil disobedience is double—the repeal of the tax and the repeal of the British bondage of which the salt tax is but an offshoot. No inquiry merely into the Salt Act followed by its repeal can stop the campaign of civil disobedience. It behooves all who want the repeal of the salt tax to join the agitation at least to that extent, unless they would have the tax rather than success of civil disobedience even for a specific grievance. 9 </p>
<p>The sense of the word Ramarajya is this that under such a rule the poor will be fully protected, everything will be done with justice, and the voice of the people will always be respected. But in order to attain Ramarajya all must help. But in order to achieve this khadi alone is the universal and constructive instrument. But in order to increase the power of the people something else with a wider appeal was needed. That something is salt tax. Both the poor and the rich use salt equally and because a tax is levied on this universally useful thing, one that is necessary for everyone, one and all can offer civil disobedience against the salt tax law and thus strengthen their power. The power that we shall gain by this sort of civil disobedience will, because of its civil and peaceable nature, help us in securing Ramarajya. There are many other taxes like the salt tax which weigh heavily on the people and in resisting which people can get a good training, and their strength can increase. Ramarajya, by such means, will become easy to establish. No one can predict when we shall attain full Ramarajya. But it is the duty of every one of us to contemplate it day and night. And true contemplation is that in which proper methods also have been used for the establishment of Ramarajya. It should be remembered that in order to establish Ramarajya no learning is necessary. The necessary talent is found in all—men and women, young and old, and in people of all religions. The only sad thing is that not all perceive its presence now. Cannot every one of us, if we want, today give proof of qualities such as truth, non-violence, propriety of conduct, bravery, forbearance, courage, etc.? The fact is we are under a delusion and for this reason we are not able to perceive what is in us, and instead we strive, in vain, to understand things that are beyond us. Undoubtedly this is a very sad thing. But even then I shall request the readers of Hindi Navajivan that in this great yajna which has been started in the country today they should be prepared to do their full share. 10 </p>
<p>The Chaukidari tax laws have been suggested for possible disobedience. This tax does not in my opinion comply with the conditions that the salt tax fulfils. The idea is to disobey such laws as are bad for all time as far as can be seen today. We do not want the salt tax even under Swaraj. Chaukidari tax is perhaps not such a tax. We may need chaukidars even under Swaraj. If such is the case, it may be wise not to touch that tax so long as we have other taxes or other laws to combat. 11 If we are to depend for Swaraj on what has been done so far, it will take us very long to win it, because it cannot be secured by mere attendance at meetings or by large numbers joining the civil disobedience movement against the salt tax. The achievement in the field of constructive work is very meagre in other districts indeed, but here also it is just as poor. We have not achieved complete boycott of foreign cloth and have not succeeded in popularizing khadi. The entry in the column for the quantity of khadi produced is nil. You have a rich crop of cotton in this district, but you put it to no use yourselves. Consumption of liquor has spread widely. Even in these circumstances, however, I have the hope that this movement will bring about a great awakening among us. The use of khadi is spreading widely in the whole of India. If, in consequence of this, there is shortage of khadi, you can even help in producing more of it. After I leave this place they may or may not let me reach Dandi, but take it from me that the salt tax is gone. If you start doing all that I have suggested, I believe we shall have stormed and won not merely the fort of the salt tax but many other forts as well. As I have the blessings of you all, this monstrous salt tax—no adjectives can be strong enough to describe it—is bound to be abolished. If you produce and spread the required climate by boycotting foreign cloth, we will win the next fort. That is, we shall win Rs. 60 crores. Through liquor and opium we have been throwing away Rs. 25 crores for the privilege of becoming mad. That third fort also we will certainly win, but only if you give up drinking. Rs. 60 crores for foreign cloth, Rs. 25 crores for intoxicants and Rs. 6 crores for the salt tax if we save all this money our faces will beam with luster and Swaraj will be won in no time. The salt tax is as good as gone, and hence those of you who do not wish to join the present movement should all co-operate and help in these two matters. I request all brothers and sisters here to give up foreign cloth and wear khadi. Understand what your true duty is. 12</p>
<p>Tomorrow we shall break the salt tax law. Whether the Government will tolerate that is a different question. It may not tolerate it, but it deserves congratulations on the patience and forbearance it has displayed in regard to this party. If the civil disobedience movement becomes widespread in the country and the Government tolerates it, the salt law may be taken as abolished. I have no doubt in my mind that the salt tax stood abolished the very moment that the decision to break the salt laws was reached and a few men took the pledge to carry on the movement even at the risk of their lives till Swaraj was won. If the Government tolerates the impending civil disobedience you may take it for certain that the Government, too, has resolved to abolish this tax sooner or later. If they arrest me or my companions tomorrow, I shall not be surprised; I shall certainly not be pained. It would be absurd to be pained if we get something that we have invited on ourselves. What if I and all the eminent leaders in Gujarat and in the rest of the country are arrested? This movement is based on the faith that when a whole nation is roused and on the march no leader is necessary. Of the hundreds of thousands that blessed us during our march and listened to my speeches there will be many who are sure to take up this battle. That alone will be mass civil disobedience. We are now resolved to make salt freely in every home, as our ancestors used to, and sell it from place to place, and we will continue doing so wherever possible till the Government yields, so much so that the salt in Government stocks will become superfluous. If the awakening of the people in the country is true and real, the salt law is as good as abolished. But the goal we wish to reach is yet very far. For the present Dandi is our destination but our real destination is no other than the temple of the goddess of Swaraj. Our minds will not be at peace till we have her darshan, nor will we allow the Government any peace. Those Headmen who have resigned their posts should prove themselves true to their word and should regard it as a sin to serve this Government till freedom is won. For the last four or five days, I have been speaking about other constructive activities also, and they should be taken up immediately in this Jalalpur taluka. Surat district is notorious for the drink habit, and the Jalalpur taluka is particularly so. Now that the wind of self-purification is blowing here, it should not be a difficult task to eradicate the drink evil altogether.</p>
<p>There is sin in every leaf of the palm tree. Its only value lies in the ruin it brings us. This plant is like poison to us. All palm trees should therefore be cut down. There should not be a single person in Jalalpur taluka wearing foreign cloth. Everyone who comes to Dandi should come with the intention to participate in, and offer his mite to, this Swaraj yajna. I would not like anyone coming to Dandi wearing foreign cloth. If it is our wish to turn Dandi into a place of pilgrimage or a bulwark of Swaraj, everyone coming here should be dressed exclusively in khadi. I know that the stocks of khadi in the khadi stores are about to be exhausted, and if, therefore, you fail to get a full-length sari or dhoti and come wearing only a khadi langoti, you will be welcome here as a civilized person. If, ignoring my suggestion, any of you comes to Dandi wearing foreign cloth, I shall have to place at the points of approach to Dandi, volunteers who will kneel before you and request you to wear khadi. If you feel offended by their doing so and slap them in the face, those satyagrahis will let themselves be slapped. Dandi was chosen not by a man but by God. How otherwise could we have chosen for the battle-field of satyagraha such an out-of-the-way place a place where no food grains are to be had, where there is scarcity of water, where thousands can assemble only with difficulty, walking ten miles from the railway station, and where if you are travelling on foot, you have to negotiate creeks full of slush and mud? The truth is that in this struggle we have to put up with suffering. You have made the road from Navsari to Dandi famous throughout the world by arranging for free drinking-water at frequent intervals all along it.</p>
<p>If this struggle did not have your approval, your blessings, why would you be doing this? Dandi should be a sacred ground for us, where we should utter no untruth, commits no sin. Everyone coming here should come with this devout feeling in his heart. If you brothers and sisters come forward as true volunteers and commit civil disobedience of the salt law, no matter what force the Government threatens to use against you, and if you do whatever else you may be required to do, we shall have in us the power to attain in a single day what we hold to be our birthright. Time was when I was infatuated with British rule, as British law taught that the person of every individual is sacred. According to that law, the police cannot kill or manhandle a man even though he might be guilty of murder. It is the duty of the police to produce the man alive before the court. Nor has the police any authority outside the jail to seize from person even goods alleged to have been stolen. But here the very opposite is true. How otherwise can the police have the authority to decide whether I hold a handful of salt or pebbles? Every man’s house is his castle. Our body also is a fort of a kind. And once salt has entered that fort, it should not be allowed to be forced out of it even if horses are made to trample on your heads. From today we should begin cultivating the strength of will to see that a fist holding salt does not open even if the wrist should be cut off.</p>
<p>Unauthorized entry into a house is a barbarous act. It is for a judge to decide whether I hold in my hand salt or dust. The English law holds the human person to be sacred. If every official assumes the authority of a judge and enters our homes, he would be acting as a robber. But the officers in India, when they feel impelled, throw the English laws to the winds or ignore them completely at their sweet will and, resorting to the Act of 1818, render them all ineffective. They have started arresting one leader after another. But according to the principle of this struggle, that the leader is one who endures the utmost suffering, one of those left outside should assume leadership and take the movement forward. This is a struggle not of one man but of millions of us. If three or four men can fight and win Swaraj, they will rule the country afterwards. Hence, in this struggle for Swaraj millions should offer themselves for sacrifice and win such Swaraj as will benefit the vast masses of the country. The Government is taking away from us all the eminent leaders one after another. If we get ready to follow in their footsteps and do the duty shown by them, we can smile at what the Government is doing, but if we fail to do our duty we should feel ashamed. The leaders are behind the bars, and now we in our turn should take their place. It is true that many of the leaders in and outside Gujarat have been jailed, that many volunteers have been wounded because they would not part with the salt in their hands, and that, at places; some were beaten so hard that they became unconscious.</p>
<p>But I remain unmoved. My heart now is as hard as stone. I am in this struggle for Swaraj ready to sacrifice thousands and hundreds of thousands of men if necessary. Since we have embarked upon a movement which will send thousands to jail, how can we weep over their imprisonment? In this game of dice we are playing, the throw has been as we wanted. Should we then weep or smile? This is God’s grace; let us remain unmoved and watch His miracles. If in spite of our breaking several salt laws the Government takes no notice of the camp here till the 13th, we shall disband it after that date and go somewhere else. But this plan depends entirely on the Government. For the present, we can but take what the Government gives. If you have not yet gone out to remove salt, let the whole village get together and go. Hold the salt in your fist and think that you are carrying in your hand salt worth Rs. 6 crores. Every year the Government has been taking away from us Rs. 6 cores through its monopoly of salt. You can today take the pledge not to eat salt supplied by the Government. You have a mine of salt right at your doorsteps. There is at Rohtak a humble, brave and selfless public worker named Lala Shyamlal.</p>
<p>At the time of the non-co-operation movement in 1921 he gave up his law practice but resumed it when the tide was low and earned thousands of rupees. However, his heart melted once more after the Lahore Congress and he pleaded to be taken into the Ashram. He also expressed his eagerness to join this march of satyagrahis to Dandi. But why should I exchange this gold mohur for a mere pice? So I sent him back to Rohtak. As he writes to me, he took leave of me after he had understood the value of non-violence better than before. He has now vowed never to give up non-violence and never to prove disloyal to the Ashram principles. This Lala Shyamlal has now been arrested on a charge of spreading disaffection against the Government. He must have made some speech on the lines of my writings in Young India in which I preach disaffection as our moral duty. In the first place, they should apply Section 124A to the person who has been every moment praying for the destruction of the Empire and has also been attempting to destroy it apply it, that is, to myself. But the true position is that Section 124A can be applied only to a person who wishes to overthrow the Government by rebellion or armed action. It can never apply to a person who wishes to destroy the Empire through self-suffering by following the path of non-violence and truth. But I am no judge. I have even been disbarred. 13</p>
<p>The attitude taken up by the Viceroy over the very mild proposal made by us regarding the salt tax affords a further painful insight into the Government’s mentality. It is as plain as daylight to us that, from the dizzy heights of Simla, the rulers of India are unable to understand or appreciate the difficulties of the starving millions living in the plains whose incessant toil makes Government from such a giddy height at all possible. 14 The people here in the slums round about live as well as the middle class in India. When I think of the poverty in which the peasants live, I feel ashamed that I have fruit to eat and fruit juice to drink. We can do nothing so long as we have this octopus bleeding us white, draining us and taxing us all the time. Why, they even tax our salt—a necessity of life, only less necessary than air and water. It ought to be free as they are. I know you pay a rate for water in England. But this salt tax is worse than a rate. It’s a monopoly. The idea of a thing so natural and necessary after air and water the one thing necessary, the idea of it being taxed! Nature bestows it on us and we may not use it. There’s the salt beside the sea and they forbid us to gather it. Salt is a small matter. What really matters is the excise on toddy and opium. That is really a big proportion of the revenue. There’s no way of filling that gap, unless we can cut down the cost of the army. That is the octopus that is strangling us. This terrible drain must come to an end. Indian Round Table Conference (Second Session): Proceedings of Federal Structure Committee and Minorities Committee, Vol. I, pp. 252- When I agreed roughly to the source of revenue to be common, I had in mind undoubtedly that I should be able to press for total repeal of the Salt Tax, merely by way of instance; but I should not in any way bind myself to the other taxes. I know that legally I do not do so; but if there is a recommendation on the part of the Committee, or if there are some calculations based upon the rigidity of the taxes that are enumerated there, I should again feel that I had not done justice to the cause that I represent. 15</p>
<p>The salt tax causes great hardship to the poor. Therefore, wherever salt can be made, poor people may certainly manufacture it for themselves and risk the penalty. 16 Its abolition would be a gesture the poorest peasant could understand. It would mean even more to him than independence itself. Salt in this climate is a necessity of life, like air and water. He needs it for himself, his cattle and his land. This monopoly will go, the instant we get independence. Then why not abolish it today? By such acts the Government could have created a feeling among the masses that the new era has already dawned. 17 The other affects the masses. I refer to the salt tax. As a means of raising revenue, it is insignificant. As a means of harassing the masses, it is a measure of which the mischief is indescribable. The masses will hardly appreciate independence, if the burden of the salt monopoly continues to affect them. I must not weary you with argument. I mention the two measures as a preparation of the Indian mind for independence. They will produce a psychological effect. I may mention that I discussed both the measures in a different setting with Mr. Casey, and I am now in correspondence with the present Governor of Bengal. I may add that I have today heard from Mr. Abell in regard to the salt tax that “the Government does not find them able to accept the suggestion.” 18</p>
<p>I am asked when the salt tax will be removed; and why it has not been removed already. The question implies impatience. The Cabinet has only been in office for eight days. The Finance Member has not yet taken charge of his office. We must wait. The Cabinet must do everything after full deliberation. It is I who should be impatient, for it was I who initiated the fight for the abolition of this tax. I also know how the loss of revenue can be made up for. Nevertheless I think we should not be impatient. We should not hustle the Cabinet. The Cabinet is of the people and works under their mandate. We must have faith that the salt tax will go and he who has faith can afford to be patient. There are many other things that the Cabinet has to do for the people as quickly as possible. If we continue to give it our support it will surely do all that should be done for the good of the masses. 19</p>
<p>Prof. Brij Narain has devoted two columns of the Lahore Tribune in support of the salt tax. I dare not combat his arguments though they make little appeal to my lay mind. He has come to the gratuitous conclusion that I ask for repeal on grounds of sentiment rather than reason. He reminds me of armchair politics and philosophy. Salt tax hits not only men, women and children, but also fish and cattle. Reason demands its immediate repeal. It is not the amount of the tax that kills, it is the monopoly and all it means that kills the poor villager and his cattle. Imagine what would happen if the poor were prohibited from breathing air or drinking water without permission of the Government. The condition as to salt is not radically different. The scientist has not taken the trouble to study what this prohibition to prepare salt even for one’s own consumption has cost India. 20 You have rightly said that the removal of the salt tax will drive home to the millions of villagers the truth that our Sarkar has now the reins of Government in its hands. Will they not also realize this truth, if the villages have cotton delivered at their homes on the easiest terms possible so that with a little corporate labour they can clothe themselves without difficulty? 21</p>
<p>If they can do this much Rajendra Babu’s helplessness in providing food for the people would be removed. I have received a letter which says that even though I had the salt tax repealed, salt is now costlier than before. How is that? I say after the repeal of the salt tax we should get salt almost free. For such a thing to happen the traders will have to do business for the sake of India instead of for their own sake. They should forget black-marketing altogether. When that happens, the ministers of the Interim Government would be able to carry out their respective tasks, and Rajaji, Rajendra Babu, Jawaharlal, Matthai, Bhabha and all the four League Ministers would be able to serve you in every way. Even after that, if India cannot have enough food and clothing and there is no progress in the country, you can remove them from office. 22 Today I wish to say something about salt. People say there was a time when I had marched to Dandi for salt but today there is no salt to be had or, if there is, an exorbitant price has to be paid for it. I can only bow down my head in shame. People say that although salt tax has been abolished it has not affected the price. Salt is not rationed but there is black-marketing in it. Traders are so mean that they derive huge profits even from salt. But we have become lazy. 23</p>
<p> </p>
<p>References:</p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Instructions for Satyagrahis, June 30, 1919</li>
<li>Young India, 9-3-1922</li>
<li>Navajivan, 12-3-1922</li>
<li>Navajivan, 8-2-1925</li>
<li>Young India, 2-4-1925</li>
<li>Chapter XXXI : That Memorable Week !—I</li>
<li>Draft Declaration for January, January 10, 1930</li>
<li>Young India, 27-2-1930 </li>
<li>Young India, 20-3-1930</li>
<li>Hindi Navajivan, 20-3-1930 </li>
<li>Young India, 27-3-1930</li>
<li>Prajabandhu, 30-3-1930 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 13-4-1930 </li>
<li>The Hindu, 5-9-l930</li>
<li>The Manchester Guardian, 13-10-1931</li>
<li>Gandhiji’s Correspondence with the Government, 1942-44, pp. 286</li>
<li>Harijan, 14-4-1946</li>
<li>Letter to Lord Pethick-Lawrence, April 2, 1946</li>
<li>Hindustan, 10-9-1946</li>
<li>Harijan, 29-9-1946</li>
<li>Harijan, 17-11-1946 </li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan-I, pp. 116</li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan–I, pp. 273</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Salvation Army and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-26:2043530:BlogPost:747762013-10-26T15:47:41.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Salvation Army and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>If orphanages were reserved for orphans alone, they could be self-supporting in a very short time. We have much to learn from the Salvation Army in this respect. The orphanages which they run have a soul in them. Ours are by comparison soulless. They have given refuge to thousands of children, have made men of them, have found employment for them. The children in our orphanages have not been given this sense of security. Some have been found petty jobs. These may be left out of account. The general practice in our orphanages is to send away the children when they come of age. Not so with the Salvation Army. In its institutions the orphans, when they come of age, start working in its factories, in the same way that a son in the family who has grown up is regarded as an additional shield and support for the family. It is necessary that such a family feeling be injected in our institutions too. 1</p>
<p>During the self-denial week, the members of the Salvation Army take a vow to abstain from taking jam or other eatable for a fixed period. During Lent, the Roman Catholics undergo certain privations. That is also a vow. In each case, the result expected is the same, viz., purification and expression of the soul. By these resolutions, you bring the body under subjection. Body is matter, soul is spirit, and there is internal conflict between matter and spirit. Triumph of matter over the spirit means destruction of the latter. It is common knowledge that [this is] in the same proportion that we indulge the body or mortify the soul. Body or matter has undoubtedly its uses. 2 The Government too teaches us this. Since it punishes, it also enlists, to some extent, the help of institutions like the Salvation Army for reforming communities which are given to robbery and other evil ways. We are in a better position than the Government to undertake this task; for we have the whole class of sadhus and fakirs for the purpose. If its members cultivate the qualities of true sadhus and fakirs, they can be of the utmost help ill this work. Let no one think that organized efforts are necessary for this purpose. Inhabitants of every village or town in which national awakening has taken place should, without waiting for a lead from others, make arrangements for their protection and undertake the work of reforming [the thieves]. If this is satisfactorily done even at a few places, the practice will spread to other villages. 3 </p>
<p>You can picket liquor shops quietly and advise drunkards in their houses, in these seven days, to refrain from drink, just like the Salvation Army. You must subject yourselves to introspection and come out like Ramachandra. Take a vow to cleanse your hearts, keeping God, and not Satan, as your witness, and make your life simple and easy. If you do these, you will have truly observed the Youth Week. May God give you that intellect and strength. 4 Wean them from their rascality by going amongst them as fearlessly as some of those Salvation Army girls who go into the dens of thieves and gamblers and drunkards, fall on their necks and at their feet, and bring them round. The service will deck you more than the fineries that you are wearing. I will then be a trustee for the money that you will save and distribute it amongst the poor. I pray that the rambling message that I have given you may find a lodgment in your hearts. 5</p>
<p>I ask the ladies in particular to help in this. They should visit the homes of those who drink and plead with them. I have seen women of the Salvation Army do this. Why should not the women of India do the same? Are they the Hindu, Muslim and Parsi women less capable of doing good? Are not those who are caught in the vice their own brothers? If I go and reason with them, they will quarrel with me as they will with other men. They will not, however, be disrespectful or insulting to any woman. They are not such beasts that they will not understand you. As soon as they come in contact with you they will be awakened, they will step back and, seeing the love and affection pouring from your eyes, they will conclude that it is some sati or yogini confronting them and ashamed of themselves they will give up liquor. 6 I have a letter from Mr. John Collett which I enclose herewith. I send you also a copy of my letter to Mr. Collett. Will you please tell me whether you will care to receive the cards and the medals for the use mentioned in the letter? 7 </p>
<p>The Salvation Army wants to teach people about God. But they come with bread. For the poor bread is their God. Similarly we should bring food into the mouths of the people through khadi. If we succeed in breaking the idleness of the people through khadi, they will begin to listen to us. Whatever else the Government might do, it does leave some food for the villagers. Unless we can bring food to them, why should the people listen to us? When we have taught them what they can do through their own efforts, then they will want to listen to us. That trust can best be generated through khadi. While working out the khadi programme our aim should be purely humanitarian, that is, economic. We should leave out all political considerations whatsoever. But it is bound to produce important political consequences which nobody can prevent and nobody need deplore. 8 I remember years and years ago in the early nineties when the brave Salvation Army people, at the risk of their own lives, used to carry on picketing at the corners of notorious streets of Bombay which were filled with houses of ill fame. There is no reason why some such thing should not be organized on a large scale. As for gambling on the racecourse, it is, so far as I am aware, an importation, like many other importations, from the West, and if I had my way I would withdraw the protection of the law that gambling on the racecourse enjoys even to the extent it does. The Congress programme being one of self-purification, as is stated in so many words in the resolution of 1920, the Congress can have nothing to do with income derived from any vice. The Ministers will, therefore, use the authority that they have obtained for educating public opinion in the right direction and for stopping gambling in high quarters. It is useless to hope that the unwary public will not copy the bad manners of the so-called high-placed people. I have heard it argued that horse-racing is necessary for breeding good horses. There may be truth in this. Is it not possible to have horse-racing without gambling, or is gambling also an aid to the good breeding of horses? 9</p>
<p>Begging is an age-old institution in India. It was not always a nuisance. It was not always a profession. Now it has become a profession to which cheats have taken. No person who is capable of working for his bread should be allowed to beg. The way to deal with the problem will be to penalize those who give alms to professional beggars. Of course begging itself by the able-bodied should be penalized. But this reform is possible only when municipalities conduct factories where they will feed people against work. The Salvation Army people are or were experts in this class of work. They had opened a match factory in London in which any person who came found work and food. What I have, however, suggused is an immediate palliative. The real remedy lies in discovering the root cause and dealing with it. This means equalizing the economic condition of the people. The present extremes have to be dealt with as a serious social disease. In a healthy society concentration of riches in a few people and unemployment among millions is a great social crime or disease which needs to be remedied. 10</p>
<p>This evening I wish to devote to Sylhet. I have received frantic telegrams from Sylhet about the serious riots that have broken out there. The cause is not known. I am sorry that I am unable to go just now to Sylhet, nor am I vain enough to think that my presence would immediately abate the mob fury. I know, too, that one should not without peremptory cause abandon his present duty, however humble it may be, in favour of one which may appear to be higher. To adopt the Salvation Army language, we are all soldiers of God to fight the battle of right against wrong, by means which are strictly non-violent and truthful. As His soldiers ours is “not to reason why”, ours is “but to do and die”. Though, therefore, I am unable to respond to the urgent call of the sufferers of Sylhet, I can appeal, not in vain, to the authorities in East Bengal in general and Sylhet in particular to put forth their best effort on behalf of the sufferers and deal sternly with the recalcitrants. Now that there is peace between the Hindus and the Muslims, I am sure the authorities do not relish these ugly outbreaks. It would be wrong and misleading to underestimate the trouble by calling it the work of goondas. The minorities must be made to realize that they are as much valued citizens of the State they live in, as the majority. Let the Premiers of the two divisions of Bengal meet often enough and jointly devise means to preserve peace in the two States and to find enough healthy food and clothing for the inhabitants and enough work for the masses in East and West Bengal. When the masses, Hindu and Muslim, see their chiefs acting together and working together honestly, courageously and without intermission, the masses living in the two States will take the cue from the leaders and act accordingly. To the sufferers I would advise bravely to face the future and never to give way to panic. Such disturbances do happen in the lifetime of a people. Manliness demands there should be no weakness shown in facing them. Weakness aggravates the mischief, courage abates it. 11</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Mahatma Gandhini Vicharsrishti</li>
<li>Letter to Esther Faering, January 25, 1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 29-1-1922</li>
<li>The Hindu, 23-11-1925</li>
<li>With Gandhiji in Ceylon, pp. 16-21 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 13-4-1930</li>
<li>Letter to Salvation Army, June 14, 1931</li>
<li>The Hindustan Times, 17-10-1935</li>
<li>Harijan, 4-9-1937 </li>
<li>Harijan, 8-6-1940</li>
<li>Harijan, 7-9-1947</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Revenue system of British and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-25:2043530:BlogPost:747692013-10-25T14:30:32.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Revenue system of British and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>When I entered on the Kaira struggle I had no notion that I was attacking the whole revenue system. I felt that I was attacking what in my opinion was a grave injustice to the people. At the same time I confess that I would not have hesitated to enter upon the struggle even if it had meant an attack on the whole revenue system. War had ever been present before me and I know that as a law-abiding citizen and still more as a lover of the British Constitution I should at least hesitate to embarrass the Government if I cannot actively co-operate in the prosecution of War. I have tried to do the latter so far as as I could. But should anybody allow the War to cover injustice? Should not the Government refrain from defying honest public opinion? I do not say the people’s verdict be accepted in the Kaira matter. But I do say that where there is a sharp difference of opinion, arbitration should be resorted to. It is no pleasure to me to use adjectives for Talatis or for that matter anybody, but I know that it would be prudery in private matters, and a shirking of a painful duty in public matters, to shun adjectives where they describe material facts. I wish you really knew them as I have come to know them. You will then probably use stronger language than I have done. Give me the committee I have asked for and I will show you what their estimates are worth and incidentally show you also what they are. But here the fault is not theirs; the system under which they are working makes them so. 1</p>
<p>They set about the work by sympathizing with Sir Sankaran over the difficulties of dealing with “so complex and specialized a subject” as the Land Revenue system. I respectfully submit that this is a highly misleading statement. There is nothing complex and specialized about the Land Revenue system except in so far as the administrators have made it so. Sir Sankaran has left ‘the complexity and specialization’ to the specialists and merely dealt with the main principles which even a layman can easily understand. I had to undergo the torture of going through the bewildering Revenue Rules and their amendments made from time to time, which, I would full grant, can only be remembered and recalled, as occasion may require, by specialists. But those rules are really devised not for the relief of distress but for ensuring a scientific, rigorous and regular collection of land-tax levied almost to the highest margin. And I would freely admit further that it will tax even the great ability of Sir Sankaran Nair if he had to find out how best to collect revenue from cultivators who can ill afford to pay. But not much ability was required to understand the simple problem whether there was failure of crops in Kaira in the year 1917, and whether the damage done by the excessive rains was such as to entitle the ryots to relief by way of suspension.</p>
<p>The Bombay Government’s note frightens the laymen . . . and in this category must be classed the Secretary of State and the Parliament by authoritatively saying that the resolution submitted to the Legislative Council and referred to by Sir Sankaran was “thoroughly impracticable”. The impracticability consisted in the Hon’ble Mr. Kamat proposing that “the expert agency of the agricultural department” should find the anna valuation. The Government ask the reader on their mere ipse dixit to consider this very practicable suggestion as thoroughly impracticable. The Hon’ble Mr. Kamat suggested a comparatively independent though still Government agency, to do the work instead of an interested Government agency, viz., the circle inspectors, and other officials in the lower ranks whose very promotion depends upon their ability to make full collection of the revenue even by “coercive” measures. In further proof of Sir Sankaran Nair’s “misconception of fact and policy”, the Government criticize his acceptance of my testimony “based on the mere statement of interested cultivators”. As the framers of the note claim to be specialists having an intimate knowledge of the Revenue Department, I find it difficult to characterize this passage. I can only say that they have been ill-served by their subordinates. If the cultivators, whose statements I accepted, were interested in one way, the circle inspectors, as I have already shown, were far more interested the opposite way.</p>
<p>The note omits, however, to mention that I did not rely upon the evidence of interested cultivators but checked their statements, in some cases, where it was possible, with my own eyes, in all cases with the evidence of disinterested and respectable men who were not concerned for their own sake in securing a suspension of the revenue collection. I thus applied a threefold test and I venture to say that, when the same evidence was given in thousands of cases by thousands of men and women, it was impossible to question that testimony, and the Government, in order to support the interested statements of their officials and in order also to be able to collect the revenue which they wanted, were obliged to discredit not only the testimony of the villagers concerned but that of practically the whole of the Kaira population. Any authority, in any shape or form responsible to the people, would have recoiled from any such imputation. Under our system, however, the word of the Government has come to be regarded with superstitious awe and it has to be accepted as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth even though large masses of people require to be damned for that purpose. The Government summarily reject Sir Sankaran Nair’s appreciation of the past economic situation of the tract. I challenge the framers of the note to go through the villages of the district, and find out for themselves from the dumb testimony of the dilapidated buildings in the villages and say, with hands on their hearts, what evidence those buildings bespeak.</p>
<p>The Government then take delight in being able to say that the agitation in Kaira did not have “any considerable effects on the measures of relief actually sanctioned”, and that the result was not to “leave the decision as regards payment of the Government demand to the raiyats themselves”. I can only say so much the worse for the Government and the broken word of their accredited officers, one of whom, in the presence of nearly two hundred people including myself, said that suspension would be granted in cases of poor cultivators and that the question of inability on the ground of poverty would be decided in consultation with the leading men of villages.1 This was confirmed by the Collector of the District. That suspension was confined to the fewest cultivators possible, that the orders of suspension were suppressed from the public for over a month and that they were only discovered when the departmant was at its wit’s end as to what to do, even after having sold the cattle of absentee cultivators, attached and removed their jewellery, imposed chothai fines, attached valuable crops wroth a few thousand rupees for a paltry balance and after the statement of the Commissioners that he did not need, like his ignorant audience, the binding effect of a vow to make good his threat, that he would sell their crops, confiscate their holdings and never restore the names of the contumacious holders, is a tale too thoroughly discreditable to require any further elaboration, and I feel sorry that the new Governor, who has given evidence of his anxiety to hear both sides and to be as impartial as he can, has been, no doubt unconsciously, made a vehicle for passing to the Imperial Parliament a note that is brimful of misleading statements, and innuendoes. I never took advantage of this so-called concession, meaning the orders discovered in June. I merely made use of the knowledge gained at Uttersanda, and, as befits a satyagrahi, stopped the struggle. Had I prolonged it, I would have been guilty of contumacy, incivility to the Government and indifference to the distress of those whom I had the privilege of guiding. 2 </p>
<p>The revenue system in the States is also not free from blame. I am confident that their imitation of the British system has done a great injury to their subjects. The British revenue system may have a shadows of justification if we grant that it is morally right for a handful of Englishmen to maintain their hold over our country in any and every circumstance. There can be no such plea of compelling necessity in the case of the Indian Princes. They have nothing to fear from their subjects as their existence is never in danger. They do not need a large military force; no Prince has got this and the British would never permit it. Still they levy a taxation far beyond the capacity of the subjects to pay. I am pained to observe that our ancient tradition that revenue is intended only for popular welfare has been receiving but scant respect. 3 The figures present a case for overhauling the land revenue system. They demand a scientific study of the relative value of cotton-growing and the growing of grains, and the scientific method of breeding, rearing and feeding cattle. The figures also demonstrate the absolute necessity of cottage industry auxiliary to cultivation. No agricultural country in the world can possibly support a population on less than one acre per head, if the population is to subsist merely or principally on agriculture. 4</p>
<p>It is only gradually that we shall come to know the importance of the victory gained at Bardoli.1 The final decision of the Government of Bombay which it has communicated in its correspondance with Shri Shroff2 is the necessary result of the triumph at Bardoli. It will have its effect on the revenue department in the entire country. And if there is real improvement in this department, if that department is freed from corruption, it would amount to securing three-fourths of swaraj. This is because a foreign government largely depends upon money for its very existence. No one would run the government of another country merely for the pleasure of doing so, certainly not the British. They have withdrawn their settlements from places where they have not earned any money. One will rarely find in another department the chaos that is found in the Indian revneue department. The peasants of Bardoli have shed light on this darkness. However, there is nothing to be cheerful about the letter addressed to Shri Shroff. No great hopes can be pinned on it. Those in authority are experts in giving verbal promises and then violating them in practice; under the pretext of dispensing justice and introducing reforms, theyhave been found to perpetuate their real position and even to strengthen it further. As a result of the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, officers have increased their salaries, consolidated their own positions, added to the expenditure of the army and strengthened the roots of their own businessmen. Hence caution will be necessary to see to it that the hopes that the letter from the Government has raised in regard to reforms in the land revenue system are realized. Bardoli has shown the way and cleared it. Swaraj lies on that route alone and that alone is the cure for starvation. 5</p>
<p>The terrific pressure of land revenue, which furnishes a large part of the total, must undergo considerable modification in an independent India. Even the much vaunted permanent settlement benefits the few rich zamindars, not the ryots. The ryot has remained as helpless as ever. He is a mere tenant at will. Not only, then, has the land revenue to be considerably reduced, but the whole revenue system has to be so revised as to make the ryot’s good its primary concern. But the British system seems to be designed to crush the very life out of him. Even the salt he must use to live is so taxed as to make the burden fall heaviest on him, if only because of the heartless impartiality of it incidence. The tax shows itself still more burdensome on the poor man when it is remembered that salt is the one thing he must eat more than the rich man both individually and collectively. The drink and drug revenue, too, is derived from the poor. It saps the foundations both of their health and morals. It is defended under the false plea of individual freedom, but, in reality, is maintained for its own sake. The ingenuity of the authors of the reforms of 1919 transferred this revenue to the so-called responsible part of dyarchy, so as to throw the burden of prohibition on it, thus, from the very beginning, rendering it powerless for good. If the unhappy minister wipes out this revenue he must starve education, since in the existing circumstances he has no new source ofreplacing that revenue.If the weight of taxation has crushed the poor from above, the destruction of the central supplementary industry, i.e., hand-spinning, has undermined their capacity for producing wealth. The tale of India’s ruination is not complete without reference to the liabilities incurred in her name. Sufficient has been recently said about these in the public Press. It must be the duty of a free India to subject all the liabilities to the strictest investigation, and repudiate those that may be adjudged by an impartial tribunal to be unjust and unfair. 6</p>
<p>In another column will be found my manifesto to the U.P. Kisans.1 I know that H. E. the Governor does not quite like it inasmuch as it goes beyond the relief given by the U.P. Government. But the advice given to the kisans in the manifesto is an honest attempt to express their capacity for payment. I am hoping, therefore, that if the kisans pay according to the suggestion made in the manifesto, the zamindars and the local Government will accept the payments in full discharge of the kisans’ liability. But under the land revenue system prevalent in the U.P. the brunt will in the first instance fall upon the zamindars. I am hoping that the Government will grant proportionate relief to the zamindars who accept the tenants’ terms. 7 The writer belittles village work. It betrays gross ignorance. If the mutts and the revenue offices were extinguished and free schools were opened, the people would not be cured of their inertia. Mutts must be reformed, the revenue system must be overhauled, free primary schools must be established in every village. But starvation will not disappear because people pay no revenue and mutts are destroyed and schools spring up in every village. The greatest education in the villages consists in the villagers being taught or induced to work methodically and profitably all the year round whether it be on the land or at industries connected with the villages. Lastly, my correspondent seems to resent acceptance by us of humanitarian services by missionaries. Will he have an agitation led against these missionary institutions? Why should they have non- Christian aid? They are established with the view of weaning Indians from their ancestral faith even as expounded by Vivekanand and Radhakrishnan. Let them isolate the institutions from the double purpose. It will be time enough then to expect non-Christian aid. The critic must be aware of the fact that even as it is some of these institutions do get non-Christian aid. My point is that there should be no complaint if they do not receive such aid so long as they have an aim which is repugnant to the non-Christian sentiment. 8</p>
<p>I think the suggestion has something in it. Such stocks are necessary in the economic conditions of the country. Ever since the system of collecting revenue in cash was introduced, the stocks of grain in the villages have diminished. I shall not go into the merits or demerits of the cash revenue system; but I do believe the country could have been saved from the present difficult situation if we had continued to stock grain in the villages. Now that the controls are being removed no one will suffer any hardship if the grain is stocked as suggested by Vaikunthbhai and if the villagers and the traders become honest. If the farmers and the traders get a fair margin of profit there can be no high prices for the working class and other people in the cities. What really matters is that necessaries of life should be within the reach of every one. There can then be no question of high or low prices. 9</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Letter to James Duboulay, April 9, 1918</li>
<li>Young India, 16-8-1919</li>
<li>Young India, 8-1-1925</li>
<li>Young India, 24-12-1925 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 21-7-1929 </li>
<li>Letter to Lord Irwin, March 2, 1930</li>
<li>Young India, 28-5-1931</li>
<li>Harijan, 6-3-1937 </li>
<li>Harijanbandhu, 28-12-1947 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Royal Commission and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-25:2043530:BlogPost:747732013-10-25T14:30:10.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Royal Commission and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is common knowledge that before the War the British Government used every effort possible that Law 3 of 1885 should be repealed. The condition today is changed, but we had hoped that it would change for the better, seeing that there is no foreign government to deal with, but our own Government. Unhappily, we are now in the position of strangers in what may be called our own land. We have always endeavoured to conciliate prejudice and with that view we have made suggestions which have been adopted in the selfgoverning Colonies. Failing, however, the adoption of these suggestions, we have asked that a commission of enquiry may be appointed. This is the time honoured British custom. Whenever a new step has been taken, a royal commission has preceded it. The latest instance, perhaps, is that of the Aliens Act in the United Kingdom. Before any steps were taken, a commission investigated the charges made against the aliens, and into the question of the adequacy of the existing laws, and into the question as to what new laws were necessary. We have asked for a similar commission regarding the British Indians in the Transvaal. We believe that we are entitled to this, in view of the very grave charges I have referred to. We have been asking all these years for bread, but we have received stones in the shape of this Ordinance. We have therefore every reason to hope that Your Lordship will not countenance the legislation above described. 1</p>
<p>With reference to the Royal Commission, what the Delegates have requested is a commission or rather a committee it may be of local, but independent and impartial men, such as the judges of the Supreme Court or the Chief Magistrate of Johannesburg to enquire into the charges made against the Indian community and which have been used as reasons for passing the Ordinance. In our humble opinion, such a committee can give its report within a month from its formation. The Delegates respectfully submit that either the veto should now be exercised, as in the case of the Native Land Tenure Ordinance, or the Royal sanction should be suspended, pending result of the investigations by the committee or the commission described above. 2</p>
<p>The first Indian to become a member of the British Parliament was Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji. Born on September 4th, 1825, in the city of Bombay, he was educated at the Elphinstone School and College, and was, at the age of 29, made Professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy—being the first Indian to receive that honour. In 1855, Mr. Naoroji visited England as partner in the first Indian business to be established in that country. The University College, London, did him the honour of appointing him Professor of Gujarati; and one of the benefits gained for India by Mr. Naoroji was the admission of Indians to the Civil Service in 1870. He was made Prime Minister of Baroda in 1874, and a year later was elected a member of the Corporation and Municipal Council of Bombay, to which body he gave five years’ valuable service. Mr. Naoroji was a member of the Bombay Legislative Council from 1885 to 1887. The Indian National Congress honoured him by electing him President in 1886, 1893, and again in 1906. Mr. Naoroji sat in the House of Commons from 1893 to 1895 as Liberal member for Central Finsbury, London, and he did good work for his country as member of the Royal Commission on Indian Expenditure, etc., and, in 1897, gave evidence before the Welby Commission. From the very commencement of the British Committee of the Indian National Congress, he was a diligent member and hard worker. Among the publications from the pen of Mr. Dadabhai Naoroji are: England’s Duty to India, Admission of Educated Natives into the Indian Civil Service, Financial Administration of India, and what is, perhaps, the best known of his many writings, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India. In 1906, the venerable Dadabhai journeyed to the Motherland to preside over the Indian National Congress, a task which was a tremendous strain upon even his iron constitution and indomitable spirit. Since the Calcutta Congress of 1906, Mr. Dadabhai has practically retired from public life, and in 1907 he went to reside at Varsova, a small fishing village in the Bombay Presidency where he still watches with a keen interest the progress of events in India which go to make or mar its future. Truly has he earned for himself the honoured title of the Grand Old Man of India. 3 </p>
<p>The most important part of the cablegram, however, is the fact that the commission promised by the Union Government is to be appointed as a “concession” to “the detractors” of Indians in the Union Parliament. Unless, therefore, the Government of India take care, there is every likelihood of the commission, like the committee of the South African Assembly, proving to the British Indians a curse instead of a blessing. It is, therefore, not unnatural that the British Indian Association urges that H. E. the Viceroy should propose a Royal Commission upon which both the Union and the Indian interests are represented. Nothing can be fairer than the proposal made by Mr. Aswat. I say so becasue, as a matter of right, no commission is really needed to decide that Indian settlers are entitled to trade in South Africa where they like and hold landed property on the same terms as the European settlers. This is the minimum they can claim. But under the complex constitution of this great Empire, justice is and has often to be done in a round-about manner. A wise captain, instead of sailing against a headwind, tacks and yet reaches his destination sooner than he otherwise would have. Even so, Mr. Aswat wisely accepts the principle of a commission on a matter that is selfevident, but equally wisely wants a commission that would not prove abortive and that will dare to tell the ruling race in South Africa that, as members in an Empire which has more Coloured people than white, they may not treat their Indian fellow-subjects as helots. Whether the above proposal is accepted or some other is adopted by the Imperial Government, it must be made clear to them that public opinion in India will not tolerate confiscation of the primary rights of the British Indian settlers in South Africa. 4</p>
<p>His Excellency the Viceroys speech at the time of the opening of the session of the Imperial Legislative Council is naturally a very important pronouncement, coming as it does after very troublous times through which we have just passed and from whose effects we have hardly emerged. The fact of the actual appointment of the Commission gives relief, though I observe that the Indian Press is not over-enthusiastic upon the personnel or upon the fact that it is not a Royal Commission, but it is one that is to report to Delhi. In my humble opinion, a commission appointed from Delhi can be just as effective as a Royal Commission. And Royal Commissions have been known in our own times to have been perfectly abortive. Lord Morley, when he was in active service, used to say that his experience of them was so unhappy that he did not believe in them at all. He became an unwilling party to them because it was an English weakness. In a case, however, like that of the Punjab, an inquiry is the necessary sequel. We need not, therefore, complain of the inquiry not being a Royal Commission, but we have every right to examine its personnel and, though Lord Hunter does not enjoy a world-wide reputation, it need not be doubted that he has a reputation to lose.</p>
<p>After all, he must be pre-eminently Mr. Montagu’s choice and I would hesitate to distrust his choice or his intentions even though he has quite unjustly and unwarrantedly put in an energetic defence of some of the measures adopted or approved by the Government of India. Nor may one cavil at the appointment of the other members. We in Bombay, however, can derive the greatest satisfaction from the appointment of Sir Chimanlal Setalvad, not because he is a Bombay man but because he is an able advocate and what is more, because he is a pupil and an ardent follower of the late Sir Pherozeshah Mehta. We may trust him to act as fearlessly and as impartially as the late Sir Pherozeshah Mehta and to hold his own against odds. His appointment, moreover, furnishes perhaps an indication of the desire of the Government of India to secure impartial men who have not formed, or rather expressed, opinions one way or other. We have a right to expect Sahebzada Sultan Mehomed Khan to do no less. And I would take leave to add, too, that where Englishmen have not formed preconceived notions or where they have not gone, as all of us sometimes do go, mad over some things, they dispense fearless justice and expose wrong even though the perpetrators may be their own people.</p>
<p>I would, therefore, respectfully suggest suspension of judgment over the personnel of the Commission. Trust it and respond to the Viceregal appeal for a calm atmosphere. I derive, however, much greater satisfaction from the knowledge that, after all, the securing of a proper finding by the Commission is in the largest measure dependent upon our countrymen in the Punjab. If those who know the facts will come forward fearlessly to tell the truth and if there are no degraded beings in the Punjab ready enough to sell themselves for the sake of personal gain, we need have no misgivings. Our case is so excellent, the injustices that have been already brought to light are so glaring that we need not fear an abortion if the people of the Punjab will but do their duty. Why was there justice done in the case of Champaran? It was primarily and principally because the poor, ground-down ryots of Champaran dared to tell the truth. Will the free people of the Punjab do less? There can be but one answer.</p>
<p>But we must help them and we shall best do so, not by spilling ink over showing the weakness of the personnel of the Committee or over its not being a Royal Commission, but by concentrating ourselves upon seeing that there is no espionage either on the one side or the other, that the people of the Punjab are permitted to have a free atomoshere to work in, and there is comfort in the thought that the ever-vigilant and ubiquitous Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviyaji is there, assisted by Sannyasi Swami Shri Shraddhanandji and the indomitable Pandit Motilal Nehru. We need not fear the consequences. It is noteworthy that the Committee is to investigate not only the affairs in the Punjab, but also in this Presidency. There should be no difficulty in our being able to show the real causes of the discontent as also the happy distinction, on the whole, between the aftermath here and the Punjab. There is one more thing about the Committee before it can be dismissed from consideration. What is the meaning of the reference to the Committee? It seems to me broad enough to cover an examination of the judgments of the Punjab Special Tribunals, whether the Special Commissions or the Martial Law Courts, and to include the power for the Committee to recommend total or partial remission of sentences. But we may not leave anything understood on a matter so vital as this. We must therefore have this point satisfactorily cleared up some way or other. As regards the Indemnity Bill, though I think that it would have been graceful, even tactful, on the part of the Viceroy not to have mentioned the Indemnity Bill in the same breath as [the] Commission, I submit it is well to suspend judgment till we have seen the full text of the Bill proposed to be introduced by the Government. 5</p>
<p>His Excellency the Viceroy has informed us in his speech that a Commission has been appointed for the purpose. I have seen criticism regretting that this is a Committee and not a Royal Commission, and that some injustice has been done by the refusal to appoint a Royal Commission. It seems to me that there is no great difference between a Royal Commission and a Committee appointed by the Viceroy. The appointment of a Royal Commission is notified in England and the Commission submits its report to the Imperial Government. In the present case the appointment of the Committee is notified by the Government of India and it will submit its report to the Viceroy. Even so, the members of the Commission appointed in India cannot be nominated without the consent of the Secretary of State of India. We have had experience of Royal Commissions having been appointed, which proved unavailing, and of local Committees having been appointed and of justice done by them. To me, therefore, there seems to be no great difference between a Royal Commission and a Committee appointed by the local Government. The outcome of the Committee’s labours depends in some measure on the members who constitute it. Examining these names, we see that, though we cannot be enthusiastic over all the names, we cannot say, on the whole, that the members are biased men or that they are not men of independent judgment. The Chairman is Lord Hunter.</p>
<p>He is not a man of Imperial standing, but he was Solicitor-General of Scotland and we have, therefore, no reason to fear that he will hesitate to express independent views. As for the other members, we have a standard of reference by which to judge them, and that is Sir Chimanlal Setalvad. We have no reason to criticize his appointment; on the contrary, we would enthusiastically welcome the Committee if all the other members were of the same calibre. Sir Chimanlal Setalvad is an advocate of established reputation and, what is more, takes part in public life. He was also a follower, a supporter and a friend of an able man and lover of freedom like Sir Pherozeshah Mehta. We may, therefore, trust to his acting impartially and fearlessly in doing justice and carrying others with him as well. If, thus, from Bombay they have selected an independent-minded and capable leader, we may assume that in selecting others too a like standard has been followed more or less. Sahibzada Sultan Ahmed is a brother of Sahibzada Aftab Ahmed Khan, a member of the India Council. However, what the Committee’s report is will depend on us, that is, on our brethren in the Punjab. If they come forward to tell the truth without fear and if no Indian comes to give us false evidence to further his own base interests, we need have no fear about the Committee’s report. Though the Committee can hold secret sessions for reasons which may appear sufficient to it, it will generally take evidence in public.</p>
<p>It will have, thus, to base its report only on this evidence. In some of the cases in the Punjab, the injustice has been so patent that even an illiterate person can see it. What other opinion can the Committee express about them? I should admit that I entertain no fear about what its report will be. The only fear is about our ability to lead evidence properly. Personally, I do not have this fear either, and want the reader, too, not to have it. The Hon’ble Madan Mohan Malaviya, Sannyasi Swami Shri Shraddhanand and the brave Pandit Motilal Nehru have taken upon themselves to collect evidence and there is no reason, therefore, to fear that evidence would not be presented properly. Thus, instead of concerning ourselves with what kind of a Committee it is, we should really direct our attention to how we can place all the facts before it. It is also for us to see that the question whether the Committee’s terms of reference include a review of the judgements already pronounced and the sentences already passed is clarified beyond doubt. Though the Viceroy’s words seem to imply as much, any doubt on an important issue like this must be removed. The reader will remember that the Committee is not only for the Punjab, but that Bombay province is also included in the scope of its inquiry. We shall, therefore, have to prepare for it. To me it seems that we need to give our main attention to obtaining an unambiguous statement of the Committee’s terms of reference and preparing ourselves for presenting our case to it. 6</p>
<p>I have not much to say, because I have not studied the scope of the Royal Commission, nor have I interested myself in it. Being a confirmed Non-co-operator, I naturally take little or no interest in the doings of the many Commissions and Committees appointed by the Government. In agriculture itself, I am certainly interested, so much so that I delight in calling myself a farmer without knowing much of farming; and, if His Excellency the Acting Governor invites me to an informal discussion on matters agricultural, I shall certainly place my views before him. 7 I went to the Acting Governor at his instance. He wrote to me not as Governor nor for any purpose connected with his office as Governor. He invited me to go to Mahabaleshwar to discuss with him agricultural matters. As I explained some time ago in the pages of Navajivan, I told him that I could not be identified with the Royal Commission in any way, that I was still confirmed in my views on non-co-operation and generally had no faith in Commisions. I added further that it would suit me to see him when he descened to the plains. His Excellency therefore wrote saying it would suit him to meet me in June. But subsequently he changed his mind and sent a message that it would suit him better if I could go to Mahabaleshwar. I had no hesitation in going there. We had two very pleasant and long talks. And you are entitled to guess (and that correctly) that our talk revolved round the charkha. That was the central theme. And I could not discuss agriculture without discussing the terrific cattle problem! 8</p>
<p>I have myself just finished a preliminary study of the report of the Royal Commission. I confess I do not understand it as I would understand say a work on the economics of the spinning-wheel. I am in search of a teacher who would make the language of currency almost as real to me as that of the spinning-wheel. Then but not till then shall I be able to express my own opinion on the problem. Meanwhile I promise to devote to its serious study all the odd moments I can spare. 9 How the Royal Commission should be constituted is as alien a subject to me as, say, the cure for tuberculosis which falls in the province of a medical expert. I have paid no thought to the subject of Royal Commission because it is distinctly outside the sphere of my knowledge, thoughts and activities. Q. Would you accept a seat on the Royal Commission, if one was offered to you? A. What is the use of asking me that question? I had once speculated what I would do if I were appointed Viceroy of India, but those days of speculation are gone. 10</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Memorial to Lord Elgin, November 8, 1906</li>
<li>Letter to Private Secretary To Morley, November 24, 1906</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 3-9-1910 </li>
<li>Young India, 16-8-1919 </li>
<li>Young India, 10-9-1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 14-9-1919</li>
<li>The Hindu, 23-4-1926 </li>
<li>Young India, 27-5-1926</li>
<li>Young India, 2-12-1926</li>
<li>Amrita Bazar Patrika, 3-11-1927</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Sarvodaya and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-25:2043530:BlogPost:747672013-10-25T14:29:48.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Sarvodaya and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>People in the West generally hold that it is man’s duty topromote the happiness prosperity, that is of the greatest number. Happiness is taken to mean material happiness exclusively, that is,economic prosperity. If, in the pursuit of this happiness moral, laws are violated, it does not matter much. Again, as the object is the happiness of the greatest number, people in the West do not believe it to be wrong if it is secured at the cost of the minority. The consequences of this attitude are in evidence in all western countries. The exclusive quest for the physical and material happiness of the majority has no sanction in divine law. In fact, some thoughtful persons in the West have pointed out that it is contrary to divine law to pursue happiness in violation of moral principles. The late John Ruskin was foremost among these. He was an Englishman of greatlearning. He has written numerous books on art and crafts. He has also written a great deal on ethical questions. One of these books, asmall one, Ruskin himself believed to be his best. It is read widely wherever English is spoken. In the book, he has effectively countered these arguments and shown that the well-being of the people at large consists in conforming to the moral law. We in India are much given nowadays to imitation of the West.</p>
<p>We do grant that it is necessary to imitate the West in certain respects. At the same time there is no doubt that many western ideas are wrong. It will be admitted on all hands that what is bad must be eschewed. The condition of Indians in South Africa is pitiable. We go out to distant lands to make money. We are so taken up with this that we become oblivious of morality and of God. We become engrossed inthe pursuit of self-interest. In the sequel, we find that going abroad does us more harm than good, or does not profit us as much as itought to. All religions presuppose the moral law, but even if wedisregard religion as such, its observance is necessary on grounds of common sense also. Our happiness consists in observing it. This is what John Ruskin has established. He has opened the eyes of the western people to this, and today, we see a large number of Europeans modelling their conduct on his teaching. In order that Indians may profit by his ideas, we have decided to present extracts from his book, in a manner intelligible to Indians who do not know English. Socrates gave us some idea of man’s duty. He practised his precepts. It can be argued that Ruskin’s ideas are an elaboration of Socrates’s. Ruskin has described vividly how one who wants to live by Socrates’s ideas should acquit himself in the different vocations. The summary of his work which we offer here is not really a translation. If we translated it, the common reader might be unable to follow some of the Biblical allusions, etc. We present therefore only the substance of Ruskin’s work. We do not even explain what the title of the bookmeans, for it be understood only by a person who has read the Bible in English. But since the object which the book works towards is the welfare of all that is, the advancement of all and not merely of the greatest number we have entitled these articles “Sarvodaya”. Man suffers from many delusions; but none so great as his attempt to formulate laws for the conduct of other men disregarding the effects of social affection, as if they were only machines at work.That we cherish such an illusion does us no credit.</p>
<p>Like other forms of error, the laws of political economy also contain an element of plausibility. Political economists assert that social affections are to belooked upon as accidental and disturbing elements in human nature; but avarice and the desire for progress are constant elements. Let use liminate the inconstants and, considering man merely as a money making machine, examine by what laws of labour, purchase and sale,the greatest amount of wealth can be accumulated. Those laws oncedetermined, it will be for each individual afterwards to introduce asmuch of the disturbing affectional elements as he chooses.This would be a convincing argument if the social affections were of the same nature as the laws of demand and supply. Man’saffections constitute an inner force. The laws of demand and supply are formulations concerning the external world. The two, therefore, are not of the same nature. If a moving body is acted upon by aconstant force from one direction and a varying force from another, we would first measure the constant force and then the inconstant. We will be able to determine the velocity of the body by comparing the two forces. We can do this because the constant and the inconstant forces are of the same kind. But in social dealings the constant forceof the laws of demand and supply and the accidental force of socialaffection are forces that differ in kind. Affection has a different kindof effect on man and acts in a different manner. It changesman’snature, so that we cannot measure its effect with the help of lawsof addition and subtraction, as we can the effects of different forceson the velocity of a body. A knowledge of the laws of exchange is ofno help in determining the effects of man’s social affections. 1</p>
<p>I do not doubt the conclusions of the science of economics ifits premises are accepted. If a gymnast formulated laws on theassumption that man is made only of flesh without a skeleton, thoselaws might well be valid, but they would not apply to man, since manhas a skeleton. In the same way, the laws of political economy may bevalid but they cannot apply to man, who is subject to affections. Aphysical-culture expert may suggest that man’s flesh be detachedfrom the skeleton, rolled into pellets, and then drawn out into cables.He may then say that the re-insertion of the skeleton will cause littleinconvenience. We should describe such a man as a madcap, for thelaws of physical culture cannot be based on the separation of theskeleton from the flesh. In the same manner, the laws of politicaleconomy which exclude human affections are of no use to man. Andyet the political economists of today behave exactly like thegymnastic instructor. According to their mode of reasoning, man is amere body a machine and they base their laws on this assumption.Though aware that man has a soul, they do not take it into account.How can such a science apply to man, in whom the soul is thepredominant element?Every time there is a strike, we have a clean proof thateconomics is not a science, that it is worse than useless. In suchsituations, the employers take one view of the matter, the workersanother.</p>
<p>Here we cannot apply the laws of supply and demand. Menrack their brains to prove that the interests of the employers and theemployees are identical. These men know nothing of such matters. Infact, it does not always follow that because their worldly interests economic interests—are at variance men must be antagonistic to eachother. Let us suppose that the members of a family are starving. Thefamily consists of a mother and her children. They have only onecrust of bread between them. All of them are hungry. Here, theinterests of the two of the mother on the one hand, and the childrenon the other are mutually opposed. If the mother eats, the childrenwill starve; if the children are fed, the mother will go hungry. There isno hostility between the mother and the children for that reason; theyare not antagonistic to one another. Though the mother is thestronger, she does not eat up the bread. The same is true of men’srelations with one another.Let us suppose that there is no difference between men andanimals, and that we must fight like animals in pursuit of ourrespective interests. Even so we can lay down no general rule eitherway on whether or not the employer and the employee will alwaysremain hostile to each other.</p>
<p>Their attitudes change withcircumstances. For instance, it is in the interest of both that workshould be well and properly done and a just price obtained for it. Butin the division of profits, the gain of the one may or may not be theloss of the other. It does not serve the employer’s interests to paywages so low as to leave his men sickly and depressed. Nor does itserve the worker’s interests to demand a high wage irrespective ofwhether the factory pays its way or not. If the owner does not haveenough money to keep the engine-wheels in repair, it will obviouslybe wrong for the worker to demand full wages or to demand anywages at all.We can thus see that we are not likely to succeed in constructinga science on the basis of the principle of supply and demand. It wasnever God’s intention that the affairs of men should be conducted onthe principle of profit and loss. Justice must provide the basis. Manmust give up, therefore, all thought of advancing his interests byfollowing expediency regardless of moral considerations. It is notalways possible to predict with certainty the outcome of a given line ofconduct. But in most cases we can determine whether a certain act isjust or unjust.</p>
<p>We can also assert that the result of moral conduct isbound to be good. We cannot predict what that result will be, or how itwill come about.Justice includes affection. The relation between master andoperative depends on this element of affection. Let us assume that themaster wants to exact the utmost amount of work from his servant. Heallows him no time for rest, pays him a low wage, and lodges him in agarret. In brief, he pays him a bare subsistence wage. It may beargued that there is no injustice in all this. The servant has placed allhis time; at the master’s disposal in return for a given wage, and thelatter avails himself of it. He determines the limits of hardship inexacting work by reference to what others do. If the servant can get abetter place, he is free to take it. This is called economics by thosewho formulate the laws of supply and demand. They assert that itisprofitable to the master thus to exact the maximum amount of workfor the minimum wage. In the long run, the entire society will benefitby it and, through the society, the servant himself.But on reflection we find that this is not quite true. This methodof calculation would have been valid if the employee were a meremachine which required some kind of force to drive it. But in this casethe motive power of the servant is his soul, and soul-force contradictsand falsifies all the calculations of the economists. The machine that isman cannot be driven by the money-fuel to do the maximum amountof work. Man will give of his best only when his affections arebrought into play. The master-servant nexus must not be a pecuniaryone, but one of love. 2</p>
<p>It usually happens that, if the master is a man of sense andenergy, the servant works hard enough, under pressure; it alsohappens that, if the master is indolent and weak, the performance ofthe servant is not of the best in quality or quantity. But the true law isthat, if we compare two masters of equal intelligence, the servant of theone who is sympathetically inclined will work better than that of theother who is not so inclined.It may be argued that this principle does not quite hold, sincekindness and indulgence are sometimes rewarded with their opposites.The servant becomes unmanageable. But the argument is neverthelessinvalid.A servant who rewards kindness with negligence willbecome vengeful when treated harshly. A servant who is dishonest to aliberal master will be injurious to an unjust one.Therefore, in any case and with any person, this unselfish treatmentwill yield the most effective return. We are here consideringaffections only as a motive power. That we should be kind becausekindness is good is quite another consideration. We are not thinkingof that for the present. We only want to point out here that not onlyare the ordinary laws of economics, which we considered above,rendered nugatory by the motive power of kindness sympathy butalso that affection, being a power of an altogether different kind, isinconsonant with the laws of economics and can survive only if thoselaws are ignored. If the master is a calculating person who shows kindnessonly in expectation of a return, he will probably be disappointed.Kindness should be exercised for the sake of kindness; the reward willthen come unsought. It is said that he who loses his life shall find it,and he who finds it shall lose it. Let us take the example of a regiment and its commander. If ageneral seeks to get his troops to work in accordance with theprinciples of economics, he will fail. There are many instances ofgenerals cultivating direc</p>
<p>t, personal relations with their men, treatingthem with kindness, sharing their joys and hardships, ensuring theirsafety in brief, treating them with sympathy. A general of this kindwill be able to exact the most arduous work from his troops. If welook into history, we shall rarely find a battle won where the troopshad no love for their general. Thus the bond of sympathy between thegeneral and his troops is the truest force. Even a band of robbers hasthe utmost affection for its leader. And yet we find no such intimaterelation between the employer and the employees in textile mills andother factories. One reason for this is that, in these factories, the wagesof the employees are determined by the laws of supply and demand.Between the employer and the employee there obtains, therefore, therelation of disaffection rather than of affection, and instead ofsympathy between them we find antagonism. We have then toconsider two questions: one, how far the rate of wages may be soregulated as not to vary with the demand for labour; second, how farworkmen can be maintained in factories, without any change in theirnumbers irrespective of the state of trade, with the same bondbetween workmen and employer as obtains between servants andmaster in an old family, or between soldiers and their commander.</p>
<p>Let us consider the first question. It is surprising why economistsdo nothing to make it possible for standards of payment forfactoryworkers to be fixed. We see, on the other hand, that the officeof the Prime Minister of England is not put up to auction, but thatwhoever the incumbent, the remuneration remains the same. Nor dowe offer the job of a priest to anyone who agrees to accept the lowestsalary. With physicians and lawyers, too, we do not generally deal inthis manner. Thus we observe that in these instances a certain standardof payment is fixed. It may be asked, however, whether a good workmanand a bad one must both be paid the same wage. In fact, that is asit should be. In the result, the rate of wages for all workers being thesame, we shall engage only a good bricklayer or carpenter as we goonly to a good physician or lawyer the fees of all physicians or lawyersbeing the same. That is the proper reward of the good workman to be chosen. Therefore, the right system respecting all labouris that it should be paid at fixed rates.</p>
<p>Where a bad workman finds itpossible to deceive employers by accepting a low wage, the eventualoutcome cannot but be bad.Let us now consider the second point. It is that, whatever thestate of trade, the factories must maintain the same number of workersin employment. When there is no security of employment, the workersare obliged to ask for higher wages. If, however, they can be assuredof continued employment for life, they will be prepared to work forvery low wages. It is clear therefore that the employer who assures securityof employment to his workers will find it profitable in the longrun. The employees also stand to gain if they continue steadily in thesame job. Large profits are not possible in factories run on these lines.Big risks cannot be taken. Gambling on a large scale will not bepossible. The soldier is ready to lay down his life for the sake of hiscommander. That is why the work of a soldier is considered morehonourable than that of an ordinary worker. The soldier’s trade isreally, not slaying, but being slain in defence of others. Anyone whoenlists as a soldier holds his life at the service of the state. This is truealso of the lawyer, the physician and the priest. That is why we lookup to them with respect. A lawyer must do justice even at the cost ofhis life. The physician must treat his patients at the cost of inconvenienceto himself. And the clergyman must instruct his congregationand direct it along the right path, regardless of consequences. 3</p>
<p>If this can happen in the professions mentioned, why not intrade and commerce? Why is it that trade is always associated withunscrupulousness? We shall see on reflection that it is always assumedthat the merchant is moved solely by self-interest. Even though hehas a socially useful function, we take it for granted that his object isto fill his own coffers. Even the laws are so drafted as to enable themerchant to amass wealth with the utmost speed. It is also accepted asa principle that the buyer must offer the lowest possible price and theseller must demand and accept the highest. The trader has thus beenencouraged in this habit, yet the public themselves look down on himfor his dishonesty. This principle must be abandoned. It is not rightthat the merchant should look only to self-interest and amass wealth.This is not trade, but robbery. The soldier lays down his life for thestate and the trader ought to suffer a comparable loss, ought even tolose his life in the interests of society. In all states the soldier’sprofession is to defend the people; the pastor’s to teach it; the physician’sto keep it in health; the lawyer’s to enforce pure justice in it;and the merchant’s to provide for it. And it is the duty of each on dueoccasion to die for the people. The soldier must be prepared to die athis post of duty rather than desert it.</p>
<p>During a plague epidemic, thephysician must not run away from his task but instead attend to thepatients even at the risk of infection. The priest must lead people fromerror to truth even if they should kill him for it. The lawyer mustensure, even at the cost of his life, that justice prevails.We pointed out above the proper occasions for members of theprofessions to lay down their lives. What, then, is the proper occasionfor the merchant to lay down his life? This is a question which all, themerchant included, must ask themselves. The man who does not knowwhen to die does not know how to live. We have seen that the merchant’sfunction is to provide for the people. Just as the clergyman’sfunction is not to earn a stipend but to instruct, so the merchant’sfunction is not to make profits but to provide for the people. Theclergyman who devotes himself to preaching has his needs providedfor, and in the same manner the merchant will have his profits. Butneither of them must have an eye only on the main chance. Both havework to do each a duty to perform irrespective of whether or notthey get the stipend or the profit. If this proposition is true, the merchantdeserves the highest honour. For his duty is to procure commoditiesof high quality and distribute them at a price which peoplecan afford. It also becomes his duty at the same time to ensure thesafety and wellbeing of the hundreds or thousands of men workingunder him. This requires a great deal of patience, kindness and intelligence.Also, in discharging these several functions he is bound, asothers are bound, to give up his life, if need be.</p>
<p>Such a trader wouldnot sell adulterated goods or cheat anyone, whatever his difficulties oreven if he was going to be reduced to utter poverty. Moreover, he willtreat the men under him with the utmost kindness. Very often a youngman taking up a situation with a big factory or commercial housetravels a long way from home, so that the master has to accept the roleof his parents. If the master is indifferent, the young man will be likean orphan. At every step, therefore, the merchant or the master mustask himself this question, ‘Do I deal with my servants as I do with mysons?’Suppose a ship’s captain places his son among the commonsailors under his command. The captain’s duty is to treat all sailors ashe would treat his son. In the same manner, a merchant may ask hisson to work alongside of those under him. He must always treat theworkers as he would then treat his son. This is the true meaning ofeconomics. And as the captain is bound to be the last man to leave hisship in case of shipwreck, so in the event of famine or other calamities,the trader is bound to safeguard the interests of his men before hisown. All this may sound strange. But the really strange thing aboutthe modern age is that it should so sound. For anyone who applies hismind to it will be able to see that the true principle is as we have statedit. Any other standard is impossible for a progressive nation. If theBritish have survived so long, it is not because they have lived up tothe maxims of economics, but because they have had many heroeswho have questioned them and followed instead these principles ofmoral conduct. The harm that results from the violation of theseprinciples and the nation’s consequent decline from greatness, weshall consider on another occasion. 4</p>
<p>Economists may reply in the following manner to what we saidearlier concerning “roots of truth”: ‘It is true that certain advantagesflow from social affection. But economists do not take theseadvantages into their reckoning. The science with which they areconcerned is the science of getting rich. Far from being fallacious, ithas in experience been found to be effective. Those who follow it dobecome rich, and those who disregard it become poor. All themillionaires of Europe have acquired their wealth by following thelaws of this science. It is futile to seek to controvert this. Every man ofthe world knows how money is made and how it is lost.’This is not quite true. Men of business do indeed make moneybut they do not know whether they make it by fair means and if theirmoney-making contributes to the national weal. Very often they donot even know the meaning of the word “rich”. They do not realizethat, if there are rich men, there must also be poor men. Peoplesometimes believe, mistakenly, that by following certain precepts it ispossible for everybody to become rich. But the true position can becompared to a water-wheel where one bucket]empties out as anotherfills.</p>
<p>The power of the rupee you possess depends on another goingwithout it. If no one wants it, it will be useless to you. The power itpossesses depends on your neighbour’s lack of it. There can bewealth only where there is scarcity. This means that, in order to berich, one must keep another poor.Political economy consists in the production, preservation anddistribution, at the fittest time and place, of useful and pleasurablethings. The farmer who reaps his harvest at the right time, the builderwho lays bricks properly, the carpenter who attends to woodwork withcare, the woman who runs her kitchen efficiently are all true politicaleconomists. All of them add to the national income. A science thatteaches the opposite of this is not “political”. Its only concern is withindividuals merely accumulating a certain metal and putting it toprofitable use by keeping others in want of it. Those who do thisestimate their wealth the value of their farms and cattle by thenumber of rupees they can get for them, rather than the value of theirrupees by the number of cattle and farms they can buy with them.Furthermore, men who thus accumulate metal rupees think interms of the number of workmen whose services they can command.Let us suppose that a certain individual possesses gold, silver, corn, etc.This person will require a servant. And if none of his neighbours is inneed of gold, silver or corn, he will find it difficult to get one. He willthen have to bake his bread, make his clothes and plough his field allby himself. This man will find his gold to be of no greater value thanthe yellow pebbles on his estate. His hoard of corn will rot. For hecannot consume more than his neighbour. He must therefore maintainhimself by hard labour as other men do. Most people will not want toaccumulate gold or silver on these terms. Careful reflection will showthat what we really desire through acquisition of wealth is power overother men power to acquire for our advantage the labour of aservant, a tradesman or an artisan. And the power we can thus acquirewill be in direct proportion to the poverty of others. If there is onlyone person in a position to employ a carpenter, the latter will acceptwhatever wage is offered. If there are three or four persons who needhis services, he will work for the person who offers him the highestwage. So that growing rich means contriving that as large a number ofmen as possible shall have less than we have. Economists generallyassume that it is of advantage to the nation as a whole if the mass ofpeople are thus kept in want. Equality among men is certainly notpossible. But conditions of scarcity, unjustly created, injure the nation.Scarcity and abundance arising naturally make, and keep, the nationhappy. 5</p>
<p>Thus the circulation of wealth among a people resembles thecirculation of blood in the body. When circulation of blood is rapid, itmay indicate any of these things: robust health, effects of exercise,ora feeling of shame or fever. There is a flush of the body which isindicative of health, and another which is a sign of gangrene. Furthermore, the concentration of blood at one spot is harmful to the bodyand, similarly, concentration of wealth at one place proves to be thenation’s undoing.Let us suppose that two sailors are shipwrecked on anuninhabited coast They are then obliged to produce food and othernecessaries of life through their own labour. If they both keep goodhealth and work in amity, they may build a good house, till the landand lay by something for the future. All these things would constitutereal wealth. If both of them work equally well they will have equalshares. Therefore, all that economic science would have to say abouttheir case is that they had acquired a right to an equal share in thefruits of their labour. Let us suppose now that after a while one ofthem feels dis-contented. So they divide the land and each one workson his land by himself and on his own account. Let us suppose that ata critical time one of them falls ill. He would then approach the otherfor help. The latter might reply: ‘I shall do this work for you, but oncondition that you do the same amount of work for me whenrequired. You must undertake in writing to work on my field whenrequired for the same number of hours that I work for you now.’Suppose further that the disabled man’s illness continues and thatevery time he has to give a written promise to the other, healthyperson. What will be the position of the reduced to utter poverty. For,during the time that the invalid was laid up, his labour was unavailable. Even assuming that the friend was very hard-working, it is obviousthat the time which he devoted to the ailing man’s land was at theexpense of work on his own. This means that the combined propertyof the two would be less than it would have been otherwise. Also, the relation in which the two stood to each other hasaltered.</p>
<p>The sick man becomes a debtor, and can only offer his labouras payment towards the debt. Suppose now that the healthy mandecided to make use of the documents in his possession. He wouldthen find it possible wholly to abstain, from work that is, be idle. Ifhe chose, he could exact further pledges from the man who hasrecovered. No one can attribute any illegality to such a transaction. Ifnow a stranger were to arrive on the scene, he would find that one ofthe two men had become wealthy and the other had lost hiswell-being. He would also see one of them passing his days in idleluxury and the other in want, though labouring hard. The reader willnote from this that claiming the fruits of another’s labour as of rightleads to a diminution of real wealth. Let us consider another illustration. Suppose that three men established a kingdom and then they all lived separately. Each ofthem raised a different crop which the others could also avail themselvesof. Suppose, further, that one of them, in order to save the timeof all the three, gave up farming and undertook to arrange the transferof commodities from one to the other, receiving in return a quantityof food-grains. If this man provided the required commodity at theright time, all of them would prosper. Now suppose that he kept backsome of the grain he was to transfer. Then suppose there set in aperiod of scarcity, and the middleman offered the stolen corn at anexorbitant price. In this way he could reduce both the farmers topoverty and employ them as labourers.This would be a case of obvious injustice. This is, however, theway the merchants of today manage their affairs. We can also see thatin consequence of this fraudulent practice the wealth of the three,taken collectively, will be less than it would have been if themiddleman had behaved honestly. The other two farmers have doneless work than they could have. Because they could not obtain thesupplies they wanted, their labour did not fructify to the fullest, andthe stolen commodities the hands of the dishonest middleman werenot put to the most effective use.</p>
<p>We can therefore reckon with mathematical accuracy how farthe estimate of a nation’s wealth depends on the manner in whichthat wealth has been acquired. We cannot estimate a nation’s wealthon the basis of the quantity of cash it possesses. Cash in the hands ofan individual may be a token of perseverance, skill and prosperity, orof harmful luxuries, merciless tyranny and chicanery. Our way ofestimating wealth not only takes into account the moral attributes ofthedifferent modes of acquiring it but is also sound mathematically.One stock of money is such that it has created ten times as much inthe gathering of it. Another is such that it has annihilated ten times asmuch in the gathering of it.To lay down directions for the making of money withoutregardto moral considerations is therefore a pursuit that bespeaks ofman’s insolence. There is nothing more disgraceful to man than theprinciple “buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest”. Buy inthe cheapest market? Yes, but what made your market cheap? Charcoalmay be cheap among roof timbers after a fire and the bricks ofbuildings brought down by an earthquake may be cheap. But no onetherefore will make bold to assert that fire and earthquake redound tothe nation’s benefit.</p>
<p>Again, sell in the dearest market? Yes, but whatmade your market dear? You made good profit today from the sale ofyour bread. But was it by extorting the last cowrie from a dying man?Or, did you sell it to a rich man who will tomorrow appropriate all thatyou have? Or did you give it to a bandit on his way to pillaging yourbank? Probably you will not be able to answer any of these questions,for you do not know. But there is one question you can answer,namely, whether you sold it justly and at a reasonable price. Andjustice is all that matters. It is your duty to act so that no one suffersthrough your actions. 6</p>
<p>We saw that the value of money consists in its power tocommand the labour of men. If that labour could be had withoutpayment, there should be no further need of money. Instances areknown where human labour can be had without payment. We haveconsidered examples which show that moral power is more effectivethan the power of money. We also saw that man’s goodness can dowhat money cannot do. There exist men in many parts of Englandwho cannot be beguiled with money.Moreover, if we admit that wealth carries with it the power todirect labour, we shall also see that the more intelligent and moral menare, the greater is the wealth amassed. It may even appear on afullerconsideration that the persons themselves constitute the wealth,not gold and silver. We must search for wealth not in the bowels of theearth, but in the hearts of men. If this is correct, the true law ofeconomics is that men must be maintained in the best possible health,both of body and mind, and in the highest state of honour.</p>
<p>A timemay also come when England, instead of adorning the turbans of itsslaves with diamonds from Golkonda and thus sporting her wealth,may be able to point to her great men of virtue, saying, in the wordsof a truly eminent Greek, “This is my wealth.”Some centuries before Christ there lived a Jewish merchant,Solomon name. He had made a large fortune and earned great fame.His maxims are remembered in Europe even today. He was so belovedof the Venetians that they erected a statue in the city to his memory.Though his maxims are known by rote, very few persons actuallypractise them. He says: “Those who make money through lies areafflicted with pride, and that is a sign of their death.” At anotherplace, he adds: “Treasures of wickedness profit nothing. It is truthwhich delivers from death.” In both these maxims Solomon assertsthat death is the outcome of wealth unjustly acquired. Nowadays,people tell lies or perpetrate injustice so cleverly that we cannot findthem out. For there are misleading advertisements. Things bearattractive labels, and so on.Again the wise man says: “He that oppresseth the poor tomultiply his riches shall surely come to want.” And he adds: “Robnot the poor because he is poor. Oppress not the afflicted in the placeof business. For God will corrupt the soul of those that tormentthem.” At present, however, it is the practice in business to administerkicks to those who are already dead. We are eager to take advantageof a needy man. The highwayman robs the rich, but the trader robsthe poor.Solomon says further: “The rich and the poor are equal. Godis their maker. God gives them knowledge.” The rich and the poorcannot live, the one without the other. They always need eachother.Neither of them can be regarded as superior or inferior to theother. But evil consequences follow when the two forget that they areequal, and that God is their light. 7</p>
<p>Wealth is like a river. A river always flows towards the sea, that is,down an incline. So, as a general rule must wealth go where it isneeded. But the flow of wealth, like the course of a river, can beregulated. Most of the rivers run out their courses unregulated, theirmarshy banks poisoning the wind. If dams are built across these riversto direct the water flow as required, they will irrigate the soil and keepthe atmosphere pure. Similarly the uncontrolled use of wealth willmultiply vices among men and cause starvation; in brief, such wealthwill act like a poison. But the selfsame wealth, if its circulation isregulated and its use controlled, can, like a river whose stream hasbeen properly harnessed, promote prosperity.The principle of regulating the circulation of wealth is ignoredaltogether by economists.</p>
<p>Theirs is merely the science of getting rich.But there are many different ways of getting rich. There was a time inEurope when people sought to acquire wealth by poisoning owners oflarge estates and appropriating their possessions. Nowadays,merchants adulterate the food sold to the poor, for example, milk withborax, wheat flour with potato flour, coffee with chicory, butter withfat and so on. This is on the same level as getting rich by poisoningothers. Can we call this either an art or a science of getting rich?Let us not, however, assume that by “getting rich” economistsmerely mean “getting rich by robbing others”. They should pointout that theirs is a science of getting rich by legal or just means. Ithappens these days that many things which are legal are not just. Theonly right way, therefore, to acquire wealth is to do so justly. And ifthis is true, we must know what is just. It is not enough to live by thelaws of demand and supply. Fish, wolves and rats subsist in thatmanner. Bigger fish prey on smaller ones, rats swallow insects andwolves devour even human beings. That for them is the law ofNature; they know no better. But God has endowed man withunderstanding, with a sense of justice. He must follow these and notthink of growing rich by devouring others—by cheating others andreducing them to beggary.Let us examine what then the laws of justice regarding paymentof labour are. As we stated earlier, a just wage for a worker will be that whichwill secure him the same labour, when he needs it, as he has put inforustoday. If we give him a lower wage, he will be underpaid, and ifmore, overpaid.Suppose</p>
<p> a man wants to engage a worker. Two persons offertheir services. If the man who offers to accept a lower wage isengaged, he will be underpaid. If there is a large number ofemployers and only one worker, he will get his own terms and willvery likely be overpaid. The just wage lies between these two points.If someone lends me money which I have to repay after a time, Ishall pay him interest. Similarly, if someone gives me his labourtoday, I must return him an identical quantity of labour andsomething more by way of interest. If someone gives me an hour oflabour today, I should promise to give him an hour and five minutesor more. This is true of every kind of worker. If, now, of two men who offer me their services, I engage theone who accepts the lower wage, the result will be that he will be half starved while the other man will remain unemployed. Even otherwise,if I pay full wages to the workman whom I employ, the other man willbe unemployed. But the former will not starve, and I shall have madejust use of my money. Starvation really occurs only when the duewages are not paid. If I pay due wages, surplus wealth will notaccumulate in my hands.</p>
<p>I shall not waste money on luxuries and addto the poverty. The workman whom I pay justly will in turn learn topay others justly. Thus the stream of justice will not dry up; instead itwill gather speed as it flows. And the nation which has such a sense ofjustice will grow happy and prosper in the right direction.According to this line of reasoning, economists are found to bewrong. They argue that increased competition means growingprosperity for a nation. This is not true in fact. Competition is desiredbecause it reduces the rate of wages. The rich become richer therebyand the poor poorer. Such competition is likely to ruin a nation in thelong run. The right law of demand and supply should ensure thepayment of a just wage to a workman according to his worth. This,too, will mean competition, but the result will be that people will behappy and skilful, for, instead of being obliged to underbid oneanother, they will have to acquire new skills to secure employment.It is for this reason that men are drawn to government service. There,salaries are fixed according to the gradation of posts. The competitionis only with regard to ability. A candidate does not offer to accepta lower salary but claims that he is abler than others. The same is thecase with the Army and the Navy, and that is why there is muchlesscorruption in these services.</p>
<p>But only in trade and commerce isthere unhealthy competition, as a result of which corrupt practices,such as fraud, chicanery, theft, have increased. Furthermore, goods ofpoor quality are manufactured. The manufacturer wants a lion’s shareof the price for himself, the workman to throw dust in the eyes ofothers and the consumer to exploit the situation to his own advantage.This poisons all human intercourse, there is starvation all round,strikes multiply, manufacturers become rogues and consumersdisregard ethical considerations. One injustice leads to numerousothers, and in the end the employer, the operative and the customerare all unhappy and meet with ruin. A people among whom thesecorrupt practices prevail comes to grief in the end. Its very wealthacts like a poison.This is why men of wisdom have held that where Mammon is God, no one worships the true God. Wealth cannot be reconciled with God. God lives only in the homes of the poor. This is what the British profess, but in practice they place wealth above everything else,estimate the prosperity of the nation by the number of its rich, andtheir economists formulate precepts for everyone to get rich quickly.True economics is the economics of justice. That people alone will behappy which learns how to do justice and be righteous under allconditions of life. All else is vain, a kind of moral perversity thatpresages doom. To teach the people to get rich at any cost is to teachthem an evil lesson. 8</p>
<p>We saw in the three preceding chapters that the generally acceptedprinciples of economics are invalid. If acted upon, they will makeindividuals and nations unhappy. The poor will become poorer andthe rich richer; neither will be any the happier for it.Economists do not take men’s conduct into account butestimate prosperity from the amount of wealth accumulated and soconclude that the happiness of nations depends upon their wealthalone. Hence they advocate greater accumulation of wealth throughmore and more work in factories. In England and elsewhere factorieshave multiplied because of the spread of these ideas. Large numbersof men leave their farms and concentrate in cities. They give up thepure and fresh air of the countryside and feel happy breathing thefoul air of factories.</p>
<p>As a result, the nation grows weaker, and avariceand immorality increase, and if someone suggests measures foreradicating vice, the so-called wise men argue that vice cannot beeliminated, that the ignorant cannot be educated all at once and that itis best to let things alone. While advancing this argument, they forgetthat it is the rich who are responsible for the immorality of the poor.The wretched workers slave for them day and night so that they maybe kept supplied with their luxuries. They have not a moment tothemselves for self-improvement. Thinking about the rich, they alsowant to be rich. When they fail in this, they become angry andresentful. They then forget themselves in their anger, and havingfailed to gather wealth by honest means, turn in desperation to fraud.Both wealth and labour are thus wasted, else they are utilized forpromoting fraud.Labour, in the real sense of the term, is that which produces usefularticles.</p>
<p>Useful articles are those which support human life. Supportinghuman life means provision of food, clothing, etc., so as toenable men to live a moral life and to do good while they live. For thispurpose, large-scale industrial undertakings would appear to be useless.To seek to acquire wealth by establishing big factories is likely tolead to sin. Many people amass wealth but few make good use of it. Ifthe making of money is likely to lead a nation to its destruction, thatmoney is useless. On the contrary, present-day capitalists are responsiblefor widespread and unjust wars. Most of the wars of our timesspring from greed for money.We hear people say that it is impossible to educate others so asto improve them, and the best course would be to live as well as onecould and accumulate wealth. Those he hold these views show littleconcern for ethical principles. For the person who values ethical principlesand does not yield to avarice has a disciplined mind; he doesnot tray from the right path, and influences others merely by his example.If the individuals who constitute a nation do not observe moralprinciples of conduct how can the nation become moral?</p>
<p>If we behaveas we choose and then point the accusing finger at an errant neighbour,how can the result of our actions be good?We thus see that money no more than a means which may makefor happiness or misery. In the hands of a good man, it can be usedfor cultivating land and raising crops. Cultivators will find contentmentin innocent labour and the nation will be happy. In the hands ofbad men, it is used for the production, say, of gun-powder and bringingutter ruin on the people. Both those who manufacture gunpowderand those who fall victims to it suffer in consequence. We thussee that there is no wealth besides life. That nation is wealthy Which ismoral. This not the time for self-indulgence. Everyone must workaccording to his ability. As we saw in the illustrations earlier, if oneman remains idle another has to labour twice as hard. This is at theroot of the starvation prevalent in England. There are men who dolittle useful work themselves because of the wealth that has accumulatedin their hands, and so force others to labour for them. This kindof labour, being unproductive, is not beneficial to the worker. In consequence,the income suffers diminution. Though all men appear tobe employed, we find on closer scrutiny that a large number are idleperforce. Moreover, envy is aroused, discontent takes root and, in theend, the rich and the poor, the employer and the workman violate thebounds of decency in their mutual relations.</p>
<p>As the cat and themouse are always at variance with each other, so the rich and the poor,the employer and the workman become hostile to one another, andman, ceasing to be man, is reduced to the level of beasts.Our summary of the great Ruskin’s book is now concluded.Though some may have been bored by it, we advise those who haveread the articles once to read them again. It will be too much to expectthat all the readers of Indian Opinion will ponder over them and acton them. But even if a law readers make a careful study of the summaryand grasp the central idea, we shall deem our labour to havebeen amply rewarded. Even if that does not happen, the reward oflabour, as Ruskin says in the last chapter, consists in having doneone’s duty and that should satisfy one.What Ruskin wrote for his countrymen, the British, is a thousandtimes more applicable to Indians. New ideas are spreading in India.The advent of a new spirit among the young who have receivedwestern education is of course to be welcomed. But the outcome willbe beneficial only if that spirit is canalized properly; if it is not, it isbound to be harmful. From one side we hear the cry for swarajya;from another, for the quick accumulation of wealth by setting upfactories like those in Britain.Our people hardly understand what swarajya means. Natalenjoys swarajya, but we would say that, if we were to imitate Natal,swarajya would be no better than hell.</p>
<p>The Natal whites tyrannizeover the Kaffirs, hound out the Indians, and in their blindness givefree rein to selfishness. If, by chance, Kaffirs and Indians were to leaveNatal, they would destroy themselves in a civil war.Shall we, then, hanker after the kind of swarajya which obtainsin the Transvaal? General Smuts is one of their leading figures. Hedoes not keep any promise, oral or written. He says one thing, doesanother. The British are disgusted with him. Under the guise ofeffecting economy, he has deprived British soldiers of livelihood andhas been replacing them with Dutchmen. We do not believe that in thelong run this will make even the Dutch happy. Those who serve onlytheir own interests will be ready to rob their own-people after theyhave done with robbing others.If we observe happenings all over the world, we shall be able tosee that what people call swarajya is not enough to secure thenation’s prosperity and happiness. We can perceive this by means of asimple example. All of us can visualize what would happen if a bandof robbers were to enjoy swarajya. In the long run they would behappy only if they were placed under the control of men who werenot themselves robbers. America, France and England are all greatStates. But there is no reason to think that they are really happy.Real swarajya consists in restraint. He alone is capable of thiswho leads a moral life, does not cheat anyone, does not forsake truthand does his duty to his parents, his wife, his children, his servant andhis neighbour. Such a man will enjoy swarajya wherever he mayhappen to live.</p>
<p>A nation that has many such men always enjoysswarajya.It is wrong normally for one nation to rule over another. Britishrule in India is an evil but we need not believe that any very greatadvantage would accrue to the Indians if the British were to leaveIndia. The reason why they rule over us is to be found in ourselves;that reason is our disunity, our immorality and our ignorance.If these three things were to disappear, not only would theBritish leave India without the rustling of a leaf, but it would be realswarajya that we would enjoy.Many people exult at the explosion of bombs. This only showsignorance and lack of understanding. If all the British were to bekilled, those who kill them would become the masters of India, and asa result India would continue in a state of slavery. The bombs withwhich the British will have been killed will fall on India after the Britishleave. The man who killed the President of the French Republicwas himself a Frenchman and the assassin of President Cleveland ofAmerica was an American. We ought to be careful, therefore, not tobe hasty and thoughtlessly to imitate the people of the West.Just as we cannot achieve real swarajya, by following the path ofevil that is by killing the British so also will it not be possible for usto achieve it by establishing big factories in India. Accumulation ofgold and silver will not bring swarajya. This has been convincinglyproved by Ruskin.</p>
<p>Let it be remembered that western civilization is only a hundredyears old, or to be more precise, fifty. Within this short span the western people appear to have been reduced to a state of culturalanarchy. We pray that India may never be reduced to the same state asEurope. The western nations are impatient to fall upon one another,and are restrained only by the accumulation of armaments all round. When the situation flares up, we will witness a veritable hell let loose in Europe. All white nations look upon the black races as their legitimate prey. This is inevitable when money is the only thing that matters. Wherever they find any territory, they swoop down on it likecrows upon carrion. There are reasons to suggest that this is theoutcome of their large industrial undertakings.To conclude, the demand of swarajya is the demand of everyIndian, and it is a just demand. But swarajya is to be achieved byrighteous means. It must be real swarajya. It cannot be achieved byviolent methods or by setting up factories. We must have industry, butof the right kind. India was once looked upon as a golden land,because Indians then were people of sterling worth. The land is stillthe same but the people have changed and that is why it has becomearid. To transform it into a golden land again we must transmuteourselves into gold by leading a life of virtue. The philosophers’stone which can bring this about consists of two syllables: satya. If,therefore, every Indian makes it a point to follow truth always, Indiawill achieve swarajya as a matter of course. 9</p>
<p> </p>
<p>References:</p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Indian Opinion, 16-5-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 23-5-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 30-5-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 6-6-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 13-6-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 20-6-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 27-6-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 4-7-1908</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 18-7-1908</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Russian Revolution and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-24:2043530:BlogPost:747652013-10-24T15:15:58.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Russian Revolution and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Some of his American friends wrote Mahatma Gandhi that, in the name of religion, he was probably introducing Bolshevism into India. These gratuitous “friends” obviously taking their cue from the spokesmen of Anglo-Saxon Imperialism (who often masquerade as pacifists), depict the revolt of the Moslem peoples as a menace to the world, because this revolt is supported by Bolshevik Russia. It should have been very simple for Mahatmaji to give a fitting reply to this impudent communication. He could have told his “responsibly (?) foreign friends” that the Moslem peoples have legitimate reason to revolt, and that any political doctrine or government supporting this revolt is to be considered favourably by all apostles of freedom. Besides, he could have requested his American friends to get busy at home, if they sincerely dreaded any menace to the world. What is menacing the world more today than American Imperialism? Is the revolt of the Moslem people more sinister than the Ku-Klux-Klan and the American Legion?</p>
<p>Is Bolshevist atheism more godless than the anti-Asiatic spirit of the American democracy? The Mahatma, however, did not give such a direct answer. He preferred to justify himself to absolve himself from any possible suspicion of Bolshevist tendency. But the curious thing is, that although by his own confession he did not know anything about Bolshevism, nevertheless he was extremely solicitous to disown any leaning towards it, so sure is his instinctive antipathy for it. In an article in Young India he writes: “In the first place I must confess that I do not know the meaning of Bolshevism.” This is indeed a very damaging confession, in view of the fact that it is made by one standing at the head of a great popular movement. The Mahatma said in the same article that he knew that there were two opposite pictures of Bolshevism, “one painting it in the blackest colour, the other hailing it as a deliverance for the downtrodden masses all the world over.” But he does not know what to believe. Here again he could follow a simple human course. He could easily find out who paints the first picture. It is done by those who are ruling over the world with the policy of blood and iron. In deference to his scruples of impartiality, he might not believe those giving the second picture; but certainly Mahatmaji does need to be convinced that the first party is not the friend or deliverer of the human race. Therefore when they depict a thing in the blackest colour, the oppressed section of humanity can instinctively sense some sinister motive, they feel that the “blackest colour” is for deceiving them. By this unerring instinct, Indian nationalists during the War used to read two German victories in the place of each allied victory cabled by Reuter, and the Mexican peon calls himself proudly a Bolshevik, for the simple reason that the American capitalists are so much against Bolshevism.</p>
<p>But I suppose, the mentality of a Mahatma is too complicated an organism to admit of such a simple instinctive process. Since the deplorable ignorance of Bolshevism is not the Mahatma’s alone, but is shared by many in India, and since this ignorance does not preclude them from forming an opinion on the subject, it may not be uncalled for to say a few words about this “monstrous” doctrine. It is the more called for, in view of the fact that Bolshevism (which, by the way, is not the result, as is commonly believed, but the basic principle of the Russian Revolution of 1917) is the most dominant political factor of the contemporary world. Just as the great French Revolution of 1789 affected the political thought and life of Europe at that epoch, the Russian Revolution is bound to play the same role in our time, with the difference that the geographical situation of Russia, coupled with the principles of her revolution, will bring wider spheres, including Asia and Africa, under its sway. This is the case, despite the explicable apprehension and righteous indignation of the pacifically minded ladies and gentlemen, whose good faith is taken for granted by Mahatmaji, but is seriously doubted by more practical men of the world.</p>
<p>Now, as far as Mahatmaji is concerned, the main principles of Bolshevism will not be anything new. He himself will think so. But principles become a bundle of dead formulas if they are not put into action. By his own declaration, the Mahatma desires to see the masses freed from the domination of capitalism. Well, Bolshevism does not propose anything more monstrous. The Bolsheviks are generally in agreement with Mahatmaji when he says, “the greatest menace to the world today is the growing, exploiting, irresponsible imperialism which is threatening the independent existence and expansion of the weaker races.” But the difference between Mahatmaji and the Bolsheviks is that in the hands of the former, this gospel of freedom loses all practical value, being subordinated to an intricate conception of morality, religion and God, while the latter do not permit their vision to be clouded by illusions, and deal with the world as it is. The result is, that while Bolshevism forges ahead, breaking one link after another of the mighty chain of time-honoured servitude, in the face of united and determined Opposition of the powers that be, Gandhism gropes in the dark, spinning out ethical and religious dogmas, that only prevent the masses from developing the will to fight for freedom. It can be taken for granted that Mahatmaji is acquainted with the general principles of Socialism; not the Utopian brand of St. Simon, Thomas More, Tolstoy, etc., but that formulated on the basis of scientific knowledge and economic facts by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The principles of Socialism are</p>
<p>(1) to overthrow the capitalist system of production;</p>
<p>(2) abolition of private property;</p>
<p>(3) reorganization of the means of social production and distribution on the basis of communal ownership and</p>
<p>(4) transformation of the class-ridden society into a human fraternity.</p>
<p>These are also the principles of Bolshevism, the latter being Socialism in its militant and initial stages of victory. The term “Bolshevism” which has come to be associated with bloodshed, destruction, terror and what not, is very harmless in its meaning. It is derived from the Russian word bolsheviki, which is the synonym for the adherents of the majority. The term was first used when the Russian Socialist Democratic Labour Party split in 1903 into two factions on the questions of programme and tactics. The programme and tactics advocated by the majority, led by Lenin together with others, came to be known as Bolshevism; and since the Russian proletariat scored the victory in October 1917, having fought according to the programme and tactics advocated by the majority of the party ever since 1903, the October Revolution is called a Bolshevist victory, which means the first triumph of Socialism. What are the concrete results of the Russian Revolution?</p>
<p>(1) A corrupt, irresponsible despotism was overthrown.</p>
<p>(2) The bourgeoisie, which under the guise of democracy, sought in conjunction with foreign powers to deprive the Russian masses of the benefits of the Revolution, was also overthrown.</p>
<p>(3) The landed aristocracy, the mainstay of the Czarist despotism, was destroyed, land declared to be the property of the entire nation and distributed among the cultivators.</p>
<p>(4) Large industries were nationalized.</p>
<p>(5) Foreign trade made a State monopoly.</p>
<p>(6) All legislative and administrative power was transferred to the overwhelming majority of the people, namely, the workers, peasants and soldiers, who exercised this power through their councils (soviets).</p>
<p>(7) All right of private property and the class privilege accruing therefrom was abolished. These in general are the principles of Bolshevism, applied practically in Russia in consequence of the Revolution.</p>
<p>Now that he knows what Bolshevism is, what is the attitude of the Mahatma towards it? It will be interesting for India, as well as the whole world, to know the reply. Now comes the thorny question. Mahatmaji might not take exception to these principles, but he would certainly make many a stipulation as to the method of realizing them. For him there is only one touch-stone for everything. If Bolshevism is atheistic, he is against it. That is all. Well, there we have given him a definition of Bolshevism in a nutshell. It is for him to pronounce whether it is a negation of God or what. He cannot maintain that it is a negation of God, unless he holds private property and vested interests to be a divine ordinance, because Bolshevism is certainly a negation of private property and vested interests, which from the dawn of civilization, have been the curse of human society.</p>
<p>In the practical programme of Bolshevism there is no question of God or religion. It is neither theistic nor atheistic. It concerns the worldly life of man. The possible conflict with God and religion occurs only when the latter stands in the way; when the conception of God or religion clashes with this practical programme. In that case, Bolshevism does not hesitate to take up the challenge even of the supposed Almighty, and become atheistic, thus running the risk of forfeiting the approbation of the Mahatma. But by doing so, it not only becomes the champion of the material rights of the masses, but holds up as well the torch of intellectual and spiritual emancipation to dissipate the gloom of ignorance and superstition in which the masses have been kept for ages by the dominating class.</p>
<p>The programme of Bolshevism, which Mahatmaji cannot deny to be humanitarian (unless he chooses to take up openly the cause of the upper class) is, however, not easily put into practice. The reign of terror and devastating civil war, that undeniably took place in Russia after the revolution, owe their origin to the fact that a brutal resistance was put up to prevent the realization of this programme. Not only the Russian aristocracy and bourgeoisie, who naturally frantically tried to regain their lost position, put up this resistance; they were openly backed by the international bourgeoisie, who saw in the Russian Revolution the first breach in their vital citadel. A part of this ceaseless campaign was the picturing of Bolshevism in the darkest colours, which did not altogether fail to impress even the Mahatma. Now what were the Bolsheviks to do in that situation? There were two alternatives: to call upon the Russian workers and peasants to be godfearing and meekly slip back into the bondage they had so heroically broken or to keep on fighting even against God anal religion, if they stood in the way, to protect and consolidate the freedom won. Bolshevism was obliged to accept the second alternative, because not only all available material forces were concentrated in order to force the Russian workers and peasants back under the capitalist and Czarist tyranny; all the arms of God and religion were also mobilized for the same purpose. Bolshevism is not a gospel of God: Bolshevists are not angels.</p>
<p>But neither is Bolshevism the spirit of demons. The Mahatma proposes “to touch the masses through their hearts, their better nature” It is a fascinating proposition, to which Bolshvism would not object, had it been found workable in the practice of liberating the masses from class domination and imperialist oppression. His theory of “discipline” is also very questionable. It may be good for the spiritual well-being of the masses; but it certainly weakens their will to fight for freedom. All these doctrines about “heart”, “better nature”, “discipline” and the like have been adumbrated from time immemorial by those who were the (perhaps unconscious) instruments of class domination. Bolshevism does not shirk any task, however disagreeable or difficult it may be. It challenges the existence of God and denounces all the codes of religion and ethics originating therefrom because in the struggle for freedom they are all found arrayed on the side of despotism, tyranny and oppression. Bolshevism is prepared to leave God alone, if He and His agents on earth agree not to meddle in things temporal. But if they do not agree to be satisfied with their super-material position and seek to make trouble on earth, Bolshevism will preach atheism to liberate the masses from the snare of ignorance woven by religion. 1 </p>
<p>In writing of the levelling process I certainly had not in mind the Soviet rule of Bolshevism. It is perhaps somewhat shameful that I have to confess to you that I do not yet know exactly what Bolshevism is for the simple reason that I have not had time to study the inner working of the Russian revolution. The levelling process to me simply means that the system of favouritism on which, as I believe, English commerce has been built should cease and for that purpose a double process has to begin. Favouritism should go and young Indian enterprises should receive State help and patronage. I know that I must not expect to convert you by argument. What I would like Englishmen in India to do is to see them selves as the average Indian sees them and ask themselves why it is that the vast majority of Indians feel as I often write in the pages of Young India. Can it be that what some English economists have written and what most Indian economists, historians and administrators have written is all untrue? The case that I have presented is based upon their testimony and supported by personal experience. 2</p>
<p>There are instances in the history of the Russian Revolution of unarmed masses or workers facing the military forces in face of rifle fire in the hope of winning them over and actually doing so. These I hold to be an unorganized and unconscious adoption of the non-violent technique, by the masses in the streets. But Trotsky’s instance shows that a responsible revolutionary statesman, having nothing to do with non-violence, could, in the light of revolutionary experience, think the ‘silly’ course now advocated by you to be a possible one, and actually experiment with it. Why should not we, with twenty years’ tradition of non-violent action, not only experiment with it, but hope for certain success? I for myself have begun to believe that of all forms of non-violent action, resistance to foreign aggression is the easiest one, and the first one likely to be completely successful. 3</p>
<p>Non-violence is a matchless weapon which can help everyone. I know we have not done much by way of non-violence and therefore, if such a change comes about I will take it as the result of our labours during the last twenty-two years and that God has helped us to achieve it. When I raised the slogan ‘Quit India’ the people in India who were then feeling despondent felt I had placed before them a new thing. If you want real freedom you will have to come together and such coming together will create true democracy—democracy the like of which has not been so far witnessed nor have there been any attempts made for such type of true democracy. I have read a good deal about the French revolution. Carlyle’s works I read while in jail. I have great admiration for the French people. Pandit Jawaharlal has told me all about the Russian revolution. But I hold that though theirs was a fight for the people it was not a fight for real democracy which I envisaged. My democracy means every man is his own master. I have read sufficient history and I did not see such an experiment on so large a scale for the establishment of democracy by non-violence. Once you understand these things you will forget the differences between the Hindus and the Muslims. The resolution that is placed before you says we do not want to remain frogs in a well. We are aiming at a world federation1 in which India would be a leading unit. It can come only through non-violence. Disarmament is only possible if you use the matchless weapon of non-violence. There are people who may call me a visionary but I tell you I am a real bania and my business is to obtain swaraj.</p>
<p>Speaking to you as a practical bania, I say, if you are prepared to pay the full price [of nonviolent conduct], pass this resolution, otherwise, do not pass it. If you do not accept this resolution I won’t be sorry for it, on the contrary I would dance with joy because you would then relieve me of the tremendous responsibility which you are now going to place on me. I want you to adopt non-violence as a matter of policy. With me it is a creed, but so far as you are concerned I want you to accept it as policy. As disciplined soldiers you must accept it in toto and stick to it when you join the struggle. 4</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Young India, 1-1-1925</li>
<li>Letter to Darcy Lindsay, June 3, 1931</li>
<li>Harijan, 6-10-1940 </li>
<li>The Hitavada 9-8-1942 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Russo-Japanese War and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-24:2043530:BlogPost:747632013-10-24T15:15:25.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Russo-Japanese War and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The bigger the war, the bigger the extent of chaos. The fraud and trickery, that were exposed during the Crimean War1, and other sundry happenings that have later come to light, are most distressing. During that war, a large stock of boots was purchased and despatched to the front for the use of soldiers, but they all were found to be for the left foot! A large quantity of foodstuff for the army was sent from England; but when it was consumed, instead of helping to feed the army, it proved deleterious being very rotten meat. It was not only merchants who wanted to become millionaires, but even the generals on the front, the politicians who were out to sacrifice a large number of precious lives, and leaders who called themselves benefactors of the state, committed fraud. Large stock of useful medicines sent out for soldiers and officers on their deathbed disappeared mysteriously before reaching the hospitals for which they were bound, and not a trace of them was found. Merchants, the so-called patriotic generals and high Government officials thus went on misappropriating hundreds of useful and valuable articles to fill their pockets at the expense of hundreds of poor soldiers who had gone to the front to fight for their country, leaving their homes and hearths.</p>
<p>When a news correspondent sent a full account of this, describing the condition of the army encamped at Sebastapol, the whole nation was so enraged that the ministry in power had to resign. In addition to this, there was a long list of oppressive tyrannies. But all these are insignificant incidents compared to those of the last Boer War. A scrutiny of how contracts, for the supply of provisions, uniforms, etc., to the army, were given and executed during that was has revealed how public money was utterly wasted. This was due solely to the misconduct of the autocratic officials. Contracts were blindly given by the departments concerned to contractors who were their favourites or were known to them and who made a profit of 50 to 500 per cent on some of the goods supplied. Such corruption was not confined to Great Britain alone. The defeat France sustained in 1879 was due to its officers who had become slaves of mammon. For, at the time of that war, the French Government had kept every necessary article ready. Millions and billions had been spent on these arrangements at the very start, but all that expenditure was incurred secretly. All these things was purchased and stored—on paper only. Although money was spent like water, articles of even ordinary military use ran short at the very outset of the war. The reports of the present Russo-Japanese War, too, are astounding. Last April, a million roubles were given to Duke of Sergius to be spent on feeding and clothing the army in Manchuria.</p>
<p>This stock was despatched to Manchuria in the month of May; but, instead of reaching there, it got transported directly from Moscow to Danzig, and from thence, goods worth thousands of pounds were sold for a song in Germany. Large sums of money were raised through subscriptions for the benefit of the widows of men and officers killed in the war; but not a farthing of that money reached the poor widows. The bags of suger despatched to the battle-field were found to contain sand instead of sugar! No trace could be found of millions of roubles that disappeared during the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. But this is not all. Innumerable examples have been recorded of the corruption and bribery practised in Russia. 1</p>
<p>Tolstoy is still writing with great energy. Though himself a Russian, he has written many strong and bitter things against Russia concerning the Russo-Japanese War. He has addressed a very pungent and effective letter to the Czar in regard to the war. Selfish officers view him with bitterness, but they, and even the Czar, fear and respect him. Such is the power of his goodness and godly living that millions of peasants are ever ready to carry out his wish no sooner than it is spoken. 2 There is an island to the east of China named Weihaiwei. This island was given by the Chinese Government to the British Government on certain conditions, one of them being that the whites could occupy the island as long as Port Arthur was in Russian possession. Now, since Russia has been obliged to vacate Port Arthur, as a result of the Russo-Japanese War, China has asked Britain to quit Weihaiwei. China refuses to pay the large expenditure incurred by Great Britain on the island. There is a likelihood of serious trouble arising out of this situation which may involve the Governments of China, Germany1 and England. 3 </p>
<p>Kodama joined the Japanese army in 1872, where his ability quickly attracted notice and he rose rapidly, becoming Lieutenant-Colonel in 1880. He became General in 1904. During the last Russo-Japanese’ War, he was Marshal Oyama’s chief lieutenant. True to the nature of the Japanese people, he remained very patient and serene in war and was never impetuous. When, in the bloody battle of Layoyang, the Russian army made a fierce charge on the Japanese, he was at breakfast. As the Russians were marching towards General Kodama’s camp:, his men, concerned for the safety of their General, requested him to shift to another place. He replied that this he could never do, adding that, if his soldiers came to know he had left the front-line, they might waver and lose heart. It was therefore better for him to remain where he was. This brave conduct of the leader gave the soldiers courage and enabled them to repel the Russian attack. In build and appearance, General Kodama resembled an Englishman. Sixteen years ago, he was sent to Europe by the Japanese Government to study western techniques of warfare. He gave proof of his proficiency during the last Chinese War. In appreciation of his services in that war, the Mikado made him a Baron. He was considered a capable man in Japan and it was expected that he would one day become Prime Minister. He was 53 when he died. 4</p>
<p>General Smuts has offered to repeal the Asiatic Registration Act, but on certain conditions which are unacceptable. That a further battle remained to be fought in the Indian war in the Transvaal has now become clear. In every great war, more than one battle has to be fought. The Russo-Japanese war lasted for over a year. In the course of that war, four or five well-known battles were fought, at Port Arthur, Mukden, etc. The Boer War also lasted for two or three years and came to an end only after several battles had been fought. The war of the Transvaal Indians is not an armed conflict as these were. Save for that, this, too, is a war. For, if we think of the consequences, this war [waged] through satyagraha is no whit less of a war than those fought with gun and powder. Victory or defeat in this war will have Far-reaching consequences for Indians in other Colonies. No otherconsequence can be more important than this.1 Looking at it thus, we can unhesitatingly compare this fight by a handful of Indians in the Transvaal to the great campaigns mentioned above. 5</p>
<p>India has to make her choice. She may try, if she wishes, the way of war and sink lower than she has. In the Hindu-Muslim quarrel, she seems to be taking her first lesson in the art of war. If India can possibly gain her freedom by war, her state will be no better and will be, probably, much worse than that of France or England. Paste examples have become obsolete. Not even Japan’s comparative progress can be any guide. For, “the science” or war has made much greater “progress” since the Russo-Japanese war. Its result can only be studied in the present condition of Europe. We can safely say that if India throws off the British yoke by the way of war, she must go through the state Mr. Page has graphically described. 6</p>
<p> </p>
<p>References:</p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Indian Opinion, 24-6-1905</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 2-9-1905 </li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 26-5-1906 </li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 1-9-1906 </li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 27-6-1908</li>
<li>Young India, 20-5-1926</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Political Reforms and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-23:2043530:BlogPost:746662013-10-23T16:21:17.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Political Reforms and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p>Edwin Samuel Montagu (1879-1924); Secretary of State for India, 1917-22; visited India in November 1917, and was responsible, along with Lord Chelmsford, the then Viceroy, for the political reforms of 1918, later embodied in the Government of India Act, 1919. </p>
<p>Mr. Montagu’s scheme of political reforms has been published and people differ in their views on it. Newspapers, too, have been expressing themselves on it. The scheme is good in parts but also strange in some ways. I have already expressed my views on it. It is necessary that we press for improvements which we desire in it. If we rest content with whatever is offered to us out of the many things we may have demanded, it would not seem that we were earnest in our demands. My opinion is that in anything that we demand by way of swaraj, we should agitate to get it as a matter of right, staking our very lives on it, and, simultaneously, stand by the Government and help it. In other words, in the war that is going on, we should send our men to France and Mesopotamia. We are not entitled to demand swaraj till we come forward to enlist in the army. It is futile to expect any results when we have not done our duty. It is extremely difficult to mention this in a public speech in Gujarat, especially in Surat, for the citizens of Surat see nothing about which they have to think and come to conclusions. It would seem from the attendance today that they had made up their mind on the subject. The first duty of a people all too eager for swaraj is to listen attentively and courteously to what is said on occasions like the present and accept whatever appeals to them and reject the rest. Till the people have learnt this, they will be unfit not only to enjoy swaraj but even to ask for it. All the 30 crores cannot go and listen to speeches but they may read newspapers and accept from them whatever they think best. 1</p>
<p>The public of Burma in discussing the political Reforms which should be adopted in Burma are in no way concerned with the events in the Punjab. The Government of Burma have certainly taken time by the forelock. We do not know what happened on the 1st of August in Rangoon nor do we know what reply the Indian promoters of the meeting returned to the Chief Secretary. But it is clear that, so long as the spirit embodied in the words of the letter from which we have quoted remains alive, the Reforms that the people of Burma might get would not be worth having. But an echo of the spirit is heard nearer Bombay also. We now know, more fully than we did before, the cause of the High Court notice served upon some of the satyagrahi lawyers of Ahmedabad. The notice was prompted by a letter addressed by the District Judge of Ahmedabad to the Registrar of the Bombay High Court. We give the full text of the letter elsewhere.3 It remains to be seen what action the High Court will take when the case is argued before it on the 25th instant. But it is curious the way the District Judge has pre-judged the issue. 2</p>
<p>Having been commanded by Panditji to say a few words to the students, I spoke before them at 7.30 on the morning of my departure, and gave them my ideas about student life . The student's stage of life is similar to the sannyasi's and his life should, therefore, be pure and celibate. Today two cultures are competing for the students' attention the ancient and the modern. Self-restraint was the key-note of the former. Ancient culture tells us that a man advances in the measure that he deliberately and with full knowledge reduces his wants. Modern civilization teaches us that man progresses by increasing his wants. The difference between self-restraint and selfindulgence is the difference between dharma and adharma. The ideal of self-restraint attaches less importance to the outward life than to the inner. There is a danger that in place of the ancient culture based on self-restraint, the modern civilization of self-indulgence will be accepted. Students can play decisive part in averting this danger. University students will be judged, not by their knowledge, but solely by their good conduct. Religious education and ethical conduct should be given the first place in this university. This requires the fullest co-operation from the students. Panditji himself is a man of piety and virtue. By bringing another man of similar qualities, viz., Anandshankar, he has provided an opportunity to the students. I should like them to make the best use of this opportunity and adorn their learning with dharma. These were the thoughts I placed before them on that morning. I have repeatedly expressed these ideas, in one form or another, at several places, and a summary of these same ideas which I explained to the students of Kashi University on getting this happy opportunity, I now lay before readers of Navajivan for them to think over. I am convinced that we cannot profit from political reforms unless we also give thought to religion. Religion will not be revived through these reforms. Rather, it is religion which will supply what the reforms may lack. 3</p>
<p>It should have been asked in 1920. In my view there is no special political field which is not related to social reform. They are both interrelated. If we do not earnestly go about the work of social reform, no political reforms are possible. I would, therefore, give the first place to the work of social reform and only the second place to purely political work, If there is such a thing. I took help from the sanatanists, whether for Gujarat Vidyapith or for the khadi work. But when they said that I should abandon my work for the removal of untouchability I told them that I would rather do without their help. The Mulji Jetha Market promised Rs. 35,000, but on some such condition. I told them that they could keep their money, I would do without it; but as for the removal of untouchability, I wanted it immediately. Till today I have not received the Rs. 35,000 from them. But the work for swaraj did not stop. It is dangerous to allow such things to find a place in our hearts. Let us not allow even such notions as ‘social’ and ‘political’ any place in our thinking. Let us not hinder national progress. It is true some sense of discretion will have to be shown. It would not be proper to go and resort to satyagraha when someone in our community calls people for dinner. It is enough if we avoid going to that feast ourselves. There are so many areas of social-reform activity that can go on side by side with political work. There too we shall stick to non-violence. But satyagraha is a mighty weapon. It cannot be used everywhere. Its use has to be limited. 4</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>Gujarat Mitra and Gujarat Darpan, 4-8-1918</li>
<li>Young India 6-8-1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 29-2-1920</li>
<li>Gandhi Seva Sanghke Panchama Varshik Adhiveshan (Brindaban,Bihar) ka Vivaran, pp. 50</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Social Reforms and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-23:2043530:BlogPost:747602013-10-23T16:20:52.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Social Reforms and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is my firm conviction that some of the most imperceptible laws of economics are at work in satyagraha. In this sense I believe satyagraha to be a practical method. Maybe it will take some time before people accept it as such, since, being a new method in the sense indicated above, they may not understand it. Is it any wonder, besides, that, when we are working for the best results, the thing should take some time? When satyagraha has become an accepted method in India, political and social reforms, which at present take such a long time to bring about, will be effected in a much shorter period; the distance between the rulers and the ruled and their distrust of each other will disappear and in their place will grow love and trust. It will be the same, we may be sure, as between the different sections of society. 1</p>
<p>The hope of India lies in satyagraha. And what is satyagraha? It has often been described. But just as the sun cannot be fully described even by the myriad-tongued sheshnaga, so also the sun of satyagraha cannot be adequately described. And though we always see the sun but know really very little of it, even so we do ever seem to see the sun of satyagraha but we know precious little about it. The spheres of satyagraha are swadeshi, social reforms and political reform. And in so far as these are based on satyagraha, so far only, and no further, is their permanence assured. The way of satyagraha is distinct from the beaten track and it is not always easy to discover it. Few have ventured along that path and the footprints on it are few and far between and indistinct, and hence the people's dread of it. And still we clearly find people taking that course, be it ever so slowly. 2</p>
<p>Shri Jamnalalji’s speech as President of the Agrawal Mahasabha deserves to be read and pondered over. He has displayed the greatest freedom and courage in it. If the Marwari community can follow Shri Jamnalalji’s advice, it will lead in effecting essential social reforms as it leads in acquiring wealth. The reforms advocated by Shri Jamnalalji are equally necessary for the other castes among Hindus all over the country. Abuse of the pure weapon of boycott, dishonest and antinational commercial practices, love of pleasure among the rich, adoption of western ways by women, child-marriages, heavy burden of marriage-expenses, proliferation of sub-castes, neglect of children’s education, these and other evils prevail in some measure among Hindus everywhere. They not only sap our vitality, but obstruct our progress towards swaraj. In his speech, Jamnalalji laid the fullest stress on the eradication of these evils as also on the removal of untouchability, on khadi and on improving the methods we adopt for protecting the cow. Let us all hope that the Agrawal members present at the meeting will act on Jamnalalji’s suggestions and facilitate the task of other Hindu communities. 3</p>
<p>The others were daughters or sons of friends and co-workers, all having lived before like you and me. In order to hearten you, I must mention them. Vallabhbhai was a barrister with a first-class practice. His son was married the other day at the Ashram with nothing but the simple religious ceremony. No dinner was given and not one single piece of ornament was given to the bride. The other case was that of Dastane, the erstwhile leading lawyer of Bhusaval. His daughter was given to a co-worker. She had no ornament except a few yards of yarn of my own spinning round her neck. Dastane had a few friends who imposed themselves on him when he gave his daughter in marriage, and who had to be fed for one or two days. I do not think that they were more than 10, if that number. He had many more friends. But he had warned them against attending. Naturally he had sent no invitations. I could give other similar instances. In our struggle for freedom these social reforms have really become extremely necessary. 4</p>
<p>And now let me repeat what I have said in other places in Tamil Nadu about the social reforms which await fulfilment at our hands. Men’s lives must become pure. Faithfulness on the part of the husband towards his wife is just as much a sacred obligation as faithfulness on the part of the wife towards her husband. It is wrong, no matter what authority may be cited from the so-called Shastras, for a man to have more than one wife. It is wrong to sell daughters in marriage. It is a sin to have a child widow in one’s house and it is equally sinful to give away a child in marriage or to refuse to call all such contracts or ceremonies as an absolute nullity. And it is wrong also to keep our boys and girls without proper education and it is a heinous crime to regard a single human being as untouchable because he is born in a particular group of family. If we had a true awakening in our midst we would deal with all these social evils and deal also with the insanitation around us. 5 I hold that without the social reforms that I am advocating, thank God, in common with many of our distinguished countrymen, Hinduism is in danger of perishing. 6</p>
<p>Let us examine what the Conference can do. Khadi, the service of the untouchables, social reforms, etc., are of course there. By taking up these activities the Conference should nurture democracy. Administrative problems are not few prohibition, education, the railway department, storage of rain water for the whole of Kathiawar, preservation of trees and their multiplication, introducing uniformity in the excise levy throughout Kathiawar as well as uniformity in its administration. Other matters, too, which would be advantageous to both the ruler and the ruled can be enumerated. Such matters are of the utmost importance and Kathiawar can subsist on these alone. By disregarding them Kathiawar will bring about its own ruin. 7</p>
<p>In the resolution Lalaji has been mentioned as the guardian of the poor and there is significance in it. His heart melted wherever he saw misery. His language was certainly strong, but there was no contempt in it. Lalaji’s heart was full of universal love. He concealed nothing from the people, why should he conceal anything from his co-workers? Lalaji was such a kindhearted person that his heart melted if he saw anyone unhappy either in India or abroad. He did not have the slightest enmity towards the Muslims. It was his innermost desire that the Hindus and the Muslims should live as brothers. He wanted that in India there should be neither Hindu rule nor Muslim rule but a rule of all the people. Lalaji’s life began with religious activity and social reforms but he felt that as long as India did not get independence, nothing could be done about religious or social reforms. Like Lokamanya Tilak, he was compelled to plunge into politics. 8</p>
<p>The reader is not llikely to know Motilal. Well, he is an unassuming, ignorant social reformer among the Bhils of Rajputana. His passion is to wean them from meats and drink. At one time he exercised among them very great influence. And now though it is not as great, his name commands respect among his tribesmen. who owe so much of their social transformation to him. I have had the privilege of meeting Motilal after my discharge from Yeravda. He is no man of letters and hardly talks to anyone. But he means business and believes in himself and his people. I am afraid that there is a colouring of truth in the imputation that I had disowned him in 1922. I had said that he had no authority to use my name which he was alleged in 1922 to have done. But after that and when I had come to know something of his mission I had strongly recommended that he should be pardoned. I had flattered myself with the belief that Sir R. E. Holland’s recommendation had something to do with the Young India paragraph. Be that as it might, I had hoped that Motilal was pardoned, and that the incident of 1922 was wholly forgotten by the States concerned. If therefore surprises me that Mewar States has arrested and detained him not for anything he has done since but for the offences alleged against him in 1922. Apart from every other consideration, surely the Mewar State will avoid the charge of bad faith which the simple Bhils will bring against it, if their beloved leader is now detained under custody for what they have been led to believe had been pardoned. So far as I am aware Motilal has done nothing to deserve detention. I trust therefore that this simple and sincere reformer will be released and encouraged in his prosecution of social reforms among his own people. 9</p>
<p>I find all this in the above letter according to my lights. The writer is a good man but in a fit of anger he has forgotten what has been written in Navajivan. All of a sudden he has become incapable of judging whether articles on social reforms can appear in a newspaper which exists only for swaraj. 10 I expect every human being to be virtuous, because I expect the same thing of myself. In this world no one is perfect. By trying hard all can become virtuous. Some: rulers are immoral, but that is because the subjects are also wanting in morals. Therefore, let us not be annoyed with the rulers. Rather, when we think of the princely system let us not confuse the issue by mixing up in our deliberations thefaults of individual rulers. This, then, is a theoretical appraisal of the aforesaid subject. But from this let no one think that according to my belief nothing should be done regarding the princely order or regarding matters like the immorality of the rulers. Whatever efforts are made to wipe out social evils in India must have some impact on the rulers as well. We have no means of measuring this impact. The truth of the matter is that our efforts at social reforms are very feeble. So the pace of social betterment is also very slight. There can be a special way of dealing with immoral rulers and that is the non-co-operation of his subjects with his rule. It is sad that this kind of awakening or strength is almost absent among the public. Not only this; the officials of the ruler, guided by self-interest, give full support to the ruler in his misdeeds. 11 </p>
<p>It is all very well for you to say that you do not want to coerce anybody, but your position cannot but compel some people to act against their will. Some of us have no respect for your religious views or your social reforms, but we want you to live for your political power, and, therefore, if you persist in fasting, we will have to pocket our convictions and help you in your fight for temple-entry. If this is not coercion, we do not know the meaning of the word. 12 Katjuji had written to me. We may look upon the Jaipur affair as having ended well. Our workers should not be impatient. If they have to make public speeches, they should talk about khadi. There is time enough for economic and social reforms. 13</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Navajivan, 14-9-1919</li>
<li>Young India, 5-11-1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 21-3-1926 </li>
<li>Letter to Satcowripati Ray, June, 12, 1927</li>
<li>The Hindu, 29-9-1927 </li>
<li>Young India, 15-12-1927</li>
<li>Navajivan, 29-1-1928</li>
<li>Prajabandhu, 25-11-1928</li>
<li>Young India, 29-8-1929</li>
<li>Navajivan, 20-10-1929</li>
<li>Hindi Navajivan, 28-11-1929</li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 29-11-1932</li>
<li>Letter to Jamnala Bajaj, June 1, 1940</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Red Cross Society and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-22:2043530:BlogPost:744482013-10-22T15:47:01.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Red Cross Society and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>In response to a desire widely expressed by Indian students resident in the United Kingdom to take some active part in the defence of the country and in service abroad, it has been decided to organise a Field Ambulance Training Corps in connection with theRed Cross Society, and to give members of this Corps, when adequa-tely trained, an opportunity of serving with the Indian Army in Europe. The nucleus of such a Corps has already been formed in London, and drilled and trained for some weeks under Dr. James Cantlie, and steps are now being taken, with the co-operation of the War Office and the authorities of the London University Officers’ Training Corps, to expand and develop this nucleus into a highly organised corps. The Government of India has given its sanction, and Lieutenant-Colonel Baker of the Indian Medical Service (retired) has consented to act as Commander of the Corps. The Corps is intended mainly for residents in London; but Indian students from other centres will be admitted if they desire to join. Men with medical training will be able to undertake special duties, but all men willing to train and serve will be of use.</p>
<p>Applicants will be asked to enrol themselves in the Indian Field Ambulance Training Corps, and will require to be passed by a Medical Board as physically fit. They will then be drilled almost every day by trained instructors in London, at an hour which will not interfere unduly with their ordinary studies or occupations; and at each week-end they will be expected to go into camp for further training from Friday night to Monday morning. A camping ground within easy reach of London will be placed at the disposal of the Corps, and uniforms and equipment will be procured. After some weeks of training which will involve hard and steady work—they will, when efficient, be entitled to volunteer to serve for six months as a Detachment under the Red Cross Society in connection with the Indian troops abroad. The terms and conditions of such service will be announced later. But it is hoped that the Red Cross Society will be able, in the first instance, to find places in the Detachment sent abroad for 10 Medical Officers and for 50 other recruits who would serve as Nursing Orderlies, Dressers, Compounders, Bearers, &c. The rates of pay on active service will probably be 20s. per day for Medical Officers and 4s. per day, with free rations, for the rest. Preference in the filling of these places would be given to recruits who, in the opinion of the Commanding Officer, were the most efficiently trained. 1 </p>
<p>There is, however, another sphere of public duty not less important for which in this country we are in the habit of depending very largely upon voluntary assistance, and this consists in rendering aid to the sick and wounded. The number of these in the present war may, unhappily, be large, and if that should prove to be the case, the military hospitals and military staff may have difficulty in coping with the demands made upon them. It will, therefore, be necessary to create temporary and voluntary organisations to meet this emergency. This duty is already being undertaken by a very large number of Englishmen and women in the voluntary aid detachments of the British Red Cross Society, and it is to work of this kind that Lord Crewe would direct your attention. His Lordship suggests that a committee should be formed among the Indian residents and visitors in London, and that they should undertake to get up an Indian voluntary aid contingent. It is understood that Mr. James Cantlie, who has taken an active part in the organisation of the voluntary aid detachments of the Red Cross Society, has offered to train and drill an Indian voluntary aid contingent if a sufficient number of persons are prepared to undergo a course of instruction. Lord Crewe notices that several of the signatories to your letter are qualified medical men, and if they will co-operate with Mr. Cantlie, there is reason to hope that the Indian voluntary aid contingent would become one of the most efficient detachments in the kingdom. 2</p>
<p>Red Cross Society one is aware of. It had at one time only military associations and used to have an imperialist flavour. Now it has expanded into civil work and covers every form of first-aid work for the relief of suffering humanity. Nevertheless its activities are largely confined to cities. It has hardly touched Indian life. England is a country for lost causes: humanitarian and even strange causes. One such is represented by the Green Cross Society for the wild life heritage. Mrs. M. H. Morrison is its Hon. Secretary (41, Asmuns Place, London, N. W. 11). The Society aims at the U. N. O. identifying itself with it. The following resolution is to be submitted to the U. N. O. for acceptance : (a) That U. N. O. ideals should include immediate effort in each country to delimit the area of any suitable National Park incorporating Nature Reserves for the protection of unique and valuable wild life—flora, fauna, avifauna— with the distinctive terrain upon which these depend. (b) And, further, that the world at large should consent to an International Park, or World National Park in South America, Africa or Asia. If in Asia then upon, around or within—it is suggested—the immense mountains encircling Tibet, Britain, China, India, Russia and U. S. A. appointing Custodians and acting as Trustees. Reasons adduced for inviting the U. N. O. to pass the foregoing resolution are :</p>
<p>1. That a stand must now be made against the maddening encroachments of materialism.</p>
<p>2. That the idealism and realism of the United Nations Organization should include an urge to all the world and to each nation to protect our heritage of wild life—its beauty, grandeur and interest—wild birds, wild animals, wild flora (flowers, plants, trees) and wild country or landscape; to protect our heritage wherever possible; and with special care within the Nature Reserves of National Parks.</p>
<p>3. That the United Nations will jointly set an example to the component nations by claiming its own World Nature Park, or International Park in South America, Africa or Asia. If in Asia, then upon, around, or within the immense mountains encircling Tibet. In this case Britain, China, India, Russia and U. S. A. might appoint Custodians and act as Trustees to prevent disastrous and disfiguring exploitation.</p>
<p>4. And, further, that such “Far Horizon’, can give direction and cohesion to friends, allies, sympathizers and well-wishers gathering in groups along the way for the march and drive on toward the distant goal. Among the numerous signatories to the resolution are Sir Alfred J. Munnings, President, Royal Academy of Arts, Dame Laura Knight and the world famous George Bernard Shaw. Mrs. Morrison would like the signatures of leading Indians and other leaders in Asia and Africa. Those who would endorse the resolution should put themselves in communication with Mrs. Morrison. 3</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Circular Regarding Training Corps, September 22, 1914</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 16-9-1914</li>
<li>Harijan, 17-11-1946 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Recruitment and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-22:2043530:BlogPost:745652013-10-22T15:30:16.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Recruitment and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The law permitting recruitment of indentured labour came into being 50 years ago. It had the result of placing Indians in the same condition as slaves. The late Sir William Hunter himself described it as slavery. It was in 1896 that a protest was first made against this enslaving law. It had no effect then and things remained as they were up to 1911. In that year, the practice was prohibited only in respect of Natal. In Fiji, however, the condition of Indian labourers has been worse than it was in Natal. There was a strong public opinion in Natal, but there is none in Fiji. Lord Hardinge declared last year1 that the law would be repealed very soon. We had hoped then that it would go after a year or 50. But we hear now, one and a half years after the declaration, that the law will remain for five more years and that afterwards they would see what could be done. This report has revived our concern for the sufferings of our fellow-countrymen and it has become our duty now to raise a strong protest to ensure the immediate repeal of the law. The agitation was launched at Allahabad and, meetings having already been held at Madras, Poona and other places, we also have met here to register our protest. Mr. Andrews has dedicated his life to this struggle. Mr. Gokhale had the fullest confidence in him and, at his instance, Mr. Andrews and Mr. Pearson went to Fiji to see things for themselves. He Mr. Andrews had £300 with him—this was all he had —and this he made over to the Satyagraha Fund at Lahore. He no longer wants to be styled Reverend, but thinks it an honour to be known as Tagore’s disciple. Mr. Polak is known to you. He is young, and if the young people here were to do even a tenth of what he has done, we should have swaraj this moment. 1 </p>
<p>I would like to warn the Government against accepting or initiating conscription. I hope it will never flourish on the Indian soil. But, in any case, it ought not to be introduced until all voluntary efforts have been honestly made and failed. You will admit that the leaders have with remarkable self-restraint hushed all the tales of the forcible recruitment that is reported to have gone on hitherto. I venture to think that the danger point has been reached. 2 This Conference emphatically urges that nothing short of a complete abolition of the indenture system of recruitment of labour in any form will meet the evils of the system which is a form of slavery which socially and politically debases the labourers and is detrimental to the economic and moral interests of this country. 3</p>
<p>Of course I would not ask you to leave the League1 and work with me; on the contrary, I wish that you remain in the League and guide its policy too in the right direction. You are satisfied with the present position. To me, it seems dangerous. If the League refuses to help in recruitment, it will be going against the Bombay resolution.2 If all the members of the League believed that it was not permissible to anyone to help in recruitment while being in the League, the Bombay resolutions should not have been passed and I should not have been given the chairmanship of the meeting. When the League accepted me, it indicated that any of its members who desired to help in recruitment could do so. 4 The Government at present wants half a million men for the army. They will certainly succeed in raising this number somehow. If we supply this number, the credit will be ours, we will be rendering a service and the reports that we often hear of improper methods adopted by recruiting agents will become things of the past. It is no small thing to have the whole work of recruiting in our hands. If the Government have no trust in us, if their intentions are not pure, they would not recruitment through us. </p>
<p>The shortcomings of the thinking sections are plain on this occasion. I use the word”thinking” in place of”educated”. If such men and women were to do their duty, they could influence the classes fitted by nature to join up. My experience goes to testify to a great weakness on the part of the thinking section. Their not taking sufficient interest in national work makes the task of recruitment difficult. Those among them into whose hands this leaflet may find its way should, if they have faith in this work, prepare themselves and inspire the illiterate and ignorant sections for this great task. We can lay bare our heart to those whom we consider our elders. Such laying bare is necessary. You have done right in writing to me. I do not know what excesses are committed in recruitment. If they are many, it is all the more necessary for me to go in for it. The Montagu-Chelmsford Scheme is, in my opinion, very good. We can have its shortcomings removed through agitation. Whatever the merits of the Scheme, however, I definitely hold that we should join the war. We do not join it for the good of the British people; we want to go in for recruitment to do service to the country, and with an eye to its interests. What shall I say about the miserable plight of India? I see clearly that India cannot attain real swarajya. I hold that by joining the army we can accomplish two things: we shall become brave and we shall learn something about the handling of arms; and we shall prove our worth by helping those with whom we wish to become partners. Resisting their excesses and sharing their troubles— both these things are worth our doing. I want you to think very calmly on this question. I suggest your sending this letter to Devdas and also discussing the matter with him. 5</p>
<p>You will see my second appeal in connection with recruitment for the war. I have offered the services of five persons from the Ashram. There are others also eager to go, but it is not possible to send them. The five who are to be sent are Ramanandan, Surendra, Thakorlal, Nanubhai and Raojibhai. I shall of course be there. I believe a depot will soon be started here. Had Devdas not been doing the work of Hindi, he too would have joined. He is eager to do so. I have written to Harilal, but he is not likely to go. You are doing important work there; I cannot therefore ask you. Ramdas remains. He can certainly join if he wishes. Ramdas does not feel happy if he has to leave one job and take another. You may ask him. 6 So much for Sir Michael and the educated classes. But though he claimed to regard the others with affection, he estranged them from him and his Government by his methods of recruitment and collection of war contributions. It is not, however, without considerable hesitation that we feel bound to deal with this matter. We realize the necessity that existed during the War for a vigorous campaign of recruiting and collection of monetary contributions. We realize, too, that if India claims, as she does, equal partnership with the other members of the Empire, she must bear her full share of the Empire’s burden. We would, therefore, if we could, have avoided any reference to the methods adopted for collecting contributions in men and money. But in understanding and appreciating the sudden response of the classes and the masses to the proposal for hartal, and then, in the Punjab, the unexpected exhibition of mob fury, it is necessary to go into the causes that contributed to the remarkable demonstration and in the Punjab to the manifestation of violence. For we consider that no amount of misrepresentation about the Rowlatt Act, assuming that there was any, can possibly account for the response of the masses, and the participation of a number of people in violence. Nor can any sense of duty towards the Empire be allowed to disregard the sacredness of individual liberty or to ignore cruelty or compulsion, secretly or openly but illegally practised. The evidence that we have collected and the judicial records that we have read conclusively prove that the methods adopted for securing recruits and donations or loans travelled far beyond the line of moral or social pressure; nor were these methods unknown to Sir Michael O’Dwyer. Indeed conscription was openly talked of, suggested and advocated, and we cannot help saying that open conscription would have been infinitely better than the so-called voluntarism, which was in effect worse than conscription, because the voluntarism pressed only the weakest and permitted the strong to go scot-free. 7 </p>
<p>This represents the ideal. Ideas of ‘high’ and ‘low’ are deep-rooted in our country and hence caste, varna and religion are given greater attention than merit or demerits. Hence it is not surprising that Brahmins are not given employment where there is a ban on their recruitment. Unfortunate incidents will persist, because of our sins and the rot that has entered our religion. We should, therefore, suffer them in a spirit of atonement. 8 I have gone through the terms of the agreement. They are certainly harsh. I am considering the matter. What I would suggest is that an impartial arbitrator should be appointed and only such terms should be laid down as he accepts. Strictly speaking, of course, every employer has a right to fix his own terms for recruitment and everyworker has a right to reject them. It is up to one’s liking. But since I know the press authorities I have suggested the appointment of an arbitrator. 9</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Prajabandhu, 11-2-1917</li>
<li>Letter to Sir Claude Hill, April 26, 1918</li>
<li>Young India, 8-5-1918</li>
<li>Letter to Shankarlal Banker, June 16, 1918</li>
<li>Mahadevbhaini Diary, Vol. IV</li>
<li>Letter to Manilal Gandhi, July 31,1918</li>
<li>Chapter II Sri Michale O’Dwayer’s Administration</li>
<li>Harijanbandhu, 10-9-1933</li>
<li>Letter to Sabhaji, April 19, 1941</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Quetta and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-21:2043530:BlogPost:745622013-10-21T15:33:39.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Quetta and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I am very glad that you have gone to Quetta. Derive the fullest benefit from the air there. Walk as much as you can. Describe to me the scenery and the climate of the place. 1 When a man is down, he prays to God to lift him up. He is the Help of the helpless, says a Tamil proverb. The appalling disaster2 in Quetta paralyses one. It baffles all attempt at reconstruction. The whole truth about the disaster will perhaps never be known. The dead cannot be recalled to life. 2 All differences vanish in the midst of the awful calamity in Quetta2 following almost in the wake of Bihar. I got the enclosed from Hyderabad today to which I sent a reply3, copy of which is also enclosed herewith. Hardly had I sent the reply when the voice within told me that I must enforce in my own action what I had advised Shri Jairamdas and Prof. Kripalani both Congress secretaries. Hence this private approach to the highest authority. If I am permitted, I should love to proceed to Quetta myself and do whatever is possible. My submission is that a small relief committee should be formed comprising all sections to concert measures of relief. In my opinion it is necessary to take the public into confidence about everything that may be done regarding alleviation of distress. Will you please put this before His Excellency and if possible wire reply as to permission for me to proceed to Quetta? If the permission is granted, it should include sufficient members to enable me to do effective work. 3 </p>
<p>I understand what you say. I only want to know what is possible under the present circumstances. What should we do to bring about the adoption of a monetary policy that would be in the interest of the country? I leave aside the argument that we should go on doing our best. Doing one’s best is not enough when a cloud is actually threatening. How much do you think the efforts of the people of Quetta must have availed against the recent earthquake there? According to me, a political earthquake is going on in the country just now and we seem helpless against it. 4 As regards Quetta, what can we do now? They are sending out everybody, and so the question of going there doesn’t arise. Wherever the injured or those rendered homeless go, they are helped by the people. What more could we do? Yesterday I received a wire similar to the one received by Rajendrababu. The only thing for us now to do is to keep silent. 5</p>
<p>This time you have punished me severely. I waited and waited for your letter and was always disappointed. A man does not die by desiring to die. Come here after you have done with Kashmir. I shall assign you work. Let us wait and see. No one is allowed to go to Quetta. 6 The few lines that I wrote inviting the people to prayer and repentance on the Quetta disaster have given rise to some private correspondence. One of the correspondents asks: At the time of the Bihar quake you had no hesitation in saying that it was to be taken by savarna Hindus as a fit punishment for the sin of untouchability. For what sin must the more terrible quake of Quetta be? The writer had the right to put the question. What I said about Bihar was deliberately said even as the lines on Quetta were deliberately written. This call to prayer is a definite yearning of the soul. Prayer is a sign of repentance, a desire to beocme better, purer. A man of prayer regards what are known as physical calamities as divine chastisement. It is a chastisement alike for individuals and for natioins. All chastisements do not equally startle people. Some affect only individuals, some others affect groups or nations only mildly. Disasters like Quetta stun us. Familiarity with ordinary everyday calamities breeds contempt for them. If earthquakes were a daily occurrence, we would take no notice of them.</p>
<p>Even this Quetta one has not caused in us the same disturbance that the Bihar one did. But it is the universal experience that every calamity brings a sensible man down on his knees. He thinks that it is God’s answer to his sins and that he must henceforth behave better. His sins have left him hopelessly weak, and in his weakness he cries out to God for help. Thus have millions of human beings used their personal calamities for self-improvement. Nations too have been known to invoke the assistance of God when calamities have overtaken them. They have abased themselves before God and appointed days of humiliation, prayer and purification. I have suggested nothing new or original. In these days of fashionable disbelief, it does need some courage to call men and women to repentance. But I can claim no credit for courage. For my weaknesses or idiosyncrasies are well-known. If I had known Quetta, as I know Bihar and Biharis, I would certainly have mentioned the sins of Quetta, though they might be no more its specialities than untouchability was Bihar’s. But we all—the rulers and the ruled— know that we have many sins, personal and national, to answer for. The call is to all these to repentance, prayer and humiliation. True prayer is not a prelude to inaction. It is a spur to ceaseless, selfless action. Purification is never for the selfishly idle, it accrues only to the selflessly industrious. 7 </p>
<p>I have suggested nothing new or original. In these days of fashionable disbelief, it does need some courage to call men and women to repentance. But I can claim no credit for courage. For my weaknesses or idiosyncrasies are well-known. If I had known Quetta, as I know Bihar and Biharis, I would certainly have mentioned the sins of Quetta, though they might be no more its specialities than untouchability was Bihar’s. But we all—the rulers and the ruled know that we have many sins, personal and national, to answer for. The call is to all these to repentance, prayer and humiliation. True prayer is not a prelude to inaction. It is a spur to ceaseless, selfless action. Purification is never for the selfishly idle, it accrues only to the selflessly industrious. 8</p>
<p>As to Quetta relief I have asked you to reserve for the time being what you collect. Later on I shall be able to guide you. The relief will last for some time. Of course this advice has force so long as you have no definite idea about its direction. Immediately you know where you would like to spend your donation, you will not hesitate to do so. VISITOR: But why prayer, and not service? Would not service be the most effective form of prayer?</p>
<p>GANDHIJI: Indeed if service was open to us. But there are vast masses of people who have no power to render any tangible service to the survivors. Rather than talk about this grim visitation, they should cast the searchlight inwards and purify themselves. Prayer is a call to self-purification. But is not prayer by itself ineffective without acts of service? I do not mean outward demonstration of prayer. I mean selfintrospection and self-purification which is essential for us all. If we were engaged in service all our waking hours, I should have to say nothing. But we are not so engaged. And when we are not so engaged, God’s name, taken with a view to self-purification, is not taken in vain. I see it. So far as some of the survivors—both our own people and tommies who did rescue work for the first two days—are concerned, I am afraid they badly need to pray. For the moment when the calamity occurs we are stunned, we make professions of prayer and brotherhood of man, but the very next moment we forget that there was a calamity. Our acquisitive and depredatory instincts get possession of us, with the result, we are none the better for the earthquake. 9</p>
<p>Though the spectre of stricken Quetta haunts me still, I have neither compunction nor hesitation in asking the benevolent to respond quickly to the appeal for the Harijan Wells Fund published in these columns. Quetta has the whole world at its back. Harijans have only a few to help them. Not one sufferer from the Quetta disaster has to languish for thirst or to be obliged to drink filthy water which people would not have their cattle to drink. We may not lose the sense of proportion in the face of overwhelming disasters. Not even the gaieties of people have been stopped except perhaps in some cases for a solitary moment. Must the burden of the Quetta grief fall on the already bruised shoulder of the Harijan? Donors would be guilty of misappropriation before God’s court, if they were to divert what they had intended for giving clean drinkingwater to Harijans or begrudge Harijans because the unexpected call of Quetta has come. The proper way is to revise the budget of personal expenses, not that of charities, least of the penetential which the Harijan Wells Fund is. It was not without purpose or experience that the appeal for prayer was made. Heart-felt prayer steadies one’s nerves, humbles one and clearly shows one the next step. Let the readers study the Punjab report on the drinking needs of the Harijans of that land of five mighty rivers. Is it not a shame that the rich people of the Punjab cannot provide clean water for Harijans? The appeal for a paltry lakh of rupees should be speedily oversubscribed. 10</p>
<p>The clothes you have for Quetta relief, may be sent to Dr. Gopichand1 for the refugees in the Punjab, unless of course there are refugees in Simla itself, in which case you can distribute your clothes among them. Only I fancy that in Simla you will have the most wellto- do refugees, whereas in Lahore the poorest must have congregated. 11 Did I ever ask you to go to Quetta and advise the Baluchistan Congress about constructive work? Maulvi Abdus Samad is the President or Secretary. I promised that I would ask you to proceed there and give a few days. I have the notion that I sent you a hurried line about this. But as you make no reference to the matter, I wonder what happened. 12</p>
<p>Pandit Malaviyaji had told me specifically that I must visit Uttarkashi once. He himself was to take me along. But that was not to be. Now it occurred to me that I might visit the holy places which Malaviyaji described to me. For I do not at all hope to live for 125 years. Nor do I have that desire. I hope and trust that God will take me away while I am clinging to the aims and principles to which I have been devoted and before anything ugly happens to the country. Then Mirabehn is there. However, the weather there is not favourable at present and so I have postponed my going. Now I will come to the main thing. When people learnt that I was going on a pilgrimage to Uttarkashi they imagined that I must be having differences with the leaders and that that was why I was retiring to the Himalayas. Yes, it is true I had difference of opinion with the leaders concerning the present situation because it seemed to me that the Ramarajya of my dreams was not materializing. But I do not worry because I have developed detachment and I am doing what I have been doing all along and what I feel is true. I do not worry if anyone is not convinced by what I say.</p>
<p>I will tell the world from the house-tops what is true. Since the people have agreed to be governed by the leaders, the latter should fulfil their obligations towards the former. It is a rule of democracy that the leaders cannot impose on the people what they do not want. I have forebodings that the future of India will be something different from the people’s conception of it. I am therefore very much worried. Sometimes I wonder whether during the last thirty years I have not taken the country in the wrong direction. However, as I have confessed time and again, our non-violence was not that of the brave. As there was no other alternative we adopted it. Had it not been so we would not have been indulging in perfidious mass murders to solve mutual quarrels among brothers. Our struggle was only ‘passive resistance.’ Our struggle was based on the non-violence of the weak. Even then a great power had to leave the country. If I alone can adopt non-violence of the brave I can show to the world what splendid results it can bring about. 13</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Letter to Vidya Hingorani, July 2, 1932</li>
<li>Harijan, 8-6-1935</li>
<li>Letter to Private Secretary to Viceroy, June 6, 1935</li>
<li>Letter to Purushottamds Thakurdas, June 7, 1935</li>
<li>Letter to Vallabhabhai Patel, June 9, 1935</li>
<li>Letter to Brijkrishna Chandiwala, June 9, 1935</li>
<li>Harijan, 15-6-1935 </li>
<li>Harijan, 15-6-1935 </li>
<li>Harijan, 22-6-1935</li>
<li>Harijan, 22-6-1935 </li>
<li>Letter to Amrit Kaur, July 4, 1935</li>
<li>Letter to N. R. Malkan, August 4, 1941</li>
<li>Bihar Pachhi Dilhi, pp. 296</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Public Funds and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-20:2043530:BlogPost:746582013-10-20T14:24:44.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Public Funds and Mahatma Gandhi</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I cabled too saying that audit was unnecessary. You could gain nothing by auditing especially now. If we decide not to take any public funds, our books can be only simple. All you will then have will be receipts from Indian Opinion and book sales and expenditure. What is left for Polak is earmarked. If you would not handle it there, it now could be transferred here. But I hope that you will all consider that allotment to be necessary. 1 As the weapon of the rich is money, that of the workers is their labour. Just as a rich man would starve if he did not employ his wealth, even so if the worker did not employ his wealth did not work—he would also starve. One who does not work is not a worker. A worker who is ashamed of working has no right to eat. If, therefore, the workers desire to fulfil their pledge in this great struggle, they should learn to do some work or other. Those who collect funds and, remaining idle, maintain themselves out of them do not deserve to win. Workers are fighting for their pledge. Those who want food without working for it do not, it may be said, understand what a pledge means. He alone can keep his pledge who can feel shame or has self-respect. Is there anyone who will not look down on those who desire to be maintained on public funds without doing any work? It behoves us, therefore, that we maintain ourselves by doing some work. If a worker does not work, he is like sugar which has lost its sweetness. If the sea water lost its salt, where would we get our salt from? If the worker did not work, the world would come to an end. 2</p>
<p>This struggle is not merely for a 35 per cent increase; it is to show that workers are prepared to suffer for their rights. We are fighting to uphold our honour. We have launched on this struggle in order to better ourselves. If we start using public funds improperly, we shall grow worse and not better. Consider the matter from any angle you choose, you will see that we must maintain ourselves by our own labour. Farhad2 broke stones for the sake of Shirin, his beloved. For the workers, their pledge is their Shirin. Why should they not break stones for its sake? For the sake of truth, Harishchandra3 sold himself; why should workers not suffer hardships for upholding their pledge ? For the sake of their honour, Imam Hassan and Hussain suffered greatly. Should we not be prepared even to die for our honour? If we get money while we remain idle at home and fight with that money, it would be untrue to say that we are fighting. If all the hundreds of public workers start travelling by first or second class, public funds will be exhausted in travelling and our ship of swaraj will make no progress. It is necessary for us every moment to pause and think before spending public funds. I say this, being ill at ease because of a remark which one rich gentleman, a public worker, made before me. The moment I brought up the subject of khadi, he said: “You cannot understand our plight. You can get a car whenever you want, you will get ten glasses of goat’s milk if you ask for one, everyone gives you khadi; but others, even a wealthy person like me, will find public service an expensive job if I have to pay each time taxi and hotel fares and for all the khadi that I require.” This gentleman is a member of the All-India Congress committee; he does not hesitate to spend money; but I realize that his daily expenses in Bombay could not have amounted to less than twenty rupees.</p>
<p>I do feel that there is a good deal of substance in his argument. However, I am helpless in my present situation. I know that my weakness has reduced my capacity to serve. I do not now have the courage to ask everyone to go walking. Because I myself am weak, I imagine others to be so and often unnecessarily take pity on them. Otherwise, one who wishes to serve the public does not have to spend overmuch. Third-class fares are not so high that one cannot afford the expense and, moreover, one should make it a point to spend nothing on transport at any place one visits. One should eat simple food and dress simply. But we have pampered ourselves so much that we think we cannot do what hundreds of thousands of other people do every day. A strike may fail in spite of a just grievance and the ability of strikers to hold out indefinitely, if there are workers to replace them. A wise man, therefore, will not strike for increase of wages or other comforts, if he feels that he can be easily replaced. But a philanthropic or patriotic man will strike in spite of supply being greater than the demand, when he feels for and wishes to associate himself with his neighbour’s distress. Needless to say, there is no room in a civil strike of the nature described by me for violence in the shape of intimidation, incendiarism or otherwise. I should therefore be extremely sorry to find, that the recent derailment near Chittagong was due to mischief done by any of the strikers. Judged by the tests suggested by me, it is clear that the friends of the strikers should never have advised them to apply for or receive Congress or any other public funds for their support. The value of the strikers’ sympathy was diminished to the extent, that they received or accepted financial aid. The merit of a sympathetic strike lies in the inconvenience and the loss suffered by the sympathizers. 3</p>
<p>I have given a summary of the 25-page letter almost in the correspondent’s own words. The writer is a thoughtful person and has said everything with a good motive. I know nothing about some of his allegations, but it is indeed my experience that public funds are being misused a great deal. I have even criticized this from time to time. I have known many instances of more money than was necessary having been spent on the comforts of workers. This practice is very much less prevalent now, but I must admit that there is still room for reform. There is certainly some substance in the complaint that expenses on conveyance are incurred much too readily. We now wish to serve the poorest of the poor and to be their representatives. I have no doubt, therefore, that there should be much greater simplicity in our lives than there is at present. A carriage must not be hired so long as one can walk the distance. Public workers arriving as one’s guests need not be treated to banquets. Workers come together not to enjoy dinners but to render service. 4</p>
<p>I have critics who see nothing but flaws in everything I say or do. I profit by their criticism sometimes. But I have also the good fortune to have friends who may be described as guardians of my virtue. They would have me to become a perfect man, and therefore, feel agitated when they think that I have erred, or am likely to err in anything I may say or do. One such well-wisher, whose caution has before now proved to be of the greatest value to me, writes to the following effect: Within my experience, you have been responsible for collecting subscriptions for several funds, such as for Jallianwala, Satyagraha Sabha, Swadeshi, Swaraj, and now you have fixed yourself up in Bengal for Deshbandhu Memorial Fund. Are you satisfied that the previous funds have been well managed, and now the Deshbandhu Memorial Fund will also be properly managed? You owe it to the public to render a full explanation. The correspondent might have added theTilak Swaraj Fund, and also the Flood Relief Fund in the South. The question is pertinent. Even in course of my collection for the Deshbandhu Memorial, those who have paid me handsomely have given me the caution.</p>
<p>My general rule is that I never identify myself with any fund where I do not know those who are to operate upon it, and where I am not satisfied about their honesty. The first three funds were raised not by me, or on the strength of any reputation I possess, but they were raised by Mr. Banker, whom even then I knew well and who had a perfect right to use my name. I know, too, that he could have raised all the money that was received on the strength of his own undoubted reputation and service rendered. Fullest accounts were kept of the receipts and disbursements, and were published also, if my recollection serves me right. But, in any event, these are very small accounts. I have referred to the Tilak Swaraj Fund, although my correspondent has not. I have heard repeated complaints about it. It was the biggest public fund ever raised. I have the clearest conscience about it. The closest scrutiny of the disposal of that fund will show that generally there has been no laxity about its administration, and that there have been far less losses than are incurred by commercial firms. The latter generally write off 10 p.c. as their book-debts. I have known big South African firms writing off so much as 25 p.c. as a normal thing. In the transactions on the Tilak Swaraj Fund, we have not lost anything near 10 p.c. I doubt if the total losses would amount to 2 p.c.</p>
<p>The working treasurer insisted upon vouchers for everything. The accounts have been audited from time to time. They have been published. This is not to say that in some cases there has not been gross misappropriation by Congress workers who were entrusted with funds. This is inevitable where monies have to be disbursed through hundreds of channels. All that is possible is to ensure against the looseness or carelessness on the part of top men. The wonder to me is that, on the whole, it is possible to show as clean a record as we have. Then take the Jallianwala Bagh Fund. Here, again, there is accurate account-keeping. The accounts have been published also from time to time. The place is well looked after. Pandit Malavyaji may be considered to be the soul of that fund. The place is kept beautifully clean, and from a dung-heap it has been turned into a garden. Complaints, however, have been made that no fitting memorial has yet been raised, and the money is allowed to lie idle. If it is a charge, I must confess that I am perhaps more answerable for it than the others. Even plans have been prepared, but I felt that conditions of the time when the fund was raised were altered immediately after. The Bagh itself has been in some way or other, a bone of contention between different parties. I do not know that we have seen the last of it. The Memorial was to be, as it should be, a memorial of solid communal unity a triumph out of a tragedy. Hindu, Mussalman and Sikh blood that flowed on that fateful 13th in a mingled stream was to signify an unbreakable union.</p>
<p>Where is that union today? It will be time to think of building a memorial when we stand united. For the present, so far as I am concerned, it is enough that the Bagh stands, as a little bit of a lung in crowded Amritsar, with its narrow, tortuous and dirty lanes. Now, I come to the Deshbandhu Memorial Fund. The treasurer of the fund is a host in himself. But I know that he will not be forever possessed of it. It will ultimately vest in the trustees. The five original trustees are nominees of the deceased patriot. Every one of them has a status in society, and a reputation to lose. Some of them are monied men. These five original trustees have added two more. They are, again, men connected not with one public trust but many. One of them, Sir Nilratan Sircar, is the premier physician of Calcutta, and the other, Mr. S. R. Das, the first cousin of the deceased, is the Advocate- General of Bengal. If these seven trustees are not capable of rendering a good account of themselves, and doing justice to the trust reposed in them, I should despair of any trust succeeding in India. The mansion is there, and I know that Dr. Bidhan Chandra Roy, another medical trustee and a physician of the first rank is busy evolving plans for putting it to the use for which it is intended. It has been whispered to me that possibly Mr. S. R. Das, being the Advocate-General of Bengal, cannot be trustee. I do not know the law in the matter. I knew that he was Advocate-General of Bengal when he undertook the trust; but if it is an oversight, there will be a trustee appointed in his place who will be equal in reputation to him. If Mr. S. R. Das can remain a trustee, I was privileged to know enough of him to be able to assure the readers that he will neglect nothing to make the administration of the trust athorough success. Up to the moment of his departure for England, it occupied his care and attention. But I feel sure that every one of the original trustees will be as jealous of the memory of the deceased as any can be, and that they will make the proposed hospital and nurses’ training institution worthy of his memory. So much for the All- Bengal Deshbandhu Memorial Fund. About the All-India Memorial Fund, I am myself one of the trustees. The object of the Memorial is nearest to my heart. My fellow-trustees are as well known to the public as any public men.</p>
<p>The Secretary is a seasoned soldier, and so is the treasurer, both respectively Secretary and Treasurer of the Congress also. Let me, however, in conclusion, warn the public that the safety of the public fund lies more even in an intelligent vigilance of the public than in the strict integrity of those who are in charge of funds. Absolute honesty of the trustees is a necessity, but public inertia is a crime. Ignorant criticism must not be mistaken for intelligent vigilance. What I have found generally is ignorant criticism.What I would love to see is, that some public men, with a knowledge of account-keeping, make it a point, now and again, of overhauling the administration of public funds, an bringing the administrators to book. 5 Father has written to me. Of course, I never wanted to go as far as he supposes. I would not think of asking anyone to support father. But I would not hesitate to ask a friend or friends who would consider it a privilege to pay you for your public services. I would press you to take it from public funds, if your wants owing to the situation in which you are and must be were not extraordinary. I am myself convinced that you should contribute to the common purse either by doing some business or by letting your personal friends find funds for retaining your services. There is no immediate hurry but without fretting about it, come to a final decision. I will not mind even if you decided to do some business. I want your mental peace. I know that you will serve the country even as manager of a business. I am sure that father will not mind any decision you may arrive at so long as it gives you complete peace. 6 </p>
<p>The volunteers in every place worked with boundless enthusiasm, and were ever alert and wide awake in the performance of their duties. Generally speaking, there was not much molestation by the police. When sometimes there was such molestation, the volunteers quietly put up with it. They brought to bear upon their work quite an amount of humour, in which the police too sometimes joined. They devised various diversions in order to beguile their time. Some of them were once arrested on a charge of obstructing the public traffic. As non-co-operation did not form a part of the satyagraha struggle there, defence could be made in courts, though as a rule advocates for defence were not paid from public funds. The volunteers were declared innocent and acquitted by the court, which still further exalted their spirit. 7 I must, however, say that Bhai Shivji’s behaviour in every respect, after my inquiry about him, has confirmed my opinion against him. First, I was the judge and others were the complainants. They had given money to Bhai Shivji. When my viewpoint became unacceptable to Bhai Shivji, even I was declared to be a complainant. Now Bhai Shivji, in his statement, seems to consider me at fault. But he and all those who are interested in the social workers obeying more or less the rules and regulations of morality, and who desire faultless management of public funds should know that the proposal to appoint the Panch was for the benefit of Bhai Shivji. He is still guilty in my opinion. His lapses are grave and he has confessed most of them. The panchnama1, which I could never have signed, was drawn up as far as I know, by Bhai Shivji himself. By issuing this statement Bhai Shivji has added salt to the wound and made his guilt worse. 8</p>
<p>Much trouble, time and money can be saved by a little forethought. As it is, I often notice a reckless waste of public funds in connection with these meetings. Let organizers of all meetings, but especially of khadi meetings, realize that we are the poorest country in the world, millions of whom are semi-starved, if only because their earnings are less even than three pice per day. Let organizers therefore understand, as stewards for the nation, it is their duty to spend public funds like misers and never to spend a pie without thought and without necessity. Organizers of khadi meetings should further realize that every pice collected is a pice meant for the starving millions and so one pice means often a day’s earning for a widow. They must not therefore spend where they need not. For instance, they spend money on paper decorations. This is no time for decorations. Let them save as much as they can by avoiding all decorations save only those which may be required to attract people’s attention. In that case they can think of several artistic things which cost nothing or very little. Thus they can have flags and buntings out of waste khaddar. We are now going in for extensive tailoring in connection with khaddar sales. There is always much waste material in a tailor’s shop which he throws away. Now every part of this waste can be used for buntings which unlike paper buntings can be preserved for further use. 9 </p>
<p>For us being in good shape means not being able to give away anything at all. I see from your report that the tenements of our workers are in a state of disrepair. If our resources permit we should utilize what we can spare for repairing their houses so that they would not be a burden on the public funds. I would regard that as our substantial contribution. 10 Then I should like to know how your volunteers here have handled funds, like a spendthrift or like a miser. Have they been able to remain free from the but too common weakness of being lax with regard to the use of public funds? I take it that there has been no extravagance or reckless expenditure in your case. But what we need is Spartan simplicity. I shall be only too glad to be told that the strictest standard of economy was observed throughout. Nothing will give me greater satisfaction than to find that you have learnt to do better in this respect than is usual with volunteers in general. Ours is the poorest country in the world. Moreover, our Government is the most extravagant in the world save that of America. If we observe the working of the hospitals here, we shall find that money is spent in them according to standards prevailing in England. Even the hospitals in Scotland would not spend so much money. Col. Maddock told me that in Scotland they could not afford to throw away the used bandages as we do here, that they were put to use again after they had been washed. England can afford to act in that manner. They have left their country for adventure and they have found in ours a field for exploitation. Our true standard can be ascertained by what the majority of people get to wear and to protect themselves with. We must assess our needs on the basis of that standard and spend money accordingly. If we do not do that, we will lose ultimately. 11</p>
<p>One personal thing, I must correct. The Khilafat Committee did pay for a time for my expenses at your instance, not on my request, and certainly not for the reason that you state, for the simple reason that I have never travelled at Congress expense on any single occasion, even when I have done exclusively Congress work. My travelling expenses have always been borne by friends. And when I accepted your offer, I had Rs. 25,000 placed at my disposal by a common friend, whom you know, purely for my travelling as he was most anxious that I should never stint myself about these, nor draw upon any public funds for them. I had given you this information, but I agreed with you that it would be more graceful if I let you pay my travelling expenses. But in the manner in which you now put the matter, I feel inclined to offer to return the whole of these expenses with interest if you will accept them without being insulted or offended. I think that Mahadev will have somewhere a record of these expenses. 12 </p>
<p>Let no one imagine that my experiments in dancing and the like marked a stage of indulgence in my life. The reader will have noticed that even then I had my wits about me. That period of infatuation was not unrelieved by a certain amount of self-intro-spection on my part. I kept account of every farthing I spent, and my expenses were carefully calculated.T1 Every little item, such as omnibus fares or postage or a couple of coppers spent on newspapers,T2 would be entered, and the balance struck every evening before going to bed. That habit has stayed with me ever since, and I know that as a result, though I have had to handle public funds amounting to lakhs, I have succeeded in exercising strict economy in their disbursement and, instead of outstanding debts, have had invariably a surplus balance in respect of all the movements I have led. Let every youth take a leaf out of my book and make it a point to account for everything that comes into and goes out of his pocket,T3 and like me, he is sure to be a gainer in the end. 13</p>
<p>No province in India has enjoyed such privileges in the matter of public funds as Gujarat. The Gujarat Provincial Congress Committee has never found its exchequer empty. Nor have its district or taluk branches ever been left to want the funds that they needed. It has been my conviction for years that such affluence cannot be good for any public institution. There comes a point in the life of every institution that has a prestige in public, when it experiences this plethora of funds and all the risks and dangers attendant on it. At that time, if it does not take care and does not spend like a miser, it is bound to come to grief. Because an institution happens to have plenty of funds it does not mean that it should anyhow spend away every pie that it possesses. The golden rule is not to hesitate to ask for or spend even a crore when it is absolutely necessary and when it is not, to hoard up every pie though one may have a crore of rupees at one’s disposal. 14</p>
<p>How could you trust Harilal? How can we believe in anything he says when drunk? But I am quite guarded. I am not going to spend a single pie out of public funds for his coming here or for keeping him here. I hope you also have not promised to pay him the railway fare from such funds. You know that formerly he had asked me for the fare and I had plainly refused. Gandhi Seva Sanghke Dwitiya Adhiveshan (Savli) ka Vivaran, pp. 36 The next question deals with body-labour. What I have said earlier includes my reply on this point also. Each person will function within his own individual limits. We cannot lay down more than this. Let every man put in the maximum body-labour he can. One worker wrote to me that he managed to earn his livelihood in the village; but all his time was spent in doing body-labour. He had resolved to take to spinning and also planned to make a living by spinning. But he found no time to do anything else. I have written to him that, if he continues his work with devotion, people will have a lesson to learn even from this. If the people of the village desire to accept his services, he can educate their children, clean up the garbage and in return earn his bread from them. If he puts his heart in his work, he will be able to earn his livelihood. But he must take only what is necessary. He may be able to have sweets, ghee, fruits, etc., if he asks for them. But he should not accept these things even if the people offer them on their own. I go round with the thought of the village in my mind, and so other problems do not arise for me. There can be no question at all of drawing the maximum out of public funds. I have understood your question. But it is not possible to set the same limit for all workers. In fact, each one of them should put in as much labour as he can. Let him earn whatever wages he can, and supplement the deficit from the funds of the Sangh. If his needs are not so great that it would be disturbing to others when they know about them, he should not hesitate to meet them from the Sangh. I cannot set any limit.</p>
<p>I would not set any limit if the management were in my hands. I do not also wish to determine which type of work should be regarded as body-labour. I can only say that writing a book is not body-labour. The third question a very difficult one relates to the family. Members should help the President in solving this problem. And the President also should be alert in the matter. We have changed our way of life. We have given up the old tradition. Nevertheless, we are born in the cities. We have got our parents, wives and children. They have been all brought up in the old tradition. They have not changed their way of living. We wonder what right we have to compel them to accept the way of life we have accepted. And we want to educate our children in the old method which we have discarded. That is the reason why the workers are worried about the future of their children. They wonder if they would be able to educate their children so as to make them lawyers or doctors. On the one hand, a member of the Sangh lives in poverty and on the other he feels that his duty to his wife and children is different from what he has accepted for himself. He believes that sacrifice is his dharma but not his family’s. Renunciation is regarded as a duty in old age. At the root of this idea is the traditional Hindu sentiment that we should renounce the world in old age.</p>
<p>That is why we want to educate our children in the old way. But we have given up the belief that renunciation is a duty only of old age, not imperative for youth. We have accepted it as our duty, even in youth, to renounce all pleasures and serve the country. If we believe that sacrifice is man’s dharma and that our pleasures should be consistent with the dharma of renunciation, then it becomes our duty to recognize the appropriateness of this dharma for our wives and children as well. If they insist on having more than this, let us tell them that we can give them only this much, that we can give them only the food that we ourselves eat; that what we consider proper for ourselves, we consider proper for them too. What more could be done? Right from my South Africa days I have adhered to this ideal. There is nothing wrong in wanting to reduce one’s income. And any ideal which is right for us is also right for our children. All problems would be easily solved if we acccept this. But the conflict arises when we believe that our wives and children have a different dharma to follow. We must go as far along this path as possible. If, out of an impulse, we have gone too far, there should be no hesitation in retracing our steps. The Sangh should carry on with whatever means it may be having. Let us keep an eye on our resources and fix the maximum limit. But, in doing this, we shall have to look to the country as well. We are bound to be affected by whatever may be happening in the country. And it is our goal to take the country along with us. We must always try to pursue our activities taking the country with us. I cannot lay down any rule in such matters. These are matters concerning the individual and they depend on his sincerity. The highest limit of Rs. 75 has been set. Whether or not that amount should be drawn is a matter for individual decision. 15</p>
<p>Now a surprise for you both. Kanti’s mind is now set on getting formal education and obtaining a degree. However one may try, he cannot possibly be deterred. I tried hard, but without success. Now, the question of the expenses for his education remains. Kanti, too, agrees that it cannot be paid from the public funds and that it would be a crime to take anything from his mother’s sisters who have already spent a good deal on him. Hence, either you three brothers should pay his expenses or he must earn and learn. In my opinion, you three should share the burden, which is likely to be Rs. 75 to Rs. 100 a month, though I do not know about it. It is enough if you give your share of Rs. 33. Start sending the sum if you agree with the proposal. 16 I have talked to Sushilabehn about the quantities of milk. She will speak to those who do not need more than 1.5 1b of milk. The fact is, no one normally needs more than 1.5 1b. Since we are living on public funds and have taken a vow of austerity, we should take nothing more than we need. 17</p>
<p>I wish to suggest that we are a long way off from the ideal of poverty. Our living continues to be luxurious. We beguile our minds by pretending that all this milk and ghee is necessary for health, for preserving our strength to serve. I cheat my heart by suggesting that my energy will decline if I don’t take goat’s milk. Thus we deviate from the vow of asvada1, we start seeking pleasures. Prafulla Babu invited us all here. He collected funds from people. The people are somewhat enamoured of my name. Once the funds were collected Prafulla Babu thought of feeding us well. That is how it goes on. We accept it too. This is not the correct way of using public funds. We should utilize the funds like a miser. There should be no wasteful expenditure. Money is not the only wealth for us. Every useful commodity is real wealth. We may not throw away even water. If one glass of water would do, why take two? Thus in all respects we should have our own point of view. We may not overeat a delicious dish. If we do, we cannot practise truth and ahimsa. 18 </p>
<p>Shri Gopinath Bardoloi deserves congratulation on his dignified protest. It was certainly unbecoming of a constitutional Governor to Identify himself with the act of his Ministers irrespective of the propriety or legality of their act and of the wishes of the Opposition in such a matter as a public gift. Apart from the legality of the transaction it is a serious thing for a Ministry to pay out of public funds any sum without previous provision and without the sanction of the House in whose name they have to act and from whom they derive their authority. I think Shri Bardoloi was quite right in raising the question. And I hope the money will not be paid without a thorough examination of the legality of the transaction. I myself so further and suggest that, even if the gift is held to be within the rights of the Ministry, His Excellency would put himself right if he has the gift sanctioned by the Assam Assembly. One lakh of rupees is insignificant compared to the daily expense of nine million sterling incurred by the British Treasury. It is, in my opinion, all the more necessary why extra care should be taken to ensure constitutional propriety. 19</p>
<p>So long as you feel grieved by my conduct, how can you forgive me? I have no conviction of wrongdoing. Just think clearly a bit. Was I in any way bound to pay you a single pice? You pleaded inability to get on with the Bengal workers. You wanted to come to Sevagram. I took pity and let you come. Inch by inch I came to know of your difficulties and I began to accommodate you. When I thought you to be unworthy of support, I declined to continue, after notice. Was that a wrong done to you? You yourself admit that you acted hastily and thoughtlessly. I acted in the only honourable way I could. I was disbursing public funds. You should know that I brought you here almost against the wish of trusted co-workers. Your wants were and are beyond your market value. I doubt whether I should have given you the support I did. I still continue to do what I can for you because I believe you to be a person willing to serve but with reasoning faculty gone astray. Your present letter is proof of what I say. 20 The money at the disposal of our institution is public money and any institution maintained with public funds must pay the utmost attention to economy. But one does not see this being done and the institution constantly finds itself short of funds. 21</p>
<p> </p>
<p>References:</p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Letter to A. H. West, November 5, 1915</li>
<li>Ahmedabad Mill-Hands’ Strike, march 15, 19181</li>
<li>Navajivan, 11-9-1921</li>
<li>Navajivan, 24-5-1925</li>
<li>Young India, 20-8-1925 </li>
<li>Letter to Jawaharlal Nehru, September 30,1925</li>
<li>Chapter XVII, A Reft in the Lute</li>
<li>Navajivan, 7-11-1926 </li>
<li>Young India, 24-2-1927</li>
<li>Letter to Swami, August 9, 1927</li>
<li>Young India, 13-9-1928</li>
<li>Letter to Shaukat Ali, November 30, 1928</li>
<li>Chapter XVI : Changes </li>
<li>Young India, 21-5-1931</li>
<li>Letter to Narandas Gandhi, October 1935</li>
<li>Letter to Manilal and Sushila Gandhi, August 16, 1936</li>
<li>Ashram Notes, January 24, 1940</li>
<li>Gandhi Seva Sanghke Chhathe Adhiveshan ka Vivaran, pp. 6</li>
<li>Harijan, 4-8-1940 </li>
<li>Letter to Amrita Lal Chatterjee, November 25, 1941</li>
<li>Bihar Pachhi Dilhi, p. 357 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Portuguese Territories and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-19:2043530:BlogPost:745582013-10-19T03:25:59.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Portuguese Territories and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p>South Africa is a continent by itself and is divided into many States of which the Colonies of Natal and the Cape of Good Hope, Zululand, a Crown Colony, the South African Republic of the Transvaal, Orange Free State and the Chartered Territories are inhabited, more or less, by the Indians together with the Europeans and the natives of those countries. The Portuguese territories, viz., Delagoa Bay, Beira and Mozambique, have a large Indian population, but there the Indians have no grievances, apart from the general population. 1 South Africa, for our purposes, consists of the two British Colonies of the Cape of Good Hope and Natal, the two Republics, viz., the South African Republic or the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, the Crown Colony of Zululand, the Chartered Territories and the Portuguese territories comprising Delagoa Bay or Lorenzo Marques and Beira. 2</p>
<p>South Africa, for our present purposes, is divided into the following States: the British Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, the British Colony of Natal, the British Colony of Zululand, the Transvaal or the South African Republic, the Orange Free State, the Chartered Territories or Rhodesia, and the Portuguese Territories of Delagoa Bay and Beira. In South Africa, apart from the Portuguese Territories, there are nearly 100,000 Indians, of whom the greater part belongs to the labouring class, drawn from the labouring population of Madras and Bengal, speaking the Tamil or Telugu and the Hindi languages respectively. A small number belongs to the trading class, chiefly drawn from the Bombay Presidency. A general feeling throughout South Africa is that of hatred towards Indian, encouraged by the newspapers and connived at, even countenanced by, the legislators. Every Indian, without exception, is a coolie in the estimation of the general body of the Europeans. Storekeepers are “coolie storekeepers”. Indian clerks and schoolmasters are “coolie clerks” and “coolie schoolmasters”. Naturally, neither the traders nor the English-educated Indians are treated with any degree of respect. Wealth and abilities in an Indian count for naught in that country except to serve the interests of the European Colonists. We are the “Asian dirt to be heartily cursed”.</p>
<p>We are “squalid coolies with truth less tongues”. We are “the real canker that is eating into the very vitals of the community”. We are “parasites, semi-barbarous Asiatics”. We live upon rice and we are chock-full of vice. Statute books describe the Indians as belonging to the “aboriginal or semi barbarous races of Asia”, while, as a matter of fact, there is hardly one Indian in South Africa belonging to the aboriginal stock. The Santhals of Assam will be as useless in South Africa as the natives of that country. The Pretoria Chamber of Commerce thinks that our religion teaches us to “consider all women as soulless and Christians a natural prey”. According to the same authority, “the whole community in South Africa is exposed to the dangers engendered by the filthy habits and immoral practices of these people.” Yet, as a matter of fact, there has happened not a single case of leprosy amongst the Indians in South Africa. And Dr. Veale of Pretoria thinks that “the lowest class Indians live better and in better habitations and with more regard to sanitation than the lowest class Whites”, and he, furthermore, puts on record that “while every nationality had one or more of its members at some time in the lazaretto, there was not a single Indian attacked.” </p>
<p>Such is the general feeling against the Indian in South Africa, except the Portuguese Territories, where he is respected and has no grievance apart from the general population. You can easily imagine how difficult it must be for a respectable Indian to exist in such a country. I am sure, gentlemen, that if our President went to South Africa, he would find it, to use a colloquial phrase, “mighty hard” to secure accommodation in a hotel, and he would not feel very comfortable in a first-class railway carriage in Natal, and, after reaching Volksrust, he would be put out unceremoniously from his first-class compartment and accommodated in a tin compartment where Kaffirs are packed like sheep. I may, however, assure him that if he ever came to South Africa, and we wish our great men did come to these uncomfortable quarters, if only to see and realize the plight in which their fellow countrymen are, we shall more than make up for these inconveniences, which we cannot help, by according him a right royal welcome, so united, so enthusiastic we are, at any rate for the present.</p>
<p>Ours is one continual struggle against a degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the Europeans, who desire to degrade us to the level of the raw Kaffir whose occupation is hunting, and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with and, then, pass his life in indolence and nakedness. The aim of the Christian Governments, so we read, is to raise people whom they come in contact with or whom they control. It is otherwise in South Africa. There, the deliberately expressed object is not to allow the Indian to rise higher in the scale of civilization but to lower him to the position of the Kaffir; in the words of the Attorney-General of Natal, “to keep him forever a hewer of wood and drawer of water”, “not to let him form part of the future South African nation that is going to be built”; in the words of another legislator in Natal, “to make the Indian’s life more comfortable in his native land than in the Colony of Natal”. The struggle against such degradation is so severe that our whole energy is spent in resistance. Consequently, we have very little left in us to attempt to make any reforms from within. 3</p>
<p>South Africa may, for our purposes, be divided into the two self-governing British Colonies of Natal and the Cape of Good Hope, the Crown Colony of Zululand, the Transvaal or the South African Republic, the Orange Free State, the Chartered Territories and the Portuguese Territories comprising Delagoa Bay and Beira. The other States have no Indian population to speak of, because of the grievances and disabilities, except the Portuguese territories which contain a very large Indian population and which do not give any trouble to the Indians. 4 At Komatipoort, however, they were detained and prevented from entering the Portuguese territories. The sergeant at the Transvaal Border endeavoured to secure for them entry into Delagoa Bay, but to no purpose. My clients were subsequently detained at the jail in Komatipoort for, as they state, five days. The sergeant then bought for them tickets for Durban. On their applying for embarkation passes to pass through Durban, they are required to deposit £11 as also to buy their passage in Johannesburg. My clients inform me that they are too poor to either deposit the money or buy their passage in Johannesburg. I am in possession of their railway tickets. I shall be obliged if you will kindly let me know what my clients are now to do. They are quite willing to leave the country, if provision can be made for them. I have also the honour to enquire why my clients were detained at the jail in Komatipoort. 5 </p>
<p>Our complaint has always been that our countrymen in India have, as it might have appeared until recently, almost studiously ignored the question of its Imperial importance. The greatest prominence has been given to it by the suicidal action of General Smuts in having forcibly deported innocent Indians, in most cases penniless, from the Transvaal through the Portuguese territories to India. This has advertized the cause as perhaps nothing else has done, and now Mr. Henry S. L. Polak is in Bombay, from the Transvaal, in order to place the position before the Indian public. He has gone there with definite instructions not to come into touch with the Extremist Party, but to be guided largely by the Editor of The Times of India, Professor Gokhale and the Aga Khan. 6</p>
<p>At the risk of repeating what has been often stated in these columns, we may remind our readers that these far-reaching orders take place without any judicial trial. The cases are administratively tried under semi-secrecy. Against these administrative acts, there is no appeal to the Supreme Court. Thus, under a totally un-British procedure, the liberty of a subject is taken away with a stroke of the pen. What is lacking in the law has been supplied by the astute subtlety of an unscrupulous Department. Legally, these deportations can take place only as far as the Transvaal boundary. The Transvaal Government have, therefore, entered into an understanding with the Portuguese authorities (the neighbouring British Colonies would not or could not enter into such a nefarious contract), whereby passive resisters deported to the boundary of the Portuguese territories are taken up by the Portuguese Government and, without any trial, put on board a steamer going to India. 7</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<ol>
<li>An Appeal to the Indian Public Rajkot, August 14, 1896</li>
<li>Notes on the Grievances of the British Indians, September 22, 1896</li>
<li>The Times of India, 27-9-1896</li>
<li>Speech at meeting, Madras, October 26, 1896</li>
<li>Letter to Registrar of Asiatics, September 11, 1907</li>
<li>Letter to Lord Ampthill, August 4, 1909</li>
<li>Indian Opinion, 26-3-1910</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Poland and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-19:2043530:BlogPost:745542013-10-19T03:25:40.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Poland and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>It pleases me to find that you have benefited by my writings. You are at liberty to translate any of the writings of Young India. There are German and French translations to be had in Europe and there is also an English edition published by Messrs S. Ganesan, Pycrofts Road, Triplicane, and Madras. 1 In fairness, however, to Europeans, let me say that in the venomous abuse of khaddar, The Times of India writer by no means represents the general European opinion. I know several Europeans in India who believe in the message of khaddar and some who use it themselves. Its message has even reached Europe. Here is a letter from a professor from far-off Poland regarding khaddar: Do you not think it would be a good thing if an attempt were made to sell Indian tissues in Europe to friends of India? I might try on a small scale here if you send me tissues of your cloth with indication of prices in English currency and an English address to which the money could be sent. I think that even if the amount of sales would not be very great, it would be useful for propaganda and I hope that many people at least in Poland would be proud and happy to wear Indian cloth in order to show their sympathy with your work. . . This is perhaps the most efficient way to gain universal sympathy for the emancipation of India. I could not easily undertake to spin myself but I can undertake to go from house to house and encourage the buying of Indian cloth even if it is more expensive than our own products. 2</p>
<p>You will now see my reply to your questions in Young India, and if you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. I like your three rules about preservation of health. The two I understand thoroughly. For, I myself don’t believe in worry and always try to snatch moments for sleep and possess a fair capacity for going off to sleep almost at will. Fasting too I understand. But I do not as you seem to have been doing. You say you fast for 10 or 15 days before each voyage. This requires explanation 10 or 15 days before each voyage. This requires explanation. 10 or 15 is a very vague number. For, 10 days or 15 days make a great difference for a fasting man; at least such is my experience. And what is this fasting? Do you take nothing during the fast except water, not fruit, not milk? Have you record of your weight before and after fast? How often have you taken these fasts? What is your weight now, and what is the meaning of each voyage? What is its duration? Do you fast, for instance, if you have to be at sea for one day only? You say you take one meal about midday at a time of intense activity. What does that meal consist of? And, do you take no fruit, no milk, and no other drink except water either in the morning or in the evening? Then, again you say you fast only when you have too much weight. Do you then say that you have always too much weight before each voyage? And why do you ever have too much weight if you are a spare eater as you evidently seem to be? When you are not intensely active, how many meals do you take? Then you say that you use at least 20 quarts of water to clear your bowels every day, until the water is returned clean and transparent and this you do when you have too much weight. What do you mean by use of water? Is it enema, or do you drink 20 quarts, even whilst you are taking your one meal per day? If you drink it, do you work it out through the kidneys or through the bowels? The experience of me and all my friends who have fasted for long lengths of time is that when we have fasted for long lengths of time is that when we have fasted the water has to pass through the kidneys, never through the bowels unless we have taken the enema. As you may know I am deeply interested in all experiments in fasting and dietetics whether merely for health or spiritual growth. 3</p>
<p>The first number of the English edition of the bulletin of the Organizing Committee of the International Juridical Conference has been on my file for the past three or four months. The bulletin is edited by a Board of Directors drawn from Austria, Czechoslovakia, Cuba, France, Germany, Holland, Indonesia, Mexico, Poland and Venezuela. The Organizing Secretary is Dr. Alfred Apfel of Berlin where the bulletin is issued. The editorial notice says that the bulletin is only a temporary publication. The opening article is headed the ‘Duty of Lawyers’ from which I take the following two interesting sections as being not irrelevant in the present times in India. 4 This book-cover is made by our women”, said the lady from Poland. Thanking them Gandhiji asked: Is it only the women who spin and weave there, and do the men do nothing? Spinning is done exclusively by women. But men are not idlers either. They are engaged in other crafts. For instance this wooden casket is made by our men Is this a recent revival, or has the movement been on for some time? Has it touched the intellectual classes, or is there a gulf between them and the masses? No; the intellectuals have taken keenly to it and we have had the movement now for some time and it is daily growing. And how do you happen to work together who must be as poles asunder, Poland an agricultural country and France a highly industrialized country? We have been working together for several years. There is a village industries movement in France too, and we thought we should go together to India to study things first-hand. We must say we have had much to learn. They were contemplating writing a book on India and wanted to know whether they could serve India by doing so. You could, if you write for Poland and France or say Europe, but not if you write for India. They paused for a moment wondering what Gandhiji meant. I shall explain.</p>
<p>If you have really learnt something from our villages, you can only give the benefit of that learning to your own people. What I learn from the West I give to my country. Fallen though we seem today, our villages have still to teach something to the world. And if what you say to your people appeals to them, that will have its reaction on us. What I say holds well only if you have really learnt something worthy from our villages. Perhaps the Exhibition has opened your eyes to many possibilities. I should like to spend weeks there and fill my soul with the atmosphere of the past. You find there workmen actually at work from Orissa and Kashmir working with their crudest possible tools, if you please, and yet conjuring up with their aid some of the most gorgeous articles in silver and wool. The things you have brought for me are no patch on similar things you will find in the Exhibition. Look at the men from Patan working at their sari of exquisite pattern and design. The work is now confined to only four families whereas hundreds of families used to get their living in the past out of the work. They are so conservative that they would not let their nearest neighbour know the cunning of their craft. But we have drawn some of them out into light. Some of this work can be revived, in all its glory, if we are prepared to pay for it adequately, pay enough to feed them and to keep them in health and comfort. Now that is a nearly perfect Exhibition, i. e., as perfect as it could be looking to the limited time at the disposal of the organizers and to the numerous handicaps they had to contend against. And yet it is nothing compared to what it could be, if we could have brought all the representative men and we men engaged in many other crafts. 5</p>
<p>All those in Poland who believe that only truth and love can be foundations of better days for humanit and who are doing their best to serve those ideals with their life I send my good wishes and blessing. 6 This is the letter a Polish sister wrote from Bombay harbour. I have known her for some years. She has become as much Indian as she is Polish. She had decided to work at Maganwadi in the Magan Museum. But the rumours of war upset her. She has an aged mother in Poland whom she could not bring out owing to passport difficulties. When the war actually broke out, she calmed down so far as her mother was concerned. But her highly strung nature would not let her rest whilst her nearest and dearest were in peril of their lives for no offence of theirs. She is herself a believer through and through in non-violence. But her very non-violence made her restless. Her whole soul has rebelled against the wrong, as she thinks, that is being perpetrated against her motherland. So she has gone to find the Poland of her imagination fighting to the last ditch, not for merely preserving her own freedom but for the freedom of all those nations who have lost it. And in this she naturally includes her second love, India. May her dream prove true? If Poland has that measure of uttermost bravery and an equal measure of selflessness, history will forget that she defended herself with violence. Her violence will be counted almost as non-violence. 7</p>
<p>The British Government has stated that the war is for the preservation of democracy, but their policy in India militates against this profession. While this Assembly has the fullest sympathy for the cause of democracy and freedom, and condemns the aggression of the Nazi Government on Poland, it cannot offer co-operation in the war, unless the principles of democracy are applied to India and her policy is guided by her people. The Assembly invites the British Government to make a clear declaration that they have decided to regard India as an independent nation entitled to frame her own Charter of Freedom, and to accompany this declaration by suitable action, in so far as this is possible, even in the prevailing war conditions. The Assembly is further of opinion that no war measure or other activity should be undertaken in this Province except with the consent and through the medium of the Provincial Government. 8 </p>
<p>I must wholly, though respectfully, dissent from the view that India is a military country. And I thank God that it is not. It may be that the Commander-in-Chief has a special meaning for the term which I do not know. Or is it that his India is composed of only the Defence Forces under his command? For me the Defence Forces are of the least importance in the make-up of the nation. I need not be reminded that life would be in constant peril if the forces were withdrawn. The forces notwithstanding, life is not free from peril. There are riots, there are murders, there are dacoities, and there are raids. The Defence Forces avail little in all these perils. They generally act after the mischief is done. But the gallant Commander-in-Chief looks at things as a soldier. I and, with me the millions are untouched by the military spirit. From ages past India has had a military caste in numbers wholly insignificant. That caste has had little to do with the millions. This, however, is not the occasion for examining its contribution to the making of India. All I want to state, with the utmost emphasis at my command, is that the description of India as a military country is wrong. Of all the countries in the world India is the least military. Though I have failed with the Working Committee in persuading them, at this supreme moment, to declare their undying faith in non-violence as the only sovereign remedy for saving mankind from destruction, I have not lost the hope that the masses will refuse to bow to the Moloch of war but will rely upon their capacity for suffering to save the country’s honour.</p>
<p>How has the undoubted military valour of Poland served her against the superior forces of Germany and Russia? Would Poland unarmed have fared worse if she had met the challenge of these combined forces with the resolution to face death without retaliation? Would the invading forces have taken a heavier toll from an infinitely more valorous Poland? It is highly probable that their essential nature would have made them desist from a wholesale slaughter of innocents. 9</p>
<p>You must not take what I say so terribly literally. If ten soldiers resist a force of a thousand soldiers armed cap-a-pie, the former are almost non-violent, because there is no capacity for anything like proportionate violence in them. But the instance I have taken of the girl is more appropriate. A girl, who attacks her assailant with her nails, if she has grown them, or with her teeth, if she has them, is almost non-violent, because there is no premeditated violence in her. Her violence is the violence of the mouse against the cat. Yes, God alone is the final judge. It is likely that what we believe to be an act of ahimsa is an act of himsa in the eyes of God. But for us the path is chalked out. And then you must know that a true practice of ahimsa means also in one who practises it the keenest intelligence and wide-awake conscience. It is difficult for him to err. When I used those words for Poland, and when I suggested to a girl believing herself to be helpless that she might use her nails and teeth without being guilty of violence, you must understand the meaning at the back of my mind. There is the refusal to bend before overwhelming might in the full knowledge that it means certain death. The Poles knew that they would be crushed to atoms, and yet they resisted the German hordes. That was why I called it almost non-violence. 10</p>
<p>I hope you will have the time and desire to know how a good portion of humanity who has view living under the influence of that doctrine of universal friendship view your action. We have no doubt about your bravery or devotion to your fatherland, nor do we believe that you are the monster described by your opponents. But your own writings and pronouncements and those of your friends and admirers leave no room for doubt that many of your acts are monstrous and unbecoming of human dignity, especially in the estimation of men like me who believe in universal friendliness. Such are your humiliation of Czechoslovakia, the rape of Poland and the swallowing of Denmark. I am aware that your view of life regards such spoliations as virtuous acts. But we have been taught from childhood to regard them as acts degrading humanity. Hence we cannot possibly wish success to your arms. 11 All I can say about the affliction through which Poland is passing is that no small nation of Europe is to expect any real help from the Allied Powers in spite of their professions to the contrary. You know I proposed a solution. It was summarily rejected. Let us rely upon God, the Rock of Ages. 12</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Letter to Dr. Joachim Henry Reinhold, March 18, 1926</li>
<li>Young India, 15-4-1926 </li>
<li>Letter to W. Lutostawski, August 6, 1927</li>
<li>Young India, 13-2-1930 </li>
<li>Harijan, 25-4-1936 </li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 31-8-1939 </li>
<li>Harijan, 23-9-1939 </li>
<li>Pilgrimage to Freedom (1902-1950), p. 58 </li>
<li>Harijan, 30-9-1939</li>
<li>Harijan, 8-9-1940</li>
<li>Letter to Adolf Hitler, December 24, 1940</li>
<li>Letter to Wanda Dynowska, September 10, 1944</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p align="center"> </p>Police and Mahatma Gandhi-Itag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-19:2043530:BlogPost:747502013-10-19T03:25:19.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Police and Mahatma Gandhi-I</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>If while visiting places or calling together people, the police or any other officials object, the Volunteer should politely reply that so long as the Head Office does not direct the cessation of work, he would have to continue his work. If in doing this, he is arrested by the police, he should allow himself to be arrested, but he should not resist the police. And if such a thing happens, he should at once send a detailed report to the Head Office. If people themselves hesitate to gather together through the fear of the police or for any other cause, the Volunteer should give up that place and should at once give information of such an occurrence to the Head Office. 1 In revenue matters as also for the maintenance of peace and order in his district, the Collector is at present dependent on the one-sided reports of the Mamlatdar and the police and this often leads to serious errors in the administration of the district and injustice to the people. This Conference therefore recommends to the Government that it appoint an advisory board of elected members for each district. 2</p>
<p>The junior most police officer can ruin the reputation of a big man of wealth. I think it is the duty of every leader to get out of this state of mind. The officers are not amenable to the public. They think their actions are divinely inspired and cannot conceivably be opposed. It will be a service to them, and therefore to the State, to help them get rid of this notion. Wherever, therefore, I find people submitting to injustice out of fear, I tell them that, to shake off imposed hardships, they must suffer voluntarily. This is Satyagraha. To make others suffer in order to save ourselves from suffering is duragraha, brute force. When a bullock is hurt, he kicks. When a man is oppressed, he should employ soul force to fight himself free, suffering voluntarily to that end. 3 A man who meddles with what is not his job is not prompted by any concern for the right—he is merely conceited. Your duty is only to impart instruction to children and to look after matters of hygiene and sanitation and you may not transgress its limits. Therefore your action in stopping the police and getting the cattle released was not right. It may be that they will not prosecute you for stopping the police, but not prosecuting you will only involve you in further trouble. It is well that you write to me about everything. Continue to write in this manner. But do not ever leave the field of school work to meddle with something else. Your duty is only that and nothing else, It is not right of you to be angry with the Saheb either. I hope you will be very cautious in your behaviour in future. 4</p>
<p>Section 33 Where, in the opinion of the Local Government, any person has been or is concerned in such area in any offence of that kind, it may make in respect of such person any order authorized in Part II and may further order (a) the arrest of any such person without warrant; (b) the confinement of any such person in such place and under such conditions and restrictions as it may specify; (c) the search of any place specified in the order which, in the opinion of the Local Government has been, is being or is about to be used by any such person in such a manner as to endanger the public safety. The arrest of such a person may be affected at any place where he may be found by any police officer or any other officer to whom the order may be directed. 5 There the Police Commissioner prohibits an innocent procession. The satyagrahis obey because they are bound by the Pledge not to commit disobedience except where authorized by the committee. Their first impulse would be to disregard the prohibition and the consequences of such hasty disregard might be most serious. In South Africa, they surrendered to my judgment as to the selection of the laws and the time of breaking them. Here the committee was thought of at my instance. But of every such committee, I am the President. I hope, you find time to read the cuttings I have been sending you. I must now end this letter as visitors are waiting to see me. 6 </p>
<p>It is the duty of the demonstrators to obey and carry out all police instructions as it is as yet no part of the movement to offer civil disobedience against police orders that may be given in connection with demonstrations, processions organized by Satyagraha Associations. 7 I remember an occasion when a mob of 6,000 Europeans, who had been previously inflamed by their leaders, tried to lynch one who, I believe, had given no cause for it. After a hot pursuit by the lynches, he found shelter in a friend’s house, which was also the latter’s shop. Towards evening, the crowd in a determined manner marched to the house, and demanded delivery of the victim of their wrath on pain of burning down the shop. Lives of nearly twenty men, women and children were at stake. Goods worth £20,000 might have been destroyed. Here, if at any time, the use of the military would have been justified. But the Superintendent of Police would not summon any such aid. He alone with his dozen constables scattered amongst the crowd, defended the lives and property that were in danger, and after three hours’ contending with the crowd, he succeeded in stealing the victim through the crowd to the police station, and finally in dispersing the lynches. This happened on the 13th day of January, 1897, in Durban. Unlike the Durban crowd, the Delhi crowd was without a mind of its own. It threatened to do nothing beyond, as alleged in the communiqué, refusing to disperse. 8</p>
<p>I think we can say things passed off wonderfully well on Sunday. There was a mixed Hindu-Muslim procession near Crawford Market. Some members of the procession were assaulted and they sustained injuries. The incident was nothing serious, I believe; all the same, that no one in the procession was at fault, though the Police Commissioner says that the men had disregarded the Deputy Commissioner’s order. The respectable gentlemen who told me of the incident absolve the precisionists of all blame. I send you a copy of my letter to Mr. Griffith, and also copies of the statements I have taken from the leading men and which have accompanied my letter to Mr. Griffith; you will be able to see from them that, if these gentlemen are right in their facts, the police certainly are to blame somewhat. 9 We need not consider the conduct of the police, nor is this the occasion for such consideration. We are beholden to H.E. the Governor and the police for the entire absence of rifle fire, or gunfire. But the one thing to be remembered is that we should learn how to observe perfect peace and how to undergo intelligent suffering. Without this there is no Satyagraha. 10</p>
<p>It arms the police and the executive with arbitrary and demoralizing powers. An executive that asks for extraordinary powers is as a rule to be distrusted. Extraordinary powers are asked by those who wish to cover their inefficiency or inability to cope with an evil. It is like an unskilled surgeon wanting to use the knife where a lancet in a skilled hand would do equally well. Often extraordinary powers are taken to cover wrongs done by authority, as I fear was done by the Punjab Government in April. History would have been written differently if the Central Government had asked the Punjab Government to deal with the situation in the ordinary manner. It is said that in two places at least the Governor told the police that the latter would be held responsible if any disturbance took place in their jurisdiction. Believing then, as I do, that the Rowlatt Act is bad in every respect and that nothing bad can outlast honest effort, I entertain no misgivings about the Act being repealed long before the expiry of the time limit. But that honest effort during the suspension period consists in meetings, memorials and resolutions. I respectfully appeal to the leaders who have advised me to suspend civil resistance to do their duty. Sir Narayan Chandavarkar even said that method other than civil resistance were open to the people. Will he and the other leaders give the lead?</p>
<p>In addition to their work, I suggest a memorial, after the style of the Congress-League Scheme Memorial, to be signed by thousands of people. Such memorial, as the late Mr. Ranade used to say, have an educative value and are quite useful for the purpose of focusing public opinion. Moreover, when civil resistance was started, I was told that it was premature; we had not exhausted all the other means at our disposal. I ventured to say we had. Adoption of the programme suggested by me avoids the possibility of a repetition of the charge of premature resumption of civil resistance, if unfortunately it has to be resumed. From every point of view, therefore, I feel that we should for the time being revert to the old method of agitation and education of public opinion, always insisting on speakers confining themselves to facts, avoiding declamation or inflammatory language. A proper explanation of the Rowlatt Act is itself its severest condemnation. 11</p>
<p>The questions, regarding the posting of an additional police force, tabled by the Hon’ble Rao Bahadur Harilal Desai in the Bombay Legislative Assembly and the Government’s reply to them are worth nothing. We can see from them how subordinate officers can mislead the Government. We can also see how one wrong leads to another. The first step of the Government was wrong. Misled by the Collector’s report, the Government stationed additional police at Nadiad and Barejadi. It realized that this was a mistake, but was not prepared to admit as much. The Government thus found itself in a position in which it had no choice but to defend the mistake anyhow. Let us examine whether, in the process, the Government has had to do another wrong. 12</p>
<p>Among the questions asked by the Rao Bahadur, one was whether there were any disturbances in Nadiad on the 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th of April. This was a significant question and in asking it the Rao Bahadur’s point was that there had been no disturbances in Nadiad on those dates and that, therefore, the Government had no justification for stationing additional police. How could the Government make such an admission? Hence it adopted a wrong line in its reply and said that a large crowd had assembled on the morning of the 11th with the object of compelling the Head Master of the English School, by show of criminal force, to close the school. There is no reason to believe the Government story simply because it is so positive about it. The Government has not come to this conclusion after a public inquiry of any nature. It gave this information in the Legislative Assembly on the basis of the one-sided police report it had received. Had it exercised its judgment, it would have used some kind of a qualifying expression and presented the information less positively. The Government is all too ready with its criticism if a one-sided case is presented on behalf of the people; what right has it, then, to come to any conclusion on the basis of a one-sided report? There are courts in existence to adjudicate between the Government and the people, and the principle of setting up an independent Commission of Inquiry is also an accepted policy at present.</p>
<p>I have made inquiries and have an altogether different account from prominent citizens of Nadiad. They say, on their side, that no crowd had collected on purpose to force the school to close. Other schools being closed on that day, the boys of the English School, too, were engaged in an argument with their Head Master and a few persons from the town had joined them, but no undue pressure was used. Now let us examine the third statement. It has been said on behalf of the Government that a party had assembled on the 12th of April with the intention of attacking the Dairy in Nadiad, but that it was dispersed by the police. The report which I have received goes to show that a party did go there with a view to persuading the manager to close the Dairy. The crowd had dispersed at the mere request of prominent citizens of Nadiad. The police did not have to make the least effort to disperse it, nor was there any need for them to make any. 13 </p>
<p>The authorities have recognized the delicacy of the situation in that they have drafted special police to Ahmadabad and taken extraordinary precautions in order to avoid unruliness on the part of the labourers and to cow them down into submission. 14 The best and quickest way to deliverance from the distrust and secret police department is to rid the country of false fear and all violence. But till that far-off day arrives, the handful of satyagrahis must be prepared to treat the prison as their second home. I hope therefore that the friends of Durgadas will not advise him or his wife to petition for mercy nor add to the wife’s unhappiness by commiserating with her. On the contrary, it is our duty to ask her to steel her heart and feel glad that her husband is in jail for no fault of his own. The truest service that we can render to Durgadas would be to offer Mrs. Durgadas such assistance, pecuniary or otherwise, as she may need. I understand that the “New Call” cases have cost nearly Rs. 15,000. The money could certainly have been utilized to better purpose. It is not right to beggar ourselves by fighting against odds. It is hardly manful to be over-anxious about the result of political trials that involve no disgrace. 15 </p>
<p>I left Bombay for Delhi and the Punjab on the 8th April and had telegraphed to Dr. Satyapal, whom I had never met before, to meet me at Delhi. But after passing Muttra I was served with an order prohibiting me from entering the province of Delhi. I felt that I was bound to disregard this order and I proceeded on my journey. At Palwal, I was served with another order prohibiting me from entering the Punjab and confining me to the Bombay Presidency. And I was arrested by a party of police and taken off the train at that station. The Superintendent of Police who arrested me acted with every courtesy. I was taken to Muttra by the first available train the thence by goods trains early in the morning to Sawai Madhopur, where I joined the Bombay Mail from Peshawar and was taken charge of by Superintendent Bowring. I was discharged at Bombay on the 10th April. I was absolutely in form and substance arrested and I was surprised to find it so often said that it was not so. The train pulled up between Muttra and Palwal and the order was served on me when we reached the border and the police officer exceedingly courteously reasoned with me saying how bad it would be for them to arrest me at a wayside station and how it would not be possible to have a magistrate and that he did not know what proceedings would be adopted. We reached Palwal. At that station, I saw not only the Superintendent of Police; I think it was the Delhi Superintendent of Police, but also a party of officers. I suppose they were police constables, I cannot say exactly who they were and the officer placing his hand on my shoulder said, “Mr. Gandhi, I arrest you.” He served two orders on me, then he asked me quickly to remove my luggage, not myself personally, but he had the luggage removed and I was called upon to point out the things that had to be removed. He asked whether there was any man who wanted to be with me. Then there was a friend who came with me. There was a police guard. I intended to go to the platform to clear my throat and the police challenged me. They were right. There were all the simple ingredients of proper arrest. 16</p>
<p>It is punitive in character. Part II deals with preventive measures and is, therefore, as the mover of the Bill practically admitted, more open to attack. Whereas Part I contemplates the actual commission of scheduled offences, part II authorizes the Governor-Genera-in-Council, if he is satisfied that revolutionary movements likely to lead to the commission of scheduled offences are being extensively promoted, to notify that the provisions of Part II shall apply in the area specified. Therefore, Section 22 enables the local government, where it has reasonable grounds for believing that any person is or has been actually concerned in a revolutionary movement, to place all the materials relating to such a case before a Judicial officer who is qualified for appointment to a High Court and to take his opinion thereon. Thereafter, if the local government is satisfied that action under part II is necessary, it may take security from such person for a period not exceeding one year, that he will not commit or attempt to commit any of the Scheduled offences, that he shall not change his residence without notifying the Government, that he shall be restricted to a particular area, shall abstain from any act calculated to disturb the public peace or prejudicial to public safety and shall report himself at the nearest police station at specified periods. Section 24 authorizes the Government to use “all means reasonably necessary to enforce compliance with its orders”. Thus, upon mere suspicion, the most respectable man may find himself entirely at the mercy of the police. If this is prevention, it is worse than the disease, and prevention itself calculated to produce the very disease sought to be prevented. Could these excesses have been prevented? Could innocent lives have been saved? What were the police doing? The Kotwali (Police Station) is a portion of the same block as the Town Hall. There were sufficient numbers of the police force at the Kotwali. The crowd did not touch the Kotwali, whilst it burnt the adjoining Town Hall with impunity. Most of the other buildings burnt were within a stone’s throw of the Kotwali. The police had also intimation of the fact that the banks were being set fire to. It was clearly the duty that the banks were being set fire to. It was clearly the duty of the police to have bestirred themselves and, even at the peril of their lives, at least tried to save the Englishmen who were murdered. 17</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Instructions to Volunteers, Before September 13, 1917</li>
<li>Gujarati, 11-11-1917</li>
<li>Letter to Balwant Rai Thakur, April 12, 1918</li>
<li>Letter to Pundalik, October 29, 1918</li>
<li>Gujarati, 9-3-1919</li>
<li>Letter to C. F. Andrews, April 1, 1919</li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 5-4-1919 </li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 7-4-1919</li>
<li>Letter to Sir Ibrahim Rahimtoolia, April 8, 1919</li>
<li>Satyagraha Leaflet: No. 3, April 11, 1919</li>
<li>Young India, 16-8-1919 </li>
<li>Navajivan, 28-9-1919</li>
<li>Navajivan, 28-9-1919</li>
<li>Young India, 4-10-1919 </li>
<li>Young India, 3-12-1919</li>
<li>Evidence before Disorders Inquiry Committee, Vol. II, pp. 251 </li>
<li>The Rowlatt Bill</li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>Patiala State and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-17:2043530:BlogPost:745512013-10-17T15:12:02.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Patiala State and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I received some weeks ago an important letter from Patiala. It contained such grave statements attributed to the Maharaja Saheb of Patiala that I referred them to him for confirmation or otherwise. It is now more than three weeks since I wrote to him. But I have no reply. I therefore presume that the statements reported by my correspondent are substantially true. Here is the main part of the letter: The Patiala State Praja Mandal launched Satyagraha against the Hidayat of 19882, a lawless law curtailing the civil liberties of the people. On our advice the Satyagraha was suspended unconditionally. The Publicity Officer, Patiala, on behalf of H.H.’s Government, stated in a Press communiqué dated 15th April that the Government would repeal or withdraw the aforesaid Hidayat within three to four weeks, and further stated that the Government had constituted a Committee to go into its provisions and submit an early report. But the announcement has remained up till now a dead letter. And instead, H.H. has by Ijlas khas orders dated 25th May ordered the strict enforcement of the Hidayat for a period of another six months. In view of this, no propaganda of any kind can be carried on by the Praja Mandal workers, the provisions of the Hidayat being very wide and sweeping. The workers arrested in connection with this agitation are still in jail and others are being tried. Apart from this there is at present another movement going on within the State, i.e., between landlords and tenants. Some of the Praja Mandal workers were allowed an interview with H. H. on the 18th instant. During the interview H. H. addressed them as follows: “My ancestors have won the State by the sword and I mean to keep it by the sword. I do not recognize any organization to represent my people or to speak on their behalf. I am their sole and only representative. No such organization such as Praja Mandal can be allowed to exist within the State. If you want to do Congress work, get out of the State. The Congress can terrify the British Government, but if it ever tries to interfere in my State it will find me a terrible resister. I cannot tolerate any flag other than my own to be flown within my boundaries. You stop your Praja Mandal activities, otherwise I shall resort to such repression that your generations to come will not forget it. When I see some of my dear subjects drifting away into another fold, it touches the very core of my heart. I advise you to get out of the Mandal and stop all kind of agitation; or else remember I am a military man; my talk is blunt and my bullet straight.” It may be that my letter never reached the Maharaja Saheb and that if it had, he would have disputed the correctness of my correspondent’s letter. If any repudiation is received by me, I shall gladly publish it. But I must say that my correspondent is a responsible person. Assuming then that the Maharaja did make the remarks quoted, it is a serious thing for any Prince, no matter how powerful he is, to use the threats the Maharaja is reported to have done. With due respect to him, I suggest that there is too much awakening among the people throughout India to be suppressed by threats and even corresponding action. The days of unadulterated autocracy are gone forever. It is possible perhaps by intense frightfulness to suppress the rising spirit of the people for some time. But I am quite sure that it cannot be suppressed for all time. I have no desire to eliminate the Princes. Friends have complained to me that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru has, however, made such a statement although the Congress has enunciated no such policy. I have not had the opportunity of asking him about the alleged remark. But assuming that he did make the statement, it can only mean that some Princes are so acting as to bring about their own elimination. It is wrong to judge him by newspaper reports. His considered opinion is to be gathered from his statement on behalf of the Standing Committee of the All-India States People’s Conference. Therein he has even warned people against hasty action. He is much too loyal a Congressman to contemplate any action in advance of known Congress policy. Therefore the fear and hatred of the Congress on the part of some Princes are misplaced and are calculated to injure rather than help them. The Congress is not seeking to interfere directly in the affairs of any State. But the Congress does guide the States people. They are part of the Congress organization. They derive strength and inspiration from their connection with the Congress. I do not know how this organic relationship can be avoided. To wish its termination is like an attempt to make children disown their parents. For better or for worse it is well to recognize the fact that just as the vast mass of people of British India look up more to the Congress than to the Government for the removal of their woes, even so do the people of the States look to the Congress for their deliverance. It is under the Congress advice and inspiration that the people of the States say that they want to grow to their full height under the aegis of their respective Princes. I hope, therefore, that the Maharaja Saheb of Patiala and those Princes who hold the opinion attributed to him will revise their views and welcome the movement of their people for liberty to grow to their full height and not regard the reformers in their States as their enemies. It will be well if they will seek Congress aid in the settlement of their people’s demands. But they need not do so, if they distrust Congress friendship. It is enough if they will placate the advanced section of their people by granting substantial reforms. What is worse in my opinion, however, than the alleged threat of the Maharaja is the breach of the promise referred to in my correspondent’s letter. There is no doubt so far as I can see that the promise of withdrawal of the Hidayat of 1988 was made; there is equally no doubt that the promise has been broken. It is a dangerous thing even for a rich and powerful Prince to break his plighted word. Breach of a promise is no less an act of insolvency than a refusal to pay one’s debt. I plead with the Maharaja Saheb to redeem the promise and hope that his counsellors will advise him to do so.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>Reference:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Harijan, 16-9-1939</p>
<p> </p>Partitions and Mahatma Gandhitag:gandhiking.ning.com,2013-10-17:2043530:BlogPost:747462013-10-17T15:11:43.000ZProf. Dr. Yogendra Yadavhttps://gandhiking.ning.com/profile/DrYogendraYadav
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29,…</b></p>
<p><b>Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav</b></p>
<p>Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist</p>
<p>Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India</p>
<p>Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229</p>
<p>E-mail- <a href="mailto:dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net">dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net</a>;</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com">dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com</a> </p>
<p><b>Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India</b></p>
<p><b> </b></p>
<p><b>Partitions and Mahatma Gandhi </b></p>
<p> </p>
<p>As a man of non-violence I cannot forcibly resist the proposed partition if the Muslims of India really insist upon it. But I can never be a willing party to the vivisection. I would employ every non-violent means to prevent it. For it means the undoing of centuries of work done by numberless Hindus and Muslims to live together as one nation. Partition means a patent untruth. My whole soul rebels against the idea that Hinduism and Islam represent two antagonistic cultures and doctrines. To assent to such a doctrine is for me denial of God. For I believe with my whole soul that the God of the Koran is also the God of the Gita, and that we are all, no matter by what name designated, children of the same God. I must rebel against the idea that millions of Indians who were Hindus the other day changed their nationality on adopting Islam as their religion. 1 </p>
<p>The partition proposal has altered the face of the Hindu- Muslim problem. I have called it an untruth. There can be no compromise with it. At the same time I have said that, if the eight crores of Muslims desire it no power on earth can prevent it, notwithstanding opposition, violent or non-violent it cannot come by honourable agreement. That is the political aspect of it, but what about the religious and the moral which are greater than the political? For at the bottom of the cry for partition is the belief that Islam is an exclusive brotherhood, and anti-Hindu. Whether it is against other religions it is not stated. The newspaper cuttings in which partition is preached describe Hindus as practically untouchables. Nothing good can come out of Hindus or Hinduism. To live under Hindu rule is a Sin. Even joint Hindu-Muslim rule is not to be thought of. The cuttings show that Hindu and Muslims are already at war with one another and that they must prepare for the final tussle. Time was when Hindus thought that Muslims were the natural enemies of Hindus. But as is the case with Hinduism, ultimately it comes to terms with the enemy and makes friends with him. The process had not been completed. As if nemesis had overtaken Hinduism, the Muslim League started the same game and taught that there could be no blending of the two cultures. In this connection I have just read a booklet by Shri Atulanand Chakravarti which shows that ever since the contact of Islam with Hinduism there has been an attempt on the part of the best minds of both to see the good points of each other, and to emphasize inherent similarities rather than seeming dissimilarities.</p>
<p>The author has shown Islamic history in India in a favourable light. If he has stated the truth and nothing but the truth, it is a revealing booklet which all Hindus and Muslims may read with profits. He has secured a very favourable and reasoned preface from Sir Shafaat Ahmed Khan and several other Muslim testimonials. If the evidence collected there reflects the true evolution of Islam in India, then the partition propaganda is anti-Islamic. Religion binds man to God and man to man. Does Islam bind Muslim only to Muslim and antagonize the Hindu? Was the message of the Prophet peace only for and between Muslims and war against Hindus or non-Muslims? Are eight crores of Muslims to be fed with this which I can only describe as poison? Those who are instilling this poison into the Muslim mind are rendering the greatest disservice to Islam. I know that it is not Islam. I have lived with and among Muslims not for one day but closely and almost uninterruptedly for twenty years. Not one Muslim taught me that Islam was an anti-Hindu religion. 2 </p>
<p>Of course Hindus and Sikhs will have the same right. I have simply said that there is no other no-violent method of dealing with the problem. If every component part of the nation claims the right of self-determination for itself, there is no one nation and there is no independence. I have already said that Pakistan is such an untruth that it cannot stand. As soon as the authors begin to work it out, they will find that it is not practicable. In any case mine is a personal opinion. What the vast Hindu masses and the others will say or do I do not know. My mission is to work for the unity of all, for the sake of the equal good of all. Hindu-Muslim unity is a morsel by itself. But my friend is on the wrong track when he suggests that unity should be hastened for fear of Muslims raising their demands, Demands against whom? India is as much theirs as anybody else’s. The way to unity lies through just demands once for all, not through ever-increasing demands, whether just or unjust. The demand for partition puts an end to all effort for unity for the time being. I hold that communal understanding is not a pre- requisite to the British doing justice on their part. When they feel that they want to recognize India’s right of self-determination, all the difficulties that they put forth as obstacles in their path will melt away like ice before the sun’s rays. The right of self-determination means the right of determination by every group and ultimately every individual. The demand for a Constituent Assembly presumes that the determinations of the groups and individuals will coincide. Should it happen otherwise and partition become the fashion, either we shall have partition or partitions rather than foreign rule, or we shall continue to wrangle among ourselves and submit to foreign rule, or else have a proper civil war. Anyway the present suspense cannot continue. It has to end one way or the other. I am an optimist. I have every hope that when we come to grips Hindus, Muslims and all others will throw in favour of India which all will claim as their own. 3</p>
<p>I have only given my opinion. If the majority of Hindus or Christians or Sikhs or even Parsis, small though their number is, stubbornly resist the express wish of the duly-elected representatives of eight crores of Muslims, they will do so at the peril of a civil war. This is not a question of majority of minority. If we are to solve our problems non-violently, there is no other way. I say this not because the eight crores happen to be Muslims. I would say the same if the eight crores were any other community. 4 The cry for partition is the logical outcome, but it is also the strongest condemnation, of separate electorates. When we have learnt wisdom we shall cease to think in terms of separate electorates and two nations. I believe in the innate goodness of human nature. I therefore swear by the Constituent Assembly. The Muslim vote will surely decide the issue so far as their special interest is concerned. Arguing communally, therefore, the fear, if there is any, about a Constituent Assembly should surely be on the part of the Hindus. For if the Muslim vote goes in favour of partition, they have either to submit not to one but many partitions or to a civil war. As things are, all satisfy themselves by passing resolutions and seeing their names in print. In practice all of us remain where we are in a state of subjection. A Constituent Assembly is a reality. It will not be a debating or legislative irresponsible body. By registering its final decision it will decide the fate of millions of human beings. You may oppose it. If you are successful in your opposition, there is the dread prospect of anarchy, not an orderly civil war. There seems to me to be no solution of the painful deadlock except through a Constituent Assembly. 5</p>
<p>I wish to give a message to the Muslim brethren. If eight crore Muslims oppose India’s independence, India will never win independence. But I shall admit such opposition only when all adult voters from among the eight crore declare their opposition to independence. But I consider this almost impossible. They may, of course, declare that they want independence without Hindu domination. It is worse than anarchy to partition a poor country like India whose every corner is populated by Hindus and Muslims living side by side. It is like cutting up a living body into pieces. No one will be able to tolerate this plain murder. I do not say this as a Hindu. I say this as a representative of Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and all. I would say to Muslim brethren, ‘Cut me to pieces first and then divide India. You are trying to do something which was not attempted even during the Muslim rule of two hundred years. We shall not allow you to do it.’ Whatever I have said about the Muslims also applies to the Sikhs. If the 30 lakh Sikhs wish to obstruct India’s independence, they are in a position to do so. We shall deal with them also in the non-violent way. Non-violent swaraj cannot be secured without non-violence. I shall work for communal unity. Islam means peace. It does not mean peace to the Muslims only; it means peace to all communities and to the entire world. 6</p>
<p>Does the partition make India a leper country the presence of whose inhabitants must carry heavy penalties including the tickets of leave such as criminals carry? They do not cease to be less offensive because they bear the inoffensive name of passports and permits. I should be prepared to understand the validity of the permit and passport system when the necessity is clearly established. I must refuse to believe that this Agreement is in response to a vital cry from the great Burmese nation with which the people of India never had any quarrel and with which India had enjoyed cultural contact long before the advent of the foreigner from the West. 7 Unfortunately, at the present moment, those Hindus who do not know the use of violence, of deadly weapons, would fain learn the trick, so as to be able to match what they describe as Muslim violence. If peace is ever to come in that manner, through both parties being equally matched in violent weapons, I know that it will not come in my lifetime, and if it came, I should not care to be a witness of it. For it will be an armed peace, to be broken at any moment. Whether those who believe in the two-nation theory can live as friends with those who believe in one nation, I do not know. If the vast majority of Muslims regard themselves as a separate nation having nothing in common with the Hindus and others, no power on earth can compel them to think otherwise. If they want partition of India on that basis, they must have partition, unless the Hindus want to fight against such a division. So far as I can see, preparation for such a fight is going on now on behalf of both parties. 8 </p>
<p>Had Sir Stafford remained detached, he would have conferred with his radical friends in India and secured their approbation before undertaking his very difficult mission. If it be said in answer that he could not very well do so, that is exactly what I mean when I say that, having become part of the machinery, he was bound to fall under its spell and could not do the obvious thing. But it is no use brooding over the past or British mistakes. It is more profitable to look within. The British will take care of themselves, if we will take care of ourselves. Our mistakes or rather defects are many. Why blame the British for our own limitations? Attainment of Independence is impossibility till we have solved the communal tangle. We may not blind ourselves to the naked fact. How to tackle the problem is another question. We will never tackle it so long as either or both parties think that independence will or can come without any solution of the tangle. There are two ways of solving what has almost become insoluble. The one is the royal way of non-violence, and the other of violence. In the first way the formal consent or co-operation of the other party is unnecessary. If there is a dispute between two boys over the ownership of an apple, the non-violent way is to leave the apple for the other party to take, the latter well knowing that it would mean non-co-operation on the surrendering party’s part. The second way is the usual way of violence. There the parties fight with each other till one is for the time being worsted. All interested in freedom have to make the choice. I suppose the choice has already been made by the chief actors. But the rank and file does not know own minds. It is necessary for them, if they can, to think independently and take to non-violent action in terms of unity.</p>
<p>It consists in Hindus and Muslims on the wayside fraternizing with one another, if they believe that joint life is a perfect possibility, nay, a necessity. Whether those who believe in the two-nation theory and communal partition of India can live as friends co-operating with one another I do not know. If the vast majority of Muslims regard themselves as a separate nation having nothing in common with Hindus and others, no power on earth can compel them to think otherwise. And if they want to partition India on that basis, they must have the partition, unless Hindus want to fight against such a division. So far as I can see such a preparation is silently going on behalf of both the parties. That way lays suicide. Each party will probably want British or foreign aid, In that case, good-bye to independence. The fight will then range round not independence but the imaginary apple after the manner of the imaginary boys. I dare not contemplate the actuality. I should not like to be its living witness. I would love to see a joint fight for independence. In the very process of securing independence it is highly likely that we shall have forgotten our quarrels. But if we have not, it will be the only time to quarrel, if we must. 9</p>
<p>As for communal unity, the third party being removed unity will follow as day follows night. Unity will not precede but will succeed freedom. Today we do not even know that the goal of the Congress and the League is one. And you cannot bribe the League to co-operate for independence. Either the League believes that India is as much the home of Muslims as of non-Muslims, or it does not. If it does, it must first free the home from bondage before partitioning it. Today there is nothing to partition. After ridding the home of the foreign occupant, it can demand partition if it wishes and get it by negotiation or force. However, if it does not believe in India being the home of the Muslims, there is no question of negotiations for freeing India from bondage. Rajaji’s plan is, in my opinion, wholly unnatural. He wants to thrust himself on the British power which does not want him, for as the possessor by right of conquest it gets all it wants. In order to thrust himself on the British he gives the League the right of self-determination which every single individual has whether the others recognize it or not. Rajaji does not like partition and hugs the belief that his superfluous recognition of the inherent right will enable him to avoid partition. I advise my correspondent not to worry over our differences. We know and love each other enough to let time correct the error, whether it lies on my side or his. Meanwhile a frank and bold admission of differences and their exact nature makes for healthy education of public opinion. What is needed is avoidance of anger and intolerance, the twin enemies of correct understanding. 10 </p>
<p>It was a test of my patience. I am amazed at my own patience. However, it was a friendly talk. His (Jinnah’s) contempt for your Formula (Rajaji Formula) and his contempt for you is staggering. You rose in my estimation that you could have talked to him for all those hours and that you should have taken the trouble to draw up that formula. He says you have accepted his demand and so should I. I said, “I endorse Rajaji’s Formula and you can call it Pakistan if you like.” He talked of the Lahore Resolution. I said, “I have not studied it and I do not want to talk about it. Let us talk about Rajaji’s Formula and you can point out any flaws that you find there.” In the middle of the talk he came back to the old ghost: “I thought you had come here as a Hindu, as a representative of the Hindu Congress.” I said, “No, I have come here neither as a Hindu nor as a representative of the Congress. I have come here as an individual. You can talk to me as an individual or as the President of the League, whichever way you prefer. If you had agreed with Rajaji and accepted his Formula, you and he would have gone before your respective organizations and pleaded with them to accept it. That is why Rajaji came to you. You would then have placed it before other parties, too, in the same way. Now you and I have to do it.” He said he was the President of the League. Where was the basis for a talk if I was there representing nobody except myself? Who was to deliver the goods? I was the same man as he had found me in 1939. There was no change in me. I almost felt like saying, “Yes, I am the same man and since you think it is no use talking to me, I will go away.” But I resisted the temptation. I told him, “Is it not worth your while to convert an individual? I am the same man no doubt. You can change my views if you can and I will support you whole-heartedly.” “Yes, I know, if I can convert you, you will be my Ali,” he said.</p>
<p>He said I should concede Pakistan and he would go the whole length with me. He would go to jail, he would even face bullets. I said, “I will stand by your side to face them.” “You may not,” he said. “Try me,” I replied. We came back to the Formula. He wants Pakistan now, not after independence. “We will have independence for Pakistan and Hindustan,” he said. “We should come to an agreement and then go to the Government and ask them to accept it, force them to accept our solution.” I said I could never be a party to that. I could never ask the Britishers to impose partition on India. “If you all want to separate, I can’t stop you. I have not got the power to compel you and I would not use it if I had.” He said, “The Muslims want Pakistan. The League represents the Muslims and it wants separation.” I said, “I agree the League is the most powerful Muslim organization. I might even concede that you as its President represent the Muslims of India, but that does not mean that all Muslims want Pakistan. Put it to the vote of all the inhabitants of the area and see.” He said, “Why should you ask non-Muslims?” I said, “You cannot possibly deprive a section of the population of its vote. You must carry them with you, and if you are in the majority why should you be afraid?” I told him of what Kiron Shankar Roy had said to me “If the worst comes to the worst, we in Bengal will all go in Pakistan, but for goodness sake do not partition Bengal. Do not vivisect it.” “If you are in majority,”</p>
<p>I said, “you will have your choice. I know it is a bad thing for you, but if you want it all the same you will have it. But that will be an adjustment between you and me. It cannot occur while the Britishers are here.” He began to cross-examine me on the various clauses of the Formula. I said to him, “If you want clarification of those things, is it not better to have it from the author of the Formula?” “Oh, no”, he did not want that. I said, “What is the use of your cross-examining me?” He recollected himself. “Oh, no, I am not cross-examining you”, and then added: “I have been a lawyer all my life and my manner may have suggested that I was cross-examining you.” I asked him to reduce to writing his objections to the Formula. He was disinclined. “Must I do so?” he asked. “Yes, I would like you to.” He agreed. In the end he said, “I would like to come to an agreement with you.” I answered, “You remember that I have said that we should meet not to separate till we had come to an agreement. He said, yes, he agreed. I suggested, “Should we put that also in our statement?”1 He said, “No, better not. Nevertheless that will be the understanding between us and the cordiality and friendliness of our talk will be reflected in our public utterances, too.” 11</p>
<p>It can be said that the breakdown took place because we could not come to an agreement of the two-nation theory of Quaid-e-Azam’s. As the correspondence will show I wanted to avoid a Central Government. I suggested an authority acceptable to both the parties, but he would insist first on complete partition as between two nations and then an agreement between them as on foreign affairs, etc. He would not agree to anything simultaneous. 12 I have long intended to write to you asking you about the Working Committee resolution on the possible partition of the Punjab. I would like to know the reason behind it. I have to speak about it. I have done so in the absence of full facts with the greatest caution. Kripalani said in answer to a question in Madras that it was possible that the principle might be applied to Bengal also. I was asked by a Muslim Leaguer of note if it was applicable to the Muslim-majority provinces, why it should not be so to a Congress majority province like Bihar. I think I did not know the reason behind the Working Committee’s resolution, nor had I the opportunity. I could only give my own view which was against any partition based on communal grounds and the two-nation theory. Anything was possible by compulsion. But willing consent required an appeal to reason and heart. Compulsion or show of it had no place in voluntariness. 13</p>
<p>My objective opinion is that the British should leave without worrying about us. And this is in their interest as well. America and England are, no doubt, big nations advanced and ambitious, but in comparison with the mute millions of Asia and Africa, their eminence is just like dust. Until they wash clean the blot on their faces they have no right to talk big. And equally true is the fact that people are no longer going to be fooled by their tall talk. It will be in their interest to earn the blessings of the millions of Africa and Asia by giving them the human right of freedom. I admit there will be chaos once the British leave India. Even at present, strife is very much in evidence everywhere. But I believe if they grant the country its independence in all sincerity and in an orderly manner, all the quarrels will come to an end and the leaders of all the parties will be able to come together and form a stable government. But I do not know whether it is going to happen or not, because I am aware of the fact that there is a large section in favour of the vivisection of India. Who cares for the nation today? Everyone wants to realize his ambition and grab power by creating dissensions. This is the situation obtaining today. 14</p>
<p>However, I am an optimist. I therefore think that the sincerity with which the British relinquish power will determine how well organized the new Government will be. And the Congress, the Muslim League and the States will be well represented in it. It hurts me to talk about the partition of the country. What will be the plight of a body if it is dismembered? Similarly, dismemberment of a prosperous country like India will utterly ruin the people. Today it is the country which is being divided, tomorrow it may be Kashmir and the day after it may be the State of Junagadh in the remote corner of Kathiawar. How is it all possible? Let the whole of India be handed over to the League. I would not mind it. That is why I believe that if, after the exit of the British power, the people of India are not awakened; India will become the battle-ground for the Princes to fight among themselves and the big ones among them will try to gain sovereignty by swallowing up the smaller ones. My non-violence will not destroy anyone, it will only purify. I therefore tell the Princes that they need not have any fears because the Congress has always been in favour of coming to terms with them. The Congress has adopted the policy of non-violence. The Princes have to delegate power to the people’s representatives of their own accord. Then the Congress will treat them with respect. We do not want to do away with the Princes After all; they are also citizens of India, aren’t they? The Princes have only to reform themselves and become servants of their subjects. The Congress will be on their side to help them. Unless they mend their ways they will be inviting their own doom, The only alternative to Pakistan in undivided India.</p>
<p>There is no via media. Once you accept the principle of partition in respect of any province, you get into a sea of difficulties. By holding fast to the ideal of undivided India, you steer clear of all difficulties. Then why does not Congress give a clear lead, because it feels helpless. It is not in favour of division. But it says, and with perfect logic, that if Pakistan is to be conceded, justice should be done to non-Muslim majority areas of Bengal and the Punjab, and to the Sikhs, and these provinces should be partitioned on the same principle on which the Muslim League demands the partition of India. I do not agree with that view. In my opinion, the Congress should in no circumstance be party to partition. We should tell the British to quit unconditionally. If they do not listen and partition the country in spite of us, we shall know what to do. Why should we make ourselves accessory to what we hold to be evil? In other words, you think that the British power need not stay on in India for another thirteen months? Quite so. If their intention is perfectly honest, they should not bother as to what would happen to the country after them. The country is quite capable of taking care of itself. They can quit with a clear conscience. The Congress leaders have said that the British cannot go away without bringing about a settlement between the Congress and the League.</p>
<p>Supposing no agreement can be arrived at between the congress and the League even after thirteen months, would that be a ‘reason’ for them to stay on in India even after that date? I therefore say: Let them quit now, otherwise their going even after thirteen months will be problematical. But if they go to whom are they to hand over power? They can hand over power either to the Muslim League or to the Congress, I do not mind which. If they hand it over to the Congress, the Congress will come to a just settlement with the League. But even if they make it over to the League, the Congress has nothing to fear. Only, let the transfer of power be complete and unqualified. The way they do it will provide a test of their sincerity and honesty. So far the British have said that they had yielded to Congress nonviolence; it was because of the non-violent struggle launched by the Congress that the Cabinet Mission was sent and the British Government made its famous declaration to withdraw from India. If this is really so, they should have no difficulty in handing over power to the Congress. But so far as I, for one, am concerned, they are free to ignore the Congress and hand over power to the League. They will then have bowed before the power of violence. For that is what the League swears by. We shall then pit our non-violence even against the League’s violence. Non-violence was meant not to give fight to the British only. It is ubiquitous in its application and scope. We shall settle with the League by offering our innocent blood to be spilt without spilling any and we will succeed. Your position is perfectly logical and consistent. You said in 1942 that the British power should withdraw immediately and unconditionally.</p>
<p>You have not changed. We are wholly with you there. But a considerable section among Congressmen today has begun to think in terms of collaboration with the British power. You are right. I have not changed. I would change only if I saw my mistake. But I see none. On the contrary, with every fresh experience I am becoming firmer and firmer in my views. What is your attitude on the States question? Irrespective of the Congress policy, Gandhiji told them, he had hitherto been in favour of the preservation of the States. But his attitude in that regard had stiffened of late. The British had allowed the States to exist on their sufferance. In certain matters they kept them completely under their thumb while they gave them free rein in others to serve their selfish ends. They were in honour bound to settle the question of the States before leaving. It would be a gross betrayal to leave that question to be decided after independence. For instance, could the Nizam be free to follow a policy antagonistic to India, or to set up ordnance factories or factories for the manufacture of heavy armour within his dominion? We do not wish the destruction of the Princes. Let them by all means live, but only as servants of their people. If the British are not insincere, they should withdraw from the whole of India including the States, leaving the map of India unchanged. What is our duty? If you agree with my analysis, you and those over whom you have influence should join me in preparing the atmosphere for nonviolence in the country. I would love to have you with me in that. The whole country is with you, in a sense, yes. But I suppose, “the whole country” includes you also. Now tell me how many of you are with me? Is Aruna with me? Are Ashok and Achyut with me? No, you are not.</p>
<p>The Congress is not. So I am left to plough my lonely furrow and I am content to do so. If you decide to launch forth with me, I shall take it to mean that you have pledged yourselves to die without killing, abjured the doctrine that the end justifies the means. I have admiration for what Jayaprakash, Aruna, Achyut and others did in 1942. They thought nothing of playing with their lives. I have paid tribute to their fearlessness and courage. But you will now have to cultivate the higher courage which dying without killing calls for. In that campaign sabotage can have no place. You may not agree but it is my conviction that if the Bihar masses had not had the lesson which they had at your hands in 1942, the excesses which Bihar witnessed last year would never have occurred. To me it is little consolation that those who sponsored the sabotage programme did not themselves directly participates in violence. They should have known that once the evil spirit of violence is unleashed, by its inherent nature it cannot be checked or even kept within any prescribed limits. All violence inevitably tends to run to excess. Therefore, I repeat, and I shall continue to repeat with my last breath, that it is for us to inculcate amongst the people the spirit of innocent suffering and self-sacrifice only without any evasion into or truck with its opposite.</p>
<p>I am proceeding to Calcutta. Some people are trying to dissuade me from going there. They say things there are worse even than in Noakhali, that there I shall be faced by ruffians who understand nothing. I tell them that are the very reason why I want to go there. If in the course of it death comes, I shall welcome it. What better use can there be for this body that has already weathered seventy-eight winters? My death will immediately stop the fratricide. If you cast in your lot with me, I shall call every one of you, top-rankers, to defy death with me. I own no party. But you will then be my party. Long before you were born I was a socialist. You are arm-chair Socialists. Your ideal is to provide a motor-car and a bungalow to everybody in India. Till that happens, you will continue to live as at present, without sacrificing any of your comforts. I, on the other hand, believe in putting myself on a level with the poorest and the least here and now. My socialism is not of today. I began to live socialism while I was still in South Africa. Even then many laborite socialists, so called, used to come to me with their bedraggled ties of dirty red to invite me to join their ranks. But they remained to join mine instead for they saw that true socialism can be based only on non-violence. If you tell me that non-violence is your ultimate goal, but in order to realize it you have to make use of violent means, because in this matter-of-fact world there is no other way, I shall say you are labouring under a great delusion. Cannot even Jinnah, that way, claim to be a votary of non-violence, for in Islam it is clearly laid down that anyone who oppresses the weak is no Muslim? But see where this has taken historical Islam. Once you open the flood-gates of violence, you cannot control it. You will be borne away before its onrushing tide. I have, therefore, one and only one thing to say to you: Carry to its ultimate conclusion the fearlessness which characterized you in 1942. Now is the time and the hour. If you let it slip away, it may never return. By learning the art of dying without killing you can mould India’s destiny. There is no other way. Can we sum up your position by saying that the British should quite immediately and unconditionally leaving India to God? You may put it that way. And if in the result there is chaos that should not frighten us. We shall emerge from the ordeal all the stronger. 15</p>
<p>If I can say anything on behalf of Muslims or the Indian Union, it is only this, that everyone should have justice. If this is ensured then there will be nothing more left to say and the pain of partition will have been forgotten. People say that the work of partition is finished, that the army has been divided, the navy has been divided. I say we have been weakened. Foreigners will say India has no navy. They will in their own interest align themselves with one or the other Dominion and thus this division of the army will become a cause of civil war. But I hope that Pakistan and India will be friends that they will be just to their minorities. Even if we have not learnt the lesson of ahimsa, we should at least from our thirty years of experience learn the lesson that we shall never again become slaves irrespective of whether we achieve this through violence or non-violence. I do not say that it should be only through non-violence. I have been saying this since I was in Bihar. People ask for guns and swords. I say, why do you want these weapons? Proclaim that you will never bow down. I said the same in Noakhali. If we can show that we have learnt this lesson after thirty years of experience, it will not matter whether people are violent or non-violent. If they come and ask me, I shall still say that they must follow only non-violence. If a single individual has to defy the world he can do so only through non-violence. Where there is non-violence, there is God. The sword breaks before it. 16</p>
<p>The partition of India does not and should not mean the partition of the Congress. The partition of India into two sovereign States does not mean that India is two nations. Supposing one or more princely States kept out of the Union, would the Congress turn their representatives out of the Congress? Would the States’ people not expect it to take even greater interest in their welfare? Of course the problems that this will create will be even more complicated and some of them will be more difficult of solution, but there still will be no reason for the Congress to be broken up into two. It will require greater political acumen, greater depth of thought and much more patient deliberation and decision. We must not anticipate incapacitating difficulties. 17 Our military and police also are in the same position as the Press. The military and the police were divided at the time of the Partition. I admit that it was not their doing. It just happened like that. The military here is composed of Hindus and Sikhs. The Muslim soldiers have gone over to Pakistan. If the Hindu and Sikh soldiers and police start thinking that because they themselves are Hindus and Sikhs they will only defend the Hindus and Sikhs and try to cover up the crimes committed by them and refuse to protect the Muslims because they are not meant to protect them, we shall be nowhere. Nor would it be any good if the Muslim army and the police started killing the Hindus saying it was not their business to protect the Hindus. The Government has the military and the police. But I need neither the military nor the police. I would ask the people to become the military and the police for us. If the Hindus kill the Muslims here they have got to be saved. We must not give up. I shall not step aside even if I have to lay down my life. Such will be my Government. I am not talking in the air. I am telling you what is right.</p>
<p>I would like to say the same thing to the army and the police which belong to the Government. Their primary duty is to protect the handful of Muslims living here. If they are attacked by the Hindus and Sikhs, they should come to their rescue. They should protect them even at the risk of their own lives. Then only can they be called true soldiers and policemen. The freedom achieved by India is indeed a remarkable phenomenon. The whole world says and I say it too that no government has ever transferred power to the people of any other country in this way. We have attained our independence without any fighting and bloodshed. Hence our military and police should not be there to fill their pockets. They should be content with what they are getting. They should not think in terms of extravagant meals complete with sweets. A soldier must satisfy his hunger with whatever meagre meal he may be getting and perform his duty. But if he starts thinking about other people’s children going to schools and colleges, and about their cars and cycles and decides to resort to corrupt means to get similar things for himself, he will cease to be a true servant. That is why I say that a true soldier and a true policeman is the one who is satisfied with whatever food he gets and does his duty without any religious bias. If he is a Hindu he should never think of harming the Muslims. It is a different thing to apprehend a Muslim and have him punished if he is guilty of a crime. But should an innocent Muslim be punished here because the Muslims elsewhere are guilty of grave crimes?</p>
<p>If a Hindu harms a Muslim, it is the duty of a policeman to protect the Muslim. I must say that a policeman who acts in this manner is true to the Indian salt. If our military and police do not behave thus, they are not true to the salt of their country. I will say the same thing about the military and the police in Pakistan. But I can do nothing about the situation there. To whom should I address my words? But I have no doubt that if things happen here as I have suggested, similar developments are bound to take place there. Today the people have lost their balance. They say, when their own brethren are being ill-treated in Pakistan, why should they not retaliate here? But it is not human to say such a thing. Hence so long as I am alive I shall proclaim at the top of my voice that we must keep ourselves pure, we must be good, our newspapers and our military and police should remain good. Without this our Government cannot function and we shall be ruined. We must remain civilized, whatever happens in Pakistan. Even if they turn mad, we have to remain good. So, under any circumstances, we have to remain civilized. Do at least this much. If you do not listen to me, let me tell you that we are all going to be ruined. 18 </p>
<p>One consequence of partition is that the League cannot continue as a political organization. The Hindu Mahasabha, the Sikh Sabha and the Parsee Sabha similarly cannot continue as political bodies. They may well stay as religious bodies. Their task then will be internal reform of society, to search for things of religious value and to act on them. Then the atmosphere will become free of poison and these organizations will rival each other in doing well. They will have amity for each other and they will help the Government. Their political ambitions can be realized through the Congress alone whether they are in the Congress or not. If the Congress thinks only of those who are in the Congress it will become very narrow in its sphere of service. Even today there are very few people in the Congress. If no other organization can rival the Congress it is because the Congress has been trying to represent the whole of India, because it has dedicated itself to the service of the poorest and the lowliest. 19</p>
<p> </p>
<p><b>References:</b></p>
<p> </p>
<ol>
<li>Harijan, 13-4-1940</li>
<li>Harijan, 4-5-1940 </li>
<li>Harijan, 18-5-1940</li>
<li>Harijan, 25-5-1940</li>
<li>Harijan, 29-6-1940 </li>
<li>Harijan Sevak, 12-10-1940</li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 25-8-1941</li>
<li>The Bombay Chronicle, 25-4-1942</li>
<li>Harijan, 19-4-1942 </li>
<li>Harijan, 7-6-1942 </li>
<li>Mahatma Gandhi—The Last Phase, Vol. I, Book I, pp. 84-6 </li>
<li>The Hindu, 10-4-1945</li>
<li>Mahatma Gandhi — The Last Phase, Vol. II, pp. 34-5 </li>
<li>Biharni Komi Agman, pp. 167-8. </li>
<li>Mahatma Gandhi—The Last Phase, Vol. II, pp. 161-5 </li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan–I, pp. 243-6 </li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan–I, pp. 286-8</li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan—I, pp. 391-8 </li>
<li>Prarthana Pravachan—II pp. 229-32 </li>
</ol>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>