Innovation and Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

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

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]

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

 

 

Innovation and Mahatma Gandhi 

 

 

I notice that the Government presumes the existence of a rule for departing from which no sufficient reasons appear to them to have been shown. The fact is the rule complained against is an innovation on the established practice for the introduction of which the community immediately concerned with it has been furnished with no reasons and the source of which it still does not know.  I venture to think that the innovation is causing an amount of inconvenience the measure of which the Government does not realize. 1 The settlement of this application, however, in my humble opinion, does not dispose of the general question as to the innovation referred to in my letter of the 30th ultimo. 2 

Then two affidavits were insisted upon, and proof that the applicant for the certificate had been resident in the Colony at least two years; and the latest innovation is that either the person wishing to enter the Colony must himself apply for a certificate of domicile, or persons of known respectability should tender, under oath, proof of domicile. Thus, it will be seen that the cordon of restriction has grown tighter with the lapse of time. The practical effect of the working of all this is that all but the well-to-do are shut out of the Colony. As to this, it is contended for the Government that it would be no hardship for the persons requiring certificates of domicile to make the application under their own signatures, as they could always take them out before leaving the Colony. Such an argument would be perfectly sound if the innovation were to affect only those that may hereafter leave the Colony. But it is positively harmful for those that are outside the Colony. A person in India requiring such a certificate may have to wait one year before he could get it. 3 

There has been established what is known as the Department of Asiatic Affairs which, however well-intentioned its institution may have been, has been, in practice, an innovation on the old system very much to our disadvantage. When it was inaugurated, we respectfully protested; but it was understood that it was only a temporary department, to be withdrawn on regular business being resumed. Under the old regime, there was no separate department with only Indian matters to attend to. 4 It may also be stated that the restriction of Indian immigration is an innovation on the old practice. Whatever the lows of the old regime were, there was absolutely no check on the entry of British Indians, nor was the clause regarding registration strictly enforced. And yet we find His Excellency assuring Mr. Chamberlain that the old laws are not being as strictly enforced as before! 5

We cannot help remarking that this is an innovation which was hardly necessary. It would have been far better if the freedom of the Indian had been unrestricted with reference to any complaints he might have to make. No doubt there would be a few frivolous complaints, but we think it is better to overlook them than that those who have confide complaints should have any difficulties placed in their way. 6 As to the second innovation, hitherto orphans have been allowed to join their guardians. Under the new rule, such children will be prevented from entering the Transvaal. My Association need hardly point out that such a rule cannot but cause very great hardship. As regards the third innovation, if the Resident Magistrates are to carry on investigations, it will cause almost interminable delay. There are refugees whose applications have been pending even for the last nine months, and if all such applications are to be referred to Resident Magistrates in the various districts, enormous delay will be caused. Moreover, there will be no continuity of procedure as to the evidence to be taken, if each town is treated separately. 7 

This is an innovation which has absolutely no justification for it. The anti-Asiatic party has never said one word regarding the influx of Indian women. There are, as is well known, very few Indian women in the Transvaal, and they do not in any way compete in trade. Their work is confined solely to looking after their households. We must, therefore, frankly confess that we were not prepared for the reply that Lord Selborne has given regarding separate permits for wives. Is it a new discovery that “all persons in the Transvaal, irrespective of age or sex, are required under the Peace Preservation Ordinance to obtain permits”? If it is not, why have Indian women not been called upon hitherto to produce any permits? Why have Indian children been exempted until recently from having to carry any permits? 8

If the Imperial Government is now going to say that the self-governing Colonies have a perfect right to exclude whom they will, then that is an innovation in Colonial policy hitherto followed. You know that, in 1897, the late Mr. Escombe actually submitted to Mr. Chamberlain a draft law to exclude Asiatics from this Colony, and Mr. Chamberlain then said that he would not pass it, and suggested that any exclusion law should not be racial, but should be of a general character That suggestion was adopted, and since then the Natal Act has been copied everywhere throughout the Colonies. But, with regard to what members of the Imperial Ministry have said as to the rights of the Colonies to exclusion of whom they will, I don’t think you will find any definite pronouncement. 9 Sub-Sections (f)1 and (g)2 of Section 5 are a complete innovation, and, in my opinion, subversive of principles of justice. That a man should prove his domicile to the satisfaction of an Immigration Officer, who may not have a legal training or a judicial mind, seems utterly absurd, nor can I see the slightest reason why he should be the arbiter to decide as to whether a particular woman, whom I claim to be my wife, and a particular child whom I claim to be mine are my wife and child or not. This innovation disturbs the existing legal position. 10 

The women of Calcutta have obstructed the gentlemen of Calcutta by trying to sell khadi and a telegram in the newspapers has announced that they have been consequently arrested. The company includes the devoted partner of the President elect, his widowed sister and his niece. I had hoped that in the initial stages, at any rate, women would be spared the honour of going to jail. They were not to become aggressive civil resisters. But the Bengal Government, in their impartial zeal to make no distinction even of sex, has conferred the honour upon three women of Calcutta. I hope that the whole country will welcome this innovation. 11Our national schools and colleges have to perform a double task. They have to work at the charkha themselves and also to create a favourable atmosphere for it in society. In a period of transition, national education has to be of this kind. Society is drawn to any innovation that helps to sustain it. To my mind, the greatest task which our national institutions or Vidyapith have to fulfil in India is to formulate the science of the charkha and to make it interesting. 12

It is for you to suggest improvements in the present methods of your work. It should be done in the cleanest and most hygienic way. I know it. I have done it in South African jails. Baskets are no good for the disposal of the night-soil. You should have strong buckets to be carried by a couple of men. You are so conservative in your ways that you may not like the innovation but I suggest to you that buckets are far more convenient, clean and effective. If you like my suggestion, I am prepared to broach the matter to the local Municipal Councillors. You want public baths. I am glad you do, but I may warn you that some of your people have not been ready to avail themselves of the facilities provided in other places. You must bestir yourselves and strengthen the hands of those who are working for your welfare. 13 I feel sure that partition of the Punjab and Bengal is wrong in every case and a needless irritant for the League. This as well as all innovation can come after the British withdrawal, not before, except always for mutual agreement. Whilst the British power is functioning in India, it must be held principally responsible for the preservation of peace in the country. That machine seems to be cracking under the existing strain which is caused by the raising of various hopes that cannot or must not be fulfilled. These have no place during the remaining thirteen months. This period can be most profitably shortened if the minds of all were focused on the sole task of withdrawal. You and you alone can do it to the exclusion of all other activity so far as the British occupation is concerned. 14 There are two ways in which you can cure my unhappiness. One is immediately to write down a confession and read it out this very day. The other is henceforth to make your life one with God. Then there can be no frivolous laughter. Read out the confession at the public prayer meeting. That will cleanse the heart. The confession should not be forced, nor should it be made out of shame. A public confession is my own innovation. 15

 

References:

 

1. Letter to Colonial Secretary, August 30, 1900
2. Letter to Colonial Secretary, September 3, 1900
3. Notes on the present position of the British Indians in South Africa, Post September 3, 1900
4. Address to Chamberlain, January 7, 1903
5. Indian Opinion, 21-1-1904  
6. Indian Opinion, 4-6-1904
7. Letter to Colonial Secretary, February 9, 1906
8. Indian Opinion, 12-5-1906
9. The Natal Mercury, 6-1-1909
10. Letter to E. F. C. Lane, January 29, 1912
11. Young India, 15-12-1921
12. Navajivan, 21-4-1929 
13. Harijan, 29-7-1933
14. Letter to Lord to Mountbatten, May 8, 1947
15. Letter to Manu Gandhi, September 22, 1947