'Village indvistries, such as hand-spinning, have been destroyed, leaving the peasantry idle for at least four months in the year, and dulling their intellect for want of handicrafts; and nothing has been substituted, as in other countries, for the crafts thus destroyed.

In the same letter which was a lengthy document, the Mahatma tried to explain to the Viceroy why he was being forced to resort to civil disobedience. Making it clear that the letter was not intended as a threat but was a simple and sacred duty peremptory on a civil resister, the Mahatma wrote: 'In common with many of my countrymen I had hugged the fond hope that the proposed Round Table Conference might furnish a solution. But when you said plainly that you could not give any assurance that you or the British Cabinet would pledge yourselves to support a scheme of full dominion status, the Round Table Conference could not possibly furnish the solution for which vocal India is consciously, and the dumb millions are unconsciously, thirsting. Needless to say there never was any question of Parliament's verdict being anticipated. Instances are not wanting, of the British Cabinet, in anticipation of the Parliamentary verdict, having pledged itself to a particular policy. The Delhi interview having miscarried, there was no option for Pandit Motilal Nehru and myself but to take steps to carry out the solemn resolution of the Congress arrived at in Calcutta at its session in 1928.' In order to keep the door open for a compromise, in spite of the launching of the civil-disobedience campaign, the Mahatma continued: 'But the Resolution of independence should cause no alarm if the word Dominion Status mentioned in your announcement had been used in its accepted sense. For has it not been admitted by responsible British statesmen that Dominion Status is virtual independence?'

To this letter — or ultimatum — of Mahatma Gandhi, the Viceroy sent a brief reply regretting that Mr. Gandhi intended to contravene the law. So, true to his announced programme, the Mahatma commenced his three weeks' march to Dandi, the sea-coast village, where the disobedience of the Salt Law was to begin. At that time the Government were sceptical about the effect that the march would produce and they were not inclined to take hinf seriously. The Anglo-Indian papers began to write taunting articles and the Statesman of Calcutta in a leading article wrote to the effect that the Mahatma could go on boiling sea-water till Dominion Status was attained. This scepticism was also shared by a section of Congressmen. Nevertheless, the march to Dandi was an event of historical importance which will rank on the same level with Napoleon's march to Paris on his return from Elba or Mussolini's march to Rome when he wanted to seize political power. Fortunately for the Mahatma, he had a wonderfully good Press within India and outside. In India, for days and days, every detail connected with the march found the widest publicity. The march on foot enabled him to rouse the entire countryside through which he passed and it also gave him time to work up the feelings of the country as a whole. If, on the other hand, he had taken the train to Delhi from Ahmedabad, arriving there the next day, he would neither have been able to rouse the people of Gujerat, nor would he have had enough time to work up the entire nation. While the Mahatma was marching from village to village, an intense propaganda was carried on in the neighbourhood asking the people to give up service under the Crown and to prepare for the non-payment of taxes, which would be started before long. At every step the Mahatma received an unexpectedly warm welcome and that made the Government realise that the coming campaign would be a much more serious affair than they had thought at first.

On April 6th, after a purificatory bath in the sea, the Mahatma started civil disobedience by appropriating pieces of salt lying on the beach. Almost simultaneously, illegal salt manufacture was begun all over the country. Where natural conditions precluded any such campaign, disobedience of other laws was attempted. In Calcutta, for instance, the Mayor, the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta, started disobedience of the Law of Sedition by openly reading seditious literature in a public meeting. Boycott of foreign cloth was begun on an extensive scale and along with that, another campaign grew up for the boycott of British goods of all sorts. There was also an intensive campaign for the boycott of liquor and of intoxicating drugs. To enforce the boycott, picketing by Congress volunteers was organised all over India. A few weeks after the march began, the Mahatma addressed a special appeal to the women of India (Young India, April 10th, 1930). Therein he said: 'The impatience of some sisters to join the good fight is to me a healthy sign. ... In this non-violent warfare, their contribution should be much greater than men's. To call women the weaker sex is a libel … If by strength is meant moral power, then woman is immeasurably man's superior.' Proceeding, the Mahatma appealed to them to take up the picketing of liquor shops and foreign-cloth shops. The prohibition of intoxicating drugs and drinks would reduce the Government revenue by 250 millions of rupees (Rs. 13½ = £1 roughly) — while the boycott of foreign cloth would stop an annual drain of nearly 600 million of rupees. He further appealed to women to devote their spare hours to spinning with a view to stimulating the production of Khadi. In conclusion he said: 'But there is no excitement and adventure in the liquor and foreign-cloth picketing, some sisters may retort. Well, if they will put their whole heart into this agitation, they will find more than enough excitement and adventure. Before they have done with the agitation, they might even find themselves in prison. It is not improbable that they may be insulted and even injured bodily. To suffer such insult and injury would be their pride. Such suffering, if it comes to them, will hasten the end.'

The appeal was transmitted all over the country and it had a magic effect. Even the women of the most orthodox and aristocratic families were moved. (1) Everywhere women came out in their thousands to carry out the Congress mandate. Not only the Government but the people of the country as well, were taken by surprise at the manifestation. Temperance workers like Miss Mary Campbell, (2) who had worked for forty years in India, were amazed at the phenomenon. Well might foreign observers like Mr. H. N. Brailsford and Mr. George Slocombe say that if the civil-disobedience campaign had accomplished nothing else but the emancipation of the women of India, it would have fully justified itself. The energy and enthusiasm of the women stirred the men to greater effort and sacrifice. Within three weeks of the commencement of the campaign, the Government resolved to strike. On April 27th, the first emergency ordinance was promulgated called the Press Ordinance, which brought the papers under the full control of the officials. Most of the Nationalist papers ceased publication for a long period as a protest. Other ordinances followed, aiming at the suppression of the different activities of the Congress. Congress organisations were declared unlawful all over the country and an ordinance was issued, enabling the Government to confiscate the property belonging to them. The result of these ordinances was that the Congress could no longer function openly and many of its activities, like raising funds, recruiting volunteers, etc., had to be conducted in an underground manner. Nevertheless, the activities of the Congress instead of being paralysed by the ordinances, were further stimulated. As meetings and processions were banned everywhere, they continued to be held in defiance of the official ban. Newspapers, bulletins, leaflets were printed and distributed by Congress agencies in spite of official prohibition. In some places as in Bombay, Congress propaganda was conducted by means of the radio and the police were not able to find out from where the messages were being transmitted.

Faced by a non-violent rebellion, the Government first proceeded to make arrests. But that was of no avail. According to official figures, (3) more than sixty thousand — civil resisters were cast jn prison. Special prisons had to be improvised at short notice but these were filled up in no time. Besides the activities described above, which were more or less common to the whole of India, there were special activitieslin certain provinces. For instance, in the Central Provinces and a part of the Bombay Presidency, disobedience of forest laws was started and people began to cut down timber at will. In Gujerat, the United Provinces and certain districts of Bengal, particularly Midnapore District, non-payment of taxes and of land revenue was launched. In the North-West Frontier Province, thanks to the efforts of Khan Abdul Qhaffar Khan, better known as Frontier Gandhi, an intensive anti-Government movement was on foot, including the non-payment of taxes. In spite of the warlike traditions of the people there, the movement was entirely non-violent. The Frontier Gandhi had organised a corps of volunteers dressed in red uniform who were called 'Khodai-Khidmadgar' or 'Servants of God'. The red-shirt volunteers were an eye-sore to the Government, because their campaign was affecting the loyalty of the people who had formerly contributed some of the finest regiments to the Indian Army. Moreover, because of the strategic position of the Frontier Province, a political movement in that part of the country was exceedingly unwelcome to the Government.

As soon as the Government realised the serious proportions which the campaign had assumed, they became entirely ruthless and brutal in their attempts at suppression. It is not possible to describe the atrocities committed by the forces of the Crown — including both the police, and the military — in this connection. It is difficult to say which province suffered most, for each province had its tale of woe. In Bengal, the Midnapore District suffered most and the sufferings of the people gave birth to a terrorist movement for organising reprisals against officials. Parts of the United Provinces where the no-rent campaign was very strong, also suffered badly. In Gujerat, when the sufferings of the peasantry became unbearable, they left their homes and migrated to the neighbouring state of Baroda. Indiscriminate and brutal use of force, attack on women and wanton destruction of property — constituted some of the features of the 'illegal' measures adopted by agents of the Crown towards a people who had, on the whole, remained strictly non-violent. The usual method of attacking Satyagrahis and unarmed citizens, including women, was with the help of powerful sticks, which being iron-shod or covered with leather, could split human skulls with ease. (4) Attacks were made on helpless Satyagrahi prisoners as well. (5) Where these were not sufficient for striking terror, shooting was occasionally resorted to. In most provinces such shooting incidents occurred occasionally, but the most diabolical incident took place at Peshawar (the capital of the North-West Frontier Province) on April 23rd, where the number of people shot and killed on one day went up to several hundred. The facts are roughly these. There was a peaceful demonstration following the arrests of some local leaders. The authorities lost their heads and sent some armoured cars to disperse the crowd that was by that time moving homewards. The armoured cars, full of soldiers, rushed full tilt into the crowd without warning from behind, killing three people on the spot and wounding a large number. Thereupon the crowd is reported to have set fire to the cars. Soldiers were at once rushed to the spot and ordered to open fire. But the crowd did not run away; hundreds of them stood their ground and faced the bullets. When the facts became known, the public demanded an inquiry which the Government refused. Then the Working Committee of the Congress appointed a Committee with Mr. Vithalbhai Patel (who by then had resigned the Presidentship of the Assembly) as Chairman to inquire into and report on the facts. This Committee was not allowed to proceed to the Frontier Province. It had therefore to assemble in Punjab at a place nearest to the Frontier Province and collect evidence there. As soon as the report of the Committee was published, it was banned by the Government. Nevertheless, through the efforts of Congress organisations, wide publicity was given to it.

In most of the provinces where atrocities were perpetrated, local committees were appointed by the public to inquire into and report on those incidents. To publish those reports would require a big volume and would be outside the scope of this book. It would not, however, be out of place to quote some lines from the second letter (7) addressed by the Mahatma to the Viceroy early in May on the eve of his arrest, which was published in Young India on May 8th, 1930.

'I had hoped that the Government would fight the civil resisters in a civilised manner. I could have had nothing to say if in dealing with the civil resisters the Government had satisfied itself with applying the ordinary process of law. Instead, whilst the known leaders have been dealt with more or less according to the legal formality, the rank and file have been often savagely and in some cases, even indecently assaulted. Had these been isolated cases, they might have been overlooked. But accounts have come to me from Bengal, Bihar, Utkal, the United Provinces, Delhi and Bombay, confirming the experiences of Gujerat, of which I have ample evidence at my disposal. In Karachi, Peshawar and Madras the firing would appear to have been unprovoked and unnecessary. Bones have been broken, private parts have been squeezed, for the purpose of making volunteers give up salt which is valueless to the Government but precious to the volunteers. At Mathura an Assistant Magistrate is said to have snatched the National flag from a ten-year-old boy. The crowd that demanded restoration of the flag, thus illegally seized, is reported to have been mercilessly beaten back. That the flag was subsequently restored, betrayed a guilty conscience. In Bengal, there seem to have been only a few prosecutions and assaults about salt, but unthinkable cruelties are said to have been practised in the act of snatching flags from volunteers. Paddy fields are reported to have been burnt, eatables forcibly taken. A vegetable market in Gujerat has been raided because the dealers would not sell vegetables to officials. These acts have taken place in front of crowds who have submitted without retaliation in pursuance of the Congress mandate. Yet this is only the fifth week of the struggle!'