| |
|
 |
Our aim is to create an online archive of all information related to Subhas Chandra Bose.
If you have any unpublished document, photograph or audio-visual material, or even out of print books/magazines,we request you to share it with us, so that we can share it with everyone through this site.
|
|
|
| |
 |
| |
| Copyright Information |
| |
| MN believes that all of Netaji's works are national property, and information on him should be easily available at the lowest cost, if not for free. You are free to use any material from this site with proper acknowledgement. At the same time, MN respects the copyright of authors of original works and would not intentionally violate their copyright or any part of the Indian Copyright Act. If you think you have noticed any infringement, please do let us know. |
|
| |
|
|
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN |
THE BENGAL SITUATION
|
In dealing with the events between 1920 and 1934 it has not been possible to do justice to all aspects of the Indian struggle. On analysing, we find several streams of activity. There is the main stream — the political movement, which is under the leadership of the Indian National Congress. Then there is a subsidiary stream — the workers' movement under the leadership of the All-India Trade Union Congress. There is also an independent movement of the peasantry in the different provinces, which has not yet emerged as a centralised all-India movement. Besides other subsidiary movements like the women's movement, the youth movement and the students' movement, there is one other movement quite independent of the Congress, which has been a serious problem to the Government. This is the revolutionary movement. This movement has had its ramifications all over India, more or less, but one could say that on the whole it has found greater support in Upper India and that comparatively speaking, Bengal is the stronghold of this movement. Up till now no serious attempt has ever been made to understand the psychology behind the movement. An important officer of the Government, Lieut.-Col. Berkeley-Hill, I.M.S. a well-known psychiatrist, who has been for years in charge of a mental hospital in India, once suggested to the Government that they should attempt a systematic psychological study of the problem, but his advice was not taken. In the present circumstances of the country it is extremely risky for an honest Indian to volunteer an explanation. He would at once be accused of sympathy with the movement and would be liable to be put in prison without trial. Therefore, when Indians do attempt to throw light on this problem, they usually make silly statements with the sole object of pleasing the rulers. For instance, it is customary for people to say that the revolutionary movement is the result of unemployment among middle-class youths.
|
At the outset it should be pointed out that the revolutionary movement is not an anarchist movement, nor is it merely a terrorist movement. The revolutionaries do not aim at creating anarchy or chaos. While it is a fact that they do occasionally resort to terrorism, their ultimate object is not terrorism but revolution and the purpose of the revolution is to install a National Government. Though the earliest revolutionaries studied something about revolutionary methods in other countries, it would not be correct to say that the inspiration came from abroad. The movement was born out of a conviction that to a Western people physical force alone makes an appeal. It is not generally realised by Britishers, that it is they who have been primarily responsible for teaching the Indian people the efficacy of physical force. Two or three decades ago (and even till today in some cases) the average Britisher in India, especially when he was a member of the army, or of the police, was so haughty in his general behaviour towards Indians, that no Indian with a grain of self-respect could help feeling the humiliation of being under a foreign government. In the street, in the railways, in the tram-cars, in public places and in public functions, in fact everywhere, the Britisher expected the Indian to make way for him, and if he refused to do so, the Indian would be assaulted. In such cases of friction, the forces of the Government were always on the side of the Britishers. Cases frequently happened in which Indians of the highest position and rank — even Judges of the High Court — would be insulted in this way. Even during the Great War, when India was fighting on the side of England, such cases of friction between Indians and Britishers would constantly occur in the tram-cars in Calcutta. (1) No legal or constitutional remedy could be found for such insults, for neither the police nor the subordinate Law Courts would venture to do justice. Then the time came when Indians began to hit back, and when they did so the effect was immediate and remarkable. Ever since then, in proportion as they have been able to hit back, Indians have been able to move about in their own country without losing their self-respect. Even in the colleges in Calcutta, British members of the staff would often be guilty of insulting behaviour towards Indian students and the fact that today such cases are not frequent, is because Indian students also made use of physical force in upholding their self-respect.
|
This then is the psychology behind the revolutionary movement; but a further explanation is necessary to show why Bengal has, comparatively speaking, become its stronghold. The trouble began with Macaulay. When he was out in India as a member of the Government, Macaulay wrote a scathing denunciation of the Bengalees and called them a race of cowards. That calumny went deep into the hearts of the Bengalee people. Simultaneously the Government took the step excluding the Bengalees from the army on the ground that they were not sufficiently warlike or brave. The climax came when the Grand Moghul, Lord Curzon of Kedleston, attempted to crush the Bengalees by partitioning their province. The people at first retorted with the help of Swadeshi and boycott. But when brute force was used — as at Barisal in 1906 — to break up peaceful processions and meetings, the people felt that peaceful methods would not suffice. In sheer despair, young men took to the bomb and the revolver. The effect was immediate. The behaviour of the Britisher began to improve. The impression gained ground that for the first time the Bengalee was being respected by the Britisher. Many of the revolutionaries were hanged but they were able to demonstrate that the race to which they belonged was not a race of cowards. They were, therefore, regarded as martyrs in many a Bengalee home and they had the silent homage of the Bengalee race.
|
On this soil and in this manner has grown up the revolutionary movement in Bengal. What is the remedy for it? Two courses are open to the Government — firstly, to demonstrate to the people that for winning political freedom it is not necessary to resort to revolutionary methods and secondly, to give individual revolutionaries a chance of serving their country along peaceful and constructive lines. With regard to the first, the short-sighted policy of the Government has served to strengthen the arguments of the revolutionaries. The reforms introduced at the end of the great War were so meagre as to cause widespread discontent. The revolutionary who came out of prison at the end of the war after years of confinement found that the promised liberty was an empty dream and there was no opening for serving his country along peaceful and constructive lines. Nevertheless, in response to the appeal made by Mahatma Gandhi and Deshabandhu C. R. Das, they promised to eschew the path of violence and give a trial to the new method of non-violence and non-co-operation, and it must be admitted that the vast majority did keep their promise. But what did the Government do? On the plea that some stray acts of violence had been committed in a corner of a great province, the Government rounded up a large number of men from all over the province in 1923, and again in 1924, and kept them in prison for a number of years without trial. The public feeling at the time was that there were over-zealous officers in the Intelligence Branch of the Bengal Police, who in order to justify their existence and the existence of their department, imagined more than they actually saw. And it was even believed that agents provocateur were employed for the purpose of entrapping innocent young men. It will not do to ignore such complaints with an official sneer, for if one really desires to go to the root of the problem, he should investigate all such complaints with an open mind. After some years, that is in 1927 and 1928, the Government again began to release the detenus. But as in 1919-20, so also in 1927-28, a real amnesty did not take place. Both before and after his release, every detenu was harassed so much by the police that the release instead of producing a sense of relief, left bitterness in his mind. If the releases had been ordered as a stroke of generous-hearted statesmanship, the effect would have been quite different. The 1930-34 phase of the revolutionary movement in Bengal could have been possibly avoided if some special circumstances had not cropped up. Firstly, the attitude of Mahatma Gandhi at the Calcutta Congress had a very unfavourable effect on the minds of the youths. It gave them the impression that the Mahatma was a spent force and that a mass movement under the leadership of the Congress was highly improbable. Owing to this feeling a section of the youths began to prepare for independent action on their own behalf on revolutionary lines. Thus it was that the Chittagong Armoury Raid took place. This activity was, however, restricted in a very small area and when the Mahatma launched his movement early in 1930, the youths all over the province were drawn towards it. For the subsequent development of the revolutionary movement in Bengal, and for the repeated acts of terrorism, the Government themselves were to blame more than anyone else. Whether in Midnanore or in Dacca or in Tipperah District, in each case atrocities committed by the agents of the Government and the failure of the public to secure any redress by constitutional means were responsible for provoking people to acts of terrorism as a retaliation. Even the subsequent acts of terrorism in Chittagong District should be attributed not to a desire to work up a revolution in the country but to a desire to retaliate against what the revolutionaries regarded as acts of official terrorism.
|
The question arises here — Is it possible in the circumstances to come to an understanding with the revolutionaries? Yes, it is, provided the approach is made in the right way and the intentions are really sincere. A broad mind is required for an understanding of the problem, and courage is needed for solving it. A direct negotiation with the Party is indispensable. This necessity would not have arisen if Mahatma Gandhi or any other public leader had volunteered to be their spokesman. Since that is not possible, direct negotiation is the only alternative.
|
It is generally urged by police-officers that the revolutionaries are out for the severance of the British connection and that they are altogether irreconcilable. There is no doubt that the revolutionaries stand for independence; but so also does the Indian National Congress. If an understanding could be attempted with the Congress, it could be equally done with the former. In 1931, the then Governor of Bengal, Sir Stanley Jackson, thought it desirable to make the attempt, and he used the late Mr. J. M. Sengupta as an intermediary. The result was not altogether hopeless. That the negotiations then proved to be abortive was due entirely to the fact that the Government did not comply with the request of the state prisoners in Buxa Detention Camp, that the negotiations should be conducted directly with them and not through any police-officer.
|
There are two conditions essential to the success of an attempt of this sort. Firstly, the Governor should really be able to demonstrate by their own liberal policy that it is possible for the Indians to win their political rights without any resort to violence. If their policy, however, be to resist for all time the Indian demand for freedom, then no understanding will ever be possible. Secondly, the Government must see to it that those who are to give up revolutionary methods are given other opportunities for serving their country along peaceful and constructive lines. Merely to find some employment for them will not be enough. It is foolish to suggest, as many have done in order to please the Government, that middle-class unemployment is the cause of the revolutionary movement. If that had been the case, Well-to-do people would never have been drawn into the movement. But while it is true that middle-class unemployment is not the cause of the revolutionary movement, it is, of course, true that if opportunities for public service had been open to young men in Bengal, then the attempts of the revolutionaries to obtain recruits would have failed. The present temper and policy of the Government whereby every young man is regarded as a potential revolutionary and treated as such, and the present conditions in the province, whereunder it is quite hopeless to win Swaraj by working along constructive lines, are among the most fruitful causes of the revolutionary movement. Revolutionary methods are, in their ultimate analysis, an expression of utter despair. If this despair is once removed, an understanding with the revolutionaries is certainly possible. That will not mean that they will cease to be patriots or that they will give up serving their country. It will only mean that they will direct their activities along other channels.
|
Whether an understanding could be reached in the near future depends largely on the personality of the present Governor of Bengal, Sir John Anderson. Before he went out of India, he made statements to the effect that he was going out not merely to suppress the revolutionary movement but with a view to understanding the deeper causes of it in order to effect a reconciliation. Unfortunately, since his arrival in Bengal, he has hardly done anything towards a genuine reconciliation. Nor has he given any proof of his desire to understand the deeper causes of the movement, though in the meantime he has done everything that a zealous police-officer could hope to do. Sir John Anderson has the reputation of being a strong man and that reputation is not without foundation. Only a strong man can tackle a problem of this sort which has baffled so many people. The diehards in the Indian Civil Service and in the Indian Police Service are not the people who would welcome an understanding with any party in the country — much less with the revolutionary party. Therefore, it is not unfortunate that the Governor of Bengal is a strong man. It is only to be hoped that he will show his strength of mind and firmness of resolve to better purpose than in the past during the remaining years of his office.
|
|
Notes
|
- The writer has had personal experience of many such cases.
|
| |
|
