EMERGENCE OF INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS (1885)

The Indian National Congress was founded by Allan Octavian Hume in 1885. Hume was a retired
Civil Service Officer. He sawa growing political consciousness among the Indians and wanted to give
it a safe, constitutional outlet so that their resentment would not develop into popular agitation against
the British rule in India. He was supported in this scheme by the Viceroy, Lord Dufferin, and by a
group of eminent Indians.
Womesh Chandra Banerjee of Calcutta was elected as the first President. The Indian National
Congress represented an urge of the politically conscious Indians to set up a national organization to
work for their betterment. Its leaders had complete faith in the British Government and in its sense of
justice. They believed that if they would place their grievances before the government reasonably, the
British would certainly try to rectify them. Among the liberal leaders, the most prominent were Firoz
Shah Mehta, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Dada Bhai Naoroji, Ras Behari Bose, Badruddin Tayabji, etc.
From 1885 to 1905, the Indian National Congress had a very narrow social base. Its influence was
confined to the urban educated Indians. The early aims of this organization were limited only to
communicate with British government on behalf of the Indian people and voice their grievances. It
was rightly called the era of the Moderates.

3.4.1. INITIAL STAGES OF INDIAN NATIONALCONGRESS

The congress placed its demands before the government always in the form of petitions and worked
within the framework of law. Figure 14. Indian National Congress in 1885 School of Distance
Education Indian History - III 85 It was for this reason that the early Congress leaders were referred to
as ‘Moderates’. During its first twenty years, the Congress made moderate demands. The members
placed their demands before the Government always in the form of petitions and worked within the
framework of law. It was for this reason that the early Congress leaders were referred to as
‘Moderates’.
They asked for:
(a) Representative legislatures,
(b) Indianization of services,
(c) Reduction of military expenditure,
(d) Education, employment and holding of the ICS (Indian Civil Services) examination in India,
(e) Decrease in the burden of the cultivators,
(f) Defense of civil rights,
(g) Separation of the judiciary from the executive,
(h) Change in the tenancy laws,
(i) Reduction in land revenue and salt duty,
(j) Policies to help in the growth of Indian industries and handicrafts,
(k) Introduction of welfare programmes for the people.
Unfortunately, their efforts did not bring many changes in the policies and administration of the
British in India. In the beginning, the Britishers had a favourable attitude towards the Congress. But,
by 1887, this attitude began to change. They did not fulfil the demands of the Moderates. The only
achievement of the Congress was the enactment of the Indian Councils Act, 1892 that enlarged the
legislature by adding a few non-official members and passing of a resolution for holding Indian Civil
Services Examination simultaneously in London and in India. Many leaders gradually lost faith in the
Constitutional process. Even though the Congress failed to achieve its goal, it succeeded in creating
national awakening and instilling in the minds of the Indian people a sense of belonging to one
Nation. They provided a forum for the Indians to discuss major national issues. By criticizing the
government policies, they gave the people valuable political training. Though, they were not ready to
take aggressive steps which would bring them in direct conflict with the Government. The most
significant achievement was the foundation of a strong national movement. The Britishers who were
earlier supporting the Moderates soon realized that the movement could turn into a National force that
would drive them out of the country. This totally changed their attitude. They passed strict laws to
control education and curb the press. Minor concessions were given so as to win over some Congress
leaders. The British Viceroy, Lord Curzon was a staunch imperialist and believed in the superiority of
the English people. He passed an Act in 1898, making it an offence to provoke people against the
British rulers. He passed the Indian Universities Act in 1904, imposing stiff control over Indian
Universities. Curzon was out to suppress the rising Nationalism in India. This was evident from what
he did in 1905about which you will read in the next section.
3.5. PARTITION OF BENGAL (1905) In 1905 Curzon announced the partition of Bengal. The
reason for partition was given as an attempt to improve administration. But School of Distance
Education Indian History - III 87 the real aim was to ‘Divide and Rule’. The partition was done in
order to create a separate State for Muslims and so introduce the poison of communalism in the
country. However, the Indians viewed the partition as an attempt by the British to disrupt the growing
national movement in Bengal and divide the Hindus and Muslims of the region. Widespread agitation
ensued in the streets and in the press. People of different parts of India opposed the partition of Bengal
all over the country. This opposition was carried on by organized meetings, processions and
demonstrations etc. Hindus and Muslims tied ‘rakhi’ on each other’s hands to show their unity and
their protest. The use of Swadeshi (made in our own country by our own people) goods, business,
national education and Indian languages were encouraged. The new nationalist spirit of self-reliance-
shed the fear of repression including imprisonment and painful torture by the British rule. It was Bal
Gangadhar Tilak who realized the importance of boycott as a weapon that could be used to paralyze
the whole British administrative machinery in India. The boycott and Swadeshi movements were
instrumental in the establishment of swadeshi enterprises - textile mills, banks, hosiery, tanneries,
chemical works and insurance companies. Swadeshi stores were opened. Volunteers supplied goods at
the doorstep of every household. The movement spread to all classes and groups of people. Everyone,
including women and children, came forward to take part. The most active were school and college
students. This made the British reverse the partition of Bengal and unite it in 1911. During this time,
the role of Radical Nationalists in the Indian National Congress, who were called the ‘Garam Dal’,
came to be appreciated. They tried to involve people from all classes and groups including peasants,
worker, students as well as women. They succeeded in uniting the Indian people against the common
enemy - the British. The young people were roused to the highest level of patriotism and zeal to free
their country. They helped in making people self-confident and self-reliant. They also revived the
Indian Cottage industry.
3.6. THE RISE OF RADICAL NATIONALISTS
The mild policies of the Moderates in the Congress led to the rise of passionate, radical nationalists,
who came to be called the ‘Garam Dal’. Thus, the first phase of the nationalist movement came to an
end with government reaction against the Congress on the one hand and a split in the Congress in
1907 on the other. That is why the period after 1905 till 1918 can be referred to as the ‘Era of
Passionate Nationalists or Garam Dal’. Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal
(Lal-Bal-Pal) were important leaders of this Radical group. When the Moderates were in the forefront
of the action, they had maintained a low profile but now they swung into action. Lal Bal Pal entry
marked the beginning of a new trend and a new face in India’s struggle for freedom. According to
them, the Moderates had failed to define India’s political goals and the methods adopted by them were
mild and ineffective. Besides, the Moderates remained confined to the upper, landed class and failed
to enlist mass support as a basis for negotiating with the British. The Garam Dal realized that the
British were out to exploit Indians, destroy their self-sufficiency and drain India of its wealth. They
felt that Indians should now become free of foreign rule and govern themselves. This group, instead
of making petitions to the government, believed in organizing mass protests, criticizing government
policies, boycotting foreign goods and use of Swadeshi (home-made) goods etc. They did not believe
in depending on the mercy of the Britishers, but believed that freedom was their right.
Bal Gangadhar Tilak gave a slogan ‘Freedom is our birth right and we must have it’. In 1916 the two
groups were again united with the efforts of Mrs. Annie Besant. She started working for the Home
rule movement in 1914. She was convinced that India should be granted Self-Government. In 1916,
Muslim League and Congress also came to an understanding with each other and signed the Lucknow
Pact. Later, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawahar Lal Nehru, Subhash Chandra Bose became the eminent figures
of Indian National Congress, who led the freedom movement of India forward.
3.7. HOME RULE MOVEMENT
Bal Gangadhar Tilak who served a jail sentence from 1908-1914, returned to the Congress which had
now become more open to him after the disappointment of the Council elections under the Morley
Minto reforms. By 1914-15 the swadeshi movement, the efforts at council entry and influencing the
administration from within and the revolutionary movement had all spent themselves. It was a time
for a new thrust to the national movement that was to come from the Home Rule Movement of Annie
Besant and Tilak. Tilak worked from within the Congress to set up a kind of agitational network
through his Home Rule League, which he set up in April 1916. At about the same time Theosophist
leader Annie Besant rose to great prominence and proposed to start agitation for a great measure of
self-government for the Indians. Besant also proposed to set up a Home Rule League in the country
modelled on the Irish Home Rule movement to spread awareness. Besant’s League was set up in
September 1916.Tilak’s League was active in Maharashtra and Karnataka. Besant’s League, with its
headquarters in Adyar, Madras had more of an all India following. The activities of the Home Rule
Leagues were to organize discussions and reading rooms in cities, to circulate pamphlets and conduct
lecture tours to sway public opinion. The Home Rule movement never spelled out the goal of
complete independence, however they did focus on the oppression of colonial policy through its
opposition to government policy, e.g., forest laws, liquor laws etc. A new generation of leaders of the
nationalist movement was formed during this time and the focus of the movement shifted from
Bengal and Punjab to Maharashtra and the South. Many moderate Congressmen also joined the Home
Rule movement. However, the Home Rule movement came to an abrupt end after 1918.

THE GANDHIAN MASS MOVEMENT: THE INITIALYEARS

The British Government introduced the next set of constitutional reforms in 1919 (The Montague-
Chelmsford Reforms). Although these reforms claimed to have brought forth local self- government
and considerable autonomy to Indians, they kept the real powers firmly in British hands. The system
of dyarchy as introduced by these reforms gave greater representation to Indians and greater control of
local expenditure. However, the elected legislature had no control over the executive. The post war
years (the First World War ended in 1918) saw growing unrest in the country as the impact of the War
on the economy of India became more apparent. War led to rise in the prices, scarcity, unemployment
etc added to which there was an influenza epidemic. Wartime necessities had given rise to a class of
entrepreneurs in India and a large working class was also created that was becoming more organized.
This working class was restive and a potential force in the nationalist movement. Part of the capitalist
class was loyal to the colonial state because it helped them control the labour force. However, there
were also some among them who were supportive of the national movement. They were opposed to
the economic policies of the colonial government and realised that the end result of British policy
would be to the detriment of Indian industry. The arrival of M.K. Gandhi in these turbulent times
marked yet another phase in the nationalist movement. Gandhi who arrived in India in 1915, used his
own methods to harness these forces that existed in India in the post war years. His style was to
address specific issues and laws and organize a peaceful resistance and violation of the laws with the
help of disciplined cadres. The significance of Gandhi’s movement was that he brought the focus
upon specific issues. Gandhi first achieved success in three movements in Champaran Kheda and
Ahmedabad respectively. The first two were peasant movements and the last was a strike of the
millworkers of Ahmedabad.
4.1.1. CHAMPARAN SATYAGRAHA
The peasantry at Champaran was agitating against the European planters who forced them to cultivate
indigo. There was a history of peasant unrest against planters in Champaran. Raj Kumar Shukla, one
of the peasant leaders, went all the way to Lucknow to invite Gandhi to see their plight. Gandhi
instituted an open enquiry into the matter in1917. The Champaran movement also got wider publicity
with the government trying to restrict Gandhi’s entry into that area and later letting him go there on
threat of satyagraha. The outcome of the Champaran movement was that the tinkathia system, under
which the farmers had to cultivate indigo in 3/20th of their holdings, was abolished.
4.1.2. AHMEDABAD MILL STRIKE
The next movement Gandhi associated himself with was the agitation of the millworkers at
Ahmedabad. The dispute between the workers and the owners had occurred due to the withdrawal of
the ‘plague bonus’. The owners withdrew the bonus after the epidemic had passed and the workers
opposed the withdrawal because of the rising prices after the War. Gandhi persuaded the workers and
owners to negotiate before a tribunal. The owners suddenly withdrew from the arbitration on the
pretext of a strike called by some workers and declared that they were ready to give only 20% bonus
and threatened dismissal to those workers who did not comply. Gandhi was greatly offended by this
breach of agreement and declared that after proper study of the production cost, profits and the cost of
living the conclusion was drawn that the workers were justified in asking for 35% increase in wages.
Ambalal Sarabhai, one of the mill owners was a close friend of Gandhi and had given a liberal
donation to his ashram at Sabarmati, and his sister Anasuya Ben was one of his greatest supporters in
the Ahmedabad mill workers struggle. During the last stages of this struggle Gandhi for the first time
used the fast as a means of protest. Gandhi observed that the workers were slowly losing their morale
so he decided to go on a fast. He declared that if the strike was to lead to starvation then he should be
the first to once more and the matter was resolved with the workers getting the 35% raise.
4.1.2. KHEDA SATYAGRAHA
The third movement was that of the Kheda peasants whose crops had failed and they were unable to
get a remission of land revenue from the government. First, enquiries were made into the situation, as
was the norm of all Gandhian movements. Crop yields were studied and it was confirmed that it had
been one third of the normal yield which made the peasants eligible for a total remission of revenue.
Gandhi advised the peasants to withhold the revenue. Vallabhbhai Patel and Indulal Yajnik helped
Gandhi in the Kheda district by organising his tour of the villages and urging the peasants to stand
firm. The government unleashed severe repression seizing cattle, household goods and even attaching
standing crops. After putting up a brave struggle however they began to suffer in the face of
repression. At that very movement Gandhi learnt that the Government was contemplating a
compromise by directing that the revenue be recovered from only those who could pay it. Gandhi had
asked the well-off peasants also to withhold payment so that the poorer peasantry may not surrender.
On learning of the Government directions, thus, Gandhi withdrew the movement. The outcome of the
Champaran, Ahmedabad and Kheda movements, that occurred between 1916–1917, was that Gandhi
was able to experiment with his method of non-violent satyagraha. The movements helped him to test
the waters so to say. He cultivated his own core group of followers who would assist him and follow
his orders in the forthcoming movements. In these movements Gandhiji showed his special talent for
reconciling apparently opposed interests e.g. mill owners and workers, keep-ing his friendship with
one and at the same time gaining the trust of the other.
4.1.3. ROWLETT SATYAGRAHA
The next significant movement under Gandhi’s leadership was the Rowlett satyagraha. In February
1919, two bills that would severely curb the civil liberty of Indians were sought to be made into laws.
The government wanted to pass these laws so that they may be able to control the rising tide of
discontent among the population. The laws would provide for arbitrary detention and punishment
without trial etc. In fact, one of the bills was passed in the Council and made into law in spite of
protests from the elected Indian members. This kind of restriction on the liberty of individuals might
have been acceptable during the war years. But the end of the war had given rise to the hopes of
further constitutional reform and a greater control of Indians over their own affairs if not self–
government. Having seen the futility of the protests from the Council members and others, Gandhi
launched ‘Satyagraha’. A ‘Satyagraha Sabha’ was formed that attracted many members. It was
decided that a nationwide ‘hartal’ or strike would be observed to protest against the Act and fasting
and prayers will be conducted. There would also be civil disobedience of certain laws. The Rowlett
Satyagraha was the first nationwide pro-test in India under the guidance of Gandhi. The people of
India showed a great and swelling resentment against British rule and the hartals became violent. 6th
April 1919was decided as the day of hartal, however due to some confusion it was observed on 30th
March in Delhi and led to fighting in the streets. Punjab had faced very severe wartime oppression
due to forcible recruitment and widespread disease and other hardships. Amritsar and Lahore were
centres of this movement. Gandhi tried to go to Punjab and get the movement back on the track of
non-violent satyagraha.
However, Gandhi was prevented from entering the Punjab by the British government and was
deported to Bombay. Bombay and Ahmedabad were also experiencing disturbances at that time and
Gandhi tried to control the movement there. Events in Punjab came to a head when two local leaders
were arrested and the local town hall and post office were attacked as a result. During the nationalist
movement a popular form of protest was to attack the symbols of British government, telegraph wires
were cut, post offices attacked, and Europeans including women were attacked. The army was called
and meetings and assemblies were banned. On the 13th of April 1919 a Baisakhi day gathering at
Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar invited the wrath of General Dyer who was made in charge of the city.
The General, angered that the ban on public meetings was being flouted attacked the unarmed and
helpless gathering and had his men fire at the crowd for ten minutes and only stopped when his
ammunition was spent. No prior warning was issued to the people before firing started and there was
no escape other than the narrow pathway where Dyer’s men stood with their guns as the Jallianwala
Bagh was enclosed by walls on all sides. This incident left 379 dead according to a conservative
government estimate. This brutal incident was followed by even more brutal repression.
4.2. NON–VIOLENT NON–COOPERATION
Martial law was imposed in Punjab after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre. Inhuman treatment was
meted out to Indians e.g. men were made to crawl on their bellies in the by lane where a Figure 16.
depiction of Jallianwala Bagh Massacre European woman had been attacked. Although the Rowlett
satyagraha had been withdrawn, the feeling of resentment toward British rule grew even more bitter.
The Montague Chelmsford reforms of 1919 frustrated the hopes of those who still had any faith in the
colonial government’s intention for bringing about reforms enabling Indians to participate in the
government. At this juncture a large group of enlightened Muslim leaders emerged and they had a
special reason for discontent with the British government. The Muslims were of fended by the
insensitive treatment of Turkey after the First World War. Muslims all over the world regarded the
Caliph of Turkey as their spiritual leader and they had been assured that the Caliph will be treated
leniently after the defeat of Turkey and its allies in the War. However, in the post-war treaty with
Turkey the powers of the Caliph were severely curtailed. Matters came to a head when the Hunter
Committee that was appointed by the government to look into the Jallianwala Bagh tragedy submitted
itsreport. In this report they upheld the action of General Dyer and all other kinds of repression. This
report enraged all the Indian leaders and the moment was ripe for the next movement of protest. It was
at this time that Gandhi contemplated a non-violent non-cooperation movement.
The non-cooperation movement was an expression of the growing resentment of all classes of the
Indian people against oppressive British rule. Gandhi took up three specific points on which the
movement was initiated:
(a) the Khilafat wrong,
(b) the Punjab wrong, and
(c) Swaraj.
The call for non-cooperation first came from the All India Khilafat Conference at Delhi on 22-23rd
November 1919 at the initiative of the Ali brothers (Mohammad and Shaukat). At the Allahabad
meeting of the Khilafat Conference, a programme of four-stage non-cooperation was announced-
boycott of titles, of the civil services, of the police and army and finally non-payment of taxes.
Thereafter, Gandhi began to urge the members of the Congress to give theirs support to the
movement. In the historical Calcutta special session in September, 1920 the Congress adopted a
programme of giving up of titles, a boycott of schools, courts and Councils and also boycott of
foreign goods. This boycott would be side by side with the establishment of national schools and
courts to resolve matters without taking recourse to the judicial system of the government and the
adoption of khadi.
In the Nagpur Congress of December 1920, veteran Congress leader of Bengal Chittaranjan Das lent
his sup-port to the movement. Although the movement was formally initiated on 1st August1920, the
Congress leaders support gave a new impetus to it and from January 1921, it gained great strength.
Within a month a large number of students left government aided schools and colleges and joined
national institutions that had been started indifferent parts of the country. Several well-established
lawyers like C.R. Das, Motilal Nehru, Saifuddin Kichhlu, Vallabhbhai Patel, C. Rajagopalachari, Asaf
Ali etc, gave up their lucrative practices.
This sacrifice inspired the people. Boycott of foreign goods, picketing of shops selling foreign cloth
were other forms of protest. Charkhas began to be distributed and handspun cloth became popular
among nationalists. Nationalist newspapers held advertisements inviting people to participate in
bonfires of foreign goods. The value of cloth exports fell to a great extent. Along with cloth shops
there was also for the first time picketing of liquor shops. To the alarm of the British government
Muhammad Ali in July 1921 appealed to all Muslims in the British Indian army and declared that
they must consider it morally wrong to be a part of the British army and that they should not continue
in it. He was arrested at once. This call was taken up by the Congress and Gandhi. A manifesto was
issued calling all men (civilian and soldier) to sever all links with the British Indian army. In the midst
of this the Prince of Wales visited India in November1921, and was greeted by a hartal in Bombay
where he landed and also in the rest of the country. Gandhi addressed a huge meeting on the day of
the Prince of Wales’ arrival and anti- British feeling was so strong that a riot situation occurred when
the people dispersing from the meeting came across the others who had gone for the welcome
procession of the Prince. Gandhi had to go on a four day fast to reduce tension. The non-cooperation
movement was gaining strength progressively. In Midnapur district of Bengal a movement was
organized against Union Board taxes and a no-tax movement was also organized in Andhra Pradesh.
The refusal to pay taxes under the Gandhian scheme was to be resorted to in the very last and most
radical stage of the movement. In the Awadh region of UP the kisan movement was gaining ground
through the kisan sabhas which were becoming more organized and a great threat to British rule. The
stand of the colonial government was also becoming more rigid. The fall in cloth exports, the show of
resentment fromthe students, lawyers, government officials, workers, peasants, plantation workers and
attempts to influence the army finally led to the adoption of repressive measures against the
movement. Public meetings and assemblies were banned, newspapers repressed, and midnight raids
were conducted at Congress and Khilafat offices.
4.2.1. CHAURI CHAURA INCIDENT
The Congress under Gandhi’s guidance was beginning to chalk out a programme of civil disobedience
at Bardoli. This move was how-ever cut short by a violent incident at Chauri Chaura in Gorakhpur
district of UP. A Khilafat and Congress procession on being confronted by some policemen turned
violent and attacked the police. The policemen tried to take shelter in the police station, however the
enraged mob set fire to it and hacked to death those policemen who came out to escape the fire.
Twenty-two policemen were killed. This incident occurred on the 5thof February and on the 12th
Gandhi withdrew the non-cooperation movement. This withdrawal proved that at this stage Gandhi
did not want to lead a movement which he could not control and it also proved that the nationalists
would heed Gandhi’s call, for though there were many who differed from him, no one thought of
defying his call for withdrawal. Within the Congress party there was a difference of opinion between
those who wanted to enter the legislative councils through the soon to be held elections; and those
who wanted to undertake Gandhian constructive work in villages and preparing for the next step of
the struggle. Rajagopalachari, Ansari and others advocated rural constructive work while Motilal
Nehru, Vithalbhai Patel and Hakim Ajmal Khan wanted to enter the councils and disrupt the business
of the government through creating a deadlock in the system. Rajendra Prasad and Vallabhbhai Patel
supported the former view while C. R. Das adhered to the latter view. School of Distance Education
Indian History - III 101 Das and Motilal Nehru set up a Swaraj Party in 1923 to contest the elections.
The ‘No-Changers’ as the group of Gandhians was called gained support with the release of Gandhi
from jail in 1924. However, the Congressmen could not be prevented from standing in the elections
though they were made to acknowledge the importance of constructive work. The Congress
candidates did win several seats in the elections held in November1924 in the Central Provinces and
in Bengal. Initial efforts at disrupting the processes of the Councils began, but whatever regulation the
members did not allow to be passed was pushed through by the special powers assigned to the
Governor exposing the limitations of the system of dyarchy. Soon the elected members began to lose
direction and were slowly beginning to be absorbed in the system. In Bengal, C.R. Das suddenly
passed away causing a leadership problem there. At this stage of the nationalist movement amidst
political uncertainties and a lull in the activities under the ‘main-stream’ Congress movement arose a
far more radical group of activists in the second phase of the revolutionary movement.