by A K Bhagwat
In the third article, Tilak further commented on the role of educational institutions in a dependent country and expressed the opinion that these institutions and the teachers serving in them would be failing in their duty if they did not create among the students a sense of their obligation to their motherland. According to Tilak, it was the duty of the teacher to make the student conscious of his welfare and in this respect he mentioned Herbert Spencer as a person who would be acknowledged as a Guru by all. It was evident that Tilak had a great admiration for scholarship and if Prof. Selby had resisted the temptation of expressing partisan views in a political issue he would have earned praise at Tilak’s hand. There were some professors who were politically neutral but who were authorities in their subject. Even though they might not fulfil the duty of creating a consciousness of national responsibility among students, which Tilak expected them to do Tilak always spoke respectfully about their scholarship and expected the students to have deep reverence for such teachers. This was evident from the deep reverence he had for Prof. Kerunana Chhatre. Tilak, however, never to lerated a teacher misusing his authority in a partisan way and hence wrote the three articles in the Kesari which were interpreted by some of his opponents as insinuations.
The success of Tilak’s leadership has been analysed by different people in different ways. His great biographer, Kelkar, has rightly remarked that his complete absorption in a cause and his persistent endeavour for its success gave strength to all the movements he led. The Swadeshi movement found in him an indefatigable champion who lent all his energies in order to take it to the people. Along with the articles already mentioned Tilak also wrote two articles on the spinning and weaving industry in the Kesari on the 14th and 21st November 1905. The articles present carefully collected data and the technical details mentioned in them show the scholar’s method of dealing with a subject. Tilak in these articles shows a good grasp of the problem, a realistic approach and the knowledge of all the efforts made by some Indians to improve the industry. The emphasis on the small-machine for reorientation of our economic life and on the urgent need of rehabilitating the uprooted weavers are the important features of these articles. They are significant in so far as they bring out the constructive approach of Tilak which he regarded to be as important as the agitational aspect. Tilak’s sense of realism and moral fervour is seen in another article ‘Objections to the Swadeshi Movement’ in which he has answered the various objections in a convincing manner. He admitted that the Swadeshi goods, in the initial phase, would cost more than the foreign goods; but he stated that the Swadeshi movement was not the line of least resistance. He stated “Swadeshi implies some sacrifice” and urged that the people must make it in order to usher in the new era of self-reliance.
Lord Curzon had a dispute with the Commander-in-Chief Lord Kitchner over the civil control of the army. In this dispute the Secretary of State, Mr. Brodrick, pronounced against Curzon and as a result Curzon resigned in indignation.
However the tyranny in Bengal did not end with his resignation. In fact the Lt.-Governor of the newly constituted East Bengal, Fuller, was one of the greatest of tyrants and took perverted delight in the naked exhibition of his autocratic power. He gave threats to Bengali leaders, imposed a ban on Vande Mataram and tried to establish military rule in Bengal. Tilak knew that the greater the oppression, the more intense would be the reaction of the people and wrote an article ‘Now the Strife is in Full Swing’. In the article Tilak first mentioned the how the London Times had congratulated the Russians on their success in compelling the Czar to surrender to public sentiment expressed through the general strike. He then remarked that the London Times, so quick in noting the progressive movement in Russia, failed to notice the beginnings of a similar movement in India. Next he condemned the opponents of the movement in Bengal in the following words: “It is an unfortunate fact that some of us are crying ‘halt’ hardly before the battle has begun. How foolish! We doubt whether these people understand the significance and meaning of a national movement. They appear to be under the impression that the Swadeshi movement was just started to encourage Swadeshi goods and that it would not go beyond creating opportunities for a soap factory or an umbrella factory in our country. Our arrogant and cunning rulers also want this idea to prevail. But anyone can easily see that the weapon of the Swadeshi movement is wielded by Bengali leaders with obviously politically intentions. The Swadeshi movement is necessary for industrial development; but its political significance is of far greater importance and this aspect is particularly evident in Bengal. This is exactly the reason why Lt.-Governor Fuller is behaving like a mad dog. He is convinced that the new weapon which the people of Bengal were using would one day score a victory over the bureaucracy. He has therefore grown frantic and wants to nip the movement in the bud.” Tilak concluded the article with the observation that it was Bengal’s destiny to bear the brunt of the attack in the political struggle of India and hoped that the leaders of Bengal would prove themselves equal to the task.
The articles written at the time of the Barisal Conference, when Surendranath Banerjee was insulted and convicted, were also full of fire and Tilak particularly congratulated Surendranath Banerjee on his personal courage and remarked, “There is some divine dispensation in the present incident and Babu Surendranath’s insult is only instrumental to it. This is not the end of the chapter and this should not be the end.... This alone is the path of our progress.” Marathi is a forceful language capable of expressing the minutest shade of meaning and in the hands of Tilak it became a rare sharp weapon. The articles written during the period have earned a permanent place in the annals of Marathi journalism. They were written with reference to an immediate issue and yet they have permanent significance as an expression of the irrepressible will of the people and as master strokes of a leader who was creating a new political climate by fomenting an agitation in which national honour was at stake.
Motley’s Enlightened Despotism
In a country ruled by foreigners, people are reduced to a state of helplessness. An improvement in material conditions depends entirely on the whim of the rulers. When tyranny comes to stay, the only thing that people can do is to hope for a change in the ruler. When the Conservative Party was in power, the colonial policy was very strict and autocratic and Indians were deprived of the bare political rights which they enjoyed. When Joseph Chamberlain was the Prime Minister and Curzon was the Viceroy, India was subject to continual humiliation and there was a retardation on almost all fronts. With a change of the party in power in England, therefore, some people hoped for better days. This certainly was not a healthy tendency but it was inevitable in the initial stages of the struggle for independence. Moreover the liberals in India had immense faith in the professions of the Liberal Party in England. Some of the Liberal leaders in England had helped Dadabhai Naoroji and other Indian leaders in acquainting the British public with facts about India and some of the Liberals had even openly expressed disapproval of some of the actions of Conservative Viceroys. This gave grounds for hope in the minds of some people, particularly the moderates who entertained the dream of realisation of political rights under the aegis of the Liberal rulers of England.
Tilak was very critical of this attitude and believed that liberalism in England did not imply a liberal colonial policy and so far as the interests of the Empire were concerned the Liberals would pursue almost the same policies as the Conservatives. He always insisted on self-reliance and though he admitted the need for propaganda in England with a view to influencing British public opinion, he believed that the pivotal point of our political struggle was the organised strength of the people expressing itself in a fight against every injustice suffered at the hands of the bureaucracy in India. Tilak had been pursuing this line of thought since 1895 and his faith in the strength of the people’s movement was intensified, particularly after he witnessed the majestic wrath of public opinion against the Bengal Partition. He t
ime and again criticised the moderate leaders for turning their eyes to England in a mood of suppliant hopefulness. The moderates as a retort criticised Tilak for his wrong judgment and objected to his unwarranted distrust of Liberals in England, who, according to them, were helpful to the cause of India. They substantiated their arguments by referring to the reforms introduced in India by Lord Ripon. The difference in the attitude of Tilak and the moderates was due to the different ways in which they interpreted the character of the British Empire. Tilak looked upon the Empire as a reactionary frame which had throttled India’s progress and which would not relax its grip at the hands of one party or the other. He believed that power would have to be wrested from the British; whereas the moderates believed that India would realise her political ideal with the introduction of political reforms given in instalments and that the Liberal Party meant to help India on her path of political progress. They attributed the reactionary policies to the Conservative Government and hoped that in the hands of Liberal statesmen, the Empire would become a benevolent Commonwealth of Nations. This controversy could not be decided and had almost a hypothetical note about it so long as the Liberals were not in power. Some Liberals criticised the policies of the Conservative Government with regard to India not because they wanted to champion India’s cause but because they wanted to exploit every opportunity for criticising their political opponents not because it gave pleasure to the Indians, but because it gave pain to the Conservatives. There were of course honourable exceptions but it is hard to say to what extent they influenced the Liberal Party. The test of the pudding lies in the eating and Indians at last got an opportunity to test the sincerity of the professions of the Liberal Party when in December 1905 the Conservatives were voted out of office and Liberals took the reins of government. There were great expectations when John Morley became the Secretary of State for India.
Great were the hopes and greater must have been the disappointment at the first statement of Morley in Parliament. Morley remarked that the reasons for the partition of Bengal were administrative and not political and though it was done against the wishes of the people, it was an accomplished fact. Moreover, according to high officials, as time passed people did not feel so keenly about it and hence it need not be abolished. When Mr. Herbert Roberts made a suggestion in Parliament that Indians should be given a greater share in the administration of their country, Morley’s answer had the usual ‘official touch’ about it. He admitted that Indians deserved political rights but remarked that it was ‘foolish’ to expect that the Liberal Party would give them some rights immediately. He remarked that if the burden of taxes was reduced, Indians would become more loyal than before.
The high priest of liberty had refused to pay even lip sympathy to the aspirations of a nation striving for political rights. Tilak had never expressed hopes for a fair deal at the hands of Morley. His opinion that Liberals in power would not be much different from Conservatives so far as Imperialist policies were concerned was vindicated. In the article on the 6th March 1906, his comment on Morley’s remarks in Parliament were: “We leave it to our readers to decide whether they should admire the wisdom of Morley’s remarks or whether they should praise the folly of some of our leaders who had entirely depended on his favours. We are of opinion that Morley’s speech is quite in keeping with British diplomacy.... His arguments about the partition of Bengal are so silly and exasperating that we are led to observe that immediately after becoming the Secretary of State for India he seems to have mortgaged his philosophic wisdom.” With the pungency which was his own he remarked in the course of the article: “Politics only admits self-interest and turns to philosophy in so far as it serves that interest.” The burden of Tilak’s song was that Morley was first an Englishman, a ruler of the Empire and then a liberal thinker. Tilak prophesied that in Morley’s future policies philosophy would be subservient to diplomacy. In the article ‘A Philosopher and a Diplomat’ Tilak has argued his point of view in a convincing manner. There is no touch of bitterness or malice about Tilak’s remarks and yet he has clearly exposed the limitations of Morley’s liberalism after assuming office. He characterised the British rule as enlightened despotism.
Tilak was severe in his attacks but was always prepared to appreciate a progressive measure. He never indulged in criticism for its own sake. When the Lian circular, owing to which shouting Vande Mataram in the street was declared a crime, was cancelled, he thanked Morley and Minto for it in his article ‘Government and the Barisal Episode’. Tilak expressed satisfaction over the fact that the Bengalis at last established their right to shout Vande Mataram but he also asked them not to be so elated over a trivial success as to allow their movement to grow slack.
The Swadeshi movement gathered momentum in aharashtra mainly on account of Tilak’s articles in the Kesari. The moderates could not find fault with it, as they also agreed that it strengthened the national movement. But the idea of boycott made them restless. They therefore did not strongly support the movement and sometimes poked fun at it when it was carried to extremes by some faddists. Tilak was a realist and his advocacy of the movement was always rational and cogent. He did not, however, think it necessary to criticise the extreme proposals put forward by some people, because he knew that such things were inevitable in the exuberance of enthusiasm. Excess could be curbed; but where there was barrenness no amount of agitation would make a people rise. The attitude of the moderates was thus negative and escapist and their criticism missed the mark. They could not therefore arouse public enthusiasm, this was to them almost taboo, and it was no wonder therefore that in spite of their intellectual airs, they were thrust into the background owing to their negative attitude. What they termed as rationalism was in reality a cloak to conceal their inaction. Tilak’s qualities of leadership far out shone the moderate s, and the people of Maharashtra looked up to him as a perpetual fountain of inspiration. Tilak was always aware of the fact that a mass movement required the services of people of different abilities and he assigned work to everyone according to their capacities. Some persons who discoursed on the Puranas also carried the message of Swadeshi to the people and Tilak duly acknowledged their services. But Tilak did not stop at the propagation of the noble idea of Swadeshi. He took positive steps to make it a reality. In 1906, Tilak went to Bombay, enlisted the support of some of the millowners and established the Bombay Swadeshi Co- operative Stores Ltd. in May 1906. The institution had a share capital of Rs. Two and a half lakhs and in order to enable the middle class to extend its support to this cooperative effort, the cost of each share was Rs. 100 only. Tilak was one of the Directors. Thanks to the efforts of a number of constructive workers, the institution, functions even today.
Satyabhamabai, Tilak’s Wife
When the atmosphere was surcharged with enthusiasm everyone strove for the success of the Swadeshi movement in his or her own humble way. The young men were of course in the vanguard of the movement. But in Maharashtra, women too who had so far been confined to the four walls of the house, came forward to play their part. It is interesting to note that in a women’s meeting in Tilak’s house, his wife Satyabhamabai also participated. Satyabhamabai was a typical Hindu housewife brought up in the orthodox tradition. She was simple, straightforward and religious. She was a woman of a few words. Though literate and conscious of the responsibilities which Tilak had undertaken, she of course never spoke about them and a quiet acceptance of the household responsibilities was her way of playing the part of a better-half to the individual whose manifold responsibilities and struggles afforded little time for private life. Tilak’s imprisonments caused great agony to Satyabhamabai’s mind and added to her responsibilities. But she played her part patiently and her sterling qualities of heart were a singular asset to Tilak. Her part in Tilak’s life appeared to be passive and yet it was owing to her that Tilak was free from the worries and cares of family life. The meeting of women about Swadeshi was probably the only occasion on which
she took part in an affair which was beyond her domestic interests.
Shivaji Celebrations in Maharashtra and Bengal
Public life is a medley of different activities and though a particular problem gets priority over every other problem at a particular moment, other activities have a place in the scheme of things. A leader has to see to it that the activities he has once started keep up their vitality. Tilak had started the Shivaji celebrations and he saw to it that the activity generated energies which he could harness to the national cause. In 1905, even when the political tension was growing, the celebrations took place with the usual enthusiasm. During this year there arose a controversy as to whether the concept of the love for one’s country was an old one or a new one. Tilak made an important speech on the controversy during the Shivaji celebrations. He said that, “the idea was an old one, though it was given a new name. Eminent historians like Ranade and Kirtane have acknowledged Shivaji’s patriotic ideals.... He was not just a religious leader and ‘Go-Brahman-Pratipalak” was just one of the epithets attributed to him. His establishment of Swaraj resulted in the protection of Hindu religion. It was not, however, the motive force behind his activities.” Tilak argued that the ways to accomplish an ideal changed according to times. This makes it quite clear that Tilak was using revivalism as merely a method. He looked upon Shivaji Maharaj as the founder of Swaraj and looked upto him as an inspiring force that made people conscious of their duty to the country.