Rajaji

by Rajmohan Gandhi

  The Mahatma’s visit did not convert non-cooperation’s principal opponents in the South. However, C.R. received the support of a group of young lawyers who heeded Gandhi’s call and gave up their practices; and the Provincial Congress Committee accepted non-cooperation in principle though not the steps proposed by Gandhi.

  Congress’s national body was to decide on non-cooperation at a special session in Calcutta in September 1920, presided over by Lala Lajpat Rai, the Punjab leader who had spent the War years in America. C.R. arrived at the head of some 200 Madras delegates on a train placarded as ‘The Khilafat Special.’

  The Congress establishment was keen to defeat the Mahatma. Bipin Chandra Pal, a central figure in the protest against Bengal’s Partition, C.R. Das, and others attacked Gandhi’s proposals; only Motilal Nehru broke ranks with the old guard. But Gandhi swayed the assembly, which by 1855 votes to 873 adopted his agenda.

  Its items were a surrender of titles bestowed by the Raj; a boycott of official ceremonials, of the elections announced for November, and of foreign goods; and a gradual withdrawal by students and lawyers from the Raj’s schools, colleges, and courts.

  The Government voiced the hope that ‘the sanity of the classes and masses alike would reject non-cooperation,’ but in November evidence came that at least the masses were embracing it. Almost two-thirds of India’s electors — many millions, despite the limited franchise — stayed away from the polls.

  Waiting until noon at ‘a freshly swept polling station’ near Allahabad, where ‘the presiding officer with his assistants sat at his table with his freshly printed electoral roll,’ Sir Valentine Chirol, the British observer, saw not a single voter.16

  In Madras C.R. led the boycott, his car, still driven by Ghouse, carrying a ‘Vote For None’ sticker. Abstention in the South was fair, even if not spectacular.

  The Calcutta decision was ratified in December when Congress met in Nagpur for its annual session. Spending Rs 36,000 from his pocket, Das had brought 200 delegates from Bengal and Assam in a bid to reverse the decision. But after an all-night discussion with the Mahatma, Das himself succumbed — and moved the resolution declaring non-cooperation! Lajpat Rai seconded it.

  Nagpur altered the creed of Congress. The previous goal of ‘Self-government within the Empire’ was replaced by ‘The attainment of Swaraj . . . by all legitimate and peaceful means.’

  Also changed was the constitution of Congress. The new scheme, prepared by Gandhi, provided for democratically elected committees at all levels — the village, town, taluk, district, ‘province’ and all-India. The provinces were linguistic areas not necessarily coinciding with the provinces of the Raj. Thus, Madras would have a Tamil Nadu Congress Committee and a separate Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee.

  The All-India Congress Committee (AICC) would choose a Working Committee, which would be the decision-making and round-the-clock arm of the Congress, consisting of the President, the General Secretary, the Treasurer, and about a dozen others. Elected annually by the provincial units, the President would be first among equals and no more.

  Nagpur raised C.R. to national leadership — he was chosen as a General Secretary for the coming year. Also drafted as General Secretaries were Motilal Nehru and Dr M.A. Ansari, a leading Muslim figure from Delhi.

  Inaugurating the practising revolt, the Mahatma had enjoined strict nonviolence in implementing his negative and positive programmes. The boycotts were to climax in mass civil disobedience, perhaps in a refusal to pay taxes.

  The positive targets to be achieved were a Rs 1 crore fund in Tilak’s name, to be used for national activities, two million charkhas for spinning yarn, and one crore members for the Congress. Hindu-Muslim partnership and the elevation of untouchables were the broader goals. Also sought, in a lower key, were the spread of Hindi/Hindustani and the prohibition of liquor.

  As the first step, the visit of the Duke of Connaught, the King’s uncle, who was to inaugurate the legislatures, was boycotted. Three thousand Calcutta students walked out of their institutions. ‘National’ educational bodies were formed in Ahmedabad, Patna, Benares, Maharashtra and Calcutta.

  Withdrawn from their schools, Krishnaswami and Ramaswami, C.R.’s sons, engaged themselves in promoting khadi in and around Salem. A Swadhinata Vidyalaya (Independence College) started in Madras at C.R.’s initiative, ‘open,’ as The Hindu put it, ‘to students withdrawing themselves from college classes and desiring to complete their equipment for national service or as teachers in national schools’ (8.3.21). The Raj’s response was to warn municipalities against supporting any ‘national’ college.

  Hindus and Muslims fraternized in hitherto unheard of ways. At Id, Muslims did not sacrifice cows. Courts continued to function and the vast majority of lawyers attended them. Yet an impressive number opted out, entering a life of uncertainty and poverty.

  Das and Motilal Nehru led the exit. C.R. had stopped practising before non-cooperation was formally launched. Vallabhbhai Patel in Gujarat and Rajendra Prasad in Bihar were among others who gave up lucrative practices. In June 1921, C.R. announced that in the Tamil country 36 lawyers, including T. Prakasam, a barrister who would play an important role in South India, had left the courts.

  As Indian opposition to the Raj gained momentum, Gandhi’s close colleagues were the Ali brothers, Lajpat Rai, Motilal Nehru and his son Jawaharlal in the North; Das and Abul Kalam Azad in Calcutta; Patel in Gujarat; Prasad in Bihar; and C.R. in the South. The Mahatma had assembled a talented team. To Gandhi’s feats of generalship all over India, C.R., travelling ceaselessly and speaking at meetings and through the press, lent valuable support.

  He made time, however, to arrange the marriage of Namagiri, now nearly fifteen, to Varadachari, who was a journalist in Rangoon. C.R. had wanted Papa to wait but friends of her age had husbands, and her father’s constant travelling had made her insecure and keen on marriage.

  After the wedding, which took place in Tirupati, C.R. moved from ‘Venkata Vilas’ to ‘Gem,’ on Poonamallee High Road, a smaller and less expensive lodging. He had been realizing that ‘living on my little savings . . . in Madras . . . is simply an “irrational”, as they say in Mathematics.’17

  By the middle of 1921, ‘Gem’ too was given up; the Darracq, the chest of drawers and the desk and the chairs obtained from the School of Arts were sold; Ghouse was sent away; and C.R. was back in Salem, staying in his bare house in the Extension.

  In a ten-day period, Congress membership in the Tamil area went up from 8,000 to 30,000. A new provincial Congress committee, loyal to C.R., came into being in July.

  Leading Brahmin intellectuals, including S. Srinivasa Iyengar, who had resigned as Advocate-General of Madras to join the Congress, Kasturiranga Iyengar, and A. Rangaswami Iyengar, editor of the Tamil daily Swadesamitran, opposed him; but C.R. secured the support of three prominent non-Brahmins, $$Ramaswami Naicker, the future founder of the Self-Respect movement$$. T.V. Kalyanasundara Mudaliar, editor of Navasakthi, and the man he had defended in 1919, Dr Varadarajulu Naidu. Backed in addition by the Muslims, C.R. was able to take Madras to the battlefield.

  The liquor front saw progress. The Madras Government informed Delhi that ‘the decrease in revenue is likely to be considerable . . . The recent sales of arrack shops have been boycotted.’ Five months later, another report admitted ‘a comparative failure in the sales of toddy shops through the Presidency,’ and acknowledged that ‘the preaching of noncooperation and in some cases the picketing of liquor have contributed largely to this result.’18

  The Moplah riots, among the most tragic in modern Indian history, took place in 1921 in Malabar, then part of Madras Presidency. Muslims with a trace of Arab blood, the Moplahs, many of them tenants of Hindu landlords, had a tradition of fanaticism.

  In February 1921, C.R. and Yakub Hassan, a Khilafat leader from Madras, visited the Moplah region with the declared aim of preaching nonviolence. However, the Government put a ban on their public speaking. Smelling da
nger, C.R. asked the public ‘not to fall into the trap set by repression and commit violence’ (The Hindu, 23.2.21).

  Poorly led, the Moplahs blundered. Alleged insults to their religious guides suddenly brought them into rebellion in August — first against the Government and then against the Hindu landlords. ‘Independence’ was declared, arson and murder took place, and some Hindus were forcibly converted.

  The Raj moved thousands of troops into the area. In the full-scale military action that ensued, 2,339 were killed and 24,167 convicted of rebellion or lesser crimes, figures withheld till much later.

  Beginning with the struggle over Rowlatt, Hindu-Muslim trust had grown hearteningly all over India. The Moplah outbreak injured the trust. Stories of forced conversions spread across the country, and movements for strengthening the Hindu community were launched. Some of these movements in turn caused disquiet among Muslims.

  In April 1921 Lord Reading, the former Rufus Isaacs, ex- Attorney-General and Lord Chief Justice in the UK, succeeded Chelmsford as Viceroy. He sent for Gandhi; they had six talks spread over thirteen hours. C.R. expected nothing new or striking from the talks but he did not share the apprehension of some that Gandhi would be softened by the new Viceroy.

  The Mahatma was achieving astonishing results. He had come close to the Tilak fund target and recruited six million members for Congress. Young men in thousands enrolled in the National Volunteer Corps. Khadi-clad shock troops of Swaraj penetrated squalid villages and industrial slums, teaching spinning, promoting literacy and deprecating drink and untouchability.

  India was astir — and altering. One way in which C.R. helped was by explaining Gandhi’s moves. As Young India put it, C.R.’s introduction to Freedom’s Battle, a collection of the Mahatma’s speeches and articles, provided ‘crushing replies’ to ‘the stock objections against noncooperation.’

  Had Hindus gained by worrying about Muslims in the Middle East? Yes, said C.R.: ‘The Indian support of the Khilafat has, as if by a magic wand, converted what was once the pan- Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship and defence for India.’

  Was not non-cooperation negative? No, it was building unity among Indians. ‘Even if we had no grievances against this Government, noncooperation with it, for a time, would be desirable in so far as it would perforce lead us to trusting and working with one another . . .’

  He also dealt with the plea for a ‘constitutional’ path to freedom: ‘An Act of Parliament can never create citizens in Hindustan. Liberty unacquired, merely found, will on the test fail like the Dead Sea Apple’ (Young India, 6.4.21).

  By July 1921 the tempo was high. Turkey’s Sultan had become a British puppet. Kamal Ataturk was leading his country’s nationalists against the Treaty and fighting a British-backed Greek invasion. In fiery speeches in Karachi, the Ali brothers called upon Muslims in India to leave the police and the army.

  To end dependence on foreign cloth, bonfires of imported textiles took place. Gandhi himself set a pile alight in Bombay on July 31, claiming that he was diverting the public’s hatred from (British) individuals to inanimate things.

  When he heard of the Moplah outbreak, Gandhi decided to go to Malabar with Muhammad Ali. On their way, at Waltair, Ali was arrested. Shaukat’s arrest followed. The Karachi speeches were cited as the reason. At Trichy, C.R. standing beside him, Gandhi declared that had he been in Karachi he would have backed the brothers.

  On the train between Trichy and Madura, Gandhi showed C.R. a statement he had prepared, announcing that he was reducing his raiment to a waist-to-knee length of cloth. This would be, said the Mahatma, in mourning for the arrest of Ali, and in identification with India’s poorest. It would also answer the objection about khadi’s cost; his new khadi dhoti would be cheaper than a standard-length dhoti of imported cloth.

  Though he ‘employed all kinds of arguments to dissuade the Mahatma,’ C.R. failed. ‘I am absolutely clear about the correctness of the step I have taken,’ Gandhi told him.19

  The sartorial change interested the Raj. From Madras, Governor Willingdon wrote to the Viceroy: ‘I hope he would not die of pneumonia as a result! Though his demise might save us all a lot of trouble.’20

  The Ali brothers’ arrest intensified the fight. Gandhi, told to keep out of Malabar, wrote that ‘sedition has become the creed of the Congress,’ and added that noncooperation ‘deliberately aims at the overthrow of the Government’ (Young India, 29.9.21). Yet the Government did not lay hands on the Mahatma, for fear of the people’s reaction.

  Early in October, C.R. joined a gathering in Bombay of leaders from all over India. In a manifesto the leaders said that it was ‘the duty of every Indian soldier and civilian to sever his connection with the Government and find some other means of livelihood’ (Young India, 6.10.21).

  After daring the Government to do its worst, the Mahatma and C.R. travelled together to Sabarmati, Gandhi’s Ashram outside Ahmedabad. The 1919 hospitality was being returned, and there were walks and talks at the Ashram.

  About seventy-five years old, his health eroded by diabetes, Chakravarti Iyengar struggled against a fever and asked for ‘Rajan.’ C.R.’s boys sent their father a wire. There was a moment of recognition when C.R. arrived, after which Chakravarti Iyengar went into delirium. Proud, thrifty, and hopeful of major things from his son, he had overcome to a large extent the unhappiness he felt when C.R. gave up practice. On 20 October 1921 he passed away.

  By then C.R. had suffered another loss. His eldest brother, Narasimhachar, at 54, his senior by 11 years, suddenly died two days before his father. Sending Krishnaswami to his brother’s rites, C.R. arranged his father’s obsequies. These possessed the odour of sanctity, with proper priests serving; Iyengar’s fear of a caste boycott at his last rites proved false.

  His responsibilities as Gandhi’s colleague and General Secretary of Congress had restricted C.R.’s times with his ailing father. Years later, looking back on this period, C.R. would tell the author that he harboured dissatisfaction with his filial role; he thought he could have done more as a son, without injury to the cause.

  When the Ali brothers were awarded two years’ rigorous imprisonment, the Mahatma announced that he would lead mass civil disobedience in Bardoli. The people of Bardoli, a taluk of Surat district in Gujarat, would simply refuse to pay taxes.

  ‘When the Swaraj flag floats victoriously at Bardoli,’ said Gandhi early in November, ‘then the people of the taluk next to Bardoli . . . should seek to plant the flag of Swaraj in their midst. Thus, district by district . . . throughout the length and breadth of India, should the Swaraj flag be hoisted.’ But he warned that he might stop the movement if there was violence.21

  The Prince of Wales arrived on 17 November. India observed a hartal on the day but violence in Bombay sullied its success. Those welcoming the royal guest were attacked in the streets; the riots and the police reaction took 58 lives. An eyewitness to mob scenes, Gandhi said that the Swaraj he had seen stank in his nostrils. He fasted until the non-cooperators made peace with the cooperators — and postponed the Bardoli rebellion.

  Troubled by the violence, C.R. suggested to the Mahatma that boycotting the Prince was ‘a political manoeuvre,’ involving no sacrifice. Gandhi replied: ‘You do not understand the pain I suffered in not meeting the Prince.’22

  To the Raj, the hartal was an act of defiance. Though not yet ready to arrest Gandhi, it banned, in different parts of the country, the volunteer organizations of Congress and the Khilafat.

  Thousands peacefully and openly defied the bans, filled the Raj’s prisons, and looked forward to sounds of triumph from Bardoli.

  When the Madras Government issued an order forbidding meetings, C.R. declared that he would disobey it. Leaflets were printed announcing that he would address a meeting in Vellore on 14 December. Over 5,000 gathered to hear him. C.R. asked them to maintain communal unity and to ‘keep to the path of nonviolence under all provocation’ (The Hindu, 15.12.21).

  At e
ight the next morning he was served with summons. ‘I feel today as young as yourself and so buoyant,’ he wrote at noon to Devadas.23 He was brought to trial at 4.00 p.m. but the prosecution was not ready, and the case was adjourned for four days.

  His sons were in the Salem Extension house, under the care of his brother Srinivasa, who was also looking after the children of the deceased Narasimhachar. Lakshmi, now nine, was with Namagiri and her husband Varadachari in Rangoon.

  Sending the addresses of his children to the Mahatma, C.R. informed him that he would ask for the full sentence. ‘Good,’ Gandhi wired back. ‘Hope you will get maximum penalty.’24 On 18 December C.R. wrote to Devadas:

  Think of me and pray for me . . . that I may not lose faith and hope. We are in great times.

  Bapu is like a trunk shorn of all hands and feet. All his companions in all provinces including even little me have simultaneously decided to run away into prison voluntarily.

  You don’t go to prison. You should remain free for work outside. Harilal (the Mahatma’s eldest son) has cheated you by going first.25

  After the judge sentenced him for three months, C.R. wrote to Gandhi: ‘I feel am realizing the object of my life as I am approaching the prison’ (Young India, 12.1.22).

  4

  Jail

  1921-22

  C.R. was locked up in a cell in Vellore Central Jail. As the key was carried away he was conscious, he wrote in a diary, of a ‘rather strange and new’ feeling, which however gave way to another thought. ‘For the first time’ in his life he felt that he ‘was free, and had thrown off the foreign yoke.’

  He had taken with him some clothes, a pillow, a thick sheet, a shawl, a flask, a quire of paper, and a few books — the Mahabharata in Tamil and English, the Bible, the Kural, a Shakespeare volume, Robinson Crusoe, and a work on Socrates.