11. “The Asiatic Question: Naidoo Appeal Fails,” JS, January 23, 1909; Naidoo and Others v. Rex, 1909 TSCR 43 (January 22, 1909).
12. Randeria v. Rex, 1909 TSCR 65 (February 4 and 5, 1909).
13. CWMG 9:198.
14. “The Resisters Fail,” RDM, February 4, 1909.
15. CWMG 9:197.
16. Ally and Habib attempted to establish a moderate group to negotiate a settlement with the Transvaal government and send a deputation to London. This effort collapsed when key Ally-Habib supporters, faced with having to oppose Gandhi’s desire for an all-resister deputation, withdrew their support. See Swan, South African Experience, 175–176. See also Hunt, Gandhi in London (New Delhi: Promilla & Co., 1978).
17. “The Deputation,” IO, June 26, 1909.
18. Swan, South African Experience, 176.
19. Satyagraha, 231–232.
20. In addition to the 271 pages, Gandhi wrote a 5-page introduction. Suresh Sharma and Tridip Suhrud (eds.), MK Gandhi’s “Hind Swaraj”: A Critical Edition (New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan, 2010), p. xi. Anthony Parel puts Gandhi’s writing of Hind Swaraj in context:
[Gandhi] came into contact with a very important segment of the newly emerging Indian middle class, the expatriate Indians living abroad. These were the new converts to modern civilisation, and it is their uncritical acceptance of their newly found secular faith that really bothered Gandhi. . . . They were attracted to . . . revolutionary movements . . . [and were not opposed to violence]. . . . Gandhi had this group very much in mind when he wrote Hind Swaraj.
Parel (ed.), “Hind Swaraj” and Other Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), xxiv–xxv. I am greatly indebted to Professor Parel for much of what follows in this chapter with respect to Hind Swaraj.
21. CWMG 70 (1977 edition): 241.
22. For the original Gujarati, see Sharma and Suhrud, MK Gandhi’s “Hind Swaraj.”
23. “Swa refers to ‘self’ as an individual and as a collective; ‘raj’ refers to rule or control.” Ibid., xv.
24. Professor Parel points out that Gandhi’s position on Western civilization is not absolute:
A glimpse into Gandhi’s Western intellectual sources should go a long way towards correcting the view held by some that the Mahatma was opposed to Western civilisation as such. Such a view is so simple as to be false. As Sir Ernest Barker puts it, he was a ‘bridge and a reconciler.’ The breadth and depth of his knowledge of Western intellectual sources suggest that his attack was limited to certain unhealthy tendencies of modern Western civilisation. . . . On the contrary, in Hind Swaraj he joins forces with many concerned Western thinkers in defence of true civilisation values everywhere, East and West.
Parel, “Hind Swaraj” and Other Writings, xlvii.
25. CWMG 10:127.
26. Almost contemporaneously with Hind Swaraj, Gandhi writes: “If a lawyer would boast of his altruism or spirituality, let him earn his livelihood through physical labour and carry on his legal practice without charging anything for it.” CWMG 10:203.
27. “Men” is Gandhi’s term.
28. See, generally, Swan, South African Experience.
29. Lloyd Rudolph and Susanne Hoeber Rudolph locate Hind Swaraj against modernity in Postmodern Gandhi and Other Essays (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).
30. While Buddhism and Jainism had a mild influence on Gandhi, Christianity’s influence on him was strong. Parel, “Hind Swaraj” and Other Writings, 10, n. 8.
31. Ibid., xlii.
32. Holmes, The Common Law (Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1881), 1.
33. CWMG 9:477.
34. “Asiatic Registration,” RDM, December 29, 1909; “West Rand,” RDM, December 31, 1909; CWMG 10:108.
35. Erik H. Erikson claims that Gandhi defined himself as the “only one” capable of particular important missions. Erikson, Gandhi’s Truth (New York: W. W. Norton, 1969), 170, 393.
36. “Asiatic Report,” RDM, August 12, 1910.
37. Shortly after the hearing, Gandhi wrote: “We shall obtain no justice by going to courts of law. We must fight on, relying on our own strength.” CWMG 10:196.
38. CWMG 10:298.
39. Ibid.
40. CWMG 10:404.
41. CWMG 10:392. It was rare for a magistrate to order a resister to both pay a fine and serve a jail sentence.
42. Undoubtedly remembering his earlier dispute with Smuts, Gandhi wrote a detailed account of the meeting. CWMG 11 (1963 edition): 31. See also CWMG 11:29.
43. Gandhi would later clarify that “under swaraj . . . I do not dream . . . of . . . no laws and no law courts. On the contrary . . . [t]here will be law and law-courts . . ., but they will be custodians of the people’s liberty.” CWMG 23 (1967 edition): 29.
44. CWMG 10:334.
45. CWMG 10:324.
46. For a description of the settlement and the events preceding it, see Swan, South African Experience.
47. Gandhi commuted from the farm to Johannesburg two or three times weekly. At first he would allow himself to go only twice weekly. CWMG 10:272. Later he increased this to three times weekly. CWMG 10:384.
Gandhi had been thinking about manual labor for some time. From his reading of Ruskin’s Unto This Last—essays on political economy Polak had given him—he had learned “that a lawyer’s work has the same value as the barber’s.” Autobiography, 299. Inspired by Ruskin, Gandhi had established Phoenix settlement in 1904, a land-based commune in Natal intended to improve its residents’ lives and provide Indian Opinion a home. Gandhi deferred his goal of living on the land himself. He began living at Tolstoy Farm in June 1910.
48. “British Indian Association’s Action,” IO, March 18, 1911. Smuts’ basis for rejecting Ritch is unknown.
49. “Mr. L. W. Ritch, who arrived in Johannesburg on the 5th inst., has commenced practice as a solicitor at Nos. 21–24, Court Chambers, Rissik Street, Johannesburg.” “Transvaal Notes,” IO, April 15, 1911. The Johannesburg Star reported that Gandhi “has already arranged for his legal practice to be taken over by Mr. Ritch.” CWMG 11:44.
50. CWMG 11:25. Earlier he had alerted the community to Ritch’s coming: “He [Ritch] will start practice shortly. If the community helps him, he will earn enough for a living.” CWMG 10:453.
51. Ritch was not the only associate whom Gandhi encouraged to practice law. He also encouraged Schlesin (see “Ladies as Attorneys,” JS, April 23, 1909; Schlesin v. Incorporated Law Society, 1909 TSCR 363 [April 23, 1909]; and Paxton, Sonja Schlesin: Gandhi’s South African Secretary [Glasgow: Pax Books, 2006]), Chhaganlal Gandhi (see CWMG 9:438), and Sorabji (see CWMG 11:5, n. 1; Satyagraha, 212–213).
52. CWMG 11:64.
SOURCES
PAPERS
British Sessional Papers. Papers Relating to the Grievances of Her Majesty’s Indian Subjects in the South African Republic. C-7911 (1895).
NEWSPAPERS
For citations to the newspaper stories on which the author relied, please see the author’s complete endnotes at disalvo.law.wvu.edu.
Indian Opinion
Johannesburg Star
Natal Advertiser
Natal Mercury
Natal Witness
The Press
Rand Daily Mail
Times of London
Transvaal Government Gazette
Transvaal Leader
DOCUMENTS: GANDHI SMARAK SANGRAHALAYA, SABARMATI ASHRAM, AHMEDABAD
“Bank deposit receipts and other famine relief records.” SNs 2091–0001 et seq.
“Correspondence from William Edward Pitcher to M. K. Gandhi” (November 30, 1897 and December 1, 1897). SNs 2609 and 2612.
“Costs, Charges and Expenses relating to the Appeal of Suliman Ebrohim Vauda.” SN 2879 (undated).
“Fee Statement from E. Howard Langston to Gandhi.” SN 3855 (June 26, 1901).
“Letter from C. Bird to Dada Abdoola and Company.” SN 1958 (January 25, 1897).
“Letter from Dumat and Davis to Gandhi.�
� SN 4082 (September 5, 1903).
“Letter from G. A. De R. Labistour to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 2901 (January 4, 1899).
“Letter from Gregorowski to Gandhi.” SN 4069 (July 24, 1903).
“Letter from J. Alexander to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 1939 (January 22,1897).
“Letter from Master of the Transvaal Supreme Court to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4071 (August 6, 1903).
“Letter from Parsee Rustomjee to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 32371 (October 19, 1901).
“Letter from R. Alexander to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 1938 (January 22, 1897).
“Letter from R. Gregorowski to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4110 (December 18, 1903).
“Letter from William Morcom to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 2891 (December 23, 1898).
“Letter of Budree to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4318a (January 24, 1905).
“Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi.” SN 4079 (September 2, 1903).
“Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi.” SN 4081 (September 3, 1903).
“Letter of Dumat & Davis to Gandhi.” SN 4082 (September 5, 1903).
“Letter of F. A. Laughton to Gandhi.” SN 2764 (June 24, 1898).
“Letter of F. A. Laughton to Gandhi.” SN 3263 (August 4, 1899).
“Letter of G. B. Cooke, Solicitor, to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 405–0001 (July 22, 1895).
“Letter of Gandhi to Dumat and Davis.” SN 4087 (September 19, 1903).
“Letter of George Goodricke to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4354a (April 10, 1906).
“Letter of Goordeen Ahir to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4318b (February 22, 1906).
“Letter of M. K. Gandhi to Assistant Master of the Supreme Court.” SN 4219 (January 5, 1905).
“Letter of M. K. Gandhi to Goordeen Ahir.” SN 4318c (March 6, 1906).
“Letter of M. K. Gandhi to Hillier & Co.” unknown SN (April 22, 1906).
“Letter of Oswald Askew to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 3638 (January 8, 1897).
“Letter of R. K. Khan to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4320 (June 4, 1908).
“Letter of Reuben Beningfield & Son to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 4712a (August 12, 1909).
“Letter to Abdoolla Carim” (sic). SN 3661 (March 30, 1897).
“Letter to Abdoolla Carim” (sic). SN 3662 (March 30, 1897).
“Letter to D. B. Shukla.” SN 233944 (undated).
“Letter to Gandhi from F. A. Laughton.” SN 3262 (August 4, 1899).
“Letter to Gandhi from F. A. Laughton.” SN 3413 (March 22, 1900).
“Letter to Gandhi from G. B. Cooke.” SN 405 (July 22, 1895).
“Letter to Gandhi from Gustave Labistour.” SN 3114 (March 12, 1899).
“Letter to Gandhi from Khan.” SN 2758 (June 1898).
“Letter to Gandhi from O. J. Askew.” SN 3919 (January 24, 1896).
“Letter to Gandhi from William Edward Pitcher.” SN 2605–2 (November 22, 1897).
“Letter to Gandhi from William Morcom.” SN 2891 (December 23, 1898).
“Letter to Indian Merchants.” SN 2182–0001 (March 30, 1897).
“Letter to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 2893 (December 26, 1898).
“Letter to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 3165 (March 31, 1899).
“Letter to M. K. Gandhi from William Morcom.” SN 3915 (October 3, 1901).
“Letter to W. Lehman from M. K. Gandhi.” SN 3812 (April 17, 1901).
“Memorandum of Agreement among Sheik Ameer, Budrea and others.” SN 4323 (March 1906).
“Memorandum of Frederick Laughton analyzing the merits of Gandhi’s exceptions to the complaint in Meter v. Meter.” SN 560 (October 12, 1895).
“Notarial Bond.” SN 4225 (March 4, 1905).
“Opinion Letter from F. A. Laughton to M. K. Gandhi.” SN 870 (April 15, 1896).
“Opinion Letters from F. A. Laughton to M. K. Gandhi.” SNs 3757 (January 18, 1901) and 3759 (January 21, 1901).
“Opinion Letter from Renaud and Robinson.” SN 2900 (December 31, 1898).
“Opinion Letter of R. Gregorowski.” SN 4247 (August 5, 1905).
“Opinion Letter of William Morcom.” SN 2054 (February 19, 1897).
“Opinion of F. A. Laughton.” SN 3134 (March 14, 1899).
“Opinion of J. W. Leonard and Arthur Hume.” SN 4780 (December 30, 1907).
“Opinion of Seward Brice.” SN 3784 (October 9, 1902).
“Pleadings of June 17, 1898.” SNs 2755 and 2757 (Moosa Hajee Adam v. Hassim Juma [Durban Circuit Court]).
“Preliminary Opinion of Gustave A. de Roquefeuil Labistour re Indian Licences.” SN 3114 (March 12, 1899).
“Statement of Bennett Expenses due to Hawthorn and Mason.” SN 2969 (July 30, 1895).
“Trust Transfer of 1895.” SN 709 (1895).
Untitled item. SN 2091–0016 (June 6, 1896).
Untitled item. SN 3750C.
Untitled item. SN 4036.
Untitled item. SN 7908.
Untitled item. SN 7910.
STATUTES, PROCLAMATIONS, REGULATIONS, RULES
Natal
General Rules for the Admission of Advocates or Attorneys and Candidate Attorneys to the Supreme Court of Natal (1893).
Government Notice No. 517 of 1897.
Law 39 of 1896, Section 8.
Law No. 19 of 1872.
South African Republic
Law 30 of 1896.
Law respecting Coolies, Arabs, and other Asiatics (No. 3, 1885), as amended, Staats Courant, No. 621, November 23, 1898.
Transvaal
Law 38 of 1902.
Transvaal Proclamation No. 14 of 1902.
Case Reports
Natal Law Reports
Advocates of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1894) and Attorneys of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1894). XV Natal Law Reports (1894).
Advocates of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1895) and Attorneys of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1895). XVI Natal Law Reports (1895).
Advocates of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1896) and Attorneys of the Supreme Court (Corrected to 31st December, 1896). XVII Natal Law Reports (1896).
Cassim Abdulla v. Bennett. XVI Natal Law Reports 159 (1895).
Chelligadu v. G. Wilkinson. XXI Natal Law Reports 24 (1900).
Coakes v. Ismail Dawjee. XV Natal Law Reports 369 (1894).
Duyall v. G. A. Riches. XXIII Natal Law Reports 94 (1902).
Ebrahim v. Jennings. XIX Natal Law Reports 93 (1898).
Ex parte Coakes. XVI Natal Law Reports 106 (1895).
Ex parte Russell, In re Coakes XVI Natal Law Reports 98 (1895).
In re Gandhi. XV Natal Law Reports 263 (1894).
In re: Intestate Estate of Hassan Dawjee. XV Natal Law Reports 211 (1894).
In re Intestate Estate of Hassan Dawjee. XVI Natal Law Reports 95 (1895).
In re K. B. Ratanji. XXIII Natal Law Reports 41 (1902).
In Re: M. C. Camrooden & Co. XX Natal Law Reports 171 (1899).
In re M. H. Nazar. XXII Natal Law Reports 369 (1901).
In re Regina v. Camroodeen. XV Natal Law Reports 335–336 (1894).
In re Russell v. Mackenzie. XVI Natal Law Reports 45 (1895).
In re Stephenson. XII Natal Law Reports 169 (1891).
Laughton v. Griffin & Others. XV Natal Law Reports 369 (1894).
Mahomed Amod Kajee v. Mapumulo Licensing Board. XXII Natal Law Reports 92 (1901).
Moosa Hoosen v. Clerk of the Peace. XX Natal Law Reports 212 (1899).
Moosajee v. Randles Brother and Hudson. XV Natal Law Reports 223 (1894).
Musa v. Dyer. XIX Natal Law Reports 26 (1898).
P. D. Desai v. Alum. XXI Natal Law Reports 278 (1900) (“P. D.” appears to be a typographical error.)
P. B. Desai v. Alum. XXII Natal Law Reports 3 (1901).
Randles Bros. & Hudson v. M. S. Coovadia. XXI Natal Law Reports 31 (1900).
Robinson & Son v. Durban Corporation. XV Natal Law Reports 360 (1894).
Rungasamy Padiachy v. The Clerk of the Peace, Durban. XVI Natal Reports 244 (1895).
Solnath v.
Durban Corporation. XIX Natal Law Reports 70 (1898).
Vanda v. Newcastle. XIX Natal Law Reports 28 (1898).
Vauda [sic] v. Mayor and Councillors of New Castle. Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. 1899 Law Reports 246 (1898); LXXIX The Law Times Reports 600 (1899); XX Natal Law Reports 1 (1898).
South African Republic Case Reports
Brown v. Leyds N.O. IV Official Reports of the High Court of the South African Republic 17 (1897).
Ismail Suleiman & Co. vs. Landdrost of Middelburg. II Reports of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the South African Republic (Transvaal) 244 (1888).
Tayob Hajee Khan Mohamed v. The Government of the South African Republic (F. W. Reitz, N.O.), V Reports of Cases Decided in the High Court of the South African Republic 168 (1898).
Transvaal Case Reports
African Political Organisation and The British Indian Association v. Johannesburg City Council. 1906 Transvaal Law Reports 962 (1906).
Aswat v. Registrar of Asiatics. 1908 Transvaal Supreme Court Reports 568 (1908).
Habib Motan v. Transvaal Government. 1904 Transvaal Law Reports 404 (1904).
Lucas’ Trustee v. Ismail and Amod. 1905 Transvaal Law Reports 239 (1905).
Mangena v. Law Society. 1910 Transvaal Provincial Division 649 (1910).
Naidoo and Others v. Rex. 1909 Transvaal Supreme Court Reports 43 (1909).
Rama and Another v. Rex. 1907 Transvaal Supreme Court Reports 949 (1907).
Randeria v. Rex. 1909 Transvaal Supreme Court Reports 65 (1909).
Schlesin v. Incorporated Law Society. 1909 Transvaal Supreme Court Reports 363 (1909).
Union of South Africa Case Reports
Chotabhai v. Minister of Justice and Another. 1910 South African Law Reports (Transvaal Provincial Division) 1151 (1910).
Chotabhai v. Union Government (Minister of Justice) and Registrar of Asiatics, 1911 South African Law Reports (Appellate Division) 13 (1911).
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS
Council of the Incorporated Law Society of the Transvaal, Minutes of the Meeting of April 14, 1903.
M.K. Gandhi, Attorney at Law Page 42