Imagining Lahore

by Haroon Khalid

  Since the creation of Pakistan, Bradlaugh Hall has assumed various incarnations. Abandoned at the time of Partition, it was re-appropriated as a food warehouse. Sometime in the 1980s, it was converted into the Milli Technical Education Institute. Soon a conflict broke out between the directors of the institute, with one of them occupying the Hall and renting it out to private academies.17 Finally the Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB) took over the Hall in 2009. The ETPB is a government institution established in 1960 to administer properties left behind by non-Muslim refugees during Partition. It argued that the occupants of Bradlaugh Hall had taken over the property illegally after Partition. Since 2009 there has been a giant lock placed by the ETPB at the gate of the Hall.

  A nineteenth-century political activist, Charles Bradlaugh was one of the few Englishmen of his time who were sympathetic to the plight of the Indians under colonial rule. He, along with a handful of other well-wishers, asked for greater representation of Indians in the Indian government. Bradlaugh was roped into politics by Allan Octavian Hume, a member of the Imperial Civil Service later known as Indian Civil Service (ICS), who is regarded as the ‘Father of the Congress’.18

  Set up in 1885, the Indian National Congress at its inception was a pro-Empire organization that believed in the benevolent nature of British colonialism for providing ‘political liberty’, which had never been available to Indians prior to the arrival of the ‘White Man’.19 It is for this reason that the Congress was initially seen as a friendly organization by government officials who regularly attended its sessions. Some of its earliest resolutions dealt with the spread of education, cutting back of military budgets, abolition of excise tax and, most importantly, availability of government employment for Indians.

  Towards the end of the nineteenth century, with the spread of British education, several Indians believed they were qualified enough to participate in the ICS. While on paper the service was open to them, in practice there was widespread discrimination in their being inducted into it, resulting in much resentment.20 A need was felt for a political organization that would channel the grievances of Indians to the colonial state. This became one of the most important reasons for the establishment of the Congress.

  Till the First World War, Englishmen sympathetic to the plight of Indians played an important role in the functioning of the Indian National Congress. For example, till 1917, Hume served as the head of the Congress Secretariat. Sir William Wedderburn, another bureaucrat of the ICS and one of the founders of the Congress, was elected twice to serve as its president, in 1889 and 1910. Sir Henry Cotton, another ICS officer, served as president of the Congress in 1904.21

  The situation began to change drastically after the arrival of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, a Marathi lawyer who was among the first to raise the voice of Indian nationalist sentiment.22 Tilak joined the Congress in 1890 and resented its passive attitude towards the Empire. He wanted it to demand greater autonomy for Indians, eventually resulting in a division within the party, between the Moderates and the Extremists.

  Accepting the providential character of the British in India, the Moderates argued that Indians must first reform their own society by removing its social and religious evils. Only then would they be ready for political reform. The Extremists, on the other hand, led by Tilak, argued that political reforms would result in the implementation of the required social and religious reforms.

  Joining hands with Tilak was Lala Lajpat Rai from Punjab. A graduate of the prestigious Government College in Lahore, Rai became acquainted with Tilak during the first session of the Congress held in the city in 1893.23 A prominent member of the Arya Samaj, Rai believed in the ‘golden era’ of Hinduism and argued that adherence to the Hindu faith would result in the revival of the country. He, along with Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal, a Bengali politician, formed what came to be known as the ‘Lal Bal Pal’ trinity and laid the foundation of the assertive Indian nationalism that would eventually sideline the Moderates.24

  Lala Lajpat Rai became the face of the Congress in Punjab. The party’s popularity soared when another session was organized in Lahore in 1900. It was held in the newly constructed Bradlaugh Hall, raised particularly for the occasion with funds collected from sympathizers of the party in the city and beyond. Even today, at the main entrance of the Hall is a plaque that records its inauguration on 30 October 1900 by Surendranath Banerjee, a Bengali politician, two months before the session of the Congress. Thereafter, Bradlaugh Hall in Lahore became home to all Congress sessions in the city. In fact, it was at Bradlaugh Hall that members of the Indian National Congress met on 19 December 1929, which culminated in the declaration of Purna Swaraj on 31 December on the banks of the Ravi.25

  The Partition of Bengal in 1905 became a turning point for the nationalist struggle in India,26 with the Extremists eventually elbowing out the Moderates. The colonial administration claimed that Bengal had been divided into two for administrative purposes, the west becoming Hindu-dominated and the east becoming Muslim-dominated. The Partition also trigged communal tensions, with Muslims in the province happy about the situation.27 For the Hindus of Bengal this was an example of the divide and rule policy of the colonial state.

  The Indian National Congress under the leadership of the ‘Lal Bal Pal’ trio launched the Swadeshi Movement, boycotting British products and services in favour of Indian products, a precursor to Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation Movement in 1920. In many ways, the Swadeshi Movement was aligned with the Arya Samaj’s philosophy of the regeneration of India’s greatness.

  From 1905 onwards, there was no stopping the growing consciousness of Indian nationalism. In 1909, the Indian Councils Act was introduced, also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, which, along with giving greater representation to the Indians in legislative councils, also introduced separate electorates for Hindus and Muslims. This move fanned communal tensions, with the Muslims supporting separate electorates and Hindu leaders rejecting it.

  The next big nationalist tide came with the Rowlatt Act of 1919.28 Under this new legislation, war-time restrictions imposed during the First World War were made permanent. The act provided the government with the authority to search or arrest any Indian without warrant or confine suspects without trial for up to a year. It also took away an offender’s right to appeal. Compounded with economic woes brought on by the prolonged war in Europe, large-scale protests sprung up in several cities of India. On 9 March 1919, a huge public meeting was organized at Bradlaugh Hall.29 A spontaneous protest turned violent in Amritsar, with protesters throwing stones at police, who retaliated by firing back. The violence spiralled out of control and several government buildings and other properties were ransacked by protesters.

  The British could not afford to lose control over Punjab, its bread basket and primary supplier of recruits to the colonial army. They were also afraid of a repeat of 1857, when Indians, including their forces, had united against the British. The colonial administration wanted to stem this budding tide even if it meant resorting to vicious violence. It is in this context that the Jallianwala Bagh massacre took place in Amritsar on 13 April 1919, when the colonial force opened fire on unarmed protesters and others gathered at Jallianwala Bagh, resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people, according to nationalist sources. Government records limited the casualties to 379.30

  Jallianwala Bagh inspired a wave of outrage throughout the country. It became the ultimate symbol of colonial repression. The British strategy of attempting to stifle nationalism with brute force had backfired.

  This was also the time when a new leader had entered the political arena and provided a fresh impetus to the Indian National Congress and the nationalist movement. In 1915, after returning from South Africa where he had earned quite a reputation fighting for the rights of Indians settled there, M.K. Gandhi joined the Indian National Congress. Immediately after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Gandhi was selected as the Congress representative to compile a report on the massacre, contesting the of
ficial version.31 After the death of Tilak in 1920, Gandhi was to emerge as the chief architect of the ideology of the Indian National Congress.

  At the end of 1921, after being elected president, Gandhi redefined the party’s goal to Swaraj—self-government—and, building upon the swadeshi policy of former Congress leaders, launched his Non-Cooperation Movement. Politically, at least, Swaraj at this point meant complete autonomy for Indians, but not necessarily a breakaway from the Empire. While Lala Lajpat Rai, the ‘Lion of Punjab’ as he had come to be known, decided to throw his weight behind Gandhi’s non-cooperation, he also predicted its failure.32 He argued that the repressive environment in the country after Jallianwala Bagh was not conducive to ‘passive resistance’, his interpretation of Gandhi’s satyagraha. The Non-Cooperation Movement did come to an unceremonious halt after the Chauri Chaura incident on 4 February 1922.

  An alliance between Gandhi and Rai that could have made the Congress more popular in Punjab was weakened after the incident. The Congress or Gandhi could not find any formidable ally from the province thereafter.

  A miniature train, profusely lit, balanced on the roof of the railway station took circles on its tracks. The railway station was decorated with green bulbs. The Kalma, placed on the building after the creation of the country, sparkled in glowing lights. It was as if the entire city of Lahore had come to the station to see this spectacle. Thousands of visitors gaped at the fort-like station. On 14 August every year, the Lahore railway station becomes one of the most visited sites in the country by enthused citizens celebrating the birth of their country.

  Even without the decorations, the railway station is a sight to behold. Unlike several other colonial monuments which depict an amalgamation of colonial architectural traditions and indigenous designs, the railway station seems more British. The thick boundary wall with its dual clock towers is interspersed with a couple of bastions on each side. The bastions almost come across as an anomaly, a forced inclusion into the structure. But they were special times requiring special measures. Constructed just a couple of years after the war of 1857 that had shaken the foundation of the Empire, the British wanted the station to fulfil the dual purpose of acting as a fort in case of a siege.33

  A few kilometres from the station is the walled city of Lahore, home to a majority of the population of the city. The British had already torn down its walls after the nightmare in Delhi. The intermingling of the colonial masters and their subjects, which happened frequently during the earlier phase of colonial rule, came to a complete halt after 1857. A new colonial state emerged in its aftermath, a much more vicious state, convinced of its superiority over the ‘natives’. It was this new state that expressed itself during the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.

  Two cities were emerging in Lahore after 1857 too—one for the locals and the other for the British. The city was expanding westwards where new avenues and bungalows for the colonial masters were being constructed. The railway station was placed right in the middle of these two worlds. It was to become the most important tool in the hands of the colonial state to extend its bureaucratic hold over the rest of the province. It was also a symbol of the ‘progress’ that came with the ‘modernizing’ colonial state.

  Whereas the railways benefited the colonial state economically, it also played a crucial role in forging a sense of common national identity.34 For the first time, Punjab was connected with other parts of the country. With the intermingling of people, there arose a sense of not only a common culture and heritage but also a realization of common problems and cases of discrimination at the hands of the colonial state. The nationalist leaders took full advantage of this growing interconnectivity, travelling to cities and towns far away from their home towns, forming political alliances that culminated in a unified nationalist struggle.

  On 30 October 1928, the Lahore railway station was in a way able to unite the whole of India. The Simon Commission was visiting Lahore and there was a massive protest against it at the station, headed by Lala Lajpat Rai, among others.35 The commission was composed of British parliamentarians visiting India to study the situation and propose constitutional reforms to address demands for self-government and the controversial issue of separate communal electorates.

  This was a crucial period in the history of the Indian National Congress. Inspired by the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917, several young Indians were sceptical of the traditionalist attitude of the old guard of the Congress. Two prominent critics of the old leadership of the Congress were Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose.36 Both felt that the leadership, including Gandhi and Motilal Nehru, were not revolutionary enough. They wanted the Congress to demand complete independence from the British Empire, as opposed to dominion status, which assured self-autonomy to the Indians albeit within the Empire, similar to Canada and Australia.

  While leaders of the Congress and other political organizations sat together to determine their united front against the British-imposed Simon Commission, a young Jawaharlal became increasingly critical of them, including his own father and his mentor, Gandhi.37 He felt any reference to dominion status would be a betrayal of the revolutionary spirit of the country.

  The arrival of Jawaharlal Nehru on the scene heralded yet another phase of nationalism. Moving away from the religious revivalist concept, his understanding of religion and history was inspired by the historical materialism of Marxism. Communal tension was for him a result of economic conflict. Swaraj meant a socialist revolution that would fundamentally alter economic structures and redistribute wealth. He openly talked about the nationalization of large-scale industries, causing anxiety amongst the industrialist backers of the Congress.38 Self-autonomy with dominion status were politics of appeasement and too mild for his revolutionary nature. The old guard of the Congress was sympathetic to some of his revolutionary ideas, but felt he was moving too fast. Many were sceptical too. They would have preferred the moderate temperament of his father, Motilal.

  Quite unexpectedly, Jawaharlal Nehru was elected president of the Congress on 28 September 1929.39 For several days prior to the meeting, Motilal, who was tipped to be the new president of the Congress, was trying to convince Gandhi to choose his son instead. Motilal had been in poor health for some time and believed his time was limited. Several members of the Congress felt that Gandhi should be president. As expected, Gandhi’s name was recommended by the Provincial Committees; however, he, at the last minute, turned it down and recommended Jawaharlal’s name instead. With Motilal’s and Gandhi’s support, Jawaharlal became the president of the Congress during this defining period in its history.

  The Nehru Report, composed by Motilal Nehru, was the Congress’s response to the Simon Commission. Disappointing Jawaharlal, the report still sought dominion status within the British Empire. Jawaharlal was made to accept the demand by Gandhi’s intercession. Gandhi said that if the British Parliament did not accept the recommendations of the report in a year, he would wholeheartedly throw his weight behind Jawaharlal’s demand for complete independence and lead a non-violent, non-cooperation struggle for it.40

  Unresponsive to nationalist demands, the Simon Commission visited several cities of the country in an attempt to glean its political picture. On 30 October 1928, as the Simon Commission stepped on to the Lahore railway station platform, a huge contingent of Congress members shouted slogans of ‘Simon Go Back’. A police lathi charge followed, seriously injuring an ageing Lala Lajpat Rai.

  Even though Rai had distanced himself from the Indian National Congress after Gandhi’s suspension of the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1922, he still held great political clout, particularly in Lahore, where his social welfare projects had earned him quite a reputation. He had set up a National College at Bradlaugh Hall, which became a hub of revolutionary activities in pre-Partition Lahore. It is here that Bhagat Singh met his comrades Sukhdev Thapar and Yashpal. Rai had also established a library close by, the Dwarka Das Library, which housed thousands of books with a p
articular focus on Marxist literature. He founded a weekly magazine as well. In 1927, he had formed a trust to run a TB hospital for women in the city, in honour of his mother, Gulab Devi, who had died of TB. The Gulab Devi Chest Hospital continues to function till today.

  Lala Lajpat Rai succumbed to his injuries on 17 November 1928. His death shook the entire nation.41 A confrontation between the nationalists and the colonial state seemed imminent. Those who had argued for dominion status were now pushed to the other side. Jawaharlal Nehru, in subsequent protests, emerged as a central leader, and his ideology for complete independence was soon to become the official ideology of the Indian National Congress. By the time the Congress gathered in Lahore on 19 December 1929 under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, a year had lapsed since the Nehru Report. Gandhi now stood firmly behind the new leader.

  Standing on the banks of the river on the night of 31 December 1929, the flag of an independent India was unfurled. Jawaharlal Nehru addressed the delegation, beginning his tryst with destiny. Gandhi asked all his supporters to celebrate 26 January 1930 as National Day. Rallies were organized on the assigned day with millions of people taking a pledge of freedom.42 The Congress, from 1930 to 1947, celebrated 26 January as Independence Day.

  Lahore had been Jawaharlal Nehru’s coronation. He was to become a legend, almost a modern-day version of the Buddha, who abandoned the luxuries of the world for the salvation of his people. The titles bestowed upon him included ‘Bharat Bhushan’ (Jewel of India) and ‘Tyagamurti’ (Embodiment of Sacrifice).43 His vision of nationalism and of India that he articulated in Lahore that night would become central to the agenda of the Indian National Congress. For the next several decades, till his death in 1964, it would power the vision of the Indian state. India became Nehru and Nehru became India. However, when the goal of Purna Swaraj was finally achieved, the city where he had first taken the pledge was no longer part of Nehru’s India.