Long suppressed and ignored in most ways by the government, the working classes, with their own militancy, rose up to act with the impetus of political reform. The Congress agitations till then had remained mostly urban. The British were uneasy with the revolts in the countryside. Tilak believed that British imperialism was an evil conspiracy of the military and merchant classes of European Society. The British and other European banks financed British colonialism and it was Britain’s monopoly of the international markets and their conscious bribing of the upper classes of colonised nations, along with their military superiority, that enabled them to dominate much of the world. The same European merchant class was behind the London-based League of Nations (precursor to the United Nations) established in January 1920, of which Tilak observed that it was a “political institution started by the powerful countries to enable themselves to keep under their rule the countries which they already hold”.45 The League, apparently, was supposed to guarantee political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike. But Tilak referred to it as a “club of dacoits” for ignoring and tacitly encouraging the exploitation of the colonised countries. He didn’t rule out a military option but decided that the use of swadeshi and boycott could be the immediate strategy of attacking British economic interests in the country.
Lenin had invested his hopes in Tilak. After the strike in 1908 he observed that the followers of Tilak had introduced to the Bombay working class certain socialist ideas they had drawn primarily from the experience of the Russian working class, and were thus instrumental in awakening the class-consciousness of the Indian proletariat. Now that the Indian proletariat had developed conscious political mass struggle, the British regime was doomed.46 Between 1894 and 1914 the number of factories in India rose from 815 to 2,936.47 The size of this workforce was significant.
J. V. Naik, author and historian of modern India and nineteenth century reform movements, establishes that it was Tilak who made the first known reference to Marx in 1881. He writes in the Economic and Political Weekly: “Tilak, who was amongst the first Indian nationalists to see clearly the central contradiction between British colonial rule and the interests of the Indian people, had introduced Karl Marx and his concept of class conflict to India as early as 1881. Ideologically, Tilak belonged to that school of Indian nationalists who, as early as 1841, made in the columns of Bombay Gazette a penetrative analysis of British rule in all its aspects and reached the conclusion that there is no such thing as beneficent imperialism and that there cannot be anything altruistic about colonial rule.” Naik also writes that it was in the 1870s that the labour movement in India began to emerge but the name of Karl Marx and his concept of class struggle between haves and have-nots was not yet known to India. He adds, “That Tilak had genuine interest in socialist thought is evident from the kind of selections he reproduced from the foreign English journals in the issues of the weekly Mahratta which he edited from its start in 1881and also from the articles which he intermittently wrote championing the cause of the agricultural labourers and industrial workers in the Kesari . . . from 1886 to 1920.” 48
Tilak wrote: “What is it that makes upper and lower classes in modern society? Is it not wealth? What is wealth? Scientifically defined, it is concentrated, accumulated, crystallised, as Marx has it, Labour.”49 There are a number of articles in the Kesari in which Tilak took up the cause of agricultural labourers as well as industrial workers. His inclination towards socialist thought is obvious in his writings of the time. He admired Lenin and referred to Karl Marx as the propounder of socialist rule. His article ‘Russiacha Pudhari Lenin’ (Russia’s Leader Lenin) in the Kesari of 29 January 1918 stands as a testimony to this.
Tilak has been described as a rightist in his economic outlook but he was a farsighted economic thinker. He was practical but also compassionate. On 6 and 13 December 1892, Tilak wrote an editorial titled “Are farmers being forced to rebel?” He said, “It is indeed a very difficult situation where food production is not sufficient to meet the minimum needs of the people and this shortfall is combined with inability to produce and sell industrial products abroad to earn enough exchange to buy food grains from foreign countries. It is not that there is no destitution in other countries but rarely is there a country where poverty is so widespread, throughout the length and breadth of the country as it is in India. If population keeps on expanding at the current rate, how long it will be able to draw sustenance form the soil with fertility diminishing by excessive use?” On 7 December he wrote in an article called “Measures suggested by the Farmers’ Commission”: “Whatever may be the extent of knowledge the farmer acquires because of the spread of the primary education, it is the government’s responsibility to train him in the ways of augmenting his harvest. Once he is shown the way there won’t be much difficulty.” In his editorial on the ways to avert famine he wrote on 25 May 1891: “We should be humane and compassionate while determining the quantum of labour to be extracted from the famished and emaciated famine-stricken workers. The penalties imposed on workers for not completing the allotted work represent the bitter and unpleasant aspects of the present system.” In the editorial “Cheers for the Queen’s Government” published on 1 June 1897, he wrote: “It is true that railways and telegraph enrich the country. But which country? The country which manufactures its own trains. Take the instance of Japan. Japan is a free country. The developments and improvements initiated in that country are meant for the comfort and happiness of the Japanese people. In India, population is expanding fast. Traditional industries and craftsmanship are almost eclipsed. What production we have today is negligible and below par. In the sphere of military and professional training, we are a big zero. People’s health and education are neglected. In short, this country which had some activity and dynamism a hundred years ago is now stagnant and listless, and is wallowing in poverty.”
In “The Causes of Famine”, Tilak wrote: “We do not want to dispute that famines are caused by drought, insufficient rain. The question is why we are not able to fight the famines with the buffer reserves built when the going was good. We are often told that the advanced countries of Europe will never face famine. This means that even if a region there was to face famine conditions, it would have enough resources to buy costly food grains from other places. This is possible because there the farmer is rich enough to fight and overcome famine. The surplus which will accrue, if government spending is reduced, can be used to offset the reduction in farm revenue receipts in the days of famine. Local trade and industries should be encouraged to expand with liberal incentives. Unless this happens, there is every likelihood that the famine-stricken ryots will lose control on famine relief work.” Tilak also advised the farmers to conserve soil and increase its yield and to use rainwater with adequate planning.50
Tilak was one of the delegates at the Maharashtra Industrial Conference held at Pandharpur on 15 November 1907. In a speech made on that occasion he said that industries in India were no longer what they used to be. Attributing this to the lack of government support, he claimed that the government was indifferent to the industrial needs of India. The cry of the people did not reach it. The people did not have sufficient to eat not because there was not enough but because they had no money to buy. He advised the crowd not to rely on government, but to strike out for themselves.
The Mahratta, on 20 January in the same year, had also published a summary of the speech, “Our present Situation” that Tilak had made in Allahabad. He had said,
My first accusation against the Government was that it had done nothing to help the indigenous industries of this country to live. On the other hand, it had helped to kill them by the neglect of industrial education . . . It is not enough merely to encourage indigenous industries; it is obligatory on the state to preserve them by giving industrial education to the artisan class. This obligation is recognised by the Government in England, but it has been invariably neglected by the Government of India. Indian
industries have been ruined in consequence. If we wish to preserve and promote them, we should establish a protective tariff of our own by the boycott of foreign goods. I accept the declaration of Anglo-Indian papers that the British are here by the right of conquest and that they hold India by the might of the sword A Government holding that position is not likely to yield any part of its power by speeches and petitions. There is no example in the whole range of history of a foreign Government, which had established its supremacy by conquest giving complete or a large measure of self-Government to the subject people of its own accord. It is not in human nature to do so. The rulers look after their own interest, not that of the ruled. Philanthropy has no part in politics. It is undeniable that the British Government has given peace to the country and a certain amount of liberty. I do not deny that Indians have received some benefits from their rulers. But they naturally aspire to improve their position. A nation must either progress, or it must fall back. It could not stand still. The desire to advance is perfectly natural, but would Government ever, of its own motion, concede to the people all that they desire? The positions of the Government as well as the people are natural. The Government does not want that we should proceed beyond a certain point; we want to proceed all along the line. And it is not by petitions that our desires can be fulfilled. The clear object of the Government is to maintain a dead level in this country. The encouragement given to the backward classes was to bring them up to this level and no higher.
On 21 December 1907 Tilak addressed a meeting of the mill hands in Chinchpokli, Bombay. Addressing the five thousand mill workers who had waited to hear him, he said,
There are nearly two lakh labourers in Bombay. Now, why are they obliged to come here in search of employment? Simply because the trade and industries of their own villages have been destroyed since the advent of British rule. India produces plenty of corn and sugarcane; but these are exported to England even during a year of famine. I do not say that we should not export our corn to other countries; what I mean is that we should first keep a sufficient quantity for our own use and export only the surplus. This will become apparent to you when you study swadeshism and understand its true meaning. Government officials are more or less opposed to the swadeshi movement because it is likely to injure British trade. The object of swadeshism is to provide us all with food. When you are able to live comfortably, you may buy foreign articles. If while suffering from hunger, you buy such articles at the instigation of your European superior, you will be guilty of cutting throat of your mother, viz., your country. Swadeshism is necessary for us in order that we may live. It is said that the British Government is a kind Government. No doubt it is so, in as much as it prevents us from doing injury to one another. But our prayer to the Government is that it should provide us with sufficient food. We shall have a sufficiency of food only when the profit derived from railways, steamers, etc., goes into our pockets and not into that of European Companies. As we are reduced to beggary, it is our duty to support the swadeshi movement so that we may get food to eat. What our rulers do is only natural; they are working in the interests of their own countrymen. Otherwise, what is the use of their having built up an empire? The British Government is doing just what I myself would have done if I had got an empire. Every one is carrying on a struggle for life. Our eyes are opened only now when we have lost everything. Seven crores of people from among us do not get even one full meal a day. The only remedy for our utter destitution is swadeshism. To make swadeshi fully effective, boycott must be tacked on to it. You should pledge yourselves solemnly to support both the movements. I am advising you in this manner at the risk of incurring the displeasure of Government. Drinking liquor is bad. The Government is no doubt kind-hearted, but it wants to make you drink liquor. The liquor trade is now more extensive than ever and the Government is the cause of this. If you take a pledge not to touch liquor or use foreign goods, the Government will take offence, but do not fear. If you, who are about two lakhs in number, act in unison and in a spirit of determination, what is there that you cannot accomplish? If you act up to the above advice your condition will improve, and you will command respect like the working class in England. When you go back to your villages, tell your relatives how necessary it is to support the swadeshi movement.
Tilak came to Bombay on 6 June. On the night of 6 June he attended a Satya Narayana Puja held by mill hands at Victoria Road and the following day addressed a mass meeting. He advised the mill hands, especially the jobbers and head jobbers, to form committees in their respective mills to discourage liquor drinking amongst the mill hands. The government reports later said, “It is clear from this that Tilak had considered the advisability of gaining the sympathies of mills hands and teaching them how to organise, and had he been vouchsafed a longer period of liberty, would no doubt in time have had a large organised body of mill-hands at his disposal.”
To show what the working classes felt for Tilak, one can only look at the historic strike and the disturbances in Mumbai at the time of Tilak’s trial in 1908. When the mill hands heard that the verdict had gone against Tilak, they struck work spontaneously. The initial reaction of the mill hands was of passive sadness, which took the form of temporary cessation of work. It would not have gone on indefinitely but the British officers took umbrage at this. The strike was considered to be an expression of sympathy for the person who had been judicially convicted for sedition and the mill owners were asked to coerce the workers to get back to work. A section of workers outside some of the mills started encouraging them to stop work. The clamour grew; soon stones were pelted and windows broken. Things started heating up and coercion lead to protests, which further led to rioting. Some Europeans were mobbed and assaulted, and some of them had to take refuge in a liquor shop. It was adjoining two railway lines where the whole length of the road was occupied by the homes of the mill hands. In all there were about six thousand of them. The Europeans were kept hidden by the Parsi owner who later helped them to be escorted by the police. On the way too, the crowd pelted stones. The police fired some revolver shots. Chaos reigned. Soon about four thousand employees of mills like Jacob Sasson Mill and Morarji Gokuldas Mill spilled out on the streets. A military detachment was brought to chase them away. The crowd pelted stones heavily and the military fired some rounds. A few people were wounded. The coolies and cart-owners also joined in. More and more mills struck work and notices in Marathi were found pasted which read: “Why are you asleep? Awake, be ready, and assist your Parel comrades.”
On 22 July Tilak was convicted and sentenced to six years’ transportation. He was immediately sent away by a special train to Ahmedabad. The cloth shop owners of the Mulji Jetha Market in the city held a meeting, at which they decided not to attend work for six days, one day for each year of Tilak’s imprisonment. The next day, nine mills struck work out of sympathy for him. The cloth market, the grain market, freight and share market, and cotton exchange closed their business. The officials set out, with the help of their non-official henchmen, to coerce businessmen, shop keepers and the staff in the shops to keep them open. On the other side, about two hundred men rushed around Girgaum, Sonapur, Chandanwadi, and Lohar street in the city to encourage the shopkeepers to down the shutters. A posse of police was sent to intercept them, and the crowd was brutally dispersed.
On 24 July seventy mills stopped work. At an early hour mill hands belonging to the Western India Mill exhorted the Bombay Cotton Mill workers to join them and soon the crowd proceeded along Chinchpokli Road. The workers of the Rachel Sassoon Mill and the E. D. Sassoon Mill soon joined them. The police forced them to keep moving and, at one stage, seeing the padded police force, the mob divided itself into two sections. One group went away to get more workers, now from the City of Bombay Mill. The Cavalry dispersed them but the others stoned a police station to such an extent that the police started firing at them in response. Three people were killed and many wounded. Some police officers were also injured.
Soon the military was sent into some parts and the crowd stoned the soldiers too. At one place the crowd armed itself with sticks as well as stones. Places were wrecked, people assaulted and in some places, the police were overpowered. There were a few deaths and many injured on both sides. On 25 July seventy-six mills struck work. On 27 July, when it was rumoured that the governor was to pass through the areas, black flags were hung across the street with Tilak’s photographs and the words “Tilak Maharaj-Ki-Jai” on them. The streets were blocked from end to end with a dense crowd of people, all hostile and demonstrative. In the next twenty-four hours, a police station was burnt down, stone pelting restarted and shouts of “Tilak-Maharaj-Ki-Jai” got louder. The scene got increasingly turbulent, large stone slabs were placed across the tramlines and Europeans were targeted. The military was brought in again and the crowds dispersed. The situation finally came under control very slowly and painfully.
The Anglo-Indian papers wondered if it was only because Tilak’s trial was held in the city that the place had seen such violent reactions. Others referred to the fact that the popularity of Tilak had steadily been growing and many, even those who did not share his political ideology, looked up to him as a man who was consumed wholly by the desire to ameliorate the condition of Indians. They respected and admired him. They made reference to his powerful personality and grudgingly accepted that wherever he addressed the people, he gained increasing support. There was no doubt that even where he was not personally known his fame spread, especially amongst the working classes, through the vernacular press. By 1908, countless homes had his picture hung on their walls; Tilak was revered as Tilak Maharaj. The Bombay National Union, with the help of the paper Hind Swarajya, had brought him to the notice of thousands. Its editor-publisher was prosecuted. Other papers like the Vihari and the Arunodaya, both Marathi papers, were gagged, the editors arrested and convicted to rigorous imprisonment.
Lokmanya Tilak- the First National Leader Page 19
