Was Madras Benighted?: The British Beauracratic control over the Swadeshi Press and Political Literature Madras Presidency, 1908-1912

Was Madras Benighted?: The British Beauracratic control over the Swadeshi Press and Political Literature

Madras Presidency, 1908-1912

 

Dr.V.Venkatraman, Ph.D., D.Litt.,

Principal and Head

Research Centre in History

Rajaplayam Rajus’ College

Rajapalayam-626117

About Author:

 

Received 11National and State Level Awards and Recognitions..Authored 13 Research oriented books on Indian National Movement and 3 books under print.Produced 13 Ph.D.Scholars, 1Ph.D.Scholar submitted and guiding 5 Ph.D Scholars.46 Research printed articles and publications in the International journals like Research Gate, Google Scholar, SSRN (Elsevier),Journal of Social Sciences Research(Elsevier) etc., and Peer Reviewed (UGC Listed) National journals. And also two of my articles got 8thand 10th rank in WGSRN Journal. One of my articles got more than 52000 reads in Research Gate.Contributed Research articles to the Newspapers like TheDeccan Chronicle, Dinamalar, Dinamani, Daily Thanthi, Malaimurasu, The Rationalist, and The Varthaijournals.Completed One Minor Research and One Major Research Project (UGC, New Delhi).Obtained M.A., M.T.M., M.Phil., Ph.D. from Madurai Kamaraj University.Obtained D.Litt (Doctor of Letters by Research) to the Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai in July 2017.Centre Head, Research Centre in History, Rajus’ College, Rajapalayam since 2006.Produced 24 M.Phil scholars and guiding 7 scholars.Served as the Local Secretary, South Indian History Congress(2007); and South Indian Numismatic Society Conference (2013).

Abstract

Lord Curzon, the then Viceroy of India partitioned Bengal on 16th October 1905 and this move created a strom of protest all over India. The people were aroused by the spirit of nationalism and were determined to fight the British to the end. The nationalists launched the Swadeshi Movement in 1906 and the Indian National Congress declared that year as the “Swadeshi Year”. ‘Swadeshi’, ‘Boycott’. ‘Swaraj’ and ‘National Education’ were the main objects of the Congress.  The Swadeshi Movement which originated in Bengal gradually spread to other parts of the nation.

The Swadeshi Press and Political Literature thus heroically encountered the dictatorial measures and actions of the British Government.  The repressive attitude of the government was denounced unequivocally in these political literatures, published during the course of the Swadeshi movement i.e., from 1910to1912.  The tone of these literatures was highly revolutionary in character.  They focused much on the efficacy of Militant Nationalism. Every aspect of the Swadeshi Movement as perceived by the grass root nationalist was revealed in these pamphlets.  They were circulated among the Militant Nationalists of Madras Presidency between 1910 and 1912.  The appeals made by these Swadeshi literatures were practically applied by Vanchi Iyer on 17th June 1911, by assassinating Robert William D.Ashe, the Collector of Tinnevely district at Maniyatchi Railway station. 

 

Keywords: The Swadeshi Press, Madras Presidency, The Indian Press Act 1910, The Swadesamitran, Political Literature, Proscription, Benighted.

 

Introduction

Lord Curzon, the then Viceroy of India partitioned Bengal on 16th October 1905 and this move created a strom of protest all over India. The people were aroused by the spirit of nationalism and were determined to fight the British to the end.[i] The nationalists launched the Swadeshi Movement in 1906 and the Indian National Congress declared that year as the “Swadeshi Year”. ‘Swadeshi’, ‘Boycott’. ‘Swaraj’ and ‘National Education’ were the main objects of the Congress.  The Swadeshi Movement which originated in Bengal gradually spread to other parts of the nation.[ii]

In the Madras Presidency, the Swadeshi nationalists like V.O.Chidambaram Pillai, C.Subramania Bharathi, Dr.Nanjunda Rao, K.Venkatramana Iyengar, Surendranath Arya, Subramania Siva, Neelakanda Bramahchari and others organized meetings to protest against the partition of the Bengal.  Finding the Swadeshi Movement gaining momentum, the Government of Madras issued several circulars and ordinances to abrogate the freedom of expression and free criticism.  To begin with, the Swadeshi leaders of Madras Presidency were mild in their approach which prompted the British to regard South India as the “benighted Presidency or a slept hollow”.  This trend however changed when Bipin Chandra Pal visited Madras on 1st May 1907. He delivered a series of lectures from 2nd May 1907 at the Marina Beech, Madras.  He spoke on concepts like ‘Swaraj’, ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’.  He made an indelible impression on his listeners.  In addition to public meetings B.C.Pal, held private get-togethers wherein only a few trustworthy persons were invited.  On receipt of the information regarding the deportation of Lala Lajipat Rai, B.C.Pal cancelled his other engagements in Madras and returned to Calcutta.  Thus his lecture tour came to an end abruptly.  However, the visit of B.C.Pal infused new vigour into the activities of the nationalists of Madras and whipped up the Swadeshi Movement.[iii]

                The Swadeshi nationalistsinspired by the speeches of B.C.Pal, undertook extensive tours of the districts of Madras Presidency and explained to the public the efficacy of the Swadeshi Movement, such sustained propaganda work, the message of Swadeshi began to reach the grass-roots.  The nationalist press of the period responded enthusiastically to the call given by the Swadeshi leaders and published articles infavour of the movement.  The impact of the movement was such that the student community of the Madras Presidency involved themselves actively in the programmes launched by the Swadeshi leaders.[iv]

The impact of the Surat split of 1907 was felt in the Madras Presidency.  The split gave fillip to the extremist movement.During this period, G.Harshavartom Rao and V.O.Chidambaram Pillai spearheaded the ‘extremist thinking’ respectively in Telugu and Tamil speaking areas of  this Presidency.  The spirit of nationalism was very vigorous in places like Rajamundry, Masulipatnam and Coconada in Andhra region; and Tinnavelly and Tuticorin in Tamil country.[v]  Swadeshi meetings were organized in different parts of Southern districts of the Madras Presidency addressed by leaders like V.O.Chidambaram Pillai, Subramania Siva, Ethiraj Surendranath Arya, Padmanabha Iyyengar etc.[vi]

                During this period, the vernacular press played a consistant role in supporting the cause of the nationalists.  It wrote editorials in support of the nationalists.  Tamil papers like the Swadesamitran and the India carried articles which referred to the inhuman activities of the British against the Indians.  S.Srinivasa Iyengar, editor of the India was convicted for publishing certain articles in the issues of the January and June 1908 which were regarded as seditious by the government. To escape official harassment, the India paper office shifted its abode to Pondicherry from where it resumed its publications more vigorously with C.Subramania Bharathi and S.Srinivachari.[vii]  G.Subramania Iyer, the editor of the Swedesamitran was arrested on 21st August 1908, for publishing certain articles which were regarded as objectionable by the government.  Taking into consideration his health condition, the government released G.Subramania Iyer on getting a bond for good behaviour for a period of one year under section 108 of Cr.P.C. for a sum of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties of Rs.2,000/- each.[viii]

                The government which entertained the firm view that newspaper and other literature created conditions conducive to revolution in India, Lord Minto II, the then Viceroypassed the Press Act of 1910 on 8th March, 1910 to curb seditious writings.  Thus the year 1910 witnessed the enactment of the most vigorous and repressive legislation hitherto unknown to the Indian press.  This Act authorised all local governments to declare forfeiture of any printed material which contained anti-Government matter.[ix] As a result, the provisions of the Press Act 1910 were invoked against many papers which were critical of the British Government.  However, this repressive press measure did not hamper the spirit of the Indian nationalist press in anyway.[x]

Proscription in Madras Presidency

                In the history of the Indian national movement, the period between 1905 and 1912 is regarded as the era of the extremists.  The general tone of the vernacular press during this period was virulent.[xi] The vernacular press of the said period did a commendable job in mobilising the public opinion against the British.  This period witnessed a publication of leaflets, pamphlets, cartoons etc. in English as well as in vernacular languages. The            pro-nationalist tone of the press resulted in the proscription of a very large amount of literature all over India.

                This first work to be proscribed by the Government of Madras was an English pamphlet entitled Ca Ira published in Paris by E.H.James. This pamphlet contained an article which gave a call for revolution and this was found in circulation in Madras and Coimbatore.  The Government of Madras felt that the contents of the pamphlet tended to bring hatred and contempt against the government and incited acts of violence in the Madras Presidency.  Hence, it issued an order on 8th March 1910 proscribing the pamphlet.[xii] Thus, Ca Ira became the first victim to section 12 (1) of the Indian Press Act of 1910.[xiii]

                Among the vernacular papers in Madras Presidency, the Tamil paper India became the first victim to the Indian Press Act of 1910.[xiv]TheIndia in its issue of, 12th February 1910 published an article entitled The Seven Secrets of the New Bill,[xv]which revealed the oppresive attitude of the government towardsto the press.  The author of this article cited above exhorted the people to be aware of their rights and advised them not to sacrifice their liberty at any cost.[xvi] The tone of the article published in the India made the Government of the Madras Presidency to evolve steps to check its importation from Pondicherry.[xvii] The Tamil newspaper theIndia was finally forfeited on 8th March 1910 under section 12 (1) of the India Press Act, 1910, alongwith the Suryodayam and the Vijaya newspapers published from Pondicherry.  There two Tamil newspapers were proscribed only because of Bharathi’s involvement in these papers.[xviii]

                I.Lakshminarayana Iyer, the publisher of the India, newspaper made an appeal on 15th March 1910 and subsequently on 5th April 1910 to the Governor of Madras Presidency requesting his to lift the ban on the India and give him “another change of being useful to the society.[xix] The Government of Madras relented and allowed the circulation of the paper in Madras Presidency.  The tone of the paper after its revival remained seditious.  The officials found the articles headed “Which is true?” and “Follow your own duty” (Dharma), published in its issue of 2nd July 1910 as objectionable.[xx] The government felt that the real intention of these two articles was not to do any good to the Indians but incite hatred upon the British Government.  These articles not only condemned the British administrators but branded as robbers and docoits.[xxi] On the direction from the Government of India, the Government of Madras declared forfeited the India paper on 24th August 1910 under section 12 (1) of the Press Act of 1910.[xxii]

                Another Tamil newspaper the Suryodayam published from Pondicherry, edited by C.Subramania Bharathi, carried many anti-British articles in its frequent issues. This paper made attempts to inculcate in the minds of the public a desire for freedom.  An article entitled A word to the public, which appeared in its issue of 13th February 1910,[xxiii]wanted the Indians to imbibe the spirit of liberty and criticized the British Government for creating dissension among the Indians.[xxiv]

                The paper remarked that the advent of the British had polluted the spiritual tradition of India.[xxv] The British by dominating the Indian race have crushed the spirit of liberty enjoyed by the Indians.[xxvi] In another article entitled,The Final Appeal to the People of theTamil Land, which appeared in the issue dated 13th February 1910, the paper gave clarion call to the people of Tamil land to uphold the Swadeshi Movement and work for the attainment of ‘Swaraj’.[xxvii] The author of the article exhorted the Indians to do all that is possible to uplift the country.[xxviii]

                The article concluded with the following exhortation. “The vow of Swadeshesim should be kept up as long as there is life, without being given up”.[xxix] No wonder that the volatile nature of the articles published in the Suryodayam attracted the attention of the Government of Madras.  Branding these articles “Highly Seditious”, the Government of Madras applied section 12(1) of the Press Act, 1910 on 18th march 1910 to forfit the paper.[xxx]Similar anti-government literature appeared in other vernacular languages also.

Banned Controversial Seditious Literature

              The confidential files kept by the Tamilnadu Archives, Chennai containing the vernacular pamphlets carry the translated English versions of the pamphlets and also the opinions of the Criminal Investigation Department.The report of the Under Secretary and the Advocate General are the basis of the translated versions of the objectionable passage of the pamphlets as unlawful and highly seditious in character.The circulation of these pamphlets in the Madras Presidency was proscribed under section 12(i) of the Indian Press Act of 1910 between 1910 and 1912.The content of these pamphlets have not been noticed by Gerald N.Barrier in his work,Banned Controversial Literature and Political Control in British India,1907-1947.

1. Naveena Hindustan (Young India) vol.1, issue nos.7 & 8, 1910-Mimeograplhed-Telugu News Sheets-Author’s name is not known.
2. The Commandments of God on the day of Vaikunda Ekadesi in the year Sadarana in Tamil, published in 1911 in Madras-Author’s name is not known.
3. A Word of Advice to the Aryans in Tamil, printed in Madurai in 1911 at the Feringhee Destroyer Press, Madurai.  Author’s name is not known.
4. Oath of Admission into the New Bharatha Association published in 1911, printed at the Feringhee Destroyer press, Madras.  Author’s name is not known.
5. Kanavu (Dream) in Tamil, written by C.Subramania Bharathi, printed at Saraswathi Press, Pondicherry in 1910.
6. Arilorupongu or Chriyakathai (One sixth’s share) in Tamil, written by C. Subramania Bharathi in 1910, printed at Saraswathi Press, Pondicherry.
7. Indiyarkalil Jatiyajakkiyakm Ennanam Untakam (How to bring about the National Unity of the Indians) in Tamil, written by C.Subramania Bharathi, printed at Saraswathi Press, Pondicherry in 1911.

 

The Naveena Hindustan !

The first pamphlet in Telugu entitled Naveena Hindustan(Young India) in its vol.1, issue no.7 published in 1910 advocated the adoption of revolutionary methods to secure free government and recalled the sacrifices of Indian martyrs like Kudiram, Satyendra Nath, Kanyall Dutt, Hemachandra Dass, Bhupendra Nath Dutt, Bipin Chandra, Syamji Krishna Varma, Aurobindo Ghose and other great  persons.  The leaflet, which suggested the establishment of “Swaraj in India”, also hinted at certain methods to achieve this.  The leaflet wanted the nationalists to organize secret societies for this purpose.  It also gave an idea about the composition of such secret societies

Further, in its issue no.8, dated 13th January 1911, it condemned the British for sending Indians to do detestable acts.  It reads: “Alass! The meanest of the mean, these Feringhees have managed to induce the sons of the sacred Mother India to perform base detestable acts! Some of the servants of India have been lamenting the death of this debased Feringhee, this Edward VII, the King of England who recently breathed his last, thus escaping the disgrace which he was about to experience in India”

Moreover, the tract opposed the move of certain Indian Civil Servants to have a statue erected for Edward VII as the “Meanest of the Mean”.  Blasting those Indians servants who came out with the proposal to erect a statue to honour in the memory of Edward VII, the leaflet said that: “It is the sin of times that the Hindus, in whose veins runs the blood of Bhima and Arjuna, who were the warriors of the (Maha) Bharatha war, and who were the strangers to the art of singing the praises of others, now wish for Viceroys from among these most debased Feringhees, send their condolences to them, even after they had left this for their country”.  The author pointed out that Bharatha Matha bitterly bemoaned the degradation heaped upon her.  Further, it called upon the Indians not to honour the Feringhees by railing memorials to them and patronize such “base acts”.  The British government which found the contents of the pamphlet young India, vol.1, issue 7 to 9 as volatile, issued orders on 30th January 1911 under section 12 (1) of the Indian Press Act 1910, and forfeited them.

The Commandments of God...!

Another leaflet in Tamil entitled The Commandments of God on the Day of Vaikunda Ekadesi in the year Sadarana was published on 25th February 1911 in Madras.  The name of the author is not known.  The track appealed to the people of Bharatha to wage a war against the British to attain Independence.

                Further, it openly condemned the rule of the British for their mismanagement, which caused poverty and starvation.  An Extract from the leaflet is reproduced hereunder to substantiate this point:  “our children are dying in hundreds of thousands from starvation in the land of Bharatha, which is capable of yielding abundant crops!  Dire diseases have made the land of Bharatha their abode!  All the Vedic duties have perished… All the Brahmins, born of the gotras of Vasista, Vamadeva, Japala, Jamadagni and Badarayana have abandoned their appointments in the governments of horrible Rakshasas (devils), who are fomenting the people… courage, spirit, strength and valor have all disappeared from heroic land of Bharatha and are full of timidity”.

                The leaflet blamed the people for failing in their duty. Quoting instance from Ramayana, Mahabharatha and religious texts like Bhagavat Gita, the leaflet tried to infuse strength and vigour among the people.  For example, the author reproduced an extract from Bhagavat Gita which stated: “For the perfection of Good, for the destruction of evil doers, for the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born from age to age”.

                The author of the leaflet said:  “Realise that he alone is virtuous man who preaches about the war of Independence to the people of the land of Bharathi!  Wake up! Care not for anything.  Take up the vow of conducting the war of Bharatha…”  This pamphlet tried to motivate the minds of the people of India to free their mother country from the clutches of the Feringhees.  In the name of God’s Commandment, this pamphlet tried to rouse the feeling of militant nationalism among the people.  The publisher took keen interest in distributing the pamphlet to the people on the occasion of Vaikunda Ekadesi, which falls in the month of December every year.  It was widely circulated at the midnight of the day at the hands of the devotees, who came to the temple in the main centers of the Tamil country.

                The main purpose of circulating this literature to the people was to encourage the people to join the Swadeshi movement and to get their support for the militant activities too.  The C.I.D found the circulation of these pamphlets at the different religious centres like Madurai, Tinnevely, Chidambaram, Srirengam etc.  The government seized all the literature from here.  After studying the opinion of the Tamil translator, the Under Secretary to the Government of Madras recommended for proscription.  Thus, the pamphlet was forfeited by the government on 30th March 1911 under section 12(1) of the Indian Press Act of 1910.  The Madras Government informed about the action against the pamphlet to the Home Department.  The Government of India took action against the pamphlet under section 13 and 15 of the Indian Press Act, 1910 and circulated the notification order to all the Provincial Governments.

 

 

 

 

A Word of Advice to the Aryans

The third pamphlet in Tamil entitled A Word of Advice to the Aryans was printed at Madurai in 1911 and widely circulated in Madurai town during the time of Chitrai festival (in April).  The same pamphlet was found in circulation at Trichirappalli town also.  Neither the name of the author not the publisher of the pamphlet was known.

The pamphlet, which referred to the greatness of the country, its river and pilgrim centres, criticized the present condition of India, which had fallen a victim to the dreadful diseases like plague, famine, malarial fever and other difficulties.  The following lines are reproduced here to substantiate the above statement:  “… The Vedas say that the Mother who begot one and the beautiful county in which one was born are superior to paradise.  Is not our country a virtuous land, which is wearing the beautiful garlands of the river, such as the Ganges, Jamuna, Godavari, Saraswathi, Narmadha, Indus and Cavery? … Is not our land of Bharatha, the country where Sri Rama lived and ruled well?  I not out land of Bharatha the country where our Krishna, who, with curled tuft of hair, adorned by the feather of peacock, with a dark blue coloured body, resembling a blue cloud…”.

Further, the author asserted that: “which Aryaputra (son of an Arya) will say that it is not his duty to see whether such a country is prosperous, whether her people are living happily without unnatural and untimely deaths and whether virtue thrives and flourished will there!” The author stated that plague had made India its Abode.  Every week about forty thousand people died of plague.  The author estimated that 42,770 persons died of plague in India last week.  More than 15 lakhs of persons had died a year for last years”.

More so, the author lamented that famine became a permanent feature in India and the starvation death touched a figure of eight crores of persons in Bharatha between 1784 and 1823 A.D. which was once said to have been the paradise on the earth.  In another paragraph of the pamphlet, the author pointed out the swindling of the temple property by the trustees who were appointed by the English.

In another paragraph of the pamphlet, the author called upon the Indians to know the reasons for these difficulties and said:  “What is the cause of all this?  The reason is that the Kings who belonged to our country have gone out of existence and the Whiteman has unjustly entered our county and is harassing us… The Feringhee is keeping in his possession all the appointment in our country, all the appointments which carry large powers as such Collectors, Assistant Collectors, Chief Surgeon, Engineer, Superintendent of Police, Professors in College, High Court Judge, Member of Council, Governor and beside these, the Traffic Manager, Agent and other appointments in the Railway…  Thus in salaries alone, 15 crores of rupees of the taxes which cause our sweat to fall to the ground, go every year in the hand of Whiteman”.

 

In another part of the pamphlet, the author condemned the British monopoly over
Indian trade and said: “...Feringhee is carrying away every year not less than sixty crores of rupees in the shape of salaries and profits in fraudulent ways.  If 6,00,00,000 rupees are every year taken away to the country of our enemy without being in the least useful to our country, our country cannot stand it, even it were the city of Kubera (God of wealth).  How can we bear it? Further, if the Feringhee exports to his country, the major portion of the grains such as wheat produced in our country, how can our country be free from famine”.

The author of the tract who reminded the people of the land, the adverse effects of the British rule asked them to take an oath and wage a war against the Feringheee.  He stated: “Take an oath that, as long as the Feringhee exercises authority in our land of Bharatha, you will regard life as a trifle.  Beat the white English you get hold of, even as you beat of dog, and kill him with knife, a stick, a stone or even by the hand given by the God! Mercilessly kill the policeman or official, who, helping the white Empire would be ruined between the years Nandhana and Anandha….   Swedeshi has begun in our country.  A violent war should take place within the yea Anandha.  Death may occur either in the sixth or in the hundredth year?  Regarding this worthless life as trifle, we shall bring out Swaraj and our name will shine in the country by killing the White Feringhees and we will go to the Paradise of Heroes!

Thus, the author of the track appealed to the youth of India to kill the white man whenever they came across.  He also called upon the young heroes to join the ne movement so as to establish “Swaraj”, to free India from the custody of the British.  The pamphlet was printed at the “Feringhee Destroyer “.  Press at Azhagarkoil in Madurai.  The Nationalist of the period coined the word “Feringhee Destroyer” frequently and it revealed the fact that they openly displayed their anti feelings by calling the press where these pamphlets printed “Feringhee Destroyer Press”.  The pamphlet was seized by the Madura police and was sent to the official translator for translation.  V.Raghvacharulu, the official Tamil translator reported to the government that the contents of the pamphlet were highly seditious.

The pamphlet was found in wide circulation in the Tamil speaking districts of the Madras Presidency.  When searches were made after the assassination of Ashe, the Collector of Tinnevelly District on 17th June 1911, copies of this pamphlet were found in the houses of Vanchi Iyer and Sankara Krishna Iyer, both were accused in the Ashe murder case in 1911.  Hence, the Government of the Madras passed an order on 24th June 1911 prescribing the same under section 12 (1) of the Indian Press Act, 1910.

Oath of Admission to the New Bharatha Association

The fourth pamphlet in Tamil entitled Oath of Admission in to the New Bharatha Association was found in circulation in the southern districts of the Madras Presidency.   The pamphlet claimed that the New Bharatha was the place of the most famous secret associations, which worked for the over throw of the British Government.  The pamphlet asserted that: “God has willed that f the Feringhee should leave this country before the year Anandha”.  It stated the commitment of the association that: “…this has spread throughout the Aryavardha.   When was it started with in  short time, those who conduct this will come forward openly?  As this is the time of preparation, they are writing such pamphlets and doing such other things as will create a zeal for liberty in the minds of the people”.

The pamphlet further appealed to the youth to adopt the following qualities: “…who ever has Aryan blood running in his body; who ever has a devotion for righteousness and a hatred for unrighteousness, a desire for truth and an aversion for falsehood; who ever as courage, manliness and a thirst for the acquisition of fame; which ever Aryan’s moustache quivers on seeing the Feringhee conducting himself gorgeously with authority in our Aryan land; which ever Aryan’s mind is eagerly fluttering to recover Aryavardha from the hands of Feringhee and placing the unsurpassed crown of liberty on its beautiful head, to remove famine and disease from the country and to create happiness, wealth and luck, such an Aryan is fit to take the oath given below and join the association”.

The pamphlet gave a description of the New Bharatha Association and its modus operandi: “the secret association is the only secret association; because the enemy does not, in the least, know who are the leaders or managers of this association, which is its head quarters, what work it does and how it does it.  All its business is done only by signals and not by correspondence.  All its blows will fall only like a thunderbolt in utter darkness… therefore this is indeed a secret association”.

he pamphlet advised the people to take an oath of allegiance and initiate efforts to recover the country from the enemy.  It listed the oath of allegiance and suggestions thus:

“I swear on the Aryan heroes who have made gift of their blood for the purpose of freeing Mother Bharatha from the English Feringhee;

I swear on the love – affection – I have for my land of Bharatha, where my fore – fathers were born and bred up and my progeny are to live;

I swear on the intense hatred I have for cruelty, injustice, wickedness and despotism;

I swear on the sense of shame felt in my mind that my country itself is not mine, and that my county has not even a flag of its own;

I swear on my precious Aryan mothers, who are shedding a flood of tears, with fluttering lives and broken hearts and becoming hopeless on seeing their children dying either in the prison or on the scaffold or an account of having been transported or shot by a gun;

I swear on virtue that has lost his strength by the wickedness of the Feringhee”.

                Thus, the pamphlet appealed to the Indians to take an oath and to wage a war to driveout the English, who had unjustly wrested their country and ruled over it despotically.  It suggested to them the purpose of establishing Swaraj through the New Bharatha Association.  Such anti-government view found in the pamphlet prompted the Government of Madras to forfeit it under section 12(1) of the Indian Press Act, 1910.

Bharathi’s Kanavu (Dream)

                An attack on the English education was made in the fifth pamphlet in Tamil entitled Kanavu, which means ‘Dream’ written by C. Subramania Bharathi, printed at the Saraswathi Press in Pondicherry in 1910.  It came to the notice of S.H. Slater, the Under Secretary to the Government of Madras.  Bharathi was known for his strong views on political issues and the government had a watchful eye on his journalistic activities at Pondicherry.  This particular pamphlet was frontal attack on the type of English education imparted to the Indians.

                Bharathi regarded the English education as worthless.  Further, Bharathi averred that Indians are not cut out for such education.  It is like: “sending the cub of a lion to eat grass and persuading a Brahmin boy to pursuer the trade of selling flesh…..”  Bharathi blamed his father for making him to learn such a worthless education.

                Further, he quotes that: “….. to acquire  worthless learning which produces much misery and is disgusting to the Aryans a learning which is resorted to by such men as menial servants who, regarding their bread alone as important, sell their lives and was set upon the learning of these low men”.

                Bharathi’s assessment of the English education is evident from his following observation:  “After studying mathematics for twelve year, they (students) are unable to ascertain the position of star in the dark sky.  Though they may studythousands of beautiful poems, they cannot perceive the deep meaning of the poet.  They will talk incoherently of trade and wealth, but they have not heard of the loss of wealth in the country in which they live.  They will mention the names of thousand…. Sastras, but all to purpose”.

                Bharathi entertained the firm view that those who were subjected to western education did not know anything about native poets, scientists, philosophers and rulers of the land.  He wrote: “….. Those who resort to the schools where English is taught know nothing of the poets Kamban and Kalidasa, the philosopher Sankara, the kings Pandya, Chola and Ashoka, and the triumphant hero Sivaji who overthrew the tyrannical rule of the mlechchhas (foreigners)”.  These observations of Bharathi suggest that sound knowledge could not be acquired from English learning alone”.

                Further, Bharathi said with remorse that:  “The stupid education acquired the great cost from persons of dull understanding is not worth a cloud of earth… what I shall do?  Why I have been in this, land of misery?...  My father lost all his vast riches by the insidiousness of the hunas (Europens)….”.  Thus, the author considered the English education as worthless and not useful to the Indians.  This pamphlet was found in Madurai, Tinnevely and Trichy districts.  V.Raghvaacharulu, the official Tamil translator forwards the objectionable passages of the pamphlet to the Under Secretary to the government for proscription.  The Government of Madras therefore proscribed Kanavu, under section12 (1) of the Indian Press Act, 1910 on 11th October 1911.

‘One Sixth’s Share’ of Bharathi

                Bharathi’s another attempt was critical towards the religious policy adopted by the British administrators. His short story in Tamil entitled Arilorupangu (one sixth’s sahre), printed at Saraswathi Press, Pondicherry in 1910 met with similar fate.  He criticized vehemently the Christians for giving wrong conception of the Hindu philosophy: “All the Rishis of the land of Bharatha from Vedic times upto this day are fools who know nothing; all the pieties cherished by Arjuna, Kalidasa, Shivaji, Kabir Das and all the other personages who proceeded and succeeded them till yesterday in the land of Bharatha, are base and barbarous superstitions…” While proving that it was a folly to have faith in the Hindu religion and Hindu civilization, he tended to create an impression in the minds of the youth that Christianity which he praised was also a “superstition and curious creature”

Bharathi, the author of the story denounced the British attitude towards rituals connected with Hinduism.  He also referred to the deplorable condition of Indian and stated that bachelors of the country also had the capacity to salvage the situation.  Bharathi asserted thus: “Wanted men of spiritual knowledge, wanted heroes, who do not desire for themselves the pleasures of the world.  This swadeshism is not a mere secular affair; it is religious faith.  Those who embrace it should possess such rare qualities as vigour, spirit and an active devotion to possess such rare qualities as vigour, spirit and an active devotion to duty”.  Further, he called upon the Indians to have union to get liberty.  He wrote thus: “liberty will come on its own accord if union and strength are established among the people”.

He contended that the land which was once ruled by Lord Ramachandra got transformed in to hell.  Bharathi wrote thus: “Right! The land which was ruled by Lord Ramachandra looked as if the celestial world had been transformed in to hell! What benefit will my Motherland derive from you?  Arise and come, let us see.  How long will you slumber thus and meet with ruin? Ah! Sinful nation, sinful nation… what can be done?  It is a curse, a curse, a curse affecting our nation.  It is not completely over yet.”

Thus, Arilorupongu appealed to the youth to arise and do their duty to the Mother country.  The Government of Madras found the contents of the tract highly seditious and recommended for proscription.  The tract was banned by the British on 11th October 1911.

How to Bringabout the National Unity ... ?

The seventh pamphlet is in Tamil entitled Indiarkalil Jatiyajakkiyam Ennanam untakam (How to bring about the National unity of the Indians?).  It is written by C. Subramania Bharathi and printed at Saraswathi press in Pondicherry.  This also came under the scrutiny of the British who pointed out that the land of Bharatha was conquered by the invaders not by their valour or in a just way but by their fraudulent means.  Bharathi remarked that: “every foreign nation who invaded India conquered the kingdom only through deceit and several kinds of fraud, by creating difference among the Indians and with the help of a few among them, who were traitors to their country and to their brethren; not one of them acquired even a foot of land by means of valour and in a just way… that frauds were committed by the English men, in acquiring dominions in the Madras Presidency and other parts of India.

The pamphlet highlighted the policy of ‘Divide and Rule’ by the British which powered to be the root cause of all the troubles in India.  Bharathi wanted the people of the land not to get carried away by certain false promises given by the British but laid stress on the unity of the Indians.  He remarked that: “….let not our people break their heads over the false privileges, resembling the illusory and deceptive enchantress in the story, and let them combine and make proper effort to remove their slavery..

Thus, Bharathi called upon the Hindus and Muhammedans that they should never forget the fact that they are all the children of the same mother and should live amicably withour mutual hatred.  T.Raghvacharulu, the Tamil translator found above passages objectionable and sent it to C.Napier, the Advocate General for getting his opinion.  C. Napier, in his opinion, said that the pamphlet created a tendency to bring in hatred of contempt of the government established by law in British India and ordered to size the pamphlets.  Hence, the pamphlet was declared forfeited on 30thMarch 1912 under section12, sub-section(1) of the Press Act, 1910.

Conclusion

The Swadeshi Press and Political Literature thus heroically encountered the dictatorial measures and actions of the British Government.  The repressive attitude of the government was denounced unequivocally in these political literatures, published during the course of the Swadeshi movement i.e., from 1910to1912. The tone of these literatures was highly revolutionary in character.  They focused much on the efficacy of Militant Nationalism. Every aspect of the Swadeshi Movement as perceived by the grass root nationalist was revealed in these pamphlets.  They were circulated among the Militant Nationalists of Madras Presidency between 1910 and 1912.  The appeals made by these Swadeshi literatures were practically applied by Vanchi Iyer on 17th June 1911, by assassinating Robert William D.Ashe, the Collector of Tinnevely district at Maniyatchi Railway station.  Knowing all these political developments, how can we say that “Madras Benighted?”.  The Madras Presidency’s involvement in the Swadeshi movement has been recently unearthed and still more researches should be carried out by the young researchers, to answer the question raised by the modern Historians that “Madras Benighted?”.

 

---

[i] J.D.Rees, The Real India, London, 1980, p.174.

[ii] M.P.Sivagnanam,ViduthalaiporilTamizhagam, (in Tamil) vol.1, Madras, 1983. p.156.

[iii] P.G.Gopalakrishnan, “Political implications of  B.C.Pal’s visit to Madras in May 1907” in the Quaterly Review of Historical Studies, Calcutta vol. XX1X, No.1,1989.

[iv] V.Sankarann Nair, Swedeshi Movement: Beginnings of Student Unrest in South India, Delhi, 1985,p.9

[v] Sedition Committee Report,Chapter XII,Delhi,1918,p.115.

[vi] Rangasamy Parthasarathy, Hundred years of the Hindu,Madras,1987,p.198.

[vii] Home (Political) Department,File No .12,Part B,1911.

[viii] S.A Govindarajan, G.Subramania Iyer, New Delhi,1969,p.79.

[ix] Home (Political) Department, File Nos.180-224,Part B,January 1910.

[x] Saroja Sundarajan, March to Freedom in Madras Presidency, 1916 – 1947,Madras,1987,p.141

[xi] Report on the Administration of Madras Presidency, (1916-1917), Madras,1918,p.108.

[xii] Judicial Department, G.O.No.359(Confdl.),8th March 1910.

[xiii]Ibid., G.O.No.1476 (Confdl.),3rd July 1914.

[xiv]Ibid., G.O.No.31(confdl.),6rd January 1914

[xv]Ibid., G.O.No.424(Confdl.), 18th March 1910

[xvi] Home (Political) Department, File Nos.191-193,(Confdl.),May,1910.

[xvii]Ibid., File Nos.180-284,April 1910.

[xviii]Judicial Department, G.O.No.228 (Confdl.), 8th February 1910.

[xix] L.Lakshminaryana Iyer sent five letters to the Government of Madras, asking the Cancellation of proscription on the India, published from French Pondicherrybetween March – April 1910.

[xx] Judicial Department, G.O.No.1588(Confdl.), 11th October 1911.

[xxi]Ibid., G.O.No.1267 (Confdl.),24th August 1910.

[xxii]Ibid., G.O.No.1386 (Confdl.), 12 th September 1910.

[xxiii] Home (Political) Department, File Nos. 191-193, March 1910.

[xxiv]Suryodayam Compared the British attitude and the attitude of the Indians in the following manner.” Saying that Liberty and equality as their (British) Principles, they make much of class-hatred and religious hatred … once upon a time we preached  divine knowledge of the principles of government , the science and several other civilized customs… The westerners while vaunting that they are civilized are getting more and more uncivilized”.  Judicial Department, G.O.No.493(confdl.), 7th May 1910.

[xxv] Home (Political) Department,file Nos.180-224,April  1910.

[xxvi] Judicial department, G.O.No. 228(Confdl.), 8th February 1910.

[xxvii] Home (Political) Department,File Nos.191-193,May 1910 (HPD), NAI.

[xxviii]Ibid., File Nos. 180-224,April 1910.

[xxix]Suryodayam, Pondicherry,13th February 1910,MNNPR,Vol.I,1910,p.266

[xxx]Judicial Department, G.O.No.424 (Confdl.), 18th March 1910.

1. Indian Press Act,(Act No.1of 1910),Government of India, Calcutta,1910,p.6.
2.  Microfilm Acc.No.4809,Reel No.1361,Proscribed Literature National Archives of India (NAI).
3.  Home (Pol) Dept, File Nos.127-139,(1910)NAI.
4.  MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1326,NAI.
5. Confidential, G.O.No.1056,Oath of Admission to the Aryans,(1911),TNA.
6. HPD file No.105-109(1911), NAI.
7. MF Acc,No.4808,Reel No.1337, NAI.
8. HPD file Nos.20-30(1911), NAI.
9. MF Acc.No 4089, Reel No.1361,NAI.
10. Methods of Establishing Secret Societies:

1. Village society, taluk society, district society, provincial society and chief society.  These societies may be organized.
2. Of the above societies, the chief society shall not have more than 10 members.
3. Intending members shall be examined in regard to courage, boldness and character and may be admitted on the responsibility of any three members of any society.  Every person shall be eligible to join this society in Confdl. G.O.No.190,Naveena Hindustan (1911) TNA.

1. Confdl. G.O.No.424, Naveena Hindustan (1911), TNA.
2. Confdl. G.O.No.1203, Naveena Hindustan (1911), TNA.
3. Confdl. G.O.No.31, Proscribed Literature up to 1913, 1914, TNA.
4. MF. Acc No.1808, Reel No.1352, NAI.
5. Confdl. G.O.No1211, The Commandment of God on the day of Vaikunda Ekadesi, (1911), TNA.
6. Confdl.G.O.No.581,The Commandment of God on the day of Vaikunda Ekadesi,(1911)TNA.
7. V. Venkat Raman, Proscribed Press and Political Literature under the British Raj, 1910-1935,Rajapalayam,2009, pp.30-34.
8. HPD file Nos.127-139(1911),NAI.
9. Confdl., Public  (Mis) Bundles No.29,CID Reports,1914.
10. MF. Acc.No.4807,Reel No.1326,NAI.
11. HPD File Nos.105-109 (1911),NAI
12. Confdl.,G.O.NO. 1036,A Word of advice to the Aryans,(1911),TNA
13. HPD file nos,105-109(1911),NAI
14. MF.Acc.No 4807,Reel No.1326,NAI
15. Confdl., G. O. NO.1036,A Word of advice to the Aryans,(1911),TNA
16. Sedition committee Report, chapter x11, Delhi,1918,p.117.
17. Public(Mis) Bundle  NO.29,C.I.D. Reports, 1914, TNA
18. MF.Acc.No. 4807,Reel No.1325,NAI
19. Confdl. G.O.NO.1056, Oath  OF Admission in to the new Bharatha                                                                                  Association(1911),TNA

1. HPD file NOS. 105-109(1911), NAI
2. V.Venkat Raman, op.cit.,p.74.
3. Confdl. G.O.NO. 1056,Oath of Admission in to the new Bharatha                                                                                  Association(1911),TNA
4. Public (Mis) Bundle No.29, C.I.D. Reports, 1914, TNA
5. MF. Acc. No.4808,Reel no.1339,NAI
6. P.B.Gopalakrishnan, ‘Banned Tamil Pamphlets of C.Subramania Bharathi’,

In the Proceedings of Tamilnadu History Congress, 1st session, Madras, 1995, p.53.

1. HPD File Nos.74-75(1912),NAI.
2. Confdl G.O.No.1588,Kanavu(Dream),(1911),TNA.
3. HPD File Nos.86-104(1912),NAI
4. HPD File.Nos.106-171(1912),NAI
5. Confdl G.O..No,1909-10,Kanavu,(1911),TNA.
6. MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1339,NAI.
7. Confdl., G.O. No.1476,List of  publications Proscribed up to June 1914,TNA
8. MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1337,NAI.
9. HPD File Nos. 160-171(1911), NAI.
10. HPD File Nos.74-75(1912),NAI
11. HPD File Nos.12, Deposit(1912),NAI.
12. Confdl., G.O.Nos.1909-10,Kanavu, (1911), TNA
13. MF.Acc.No.4808,ReelNo.1338,NAI
14. Confdl. G.O.No.541, How to bring about the National Unity among the Indians?(1912),TNA.
15. HPD File Nos 81-86(1912),NAI.
16. HPD File Nos.20-30(1912),NAI.
17. HPD File Nos.14,Deposit(1912),NAI.

Notes and References:

[1] J.D.Rees, The Real India, London, 1980, p.174.

[1] M.P.Sivagnanam,ViduthalaiporilTamizhagam, (in Tamil) vol.1, Madras, 1983. p.156.

[1] P.G.Gopalakrishnan, “Political implications of  B.C.Pal’s visit to Madras in May 1907” in the Quaterly Review of Historical Studies, Calcutta vol. XX1X, No.1,1989.

[1] V.Sankarann Nair, Swedeshi Movement: Beginnings of Student Unrest in South India, Delhi, 1985,p.9

[1] Sedition Committee Report,Chapter XII,Delhi,1918,p.115.

[1] Rangasamy Parthasarathy, Hundred years of the Hindu,Madras,1987,p.198.

[1] Home (Political) Department,File No .12,Part B,1911.

[1] S.A Govindarajan, G.Subramania Iyer, New Delhi,1969,p.79.

[1] Home (Political) Department, File Nos.180-224,Part B,January 1910.

[1] Saroja Sundarajan, March to Freedom in Madras Presidency, 1916 – 1947,Madras,1987,p.141

[1] Report on the Administration of Madras Presidency, (1916-1917), Madras,1918,p.108.

[1] Judicial Department, G.O.No.359(Confdl.),8th March 1910.

[1]Ibid., G.O.No.1476 (Confdl.),3rd July 1914.

[1]Ibid., G.O.No.31(confdl.),6rd January 1914

[1]Ibid., G.O.No.424(Confdl.), 18th March 1910

[1] Home (Political) Department, File Nos.191-193,(Confdl.),May,1910.

[1]Ibid., File Nos.180-284,April 1910.

[1]Judicial Department, G.O.No.228 (Confdl.), 8th February 1910.

[1] L.Lakshminaryana Iyer sent five letters to the Government of Madras, asking the Cancellation of proscription on the India, published from French Pondicherrybetween March – April 1910.

[1] Judicial Department, G.O.No.1588(Confdl.), 11th October 1911.

[1]Ibid., G.O.No.1267 (Confdl.),24th August 1910.

[1]Ibid., G.O.No.1386 (Confdl.), 12 th September 1910.

[1] Home (Political) Department, File Nos. 191-193, March 1910.

[1]Suryodayam Compared the British attitude and the attitude of the Indians in the following manner.” Saying that Liberty and equality as their (British) Principles, they make much of class-hatred and religious hatred … once upon a time we preached  divine knowledge of the principles of government , the science and several other civilized customs… The westerners while vaunting that they are civilized are getting more and more uncivilized”.  Judicial Department, G.O.No.493(confdl.), 7th May 1910.

[1] Home (Political) Department,file Nos.180-224,April  1910.

[1] Judicial department, G.O.No. 228(Confdl.), 8th February 1910.

[1] Home (Political) Department,File Nos.191-193,May 1910 (HPD), NAI.

[1]Ibid., File Nos. 180-224,April 1910.

[1]Suryodayam, Pondicherry,13th February 1910,MNNPR,Vol.I,1910,p.266

[1]Judicial Department, G.O.No.424 (Confdl.), 18th March 1910.

1. Indian Press Act,(Act No.1of 1910),Government of India, Calcutta,1910,p.6.
2.  Microfilm Acc.No.4809,Reel No.1361,Proscribed Literature National Archives of India (NAI).
3.  Home (Pol) Dept, File Nos.127-139,(1910)NAI.
4.  MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1326,NAI.
5. Confidential, G.O.No.1056,Oath of Admission to the Aryans,(1911),TNA.
6. HPD file No.105-109(1911), NAI.
7. MF Acc,No.4808,Reel No.1337, NAI.
8. HPD file Nos.20-30(1911), NAI.
9. MF Acc.No 4089, Reel No.1361,NAI.
10. Methods of Establishing Secret Societies:

1. Village society, taluk society, district society, provincial society and chief society.  These societies may be organized.
2. Of the above societies, the chief society shall not have more than 10 members.
3. Intending members shall be examined in regard to courage, boldness and character and may be admitted on the responsibility of any three members of any society.  Every person shall be eligible to join this society in Confdl. G.O.No.190,Naveena Hindustan (1911) TNA.

1. Confdl. G.O.No.424, Naveena Hindustan (1911), TNA.
2. Confdl. G.O.No.1203, Naveena Hindustan (1911), TNA.
3. Confdl. G.O.No.31, Proscribed Literature up to 1913, 1914, TNA.
4. MF. Acc No.1808, Reel No.1352, NAI.
5. Confdl. G.O.No1211, The Commandment of God on the day of Vaikunda Ekadesi, (1911), TNA.
6. Confdl.G.O.No.581,The Commandment of God on the day of Vaikunda Ekadesi,(1911)TNA.
7. V. Venkat Raman, Proscribed Press and Political Literature under the British Raj, 1910-1935,Rajapalayam,2009, pp.30-34.
8. HPD file Nos.127-139(1911),NAI.
9. Confdl., Public  (Mis) Bundles No.29,CID Reports,1914.
10. MF. Acc.No.4807,Reel No.1326,NAI.
11. HPD File Nos.105-109 (1911),NAI
12. Confdl.,G.O.NO. 1036,A Word of advice to the Aryans,(1911),TNA
13. HPD file nos,105-109(1911),NAI
14. MF.Acc.No 4807,Reel No.1326,NAI
15. Confdl., G. O. NO.1036,A Word of advice to the Aryans,(1911),TNA
16. Sedition committee Report, chapter x11, Delhi,1918,p.117.
17. Public(Mis) Bundle  NO.29,C.I.D. Reports, 1914, TNA
18. MF.Acc.No. 4807,Reel No.1325,NAI
19. Confdl. G.O.NO.1056, Oath  OF Admission in to the new Bharatha                                                                                  Association(1911),TNA

1. HPD file NOS. 105-109(1911), NAI
2. V.Venkat Raman, op.cit.,p.74.
3. Confdl. G.O.NO. 1056,Oath of Admission in to the new Bharatha                                                                                  Association(1911),TNA
4. Public (Mis) Bundle No.29, C.I.D. Reports, 1914, TNA
5. MF. Acc. No.4808,Reel no.1339,NAI
6. P.B.Gopalakrishnan, ‘Banned Tamil Pamphlets of C.Subramania Bharathi’,

In the Proceedings of Tamilnadu History Congress, 1st session, Madras, 1995, p.53.

1. HPD File Nos.74-75(1912),NAI.
2. Confdl G.O.No.1588,Kanavu(Dream),(1911),TNA.
3. HPD File Nos.86-104(1912),NAI
4. HPD File.Nos.106-171(1912),NAI
5. Confdl G.O..No,1909-10,Kanavu,(1911),TNA.
6. MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1339,NAI.
7. Confdl., G.O. No.1476,List of  publications Proscribed up to June 1914,TNA
8. MF.Acc.No.4808,Reel No.1337,NAI.
9. HPD File Nos. 160-171(1911), NAI.
10. HPD File Nos.74-75(1912),NAI
11. HPD File Nos.12, Deposit(1912),NAI.
12. Confdl., G.O.Nos.1909-10,Kanavu, (1911), TNA
13. MF.Acc.No.4808,ReelNo.1338,NAI
14. Confdl. G.O.No.541, How to bring about the National Unity among the Indians?(1912),TNA.
15. HPD File Nos 81-86(1912),NAI.
16. HPD File Nos.20-30(1912),NAI.
17. HPD File Nos.14,Deposit(1912),NAI.