Civil Disobedience Movements

Civil Disobedience Movement, one of the most pivotal episodes in India’s struggle for independence from British rule, was launched under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi in 1930. This non-violent movement aimed at defying British laws through Civil disobedience, marked a significant escalation from the earlier Non-Cooperation Movement, emphasizing not just refusal to cooperate with the British authorities but actively breaking colonial laws.

The movement was sparked by the Salt March, a 240- mile march to the Arabian Sea, where Gandhi and his followers made their own salt, directly challenging the British monopoly. This act of defiance galvanized Indians across the country, leading to widespread participation in acts of Civil disobedience including the refusal to pay taxes and the boycott of British goods. The Civil Disobedience Movement not only intensified the Indian nationalistic fervor but also drew international attention to India’s independence struggle, laying a crucial foundation for future campaigns against British rule and ultimately, India’s independence in 1947. To explore the origins and strategic developments that led to this landmark movement, continue reading on “Towards the Civil Disobedience Movement“. In this page we will continue from Calcutta session of the congress:

Calcutta session of the Congress (December 1928)

In the Calcutta session of the Congress (December 1928), the Nehru report was approved. However, discontent surfaced among the younger leaders, including Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Bose, who were dissatisfied with the demand for dominion status and pushed for the adoption of “Poorna Swaraj”, or complete independence as the Congress’s goal.

In contrast, senior leaders such as Gandhi and Motilal Nehru wanted to tread cautiously, emphasizing the difficulty of achieving consensus on dominion status. Ultimately, Gandhi compromised by moving a resolution (Calcutta Congress resolution) that the offer to accept the dominion status stood only if the British government accepted the all-parties report (Nehru report) by the year-end (1929); if it failed to do so, the Congress would shift its focus to complete independence and launch a civil disobedience movement to achieve this objective.

This compromise by Gandhi meant that, for all practical purposes, Gandhi himself was now committed to the goal of complete independence; this was an enormous concession to the radicals.

The world depression of 1929-33 also significantly impacted national movements during this period. Due to political and economic tensions, the British colonial set-up failed to accommodate emerging Indian interests during this period. The British tariff policies during this period led to large-scale discontent among the different business groups. The large-scale layoffs of workers led to intense and well-organized protests.

Government’s Response to the Calcutta Congress Resolution

While the Calcutta resolution gave an ultimatum to the British, It also gave them a respite for one year. The British sought to use this period to deprive the Congress of its allies, both through repression and allurement.

The government tried to crush the communist and other revolutionary activities through its draconian Public safety ordinance. We will read about this phase of revolutionary activities in a separate chapter, Militant Nationalism 2.0.
Along with repression, the government also attempted to attract moderate elements. Realizing that the offers through the Simon Commission were a gone case due to its vehement boycott by parties and groups across the political spectrum, Lord Irwin agreed to a Round Table conference, which would include representatives of the British government and the British government and parties. Besides this, the government also committed itself to granting “Dominion status” sometime in future.

Congress’ Response to the government’s offer

The government’s offer was initially supported by Congress leaders and liberals like Gandhi, Motilal Nehru, Jawaharlal Nehru, Madan Mohan Malaviya, and Tej Bahadur Sapru. They issued a joint statement, welcoming Irwin’s offer.
However, due to resistance from Congress (Subhash Bose and Nehru) and the Secretary of State for India, Wedgwood Benn’s acceptance that nothing new was offered and Simon Commission’s final authority remained unaffected led to the issuance of the “Delhi Manifesto” in November 1929, which put forward the following conditions for attending the Round Table conference:

1. General amnesty for political prisoners;
2. The Congress should have majority representation at the conference.
3. The purpose of the conference should be the formulation of a constitution facilitating the implementation of the dominion status, and the basic principle of the dominion status should be immediately accepted.

As expected, the demands put forward by the Congress in the Delhi manifesto were rejected by Viceroy Irwin.

Political activity by the Congress during 1929

After giving an ultimatum to the government in the Calcutta resolution, Gandhi toured various parts of the country, carrying the message of his constructive program.

He organised the boycott of foreign clothes and concentrated on promoting Khadi. He also devoted his attention towards his fight against untouchability and mobilisation of women.

He also showed enthusiasm towards the Hindu-Muslim unity. While his talks with Jinnah (over his 14 points demands) failed, the nationalist Muslim leaders established the Nationalist Muslim Party to oppose communalism and to take a proper share in the freedom struggle. The leaders of this party included Abul Kalam Azad, Dr Ansari and Ch. Kahliquzaman.

Lahore Session and demand of Poorna Swaraj

For the crucial Lahore session of the Congress, Gandhi’s name was proposed; however, he refused the office for himself and insisted on Jawahar Lal Nehru as the President, side-lining Vallabh Bhai Patel, who was next in line after himself. This decision was taken perhaps by his desire to build bridges with the radical ranks of Congress.

In his address, Nehru declared, “We have now an open conspiracy to free this country from foreign rule and you, comrades, and all our countrymen and countrywomen are invited to join it”.
He also gave his socialist vision for independent India, which was different from the moderate constitutionalism of earlier leadership and Gandhi’s own vision of Gram Swaraj.

Adoption of Poorna Swaraj as the ultimate goal

The failure of talks with Viceroy Irwin had cleared the path for a direct call to attain “Poorna Swaraj”, or full independence.
In the Lahore session, the following important decisions were taken:

1. The Round Table conference was to be boycotted.
2. “Poorna Swaraj” declared as the ultimate aim of the Congress.
3. A large civil disobedience movement, including non-payment of taxes, was authorised.
4. A request was made to all members of the legislature to resign from their seats.
5. 26 January was declared as the first day of Swarajya (independence).

The Civil Disobedience Movement

Although the Congress at the Lahore session had authorized Gandhi to launch a civil disobedience movement at a place and time of his choosing, he was in desperate need of an effective formula.

Consequently, he presented an 11-point demand to the Viceroy Irwin, which included:

Reduction of Rupee sterling exchange ratio to 1s 4d per Rupee; (s- Shilling, d-pence), i.e. £1= Rs.15
Reduction of agricultural tax by 50% and making it a subject of legislative control.
Reduce expenditure on Army and civil services by 50%.
Abolition of salt tax and salt monopoly of the government.
Release of all political prisoners.
Protection for Indian textiles.
Reservation of coastal shipping for Indians.
Introduce total prohibition.
Carry out reforms in the Criminal Investigation Department.
Issue licenses of arms to citizens for self-defence.
Accept postal reservation bills.

These demands were ignored by the government. Jawahar Lal Nehru regarded these demands as ‘a climb down from ‘Poorna Swaraj’.

Salt is the theme of the Satyagraha.

Salt duty was an entirely regressive tax. In 1929-30, its collection amounted to ₹6.76 crores, which is equivalent to 2/5^th of the realization from income tax. The salt duty not only affected the poor but also caused a ban on local salt-makers. Since it affected a very large number of people, it was a cause with which the poor would identify.

As per Gandhi, “There is no article like salt outside water by taxing which the State can reach even the starving millions, the sick, the maimed and the utterly helpless. The tax constitutes, therefore, the most inhuman poll tax the ingenuity of man can devise”.

Dandi March

After obtaining explicit authorization from the Congress Working Committee, Gandhi announced the decision to begin the Satyagraha in a letter to Viceroy Irwin on 2^nd March 1930.

Before initiating his march, Gandhi gave direction to the people for the future course of action, emphasized the importance of non-violence, and prepared them for the government’s response. He issued the following directions:

1. Wherever possible, civil disobedience of salt laws should be started;
2. Liquor and foreign cloth shops should be picketed;
3. Refuse to pay tax, if possible;
4. The lawyers can give up practice;
5. The public can boycott the courts by avoiding litigation;
6. Government servants can resign from their posts;
7. Truth and the path of non-violence should be faithfully adhered to;
8. The local leaders should be obeyed after Gandhi’s arrest.

On 12 March, Gandhi initiated the Satyagraha by starting the famous Dandi March from his Sabarmati Ashram at Ahmedabad to Dandi on the Gujarat coast, where salt could be made from pans.

As the 388 km (241 miles) long march progressed, the number of satyagrahis grew as well. The march got enthusiastic local support, evidenced by the fact that 227 village headmen in the area resigned from their posts as a gesture of non-cooperation.

Finally, on 6 April 1930, Gandhi and his companions defiantly broke the law by extracting salt.

Spread of the Civil Disobedience Movement

The news of Gandhi breaking the salt law caused great excitement, and similar salt-making satyagraha’s were organized across the country.

State	Leadership	Path
1. Dandi, Navsari district, Gujarat (12th Mar to 6th April)	Gandhi	Sabarmati to Dandi
2. Tamil Nadu	C. Rajagopalachari	Trichinopoly to Veddaranniyam
1. Malabar	K Kellappan	Calicut to Payannur
4. Bengal		Sylhet to Noakhali
5. Andhra	Sibirams/camps set up for Salt Satyagraha
6. Odisha	Gopal Bandhu Chaudhari
7. Dharshana	Sarojini Naidu, Imam sahib, Manilal Gandhi(son)

Methods used during Civil Disobedience Movement:

In the Non-cooperation Movement, the participants were asked not only to withdraw their cooperation with the government within the boundaries of the law, but in the Civil Disobedience Movement, the participants were not only asked not to cooperate but also to break colonial laws.

Philosophy of Civil Disobedience

Civil disobedience does not mean standing against the “Rule of Law”. The Indian nationalists firmly believed in the modern conception of the state. They only wanted a functional democracy in the country, and colonial laws were against the ideas of justice, equality and liberty, which are the foundation of any democracy.Thus, it was imagined that those civil laws that are unjustified in nature should be broken. In any case, no criminal laws were allowed to be broken, which were essential to maintain order and peace in the society.

This was done in several ways:

Thousands in different parts of the country broke the salt law by manufacturing salt and demonstrating in front of government salt factories.
Peasants, in several places, refused to pay chaukidari taxes,
Tribals: In many places, forest laws were violated- went to Reserved forests to collect wood & graze cattle.
Village officials resigned from their posts,
Foreign clothes were boycotted, and liquor shops were picketed as the movement spread.
Even Workers participated in some places. For example, Textile workers in the Industrial City of Solapur went on strike. When the government tried to control the situation, the movement became violent.
Princes and Zamindars remained neutral in the movement, with a few exceptions. For example, Rani Gaidinlau (Nagaland) was Imprisoned at the age of 16; they had just become rani after the death of his father Jadonang. She opposed the British and joined the Hera Religious movement.

Government response to Civil disobedience Movement:

For the first time, mainstream political leaders mustered the courage to break colonial laws, and to the horror of the government, people followed. This meant the erosion of British authority. Thus, the government response was swift and violent.

Several steps were taken to address the situation:

Provincial governments were given the freedom to ban Civil Disobedience organisations; However, the Congress Working Committee wasn’t declared illegal.
Arrests of Congress leaders one by one. Leading to violent clashes in many places.

- Abdul Gaffar Khan was arrested in April 1930; angry crowds demonstrated in the streets of Peshawar, facing armoured cars & police firing, and many were killed.
- Gandhi was arrested in May 1930

Often, peaceful Satyagrahis were attacked, women & children were beaten & about 100,000 were arrested.

Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan

Abdul Gaffar Khan, also known as the “frontier Gandhi” (Sarhadi Gandhi) or Badshah Khan, was a devout friend of Gandhi. He was the founder of the Khudai Khidmatgar resistance movement in the North West Frontier Province. He, too, supported peaceful means to attain freedom from the British.He was strongly against the idea of a separate Pakistan and sided with the All India Azad Muslim Conference against the Muslim League. To spread his ideas, he launched a newspaper named Pukhtun.

Spread of Violence:

This meant that in many places’ violence was inevitable. For example, Industrial workers in Sholapur attacked police posts, municipal buildings, law courts and railway stations after Gandhi’s arrest. All structures that symbolised British rule were attacked. In the police firing, at least four people were recorded as dead. Unofficially, around 50 were reported dead.

Round Table Conferences:

As the movement spread, the government rushed to negotiate with the Indian leaders on the future political development in India. Thus, a round table conference (RTC) was planned to discuss the recommendations given by the Simon Commission and Indian leaders like Jinnah.

1st RTC

The first round table conference was held between November 1930 and January 1931; it ended in failure.

Attendance: 74 Delegates attended the conference. The Indian representatives were presented separately.
- There were separate representatives of the Indian Princely states.
- British ensured communal representation in the conference: the Muslim league represented Muslim interests, and the Hindu Mahasabha represented Hindu interests.
- Sikhs, Parsis, Women, liberals and the Justice Party were separately represented. Ambedkar represented the Depressed classes within Hindus.
Demands by Indian Leaders:
- Ambedkar demanded a separate electorate for depressed classes.
- Tej Bahadur Sapru (liberal) and Princely states proposed the idea of an All India Federation and that the British should give at least a semblance of representative authority to Indians and keep real authority to itself.
- Even the Muslim League accepted the demand of the All India Federation, as it was always opposed to a strong centre.

Boycott: by Congress and several Business leaders.

Since the biggest political organisation in India did not participate in the RTC, it could produce no consensus. To bridge the gap between the government and the nationalists, liberals such as Tej Bahadur Sapru and MR Jayakar requested Gandhi to meet the Viceroy. All this while the violence continued to spread.

Nevertheless, this was the first conference in which Indians were treated as equals.

Gandhi Irwin Pact/Delhi Pact

When the situation worsened, Gandhi once again decided to call off the movement and entered into a pact with Irwin on March 5, 1931. The Congress presented a few terms to the government against which Irwin consented. Finally, the following offer was reached.

The government Consented to the following terms:

Withdrawal of all ordinances and end prosecutions.
Release of all political prisoners except those guilty of violence.
Permitted peaceful picketing of liquor and foreign cloth shops.
Restored all confiscated properties of the satyagrahis.
Permit-free collection or manufacture of salt by persons near the sea coast.
Lift the ban over the Congress.

Gandhiji consented to:

Participate in Round Table Conference in London
Suspend CDM

Two other demands, such as public inquiry into police excesses and commutation of the Death sentence of Bhagat Singh and his comrades, weren’t met. Nevertheless, around 90,000 prisoners were released after this pact.

There were several oppositions to this agreement from both the nationalists and the British officers. On the one hand, several Congress leaders did not want to suspend the movement; On the other, Britishers such as Churchill mocked the government, which allowed the mighty British empire to bow in front of a ‘half-naked Fakir’.

2nd RTC

The first round table conference was held between September 1931 and December 1931. This time, two important changes occurred:

Labour government was replaced, and a new Secretary, Samuel Hore, was appointed.
Lord Wellington became the new Viceroy of the government. The new government did not adhere to the old conditions.

Negotiations started but soon broke down again. Indian leaders like Ambedkar clashed with Gandhi at the Second round table conference by demanding a separate electorate for Dalits.

The Second-round table Conference failed, and Gandhi returned disappointed.

Relaunch of CDM

Back in India, the Government had begun a new cycle of repression.

Ghaffar Khan and Jawaharlal Nehru were in jail,
Congress was declared illegal,
A series of measures had been imposed to prevent meetings, demonstrations & boycotts.

CDM was relaunched in Jan 1932. It continued for a year but lost its momentum by 1934. On 7^th April 1934, it was withdrawn again.

Communal Award of 1932

Regardless of the popular demand, after the failure of the 2^nd CDM, the British introduced a new communal award in August 1932. It awarded a Separate electorate (communal electorate) to Sikh, women, Anglo-Indian, and depressed classes.

Ambedkar supported this move. However, the majority of society criticised it:

Congress was against the Communal Electorate within Hindus: Now, depressed communities were to elect leaders from amongst their own communities during elections. This would have created a further divide in the Indian society. Thus, Gandhi sat on a hunger strike in the Yarvada Jail against it.
Sikhs expected a greater number of seats; In Punjab, Sikhs got only 19% of the seats, whereas Muslims got 51% reservations and Hindus got 30% of the seats.
Hindu leaders like Madan Mohan Malviya opposed separate electorates for any minority.

General Electorate v/s communal electorate

In the general electorate, leaders are elected from amongst the whole of the society. In such a situation, the leaders have to please all sections of the community in order to get elected.In the Communal electorate, leaders get votes only from their own community. This means that the leaders who are most extremist and radical about their communal view got more support from their community.The Indian leaders had recognised the dangers of the Communal award in India. Due to the communal politics introduced after the introduction of the communal electorate, the gap between the Hindus and the Muslims was ever widening.The government promoted those voices that supported the communal separation of communities within its RTCs. This led to further communalisation of the Indian society.

Poona pact:

Gandhi’s Hunger strike escalated the matters. No leader wanted to take the blame for Gandhi’s death. This pushed Indian leaders towards negotiations, leading to the Poona Pact, in which Ambedkar accepted Gandhi’s position.

The pact was signed by Madan Mohan Malviya, who represented the Hindus, and Ambedkar, who represented Ambedkar. This ensured unity amongst the wider Hindu community as far as possible.

It was agreed that the depressed classes (later SCs) would get reserved seats in provincial and central legislative councils but were voted by the general electorate.

Despite the agreement, Madan Mohan Malviya left Congress and started the Congress Nationalist Party to participate in the 1934 elections.

Approach towards the upliftment of Dalit

The Congress had included the aim of upliftment of the Dalits into its program. But its approach was often criticised by the Dalit leaders like Ambedkar.Gandhi’s approach: Gandhi declared that Swaraj would not come for 100 years if untouchability was not eliminated. He focused on per1. He called them ‘Harijans‘ or children of gods,2. Organised satyagraha to secure their entry into temples, & access to public wells, tanks, roads & schools. Ex: Vaicom Satyagraha.

3. Lead by Percept & Example: He himself cleaned toilets to dignify the work of bhangi (sweepers)

4. Persuaded upper castes to change their heart & give up the sin of untouchability.

He focused on the change of heart instead of abolishing the Varnashram System altogether.

Dalit Leaders

Dalit leaders were keen on different political solutions.

1. Demanded reserved seats in educational institutions,

2. Separate electorate for Dalits for legislative councils. They believed political empowerment would resolve the problems of Social disabilities.

3. BR Ambedkar formed the Depressed Class Association in 1930.

According to Gandhi, such demands would only slow down the integration of Dalits into society.

How participants saw Civil Disobedience Movement:

1. Land-owning castes:

Patidars (Gujarat) & Jats (UP) were active in the movement:

Producers of commercial crops were hit by the trade depression & falling prices & couldn’t pay revenue.
The government refused to reduce revenue demand: For them, the struggle was against high revenues.
Rich peasants became enthusiastic supporters of the movement organising communities, & at times, forced reluctant members to participate in boycott programmes.
Deeply disappointed when the movement was called off, many refused to participate again.

2. Poorer Peasantry

The poorer peasantry was not just interested in lowering revenue demands. They wanted unpaid rent to the landlord to be remitted.

They joined a variety of radical movements, often joined by Socialists & communists.
Congress was apprehensive of raising issues that might upset rich peasants & landlords, and Congress was unwilling to support ‘no rents’ campaigns in most places.

3. Business Classes

During World War I, Indian merchants & industrialists made huge profits & became powerful. They now reacted to colonial policies that restricted business.

They wanted protection against imports of foreign goods & a rupee-sterling exchange ratio that would discourage imports.
Participation:
- Industrialists attacked colonial control & supported the movement when it was first launched.
- They gave financial assistance & refused to buy/sell foreign goods.
- Swaraj, for them, was a time when colonial restrictions would not exist & trade & industry would flourish.
Leadership:
- Indian Industrial & Commercial Congress, 1920 & Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce & Industries(FICCI), 1927.
- Led by prominent industrialists like Purshottamdas Thakurdas & GD Birla.
Withdrawal: After failure of roundtable conf. They were apprehensive of the spread of militant activities & were worried about prolonged disruption of business as well as the growing influence of socialism amongst younger members of Congress.

4. Industrial working classes

They didn’t participate much (since industrialists came closer), except in the Nagpur region.

Some did participate, selectively adopting some ideas of the Gandhian programme: boycott of foreign goods as part of their own movement against low wages & poor working conditions.
Participation:
- Strikes by railway workers in 1930 & dockworkers in 1932.
- 1930: 1000s of workers in Chotanagpur tin mines wore Gandhi caps & participated in protest rallies & boycott campaigns
But Congress was reluctant to include workers’ demands as part of its programme of struggle as it would alienate industrialists & divide anti-imperial forces.

5. Women Participation

Participation
- During the salt march, 1000s came out to listen to him, participated in protest marches, manufactured salts, and
- Picketed foreign cloth & liquor shops.
- Many went to jail.
- In Urban areas: High-Caste families.
- Rural areas: rich peasant households.
Prominent women:
- Chhaatri Sangh – Association for female students by Bina Das (elder sister) Kalyani, Surma Mitra & Kamla Dasgupta.
  - Bina Das(1932): Shot Bengal governor Stanley Jackson during her convocation of Calcutta University.
  - Kamla Dasgupta – Jugantar party
- Mahila Rashtra Sangh(1928): Latika Ghosh in Bengal upon instigation by Netaji Bose. 1st organization that aimed to engage women in political activism.
- Nari Satyagraha Samiti: Urmila devi(President) – sister of CR Das, Jyotinoi Ganguly(VP), Shanti Das, Vimal Pratibha devi; Supported Swadeshi.
- Shanti and Suniti: Kumila fired Magistrate Stevans to death under Surya Sen’s leadership.
- Rashtriya Stree Sangh: Sarojini Naidu, Goshiben Naroji Captain & Avantikabai Gokhle – aimed swaraj and women’s freedom.
  - Desh Sevika Sangh – 1st wing.
- Nehru family:
  - Kamala Nehru & Vijaylakshmi Pandit: Raised issues of gender equality.
  - Lahore uprising: Mastermind – Lado Rani Jyotshi & 3 daughters.

Moved by Gandhiji’s call: Service of the nation as the sacred duty of women.
- It did not mean any radical change in the way Gandhi visualised women.: convinced that the duty of women was to look after the home & heart and be good women & wives.
- Cong was reluctant to allow women to hold any position of authority within the organisation.
However, many saw women differently from now on.

Limitations of Civil Disobedience Movement:

Communalization of Politics: During Civil Disobedience, the atmosphere of suspicion & distrust b/w communities. A large section did not respond to the call for a united struggle. Many Muslim leaders & intellectuals expressed their concern about the status of Muslims as a minority in India. They feared being submerged under the Domination of the Hindu Majority.
Dalit Participation was limited, particularly in the Nagpur region, where their organization was strong.
1. ‘untouchables’ who around the 1930s had begun to call themselves Dalit or oppressed were not moved by the abstract concept of Swaraj.
2. Long since the Congress had ignored them for fear of offending Sanatanis (conservative high caste).
Some Muslim political organisations were also lukewarm in response:
1. After the decline of Non-cooperation-khilafat, a large section of Muslims felt alienated from Cong).
2. From the mid-1920s, congress came visibly closer to Hindu Mahasabha.
3. Communalization: Each community organised religious processions with militant fervour, provoking Hindu-Muslim communal clashes & riots in various cities.
4. 1927: Congress & Muslim League made efforts to renegotiate the alliance, & it appeared such unity could be forged. Important differences over the question of representation in future assemblies: Jinnah was willing to give up the demand for separate electorates if Muslims were assured reserved seats in the Central Assembly & representation in proportion to the population in Muslim-dominated provinces.
  - 1928, All party conf.: MR Jayakar of Hindu Mahasabha strongly opposed efforts to compromise.
Loss of Momentum: Movement was called off twice. The momentum was lost.

In general, these several issues created division in the nationalist ranks. The government was successful in throwing too many bones at the communal leaders to detach them from Congress.

Impact of Civil Disobedience Movement

Growth of Nationalism – 1 step closer to Purna Swaraj
Constitution reforms – 1935 Act.
Dalits & Depressed classes concerns were taken more heed.
Ideas of Swadeshi

Conclusion

The Civil Disobedience movement, led by Mahatma Gandhi, marked as a critical move in India’s struggle for independence, showcasing the power of non-violent resistance against colonial rule. By challenging the British goods, the movement united diverse sections of Indian society, highlighting the struggle for “Poorna Swaraj” or complete independence. Despite its suspension, the movement significantly advanced the nationalistic cause , setting the stage for future protests and ultimately contributing to India’s independence in 1947.

Sources:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3517680?read-now=1&seq=17#page_scan_tab_contents
https://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/44322/3/Unit-15.pdf