|
The New Situation
THE circular letter addressed to the leaders of public opinion in East Bengal by Babu Ananda Chandra Roy of Dacca, on the new situation created by the dismissal of Sir B. Fuller, which ‘has been noticed already in the last two issues of this paper, does not seem to have at all grasped the real significance of this situation, which therefore cannot be properly met by the policy which is suggested in that letter. The Partition of Bengal is a settled fact; and we agree with Babu Ananda Chandra Roy that we cannot refuse to accept it as such, though we do not see how, consistently with this view, he can say that our protest against it must still be kept up, or what in the face of this practical acceptance of Partition by us, this verbal protest can really be worth. But though we must practically accept the Partition, we may, however, at the same time, keep up a standing protest against, not merely that particular measure, but the very system that made the carrying out of it, in the teeth of the opposition of the entire community, possible, – by keeping aloof from every voluntary association with Government, and refusing to render them any help whatever except what they can compel us to give by their lawful authority. They can compel us to pay rates and taxes and we shall pay these; they can compel us to serve as jurors, and this service also we shall render whenever summoned to do so; they can compel our attendance at their law-courts as witness or accused, and we shall do so when required. But they can- not compel us to go to their court as plaintiffs or complainants, and we may well refuse to do so. They cannot compel us to serve as Honorary Magistrates, and we must refuse to accept such honours. They cannot compel us to vote at Municipal elections or to act as Municipal Commissioners, neither can they compel us to vote at Council-elections or stand as candidates for such elections and we should, as a protest against Partition, continue our present boycott of the Legislative Council in East Bengal, and extend it to the Legislative Council in West Bengal also. Page-6 These are the only methods by which while in a sense accepting the Partition of Bengal as a settled fact, that is by submitting to revenue and executive authority of the Government at Dacca, we may yet keep up a most vigorous and effective protest against that obnoxious measure, and if we do so, and can thereby gradually bring, as may not be altogether impossible, the administration of the Province by the present despotism to an absolute deadlock, by extending the boycott, from voluntary and honorary, even to paid offices under that despotism, we may hope some day to bring out a repeal of the Partition even, as we have already brought about the downfall of Sir B. Fuller. But Babu Ananda Chandra Roy does not seem to advocate this policy; and indeed, we do not know of any single leader of the old school, who has yet consistently advocated, much less themselves followed, this policy. They advised the leaders of East Bengal to refuse to participate either as voters or candidates at the Council- elections in the New Province, but are themselves still members the Legislative Council in Calcutta, and those that are not are anxious to get in there as quickly as possible, and this difference in their attitude towards the two Councils seems to show at their objection against the Council in East Bengal was due entirely to a personal hostility to Sir B. Fuller. That such hostility would be absolutely without justification, we cannot honestly; but at the same time to allow such personal feelings, however justifiable these might be, to influence the nation’s public policy a matter like this is to misread, as we have repeatedly pointed in these columns, the whole situation, and considerably to weaken the whole movement, which is directed not against any individual ruler but against the present vicious system. Babu Ananda Chandra Roy has sought to put this personal interpretation upon the policy that had been enunciated by Calcutta, in the matter of Sir B. Fuller’s Council; and he has his justification in the attitude and action of the Calcutta leaders themselves. If the East Bengal leaders had been asked to boycott the Council at Dacca on any general policy of boycott, as a standing protest against Partition, the Council in Calcutta would also have been boycotted. But Babu Bhupendranath Bose is still there, and so is Babu Jogesh Chandra Choudhuri - and they Page-7 are among those who have been advising, we take it, the East Bengal leaders to boycott the Legislative Council in the New Province. Babu Surendranath Banerji has been directing the boycott we know; and both Babu Bhupendranath and Jogesh Chandra are identified with him in the present public life of this country; and since they had not resigned their own place in the Bengal Council, the instruction to boycott the East Bengal Council could be rightly interpreted only in the way in which Babu Ananda Chandra Roy has interpreted it, namely, that this boycott was directed personally against the late Lieutenant Governor of East Bengal and Assam; and therefore, as a new ruler has succeeded him, this boycott should now be withdrawn. But whatever may be the attitude of some of the leaders and whatever be their meaning and motive, the people at large have from the very beginning refused to take any narrow view of the present situation in the country. The boycott of British goods was originally proposed temporarily, as a protest against Partition, but when the people took it up they openly declared that, Partition or no Partition, they would keep this boycott up to the utmost of their powers, until both economic freedom and political autonomy had been attained and they had a State of their own, which could protect home-industries by a well-considered tariff. Similarly they proposed a much larger boycott – the boycott of the present officialised schools and colleges – and set up National institutions with a view to assert the Swadeshi principle in the matter of education, and they also proposed to boycott every honorary office, and every form of voluntary association with the present despotism in the administration of the country. And those who proposed the boycott of the East Bengal Council as part of this general scheme of passive resistance will naturally regard the interpretation that has, evidently, been put on it by Babu Ananda Chandra Roy as wrong, and even positively mischievous and calculated to weaken the whole movement, and to them the soul of the new situation in East Bengal is not to be found in the retirement of Sir B. Fuller and in the character of his successor, but in the failure of the policy of regulation lathis that had been set up under Sir B. Fuller’s regime, and the complete success of the resistful attitude and policy that the people of East Page-8 Bengal has adopted as a protest against the illegal excesses of the last few months. The aim of the recent change in the personnel of the Administration of East Bengal is to quietly lead the people to abandon this resistful and forceful attitude and policy, and it will be fatal folly on our part, and the complete undoing of what bas been achieved during these last twelve months, to accept the policy that Babu Ananda Chandra Roy has suggested in his resent circular letter. This is why we are forced to characterise it as exceedingly unwise and mischievous. Bande Mataram, August 27, 1906 Page-9 |