|
Bande Mataram { CALCUTTA, May 8th, 1907 }
Curzonism for the University
At last the Brahmastra which Lord Curzon forged for the stifling of patriotism through the instrumentality of the University, is to be utilised, and utilised to its full capacity. We all remember the particular skirmish in the first Swadeshi struggle in which Sir Bampfylde Fuller fell. Sir Bampfylde insisted on the disaffiliation of the Serajgunge Schools because the teachers and students were publicly taking part in politics. Lord Minto’s Government refused to support him in this action because it was inadvisable, having regard to the troubled nature of the times, and Sir Bampfylde had to resign. Whatever stronger motives were behind Lord Minto’s action, this was the ostensible occasion for a resignation which practically amounted to a dismissal. Now we find the same Government and the same Lord Minto outfullering Fuller and threatening in much more troubled times against all Government or aided or affiliated Colleges and Schools the action which Sir Bampfylde contemplated against only two. The circular letter issued to the local Governments “with the object of protecting Higher Education in India” from any connection with politics, is an awkward and clumsily worded document such as we would not have expected from the pen of Sir H. Risley, but it manages to make its object and methods pretty clear. The object is to put a stop to the system of National Volunteers which is growing up throughout Bengal, to use the Universities as an instrument for stifling the growth of political life and incidentally to prevent men of ability and influence in the educational line from becoming a political power. This is how Lord Minto, presumably with the approval of Mr. John Morley, proposes to bring about these objects. The objects of
Page – 385 their benevolent and high-minded attention are divided into four classes, schoolboys, college students, schoolmasters, professors, and for each a scientifically varied treatment is carefully prescribed. For students in high schools, “In the interest of the boys themselves, it is clearly undesirable that they should be distracted from their work by attending political meetings or engaging in any form of political agitation. In the event of such misconduct being persisted in and encouraged or permitted by masters or managing authorities, the offending school can after due warning be dealt with— (a) by the local Government, which has the power of withdrawing any grant-in-aid and of withholding the privilege of competing for scholarships and of receiving scholarship-holders; (b) by the University, which can withdraw recognition from the school, the effect of which is to prevent it from sending up pupils as candidates for matriculation examination.” Students in high schools are therefore to be debarred from all political education and brought up on an exclusive diet of Lee-Warner and Empire Day. Attending political meetings, outside school hours, mind you, and, it may be, with the full consent of the guardians, is to be reckoned as misconduct coming within the scope of school discipline. It is to be punished by the disciplining, that is to say, the flogging or expulsion of the boys. But what if the teachers or the managing authorities remember that they are men and not dogs who for a little food from the Government are ready to do its will just or unjust? What if they decline to do the Government’s dirty work for it? Then the local magistrate appears on the scene and takes away the grant-in-aid and the privilege of competing for scholarships and of receiving scholarship-holders. But supposing there should still be found a Vidyasagar or two who would contemptuously spurn these bribes and prefer to keep his manhood? For that also this provident circular has provided. The school can be refused recognition, a refusal which will mean exclusion of its students from a college education. For this purpose the local Government will report to the University “which alone is legally competent to inflict the requisite penalty”. But if this sole legal authority
Page – 386 should decline to act on the report of the local Government? Then, it appears, there is another sole authority which is legally or illegally competent, the Government itself. The report is to be understood not as a report but as an order, and if it is disobeyed, the University “would fail to carry out the educational trust with which the law has invested it, and it would be the duty of the Government to intervene”. The next class is composed of university students. In their case the Government is not prepared to punish them, as a general rule, for merely attending political meetings. We take it that, in special cases, e.g. if it were a meeting addressed by Srijut Bipin Chandra Pal or Syed Haidar Reza or Mr. Tilak, they will not be punished. But if they take an active part in the meeting, then the need for discipline will begin. Any action which will bring undesirable notoriety upon their college, will be sufficient ground for Government interference. Picketing is of course forbidden to the student and so is open violence— such for instance as the defence of his father’s house, person and property from Mahomedan goondas or of the chastity of his wife, sister or mother from violation by political hooligans. The schoolmaster is mercifully treated. He is graciously conceded the right of having his own opinions and even of expressing them within limits set by the alien bureaucracy. “If, therefore, the public utterances of a schoolmaster are of such a character as to endanger the orderly development of the boys under his charge by introducing into their immature minds doctrines subversive of their respect for authority and calculated to impair their usefulness as citizens and to hinder their advancement in after life, his proceedings must be held to constitute a dereliction of duty, and may properly be visited with disciplinary action.” In plain unofficial English the schoolmaster will be allowed to teach loyalty and subservience, but if he teaches patriotism, he must be suspended, degraded or dismissed. If he takes his pupils or encourages them to go to political meetings,— barring celebrations of the Empire Day,— he will, of course, be dismissed at once. Finally the College Professors, men like Srijuts Surendranath Banerji, Aswini Kumar Dutta, Krishna Kumar
Page – 387 Mitra, are not to be altogether gagged, but their hands are to be bound. “If he diverts his students’ minds to political agitation,” as Srijut Surendranath has done for decades, “if he encourages them to attend political meetings or personally” conducts them to such meetings,— this is obviously aimed at Srijut Krishna Kumar Mitra and the Anti-Circular Society— “or if he adopts a line of action which disturbs and disorganises the life and work of the College at which he is employed”,— whatever this portentous phrase may mean,— the College is to be disaffiliated or the offender expelled. This ukase out-Russias Russia. Not even in Russia have such systematically drastic measures been taken to discourage political life and patriotic activity among the young. Not even the omnipotent Tsar has dared to issue an ukase so arbitrary, oppressive and inquisitorial. It means that no self-respecting patriot will in future enter or remain in the Government educational service in any position of responsibility; or if he remains, he will not be allowed to remain long. It means that the position of private schools and colleges will become unbearable and they will be compelled to break off connection with the Government University. It means, if there is a grain of self-respect left in the country, that the Government University will perish and a National University be developed. And for this reason we welcome the circular and hope that its provisions will be stringently enforced. __________
Incompetence or Connivance
The question has been raised whether the action of the officials in Mymensingh amounts to incompetence or connivance. In face of the open partiality of these bureaucrats, their severity to Hindus and leniency to Mahomedans, it seems absurd to ask the question. To arrest the leading local Hindus en masse and leave the Mahomedans untouched, although influential local Mahomedans have been publicly charged by name with fomenting riots; to loot houses and cutcherries under the pretence of search with
Page – 388 a Mahomedan mob at their back; to institute rigorous enquiry into the wounding of a Mahomedan and none into the death of a Hindu; to turn a deaf ear to appeals for help from threatened Hindus in the villages and delay action till the looting and outrage have been accomplished; to look on inactive in the face of a surging Mahomedan tumult and be on the alert when there is a rumour of Hindu retaliation;— all this is not incompetence, but connivance. We could have understood it, if the authorities had been equally supine and helpless in dealing with Hindus as with Mahomedans, but this is not the case. Compare the action of the Government in the Punjab with that of the Government in Bengal. In the Punjab, because there was a popular riot, all the leading Hindu gentlemen have been arrested on outrageous charges, the town held by cavalry, siege-guns pointed upon it, the police ordered to butcher any group of five to be seen in the streets or public places. If the East Bengal Nawabs and Maulavis had been similarly treated and similar measures taken in Jamalpur, we could have admired the impartial, if ferocious energy of the bureaucracy. Compare again the action in Bengal itself. A rumour is spread that the Hindus would attack the Mahomedan piece-goods shops in Comilla; at once Mr. Lees posts constables and himself stands on guard over the bazaar. A rumour is spread that the Jamalpur accused are coming up with an army of volunteers and the Gurkhas are out to receive them on the station. Compare this with the action against Mahomedan riot. “Armed police have been sent only after the occurrence. The authorities are taking no preventive measures. The Magistrate is sending Gurkhas and constables after everything has been finished.” This phenomenon has been more than once repeated. “All shops at Bakshiganj, Mymensingh, have been looted and papers destroyed. The Image of Kali has been broken to pieces;” but “I hear that a regular enquiry is not taking place in the Bakshiganj case. Some of the accused who were arrested, have been let off. First informations have not been taken in all the cases.” Or take this suggestive telegram from Rangpur District: “The rowdy Mahomedans of the locality gathered and looted Bakshiganj Bazar and the houses of several
Page – 390 Hindu residents of Charkaseria. Females were outraged. The looting continued from noon to midnight.” Looting of Hindus accompanied by outrages on their women may continue from noon to midnight, and no one thinks it his business to interfere; but a few Mahomedan shops were supposed to be threatened and a British Magistrate at once appears on the scene. __________
Soldiers and Assaults
The Englishman has after much deliberation decided to open a fund in aid of the soldiers who the other day attacked an Indian and assaulted him and was fined Rs. 150 by the Magistrate. The appeal for help is made at the fag end of a long article which opens thus:— “The private soldier in a large Indian town such as Calcutta has many disabilities and not less temptations. The nature of his occupation leaves him a certain amount of leisure, and it is not to be expected that he should be a man of sufficient culture to spend this leisure in literary pursuits. He sallies forth for a walk, during the course of which he is only too frequently the object of undesirable attention of both a quasi-friendly and an openly hostile kind. Our experience of the excellent Mr. Atkins goes to show that he is as a rule an extremely well-behaved man, chivalrous and kindly in his way, and certainly by no means a swaggering, hectoring bully. Yet he inevitably on occasion comes into unpleasant contact with the natives of the country.” Then the Hare Street journal says that petty dealers and hucksters take advantage of the soldier’s ignorance of the language and other disabilities and attempt to cheat him, an “attempt which if discovered leads to the most natural resentment on the part of the victim. This resentment may be, in default of the power of vernacular expression, translated into action, but is the soldier to blame?” Certainly not. And as a white man, he has every right to assault the Indian who is, in the words of Kipling, the Banjo Bard of the Empire, no more than “half-devil, half-child”. Belonging to a race that makes laws the soldier has
Page – 390 the power to take the law into his own hand when dealing with “natives”. And the Englishman is sure that “his behaviour is as a rule admirable and reflects credit on the man and the service.” The man, of course, is worthy of the service. If attempts to cheat are to be punished with blows by the victim, why, Clive should have been the first Englishman to suffer at the hand of Omichand. We are sorry the wisdom of the Englishman was not shared by Justice Norris who tried the O’Hara case, nor by Lord Curzon who was constrained to punish an entire regiment for misconduct, nor by the Bengal Government in the matter of the Barrackpur shooting case. But we do not quarrel with the Englishman for supporting the soldiers. We are convinced misconduct on their part will not cease till we learn to retaliate. Our duty lies clear before us— to organize measures of self-defence and determine to have tooth for tooth and eye for eye.
Page – 391 |