|
The "Mirror" and Mr. Tilak
THE Indian Mirror, which is now the chief ally
of Government among the Congress organs in Bengal,
has chosen, naturally enough, to fall foul of Mr. Tilak. Our contemporary, it appears,
has heard that some people propose to put forward Mr. Tilak's name as President
of the next Congress, and it hastens to point out how extremely distasteful
the idea is to all thoughtful and enlightened men, that is to say, to all whose
views agree with the Mirror's. Mr. Tilak, we learn, has seriously
offended our contemporary by giving honour to Mr. Bhopatkar on his release from
jail; his speeches on the occasion of the Shivaji festival were displeasing to
the thoughtful and enlightened men who congregate in the office of the Indian
Mirror; and to sum up the whole matter, he is a man of extreme views and
without "tact". Ergo, he is no fit man for the presidential chair of
the Congress.
It is
interesting to learn on this unimpeachable authority what are the
qualifications which the moderate and loyalist mind demands in a President of
the "National" Congress. It is not, apparently, the acknowledged
leader of one of the greatest Indian races who can aspire to that post; it is a
man of "tact" — one, in other words, who does not like to offend the
authorities. It is not the great protagonist and champion of Swadeshi in
Western India; it is a man of moderate views, one, let us say, who dare not
look Truth in the face and speak out boldly what he thinks. It is not the one
man whom the whole Hindu community in Western India
delights to honour, from Peshawar
to Kolhapur and from Bombay to our own borders; it is one who will not talk about
Shivaji and Bhavani — only about Mahatmas. It is not the man who has suffered
and denied himself for his country's sake and never abased his courage nor
bowed his head under the most crushing persecution; it is
one who by refusing to honour a similar courage in others, dishonours the
country for which they have suffered.
Page-140
If
this is the creed of our contemporary and those whose opinions it
"mirrors", it is not the creed of the country at large. With the
exception of a fast-dwindling minority of Anglophiles, the whole of
India
has learned to honour the name of the great
Maratha leader and patriot. His social and religious views may not agree with
those of the "enlightened", but we have yet to learn that the Congress
platform is sacred to advanced social reformers, that the profession of the
Hindu religion is a bar to leadership in its ranks. Mr. Tilak's only other
offence is the courage and boldness of his views and his sturdiness in holding
by them. He has dared to go to jail and honour those who follow his example, —
the bold bad man! And yet we seem to have somehow or other a dim recollection of
a venerable Congress leader named Babu Narendra Nath Sen figuring prominently at
a meeting in which men and boys who had gone to jail for resisting the
Government were honoured and saluted as national heroes. Evidently we have been
under an error. Evidently our contemporary is at heart a favourer of the
doctrine of self-help and action. It is talking and writing against the
Government that he condemns, but to act against the Government, rebellion
against constituted authorities has Babu Narendra Nath's full approval. Wearing
the outward guise of a loyalist, he is at heart revolutionary. Otherwise would
he have presided at the 7th of August celebration and countenanced the raising
of the National flag? Now, at last, we understand the policy of the
Mirror.
Whether
loyalism likes it or not, Mr. Tilak is now the leader of the
Deccan, a man whom twenty millions look up to as their
chief and head. If Mr. Mehta is the "uncrowned King" of
Bombay
City, Mr. Tilak is the uncrowned King of all
Maharashtra. The attempt to exclude such a man from his
rightful place and influence in the counsels of the nation can only recoil on
its authors.
Leaders in Council
The conference held in the Land-holders Association on Sunday
Page-141
seems
to have been very select in its composition, the organisers confining
themselves mostly to staunch congress-men or those who might be supposed to
hold fast by Congress views. It must have been a disagreeable surprise to them
to find that even in this small circle a strong opposition was offered to the
renewal of a petitioning policy. Babu Motilal Ghose could not be excluded
and the views of this veteran leader on the question of action versus resolution
are well known. But Babu Motilal was backed up by strong voices from the
Mofussil and we understand that it was only by the old plea of its being the
very last time that the conference was persuaded to agree to something in the
shape of a memorial. We know that "last time" well. It was the very
last time on the occasion of the Town Hall; it was the very last time at
Barisal; and now again this long-lived old friend of
ours crops up like the clown of the pantomime with his eternal smirk and his
eternal "Here I am". Our leaders resemble English theatrical
managers, when their audiences grow small. They declare that today is the last
night of the piece; next day it becomes the very last night; then it is absolutely
the last night, and so on till it is absolutely quite the very very last, last
night of all. Meanwhile audiences increase and the shillings pour in.
Bande
Mataram,
August 28, 1906
BY THE WAY
Diogenes
in the Statesman indulges himself in a paragraph of grave advice to the
'self-constituted' leaders of the Indian labour movement. For a philosopher,
our friend takes singularly little trouble to understand the opponents' case.
Neither Mr. A. K. Ghose nor Mr. Aswini Banerji nor any of their assistants proposes,
so far as we know, to benefit labour by getting rid of English capital. What
they do propose is to get rid of the exceedingly unjust conditions under which
Indian labour has to sweat in order to enrich alien capitalists. And by the
way, as it were, they also propose to get rid of the habit of coarse insult
and brutal
Page-142
speech
which Englishmen have accustomed themselves to indulge in when dealing with
'low-class' Indians.
Are the leaders of Indian labour self-constituted? One would imagine that
men whom Indian workers naturally turn to in difficulty and who can organise in
a few weeks so large an affair as the Railway Union have vindicated their claims
to be the national leaders of Labour. At any rate, their constituents have very
enthusiastically ratified their 'self-constituted' authority. But perhaps
Diogenes has been converted from cynicism to Vedanta, and sees no difference
between the self of the railway employees and the self of Mr. A. K. Ghose.
Still, the tub from which he holds forth is a small one, and he should not
cumber one-sixth of his space with such cumber.
The rift between the Labourites and the Liberals grows daily wider. The
alliance was never natural and cannot in its nature be permanent. But official
Liberaldom will be foolish indeed if it declares war on Labour at the present
juncture. The Socialistic element in
England
is quite strong enough to turn the Liberal
triumph of 1905 into a serious disaster at the next elections. Nor are the
Labourites likely to be frightened by Ministerial menaces. Mr. Winston Churchill
and the Master of Elibank may thunder from their high official
Olympus, but Mr. Keir Hardie will go on his way unscathed
and unmoved. He knows that the future is with Socialism and he can afford to
despise the temporary and imperfect fruits which a Liberal alliance promises.
For us English politics have small personal interest. From the
Conservatives we can expect nothing but open oppression, from the Liberals,
nothing but insincere professions and fraudulent concessions, — shadows
calling themselves substance. Can we hope better things from Labour? Many whose
judgment we
respect think that there is a real ally — that the friendship of Labour for
India
is sincere and disinterested. For the present,
yes. But when Labour becomes a power and sits on front benches we fear that it
will be as intolerant and oppressive as Conservatism itself.
Australia
is a
Labour
Commonwealth, and we know the attitude of the Australian
working-man to Indians and Asiatics generally.
India
's hope lies not in English Liberalism or
Page-143
Labour,
but in her own strong heart and giant limbs. Titaness, who by thy mere attempt
to rise can burst these Lilliputian bonds, why shouldst thou clamour feebly for
help to these pigmies over the seas?
Bande
Mataram,
August 30, 1906
Page-144
|