Purna Swaraj (Lahore, December 1929) JAWAHARLAL NEHRU (1889–1964)

Purna Swaraj (Lahore, December 1929)
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU (1889–1964)

Jawaharlal Nehru was president of the Congress at its session held in

Lahore in 1929. Riding on a white horse at the Congress procession, he

seemed destined to be—as Mahatma Gandhi had prophesied—the young

Galahad of revolt. His presidential address demanding complete

independence captured the nation’s mood of defiance and rebellion. e

demand for complete independence had been in the air for sometime. e

Congress resolution of Purna Swaraj embodied it and Nehru’s presidential

address gave it formal shape. Nehru spoke of India’s struggle for

independence as a conquest of power and put it in an international context

of ending European dominance. e speech was received with great

enthusiasm except obviously by the British who were dismayed that the

Congress had enthroned a socialist and a revolutionary. e mood of the

Lahore Congress was appositely captured in the cries of ‘inquilab zindabad’

that went up with the traditional ‘bande mataram’ when the tricolour was

unfurled. Nehru, the idealistic nationalist, was clearly in no mood for

political compromise. is would be the last such romantic speech he would

make; the Jawaharlal of the 30s and 40s would be a more sombre, grander

figure.

main speech

Comrades—for four and forty years this National Congress has laboured for

the freedom of India. During this period it has somewhat slowly, but surely,

awakened national consciousness from its long stupor and built up the

national movement. If, today we are gathered here at a crisis of our destiny,

conscious of our strength as well as of our weakness, and looking with hope

and apprehension to the future, it is well that we give first thought to those

h h b f d h h l h l l h f

who have gone before us and who spent out their lives with little hope of

reward, so that those that followed them may have the joy of achievement.

Many of the giants of old are not with us and we of a later day, standing on

an eminence of their creation, may often decry their efforts. at is the way

of the world. But none of you can forget them or the great work they did in

laying the foundations of a free India. And none of us can ever forget that

glorious band of men and women who, without tacking the consequences,

have laid down their young lives or spent their bright youth in suffering and

torment in utter protest against a foreign domination.

Many of their names even are not known to us. ey laboured and suffered

in silence without any expectation of public applause, and by their heart’s

blood they nursed the tender plant of India’s freedom. While many of us

temporized and compromised, they stood up and proclaimed a people’s

right to freedom and declared to the world that India, even in her

degradation, had the spark of life in her, because she refused to submit to

tyranny and serfdom. Brick by brick has our national movement been built

up, and often on the prostrate bodies of her martyred sons has India

advanced. e giants of old may not be with us, but the courage of old is

with us still and India can yet produce martyrs like Jatin Das and Wizaya.

is is the glorious heritage that we have inherited and you wish to put me

in charge of it. I know well that I occupy this honoured place by chance

more than by your deliberate design. Your desire was to choose another—

one who towers above all others in this present day world of ours—and

there could have been no wiser choice. But fate and He conspired together

and thrust me against your will and mine into this terrible seat of

responsibility. Should I express my gratitude to you for having placed me in

this dilemma? But I am grateful indeed for your confidence in one who

strangely lacks it himself.

You will discuss many vital national problems that face us today and your

decisions may change the course of Indian history. But you are not the only

people that are faced with problems. e whole world today is one vast

question-mark and every country and every people is in the melting pot.

e age of faith, with the comfort and stability it brings, is past and there is

questioning about everything, however permanent or sacred it might have

appeared to our forefathers. Everywhere, there is doubt and restlessness and

the foundations of the state and society are in process of transformation.

Old bl h d d f l b d h f l

Old established ideas of liberty, justice, property, and even the family are

being attacked and the outcome hangs in the balance. We appear to be in a

dissolving period of history when the world is in labour and out of her

travail will give birth to a new order.

No one can say what the future will bring, but we may assert with some

confidence that Asia and even India, will play a determining part in future

world policy. e brief day of European domination is already approaching

its end. Europe has ceased to be the centre of activity and interest. e

future lies with America and Asia. Owing to false and incomplete history

many of us have been led to think that Europe has always dominated over

the rest of the world, and Asia has always let the legions of the West

thunder past and had plunged in thought again. We have forgotten that for

millennia the legions of Asia overran Europe and modern Europe itself

largely consists of the descendants of these invaders from Asia. We have

forgotten that it was India that finally broke the military power of

Alexander.

ought has undoubtedly been the glory of Asia and specially of India, but

in the field of action the record of Asia has been equally great. But none of

us desires that the legions of Asia or Europe should overrun the continents

again. We have all had enough of them.

India today is a part of a world movement. Not only China, Turkey, Persia,

and Egypt but also Russia and the countries of the West are taking part in

this movement, and India cannot isolate herself from it. We have our own

problems—difficult and intricate—and we cannot run away from them and

take shelter in the wider problems that affect the world. But if we ignore the

world, we do so at our peril. Civilization today, such as it is, is not the

creation or monopoly of one people or nation. It is a composite fabric to

which all countries have contributed and then have adapted to suit their

particular needs. And if India has a message to give to the world as I hope

she has, she has also to receive and learn much from the messages of other

peoples.

When everything is changing it is well to remember the long course of

Indian history. Few things in history are more amazing than the wonderful

stability of the social structure in India, which withstood the impact of

numerous alien influences and thousands of years of change and conflict. It

withstood them because it always sought to absorb them and tolerate them.

I b bl h l b b

Its aim was not to exterminate, but to establish an equilibrium between

different cultures. Aryans and non-Aryans settled down together

recognizing each other’s right to their culture, and outsiders who came, like

the Parsis, found a welcome and a place in the social order. With the

coming of the Muslims, the equilibrium was disturbed, but India sought to

restore it, and largely succeeded. Unhappily for us before we could adjust

our differences, the political structure broke down, the British came and we

fell.

Great as was the success of India in evolving a stable society, she failed and

in a vital particular, and because she failed in this, she fell and remains

fallen. No solution was found for the problem of equality. India deliberately

ignored this and built up her social structure on inequality, and we have the

tragic consequences of this policy in the millions of our people who till

yesterday were suppressed and had little opportunity for growth.

And yet when Europe fought her wars of religion and Christians massacred

each other in the name of their saviour, India was tolerant, although alas,

there is little of this toleration today. Having attained some measure of

religious liberty, Europe sought after political liberty, and political and legal

equality. Having attained these also, she finds that they mean very little

without economic liberty and equality. And so today politics have ceased to

have much meaning and the most vital question is that of social and

economic equality.

India also will have to find a solution to this problem and until she does so,

her political and social structure cannot have stability. at solution need

not necessarily follow the example of any other country. It must, if it has to

endure, be based on the genius of her people and be an outcome of her

thought and culture. And when it is found, the unhappy differences

between various communities, which trouble us today and keep back our

freedom, will automatically disappear.

Indeed, the real differences have already largely gone, but fear of each other

and distrust and suspicion remain and sow seeds of discord. e problem is

how to remove fear and suspicion and, being intangible, they are hard to get

at. An earnest attempt was made to do so last year by the All Parties’

Committee and much progress was made towards the goal. But we must

admit with sorrow that success has not wholly crowned its efforts. Many of

our Muslim and Sikh friends have strenuously opposed the solutions

d d h b d h l fi d

suggested and passions have been roused over mathematical figures and

percentages. Logic and cold reasons are poor weapons to fight fear and

distrust. Only faith and generosity can overcome them. I can only hope that

the leaders of various communities will have this faith and generosity in

ample measure. What shall we gain for ourselves or for our community, if

all of us are slaves in a slave country? And what can we lose if once we

remove the shackles from India and can breathe the air of freedom again?

Do we want outsiders who are not of us and who have kept us in bondage,

to be the protectors of our little rights and privileges, when they deny us the

very right to freedom? No majority can crush a determined minority and no

minority can be protected by a little addition to its seats in a legislature. Let

us remember that in the world today, almost everywhere a very small

minority holds wealth and power and dominates over the great majority.

I have no love for bigotry and dogmatism in religion and I am glad that

they are weakening. Nor do I love communalism in any shape or form. I

find it difficult to appreciate why political or economic rights should depend

on the membership of a religious group or community. I can fully

understand the right to freedom in a religion and the right to one’s culture,

and in India specially, which has always acknowledged and granted these

rights, it should be no difficult matter to ensure their continuance We have

only to find out some way whereby we may root out the fear and distrust

that darken our horizon today. e politics of a subject race are largely based

on fear and hatred, and we have been too long under subjection to get rid of

them easily.

I was born a Hindu but I do not know how far I am justified in calling

myself one or in speaking on behalf of Hindus. But birth still counts in this

country and by right of birth I shall venture to submit to the leaders of the

Hindus that it should be their privilege to take the lead in generosity.

Generosity is not only good morals, but is often good politics and sound

expediency. And it is inconceivable to me that in a free India, the Hindus

can ever be powerless. So far as I am concerned, I would gladly ask our

Muslim and Sikh friends to take what they will without protest and

argument from me. I know that the time is coming soon when these labels

and appellations will have little meaning and when our struggle will be on

an economic basis. Meanwhile, it matters little what our mutual

arrangements are, provided only that we do not build up barriers which will

come in the way of our future progress.

 h d d l d h h All P ’ R h b

e time has indeed already come when the All Parties’ Report has to be

put aside and we march forward unfettered to our goal. You will remember

that the resolution of the last Congress fixed a year of grace for the adoption

of the All-Parties scheme. at year is nearly over and the natural issue of

that decision is for this Congress to declare in favour of independence and

devise sanctions to achieve it.

Recently, there has been a seeming offer of peace. e Viceroy has stated on

behalf of the British Government that the leaders of Indian opinion will be

invited to confer with the government on the subject of India’s future

Constitution. e Viceroy meant well and his language was the language of

peace. But even a Viceroy’s goodwill and courteous phrases are poor

substitutes for the hard facts that confront us. We have sufficient experience

of the devious ways of British diplomacy to beware of it. e offer which

the British Government made was vague and there was no commitment or

promise of performance. Only by the greatest stretch of imagination could

it be interpreted as a possible response to the Calcutta resolution. Many

leaders of various political parties met together soon after and considered it.

ey gave it the most favourable interpretation, for they desired peace and

were willing to go half-way to meet it. But in courteous language they made

it clear what the vital conditions for its acceptance were.

Many of us who believed in independence and were convinced that the offer

was only a device to lead us astray and create division in our ranks, suffered

bitter anguish and were torn with doubt. Were we justified in precipitating a

terrible national struggle with all its inevitable consequences of suffering for

many, when there was even an outside chance of honourable peace? With

much searching of heart we signed that manifesto and I know not today if

we did right or wrong. Later came the explanations and amplifications in

the British Parliament and elsewhere and all doubt, if doubt there was, was

removed as to the true significance of the offer. Even so your Working

Committee chose to keep open the door of negotiation and left it to this

Congress to take the final decision.

During the last few days there has been another discussion of this subject in

the British House of Commons and the Secretary of State for India has

endeavoured to point out that successive governments have tried to prove,

not only by words but by deeds also, the sincerity of their faith in regard to

India. We must recognize Mr Wedgwood Benn’s desire to do something for

I d d h h d ll f h I d l B h

India and his anxiety to secure the goodwill of the Indian people. But his

speech and other speeches made in Parliament carry us no further.

‘Dominion Status in action’, to which he has drawn attention has been a

snare for us and has certainly not reduced the exploitation of India.

e burdens on the Indian masses are even greater today, because of this

‘Dominion Status in action’ and the so-called constitutional reforms of ten

years ago. High Commissioners in London and representatives of the

League of Nations, and the purchase of stores, and Indian Governors and

high officials are no parts of our demand. We want to put an end to the

exploitation of India’s poor and to get the reality of power and not merely

the livery of office. Mr Wedgwood Benn has given us a record of the

achievements of the past decade. He could have added to it by referring to

Martial Law in the Punjab and the Jallianwala Bagh shooting and the

repression and exploitation that have gone on continually during this period

of ‘Dominion Status in action.’ He has given us some insight into what

more of Dominion Status may mean for us. It will mean the shadow of

authority to a handful of Indians and more repression and exploitation of

the masses.

What will this Congress do? e conditions for cooperation remain

unfulfilled. Can we cooperate so long as there is no guarantee that real

freedom will come to us? Can we cooperate when our comrades lie in

prison and repression continues? Can we cooperate until we are assured that

real peace is sought after and not merely a tactical advantage over us? Peace

cannot come at the point of the bayonet, and if we are to continue to be

dominated over by an alien people, let us at least be no consenting parties to

it.

If the Calcutta resolution holds, we have but one goal today, that of

independence. Independence is not a happy word in the world today; for it

means exclusiveness and isolation. Civilization has had enough of narrow

nationalism and gropes towards a wider cooperation and inter-dependence.

And if we use the word ‘independence’, we do so in no sense hostile to the

larger ideal. Independence for us means complete freedom from British

domination and British imperialism. Having attained our freedom, I have

no doubt that India will welcome all attempts at world-cooperation and

federation, and will even agree to give up part of her own independence to a

larger group of which she is an equal member.

 B h E d h d b l

e British Empire today is not such a group and cannot be so long as it

dominates over millions of people and holds large areas of the world’s

surface despite the will of their inhabitants. It cannot be a true

commonwealth so long as imperialism is its basis and the exploitation of

other races its chief means of sustenance. e British Empire today is

indeed gradually undergoing a process of political dissolution. It is in a state

of unstable equilibrium. e Union of South Africa is not a happy member

of the family, nor is the Irish Free State, a willing one. Egypt drifts away.

India could never be an equal member of the Commonwealth unless

imperialism and all it implies is discarded. So long as this is not done,

India’s position in the empire must be one of subservience and her

exploitation will continue.

ere is talk of world-peace and pacts have been signed by the nations of

the world. But despite pacts, armaments grow and beautiful language is the

only homage that is paid to the goddess of peace. Peace can only come

when the causes of war are removed. So long as there is the domination of

one country over another, or the exploitation of one class by another, there

will always be attempts to subvert the existing order and no stable

equilibrium can endure. Out of imperialism and capitalism peace can never

come. And it is because the British Empire stands for these and bases itself

on the exploitation of the masses that we can find no willing place in it. No

gain that may come to us is worth anything unless it helps in removing the

grievous burdens on our masses. e weight of a great empire is heavy to

carry and long our people have endured it. eir backs are bent down and

their spirit has almost broken. How will they share in the Commonwealth

partnership if the burden of exploitation continues? Many of the problems

we have to face are the problems of vested interests mostly created or

encouraged by the British Government. e interests of the Rulers of

Indian States, of British officials and British capital and Indian capital and

of the owners of big zamindaris are ever thrust before us, and they clamour

for protection. e unhappy millions who really need protection are almost

voiceless and have few advocates.

We have had much controversy about independence and Dominion Status

and we have quarrelled about words. But the real thing is the conquest of

power by whatever name it may be called. I do not think that any form of

Dominion Status applicable to India will give us real power. A test of this

power would be the entire withdrawal of the alien army of occupation and

l L h f h d h ll

economic control. Let us, therefore, concentrate on these and the rest will

follow easily.

We stand therefore today, for the fullest freedom of India. is Congress

has not acknowledged and will not acknowledge the right of the British

Parliament to dictate to us in any way. To it we make no appeal. But we do

appeal to the Parliament and the conscience of the world, and to them we

shall declare, I hope, that India submits no longer to any foreign

domination. Today or tomorrow, we may not be strong enough to assert our

will. We are very conscious of our weakness, and there is no boasting in us

or pride of strength. But let no one, least of all England, mistake or

underrate the meaning or strength of our resolve. Solemnly, with full

knowledge of consequences, I hope, we shall take it and there will be no

turning back. A great nation cannot be thwarted for long when once its

mind is clear and resolved. If today we fail and tomorrow brings no success,

the day after will follow and bring achievement.

We are weary of strife and hunger for peace and opportunity to work

constructively for our country. Do we enjoy the breaking up of our homes

and the sight of our brave young men going to prison or facing the halter?

Does the worker like going on strike to lose even his miserable pittance and

starve? He does so by sheer compulsion when there is no other way for him.

And we who take this perilous path of national strife do so because there is

no other way to an honourable peace. But we long for peace, and the hand

fellowship will always be stretched out to all who may care to grasp it. But

behind the hand will be a body which will not bend to injustice and a mind

that will not surrender on any vital point.

With the struggle before us, the time for determining our future

Constitution is not yet. For two years or more we have drawn up

constitutions and finally the All-Parties’ Committee put a crown to these

efforts by drawing up a scheme of its own which the Congress adopted for a

year. e labour that went to the making of this scheme was not wasted and

India has profited by it. But the year is past and we have to face new

circumstances which require action rather than constitution-making. Yet we

cannot ignore the problems that beset us and that will make or mar our

struggle and our future constitution. We have to aim at social adjustment

and equilibrium and to overcome the forces of disruption that have been the

bane of India.

I f kl f h I l d bl d

I must frankly confess that I am a socialist and a republican and am no

believer in kings and princes, or in the order which produces the modern

kings of industry, who have greater power over the lives and fortunes of men

than even kings of old, and whose methods are as predatory as those of the

old feudal aristocracy. I recognize, however, that it may not be possible for a

body constituted as in this National Congress and in the present

circumstances of the country to adopt a full socialistic programme. But we

must realize that the philosophy of socialism has gradually permeated the

entire structure of society the world over and almost the only points in

dispute are the pace and methods of advance to its full realization. India will

have to go that way too if she seeks to end her poverty and inequality,

though she may evolve her own methods and may adapt the ideal to the

genuine of her race.

We have three major problems, the minorities, the Indian states, and labour

and peasantry. I have dealt already with the question of minorities. I shall

only repeat that we must give the fullest assurance by our words and our

deeds that their culture and traditions will be safe.

e Indian states cannot live apart from the rest of India and their rulers

must, unless they accept their inevitable limitations, go the way of others

who thought like them. And the only people who have a right to determine

the future of the states must be the people of these states, including the

rulers. is Congress which claims self-determination cannot deny it to the

people of the states. Meanwhile, the Congress is perfectly willing to confer

with such rulers as are prepared to do so and to devise means whereby the

transition may not be too sudden. But in no event can the people of the

states be ignored.

Our third major problem is the biggest of all. For India means the peasantry

and labour and to the extent that we raise them and satisfy their wants will

we succeed in our task. And the measure of the strength of our national

movement will be the measure of their adherence to it. We can only gain

them to our side by our espousing their cause which is really the country’s

cause. e Congress has often expressed its goodwill towards them; but

beyond that it has not gone. e Congress, it is said, must hold the balance

fairly between capital and labour and zamindar and tenant.

But the balance has been and is terribly weighed on one side, and to

maintain the status quo is to maintain injustice and exploitation. e only

h d h h d f l

way to right it is to do away with the domination of any one class over

another. e All-India Congress Committee accepted this ideal of social

and economic change in a resolution it passed some months ago in Bombay.

I hope the Congress will also set its seal on it and will further draw up a

programme of such changes as can be immediately put in operation.

In this programme perhaps the Congress as a whole cannot go very far

today. But it must keep the ultimate ideal in view and work for it. e

question is not one merely of wages and charity doled out by an employer or

landlord. Paternalism in industry or in the land is but a form of charity with

all its sting and its utter incapacity to root out the evil. e new theory of

trusteeship, which some advocate, is equally barren. For trusteeship means

that the power for good or evil remains with the self-appointed trustee and

he may exercise it as he will. e sole trusteeship that can be fair is the

trusteeship of the nation and not of one individual or a group. Many

Englishmen honestly consider themselves the trustees for India, and yet to

what a condition they have reduced our country.

We must decide for whose benefit industry must be run and the land

produce food. Today the abundance that the land produces is not for the

peasant or the labourer who works on it; and industry’s chief function is

supposed to be to produce millionaires. However golden the harvest and

heavy the dividends, the mud-huts and hovels and nakedness of our people

testify to the glory of the British Empire and of our present social system.

Our economic programme must therefore be based on a human outlook and

must not sacrifice man to money. If an industry cannot be run without

starving its workers, then the industry must be closed down. If the workers

on the land have not enough to eat then the intermediaries who deprive

them of their full share must go. e least that every worker in the field or

factory is entitled to is a minimum wage which will enable him to live in

moderate comfort, and human hours of labour which do not break his

strength and spirit. e All-Parties’ Committee accepted the principle and

included it in their recommendations. I hope the Congress will also do so

and will in addition be prepared to accept its natural consequences. Further

that, it will adopt the well known demands of labour for a better life, and

will give every assistance to organize itself and prepare itself for the day

when it can control industry on a cooperative basis.

B d l l b l ll f I d l h h dl

But industrial labour is only a small part of India, although it is rapidly

becoming a force that cannot be ignored. It is the peasantry that cry loudly

and piteously for relief and our programme must deal with their present

condition. Real relief can only come by a great change in the land-laws and

the basis of the present system of land tenure. We have among us many big

landowners and we welcome them. But they must realize that the

ownership of large estates by individuals, which is the outcome of a state

resembling the old feudalism of Europe, is a rapidly disappearing

phenomenon all over the world. Even in countries which are the

strongholds of capitalism, the large estates are being split up and given to

the peasantry who work on them. In India also we have large areas where

the system of peasant proprietorship prevails and we shall have to extend

this all over the country. I hope that in doing so, we may have the

cooperation of some, atleast of the big landowners.

It is not possible for this Congress at its annual session to draw up any

detailed economic programme. It can only lay down some general principles

and call upon the All India Congress Committee to fill in the details in

cooperation with the representatives of the Trade Union Congress and

other organizations which are vitally interested in this matter. Indeed, I

hope that the cooperation between this Congress and the Trade Union

Congress will grow and the two organizations will fight side by side in

future struggles.

All these are pious hopes till we gain power, and the real problem therefore

before us is the conquest of power. We shall not do so by subtle reasoning or

argument or lawyers’ quibbles, but by the forging of sanction to enforce the

nation’s will. To that end, this Congress must address itself.

e past year has been one of preparation for us and we have made every

effort to reorganize and strengthen the Congress Organization. e results

have been considerable and our organization is in a better state today than

at any time since the reaction which followed the non-cooperation

movement. But our weaknesses are many and are apparent enough. Mutual

strife, even within Congress Committees, is unhappily too common and

election squabbles drain all our strength and energy. How can we fight a

great fight if we cannot get over this ancient weakness of ours and rise above

our petty selves? I earnestly hope that with a strong programme of action

b f h ll d ll l h

before the country, our perspective will improve and we will not tolerate this

barren and demoralizing strife.

What can this programme be? Our choice is limited, not by our own

constitution, which we can change at our will but by facts and

circumstances. Article one of our constitution lays down that our methods

must be legitimate and peaceful. Legitimate I hope they will always be, for

we must not sully the great cause for which we stand, by any deed that will

bring dishonour to it and that we may ourselves regret later. Peaceful I

should like them to be, for the methods of peace are more desirable and

more enduring than those of violence. Violence too often brings reaction

and demoralization in its train, and in our country especially it may lead to

disruption. It is perfectly true that organized violence rules the world today

and it may be that we could profit by its use. But we have not the material

or the training for organized violence and individual or sporadic violence is

a confession of despair. e great majority of us, I take it, judge the issue

not on moral but on practical grounds, and if we reject the way of violence it

is because it promises no substantial results.

Any great movement for liberation today must necessarily be a mass

movement and mass movement must essentially be peaceful, except in times

of organized revolt. Whether we have the non-cooperation of a decade ago

or the modern industrial weapon of the general strike, the basis is peaceful

organization and peaceful action. And if the principal movement is a

peaceful one, contemporaneous attempts at sporadic violence can only

distract attention and weaken it. It is not possible to carry on at one and the

same time the two movements, side by side. We have to choose and strictly

to abide by our choice. What the choice of this Congress is likely to be I

have no doubt. It can only choose a peaceful mass movement.

Should we repeat the programme and tactics of the non-cooperation

movement? Not necessarily, but the basic idea must remain. Programmes

and tactics must be made to fit in with circumstances and it is neither easy

nor desirable for this Congress at this stage to determine them in detail.

at should be the work of its executive, the All-India Congress

Committee. But the principles have to be fixed.

e old programme was one of the three boycotts—Councils, law courts

and schools—leading up to refusal of service in the army and non-payment

of taxes. When the national struggle is at its height, I fail to see how it will

b bl f d h h

be possible for any person engaged in it to continue in the courts or the

schools. But still I think that it will be unwise to declare a boycott of the

courts and schools at this stage.

e boycott of the Legislative Councils has led to much heated debate in

the past and this Congress itself has been rent in twain over it. We need not

revive that controversy, for the circumstances today are entirely different. I

feel that the step the Congress took some years ago to permit Congressmen

to enter the Councils was an inevitable step and I am not prepared to say

that some good has not resulted from it. But we have exhausted that good

and there is no middle course left today between boycott and noncooperation.

All of us know the demoralization that these sham legislatures

have brought in our ranks and how many of our good men, their

committees and commissions lured away. Our workers are limited in

number and we can have no mass movement unless they concentrate on it

and turn their backs to the palatial Council Chambers of our Legislatures.

And if we declare for independence, how can we enter the Councils, and

carry on our humdrum and profitless activities there? No programme or

policy can be laid down for ever, nor can this Congress bind the country or

even itself to pursue one line of action indefinitely. But today I would

respectfully urge the Congress that the only policy in regard to the Council

is a complete boycott of them. e All-India Congress Committee

recommended this course in July last and the time has come to give effect to

it.

is boycott will only be a means to an end. It will release energy and divert

attention to the real struggle which must take the shape of the nonpayment

of taxes, where possible, with the cooperation of the labour

movement, general strikes. But nonpayment of taxes must be wellorganized

in specific areas, and for this purpose the Congress should

authorize the All India Congress Committee to take the necessary action,

wherever and whenever it considers desirable.

I have not so far referred to the constructive programme of the Congress.

is should certainly continue but the experience of the last few years shows

us that by itself it does not carry us swiftly enough. It prepares the ground

for future action and ten years’ silent work is bearing fruit today. In

particular we shall, I hope, continue our boycott of foreign cloth and the

boycott of British goods.

O h f b f l l d b

Our programme must, therefore, be one of political and economic boycott.

It is not possible for us, so long as we are actually independent, and even

then completely, to boycott another country wholly or to sever all

connection with it. But our endeavour must be to reduce all points of

contact with the British Government and to rely on ourselves. We must also

make it clear that India will not accept responsibility for all the debts that

England has piled on her. e Gaya Congress repudiated liability to pay

those debts and we must repeat this repudiation and stand by it. Such of

India’s public debt as has been used for purposes beneficial to India we are

prepared to admit and pay back. But we wholly deny all liability to pay back

the vast sums which have been raised, so that India may be held in

subjection and her burdens may be increased. In particular the poverty

stricken people of India cannot agree to shoulder the burden of the wars

fought by England to extend her domain and consolidate her position in

India. Nor can they accept the many concessions lavishly bestowed without

any proper compensation on foreign exploiters.

I have not referred so far to the Indians overseas and I do not propose to say

much about them. is is not from any want of fellow-feeling with our

brethren in East Africa or South Africa or Fiji or elsewhere, who are

bravely struggling against great odds. But their fate will be decided in the

plains of India and the struggle we are launching into is as much for them

as for ourselves.

For this struggle, we want efficient machinery. Our Congress Constitution

and organization have become too archaic and slow moving, and are illsuited

to times of crisis. e times of great demonstrations are past. We

want quiet and irresistible action now, and this can only be brought about

by the strictest discipline in our ranks. Our resolutions must be passed in

order to be acted upon. e Congress will gain in strength, however small

its actual membership may become, if it acts in a disciplined way. Small,

determined minorities have changed the fate of nations. Mobs and crowds

can do little. Freedom itself involves restraint and discipline and each one of

us will have to subordinate himself to the larger good.

e Congress represents no small minority in the country and though many

may be too weak to join it or to work for it, they look to it with hope and

longing to bring them deliverance. Ever since the Calcutta resolution, the

country has waited with anxious expectation for this great day when this

C N f h d h h W

Congress meets. None of us can say what and when we can achieve. We

cannot command success. But success often comes to those who dare and

act; it seldom goes to the timid who are ever afraid of the consequences. We

play for high stakes; and if we seek to achieve great things it can only be

through great dangers. Whether we succeed soon or late, none but ourselves

can stop us from high endeavour and from writing a noble page in our

country’s long and splendid history.

We have conspiracy cases going on in various parts of the country. ey are

ever with us. But the time has gone for secret conspiracy. 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. But the

rewards that are in store for you are suffering and prison and you have done

your little bit for India, the ancient, but ever young, and have helped a little

in the liberation of humanity from its present bondage.