Dr. Annie Besant and her two co-workers were interned by the Madras Government under the Defence of India Act at the height of the Home Rule movement. THE HINDU: “The internment of Mrs. Besant and her co-workers is a particularly unfortunate decision which will be widely interpreted as a hostile act, directed against a movement which has met with much popular support and which she has led with singular self-sacrifice, ability and intrepidity. She had brought to bear on the agitation all her remarkable qualities of eloquence, perseverance, and boldness and one need not agree with her always to appreciate her admirable courage, her great power of organisation, her disinterestedness and her striking personality. The cause for which she has been working so zealously is sure to suffer as soon as her guiding hand is forcibly removed…”.
JUNE 18, 1917
The internments
“This liberty alone that gives the flower of fleeting life, its lustre and perfume. And we are weeds without it – All constraint, Except what wisdom lays on evil men, Is evil” – Cowper.
IT IS AN IRONY OF FATE AND A FACT OF GLOOMY SIGNIFICANCE that the day on which India learnt of the statesmanlike announcement of the release of Irish prisoners in connection with the recent rebellion in Ireland in view of the forthcoming Convention, she should have also heard of the internment of Mrs. Besant and Messrs. B. P. Wadia and G. S. Arundale. These two circumstances, of great and world-wide importance, afford a striking study in contrast and thoughtful people in this country cannot but draw the most disheartening conclusions from them. Mr. Bonar Law, in breaking the news to the House of Commons on Friday last, said that Government could not give a better earnest of the spirit in which they approached the Convention than by removing one of the causes of serious misunderstanding and he was sure in recommending His Majesty to grant a general amnesty to the persons in question, the Government were inspired by the sanguine hope that their action will be welcomed in a spirit of magnanimity. May we ask what has happened in India or in Madras in particular, which has rendered the inauguration of repressive measures a matter of urgency? Ireland, embittered, disloyal and revolutionary – it is deemed necessary to conciliate and satisfy. India, peace-loving, loyal and law-abiding – it has pleased the authorities to attempt to cow down by the adoption of a policy quite contrary in spirit. There has not been a whisper of rebellion or any widespread conspiracy in this part of India, at any rate, and yet, the Defence of India Act, intended against aliens and enemies in Great Britain, has been put in force against three brilliant, unselfish and devoted workers for Indian constitutional reforms. The law under which action has been taken is a war measure, meant principally to arm the authorities with power to act in a summary manner with enemies and undesirable aliens. It cannot be pretended that the persons who have fallen victims in the present instance have either by word, act or deed manifested the least sympathy with German aims; on the contrary they have been known to be earnest and sincere in contributing their mite to the noble attempt to put an end to Prussianism. The Hon’ble Mr. Dadabhai stated at the meeting of the Imperial Legislative Council in February last, when speaking on his resolution regarding amendment of the rules under the Defence of India Act that “a policy of such wholesale arrests, promiscuous house searches, indiscriminate internments, is hardly calculated to inspire public confidence in the administration of the Act.” The Hon’ble Mr. K. K. Chanda, who followed, voiced public feeling when he told the Council that “acts which are really infractions of the ordinary civil law and which would be excluded from the operation of the Defence of the Realm Act in England are dealt with under the Defence of India Act. This is not all; the more serious part is that we do not require any proof, mere suspicion is enough. Sir, I am not drawing upon my imagination.” The public are quite unaware as to how the Government have come to the conclusion that in regard to the persons on whom orders of internment were served on Saturday last there are reasonable grounds for believing that they had acted and were about to act in a manner prejudicial to public safety. The grounds of such belief are not given and it is really astonishing that no attempt was made to apprise them of the offences for which they were to be interned or to take any explanation from them. The orders were served on Messrs. Wadia and Arundale earlier in the day and nobody in the charmed circle of Government had been charged with the duty of telling them why it was that they were served with the orders which, in their cases especially, have astonished and alarmed the public. Mrs. Besant, it is true, was invited to an interview with His Excellency, but we understand, that, on Mrs. Besant pointing out that she may be favoured with the reason why she should be proceeded against under the Defence of India Act – in accordance with an assurance given to that effect by Sir Reginald Craddock – His Excellency declined to discuss the matter with her. The inference, therefore, is irresistible that Government found the ordinary law inconvenient and therefore resorted to the Defence of India Act. The matter may appear to Government to be simple, but the application of a war measure to cases of persons engaged in work for constitutional changes in the machinery of Government, not only exposes the deplorable weakness of the Government’s case, but raises a most important issue. Such an unwarranted application of an emergency measure strikes a blow at popular agitation which is fraught with the gravest danger to the public cause as well as to the prestige of the Government. For, there is no mistaking it that internments in Madras of devoted workers for the public cause, is meant to discourage the agitation for Home Rule or self-Government, and the anxiety and anguish caused in the public mind have, as a consequence, never been surpassed. What appears to be particularly lacking in magnanimity when dealing with Mrs. Besant, Messrs. Wadia and Arundale is the prohibition, as we take it, of having their published books sold and therefore of depriving them of their income. Another consequence of the internments has to be mentioned. Mrs. Besant is the printer and publisher of the New India newspaper and, under the order of internment, she cannot print or publish. The result is that by a single stroke of the pen that journal which had gained great popularity and had, on Saturday last, a circulation of 10,000, has had to be stopped publication – a fact which will be widely and seriously deplored. The removal of Messrs. Wadia and Arundale has facilitated that end. It has also to be noted that two orders were served on Mrs. Besant on Saturday, bearing the dates the 7th June and 14th June respectively, the second of them reducing the period within which Mrs. Besant has to leave Madras, from 14 days to 7 days after the service of notice. An explanation of this unaccountable restriction is certainly called for.
The action of the Government of Lord Pentland will be received with profound grief and disappointment throughout the civilised world; and indications of widespread disapprobation and indignation with which the deprivation of the liberty of Mrs. Besant and her devoted coworkers is viewed, are already reaching us. We had hoped that after the emphatic disapproval of His Excellency’s speech, which had resulted in the issue of a Press Communique explaining that utterance, the local Government would have reconsidered the situation and adopted a conciliatory attitude. The sequel has, however, shown that they have not appreciated the significance of public disapproval and that wiser counsels have not prevailed. On the other hand, the indiscriminate action taken against three prominent individuals, who had identified themselves with the agitation for Home Rule which has now acquired a firm hold upon a large section of the Indian public, indicates a determination on the part of Government not to attach due importance to the maintenance of happy relations between the public and the authorities. Our sorrow is all the greater because this step has been taken at this time when India is contributing her best towards the victorious termination of the war, when new hopes are entertained in the land and when the necessity for conciliating public opinion must be obvious to sound statesmanship manifest.
The internment of Mrs. Besant and her co-workers is a particularly unfortunate decision which will be widely interpreted as a hostile act directed against a movement which has met with much popular support and which she has led with singular self-sacrifice, ability and intrepidity. She had brought to bear on the agitation all her remarkable qualities of eloquence, perseverance and boldness, and one need not agree with her always to appreciate her admirable courage, her great powers of organisation, her disinterestedness and her striking personality. The cause for which she has been working so zealously is sure to suffer as soon as her guiding hand is forcibly removed, but she believes in her robust optimism in the ultimate triumph of the cause. In the enforced retirement to which she must shortly go, she has been deprived of the means of subsistence by the prohibition to have her books sold. Apart from the ungraciousness of the act, the duty of Indians for whom she has laboured so gloriously, is clear. It is to raise a fund for her, such a fund as will unmistakably show to the world how wonderfully she has gained a place in the hearts of Indians, how warmly the Indians recognise her sterling merits and work. We associate ourselves wholeheartedly with the important appeal for funds made in another column by our revered and respected countryman, Dr. Sir S. Subrahmania Aiyar. There are precedents for such acts in crises such as our country finds itself in today. The name of O’Connell, ‘the great liberator’ is cherished and revered in Ireland even today and history records how a grateful country raised a sum of £50,000 as a testimonial to his magnificent work. An annual tribute was also decided upon and it is stated how the amount subscribed exceeded sometimes £15,000 a year, and how between 1829 and 1835, no less than £91,800 was collected. Again, after the campaign on which Richard Cobden was engaged was accomplished the idea was started that the nation should show him some sustained token of gratitude and admiration for his noble sacrifices. Liberal contributions came quickly and Cobden was presented with a sum of £ 80,000. Public life in this country is, it must be confessed, still unorganised to a great extent: public service is still thankless, in some measure, as a consequence. But Indians cannot do better at this unfortunate moment than to show their gratitude for the eminent lady who suffers for them, by responding adequately to our revered countryman’s appeal and learn a much-needed lesson in sacrifice. That occasion has now arisen. A public meeting convened under very influential auspices will be held on Thursday next at which it is expected that there will be an unmistakable expression of popular opinion against the internment orders.
Reference:
The First 100
A Selection of Editorials, 1878-1978, THE HINDU, VOLUME I