The liberal thought and movement developed in Maharashtra from 1850 to 1920. But the decline was set in long back before 1920. The last decade of the 19th century can be considered as a period when the forces leading towards decline started working. The Liberal Party of India as such faded out of existence in 1948-49. The period from 1895 to 1948 is the period of decline of Liberalism in Maharashtra as well as in India. But in 1919 when the Liberals all over India organised themselves into a separate political party Liberalism became politically unimportant. Thus one can divide the story of decline in two periods. First from 1895 to 1919 and second from 1919 to 1948 of which the first period is historically important because after 1919 Liberalism was away from main political stream of Maharashtra and India. How Liberalism declined in Maharashtra will be clear in details after the analysis of factors which were responsible for the decline.
Causes of Decline :
Rise of Extremism: The rise and speedy progress of Extremist politics in Maharashtra was the most important factor which caused the decline of Liberalism. The undisputed leader of the party was Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak.2 Tilak had very keen political acumen and understanding of Maharashtra. The political strategies and tactics of Tilak gave him expected . results. He is regarded as the father of Extremist party. Therefore his progress as a leader, and growth of Extremism almost goes together. The rise of his party as a politically powerful block with large following from people of different social and economic strata, undermined the foundations of, Liberal movement. Tilak emerged as a leader in the agitation against the Age of ~ Consent of Bill of 1891, which was the main reform over which the Liberals like Agarkar and Ranade concentrated in the period. It was the first challenge given by Tilak to the so far undisputed leadership of Ranade. In the next year he protested against the Sharadasadan —an institution for the education of women and specially widows—which was supported by Liberals. The greatest — success Tilak got in 1895 when he defeated Ranade party and acquired the hold of Sarvajanik Sabha, a political association, which was moulded by Ranade according to his idea of political, economic and administrative reform and political education of the people. Ranade and his group had to start the new association devoted to Liberal and moderate reforms. The next blow to Liberal camp led by Ranade, came from Tilak in the form of opposition to the session of Social Conference in the pendal of Congress. Ranade had to concede the demand.
In the official and governmental bodies Tilak acquired seats after 1893. He became the member of Poona Municipality. In 1894 he was selected as_ fellow of Bombay University. In the elections to expanded Legislative Councils under the India Councils Act of 1892 Tilak defeated a candidate supported by Ranade Party in 1893. A weekly named ‘ Kesari’ which he had started in 1881 with the co- operation of Agarkar, immediately achieved popularity and became the mouth . piece of extremists party led by Tilak. Due to differences of opinion on crucial matters such as social reform, Agarkar had to leave the ‘ Keasari’, within a few years and start his own paper ‘Sudharak’. Tilak used the columns of ‘Kesari’ to attack the Liberal camp on different occasions. -Agarkar, Ranade and Gokhale the three stalwarts of Liberalism in Maha- rashtra were relentlessly criticised, in his characteristic pungent Marathi, by Tilak. Ranade and Gokhale had to take always a defensive posture while Agarkar with all his aggressive language could not win the war of words.
Tilak gained tremendous popularity due to his bitter criticism on repressive policies of the British Government. He wrote many articles supporting the cause of farmers and attacked the government for its policy towards farmers.* He took active part in farmers’ agitation in Thana District. © In the Plague epidemic of 1897 he condemned the police and military on account of their cruel actions in the anti-plague operations. Similarly the drought relief measures of the government came under vehement attack from Tilak. The July issue gave him another opportunity to expose the imperialistic character of the British rule. He showed to the people that the government is. not “honestly ’ willing fo offer various political reforms the Congress was demanding. Liberals had deep faith in the British rulers like Morley, while Tilak made it very clear that whatever might be their convictions, so far as the attitude towards India was concerned it was imperialistic.
Tilak’s Extremism had different facets. One of them was Hindu revivalism. When Liberals were criticising Hindu religion and social customs and suggesting various reforms, Tilak was arguing the case for traditional Hinduism. He started Ganapati festival to integrate the Hindus and utilised thefopportunity of Hindu-Muslim riots to create separate identity of Hindus. TheS Shivaji festival was started by him in order to inspire patriotism through worship of the great hero. In fact these two festivals were the recruiting agents for the extremists party. The essentially traditional mind of Maharashtra’s middle and lower middle class found in Tilak their true representative. What- ever might be Tilak’s attitude towards social reforms, what mattered was his opposition to all reforms propogated by Liberals. On this point, his main objection was that the alien rulers should not be allowed to interfere in the sacred religion of Indians. The cause of degeneration in his opinion was not the traditions and customs of Hindus, and their social structure, but the - British rule. Thus he strengthened the patriotric feelings, aroused a hatred and contempt for alien rule through exposing its repressive nature, and focused: the attention of people on only one aim, that is establishment of self-rule or ‘Swarajya’ as he liked to put it.
The Swadeshi movement was the expression of the same ideology. It composed of economic boycott of foreign and especially British articles-and promoting Indian industries. The Liberals were for the latter element but opposed Boycott. The Extremists party in fact made use of economic theories developed by Liberals. But they used them to show economic imperialism and exploitation.
In place of Western education supported by Liberais, Tilak and his party put National Education which contained religious education, industrial education, education in politics and lightening the load of the study of the foreign language.
The Extremists were growing in strength not only in Maharashtra but all over India. But Tilak was the most important and distinguished leader of the Extremist party in Maharashtra. Gopal Krishna Gokhale was the leader of Liberal party. Tilak captured Maharashtra through his ceaseless activities described in preceding paras, but at the same time he did not lose the sight of all india politics of which the Congress was the main theatre. There he created with his supporters an Extremist block. The Extremist leaders of other provinces joined him in his efforts. In 1906 session of the Congress at Calcutta the rift between Liberal members and Extremists was felt. The session was dominated by Extremists because they had created sufficient opposition to Curzon’s repression and imperialism. The partition of Bengal was utilised by them to organise mass movement. The boycott, Swadeshi, passive resistence were the weapons of their movement which gained immediate following all over India including Maharashtra. At Surat (1907) the differences between Tilak’s party and Gokhale’s party went to such an extent that Congress was split and the Extremist left the organisation. The next session lield at Madras ( 1908 ) under Liberal leadership was attended by only 626 delegates. Maharashtra, Bengal, and Punjab the strongholds of Extremists sent very few delegates to this session. The Lahore session of 1909 was attended by only 243 delegates.© From 1908 to 1910 the number of - delegates to Congress of Moderates dropped and it could arouse little interest in the national movement or in the country. Upto 1915 Congress remained under the control of Liberals but in 1916 its Lucknow session the Extremists led by Tilak, Gandhi, Annie Besant and Bipin Chandra Pal captured the Congress almost completely. The Montagu-chelmsford Report declaring reforms was published on 8th July 1918.’ The Liberals boycotted a meeting of Congress which passed a resolution expressing disappointment of the Reforms. In 1918 they held a Conference of like-minded men. The confe- rence welcomed the reforms. In 1919 the Liberais who were called as mode- rates formed the Indian National Liberal Federation of India.2 This marked their complete separation from the Congess as well the beginning of the last phase of Liberalism which had already lost the main battle.
The Failure in mobilization of masses
The Liberal movement from its inception was mainly a movement of the urban western educated class. The liberals never bothered about the recruitment of other classes to their. movement. They talked in western political idiom, wrote articles and essays in English and their appeals were based on reason, because they were meant for men nurtured in Western education. Liberals had taken this approach consciously and with a definite purpose in mind. They considered educated class as the leaders of the society. This class they felt was to play a special role in the modernisation of the Indian society. The organisations and associations formed by these Liberals were composed of western educated men. Thus their approach was elitist and remained elitist even in 20th century.
In effect masses remained unaffected by Liberal movement even though it had developed for more than fifty years. Their method of constitutional agitation, appealing to government for more and more concessions and explaining to people the good intentions of the government did not involve the masses who had no place and interest in it.
When the British rulers expanded the Legislative Councils and reformed its structure the Liberals thought that it was an opportunity to co- operate with the government and implement the reforms by entering the
councils. But when. their leaders were busy with the job of communicating with the British rulers and getting more and more concessions the Liberal movement lost the contact with masses. When the Extremists were mobilising masses by addressing them in their language, using appealing symbols, emotional words and exploiting their love for tradition and religion, the elitist Liberals were engaged in different governmental committees, university senates, local self government bodies and legislative councils. Because of such kind of cooperation with the foreign government, when the Extremists were attacking its repression, the Liberals could not get the legitimacy in the eyes of the masses.
It is the failure of Liberals to mobilise lower classes that deprived them of any following. They found it very difficult to mobilise masses. One of Gokhale’s observation makes their position very clear ‘As regards the vast-mass-which we have on the other side... .it is an exceedingly difficult. work.to energise this vast mass, to put life into it, to make it more along with us; and the work ts bound to be slow, and it is being very slowly done.
But when Liberal leaders held this view the Extremist leaders like Tilak could achieve considerable success in mass mobilisation. Tilak got popularity among farmers, through his articles in which he criticised government, measures, among workers whom he had addressed on more than one occasions as well as among lower middle salaried and professional classes. In fact he could attract the educated classes which was the main hope.of Liberals to his movement by arousing patriotic feelings and religious revivalism.
Liberal’s Refusal to change and adopt to new situation
At the beginning of the 20th century the situation in Maharashtra had radically changed. The British rule had completed its 75 years. Its true character and nature was revealed. How far the enlightened rule was bene- ficial to the country was realised. Along with its benefits, the experience of so many years had exposed the dark side of the rule. The economic explot- tation of Indian economy by British was exposed by many scholars and economists. The books like ‘Poverty and Un-British Rule in India’, by Dadabhai Naoraji and ‘“ Prosporous British India”, by Wuham Digby explained to the people the economic imperialism of Britain and its adverse effects on the economic conditions of India.
The British Government did not respond to the honest demands of Indian politicians as they had hoped. The government was always hesitant to offer any reform desired by the Congress. And in Curzon’s regime came the repression of worst kind. This conservative and imperialistic attitude of the British government created frustration in the minds of later generations. All hopes of collaborations and cooperation with the government became increasingly useless and unrealistic.
Education did not remain the monopoly of a few of highest class; but it had how percolated to lower classes. To this class of newly educated young men the Liberals could not appeal. There was now a division between the educated class. Tilak and his party recruited this class to their movement. The class with a frustration regarding Britishers, contempt for its exploitation created by Extremists leadership turned their back to Liberals. The middle — and lower middle class was very much susceptible to the emotional appeals of . patriotism and love for whatever was Indian. They became more and more anti-western instead of advocates of western culture. To this class Tilak provided the platform, representation and the movement.
To such changed situation the Liberals refused to adopt. They could not face the challenge of new conditions. The old method and style soon became out of date. Instead of changing, revitalising and giving new shape to the method, and strategy, Liberals continued with the same cold tactics and beliefs. In fact what Ranade had given in 1870’s was a new shape to social life of Maharashtra. It wasa great brake-through. At the time useful, timely, appropriate and adequate, but in changed circumstances of the 20th century Liberals sticked to the same programme and prepared the way for their decline. - Liberals found it very difficult to change, deviate from old Ranade model. Their faith and beliefs became hurdles in the progress of the movement and spread of thought. Liberals led by Gokhale instead of adapting to the atmos- . phere of the day remained in the old shell of constitutional methods. Gokhale tried to allow some concessions to mass movement but could. not leave the most cherished and loved ties with British men and peaceful agitation. Afier his death the leadership went to younger politicians of Liberal Federation. But they too sticked to Gokhale’s line of action. They worked in legislative councils, collaborated with the alien government in implementing reforms, and always tried to act as communicating agents between Tilakit Congress or Gandhian Congress and the British government. They had ‘a kind of aversion to the revivalistic overtones of Tilak and spiritual and religious colour of Gandhian methods. They continued to appeal to the liberal consciousness of rulers, and believed in peaceful and constitutional method of achieving political aims. The mass movements which was the main. instrument first used by Tilak and later developed by Gandhi could not attract the dogmatic Liberals. In 1919 in which year the Jallianwalla bag incidence . had. taken place, R. P. Paranjpe a Maharashtrian leader of Liberal Party said, "The fundamental basis on which the Liberal Party takes its stand is a belief, on the whole, in the righteousness of the British Empire. In spite of occasional mishaps, one might say, that if this belief was not ingrained amongst 1s, we should not be Liberals but might have joined some other party in this country"
In his Presidential Address to National Liberal Federation (1925) Sit Moropant Joshi remarked that his party had consistently acted on the principle of cooperation, whenever possible and opposition whenever nece- ssary.'2 These statements of two important leaders of Liberal Party show that the disciples of Gokhale working in twenties, when politics of the country had reached the next stage, refused to deviate from the model given in 1870's. Thus the moderation which was a characteristic feature of liberal thought became impediment in its own way.
The unfavourable response of the British Government
Liberals as it is seen earlier always believed in the sence of justice and liberal convictions of their alien rulers. They thought that the British govern- ment would concede their demands put forward through constitutional agitation. Fortunately many British viceroys were sympathetic towards their demands. For instance the Indian policy was dominated by liberalism from 1880 to 1888 when Ripon and Duffer in introduced various reforms. But the British policy- was not always liberal. On the country it turned into a reactionary and imperialistic one at the end of the 19th century. On the whole there was a ‘deep rooted incompatibility’ between the demands of - liberals and what the British government was ready to concede.’ After 1888 the attitude of the government towards the Indian National Congress became more and more unsympathetic. Due to the constitutional agitation of Congress, government conceded some reforms regarding rne representation to Indians in the Civil Service in 1889 and structure of Legislative Councils in 1892. But the concessions given were much less than what Congress had desired. The failure in this connection was a damaging biow to the prestige of the liberal congressmen." In fact, the difference between what government agreed to offer and what liberal politicians were demanding was the characteristic feature of all reforms. . Gokhale aptly said “too little and too late ” is the epitaph written on all steps of Anglo-Indian reforms.
But the height of reactionary policy was achieved in Curzon’s vice- royalty from 1899 to 1905. Curzon’s imperialistic attitude was reflected in all the 12 measures he took. The Calcutta Corporation was reformed by Act of 1899. It reduced by half the number of elected members on the Corporation and gave its British members a decisive voice. The Corporation’s powers were reduced and it got a nominated chairman. The Official Secrets Act which was passed in 1904 brought restrictions on the Press. The reforms introduced in Universities in 1904 went contrary to Liberal’s ideas regarding university administration and higher education. The Partition of Bengal ( 1905) came as the greatest shock and disappointment to the Liberal leaders. Even Gokhale a believer in moderation and cooperation with Government remarked
“The all I can say is good-bye to all hope of cooperating, in any way with the bureaucracy, in the interests of the people ”
After Curzon’s era the British attitude towards the demands of Indians remained more or less the same as it was earlier. The later instalments of reforms such as Morley-Minto Reforms (1909) and Montague-Chelsmford Reforms ( 1919) were also disappointing. The Extremist party rejected them totally while Liberals led by Gokhale and Banarjee of Bengal welcomed them with some criticism as steps towards self-government.
Thus the unfavourable response to the earnest demands of Liberals, made their position precarious and awkward in Indian politics. It projected . bad image of Liberals before the people and proved the invalidity of their approach. The unsympathetic attitude of government on the other hand made the position of the Extremists stronger. Extremists were attacking government every now and then. Their leaders on account of agitation against government went to jails and were harrased by government. Tilak could create a contempt in the minds of the people for the oppressive and cruel rule. When the government was suppressing the Extremist leadership, the people at large were accepting it more and more. As a result the popu- larity and following of Extremist leaders increased tremendously within few years. Thus the unfavourable response of British Government caused a decline of liberal movement and added the strength of rival movement of Extremists.
Liberalism loose important leaders
The death of Liberal leaders deprived the movement of able leadership. When the extremist party was taking roots in Maharashtra, Liberals lost Ranade (1901 ) their greatest leader. After Ranade, no liberal leader worked in all the branches of social life with equal ability and interest. The social reform movement got competent men. Politics was taken up as full time engagement by Gokhale. But nobody came forward to take the place of Ranade. Agarkar died in 1895, when he was only 39 years old. After 1901 the Liberal movement was led by Gokhale so far as politics was concerned. Gokhale who was regarded in the first decade of the 20th century as the most important leader of Liberal party in India died in February 1915. His death “ delivered a crushing blow to the cause of Liberal nationalism”.'’ The Liberal party not only in Maharashtra but in India could not get the leader of Gokhale’s ability and idealism after 1915."
--------------------------------------------------
म ( ) मध्ये प्रकाशित