Marwar Lok Parishad was established in 1938 to raise the voice of people of Marwar for their civil rights.
In June, 1936 the newly formed Civil Liberties Union was banned in the Jodhpur State.[1] Thus the Civil Liberties Union was buried before it was born. Commenting on this high-handed action of the State Government Jawaharlal Nehru sarcastically said: “It is right and proper thing to go against the Civil Liberties Union. I congratulate the Jodhpur Darbar on its wide awakening and smart pieces of work.”[2]
The Chief Minister of Jodhpur, Sir Donald Field, attempted unconvincingly to contradict the news that the State Government had banned the Civil Liberties Union.[3]
In fact an order was served individually on the sponsors of the Union restraining their public activities, which tantamount to finish off the Union. The State Government resorted to policy of repression and arrested some workers of Jodhpur Praja Mandal in 1936 and detained them without trial.[4]
In year 1937arrests were made for opposing the policy of the State on the issue of Federation.[5]
Thus before the end of this year both Praja Mandal and Civil Liberties Union had been banned.[6] The prominent nationalist leader, Baba Narsinghdass, wrote to the Congress President expressing great concern “If these sun-dried bureaucrats are not” he said, “checked from their nefarious activities, our programme of establishing Congress Committees in the States would not be carried out in the near future.” [7]
TheArrest of political workers and b an on the Praja Mandal and the Civil Liberties Union caused extinction of allmedia in the States by which the people could ventilate their grievances. In this strained political atmosphere in May 1938, the Marwar Lok Parishad was born.[8] It was to establish responsible objective as expressed in its constitution, government under the Aegis of the Maharaja.
The use of word ‘Lok’ in place of ‘Praja’ in the nomenclature of the new party had a special significance. Jainarayan Vyas (who was the main inspiring force behind political awakening in the State was in exile at that time) believed that the word ‘Praja’ being used for subjects smacked of slavish mentality and therefore the word ‘Lok’ meaning people should be used. It was people’s will that was to be supreme in the movement.[9]
The Marwar Lok Parishad did not find favour with the State authorities. The method of direct repression could not deter the spirit of the people determined to win responsible government. So the bureaucracy stooped to the lowest methods to finish the Lok Parishad in its infancy. The meetings of the Lok Parishad were disturbed by the hired agents and stooges of the bureaucracy. Malicious propaganda was also carried on by opportunistic elements to win quick favours from the Government. The Marwar Lok Parishad organized a public meeting on the visit of Shrimati Vijay Laxmi Pandit.[10]
As the meeting could not take place due to her indispositipn mendacious reports were circulated to the effect that the Lok Parishad did not enjoy the good wishes of Smt. Pandit and it was for this that she declined to address the meeting organized by the Parishad.[11]
In fact, plans had been hatched to disrupt the meeting. in a leaflet issued prior to the cancellation of the meeting it was stated that “it was not in the least called-for to hear anything on the political matters concerning the State from Smt. Pandit.”[12]
On another occasion, in a public meeting of the Lok Parishad, its President was bodily removed from the chair and well organized hooligans occupied the chair by force.[13]
Subhas Chandra Bose, who was the then President of Congress while passing through Jodhpur in December, 1938 said: “I was grieved to find that from the point of view of Civil Liberty and Responsible Government the position was not any better since January last when I happened to address a public meeting in Jodhpur. In fact the position was in some respect even worse.[14]
Though the rulers lived in the twentieth century, their ideas were antiquated. They were averse to all reforms. They saw danger to their existence in every reform. They were in a split mind, as they were neither able to resist reforms nor were they prepared to accept them.[15]
The Chief Minister of the State, Sir D.M. Field, in his note to the Maharaja on the question of the establishment of advisory Boards in the State woefully said: “This was an immensely difficult task. On one side we have to provide an institution which will afford proper schooling to the people in the art of popular representation and self-government by gradual stages. On the other hand we must preserve the character of the State Government and the sovereignty of the Ruler.[16]
But the establishment of the advisory Board was thought expedient to “serve as a safety valve.” [17]
In the meantime one significant development took place. The State Government lifted ban on Jainarayan Vyas from entering into the State.[18]
About Jainarayan Vyas, Maharaja Ganga Singh of Bikaner once wrote to the Chief Minister of Jodhpur “he is thoroughly honest, incorruptible and true to his conscience and political creed”[19] and urged the State authorities to take a lenient view towards Jainarayan Vyas and to allow him to return to Jodhpur “to share the administrative responsibility”[20] and prophesied “I say he will prove as an asset and you will never be sorry for having supported your adversary because you know he is going to survive you and also destined to play a more important role in politics.”[21]
Jainarayan Vyas was nominated by the State Government as official member of the Central advisory Board[22] and his acceptance of the membership caused a major political controversy in the Lak Parishad in its very short life. Ranchhor Das Gattani, a prominent member of the Lok Parishad, vehemently criticised this act. In his views the Central advisory Board was a Government body, as its members were nominated and not elected. [23]
It was against the Lok Parishad’s policy of non-cooperation with the Government till the object of Responsible Government was achieved. He was critical about the fact that the State Government had not formally approached the Lok Parishad to nominate its member on the Board and as such joining of the Board by its member even in an individual capacity would undermine the ‘militant spirit’ of the people to fight against the autocracy in the State which would ultimately jeopardise the the cause of attainment of Responsible Government.[24]
In an article, written by Ranchhor Das Gattani in the ‘Rajasthan’ he questioned the manner in which Jainarayan Vyas ‘extorted’ the permission of the Lok Parishad for joining the Board. He objected by saying that in the meeting held on the 4th February, 1939 in which the decision in favour of joining the Board was taken, this item was not on the agenda and no such important issue ought to have been decided except in the general meeting of the party .[25]
Jainarayan Vyas, even before he joined the Central Advisory Board, indicated his views very clearly in a press interview saying that the question of his joining the Board depended on the advice of his colleagues. He categorically stated that “Nothing less than the Responsible Government can satisfy the people of the State and the appointment of the advisory Board is not the solution.” [26]
But in the context of the political conditions prevailing in the State he expressed the opinion that the public workers should increase contact with Government to derive full advantages from the liberal attitude of the State Government and told his colleagues that “Responsible Government must come tomorrow, if not to-day, but any unstatesmanlike step taken may delay our achieving the goal.” [27]
In reply to criticism by Ranchhor Das Gattani he reiterated the views that though the Board fell too much short of meeting the people’s aspirations, he would avail of it as a new platform to ventilate their grievances He did not defend the Government for its mistakes. He further stated that he had joined the Board after taking permission of the Lok Parishad and that he would unhesitatingly quit the Board if he found its medium unsuit able to propagate the views of the Lok Parishad or at any time the Lok Parishad desired him to do so.[28]
Refuting the plea that by his joining the Board the ‘militant spirit’ of the people would receive a set-back, Jainarayan Vyas said that before reaching this conclusion it was to be ascertained whether the Lok Parishad had shown any sign of weakness or was becoming weak or its member nominated on the Board had become weak-spirited. [29]
He took Ranchhor Das Gattani to task for indulging in propaganda against the st and of the Lok Parishad in the press and in the public and enquired caustically if the lack of discipline shown by Gattani was an exhibition of ‘militant spirit’. He emphasised that in order to get a change in the policies of the Government, it needed men of selfless sacrifice who were prepared to suffer hardship and to work in a disciplined manner under an organisation according to a well chalked out plan. He did not c are whether the Board remained or went, but he wanted the Lok Parishad to march ahead.[30]
Though much water had flown under the bridge since a controversy of similar nature had confronted the Congress in the early twenties on the issue of Council-entry and Non-cooperation, this present controversy was a very minor issue in comparison with the all India controversy of the past; some important moral and ethical deductions could have been made and lessons learnt from the example set by our all India leaders. Deshbandhu Chittaranjan Das and Pandit Motilal Nehru in a statement clarifying their stand on non-cooperation stated: “In our view, this principle includes self-reliance in all the activities which make for the healthy growth of the Nation and resistance to the bureaucracy as it impedes our progress towards Swaraj. We are, however, anxious to end this fruitless verbal discussion, making it clear that Council-entry is, and can be, thoroughly consistent with the principle of non-cooperation as we understand that principle to be.”[31]
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru who was the then President of the all India States Peoples’ Conference in a letter to Jainarayan Vyas expressed the views, “The question of joining Advisory board or not should be considered separately for each state. It is difficult to lay down a general rule. I can conceive of such membership being accepted in a particular case”[32] which were not against the question of joining the Board.
There were no two opinions on the question that the establishment of the Advisory Boards in the state was a half-hearted measure and Jainarayan Vyas never led himself into the belief that the State Government genuinely intended to introduce reforms or to give real power to the people. The entire authority about Board was vested in the hands of the Government. The proceedings of the Central Advisory Board were tame and dull. [33]
It was just a show-piece of the Government and allits nominated members meekly dittoed the Government officials, except Jainarayan Vyas who never missed an opportunity to speak in the house and criticise the Government in a straightforward and bold manner for withholding reforms in administration and for not amending repressive laws. In fact he did not ever leave any topic which came in course of discussion in the Board without giving it a new form according to the nationalistic and cam radical ideas he held.
The Central Advisory Board was a platform for him which he used to the fullest extent to express his and his party’s views and public grievances and he quit it when he found that it was expedient to do so. Jainarayan Vyas proved himself a shrewd politician by joining the Centarl Advisory Board, as it gave respite to the Lok Parishad to build the organisation. If he had not adapted his Action to the circumstances of the time, the Lok Parishad also would have met the fate of Praja Mandal and the Civil Liberties Union and the movement for Responsible Government in the State would have received a set back.
REFERENCES
[1] The Hindusthan Times, July 7, 1936.
[2] Observation of Jawaharlal Nehru on the banning the civil liberties upon appeared in the Hindusthan Times, July 5, 1936.
[3] Contradiction of Sir Donald Field, Chief Minister, Government of Jodhpur, appeared in the Hindustan Times, July 20, 1936.
[4] The National Call, October 7, 1936.
[5] The Statesman, November 4, 1937.
[6] The Hindusthan Times, November 23, 1937.
[7] Letter of Baba Narsingh Dass to the president all India Congress Committee, dated November 4, 1937.
[8] Article 2, Constitution of the Marwar Lok Parishad, 1938.
[9] Article titled ‘Deshi Rajaya Lok Parishad’ written by Jainarayan Vyas, appeared in Nav Jotiy, November 1, 1938.
[10] Notice issued by Secretary, Marwar Lok Parishad, and Secretary, Jodhpur Congress Committee.
[11] Notice issued by Secretary, Marwar Lok Parishad, titled ‘Jodhpur Nivasi Apana Farge Na Bhulan’ Printed at Sumer Printing Press, Jodhpur.
[12] (a) Notice ‘Marudhis Ki Jai’ written by Jagdish Lal (citizen of Jodhpur) Printed at Prabhakar Printing Press, Jodhpur, dated November 7, 1938.
(b) Notice issued by Raj Bnakat Desh Hitakarni Sabha Jodhpur-Titled ‘Swagatam’ (welcome) by Ganesh Das Bohra, Secretary, Shri Raj Bhakat Desh Hitakarni Sabha, Jodhpur printied at Prabhakar Printing Press Jodhpur.
(c) Notice titled ‘Vija Laxmi Pandit’ Is patra KiAur Dhy an Dene Ki Krapa Karen’ issued by Radha Kishan Purohit, dated November 10, 1938 printed at Prabhakar Printing Press, Jodhpur.
[13] Notice titled ’27th November Ki Gatna Per Doo Sabad’ issued by Purusotam Prashad, President, Jodhpur Congress Committee, dated November 29, 1938, Printed at Sumer Press, Jodhpur.
[14] Bow before the popular will, while there is a time’ by Subhash Chandra Bose, dated 6th December, 1938, published by Marwar Lok Parishad, Jodhpur, Printed At Adarsh Press, Ajmer.
[15] Sobhag Mal Mathur, Formation of the Marwar Lok Parishad And Controvercy Rrgarding Joining Of The Central Advisory Board By Jainarayan Vyas, Proceedings of The Rajasthan History Congress 1968, pp, 142-148.
[16] Note No. C. 138 dated January 1938 from Chief Minister to His Highness (Village Panchayats and Advisory Boards in Marwar, 1938).
[17] Note No. C. 2644 dated December 8, 1937 from Judicial Minister to Chief Minister, Jodhpur, (Village Panchayats and Advisory Boards in Marwar, 1938).
[18] The Hindustan Times, February 7, 1938.
[19] Copy of D.O. letter No. 201 P.S. 54-51 dated February 21, 1937 from H.H. Maharaja Ganga Singhji Bahadur to Sir D. M. Field, Chief Minister of Jodhpur State.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] The Hindustan, February 7, 1938.
[23] Sobhag Mal Mathur, Formation of the Marwar Lok Parishad And Controvercy Rrgarding Joining Of The Central Advisory Board By Jainarayan Vyas, Proceedings of The Rajasthan History Congress 1968, pp, 142-148.
[24] ‘Marwar Lok Parishad Aur Jodhpur Sarkar – Kya Sarkar Sahyog Lena Chahti Hai’ ? Deshi Rajoyan Ka Sabja Bag, written by Ranchor Das Gattani.
[25] ‘Sahyog Aur Uskey Bad’ written by Ranchor Das Gattani, Published in ‘Rajasthan dated April 3, 1939.
[26] Opinion expressed by Jainarayan Vyas in Press conference about Responsible Government and Advisory Board The Hindustan Times, February 7, 1938.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Jainarayan Vyas, ‘Marwar SarkarAur Lok Parishad Kya Hamara Patan Ho Gaya Hai’ ?
[29] Sobhag Mal Mathur, Formation of the Marwar Lok Parishad And Controvercy Rrgarding Joining Of The Central Advisory Board By Jainarayan Vyas, Proceedings of The Rajasthan History Congress 1968, pp, 142-148.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Dr. Pattabhai Sitaramayya, The History of the Indian National Congress, Vol. I, page 271, published by Padma publications Ltd., Bombay.
[32] Opinion of Jawaharlal Nehru cited by Jai Nary an Vyas in letter to the Secretary, Marwar Lok Parishad, dated June 1, 1939.
[33] Sobhag Mal Mathur, Formation of the Marwar Lok Parishad And Controvercy Rrgarding Joining Of The Central Advisory Board By Jainarayan Vyas, Proceedings of The Rajasthan History Congress 1968, pp, 142-148.
