The First World War and its impact on British India, 1914-1920

World War One 1914-1918

Key features

• 27 of the largest princely states put their armies at Britain's disposal and commissioned a hospital ship 

• Bal Tilak, leader of the extremist faction in Congress, declared his loyalty 

• By November 1918, 827,000 Indians had enlisted as combatants and 64,500 soldiers died. 1.5 million had been recruited into combatant and non-combatant roles and nearly all of them sent overseas, dwarfing all other imperial contributions to the war effort 

• Most soldiers cited the King/Empire (rather than India) as legitimate causes for which they were fighting 

• The first Indian expeditionary  force, made up of 16,000 British and 28,500 Indian troops on 24 August 1914 (3 weeks after declaration of war) and got to the Western Front in time for the first Battle of Ypres, where their losses were heavy 

• Indians provided half the Allied fighting forces at Neuve Chapelle (March 1915) and the Lahore division was thrown into counter-attack at the Second Battle of Ypres (April 1915) 

• By the end of the war, Indian revenues had contributed over £146 million to the Allied war effort, half of which came from war loans 

• Military expenditure had risen dramatically, and revenue demands were raised by 16% in 1916-17 and 10% in 1918-19 

Significance

• The war disrupted normal trading, created exchange rate problems and imposed the demands of the military 

  • Food grain prices rose by 93% 

  • Indian-made good prices rose by 60% 

  • Imported good prices rose by 190% 

  • The situation was exacerbated by the failure of the monsoon rains to arrive in 1918-19 and consequent grain shortages and famine 

• Indian manufacturing industries (particularly cotton, iron and steel, sugar, engineering and chemicals) expanded to replace goods normally imported) 

  • In Bombay, dividends from cloth mills jumped from 6% in 1914 to >30% in 1917 

  • One cotton mill owner in Ahmedabad reported a trebling in profits 

• By 1918, the viceroy's office received regular reports of food riots and petty violence, although these outbreaks were sporadic and never coalesced into a general campaign 

Links to later events

• Britain felt obligated to reward the enormous sacrifices made by Indians in WW1 (Montagu Declaration) 

Gandhi returns to India 1914

Context

• Gandhi's work as a lawyer in South Africa gave him experience in working with a wide range of Indians from all castes and religions, cooperating and confronting people in positions of authority and experimenting with protest techniques (particularly direct, non-violent opposition) 

• He had formed a strong friendship with Gokhale, who advised him to keep a low profile while he developed an understanding of the dynamics of the Indian situation and of the ways in which his ideas of satyagraha could chime with growing Indian nationalism 

Key features

• In 1917, Gandhi intervened in local situations: 

  • When peasant farmers of Champaran in north Bihar were forced by white planters to grow indigo on disadvantageous terms, he refused to leave the district 

  • In Gujarat, where cotton farmers were earning a pittance, he fasted until the situation was resolved 

• During the war years, having developed an astute awareness of those who would be useful to him in future struggles, Gandhi forged relationships with up-and-coming leaders: 

  • Bihari lawyer Rajendra Prasad 

  • Mayor of Ahmedabad Vallabhbhai Patel 

  • Jawaharlal Nehru 

• Gandhi developed connections with communities previously neglected by Congress politicians 

  • Muslims (who later supported his take-over of Congress in 1920) 

  • Businessmen (who bankrolled his non-cooperation campaign) 

Significance

• The positive outcome of Gandhi's satyagraha was impressive and suggested that it could work on a national scale 

• Gandhi's relationships with individuals and communities later proved extremely useful as a source of support for him and his campaigns 

Links to events after

• Gandhi became leader of Congress in 1920 

Ghadr movement

Siege of Kut December 1915 - April 1916

Context

• In December 1915, 2 infantry divisions were withdrawn from France and sent to serve in the Middle East 

  • Some argued this was because the Indians were suffering low morale and couldn't survive another Winter on the Western Front 

  • However, it made sense to concentrate the Indian Army in the Middle East, where they would be better suited to the climate and it would be easier to send supplies and reinforcements from India 

Key features

• Indian troops took part in a campaign against the Ottoman Turks in Iraq. They were badly led and under-equipped as Indian industry was not geared up to the production of weapons or vehicles and the Allies couldn’t afford to divert supplies from Europe 

Significance

• The British forces was besieged at Kut-al-Amara and eventually surrendered to the Turks. 1000s of Indian and British troops had to endure a forced march across the desert to Turkish prisoner of war camps, with hundreds dying 

 

Lucknow Pact 1916

Context

• The Muslim League, believing the annulment of the partition of Bengal implied that the British were no longer sympathetic to separate electorates, demanded separation from the Raj in 1913, bringing them closer to the aims of Congress 

• The declaration of war against Turkey in November 1914 caused resentment among those Muslims who regarded the Sultan of Turkey as their Caliph 

• Jinnah, a member of both Congress and the Muslim League, worked tirelessly to bring about a rapprochement in the pursuit of the common aim of self-government 

• In December 1915, Congress and the Muslim League held sessions in Bombay at the same time and both committed themselves to pursuing the political objective of self-government 

Key features

• It was agreed that the number of Muslims in provincial legislatures should be laid down province by province, and that there should be separate electorates for all communities unless they requested a joint one 

Significance

• Muslims felt they had been given assurance by Hindus that were similar to those obtained earlier from the British government and felt able to work with Congress 

• Proposals to create a Muslim separate electorate with reserved seats not only guaranteed Muslims a voice, it also gave them an enhanced sense of Islamic identity that sat uneasily with the secularism of men like Jinnah (who didn't like the idea of separate electorates) 

• Congress was strengthened, not only by cooperation with the Muslim League, but also by healing rifts in its own membership. The death of moderates Gokhale and Mohta enabled Tilak to re-enter Congress 

Links to events after

• One of the first resolutions passed by the newly united Congress was to urge Britain to issue a proclamation stating that their aim was to confer self-government on India in the near future 

Home Rule Leagues 1916

Key features

• Bal Tilak's Home Rule League operated in western India and rapidly gained 32,000 members 

• The All-India Home Rule League, started by Annie Besant, grew more slowly but soon had a network of committees that covered most of India 

• Home rule, for both Besant and Tilak, meant defence and foreign policy matters would remain the responsibility of Britain, while Indian would control domestic affairs 

• Besant and Tilak toured widely, giving public lectures, and joined each other's leagues. Both organisations used newspapers, rallies, pamphlets, speeches and songs to generate interest and support, and attracted members of both Congress and the Muslim League (Jinnah joined Besant's All-India Home Rule League in 1917) 

Significance

• Excitement and enthusiasm were widespread, and hundreds of thousands of Indians signed petitions that were presented to the British authorities, demanding home rule 

• The concept of home rule was brought to masses of Indians who were otherwise disinterested in the doings of Congress and the Muslim League  

• Provincial assemblies and the Raj were alarmed by the rapid growth of the Home Rule Leagues. Tilak was arrested and Besant was interned in June 1917, although these moves were counter-productive as both the Muslim League and Congress swung behind home rule 

• Home rule leagues spread political awareness in previously unpoliticised provinces, something built upon by Gandhi and his satyagraha approach to protest, which was found by many living in rural India to be a more attractive alternative 

Montagu Declaration August 1917

Context

• Britain couldn't ignore sacrifices made by India in WW1 - most people + politicians looking for recognition of loyalty 

• Belief in rights of people to democracy and self-determination 

• Fear of anarchy - attempt to compromise 

Key features

• Promised a gradual journey to Indian self – governance (though no specific timescale suggested)

Significance

• Establishes idea of Indian self-governance 

• Positive steps - promise to become more involved, self-governance 

• Not independent - still under control of British Empire 

Links to events after

• Incorporated into 1919 Government of India Act  

Rowlatt Acts March 1919

Context

• India placed under Defence of India Act in 1915 to put a stop to anti-war and revolutionary activities. Protest forbidden, viceroy given power to issue regulations to secure public safety and ensure India was appropriately defended. Meant to be temporary. 

• Economic and political turbulence creating potentially dangerous situation for the Raj in 1917 

Key features

• Report made by Rowlatt (a Scottish judge) isolated Bengal, Bombay and Punjab as centres of revolutionary activity  

• Suggested wartime controls be continued to control situation. Included trial without jury, censorship + house arrest of suspects, unlimited detention without trial, use of evidence illegal in peacetime 

• Anarchic behaviour - 2 years prison for possessing seditious newspaper 

• Proposals incorporated into Rowlatt Act. Montagu reluctantly sanctioned it, made it clear to Chelmsford that it was deeply offensive but also appreciating the need to stamp out rebellion and riot 

• All 22 Indian members of Indian Legislative Council opposed measure but outvoted by appointed officials 

• Act became law in March 1919 

Significance

• Muslim leader (Jinnah) and several colleagues resigned from Council. Jinnah wrote letter to Chelmsford - accused the Raj of being irresponsible to people and out of touch with public opinion 

• New powers not needed and Act repealed in 1922 

• Damage was done and Raj seen as duplicitous: supporting Montagu declaration but also reacting to potential trouble by repression 

• Freedom repressed 

• Damaging relationship between Raj and Indians  

• Contrast with Montagu declaration - ideal and promises undermined. Progress + good faith generated by it now lost 

• Where British interests + intentions lie. Lack of autonomy.  

• Nature of controls deny them basic rights which British legal system acknowledge as universal - hypocrisy 

• British interests prioritised over Indian rights 

Links to events after

• Hartals organised for 30 March and 6 April 

Amritsar Massacre 13 April 1919

Context

• Opposition to Rowlatt Act - hartals that triggered rioting and general anti-Raj protest. Attack on Europeans (Marcia Sherwood) 

• O'Dwyer convinced this was part of general uprising - sent in troops 

• Thousands of pilgrims at Amritsar for Baisakhi Day - people gathered in park near Temple despite curfew and assemblies being banned 

Key features

• With no warning, Dyer and infantrymen fired 1650 rounds of live ammunition into the crowd in 10-15 minutes. 400 killed and 1500 wounded 

• Wounded left to fend for themselves or wait for help from those brave enough to risk curfew 

Significance

• Martial law established - "fancy punishments" - designed to humiliate Indians. Any Indian who passes a European had to salaam. Public floggings were common. Crawling Order - any Indian passing along the Kucha Tawarian (where Marcia Sherwood was attacked) had to crawl along it in the filth. Particularly offensive to Hindus - caste system based on purity and pollution 

• Divided opinion in Britain 

• Britain knew they could no longer risk violence to supress uprising 

• Even loyal Indians turned against the Raj and began believing any British reform toward Indian independence was a sham 

Links to events after

• Gandhi called for a satyagraha in April. Hartals were held in most provinces, although the degree to which they were observed varied. They erupted into violence in Gujarat and the Punjab and Gandhi immediately called them off 

Congress Punjab Sub-Committee Enquiry 

Context

• Congress wanted to investigate the causes behind the Amritsar Massacre 

Key features

• The Punjab Sub-Committee heard evidence in advance of the Hunter Committee and completed its own report some time earlier 

• It examined 1700 witnesses and published 650 verified statements 

Significance

• Their final report included graphic photos, amounted to savage indictment of the way in which India was governed and was calculated to arouse deep feelings of anger and resentment among Indians 

Hunter Enquiry

Context

• Montagu was appalled by Dyer's actions at Amritsar and demanded an enquiry, Dyer's superior officer General William Beynon approved 

Key features

• On 11 November 1919, Lord Hunter and his colleagues arrived at Lahore to ask questions, listen to evidence and reach a conclusions about 13 April 

• Dyer admitted that:  

  • He would have used machine guns if possible 

  • He hadn't given a warning before opening fire 

  • He continued firing until his ammunition was exhausted 

  • He wanted to punish the Punjabis because they were disobedient 

  • He had considered razing Amritsar to the ground 

Significance

• Hunter Commission concluded there was no evidence of a conspiracy to overthrow the Raj 

• Dyer was censured and forced to resign. Gratitude expressed by Ladies of the Punjab, entire garrison cheered him as he boarded plane 

• O'Dwyer was only gently reprimanded 

• The three Indian members of the Commission condemned the actions of both men 

Government of India Act December 1919

Context

• Secretary of state Edwin Montagu and Viceroy Lord Chelmsford published the Chelmsford report in July 1918 which fleshed out the Montague Declaration of 1917 

Key features

• The proposals made in the Chelmsford report became law as the Government of India Act in December 1919, creating a dyarchy between Indians and the British: 

  • The viceroy was to be advised by a council of 6 civilians, 3 of whom had to be Indians, and the commander-in-chief of the British Army in India. The viceroy could enforce laws even if the legislative councils rejected them and he could choose his own officials 

  • The provincial and legislative councils were enlarged 

  • The provincial councils were given control over education, agriculture, health, local self-government and public works 

  • The British retained control of military matters, foreign affairs, currency, communications and criminal law 

  • The franchise was extended, although it was still linked to tax payments. After 1919 about 10% of men were enfranchised 

  • Provincial assemblies could enfranchise women, although less than 1% of women voted 

  • There were reserved seats in all provincial legislatures for different religious and special interest groups (e.g. landowners and students) 

Significance

• Decision-making shifted from the centre to the provinces to involve more Indians in the government of their own country 

• In the House of Commons, right-wing MPs were convinced that the government was losing its nerve and would soon lose India, while left-wing MPs protested that the reforms had not gone far enough 

• Members of the ICS, concerned about their authority and their mandate to administer India, felt their strength and influence slipping away 

Links to events after

• Updated in the 1935 Government of India Act