Arrested at Sabarmati in March, 1922, on a charge of sedition Gandhiji was sentenced to six years in jail. He had spent two years out of the six in the Yeravda prison house at Poona when he was stricken with appendicitis necessitating emergency surgery. The Government decided to release him prematurely. While in jail, Gandhiji dictated to Indulal Yajnik the major part of Satyagraha in South Africa, Gandhiji's gripping account of the campaign conducted by him in that country which had culminated successfully in the Smuts-Gandhi Agreement and the Indians Relief Act, 1914.
Gandhiji observed in the conclusion to the book:
"When one considers the painful contrast between the happy ending of the Satyagraha struggle and the present condition of the Indians in South Africa, one feels for a moment as if all this suffering had gone for nothing, or is inclined to question the efficacy of Satyagraha as a solvent of the problems of mankind. Let us here consider this point for a little while. There is a law of nature that a thing can be retained by the same means by which it has been acquired. A thing acquired by violence can be retained by violence alone, while one acquired by truth can be retained only by truth.
"The Indians in South Africa, therefore, can ensure their safety today if they can wield the weapon of Satyagraha. There are no such miraculous properties in Satyagraha, that a thing acquired by truth could be retained even when truth was given up. It would not be desirable even if it was possible. If therefore the position of Indians in South Africa has now suffered deterioration, that argues the absence of Satyagrahis among them.
"There is no question here of finding fault with the present generation of South African Indians, but of merely stating the facts of the case."
The period 1924-1927 was one of setbacks for the struggle, both in India and in South Africa.
The "moderate" elements in the Indian National Congress dissociated themselves from Gandhiji's programme of non-cooperation, while the formidable unity between Hindus and Muslims forged in the wake of "the Punjab wrong" and "the Khilafat wrong" came unstuck. Communal riots disfigured the country in various places and Gandhiji withdrew substantially from political work. But his interest in South African affairs, however, continued unabated.
Gandhiji was informed in February 1924 that a "Class Areas Bill" had been introduced by the Government of General Smuts in the Union Parliament in Cape Town. To be applied in all four provinces, it would enable the South African Government to segregate all domiciled Indians and other Asiatics, both for residence and trade. This was in flagrant violation of the Smuts-Gandhi Settlement of 1914.
In a statement to the Press on February 14, 1924 - from the hospital where he was recovering - he stressed the responsibility of the Imperial Government to insist on the observance of the 1914 agreement. He pointed out that the situation had arisen because of the "original flaw" in the South African Constitution which denied franchise to Indians and the natives of the soil, and made the government dependent solely upon the will of the Europeans. The Imperial Government which had permitted this was, therefore, honour bound to prevent untoward results arising from it. (Item 51). In another statement on March 23, 1924, Gandhiji warned: "Let there be no mistake that unless India can make an effort adequate to the situation, the Bill will be carried through..." (Item 56). At the same time, in a letter to P.K. Naidu, Gandhiji suggested satyagraha by the Indian people if it becomes necessary. (Item 57). In an interview to Associated Press in April, he warned again that the Bill's effect "must be to ruin the Indian settlers." (Item 59).
News came in August 1924 that the Natal Boroughs Ordinance, 1924, had deprived Indians of municipal franchise in Natal. Urging Delhi to act swiftly, Gandhiji wrote in Young India: "If the Government of India move, for very shame, to protect them (Indians in South Africa) against impending spoliation, it can do so with effect." (Item 62).
But he told the Indian community that they could expect little help from the Indian public, except for newspaper articles. The Indian Government set no store by public opinion in India. But, he added, if they show the spirit of sacrifice as they had shown in the past, India and the world would be with them. (Items 66-67).
Fortunately, Mrs. Sarojini Naidu, a close associate of Gandhiji, was able to visit South Africa to provide encouragement to the Indian community during this critical time. She met many leaders of opinion in the country and suggested a round table conference to discuss the position of Indians in South Africa.
There was then a short respite as the Smuts Government dissolved the Parliament and called general elections, but they resulted in a Government led by General Hertzog, which was even more decidedly anti-Asiatic.
In April 1925, the Secretary of the British Indian Association, Johannesburg, cabled Gandhiji about a Bill restricting Indian trade to within six miles of the Transvaal muncipal or township areas. Profoundly disturbed, Gandhiji said (Young India, April 30, 1925):
"If extermination of the Asiatic is the goal, the honest course would be to bring in an expatriation bill and challenge the Indian Government to do its worst." (Item 71).
Amod Bhayat, one of the founding members of the Natal Indian Congress, cabled to Gandhiji in July 1925about the introduction in Parliament by the Hertzog Government of the "Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provisions) Bill", which was more draconian than the Class Areas Bill.
Gandhiji declared that this Bill was "an indication of the determination of the Union Government to starve the Indians out of South Africa". (Item 73). In another significant comment made in Young India (November 26, 1925), he described the South African Indian question as "the question of the hour", "a question of life and death" for the Indians settled in South Africa. (Item 75).
The South African Indian Congress sent a deputation to India, led by Dr. Abdulla Abdurahman, to seek support from the Government, the Congress and the people in this grave crisis. They attended the Kanpur Congress session that December. In a resolution, moved by Gandhiji, the Congress declared:
"The proposed legislation known as the Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provisions) Bill is a breach of the Smuts-Gandhi Agreement of 1914 in that it is racial in character and is calculated not only to make the position of settlers much worse than it was in 1911 but is designed to make the residence in that country of any self-respecting Indian impossible... The Congress heartily endorses the suggestion that a Round Table Conference containing among others proper Indian representatives should be called to settle the question." (Items 79-80).
Gandhiji also asked for a withholding of the Royal assent to the Bill. He urged the Viceroy, Lord Reading, on January 28, 1926, "not merely to secure a postponement of the consideration of the measure but to insist upon at least a reversion to the position of 1914." (Item 83).
The Indians in South Africa, he felt, should offer satyagraha if necessary and if they had the will and courage, but at the proper time. "That time is not yet," he said. "They must, as they are doing, exhaust every diplomatic remedy..." (Item 88).
The `diplomatic remedies' met with partial success. Prodded, doubtless, by the Government of India and the Imperial Government, the South African authorities announced in April 1926 that a Round Table Conference would be called and consideration of the Bill postponed until then. But while giving in to reason on the Areas Reservation Bill which was to affect Asiatics, the South African authorities went ahead, in May 1926, to pass the Mines and Works Amendment Act (Colour Bar Bill) which directly and shamelessly discriminated against the non-Europeans, mainly South Africa's "Native" population. Gandhiji saw the broader significance of this Act. He warned that "the Europeans of South Africaif they persist in their arrogant policy will have sown the seeds of their own destruction". (Item 86).
Deploring the passing of the Colour Bar Bill, Gandhiji issued a statement on May 14, 1926: "One had wished that the spirit of justice that actuated the Union Government to postpone the passing of one Bill (Class Areas Bill) would induce them not to force the passage of the other..." (Item 99). On July 22, 1926, he was more forthright. "I do not conceive the possibility of justice being done to Indians if none is rendered to the natives of the soil. Justice to them is not to be expected if injustice is done to the Natives..." (Item 105).
And in November 1926, as the Round Table Conference prepared to meet, Gandhiji cast a long gaze into the future. The Areas Reservation Bill, he said, "may be shelved for ever but if the spirit animating it survives, the position of the settlers will, in no wise, be better than if the Bill had been passed." (Item 110).
Yet notwithstanding all his misigivings about the white rulers of South Africa, Gandhiji wanted the Indian settlers to play fair. He cautioned them against breaches of conduct at the time of the Round Table Conference. "In order to ensure a peaceful atmosphere at the Conference, all that is necessary is for us not to impute motives, not to exaggerate and not to use harsh language in discussing subjects..." (Item 101).
When the results of the Cape Town Conference were announced in a joint communique on February 1927, Gandhiji was persuaded that they represented an "honourable compromise". "It is not the best that could be conceived", he wrote, "but it is the best that was possible." (Item 121). The dropping of the Areas Reservation Bill gave another respite to the Indian community.
But Gandhiji had serious reservations on the provisions on "repatriation" of Indians from South Africa and on other aspects of the Cape Town agreement. At the next session of the Congress in Madras, in December 1927, he moved a resolution proclaiming that the Congress "cannot be satisfied till the status of the (Indian) settlers is brought on par with that of the enfranchised inhabitants of the Union..." (Item 133).
As one expected to understand the situation created in South Africa by the anti-Asiatic movement now going on there, and especially the Class Areas Bill now under consideration by the Union Parliament, I deem it my duty to place my opinion on the situation before the public.(2)
The anti-Asiatic agitation on the part of Europeans in South Africa is no new thing. It is almost as old as the first settlement of unindentured Indians in South Africa, and is principally due to trade jealousy on the part of white retail traders. As in other parts of the world so in South Africa, interested men, if they sufficiently persist, find no difficulty in gathering the support round them of those who are not so interested, but who do not think for themselves. The present agitation, I remember, was begun as early as 1921, and the Class Areas Bill is, no doubt, one result of that agitation.
Before dealing with the nature and effect of the Bill, it is necessary to point out that it is in breach of the compromise of 1914 arrived at between the Union Government and the Indian community of South Africa. But it was a compromise to which both the Indian Government and the Imperial Government were as much party as the Union Government and Indian community, because the compromise was arrived at with the knowledge and concurrence of the Imperial and the Indian Governments. The latter even sent Sir Benjamin Robertson as a representative, technically to watch the course of the Commission that was appointed by the Union Government to inquire into the Indian position, but in reality to negotiate a settlement. The main terms of the compromise were settled before Sir Benjamin Robertson, who represented the Indian Government, returned to India.
In accordance with that compromise, no further anti- Asiatic legislation was to be passed by the Union Government. The understanding at the time was that the legal position of the Indian would be gradually improved and that the then existing anti-Asiatic legislation would, in time to come, be repealed. The contrary has, however, happened. The public may remember that the first attempt to break the spirit of the compromise was made when, in the Transvaal, an attempt was made to enforce the existing legislation adversely to the Indians and contrary to the practice that prevailed at the time of the compromise. The Class Areas Bill, however, goes much further in restricting Indian liberty.
Whatever may be the other implications of the compromise, this much cannot be disputed by any party, that the settlement of 1914 pledged the Union Government not to put further restrictions upon the Indian liberty, and apart from the general powers of disallowance vested in His Majesty under the Letter of Instructions addressed to the Governor-General of South Africa, the Imperial Government if they would be true to their trust are bound, at any cost, to insist upon the observance of the terms of the compromise referred to by me.
We in India may not ignore the difficulties of the Union Government which is dependent for its existence solely upon the will of the Europeans of South Africa expressed through their elected representatives to the exclusion of Indians and the natives of soil. This unwarranted exclusion is the original flaw in the South African constitution, as it is to be found in the constitutions of most of the self-governing Colonies which have their native populations and Indian populations. As the Imperial Government permitted the flaw, it is in honour bound to prevent untoward results arising from it. South Africa and Kenya will presently show what moral worth there is in the Imperial system. Pressure of public opinion may, and probably will, bring about temporary relief in both the places; but it will be only temporary. It can merely postpone the final act in the tragedy unless some unforeseen radical change, either in England or in India, takes place.
And now for the Bill itself. Unlike the Natal Municipal Franchise Bill, which happily the Union Governor-General has in effect vetoed and which applied only to Natal, the Class Areas Bill is designed to apply to all the four provinces. It enables the Government to segregate all the domiciled Indians and other Asiatics alike for residence and trade. It is, therefore, an extension, in a modified manner, of the location system devised as early as 1885 by the late Transvaal Government.(3)
Let me say in a few words what the segregation may mean. The Indian Location in Pretoria, where, in spite of the Law of 1885, not a single Indian has been as yet compelled to remove, is situated far away from the town itself and entirely outside the beat of the buyer, whether English, Dutch or Native. The only trade possible in such locations is trade among themselves. Segregation, therefore, carried out to the full means nothing less than compulsory repatriation without any compensation. It is true that the Bill appears to preserve to a certain extent the existing rights. But that reservation is of little consequence to the Indian settlers. I do not wish to burden this note by citing illustrations from my South African experience to show how such reservations have, in practice, proved almost useless.
Finally, let it be remembered that, when Indian emigration to South Africa was unrestricted, the fear of the Europeans was expressed to be that South Africa might be swamped by India`s millions. All the South African statesmen then used to say that South Africa could easily digest a small Indian population and could even give it a liberal treatment, but that the European settlers could never rest content so long as the possibility of swamping remained. Now that the so-called fear of swamping has been removed, practically since 1897, the cry is raised for segregation, and if that is accomplished, the next step will be compulsory repatriation. If the segregated Indians do not voluntarily retire, the fact is that the more accommodating the European settlers of South Africa find the Imperial trustees to be, the more grasping they become in their anti-Asiatic demands.
Young India, February 21, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 205-08
Dear Mr. Paul,
...The Indian community of South Africa includes people from all provinces and represents Hinduism, Islam, Christianity and Zoroastrianism. There are many South Africa-born Indians who are Christians and are highly educated and therefore naturally very sensitive about self-respect. Th restrictive legislation of South Africa applies to them although South Africa is their home and although the majority of them never expect to see India at all. It is not known here that rightly or wrongly these young men and women have adopted European customs, manners, dress, etc., but neither their Christianity nor their education nor their Europeanisation has saved them from the bar sinister. I mention this fact not to show that they should have a special or separate treatment (they would themselves object to any such distinction), but to emphasise the fact that the restrictive legislation in South Africa is predominantly racial in character. The economic aspect occupies a subordinate position.
The Indian claim is exceedingly simple and reasonable. They have voluntarily accepted administrative restriction of Indian immigration and, as a matter of fact, hardly any Indian who has not previously resided in South Africa and practically made it his home is admitted. In exchange for this voluntary self-denial, the domiciled community claims equality of treatment. This position has been always regarded by the thoughtful Europeans of South Africa as eminently reasonable, and in 1914, an agreement was arrived at between the South African Government and the Indian community to which both the Imperial and the Indian Governments were party, whereby it was understood that no further restrictive legislation should be passed and that the position of the domiciled Indians would be steadily and progressively ameliorated. The local Indian community, therefore, has a double grievance in respect of the present anti-Indian agitation in South Africa.
The vast majority of Europeans in South Africa are nominally Christian. I have the privilege of claiming many of them, especially the missionaries, as my life-long friends. What is wanted is for the real Christians to dare to stand for truth and justice. There is unfortunately too much of expedience even amongst some of the best of them. They think that standing for truth in the face of prejudice will impair their usefulness for service. I have always dissented from this view, and my humble opinion based upon extensive experience is that such an attitude is a concession, although totally unconscious, to Satan...
Yours truly,
Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 256-57
PRAY TELL GENERAL SMUTS AND RESPONSIBLE EUROPEANS THAT THE CLASS AREAS BILL IS A POOR RECOMPENSE FOR THE LOCAL INDIANS` EXEMPLARY SELF-RESTRAINT THROUGHOUT THE INTERESTED CAMPAIGN AGAINST THEM. EUROPEANS SHOULD REMEMBER THAT THE LOCAL INDIANS VOLUNTARILY SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESTRICTION OF FURTHER INDIAN IMMIGRATION. REMIND THE UNION GOVERNMENT OF THE ASSURANCE GIVEN GOKHALE THAT NO FURTHER DISABLING LEGISLATION WILL BE PASSED. ALSO THE COMPACT OF 1914. NOTHING SINCE DONE BY THE LOCAL INDIANS DESERVES THE PROPOSED TREATMENT. ACCEPTANCE OF CLASS AREAS BILL IS TANTAMOUNT TO POLITICAL AND CIVIL SUICIDE. I TRUST YOUR WINSOME ELOQUENCE WILL DISARM OPPOSITION AND MAKE THE LOT OF YOUR COUNTRYMEN EASIER FOR YOUR PRESENCE.
Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 258-59
Gandhiji gave an interesting explanation of the South African Government`s decision to omit the Cape Province from the operation of the Class Areas Bill. He said:
This is merely an instance of selfishness on the part, principally, of the Dutch population. Nearly all the house-work in the Cape is done by Malay women, and if the Segregation Act came into force, these Malay women would be affected by it.(6)
This would mean depriving a major part of the white population of its domestic help, which would give no end of inconvenience. Consequently, as the Indian population of the Cape is small - about 10,000 in all - the Cape people decided that they are not worth worrying about as far as segregation is concerned in view of the difficulties which segregation would bring in its train.
Times of India, March 21, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, page 287
If you continue to oppress us, we shall leave your Empire and, if we do, where will your Empire be then?
The Hindu, March 26, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, page 296
Bombay
March 23, 1924
The following cablegram has been received from Cape Town signed by Mr. Pather,(9) General Secretary, South African Indian Congress:
"SOUTH AFRICAN INDIAN COMMUNITY SUBMITS NOTWITHSTANDING STRONGEST PROTESTS UNION GOVERNMENT DETERMINED CARRYING THROUGH CLASS AREAS BILL VIOLATING PLEDGES GIVEN. BILL INDEFENSIBLE. FOREIGNERS, ALSO EURO-AFRICANS, MALAYS AND NATIVES BEING EXEMPTED. BILL WILL APPLY ONLY TO INDIANS. EURO-AFRICANS, MALAYS AND NATIVES ASSEMBLED IN THOUSANDS CAPE TOWN ASSURED MRS. SAROJINI NAIDU OF SUPPORT TO INDIANS IN OPPOSITION TO BILL. INDIANS WILL NEVER SUBMIT SEGREGATION. INFORM INDIA. PLEASE TAKE SUCH ACTION AS YOU THINK BEST. MRS. SAROJINI NAIDU HAS MADE DEEP IMPRESSION AND WON MANY HEARTS. MRS. NAIDU DEFERRED LEAVING SOUTH AFRICA UNTIL 30TH APRIL OWING GREAT DEMAND ON HER IN INTEREST OF THE CAUSE."(10)
This is startling news, almost too bad even for South Africa to be believed. I have already endeavoured to show why the Cape was to be excluded from the operation of the measure. If the information cabled by Reuter as to the exclusion of the Cape is correct, there is something wrong in the foregoing cable, or the information contained in it is applicable to the other three Provinces only, namely, Orangia, Transvaal and Natal. The position will be that, so far as the Cape is concerned, the Cape Indians will still remain exempted from the operation of the measure, whereas in the other Provinces the measure will apply only to Indians.
There is no difficulty about understanding the exemptions, because the idea of segregation of Natives and Malays in the extreme sense is new. Every European household has Natives of South Africa as domestic servants. Malays, as I have shown in a previous communication, are a negligible quantity except in the Cape. We have, therefore, the naked truth before us that the Bill in question is aimed merely at Indians and that it connotes not only segregation but indirect expulsion.
Mrs. Sarojini Naidu`s visit to South Africa and her inspiring presence there will undoubtedly steel the hearts of the Indian settlers for further effort. Her presence is also bringing Europeans and Indians on the same platform. Let India, however, not be lulled into a sense of false security because of the commanding presence of Mrs. Naidu in the midst of the sorely-tried Indian settlers.
After all, the cultured Europeans of South Africa are gentlemen, and I have little doubt that Mrs. Naidu is receiving all the attention that is due to her for her many and matchless gifts, but the South African Europeans have also a fixed and determined anti-Indian policy. General Smuts is a finished diplomat. On due occasions he can speak honeyed words, but he knows his mind, and let there be no mistake that unless India can make an effort adequate to the situation, the Bill will be carried through the Union Parliament in spite of Mrs. Naidu`s resourcefulness.
M. K. Gandhi
Young India, March 27, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 300-01
Post Andheri,
March 23, 1924
My dear Naidu(11) ,
I was delighted to see your writing after such a long time.
I am watching the course of events in South Africa with the greatest attention and anxiety. If any one person can possibly influence the course of events in our favour, it is certainly Mrs. Naidu(12)
. She has a wonderful charm of manner and is tireless in her duty. She is staying up to the end of this month and probably longer still. I only hope that if, in spite of all the efforts, the Class Areas Bill does become law, you will be able to persuade our people to get up satyagraha if it becomes necessary. At the same time, I would say, do not launch it unless you are absolutely certain that you will be able to carry the thing through. Do please keep me posted with all the particulars, sending me cuttings.
Yours sincerely,
Collected Works, Volume 23, page 329.
Post Andheri,
March 28, 1924
My dear Christopher(13) ,
I was so glad to see your familiar writing after so many years.
I am anxiously and closely watching the events in South Africa and will do all that is possible for an ailing man to do. I know that the presence of Mrs. Naidu is a source of great joy and strength to you. Do please keep me well informed of the progress of events, sending me all the cuttings and other documents that you may think I should see. You have asked me to send a cablegram about unity amongst our people. I think it will serve no useful purpose. Your letter is dated 11th February. It is now 28th of March. All that I infer from the cablegrams being received about Mrs. Naidu`s progress in South Africa goes to show that you are presenting a united front. Why should I therefore assume disunion when everything points to the contrary...
Yours sincerely,
Collected Works, Volume 23, page 331
I have carefully read Mr. Duncan`s speech delivered by him at the second reading of the Class Areas Bill in the Union Assembly.(15)
I have not before me the letters exchanged between General Smuts and myself.(16)
I have sent for the file of the Indian Opinion which I have at Satyagraha Ashram, Sabarmati. It contains the text of the two letters, but for my purpose I do not really need them. I am surprised at Mr. Duncan`s assertion. The two letters do not form the whole of the agreement. It is necessary to remember that the Indian struggle commenced with the Asiatic Registration Act of 1907, which was vetoed as an Ordinance and passed, almost word for word, by the first responsible legislature of the Transvaal. Finally, in 1914, the struggle reached its climax and embraced all the four provinces of the Union. "Vested rights" has been a phrase requiring interpretation from time to time. My contention is that the whole tenor of the agreement pledged the Union Government not only not to curtail vested rights, but gradually to remove the restrictions that existed in 1914.
I have already cited Sir Benjamin Robertson and Mr. Andrews as my witnesses in support of my contention. I have asked Mr. Andrews, who was present at the negotiations that were going on between General Smuts and myself, and he completely supports me.(17)
The Indian struggle extending over a long period of eight years could not have been undertaken so that, after a full and honourable settlement, it was open to the Union Government to take away the rights already possessed by the Indians.
The whole of Mr. Duncan`s speech is a curious exhibition of inconsistency and refusal to do the right thing. As the speech itself shows, the Class Areas Bill is introduced not because it is necessary for the conservation of European predominance, but because interested Europeans are clamouring for it. Mr. Duncan himself admits that the Indian population is gradually decreasing, because immigration has ceased. His distinction between segregation and separation is, to say the least, hypocritical. And in spite of his statement to the contrary, I venture to state that, whatever the idea underlying the Bill may be, its effect must be to ruin the Indian settlers.
The Hindu, April 7, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 375-76
Shrimati Sarojini`s splendid work in South Africa has told. Letters received by me from South Africa show that her presence has brought fresh courage to the Indian settlers. Mr. Duncan`s fruitless efforts to justify an unjustifiable measure show also that the Europeans of South Africa have felt the force of her wonderful work. Mr. Duncan`s assertion that the agreement of 1914 did not bind the Union Government (not?) to take away vested rights, as the Class Areas Bill admittedly does, ought to carry with it the understanding that, if such an agreement can be proved, the Bill will not be proceeded with. Even though a non- cooperator, I beg to make the proposal that, if the Government of India receive an undertaking from the Union Government that, if the agreement can be proved to the satisfaction of an impartial tribunal, they will suspend the Bill pending such an enquiry, I shall be prepared to appear before such a tribunal to prove the agreement. Nor is precedent wanting for such a course. When the interpretation of the Transvaal Law 3 of 1885 and the propriety of its enactment in spite of the London Convention were in dispute, the matter was referred to arbitration by the Imperial and the Transvaal Governments.(18) Young India, April 10, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 400-01
For the present at least the Indians (in South Africa) appear to have been saved from the sword, hitherto hanging over their heads, in the form of confining their residence to the scavengers` location. Smt. Sarojini`s efforts appear to have succeeded in an unexpected manner. General Smuts has announced his decision to dissolve Parliament and to hold fresh elections as he felt that public opinion did not back the Union Government of South Africa. Hence the new Bills which were to be passed by the present Parliament have been postponed, at least for the present.(19)
But it is not at all likely that members of the new Parliament will be inclined to do justice to Indians. It will not at all be surprising if their attitude towards the Indians in South Africa is harder even than that of the present members. Still, we should rest satisfied, for the time being at least, as "he who survives a crisis may live up to the age of a hundred years".
(From Gujarati)
Navajivan, April 13, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 23, pages 425-26
It is a pathetic cable from the Natal Indians protesting against the passing of the Ordinance disenfranchising Natal Indians from voting at municipal elections.(20)
This fight commenced in 1894. It was finally decided in favour of the Indian settlers. The then Natal Government admitted that it would be most unjust to deprive the Indian taxpayer of the municipal franchise. The Indian settler submitted to the virtual deprivation of the political franchise. But no past promises or undertakings bind governments when they wish to change policies or principles. We have seen this illustrated often enough in the history of Indians in South Africa. Almost every assurance given to them has been violated on due occasion. Our bewildered countrymen make a pathetic appeal to the nation for help. Little do they know that we are powerless to give them real assistance. Sympathy they have. Newspaper articles they will have, but I fear that beyond that they are likely to get very little. If the Government of India move, for very shame, to protect them against impending spoliation, it can do so with effect. I say "impending", for the Ordinance requires the sanction of the Governor-General of the Union of South Africa. He has once refused to sanction such an Ordinance. If he exercises his prerogative, he can save the Indians the insult that the Ordinance implies. Every letter received by me from South Africa during Mrs. Naidu`s stay there showed the high hopes our people built on the brilliant mission of Mrs. Naidu. But the South African Europeans can be courteous and yet carry out their determination, though it may be, as this is, totally unjust. They have learnt under General Smuts the art of being sweetly unjust. The ultimate remedy lies with our countrymen themselves.
Young India, August 21, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 25, page 17
We in India know nothing of our South African heroes. They are unknown to fame like Some village Hampden that with dauntless breast The little tyrant of his fields withstood.
I have just received a cable from Johannesburg announcing the death of P. K. Naidu from pneumonia. He was one of the truest of Indians and the stoutest of hearts. He suffered the hardships of a prison life many times. His wife followed suit. He was ready for all work. He got ready on an hour`s notice to take charge of a party of deportees who were banished by General Smuts to India. He counted no cost too dear for the sake of his country`s freedom. His death at the present moment, for our countrymen in South Africa, is a tremendous loss. He was capable single-handed of hurling defiance against the mighty South African Government. Indeed only a few weeks ago I had a letter from him describing his plan of campaign. Alas! cruel Nature had planned otherwise. Naidu is dead; his work will live for ever. P. K. Naidu was a fair English scholar. He knew Hindi, Telugu, French and Zulu. He was self-taught. He had a powerful build. He was no mean pugilist. But he had learnt the secret of non-violence. He was therefore able to control himself under the gravest provocation. He was a born toiler. He never refused any work. He was an expert barber and, because he would not become a clerk, he had chosen to be a barber and carried on a haircutting saloon. When, at Tolstoy Farm, we took to sandal making, he became a finished sandal-maker. He was a true soldier. He knew how to obey. I tender my humble condolences to Mrs. Naidu and our countrymen in South Africa.
Young India, September 25, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 25, pages 210-11
Hope that Indians of Transvaal as other parts of Union will see struggle through for honourable existence in South Africa at the cost of suffering, no matter how great.
Collected Works, Volume 25, page 244
With the passing away of Parsee Rustomjee... India has lost a true soldier. So far as I am concerned, I have lost a true friend. I have come across few men like Parsee Rustomjee. He had had hardly any education. He knew a little English and his knowledge of Gujarati was not much. He was not too fond of reading. Right from his youth he was in business. Through sheer hard work he had risen from the status of a common clerk to that of a big businessman. Despite this, he had a keen common sense and great generosity and he was so tolerant that, although he was an orthodox Parsi, he had the same affection for Hindus, Muslims and Christians. I have never seen anyone going round for funds return empty-handed from him. His loyalty to his friends was so staunch that many gave him their power of attorney. I have seen many prominent Muslim businessmen name Parsee Rustomjee their representative in preference to their own relations. No poor Parsi was sent away from Rustomjee`s shop. He was as sparing towards himself as he was generous towards others. Luxuries had no place in his life. He spent money after great hesitation on himself and his family. He continued to live in great simplicity till the end. Parsee Rustomjee`s shop was the only place where Gokhale, Andrews, Sarojini Devi and such others stayed. The minutest detail did not escape his eyes. Who else but he could be given the responsibility of packing Gokhale`s forty-five packages consisting of innumerable addresses of welcome and such other things, making a list of these and loading them on the steamer?
By making a trust in the name of his dearly loved wife Jerbai after her death, he gave away the larger part of his wealth in charity. He has not pampered his children at all but has rather brought them up in simplicity and left them an inheritance sufficient only to prevent them from starving. He has remembered all his relations in making his will.
He took part in public affairs with the same degree of precision and firmness described above. At the time of satyagraha, Parsee Rustomjee was the first among the businessmen of Natal who were prepared to sacrifice their all. It was his way not to give up a task once he had undertaken it, whatever the risks involved. He had to serve a longer sentence in prison than expected, but this did not frighten him. The struggle continued for eight years; many staunch warriors fell. Rustomjee, however, did not waver. He made his son Sorabjee also plunge into the struggle.
I first made the acquaintance of this good Indian in 1893. At first I was not greatly impressed by him. However, as I got more and more involved in public work, I learnt more and more to value the gemlike qualities in Parsee Rustomjee. He was my client, my colleague in public work and finally he became my friend. He did not hesitate to come to me and describe his faults like a child. He astounded me by his faith in me. When the whites attacked me in 1897, Rustomjee`s house sheltered me and my sons. The whites had threatened to burn down his house and property. That threat, however, did not deter him in the least. He continued the relationship thus built up in Africa till the time of his death. He continued to send money here too for public work. He was to have come here in December at the time of the Congress session. God, however, willed otherwise. Sheth Rustomjee`s death is a great loss to the Indians in South Africa. Sorabji Adajania passed away, after that Ahmed Mohamed Cachalia died, some time back P. K. Naidu, and now Parsee Rustomjee has departed. There are hardly any Indian workers of their calibre left in South Africa now. As God is the friend of the helpless, He will look after the Indians in South Africa. But the void created by Parsee Rustomjee`s death will never be filled.
(From Gujarati)
Navajivan, November 30, 1924; Collected Works, Volume 25, pages 372-74
The serpentine coil round the Indian settlers of South Africa is daily tightening. Now in Natal they are deprived even of the municipal franchise. This was said to have been protected. When the attempt was made to take away from them the political franchise, the Natal Government declared that they had no design upon the enjoyment by Indians of the municipal franchise. But no promise made to a weak party is sacred in the estimation of modern governments. Each party must be able to defend its rights by its own inherent strength. The Government of India`s vaunted trusteeship fails at the critical moment. I know that the settlers look to us for help and protection. But they should know that they can have little help from India for the present. She herself is engaged in a life and death struggle. Years ago the late Sir Phirozeshah(22) prophesied that India would be of little help to the Indians overseas, so long as she had not acquired the ability to assert herself. The late Pestonji Padsha was even disgusted with me for going to South Africa. He thought every Indian worker going out of India was so much economic waste. I think his clear brain partially failed Mr. Padsha. My residence in South Africa was not an economic waste of power. But is there not much truth underlying Mr. Padsha`s burning desire first to secure India`s freedom? Till we have acquired it, we must send our countrymen across the seas such comfort as newspaper and other sympathy can give them.
Young India, December 26, 1924
The Viceregal answer to the deputation that waited on His Excellency was sympathetic but non-committal.(23)
It betrays unnecessary consideration for the difficulties of the Union Government. It is just for one Government to appreciate the difficulties of another but the performance might easily be overdone. The Union Government observed no delicacy when it had to make its choice. The Indian Government has had many an occasion to make such a choice. Each time, except once, it has surrendered. The exception was made by Lord Hardinge(24) who hurled defiance at the Government of South Africa and ranged himself on the side of Indians in South Africa. There were reasons for it. The Indians were fighting by direct action. The method was new. They had proved their capacity for resistance and suffering and yet they were demonstrably and wholly non-violent. But at the present moment Indians of South Africa are leaderless. With Sorabji,(25) Cachalia,(26) P. K. Naidu(27) and now Rustomjee(28) gone, they do not know what they should do or can do. There is ample scope for non-violent action. But it requires thinking out and vigorous working out. That seems hardly possible at the present moment. I have, however, great hope of one or two young men who are resident in South Africa. Not the least among them is Sorabjee, the brave son of the brave Rustomjee. Young Sorabjee is himself a seasoned soldier in satyagraha. He has been to prison. He organised the wonderful receptions that were given in Natal to Sarojini Devi. Let our countrymen in South Africa realise that they must work out their own salvation. Even heaven helps only those who help themselves. They will find that if they show their original grit and spirit and sacrifice, they will have the people of India, the Government of India and the world helping and fighting for them.
There is a passage in the Viceregal pronouncement which needs supplementing. His Excellency says,
"it is stated in your address that the municipal franchise was solemnly assured to Indians by the Natal Government when in 1896 Indians were deprived of the Parliamentary franchise. But you have not indicated the exact nature of the assurance. My Government are making the necessary enquiries to verify the position."
The statement made by the deputation is substantially correct. It was, however, not in 1896 but probably in 1894 that the assurance was given. I am writing from memory. The facts are these. It was in 1894 that the first disfranchising Bill was passed by the Natal Assembly. Whilst it was passing through the Assembly a petition was presented to it on behalf of Indians wherein it was stated that the Indians enjoyed in India the municipal and indirectly even the political franchise. Fear was also expressed that the deprivation of the political franchise was likely to be a prelude to that of the municipal franchise. It was in answer to this petition that the late Sir John Robinson, the Premier of Natal, and the late Mr. Escombe,(29) the Attorney-General, gave the assurance that there was no intention to go further and deprive the Indians of the municipal franchise at a future date. The disenfranchising Bill was disallowed by the superior Government but another, non-racial in character, was passed. The assurance referred to by me was several times repeated by Mr. Escombe who had charge of all the Bills and who was virtually the dictator of Natal`s policy whilst he was in office.
Young India, February 5, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 26, pages 71-72
General Smuts has at last spoken out on the proposed extension of the Colour Bar in South African legislation. The reader will remember the cablegram received sometime ago that the Union Government was seeking to put the ban on Asiatics being employed in the mines. Speaking on and against that legislation General Smuts is reported to have said:
"In opposing the Colour Bar Bill in the Union Assembly, General Smuts declared that the Bill sought to give the Government power by regulation to apportion work in mines and works between whites on the one hand, and Natives and Asiatics on the other, which he thought was a very serious matter. He felt that the Bill was not honest dealing and it was his deliberate opinion that there was only one guarantee of the security of white civilisation, namely, honest justice between man and man in this country. (Hear, hear!) Turning to the Bill, as it affected Asiatics, he said that in the days of his negotiation with Mr. Gandhi the position which the latter took up, and which had been taken up at subsequent conferences in London, was an appeal not to dishonour Indians. We recognise, said Mr. Gandhi, there is a difference between you and us and that distinctions must be made, but don`t cast a stigma on us in the laws of your country, but in this Bill they were doing the very thing they were asked to avoid. They were gathering on their heads the hatred of the whole of Asia from one side to the other. In conclusion, he suggested that the matter should be seriously considered, whether they should not discharge the order for the second reading of the Bill, and see whether some way out of the difficulty could not be found."
General Smuts has correctly given the substance of my conversation with him. My point was that whilst administrative difference there was bound to be so long as human nature remained what it was and so long as there was a conflict between European culture and the Indian, a legal recognition of the difference in the shape of the introduction of the Bar Sinister in the laws of the country was an intolerable burden. The settlement of 1914 chiefly consisted in the vindication of the Indian position. With General Smuts` opposition we may hope that the Bill will now be dropped.
But let us not deceive ourselves. The Natal Disfranchising Bill recently passed is an extension of the "Bar Sinister". General Smuts` opposition therefore means only a protest against the bar being introduced even in the matter of employment, not against the bar altogether. However I tender my congratulations to General Smuts on his plain speech at the risk of still further weakening his political position in his country. We may not be satisfied till the South African statute- book is purged of all legal inequality as between whites and Asiatics or better still as between white and coloured people.
Young India,March 5, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 26, pages 221-22
"Things are clearly going from bad to worse in South Africa and there is no telling where they will end. In two separate measures, which have been put forward by the Government in power, Asiatics are discriminated against and classed with Native, as contrasted with the Coloured people. It is somewhat difficult for those who have never been to South Africa to understand clearly what such discrimination means. What has to be realised is that the great bulk of the Native population is entirely uneducated. On the other hand, the Coloured people (i.e., those who have a slight mixture of European blood in their veins) are on the whole a fairly literate community. It appears that the policy of the new Government, under General Hertzog is to depress still further the Asiatic and to raise the status of the Coloured people.
"A further measure is scheduled, whereby South African citizenship will be confined to the pure white population, which has been born and bred in South Africa. An Englishman coming out straight from England will not have his citizenship in South Africa as an inherent right on account of his English birth and origin. He will have to take out naturalisation papers in South Africa. Leading newspapers in South Africa suggest that a compact has been made between the Labour Party (which relies chiefly on the British labour vote) and the Nationalist Party (which relies chiefly on the Dutch vote) on the understanding that the Nationalists will support a strong anti-Asiatic policy provided that the Labourites will support strong burgher policy.
"In addition to this, we have the further news that a new segregation measure, of even more drastic character than the late Class Areas Bill, is already being prepared. It will be remembered that the Municipal Franchise Act for Natal, depriving Indians in future municipal franchise, has now been passed and sanctioned by the Governor-General. If a racial Segregation Act is also passed, it will be difficult to see what will still remain of the vested rights, which were to be strictly observed under the Smuts- Gandhi Agreement of 1914.
"In the Transvaal, a picketing system and a boycott of all Indian trade has again been started. This time, in the present inflamed atmosphere - it has met with some measure of success. The repatriation of Indians in Natal by means of Government recruiters is still proceeding. I have personally cross-examined those in Madras who have returned. They have told me that they have been unable to find employment in India. They are therefore now to be found, after great misery and privation, entering the emigration depot for Malaya, asking to be sent out of India to the rubber plantations of the Federated Malaya States. Truly the whole situation of Indians in South Africa has reached the lowest point where even stout hearts may find it difficult to look forward to the future with hope. There is one redeeming feature, however, which continually meets us in every fresh information that reaches us in India. The Hindu-Muslim problem out there does not exist. In face of common suffering Indians are one people - one in heart and soul as well as one in Indian birth."(30)
In view of the foregoing gloomy study of the situation in South Africa, the remarks of General Smuts quoted last week in these columns derive an added interest. The picketing referred to by Mr. Andrews is nothing but veiled coercion. If with all the elaborate precautions it did not remain peaceful everywhere in India in 1921, how less likely it is to be peaceful in South Africa, only those who know its white population can realise.
Young India, March 12, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 26, pages 276-77
General Smuts deserves credit for supporting the cause of the Indians in South Africa. But this by itself will not remove their hardship. Their plight is becoming more and more pitiable. European traders are out to destroy completely the Indians` business, the very means of their existence. They are, therefore, now ready openly to attack the trade interests of Indians settled in the Transvaal. India is not in a position to help them. Government has given up all pretence of decency. It sets no store by public opinion in this country. No matter what the result of voting in the Legislative Assembly is, the Government goes its own way. Public opinion in India is of course in favour of their countrymen in South Africa. Whatever is possible will certainly be done here. But I feel it my duty to warn the Indians living in South Africa or other foreign countries that they must in the last resort rely on their own strength. The saying, "One cannot go to heaven except by giving up one`s life" fully applies to their situation.
(From Gujarati)
Navajivan, April 5, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 26, pages 472-73
Here is a cable from the Secretary, British Indian Association, Johannesburg:
"MR. COLLINS, OPPOSITION MEMBER ERMELO, INTRODUCED IN THE ASSEMBLY A BILL PROHIBITING THE GRANT OR RENEWAL OF TRADING OR BUSINESS LICENCES WITHIN SIX MILES TRANSVAAL MUNICIPAL OR TOWNSHIP AREA TO ANY ASIATIC WHEREIN HE IS NOT OWNER OF FIXED PROPERTY, ALSO TO ANY ASIATIC COMPANY CORPORATE OR OTHERWISE. BILL IF PASSED WILL GROSSLY VIOLATE SMUTS-GANDHI AGREEMENT RESPECTING VESTED RIGHTS AND SPELL TOTAL ANNIHILATION AND FINAL EXTERMINATION OF INDIANS. ASSOCIATION EMPHATICALLY PROTESTS AGAINST ITS PASSAGE AND URGES YOU ADOPT MEANS FOR ITS WITHDRAWAL. H. E. THE VICEROY HAS BEEN CABLED."
The cable was received sometime ago but owing to my incessant travelling it has remained unattended to till now. I offer my apologies to the Association. The matter, however, is not stale nor beyond help. This measure is after the style of what General Hertzog introduced and which General Smuts so energetically opposed. In appealing to me, the Association has relied on a broken reed. I can but give publicity to the grievance and hope that the appeal to the Viceroy will not prove fruitless. His Excellency can at least vindicate the position of Indian settlers overseas if he can do nothing else. The proposed Bill is a manifest breach of the Smuts-Gandhi agreement of 1914. It is dishonest to mention Asiatic owners of fixed property in the Transvaal, for it is known to everyone that they cannot become owners of fixed property except in Locations and that they are denied the right of owning fixed property even in Locations. Everyone knows, moreover, that to confine Asiatic trade to Locations is to kill that trade. If extermination of the Asiatic is the goal, the honest course would be to bring in an expatriation bill and challenge the Indian Government to do its worst.
Young India, April 30, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 26, page 563
Lest we forget our status and proper place in the imperial economy, we receive a constant reminder now from England and now from South Africa, or some such place, of what we are... Mr. Malan, the Union Minister in South Africa, tells us that there shall be no equality between Europeans and Indians, and that therefore if he will not kill out the Indian settler, he will squeeze him out of South Africa and will reduce him to such a state that he cannot even think of equality. The Ghetto is his proper place, and menial labour his proper sphere of action. We must be, and remain, a suppressed class of the world.
To mention this evil is not to get rid of it... What to do is the question. Pherozeshah Mehta disapproved even of my going to South Africa. He said that nothing was to be done in South Africa until we had vindicated our position in India. Lokamanya(31)
said much the same thing. "Seek ye first Swaraj and everything will be added unto you" was his refrain. But Swaraj is a result of the sum total of India`s energy. The order of the day is work from without and work from within. It is a long drawn out agony, but there is no new birth without the necessary pains of labour. We must pass through this inevitable life-giving, life-sustaining discipline, fiery though it is.
Our countrymen in South Africa must do the very best they can without flinching. If they have the old spirit of resistance and cohesion in them, and if they think that the moment has arrived, they must take up the cross of suffering. They must be sole judges of their fitness and of the psychological moment for taking the plunge. They must know that public opinion of India is with them. But they will also realise that it is an opinion which is powerless to help them. They must therefore rely upon their own strength and capacity for enduring hardships and in the innate justice of their cause.
Young India, August 6, 1925
The following cable has been received by me from Mr. Amod Bhayat,(32)
President of a mass meeting of Indians held in Durban:
"THE ASIATIC BILL(33) IN THE UNION PARLIAMENT IS FAR REACHING IN ITS RESULTS. IT IS INEQUITOUS AND DISASTROUS TO INDIAN INTERESTS AND IS DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF GANDHI-SMUTS UNDERSTANDING TO RECOGNISE VESTED INTERESTS. THE BILL PROVIDES FOR ALLOCATING RESIDENTIAL AND TRADING AREAS ONLY WITHIN WHICH INDIANS MAY BUY AND LEASE PROPERTY. IN RURAL DISTRICTS INDIANS WILL BE CONFINED TO THIRTY MILES FROM THE COASTLINE WHEREIN AREAS MAY BE DEFINED. THE RESULT WILL BE THAT THE BUSINESS OF THOUSANDS OF INDIANS MUST CEASE ON THE EXPIRY OF PRESENT LEASES. IT AMOUNTS TO COMPULSORY SEGREGATION, DELIBERATE DEPRIVATION OF INDIAN PROPERTY. ULTIMATE AIM IS APPARENTLY REPATRIATION AND CONFISCATION OF RIGHTS. THE RIGHT OF BONA FIDE INDIANS TO ENTER THE UNION IS SERIOUSLY JEOPARDISED. MANY PROVISIONS OF THE BILL WILL ENABLE THE GOVERNMENT TO DECLARE INDIANS AS PROHIBITED IMMIGRANTS AND DOMICILE RIGHTS WILL BE PRACTICALLY FORFEITED. MERE ABSENCE OVER THREE YEARS CAUSES FORFEITURE. THE WIVES AND CHILDREN OF DOMICILED INDIANS CANNOT ENTER THE UNION AFTER FIVE YEARS FROM AUGUST 1925. THOUSANDS EX-INDENTURED INDIANS WHO ARE NOW FOR THIRTY YEARS HERE AND THEIR DESCENDANTS MAY BE DECLARED PROHIBITED IMMIGRANTS AND CANNOT CLAIM DOMICILE. SOUTH AFRICAN BORN INDIANS DOMICILED IN ONE PROVINCE OF THE UNION MUST RETURN TO THE PROVINCE OF THEIR BIRTH, AND THERE ALSO INTO SEGREGATED AREAS. INDIANS BORN HERE COULD ALSO BE DECLARED PROHIBITED IMMIGRANTS IF UNSUITABLE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNION. SUCH PROHIBITED INDIANS WILL LOSE ALL PROPERTY AND VESTED RIGHTS IN THE UNION AND BE DRIVEN AWAY. PROTEST MASS MEETING NATAL INDIANS BEEN CALLED FOR 31ST IN DURBAN. WE RELY UPON YOU FOR CREATING STRONG INFLUENTIAL PUBLIC OPINION SO THAT THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT MAY BE AROUSED INTO DETERMINED ACTION TO PROTECT US. AFFRONT TO INDIAN NATION MUST BE MET WITH DIGNIFIED PROTESTS FROM INDIA. THE INSULT IS GRATUITOUS AND WE RESENT SAME IN A MOST STRENUOUS AND EMPHATIC MANNER. WE IMPLORE YOU TO PRESS INDIAN GOVERNMENT TO GIVE IMMEDIATE PUBLIC EXPRESSION TO ITS ATTITUDE AS SUPINENESS MAY BE MISUNDERSTOOD BY ALL CONCERNED."
Although it has been published in the press, it can bear repetition here. I have also received a copy of the Gazette containing the full text of the Bill. It is a long Bill divided into three chapters, containing 27 sections and a schedule. It occupies 9 foolscap sides closely printed. I do not print the Bill, as without the aid of previous enactments with which it deals and which it modifies or repeals, it is not capable of being understood by the reader. Suffice it to observe here that the cablegram faithfully summarises the restrictions sought to be imposed by the Bill. It reduces the position of the resident Indian population to such an extent that, without the Union Government having to pay any compensation whatsoever, there will be no Indian settlers in South Africa within a few years` time. If the provisions of the Bill are applied with enough stringency, there will be powers given to the administration to freeze out every Indian, no matter what the step may be, in the land of his adoption and even of his birth, for the Bill makes no distinction between Indians born in South Africa and domiciled. The safeguards provided by the Bill are all illusory and can be rendered perfectly nugatory. That the Bill has not yet become law is a matter of little comfort. The Bill is an indication of the determination of the Union Government to starve the Indians out of South Africa. Mr. Malan has made no secret of it. It is a matter of time when every Indian will have left South Africa. Let the reader remember, or know, that the Chinese labourers who were imported for developing the gold mines of Johannesburg, were summarily repatriated when the Government had made up its mind. The Chinese had no voice. So it will be with the Indians unless the Government of India choose to do its duty. Mr. Bhayat has made a pathetic appeal to us here. So far as public opinion is concerned, it is unanimously for the Indian settlers. Unfortunately for them, it is at present ineffective. Such as it is, it will certainly be mobilised for the purpose of preventing the impending spoliation of our countrymen in South Africa in total disregard of the agreement of 1914, which was designed to guarantee the then existing rights of the Indian residents in South Africa.
Young India, September 3, 1925; Collected Works, Volume 28, pages 149-150
1. This statement was published generally in the Indian press.
2. The Class Areas Bill sought to deprive the Indians of their right to trade, residence and ownership of land, and to impose more stringent restrictions on Indian immigration.
3. Indians and Africans were forced to reside in certain areas which were known as "locations."
4 A. A. Paul was General Secretary of the Student Christian Association of India, Burma and Ceylon, with headquareters in Madras.
5. This cable was sent before March 16, 1924. Mrs. Sarojini Naidu (1879-1949), poetess, a leader of the Indian National Congress and a close associate of Gandhiji, was in South Africa at the time. She had been invited by the Indian community in South Africa while she was in Nairobi to preside over the East African Indian Congress.
6. Please see next item indicating that Malays would be exempted.
7. Mrs. Sarojini Naidu quoted this in the course of a speech at a gathering in Cape Town on March 22, 1924.
8. This was published generally in the Indian press. Young India reproduced it under the title "The Class Areas Bill".
10. Mrs. Sarojini Naidu travelled all over South Africa, creating a great impression on all sections of the population and providing encouragement to the Indians. In the course of her tour she suggested a round-table conference to bring about reconciliation between South Africa and India - and this proposal was endorsed by the South African Indian Congress which elected her its President that year.
Mrs. Naidu`s tour was also significant for her support for the unity of the oppressed people in South Africa.
11. A passive resister and associate of Gandhiji in South Africa. Please see item 63.
13. Albert Christopher, who actively participated in the Great March of 1913, later became an advocate and took a lead in forming the South African Indian Congress. He was a prominent leader of the Indian community for many years.
14. The interview was given in Bombay on or before April 6, 1924.
15. Patrick Duncan, member of the South African Cabinet; Governor -General in 1927.
17. For the statement of the Reverend C.F. Andrews substantiating the position taken by Gandhiji, see Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 23, Appendix XII.
18. Please see above, footnote under item 25.
19. The Smuts Governments did not press the Class Areas Bill, pending the general election in June 1924. General Smuts was defeated in the elections and a new Government was formed by General J. B. M. Hertzog, leader of the Nationalist Party which had advocated expulsion of Indians from South Africa.
20. Indians were deprived of the municipal franchise in the Natal by the Natal Boroughs Ordinance, 1924, and the Natal Township Franchise Ordinance, 1925.
21. This message was given in response to a letter from Ismail Ahmed, who was proceeding to the Transvaal from Surat.
23. A deputation led by Sir Dinshaw Petit met the Viceroy on January 25, 1925, to draw his attention to the disabilities of Indians in South Africa.
25. Sorabji Shapurji Adajania. Parsi public worker and passive resister who suffered imprisonment and deportation during the satyagraha campaign in South Africa. Please see item 15 above.
26. A. M. Cachalia, Chairman, Transvaal British Indian Association, who served several terms of imprisonment in the satyagraha. Please see item 18 above.
27. P.K. Naidu, satyagrahi, who suffered imprisonment and deportation. Secretary of the Transvaal British Indian Association. Please see item 63 above.
28. Parsee Rustomjee, a businessmen who served several terms of imprisonment in the satyagraha. Please see item 65 above.
29. Sir Harry Escombe (1838-1899). Leading advocate in Natal. Premier of Natal in 1897.
30. The foregoing article was contributed by the Reverend C. F. Andrews.
31. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Indian leader
32. Amod Bhayat (1859-1931). A founding member of the Natal Indian Congress and leader of the Indian community. A businessman in Pietermaritzburg.
33. The Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill, was introduced in the Union Parliament in July 1925. Dr. D. F. Malan, the Minister of the Interior, told the Parliament:
"I must say that the Bill frankly starts from the general supposition that the Indian, as a race in this country, is an alien element in the population, and that no solution of this question will be acceptable to the country unless it results in a very considerable reduction of the Indian population in this country.... The method which this Bill will propose will be the application of pressure to supplement... the inducement which is held out to Indians to leave the country."