-02_Nagpur Speeches

Nagpur Speeches

THE AIMS OF THE NATIONALIST PARTY

My dear countrymen, when I stopped here on my way to Surat I spoke a few words to you. The Congress had not taken place then. I merely pointed out the course our line of action should take at the Surat Congress. The motives and hopes with which we went to Surat were unfortunately not realised. But we are helpless in the matter. Several partisan papers have already begun to pass remarks such as "The Nationalist Party assembled at Surat solely with the purpose of breaking up the Congress", "It did not want the Congress", and "It had a premeditated intention of wrecking it." But I ask you, What advantage would the Nationalist Party derive from destroying the Congress? The Nationalist Party wanted the Congress; we required it for the purpose of disseminating our nationalist views. What would we gain by breaking it up? Several letters have appeared about the Congress from many leaders of the old party. One of them has remarked that the Bengal Nationalists received from their headquarters a wire to the following effect: "Break up the Congress if everything else fails." We were greatly surprised to hear that such a telegram had been received. Nationalism has no headquarters in any one town. It is neither at Calcutta nor at Poona; it is spread all over the nation. The whole nation is the seat of Nationalism. Since this is so, we have to ask the Moderates what is meant by the expression "headquarters at Calcutta". Who sent that wire? The leaders of the Nationalist Party in Bengal — our leaders — are the very headquarters of Nationalism. From this standpoint, which of our headquarters had been left behind? If we regard the leaders as the headquarters, one of them is at Buxar at present and the other was at Surat! No such telegram was received by the Nationalist Party. The above statement is entirely false. The Nationalist Party did not want to wreck the Congress and it never did. I do not blame anyone. But I ask, What were we to gain by wrecking the Congress? It was not that Government would [not] have been pleased if we had severed our connections with the other party by wrecking the Congress. Where did we get the desire

to rally round the British flag by cutting off our connection with the other party? If we consider the three issues raised in the debate of this year's Congress, it will be possible to decide who was responsible for the wrecking of the Congress.

Every member of any public institution started and managed by the people of any civilized nation is given full liberty to offer his opinion on any question, in accordance with the universally acknowledged rules of all public institutions. No president has the authority to suppress this liberty — this natural right of every member of society. The president is merely a servant of the meeting formed by the coming together of the people who appoint him. There are rules to regulate his conduct. No president should break these rules. He cannot stifle freedom of speech and liberty of opinion. When such is the universally acknowledged rule, who then tried to snatch away the rights of a member? Was it the Nationalist Party or the other party? Who transgressed the universally accepted rule of meetings by not allowing the leader of our party to speak, though timely notice was given by him? Did we do this? Those who say that we went to the Congress with the intention of wrecking it should think over this question.

Another important thing is that the Congress is an institution belonging to all Indians — to all the well-wishers of the nation. Whoever exerts himself for the good of the nation ought to get a place in this institution. Whoever has to push forward the cart of the nation, whoever is desirous of procuring happiness and as much liberty as is possible for his country to get, ought to be able to enter this institution. The ideal of one may be less exalted, while that of another more exalted, and that of the third most exalted. But since "the good of the nation" is the common object of all. everyone ought to be included in that institution. One party may defeat the other on the strength of a majority of votes and establish its own superiority. If the other party has any stamina or mettle, it will live and fight. But none should try to drive away any party from the institution by taking advantage of a local majority formed according to his own wishes. It is clear that the other party had the majority at Surat. Was it not the attempt of the Moderate Party to drive away the Nationalist Party from the Congress from next year by taking advantage of this local majority? Why should the opinion of one party that such is the particular goal of our nation be fastened on to the other party? It is not that the

ultimate aim of our political agitation should be one and the same for all. One may be in advance of the other. Was it not a fact that in the resolution of this year's constitution they were going to fasten on the Nationalist Party a "final goal" which was unacceptable to it? It is a mockery of the opinions of the Nationalists to make them sign a paper containing false principles of Nationalism which are not acceptable to them. Who has the right to thrust his own idea of the "final goal" upon others and, if they do not consent, to drive them out of the meeting? Mr. Gokhale knew that one particular party did not accept as the final goal partial Swarajya and slow reforms. Still, in the draft he had prepared of the constitution, he tried to thrust the final goal of one particular party upon another and to drive out the latter from the Congress. The meaning of the new rule made by Mr. Gokhale was "Accept a certain final goal, otherwise you have no place in the Congress and out you go." I ask those who say that our intention was to wreck the Congress, Is it not necessary to include people of different views in the National Congress? Was it not the intention of the other party to drive out from the Congress those whose final goal is different from that of Mr. Gokhale, but who still belong to that party which has national well-being at heart? Only those resolutions that are universally acceptable or acceptable to many will be passed. But none should attempt forcibly to eject another because his views do not tally with his own. Did the Nationalist Parly make any such attempt? Who were intolerant towards those who held views different from their own? To whom did the presence of another party become unbearable in the Congress, the Moderates or the Extremists? This trick of driving out the opposite party was played by the Moderates and not by the Extremists. When this is so, did the Nationalist Party break up the National Congress?

The third important question is with regard to the retrogression of the Congress. We, the Nationalists, went to Surat to help the Congress progress by means of spiritedness, steadiness, and self-reliance. Our desire was, and is, that the fixed determination — that austere vow — which the Bengali nation has resolved upon in its helplessness might spread to other provinces as well, and the people of those provinces might help us in our contest. Our ambition was to get tangible help from other provinces in this our peaceful but determined contest. But we found all but one of the subjects omitted from

this year's resolutions published in the name of the Reception Committee. These were subjects for which we fought so zealously in the Calcutta Congress. What then of pushing the Congress forward? We became anxious to see whether it would remain where it was. Subjects were entirely omitted, and we cannot say whether they were introduced after making sweeping changes in them and rendering them vague as soon as an objection from the Nationalists was anticipated, or whether the subjects which were thus mutilated and with the names suppressed were put in from the beginning. But on the list which was sent to Bombay on the 25th December 1907, but which was given to us on the 26th, that is, after the opening of the Congress, we found the subjects greatly mutilated.

Mr. Gokhale states that the changes they introduced in the resolutions of last year were merely trivial and verbal and were made to make the meaning clear and to put them in better language. It is surprising to find that a man like Mr. Gokhale says so! The resolution of Swarajya was passed last year at Calcutta. I have already told you how the final goal, which was clearly laid down in that resolution, has been rendered doubtful and insignificant by the introduction of a creed resolution by Mr. Gokhale. The resolution about Swadeshi was also found greatly pruned down. What great efforts the Nationalists had to make last year simply to introduce the words "even at some sacrifice"! By the introduction of these words the compromise was effected last year. These words were acceptable to both parties. Mr. Gokhale says they were inadvertently omitted. We could not reconcile with the past history of these words the fact of their omission by mistake or forgetfulness by Mr. Gokhale. Last year, when the people of both parties had assembled to settle their differences of opinion, I also had the opportunity to be present. Mr. Tilak, Ashwini Babu and myself were the three representatives for our side. The opposite side was represented by Mr. Gokhale and Mr. Madan Mohan Malaviya. After a discussion between us five it was settled to add the words "even at some sacrifice". We could never believe that these words, which had been purposely put in, were omitted inadvertently. It cannot be said that we are doing an injustice to Mr. Gokhale if we infer, by looking at the radical changes made to the second resolution, that the words had been purposely omitted. How do we know that Mr. Gokhale, one of the General Secretaries, could not find out from

the files of any newspaper the correct resolution? It is true that we did not think that Mr. Gokhale might forget the words even though they were introduced in the committee of the above-mentioned five persons.

Mr. Gokhale made such sweeping changes as would destroy the meaning of the boycott resolution and would make the weapon of boycott adopted by the Bengalis appear to apply only to English-made goods. The boycott movement inaugurated in Bengal has a wider significance than the boycott of British goods resorted to in Bengal. Taking the word "movement" to mean activity, Babu Bipin Chandra Pal expressed the hope before last year's Congress that the boycott movement would travel from one point to another, from one village to another, and from one province to another. Was it not the intention of Mr. Gokhale to cripple this resolution by altering its meaning? Even a superficial observer can see that the agitation in Bengal was not confined to British goods. When Government proclaimed the partition, we distinctly informed Government that this partition was not acceptable to us. We adopted a universal boycott, which showed our disapproval of the partition. It is known throughout India that our boycott means passive resistance. If the boycott was with regard to English goods only, then why have honourable and spirited Bengali gentlemen resigned their seats in the Councils? Were the boycott in Bengal confined to goods only or merely to a commercial boycott, where was the necessity of boycotting Government schools? It is true that Bengal has boycotted English goods. But that was merely a subsidiary part of the all-pervading boycott. One thing must be borne in mind here, that the boycott of foreign goods is merely a commercial one, while that which is applied to English goods is of a political nature. We have no necessity to apply these political weapons to any other country besides Britain. Why should we revenge ourselves upon America and Germany for the oppression caused to us by the people of Britain? The reason we do not buy or will not buy German and American goods in the future will be for the sake of increasing Indian trades and industries. But there is a political reason besides this for the boycott of British goods; it is to make the brethren of our oppressors feel the pinch.

The boycott adopted by Bengal is of a different type, its area and its limits are far-reaching. The meaning of our boycott is that we

should not be of any help to Government in its administration carried on by unjust and uncontrolled authority. This is so plain that it could be seen by anyone possessing eyes. Mr. Gokhale knew that we had started such a boycott. He purposely tried to create the impression that the Bengal boycott was directed against English goods only. Or his intention might have been to show that the Surat Congress at least accepted Bengal's boycott to that extent. The changes that were made in the last year's resolution were very important and of a retrograde nature, from the standpoint of the Bengal Nationalists at least. And yet Mr. Gokhale says that the changes introduced were merely trivial and verbal. To him the changes may be very trivial, but it is impossible for the Bengal Nationalists to regard them as such. We did not at all like the flimsy picture drawn by Mr. Gokhale of the all-pervading boycott for the spread of which we — and particularly the people of Eastern Bengal — had to suffer so much. Boys received stripes, many of them suffered physical pangs in jail, and several others gave up everything. We did not like Mr. Gokhale's intention of giving a commercial appearance to our boycott. We fought zealously in order to secure sincere sympathy and suffered prosecutions, and this mode of passive resistance received support from the National Congress last year. Mr. Gokhale, by taking away that support, rendered the resolution ineffectual; yet in the face of this open attempt, he says that the changes made were merely verbal.

He substituted the words "independent system" for the more important words "on national lines and under national control" in the resolution on national education. Mr. Gokhale says that the word "national" occurred thrice in the resolution and this did not sound well, so the changes in the wording were made. Mr. Gokhale is a scholar of English, but we see a particular motive in repeating the word "national" thrice. An independent system of education may include education imparted by semi-government schools or colleges which receive government aid. But the words "on national lines" and "under national control" appeared to Mr. Gokhale as meaningless and superfluous, so he corrected the bad English sentence by putting it in good English in order to obtain some elegance of expression. There would have been no harm done, except slightly lowering Mr. Gokhale's knowledge of English, if he had allowed the bad English to stand, as he knew that the Nationalist Party would be

displeased, and actually was displeased, at the change of language -this trivial verbal change made solely with a view to improving the elegance of style. The object of the Congress is not to enable men to write English correctly and elegantly. If slightly bad language were to satisfy all, what harm was there in allowing it to stand? It would be regarding the Nationalist Party as ignorant and dull indeed to say that such a material change in the resolution would be accepted by it as merely verbal.

These three questions are before those who say that our intention was to wreck the Congress. Who tried to destroy unconstitutionally the rights of members to speak? The Nationalist Party? Who made the ignoble attempt to drop out or drive out people of a particular opinion from the Congress by making rules partial to the constitutional party? The Nationalist Party? Whose desire was it to put back the Congress by making changes in the resolutions passed universally on the strength of a local majority? The Nationalist Party? These are important points. This year's fight in the Congress was between the ordinary people and unrestricted authority. It was a fight for principle in one way. How is it possible to put up with the arbitrariness of some people in a Congress which itself passes resolutions against the oppression of Government? The confusion that took place in the Congress was due to the peculiar circumstances of this year. It is not the fault of Mr. Tilak or of the Nationalist Party. Whether there will be compromise or not. or whether it will be possible to have any, will be decided by time alone. Our Nationalist Party has to perform a very great task in the future. There are mountains of obstacles and difficulties in the way. Immense troubles will have to be suffered, hard work will have to be done and everything will have to be sacrificed: a great many will have to sacrifice their lives; then only will we be able to obtain that which is our final and exalted goal, the realisation of all happiness, the final achievement of all that is to be achieved and the desired object of all — Swarajya.

I shall speak tomorrow on what is to be done in future.

OUR WORK IN THE FUTURE

My countrymen, those who have minutely observed with open

eyes the agitation started two years ago, must have been convinced that the wonderful force of this agitation, this revolution in ideas, and these extreme changes in behaviour must have the support of some unseen wonderful supernatural and divine force. This movement is not an ordinary one, its regulator and leader is certainly not a human being, and it has the support of the best force in the universe. All the revolutions in the world have been brought about by this wonderful force. Some extraordinary superhuman strength has suddenly become visible in the nation. Those people — a handful of madmen — who started this agitation were insignificant beings. This agitation was not started by very experienced leaders. Now those leaders have had to fall in with the current. Along this current of agitation started by obscure men many a great leader is now being carried. Within the last two years a public awakening which had not been created for centuries has been produced by this agitation. Those who took part in it were not necessarily learned men. They were ordinary men like others. They did commit mistakes and blunders, but the wonderful thing is that the progress of the movement, instead of being retarded by these mistakes, went on increasing unimpeded. In short, the full vigour of this movement cannot be comprehended by us poor human creatures. Some ordinary people, by getting up on this wave of awakening, have attained an exalted position and become objects of adoration of the entire nation by means of their earnestness, burning patriotism, unparalleled self-sacrifice, and devotion to duty.

The force of this movement was not diminished by the inflamed anger of the other party, by dissensions among ourselves, by the slander-ings of back-biters, by the treacheries of those who reveal the secrets of the house, and who are guilty of incest with their motherland. This awakening is shoving away everything that comes in its way like the current of a river that sweeps away everything. Many wonderful religious revolutions have taken place in the different nations on this earth. This is also one of that sort. This revolution is taking place in the political atmosphere. This is the beginning of the political enhancement of a nation. The Indian community, by taking its seat on this current, is proving itself an instrument for carrying out God's wishes and is fulfilling His command naturally. There is no doubt that this commotion in the interior of the community will surely bring about some divine work. This agitation is

certainly not propelled by human will. We went to Surat with a particular motive. We went to the Congress in order to propagate our views and our doctrines. But there something different happened. The other party assembled there with the same purpose, but they were also disappointed! How can we say that this sudden split has not been brought about by God's design for the good of the nation? Impossible to fathom are the motives of God and impregnable is His Lila. Unity is wanted, unity is essential. Is it God's intention to regenerate the nation by means of this split? Perhaps; it may be; who can say? That a compromise should be effected between the two parties is the desire of all. Who can say what is going to happen in the future?

The work which has to be performed by the Nationalist Party hereafter is very formidable. The strength and vitality of our party will be tested today. The strength of our party will be tried now. We ought to ascertain today exactly the nature of the work we have undertaken, our destination, the obstacles and pitfalls in the way, the weaknesses we possess, and the course we should adopt. Our dissensions were merely intellectual discussions till now. We required them to infuse life into the body of the nation, — our strength was limited, and we expended it in our debates. Nobody estimated correctly what strength we, our nation, possessed. None attempted to concentrate this power. Many do not yet believe in the existence of this power and are not convinced; many people are whisked about; for this reason the two factions have cropped up. May it not be God's intention to get the work done through our party and through it alone? May it not be God's desire to find out the extent of our powers? The present time is not for slow progress. It is one of great quickness, extreme briskness and progress. Everyone should rush forward at this moment. Courage is wanted. Daring is required. Boldness is necessary. A writer at the time of the French Revolution said, "There is nothing to be dreaded. Run forward with firm devotion, go on, run on, push on!" In Germany and Japan there was such a rapid progress. Perhaps our attempts to bring about compromise may prove fruitless. We ought, therefore, to settle on what we have to gain or obtain.

The way of the Moderates, the former devotees of the Congress, was different. They did not intend to change entirely the present arrangement of government. They did not want to progress. They

wanted to make changes in the existing system of government. They did not require courage. But by their method the accomplishment of the object did not take place. It is impossible to obtain your rights. Simple good government cannot allay the thirst for Swarajya. If we were to throw our political responsibility, our political duty upon others, it would be nothing but political death to us. That would be the greatest calamity. Those who care for their safety and comfort ought not to place their feet in our path. We do not want those who spare themselves. How can you procure a kingdom in the possession of the foreigners through their kindness? Your interests and theirs are entirely different. Why should those who have give by bits? Government will not give us the true rights of Swarajya even by degrees. It is afraid that if some rights are given, more will be demanded. To say that we shall compel Government to give us our rights is as dangerous as to cherish an ambition for absolute Swarajya. We must adopt whatever remedies other nations of the world adopted to attain Swarajya, having regard to the present conditions. A final goal such as the colonial form of Swarajya is both inconvenient and vague. The effect of the agitation is also partial and indistinct. If the final goal is very high, exalted and inspiring, then only will the workers be filled with enthusiasm and activity. Hence we ought to have a high ideal before us. We have to travel towards this ideal of absolute Swarajya. We are often ridiculed that a desire for Swarajya is nothing but a dream, a castle in the air, because our community has become weak, sapless, deranged and rickety. Where in our community is that courage which is required for the performance of such a great work, that capacity, that self-sacrifice and those material or spiritual remedies? Some people advise that because the achievement of Swarajya is beyond human strength, we must wait for some centuries and work before we are able to speak of Swarajya; but no nation ever came into prominence by helping a foreign government. Lessons on independence must be learnt only in the school of liberty. If we wait for centuries the weakness of our nation will increase. We cannot afford to wait. If you want to acquire Swarajya, try for it now; otherwise give up the name Swarajya once for all.

The present agitation in India sprang up suddenly in Bengal. It has entirely changed the whole face of Bengal. There is an inspiration created in the hearts of everyone by divine promptings. It must

be a divine arrangement; otherwise how could such a superhuman work be achieved within two years by the agitation carried on by a few obscure men? Perhaps you may not have examined carefully the agitation in Bengal. It was started by a few people first. People used to regard these originators as madcaps. But these very madcaps spread Swadeshism, preached boycott and established gymnasiums. This spread the conflagration of the agitation everywhere. The young generation assisted the movement: the whole of Bengal became alive and pricked up its ears. The leaders had no faith in boycott, yet they could not hold their own against the current of public opinion. They joined the boycott movement. Government officers were terrified. They began their repressive policy in order to break the bones of agitation.

Students were the first to bear the brunt of the oppression and it was they who strenuously pushed on the sale of Swadeshi goods. Fines were imposed upon them for this. They were punished and even were rusticated; but since they did not want to give up their Swadeshi vows, they left the schools. National schools had to be started. They were opened at Rangpur, Dacca and other places. The National Council of Education of Bengal was established. As soon as the necessity was felt, the schools were started without much help or materials. Though there were no funds, no school buildings, no furniture, yet, through the help of the Bengali nation, all these institutions are in a flourishing condition.

People are suffering immense troubles, undergoing imprisonments and whipping. Till now the people regarded the Bengali nation as impotent. The opinion of a certain English gentleman is that the Bengalis are well-versed in education and every individual among them is intellectual and dutiful, but from the political standpoint they are lifeless; they cannot do anything. But since the Swadeshi movement this condition has changed. The difference between speaking and actually doing has disappeared. All the patriots are, as it were, one person and are moved by the same thoughts. Our younger generation seems to have lost regard for their lives. The example of Moulvi Leakat Hussain is not the only one. There are many such examples. Moulvi Leakat Hussain does not even know Bengali properly. But the endeavours and self-sacrifice made by this brave and noble-minded person are indescribable! There are three prosecutions

pending against him at present. He not only accepted with a smile three years' imprisonment recently inflicted on him, but expressed his obligation to the Magistrate for having afforded him an opportunity to serve his country! He has gone to jail perhaps never to return again. The story of the Yugantar newspaper is very wonderful. No sooner was one editor sentenced to one year's imprisonment than another took up his place. The moment the second man was prosecuted and sentenced, a third one came forward and willingly accepted the responsibility of editorship, in spite of the warning of the Magistrate! He was followed by a fourth person and thus the paper was continued. Whenever any editor was punished, his great concern was for the future issue of the paper; he did not think of his wife and children first. In this way the Yugantar still continues. And so the Bengalis are sacrificing their self-interest and their all in accordance with the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita: "Thy business is with the action only, never with its fruits."

The Nationalist Party in Bengal did not shrink at all. Italy was merely a name before in the geography of the world. It became a mighty nation in the course of twenty years. The same thing is going on in Bengal. The divine splendour of Bengali youths is clearly shining forth. The divine element has manifested itself. As soon as Government removes one, one hundred others take his place. Every Bengali patriot feels inclined to sacrifice his own self for the good of thirty crores of people. This idea ought to spread throughout the country. The misery of the Indian nation must be looked upon as the misery of everyone, and the pleasure of the nation must be regarded by him as his own. One ought to feel a pride in bearing pain and anguish. To suffer such pangs is to repay one's debt to the nation.

Nations do not prosper without self-sacrifice. None should turn back like a woman from repaying his debt to the nation. We do not want laziness, legerdemain or acting. Matured circumspection, limited and carefully adopted remedies will not do; one should rush forth. The self-respect of the nation is our religion, self-sacrifice is our only action or duty. We ought to give proper scope for the divine qualities in us to shine forth. Trifling emotions ought to be given up. Do not be afraid even if you are required to die. Do not retreat; bear pain for the sake of the nation. God is your support. If you do this, the Indian nation will, in an instant, get back its former splendour and glory.

It will take its place at the side of the independent nations of the world; it will educate other nations; it will shed the lustre of true knowledge, and it will inculcate the principles of Vedanta. Our nation will come forward to benefit the human race and the whole world. Before it the whole world will tremble! But when? Only when we all are prepared to repay our debt to the nation.

COMMERCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL SWARAJYA

My countrymen, I am greatly obliged to you for the reception you have given me. This is not respect paid to me, but to our motherland through me as medium. The people of whatever place I have been in have shown a wonderful enthusiasm which clearly proves that national sentiments are enkindled in their bosoms. The thought of what we were two years ago, what things were liked by the people then, and what a change has taken place in the mental condition is very encouraging.

From the time the Swadeshi movement was started by the Bengalis, we notice an exalted and self-sacrificing spirit in the conduct of the people. It is not that there was no Swadeshi movement before. Rich Bengalis had started Swadeshi companies before the said agitation: as soon as these companies came into existence the European companies began to cause loss to them by reducing their own rates, and at last they began to request people to take their (English) goods free. That earnestness for Swadeshi, that particular resolve to buy nothing but Swadeshi goods, however dear, did not exist then. For want of the support of a national awakening, the Swadeshi trades did not thrive then. People have accepted Swadeshism in total disregard of the quality and price of the Swadeshi goods because of the awakening of the national life throughout in the shape of the Swadeshi and boycott movements started on the pretext of the partition of Bengal. Though the rates of the Swadeshi navigation companies were two or three times greater than those of the foreign companies, yet the former were patronized by the patriots. This is due to the development of the new force.

It is well known to all what efforts were made by the young men of Bengal. It is they who worked for the boycott. They purchased

Swadeshi cloth and sold it at cost price without taking any profit from the villagers in the mofussil. If at that time the Bombay merchants and mill-owners and the Marwaris of Calcutta had co-operated with us sincerely, the Swadeshi and the boycott movements would have been in a different condition today. The mill-owners of Bombay took advantage of the Swadeshi movement and enhanced their rates, thus putting impediments in our way and compelling us to buy the same goods dearly. We had to work hard to command the market because our Marwari brethren did not give up their profession as brokers and continued to sell English goods.

It is very necessary to boycott English goods. Did not the English boycott your goods? A hundred years ago, your trades and industries were in a flourishing condition arid your goods, after satisfying the demands of the whole of India, used to be exported to other countries. But by making all sorts of crooked laws, they managed to shut out your goods from our markets and, on the contrary, afforded all sorts of facilities enabling the foreign merchants to flood the markets with their own goods. Our Marwari brethren ought to have understood this. They purposely, or through obstinacy born of ignorance, caused a loss to the country, so God has punished them for it. All-powerful God brought down calamity on them, considering that those who acted against the interests of His children will never come to their senses unless they are punished. The Marwaris are mostly Jains. Government has taken possession of Parsvanath Hill, and on the spot where people used to flock for worship, there will be bungalows erected in which there will be dancing and tamasas, and the eating and drinking of prohibited food and drinks. What does Government care for the entreaties, petitions, and deputations of the Jains? God must have designed this to serve as an eye-opener to these Marwaris and to show them how much regard those English have for their welfare — the English for whose benefit the Marwaris acted treacherously towards their own people. The Marwaris ought to take a lesson from the calamity and be prepared to act in accordance with God's design.

See what the foreigners are doing. See what troubles thousands of your brethren who have gone to Africa to attain a commercial balance by making up the commercial loss sustained in India are suffering. Very oppressive and inhuman laws are inflicted upon them, they are being treated like beasts, and devilish attempts are in progress

to destroy their commercial superiority here. It is therefore necessary to take in our hands all the trades and industries, and our rich people should gird their loins for the same purpose. We ought to change the ways or methods of expenditure. These attempts to secure commercial Swarajya must be vigorously carried out. There will be difficulties and losses in attaining this, but it cannot be helped. Such troubles must be suffered until the demerits of the nation are exhausted. There ought to be institutions started in order to impress these ideas on the minds of the young. It is a good sign that attempts are being made to start schools for national training in our Bengal and in your town. Many such institutions are coming into existence at several places in Bengal. We do not want the unnecessary parrot-like education which wastes away the strength and intellect of our young men. It is much better to have a harmonious combination of self-protection and patriotism, but we do not want for our movement that poisonous education imparted to our children which has a blighting effect on the ideas of political morality and national greatness by creating a hankering in them for the subordinate posts under Government in order to earn their livelihood. Education should be imparted on national lines and under national control. True national education consists in awakening in one's mind the highest ideas of national activity, which make one forget oneself and feel that he does not exist separately from his country. The expressions "national lines" and "national control" are very important, and therefore we insisted on having them in the resolution of the National Congress. It is not possible to have national education without the help of the rich and the learned men. If the money of the opulent is utilised in this direction, it will be very well spent. All should work heartily in order to secure a future generation that is sturdy —- both physically and mentally. This wave of political ideas ought to reach the remotest, unknown regions of the country. There is no good in looking back. When you secure commercial Swarajya, and educational Swarajya, then the way to political Swarajya will be easy!