PIONEERS OF SATYAGRAHA

Indian South Africans Defy Racist Laws, 1907-1914

by

E.S. Reddy

Kalpana Hiralal
 CONTENTS

PART I
THE RESISTANCE
I. Introduction
II. Prelude to Defiance
III. Passive Resistance in the Transvaal
IV. The Final Stage of the Struggle, 1913-14
V. Negotiations and Settlement
VI. Women in the Frontline
VII. Prison Conditions and Deportations
VIII. National and International Support to the Struggle
IX. World Significance of the Satyagraha in South Africa

PART II
THE RESISTERS
I. Names of Resisters
II. Biographical Notes on Some of the Resisters
III. Workers Killed, Wounded or Imprisoned during the 1913 Strike
IV. Note on Helpers in the Struggle
V. Bibliography
 INTRODUCTION
The Indian people in South Africa, under the leadership of Gandhi, staged the first non-violent
mass movement which involved defiance of unjust laws, courting of imprisonment, bonfires,
boycotts, marches and strikes. It brought together people of different religions and linguistic
groups, as well as different social classes.

In the Transvaal, a province of South Africa,1 three thousand Indians, or more than one-third of
the adult males, and even some children, went to prison and suffered privations between 1908
and 1911. Over a hundred were deported to Bombay and Colombo, often leaving their families
without support. When the struggle was extended to the rest of South Africa in 1913, nearly forty
thousand workers, or over half of the adult Indian population of Natal, struck work. Almost ten
thousand were imprisoned, some in mining compounds. Some workers were killed and many
injured. Many families were reduced to poverty.

The suffering, sacrifice and determination of the resisters resulted in the attainment of the main
demands of the community.

This struggle secured the understanding and sympathy of many whites in South Africa – a few of
whom suffered imprisonment for their active support - and of opinion in Britain, the
metropolitan country. It was supported by an unprecedented solidarity movement all over India
uniting people of all religions, princes and commoners, rich and poor, elder statesman and
students. Sanctions were considered for the first time as a means to combat racist oppression in
South Africa.

This mass movement in South Africa was a precursor to the later mass struggles for the
liberation of the country. In 1946-48, two thousand Indian men and women went to prison in
protest against the “Ghetto Act”. They were joined by seventy whites, Coloured people and
Africans who demonstrated their solidarity. Racial discrimination in South Africa and resistance
against it received international attention as a result of India’s complaint to the United Nations.
The Indian passive resistance was followed in 1952 by the Defiance Campaign in which eight
thousand people of all racial origins courted imprisonment. These non-violent mass movements
encouraged the formation of movements of solidarity which grew in strength as repression and
resistance escalated in South Africa.

The mass democratic movement of the 1980s in South Africa represented a new stage in the
mobilisation of the people and involved unprecedented general strikes under severe repression.
The international solidarity movement had become powerful and effective sanctions began to be

1
Transvaal had been under Afrikaner (Boer) administration, as South African Republic, until the British occupied
the region during the Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902. It was a British Colony until 1910. It became a province of the
Union of South Africa when it was formed in 1910.
imposed on apartheid South Africa. The apartheid regime was forced to release prisoners, end
repression and negotiate with the leaders of the struggle for a transition to a democratic society.

Gandhi developed his philosophy of satyagraha during the course of the struggle in South
Africa.2 With the benefit of his experience in South Africa, he was able to lead a mass movement
of millions of people in India for independence from colonial rule.

The movement in India against the mightiest empire of the time attracted world attention. It
inspired leaders of many struggles against oppression, and for peace. Non-violent resistance
became a major force in international affairs.

Yet, no history of the movement in South Africa exists except for Satyagraha in South Africa,
dictated by Gandhi in prison from 1922 to 1924 and completed while recuperating from illness
after release. He said in the preface to that book:

I have neither the time nor the inclination to write a regular detailed history. My only object in writing this
book is that it may be helpful in our present struggle, and serve as a guide to any regular historian who may
arise in the future.3

The struggle for freedom in India was at that time in an ebb. Serious differences had developed
in the national movement for freedom. Gandhi felt it necessary to educate his followers on his
concept of satyagraha and persuade them that there was no reason for despair. He said:

The reader will note South African parallels for all our experiences in the present struggle to date. He will
also see from this history that there is so far no ground whatever for despair in the fight that is going on.
The only condition of victory is a tenacious adherence to our programme. 4

Because of his purpose in writing this book, he glossed over the opposition he faced within the
Indian community in South Africa, the mistakes that were made and corrected, and the extent of
the suffering of the passive resisters. He could mention only a few of the resisters. He explained:

The names of several other friends who joined this “Asiatic invasion” have been left out as I am writing
this without consulting any papers, and I hope they will excuse me for it. I am not writing these chapters
to immortalise names but to explain the secret of Satyagraha…5

Most of the other satyagrahis have remained almost unknown to this day.

2
Gandhi considered that the term “passive resistance” did not adequately describe the struggle in South Africa. In
January 1908, he invented the term “satyagraha” as more appropriate. But the English section of Indian Opinion, his
weekly newspaper, continued to use “passive resistance” as it was better known while the Gujarati section used
“satyagraha”. We use the two terms interchangeably, but we prefer “non-violent resistance” as the struggle was not
passive and as “satyagraha” became for Gandhi an ideal rather than a description of the struggle. For further
discussion on the use of the terms, please see the last chapter, “World Significance of the Satyagraha in South
Africa”.
3
MK Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa (Ahmedabad, Navajivan Publishing House, 1961), pp. xiv-xv. As the
book was written from memory it contains some errors.
4
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. xiv
5
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 217
Apart from Gandhi himself, only two of the satyagrahis – Bhawani Dayal and Raojibhai M. Patel
– have published their reminiscences. They participated in the struggle only in the final phase in
1913 and were soon imprisoned. Bhawani Dayal’s book - Dakshin Africa [Ke] Satyagraha Ka
Itihas, 1916 – is in Hindi and hard to find. Raojibhai Patel’s Gandhiji ni Sadhana was published
in Gujarati and translated into Hindi. An English “adaptation” has numerous errors.6 Pragji
Khandubhai Desai, one of the leading satyagrahis, has written only a short article.7 Prabhudas
Gandhi, then a child in the Phoenix Settlement, wrote his reminiscences in Gujarati and a
condensed edition was published in English.8 No biography of a participant in the struggle has
been published, except for two recent biographies of Hermann Kallenbach.9

Numerous biographies of Gandhi deal with the satyagraha, but they are centred around Gandhi,
his leadership and spiritual development. The satyagraha is treated more as an Indian struggle
rather than an important event in South African history. Sushila Nayar, in her large volume on
Mahatma Gandhi – Satyagraha at Work, mentions only a few Indian resisters while devoting a
long chapter to biographies of European sympathisers.10

Several studies by scholars since 1980 describe the socio-economic background to the Indian
resistance in South Africa in the early twentieth century, and stress the role of the masses.11
Feminist analyses of the movement by Kalpana Hiralal and R. Mongia highlight the role of
Indian women and debunk the myth of docile Indian women in the diaspora.12 Surendra Bhana
and Shukla-Bhatt have published poems written in Gujarati, English and Hindi during the
movement and produced an interesting literary study of the struggle.13 But none of them identify
many of the resisters and their role in the struggle.

6
Raojibhai M. Patel, The Making of the Mahatma based on “Gandhijini Sadhana - Adaptation in English (of
Dakshina Afrikake Satyagrahaka Itihasa) by Abid Shamsi (Ahmedabad: Ravindra R. Patel, 1990).
7
Pragji Desai, “Satyagraha in South Africa” in Chandrashanker Shukla, Reminiscences of Gandhiji by Forty-eight
contributors (Bombay: Vora and Co., 1951).
8
Prabhudas Gandhi, My Childhood with Gandhiji (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1957).
9
Isa Sarid and Christian Bartolf, Hermann Kallenbach (Berlin: Gandhi-Informations-Zentrum, 1997); Shimon Lev,
Soulmates: The Story of Mahatma Gandhi and Hermann Kallenbach (Hyderabad, Orient Black Swan, 2012).
10
Sushila Nayar, Mahatma Gandhi, Volume IV: Satyagraha at Work (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House,
1989), pp. 450-85.
11
S. Bhana and U. Dhupelia, “Passive Resistance among Indian South Africans’ unpublished paper presented to the
conference of the South African Historical Association, University of Durban-Westville, July 1981; J. Beall and D.
North-Coombes, “The 1913 Natal Indian Strike: The Social and Economic Background to Passive Resistance,
Journal of Natal and Zulu History, vi, 1983, pp. 48-81; M. Swan, “The 1913 Natal Indian Strike”, Journal of
Southern African Studies, 10, 1984, pp. 239-58. A. Desai and G. Vahed, Inside Indenture – A South African Story,
1860-1914 (Durban: Madiba Publishers, 2008). See also Ramachandra Guha, Gandhi before India (London and
New Delhi: Penguin, 2013) based on extensive archival research.
12
R. Mongia, “Gender and the Historiography of Gandhian Satyagraha in South Africa, Gender and History”, Vol.
18, 2006, pp. 130-149; K. Hiralal, “Rethinking Gender and Agency in the Satyagraha Movement of 1913”, Journal
of Social Sciences, Vol. 25, 2010, pp. 71-80, “’Our Plucky Sisters who have dared to fight’ - Indian Women and
the Satyagraha Movement in South Africa”, The Oriental Anthropologist , Vol. 9, No. 1, 2009, pp. 1-22.
13
S. Bhana and N. Shukla-Bhatt, A Fire That Blazed in the Ocean – Gandhi and the Poems of Satyagraha in South
Africa, 1909-1911 (New Delhi: Promilla & Co., 2011).
We have written a short history of the struggle which describes the inspirational leadership of
Gandhi as well as the contributions of other leaders and individual resisters, and have provided
available information on hundreds of resisters. We hope further research and contributions of
descendants of the satyagrahis will lead to a more detailed history of that great struggle of the
Indian South Africans.

The Course of the Struggle

The struggle was confined to the Transvaal until 1911 and was directed against the Asiatic
Registration Act and the discriminatory provisions of the Immigration Restriction Act which
restricted immigration of even former residents of the Colony who left during the Anglo-Boer
War. It was resumed in 1913 throughout the Union of South Africa, especially as the courts
declared most Indian marriages invalid and the Government failed to fulfil its promise to abolish
the £3 tax on former indentured workers, their wives and children.

The struggle went through three phases: (a) from the decision at a mass meeting on 11
September 1906 to defy the Asiatic Ordinance to the provisional agreement with General Smuts
on 30 January 1908; (b) from the renewal of resistance in July 1908 to the provisional settlement
with General Smuts in May 1911; and (c) from 15 September 1913 to the passage of the Indians
Relief Act in June 1914. The first two phases were in the Transvaal and the last in Natal and the
Cape as well.

In August 1906 the Transvaal Government published a draft Asiatic Ordinance requiring the
Asiatics (mainly Indians and about a thousand Chinese) to register again. It contained
humiliating provisions: they had to provide ten finger prints and show the registration certificates
on demand by police officers. The Ordinance was replaced by an Act of the Transvaal
Parliament in 1907 when the Colony received self-government.

The Hamidia Islamic Society and the British Indian Association (BIA) 14 organised a huge mass
meeting on 11 September 1906 to protest against the Ordinance. On the proposal of Haji Habib,
a merchant and community leader in Pretoria, the community took an oath not to register and to
suffer imprisonment until the law was repealed. H.O. Ally, Chairman of the Hamidia Islamic
Society, seconded the proposal with a rousing speech. By the end of November, when
registration closed, only 545 had registered.

Soon after, an Immigration Restriction Act came into force, making it almost impossible for
former Asiatic residents of the Transvaal to enter the Colony15 and prohibiting further
immigration by Asiatics. Licences were refused to traders and hawkers unless they produced
registration certificates.
14
The Hamidia Islamic Society represented the Muslim merchants who were the majority of Indians in the
Transvaal and relatively more well-to-do. The British Indian Association, set up by Gandhi, was open to all Indians.
15
Thousands of Indians had left the Transvaal during the Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902, and many of them were
unable to return under the British administration which followed. Indian Opinion, 31 August 1907.
The Government began to arrest those it considered leaders of the resistance. They defied orders
by the courts to leave the Transvaal and were sentenced to two or three months of imprisonment.
By the end of January 1908, nearly two hundred Indians and some Chinese were in prison.

Albert Cartwright, an editor, helped arrange a compromise which was confirmed on 30 January
1908 when General Smuts, the Colonial Secretary, invited Gandhi, the Secretary of the British
Indian Association then in prison, for talks. Under the compromise, Indians would register
voluntarily and would not be harassed by the police. They would be allowed to trade without
licences until the Parliament met again in June. The prisoners were released and pending
prosecutions were withdrawn.

Almost all Indians and Chinese registered voluntarily, but the Government did not repeal the
Asiatic Act. Negotiations with the Government by Gandhi, on behalf of the Indian community,
broke down as the Government rejected the requests that it repeal the Asiatic Act, amend the
Immigration Restriction Act to make it of general application, and allow the immigration of a
few educated Indians such as doctors, lawyers, accountants, teachers and priests needed by the
Indian community.

Resistance was resumed and on 16 August registration certificates and licences were burnt in a
huge cauldron at a mass meeting of Indians.

While resistance in the first phase was defended on religious grounds because of the oath taken
on 11 September 1906, it was now increasingly seen as a struggle for the honour of India and the
dignity of Indians in South Africa.

About two thousand persons courted arrest within the next year. Gandhi brought several
educated persons and former residents into the Transvaal from Natal to claim their right to enter
the Colony and court imprisonment.

The authorities resorted to stringent repression. The courts routinely sentenced resisters to the
maximum penalty with hard labour. Some merchants were fined, without the option of prison,
and their goods were auctioned. Scores of Indians were deported to Bombay and Colombo, far
from their ancestral homes.

By late 1909, the number of determined satyagrahis dropped to less than one hundred. But the
Government of the Union of South Africa16 came under great pressure from India and Britain. It
decided to calm the situation before the next Imperial Conference in London. Gandhi and Smuts
held discussions and reached a provisional settlement in May 1911. Passive resistance was
suspended and the resisters were released from prison.

But the Government did not implement the settlement, partly because of opposition in
Parliament. A new and more serious issue arose in 1913 when the courts declared that marriages

16
The Cape, Natal, the Transvaal and the Orange Free State formed the Union of South Africa in 1910.
under religions which recognised polygamy – that is, most Indian marriages - were invalid in
South Africa. The Government was unwilling to adopt remedial legislation. The exorbitant £3
tax in Natal on former indentured labourers, their wives and children – designed to force them to
work again under semi-slave conditions or leave South Africa – was causing great suffering and
could no longer be ignored. The Government had assured Gopal Krishna Gokhale, an eminent
Indian leader who visited South Africa in 1912, that the tax would be abolished, but failed to
fulfil the promise.

Resistance was resumed on 15 September 1913. It was no longer limited to the Transvaal.
Gandhi and his associates invited Indian women to court imprisonment. Workers were advised to
suspend work until the Government gave an assurance that the £3 tax would be abolished.
Recognition of all Indian marriages and abolition of the £3 tax were added to the demands.

On 15 September the first batch of 16 resisters from the Phoenix Settlement – 12 men and 4
women, including the wife, a son and two other relatives of Gandhi – proceeded to the Transvaal
to court arrest. About five thousand Indian workers in the coal mining area of Natal struck work
in October demanding the abolition of the £3 tax. They were led by Gandhi to the Transvaal in a
dramatic march. The Government delayed arrest of the workers in the hope that the movement
would collapse when they could not be provided food and other necessities. But the contributions
of Indian merchants and large donations from India frustrated those hopes. The workers were
arrested on 10 November, sent back to the mines and imprisoned in the compounds. Gandhi and
two European associates - Hermann Kallenbach and Henry Polak - were also imprisoned.

More than twenty thousand workers on plantations and the cities then went on strike. The
Government brought the army and reinforcements of the police into the area. In collusion with
the plantation owners and other employers, it was able to suppress the strikes by mid-December.

The brutality against the Indian workers, and the imprisonment of women resisters for three
months with hard labour, outraged India. Pressure from India and Britain and the spirit of
resistance in the Indian community helped persuade the Government to seek a settlement.
General Smuts and Gandhi reached a provisional settlement in January 1914 and the Indians
Relief Act was adopted by the Union Parliament in June 1914. The resistance ended with the
satisfaction of its main demands though many other serious grievances of the Indians remained.

Some significant aspects of the struggle are briefly noted below.

Leadership of the Struggle

Almost all accounts of the struggle describe Gandhi’s role as an inspired and inspiring leader,17
but provide little information on the organisation leading the struggle, its structure and the
organisers at different levels.

The Hamidia Islamic Society was mainly responsible for organising the mass meeting on 11
September 1906. Leaders of this Society and of the British Indian Association toured the
Transvaal and helped organise an almost total boycott of registration under the Asiatic Act.
Volunteers were enrolled to picket registration offices. Gandhi, the Secretary of the British
Indian Association, acted as an adviser and spokesman. He exhorted the people to defy the
“Black Act”, court arrest and be strictly non-violent.

By the end of 1907, enthusiasm for jail-going began to wane among the merchants. H.O. Ally
and Haji Habib left the Transvaal to avoid arrest and Gandhi came to be recognised as the leader
of resistance. He was not elected or appointed. People looked to him as the only person
competent to lead because of his status as barrister, his honesty, his willingness to sacrifice and
his ability to negotiate with the Government. The Government also recognised him as the leader
when General Smuts reached an agreement with him on 30 January 1908.

Leaders emerged in different towns and communities. For instance, Thambi Naidoo became a
very effective leader in the Tamil community. His leadership and courage were crucial in
organising the strike of Indian workers in Natal. Groups of activists, mostly without formal
organisation, appear to have organised jail-going in various centres.

The British Indian Association was always involved in the resistance. It organised mass meetings
where Gandhi reported on negotiations with the Government. Letters to the Government on
behalf of the community and the resisters were often drafted by Gandhi and signed by the
Chairman of the Association. But its role in the resistance was somewhat ambiguous.

Gandhi wrote in a letter to Gokhale on 6 December 1909 that the Central Association and sub-
committees already spent no less than £10,000 for the struggle.18 He wrote to Dr. Yusuf Dadoo
in 1939:

17
Speaking at a public meeting in Madras on 21 April 1915, Gandhi said that he was inspired by the resisters in
South Africa.

It was they, the simpleminded folk, who worked away in faith, never expecting the slightest reward, who
inspired me, who kept me to the proper level, and who compelled me by their great sacrifice, by their great
faith, by their great trust in the great God to do the work that I was able to do… The inspiration was given
by them to us, and we were able to be interpreters between the powers who called themselves the governors
and those men for whom redress was so necessary... It was my duty, having received the education that
was given to me by my parents, to interpret what was going on in our midst to those simple folk, and they
rose to the occasion. They realised the importance of birth in India, they realised the might of religious
force, and it was they who inspired us…
(Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi: Publications Division, Government of India, 1958-94),
hereinafter referred to as CWMG, Vol. 13, pp. 52-53).
 From the very commencement of passive resistance, I recognised that all Indians would not and could not
join the struggle although all might be, as they actually were, in sympathy with it. Although it was open to
me, being secretary, to utilise the name and prestige of the Association, I founded a separate organisation,
leaving the British Indian Association free to act as it might within constitutional limits. It was possible by
this arrangement to protect the non-resisters from harm, retain their sympathy and save the resisters from
the embarrassment that would undoubtedly be caused by non-resisters if they were members of the same
body.19

A footnote in Collective Works of Mahatma Gandhi indicates that Gandhi was referring to
“Passive Resistance Association”. But there is no mention of a Central Association or Passive
Resistance Association in Gandhi’s writings or in Indian Opinion during the struggle. The funds
received from South Africa or from abroad, in support of the struggle and for relief to the
families of resisters, were kept in a separate account, known as passive resistance fund, with
Gandhi in charge. He made disbursements in consultation with his associates but their identities
are not known, except for A.M. Cachalia, Chairman of the British Indian Association.

The Natal Indian Association was formed after the struggle had begun in Natal in 1913 since the
leadership of the Natal Indian Congress did not support the struggle. It did not seek to lead the
struggle but helped the Indian workers on strike with the provision of food and other supplies.
Local passive resistance committees were also formed in towns outside Durban to help the
resistance.

After the strike was over and Gandhi was released from prison, the Natal Indian Association
assumed a role similar to that of the British Indian Association in the Transvaal.

What emerges from the writings of Gandhi and the Indian Opinion is the lack of a formal
organisation leading the struggle.

Major decisions were made in mass meetings where there was heated discussion. 20 Gandhi faced
opposition from Pathans at a mass meeting in February 1908, called to endorse the agreement of
30 January with General Smuts. At another mass meeting in August 1908, at which Gandhi
reported on concessions made by the Government and expressed hope that a satisfactory
agreement could be reached, it was decided not to accept any agreement without the repeal of
the Asiatic Act. There was often a feeling among some Indians that Gandhi was too naïve in
trusting the Government.

18
CWMG, Vol. 10, pp. 96-98
19
Harijan, 19 August 1939; CWMG, Vol. 70, pp. 91-92. Gandhi was advising Dr. Yusuf Dadoo, leader of the
radical group in the Transvaal Indian Congress, who advocated passive resistance while the leadership of the
Congress was opposed.
20
As Professor Kader Asmal wrote in 2008: “Non-violent action is a form of participatory democracy. Mail and
Guardian, “The Centenary of a Bonfire, 27 August 2008”, http://mg.co.za/article/2008-08-27-the-centenary-of-a-
bonfire. Accessed 9 August 2013.
The decision to renew passive resistance in 1913 was taken at a mass meeting convened by the
British Indian Association in Johannesburg. The decision to invite women to participate in
resistance was apparently taken at a meeting of Gandhi with leading passive resisters.21

Workers on plantations and in Durban and Pietermaritzburg went on strike in November 1913 on
their own initiative. Gandhi, who was then in prison, had not wanted to extend the strike beyond
the coal-mining area. He was, however, an unseen inspiration to the workers.

In December 1913, while Gandhi was in prison, mass meetings in several cities and towns
decided to boycott a commission of inquiry set up by the Government unless two members
acceptable to Indians were included.

After Gandhi was released in December, decisions on further action were taken at a mass
meeting organised by the Natal Indian Association in Durban. The provisional settlement
reached with Smuts in January was endorsed at a mass meeting in Durban, as well as mass
meetings in other cities in Natal and the Transvaal.

After the Indian Relief Bill was enacted, Gandhi addressed farewell meetings in Cape Town,
Durban, Johannesburg and Pretoria where he explained and defended the agreement. The
agreement was criticised by some Muslim merchants and others, but the attendance at mass
meetings showed that it was welcomed by most of the community.

The resisters had received hardly any training except for Gandhi’s speeches at mass meetings
and his articles in Indian Opinion.22 Gandhi was imprisoned or on a mission abroad for much of
the time. He was in prison from 10 to 30 January 1908. He was sentenced to two months of hard
labour on 14 October 1908 and to three months with hard labour in February 1909. He was away
on a deputation in Britain from 21 June to 30 November 1909. A.M. Cachalia, Chairman of the
British Indian Association, was imprisoned and several acting chairmen were swiftly sent to
prison, as were all members of the executive. The resisters were disciplined and followed
Gandhi’s guidelines despite the absence of their leaders.

As Gandhi was to say later:

In a satyagraha army everybody is a soldier and a servant. But at a pinch every satyagrahi soldier has also
to be his own general and leader.23

In short, the example of Gandhi and the respect and confidence gained by him were the main
driving force behind the resistance for much of the time rather than an organisation. Gandhi, in
21
These decisions were taken in the Transvaal as the leaders of the Natal Indian Congress were opposed to passive
resistance.
22
Gandhi considered the austere life at Phoenix Settlement and the Tolstoy Farm as training, but the number of
persons in the two settlements was small. Austere life was essential training for jail-going. But in the Civil Rights
Movement in the United States and the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, the volunteers had to be trained to
withstand brutal assaults by the police and civilians, and even savage torture.
23
Harijan, 13 July 1940
fact, did not believe in the need for an elaborate organisation to lead the struggle. He felt that a
few resisters with the spirit of satyagraha could influence the masses.24 He said in March 1930:

In South Africa the movement was not in my control during the latter part of it, when it gained considerable
momentum without any action on my part. Thousands joined the movement instinctively. I had not even
seen the faces of them, much less known them. They joined because they felt that they must. They had
possibly only heard my name, but they saw in the twinkling of an eye that it was a movement for their
liberation; they knew that there was a man prepared to fight the £3 tax and they took the plunge. … They
knew that there would be hell let loose on them. And yet they did not waver or falter. It was a perfect
miracle.25

Gandhi’s Style of Leadership

Gandhi’s style of leadership will be seen in the following chapters. But three aspects deserve
mention here.

First, efforts to obtain support from the whites and those who could influence them. Gandhi
placed great emphasis on securing support among the whites as the Government was responsive
only to white opinion. A Committee of Sympathisers was formed in the Transvaal and it proved
very helpful though it represented a small minority among the whites. A few whites identified
themselves fully with the Indian cause. Hermann Kallenbach and Henry Polak were given
important positions and responsibilities by the British Indian Association. Sonja Schlesin was
Honorary Secretary of the Transvaal Indian Women’s Association. They proved great assets to
the struggle.

In negotiations with the Government, Gandhi always took note of white opinion at the time and
made compromises to reach an agreement. Aware of opposition of whites to legal or illegal
immigration of Indians to the Transvaal, he offered voluntary registration of Indians. He
proposed limiting Indian immigration by administrative means rather than by law.

He also devoted great attention to securing full support of Indian public opinion and to lobbying
in Britain.

Second, Gandhi stressed suffering as the means to show the distress and earnestness of the Indian
community and thereby persuade the whites to respond. He favoured dramatic actions – such as
the bonfire of registration certificates and the march of thousands of Indian workers from

24
Gandhi said at a press conference on 8 March 1934: “… a non-violent general has this special advantage: he does
not require thousands of leaders to successfully carry on his fight. The non-violent message does not require so
many for transmission. The example of a few true men or women if they have fully imbibed the spirit of non-
violence is bound to infect the whole mass in the end”. Interview to Amrita Bazar Patrika in Nirmal Kumar Bose,
Selections from Gandhi (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1960), p. 196.
25
Young India, 20 March 1930; CWMG, Vol. 43, p. 43.
Newcastle to the Transvaal – to make the white community aware of the strength of feeling
among Indians.

Third, Gandhi did not lose heart when the number of resisters dwindled to less than a hundred in
the Transvaal, or when the strike was suppressed in Natal. He had faith that even one pure
satyagrahi would prevail.

Unity and Disunity in the Indian Community

The Asiatic Registration Act and the Immigration Restriction Act affected all the Indians of the
Transvaal, irrespective of religion, language, education or social status. The Parsis, who had
enjoyed the privileges of Europeans as regards immigration, the Muslim merchants who had
tried to claim respect by calling themselves Arabs, as well as the Tamil and Telugu-speaking
hawkers, were subject to humiliation under these acts. In mass meetings of Indians support to
resistance was universal. But this commitment to resistance did not last long.

By the middle of 1907, some merchants began to complain that Gandhi’s campaign for
resistance instead of compromise was hurting Muslims.26

Gandhi wrote after the provisional agreement with General Smuts at the end of January 1908:

The entire campaign was intended to preserve the status of the well-to-do Indians. Muslims are better
placed in South Africa and it was chiefly a businessmen’s campaign. Had it not been for the massive effort
of the Hamidia Islamic Society, we would never have won. Also, had not a large number of Muslims
worked hard for it, there would have been no victory.27

When active courting of imprisonment began in August 1908, people from all communities in
the Transvaal and some volunteers from Natal participated. The resisters included persons
professing different religions – Muslim, Hindu, Christian and Parsi – who spoke different
languages – Gujarati, Tamil and Telugu – and who belonged to different economic strata.

The resisters initially went out hawking without permit. They were sentenced to one or two
weeks’ imprisonment with hard labour. But the Government found ways to increase punishment.
The courts ordered deportation to Natal for not producing the registration certificate and the
usual sentence for returning to the Transvaal was three or more months with hard labour. The
courts imposed fines on the merchants, without option of a prison sentence, and their goods were
auctioned. These measures persuaded most merchants to abandon resistance after a short
sentence. But some Muslim and Parsee merchants – such as A.M. Cachalia, Ebrahim Asvat,
Parsee Rustomjee and Dawad Mahomed - were prepared to suffer longer and multiple terms in
prison. Resistance was kept up by the Tamil minority in the Transvaal which was relatively poor.

26
Most of the Indian merchants in South Africa were Muslims from Gujarat.
27
CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 100
Two deputations were sent by the Indian community to London to obtain support from the
British Government – the first consisting of Gandhi and H.O. Ally in 1906 and the second with
Gandhi and Haji Habib in 1909. After the first deputation, Ally sent a telegram in July 1907 to
Syed Ameer Ali, member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London and a
member of the South Africa British Indian Committee (SABIC), expressing his opposition to
Gandhi’s continued campaign against the Asiatic Registration Act as it would ruin “thousands of
my co-religionists who are all traders while the Hindus are mostly hawkers.” He sought the
intervention of the Committee against the passive resistance.28 SABIC then sent a cable to the
British Indian Association advising Indians not to court imprisonment.29

During the visit of the second deputation in 1909, when Generals Botha and Smuts conceded the
demands of the struggle, except for the removal of discrimination against Asiatics in the
Immigration Restriction Act, Haji Habib asked Gandhi to tell Lord Ampthill, Chairman of
SABIC, that he would accept the offer.

Tell him from me that I accept General Botha’s offer on behalf of the conciliation party. 30 If he makes these
concessions, we will be satisfied for the present and later on struggle for principle. I do not like the community
to suffer any more. The party I represent constitutes the majority of the community, and it also holds the major
portion of the community’s wealth.

After translating Habib, Gandhi conceded that Habib represented the majority of Indians in the
Transvaal. He said:

My colleague is right when he says that he represents a numerically and financially stronger section. The
Indians for whom I speak are comparatively poor and inferior numbers, but they are resolute unto death.
They are fighting not only for practical relief but for principle as well.31

While there was much opposition to resistance, the entire Indian community agreed on the
demands of the resisters and some merchants provided it material support.

In 1913, when the resistance was extended beyond the Transvaal and Natal became the main
theatre, there was strong opposition by the leaders of the Natal Indian Congress, including M.C.
Anglia who had earlier courted imprisonment in the Transvaal. At a mass meeting of the
Congress on 19 October 1913, Gandhi was criticised by one of its secretaries for eroding the
position of the merchants. Sensing that a group was hostile to him, Gandhi requested the
Chairman to adjourn the meeting. Gandhi and his supporters formed a Natal Indian Association
which provided valuable support to the resistance. Despite the opposition of the Natal Indian
Congress to passive resistance, many merchants provided food and other supplies to the Indian
workers on strike.

28
CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 100
29
Indian Opinion, 27 July 907; CWMG, Vol. 7, pp. 123-24.
30
Haji Habib and H.O. Ally, who avoided arrest by leaving the Transvaal in 1907, returned and set up a British
Indian Conciliation Committee in June 1909 to seek a compromise with the Government.
31
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, Chapter 32
After the final settlement in June 1914, Gandhi came under attack by a number of Muslim
merchants as it did not deal with the grievances of merchants and did not recognise plural
marriages of Muslims. At a meeting of Muslims in Johannesburg on 15 July, Gandhi was
severely attacked by H.O. Ally.

As Gandhi said many years later:

Some fell and some weakened, and some opposed me bitterly… 32

Struggle for the Honour of India, not for Personal Interest

A very significant feature of the struggle was that the resisters were defying the law and making
sacrifices not for their personal interests but for the honour of India.

The Transvaal Government made substantial concessions during the resistance, as did Gandhi.
The Government agreed to voluntary rather than compulsory registration and to permit most
former residents of the Transvaal to return. By 1909, only one major problem remained. Gandhi
asked that the Immigration Restriction Act should be of general application, without restriction
on Asiatics, even though, in its administration, only about six educated Indians a year may be
admitted. General Smuts agreed to the admission of six persons as a special case, but was not
willing to amend the Act. The resisters, under the influence of Gandhi, were not prepared to
accept a racial taint in law which they considered an insult to India and Indians.33

Gandhi claimed, in a letter to Count Leo Tolstoy on 10 November 1909, that the struggle had
enormous significance:

In my opinion, this struggle of the Indians in the Transvaal is the greatest of modern times, inasmuch as it has
been idealised both as to the goal as also the methods adopted to reach the goal. I am not aware of a struggle
in which the participators are not to derive any personal advantage at the end of it, and in which 50 per cent.
of the persons affected have undergone great suffering and trial for the sake of a principle… If it succeeds, it
well be not only a triumph of religion, love and truth over irreligion, hatred and falsehood, but it is highly
likely to serve as an example to the millions in India and to people in other parts of the world, who may be
down-trodden and will certainly go a great way towards breaking up the party of violence, at least in India. 34

Women and Children in Resistance

Another significant feature of the resistance was the courting of imprisonment by Indian women
in a political struggle.

32
CWMG, Vol. 49, p. 203
33
CWMG, Vol. 10, pp. 149-54
34
CWMG, Vol. 10, p. 224
Women in the Transvaal were anxious to join the resistance when their husbands and children
began to court imprisonment, but Gandhi hesitated for fear that they may not be able to take the
treatment in prison. He decided in 1913, after consultation with his associates, to invite women
to join the struggle because of the invalidation of Hindu, Muslim and Zoroastrian marriages. He
chose at first those who had resided in the Tolstoy Farm or the Phoenix Settlement and were
trained to follow an austere life.

The entry of women into the battle had an immediate effect in encouraging workers to go on
strike, swelling the number of resisters from less than a hundred to thirty or forty thousand. The
incarceration of women, including Kasturba Gandhi, under sentences of three months with hard
labour, provoked an outrage all over India.

The youth, many of them born in South Africa, were the backbone of the struggle. Valliamma, a
teenager, became a symbol of heroism. She refused release from prison despite her illness and
died a few days after release. Nagappan and Narayansamy, two other martyrs, were also young.

Many children of resisters went to prison soon after they reached the age of 18 or even before.
They were among the most determined resisters.

Cooperation between Indians and Chinese

Another notable aspect of the struggle in the Transvaal was the close cooperation between
Indians and Chinese.

After the abolition of slavery in the nineteenth century, British territories in the Caribbean,
Mauritius, South Africa and Fiji looked upon India and China as reservoirs of cheap labour. Tens
of thousands of Chinese were brought to work in the mines in the Transvaal under inhuman
conditions, while Indians were imported to Natal as indentured labour. After the Liberal Party
came to power in Britain in 1906, the Chinese labourers were repatriated. Less than a thousand
Chinese – mainly traders and farmers – remained.

When Indians began to resist the Asiatic Registration Act, the Chinese too decided to defy the
Act which affected them equally. Gandhi defended the Chinese who were charged for refusing to
register under the Act.

Altogether 150 Chinese went to prison.35 More than twenty Chinese were deported to Colombo
though they were from China and Hong Kong. H.S.L. Polak, who was then in India as
representative of the Transvaal Indian community, met them in Colombo and took them back to
Durban. The number of Chinese in prison was probably higher than the number of Indians in
prison when Gandhi and Smuts reached the provisional settlement in May 1911.

35
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
The Chinese honoured Gandhi and his associates – H.S.L. Polak, L.W. Ritch and Hermann
Kallenbach – for their help during the struggle.

While Indians and Chinese cooperated closely they had their own organisations and carried on
their campaigns in parallel as Indians claimed rights as British subjects and Chinese looked for
protection from their Government.

***

Part I of this volume contains a brief history of the passive resistance, describing the leadership
of Gandhi as well as the role of his associates and of the masses who participated in the
resistance.

In Part II, we present information, mainly from published sources, on hundreds of resisters
whose courage and sacrifices contributed to the success of the struggle.

We have omitted reference to fines imposed by courts, unless there was no option of prison, as
almost all resisters chose prison.

We would welcome any additional information and photos from descendants of the satyagrahis
or others to enable scholars to prepare a more comprehensive history of the struggle which
initiated a new form of resistance against oppression, injustice and conflict.

Finally, we wish to express our gratitude to the many librarians, archivists, scholars and
descendants of resisters for their kind cooperation.

E. S. Reddy
enuga.reddy@gmail.com
Kalpana Harilal
hiralalk@ukzn.ac.za
 II. PRELUDE TO DEFIANCE
Indians arrived in South Africa from 1860. The authorities in Natal had repeatedly appealed to
the Indian Government to allow the recruitment of Indian labourers. They promised that they
would be granted free passage to India, or in lieu of passage, five acres of land and free
education to their descendants after the completion of the contracts.

More than 150,000 indentured labourers arrived in Natal before the recruitment of labour for
Natal was stopped by the Indian Government on 1 July 1911. For every hundred men, only about
25 women were recruited.36

Almost half the workers stayed on in Natal. These “free Indians” were a great economic asset to
Natal. They built the sugar industry and after indenture they turned Natal green as market
gardeners. They also worked on railways, municipalities, hotels and restaurants or became
hawkers and small traders.

Sir Liege Hulett, a sugar magnate in Natal, recalled that Indians were first introduced to save
Natal from absolute ruin, as the industries had outstripped available labour. From the day when
the introduction of Indian labour was started, Natal’s industrial prosperity commenced.37

Robert Sutherland wrote in Evening Chronicle, Johannesburg, in April 1911:

Sixty years ago Natal, especially the whole of the belt of it which is washed by the Indians Ocean,
extending to the border of Zululand, was a useless, malarious swamp, covered with mangrove and jungle,
and the habitat of wild animals and poisonous snakes. The owners could make nothing of it, but they had an
object lesson of what Indians were capable of doing, in Mauritius, so they went to India and engaged Indian
labourers, who cleared and drained the land and converted it into smiling fields, including the present tea,
sugar, and wattle industries, thus creating employment and bread for thousands of white men… 38

The system of indentured labour was, however, a form of slavery. As Prof. Gopal Krishna
Gokhale said in the Viceroy’s Executive Council in 1910:

It is true that it is not actual slavery but I fear that in practice in a large number of cases it cannot be far
removed from it. To take from this country helpless men and women to a distant land, to assign them there
to employers in whose choice they have no voice and of whose language, customs, social usages and
special civilisation they are entirely ignorant, and to make them work there under a law which they do not
understand, and which treats their simplest and most natural attempts to escape ill-treatment as criminal
offences, such a system, by whatever name it may be called, must really border on slavery. 39

36
Y.S. Meer et al., Documents of Indentured Labour in Natal 1851-1917 (Durban: Institute of Black Research,
1980), p. 16.
37
Statement in the Natal Parliament on 14 July 1908. Indian Opinion, 18 July 1908.
38
From Indian Opinion, 22 April 1911
39
Indian Opinion, 9 April 1910
Indentured workers were followed by some traders (also known as “passenger Indians”),40 most
of whom came from present day Gujarat in western India, initially to provide for the needs of the
Indian workers.

In the course of time, the number of “free Indians” who had settled in Natal increased.41 By the
1880s there was agitation that Indians were competing with Europeans in trade and agriculture.
A series of laws and regulations were passed in Natal in ensuing years to limit the economic,
political and social freedom of both the “free Indians” and the “passenger Indians”.

In 1891 the Natal government stopped the allocation of land to ex-indentured labourers and in
1896 passed a law imposing a £3 annual tax on them, in addition to a £1 tax on all Indians, to
force them to re-indenture or leave for India. In 1894 the trading activities of Indians were
restricted by the Powers of the Municipal Corporations Act which empowered Town Councils to
regulate sanitary condition in Natal’s boroughs. The Act was used as a means to refuse trade
licences to Indians on alleged sanitary grounds. In 1897 the trading disabilities were reinforced
by the General Dealers’ Licences Amendment Law under which local bodies such as the town
councils or town boards were given discretionary powers for issuing trade licences. Licences
were denied if applicants did not comply with sanitary regulations or if the applicants were
unable to fulfil the condition of the Insolvency Law of 1887, which required account books to be
kept in English. There was no right of appeal to any court of justice if the licence was refused.42
The measure was general in its application, but was aimed at Indian traders. In May 1896 the
Franchise Act denied immigrants the franchise if they came from countries not in possession of
elective representative institutions. India was considered to be one of them.43 The Immigration
Restriction Act of 1897 imposed a language test requiring knowledge of a European language. It
was aimed against Indian merchants who made periodic visits to India for business and personal
reasons. It also made it difficult for them to bring employees from India to assist in their
businesses.44

A few thousand traders and “free Indians” had moved to the Transvaal after paying the fee of £3
for registration. Under Law 3 of 1885 (with the title “Coolies, Arabs and other Asiatics”), they
were required, “for sanitary reasons”, to reside in locations set apart for them so that they could
not compete with European business. They could not own fixed property except in those
locations. They were prohibited from trading near gold areas. This law was blatantly racist: it

40
“Passenger Indians” refers to Indians who paid their own passage to Natal.
41
The Colonial Secretary told the Natal Legislative Assembly on 14 July 1908 that there were 61,441 free Indians,
33,444 indentured Indians, and 7,972 re-indentured. Indian Opinion, 18 July 1908.
42
P.S. Joshi, The Tyranny of Colour – A Study of the Indian Problem in South Africa (Durban: EP Commercial
Printing Company Limited, 1942), p. 58.
43
A bill to deprive Indians of the franchise was passed by Natal in 1894. (Some white politicians had enrolled a few
Indian voters for their own purposes). After petitions by the Indian community to the Imperial Government, Royal
assent was denied as the law was not of general application and was discriminatory. The new law, which was
seemingly of general application, was approved.
44
K. Hiralal, “Indian Family Businesses in the Natal Economy 1890-1950” (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of
Natal, 2000), pp. 17, 20; Joshi, The Tyranny of Colour, p. 55.
applied to “Turkish Mahomedans”, but not to Christians in the Ottoman empire. It was also in
flagrant contradiction with the London Convention of 1884 signed by Britain and the South
African Republic (Transvaal) which provided that all persons “other than Natives” would have
full liberty to enter, reside, hold property and trade in any part of the Transvaal and would be
liable to taxes only as those exacted from the citizens of the Republic. Some municipalities even
prohibited Indians from the sidewalks.45

Indians were barred from farming, trading or residing in the Orange Free State. In the Cape,
which was relatively more liberal, restrictions were imposed on trade and immigration.

Gandhi arrived in South Africa in 1893 when anti-Indian feeling was increasing and decided in
1894 to remain in South Africa to practise law and devote himself to the service of the Indian
community.

Prior to Gandhi’s arrival, there had been attempts by the Indian community to resist
discrimination.

Leading Indian merchants of Durban had formed a Durban Indian Committee in 1890, with
Hajee Mahomed Haji Dada of Dada Abdulla and Co., as Chairman. They prepared a document
listing their grievances and sent it to Fazalbhai Vishram of Bombay. Eighty businessmen in
Bombay then sent petitions to the Viceroy of India, the Natal Government and the Secretary of
State for the Colonies in London urging them to protect the rights of Indians in Natal. The
Durban Committee also sent a memorial to Dadabhai Naoroji, member of British Parliament.46

Indian merchants in Pretoria resorted to passive resistance on one occasion. Haji Habib,47 a
Pretoria merchant and leader of the community, told the mass meeting on 11 September 1906:

At one time the Dutch Government having refused to issue trade licences to British
Indians intended to prosecute them for trading without licences. About 40 Indians were
arrested. He (the speaker) advised them to go to gaol48 and refuse to deposit bail. The
advice was followed. The speaker went to the British Agent who approved of the step
taken by the Indians. The British Agent registered a strong protest in their behalf with the
result that relief was promptly granted.49

45
Indian Opinion, 29 August 1908; M.K. Gandhi. Satyagraha in South Africa (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing
House, 1961), pp. 34-35; CWMG, Vol. 3, p. 350.
46
Hassim Seedat, “Pre-Gandhian Indian Politics in Natal 1891-1892” in Fatima Meer, The South African Gandhi:
An Abstract of the Speeches and Writings of M.K. Gandhi 1893-1914 (Durban: Madiba Publishers, 1996). Ebrahim
Mahomed Mahida, History of Muslims in South Africa: A Chronology (Durban: Arabic Study Circle, 1993), pp. 39-
40. The India Committee perhaps became inactive after preparing this document. Many of its members were
prominent in the Natal Indian Congress founded in 1894.
47
Haji Habib was from Porbandar, the town where Gandhi was born.
48
“Gaol” is South African term for “jail”.
49
Indian Opinion, 22 September 1906
H.O. Ally50 and Thambi Naidoo51, were reported to have formed the Indian Congress in the
Transvaal in 1893 and led a deputation to President Kruger of the South African Republic in
regard to Law 3 of 1885.52

Indentured Indians, too, engaged in individual and collective resistance.53 Leonard Thompson,
the South African historian, described the passive resistance of Indian workers in 1862, two
years after the first shipment of Indian indentured labourers arrived in South Africa.

On the estate of Henry Shire at Umhlanga a state of warfare followed the appointment of an unpopular
Sirdar (foreman), in spite of the protests of the other Indians. Shire prolonged the hours of work on the
estate; made arbitrary deductions from pay and rations; and submitted several Indians to the humiliation of
being flogged by Natives. The labourers retaliated with a weapon peculiarly potent in Indian hands -
passive resistance. After more or less successfully avoiding work for some months they deserted en masse
to Durban, where they endured three successive terms of imprisonment rather then return to their employer.
In February, 1862, they retained an attorney to petition the Governor to cancel their contracts with Shire
and transfer them to another employer. A commission of two magistrates and the Agent 54 made an
exhaustive enquiry, finding Shire guilty of the charges enumerated above, but weighing more heavily the
fact that Indians` “insubordinate and vexatious” conduct had deprived Shire of a season’s sugar crop. The
Governor accepted its recommendation not to cancel the contracts… The Indians, who had already been
imprisoned for desertion, were forced to continue to work for the same master, and not even repaid those
wages which had been illegally withheld. Shire was rebuked, condoned, and reinvested with the status of
employer for which he had amply demonstrated his incompetence. He was, indeed, the “Grand Old Man”
of his district. It was not politic to offend him, and with him the strong body of the coastal planters.55

50
Haji Ojer Ally, born in Mauritius of Indian and Malay parents, spoke Dutch, English and Hindustani fluently.
Arriving in Cape Town, he was involved in Coloured politics and was elected Chairman of Cape Coloured People’s
Organisation in 1892. He went to Johannesburg soon after and was active in public affairs of Indians. He founded
the Hamidia Islamic Society in 1906 and was its first President. He left the Transvaal with his family for the Cape in
1907 as he was unable, because of age and health, to join the satyagraha but unwilling to submit to the Asiatic
Registration Act. CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 99-101.
51
Govindasamy Krishnasamy Thambi Naidoo was born in 1875 in Mauritius where his parents had migrated from
Madras Presidency. He went to South Africa and started business in Kimberley, centre of diamond mines, in 1889
when he was only 14 years old .He moved to Johannesburg three years later when gold was discovered in the
Transvaal. He started hawking fresh produce and gradually expanded his business into that of a produce merchant
and wholesaler. He also became a cartage contractor. He was active in the affairs of the Indian community and
became a leader of the Tamils in the Transvaal. He was one of the most courageous satyagrahis and went to prison
14 times. His leadership was crucial in organising the strike of Indian workers in Natal in 1913. His wife, elder son,
mother-in-law and other members of his family also went to prison in the struggle.
52
Rand Daily Mail, 1 November 1933; E.S. Reddy, Thambi Naidoo and His Family – Four Generations in the
Heroic Struggle for Freedom in South Africa (New Delhi: A Mainstream Publication, 1988), p. 8. See also revised
edition of this pamphlet at: www.muthalnaidoo.co.za/other-publications.
53
Jo Beall, “Women under Indentured Labour in Colonial Natal 1860-1911” in C. Walker (ed.), Women and Gender
in Southern Africa to 1945 (Cape Town: David Philip, 1990), pp. 147-167; “Women Under Indenture”, in S. Bhana,
(ed.), Essays on Indentured Indians (Yorkshire: Peepal Tree Press, 1991), pp. 89-116.
54
Coolie Immigration Agent.
55
L. M. Thompson, "Indian Immigration into Natal 1860-1872" (MA dissertation, University of South Africa,
1938), pp. 103-104. Printed in Archives Year Book for South African History, 1952, Vol. 2.
Gandhi helped organise petitions to the Natal Assembly and Council and the Natal Governor
against the Franchise Law Amendment Bill in 1894. After the Bill was passed in July 1894, he
organised a “monster petition” to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Lord Ripon, with more
than 10,000 signatures. He formed the Natal Indian Congress, mainly of merchants,56 in the same
year and tried to defend the rights of the Indian community through petitions, deputations, letters
to the press, appeals to the British Government, Parliament and the public.

Gandhi also steadily built support in India. During his visits to India in 1896 and 1901-02, he
met many editors and political leaders and did extensive propaganda for the cause of Indians in
South Africa. He kept Dadabhai Naoroji, the Liberal Member of British Parliament, informed of
the situation of Indians in Natal so that the latter could draw the attention of the British
Government. When Dadabhai Naoroji’s term in Parliament ended, Gandhi began writing to Sir
Mancherjee Bhownaggreee, Conservative Member of Parliament, who was equally helpful. He
also received support from the British Committee of the Indian National Congress. 57

In 1899, Britain went to war against the Boer Republic in the Transvaal (called the South African
Republic) and the Free State, mainly to gain control of the gold mines which were discovered
there. One of Britain’s charges against the Government in the Transvaal was that it was
persecuting the Indians. Gandhi organised and led the Indian Volunteer Ambulance Corps and
was gratified that the Indians earned the goodwill of the Europeans. But this did not last long.

Discrimination against Indians became more acute under the British administration of the
Transvaal after the end of the war in 1902. Former residents of the Transvaal, many of whom
had left for Natal or India during the war, were required, under the Peace Preservation
Ordinance, to register again and pay £3 to obtain a permit to re-enter the Transvaal while whites

Oliver Tambo said in his speech receiving the Nehru award for International Understanding, on behalf of Nelson
Mandela, in New Delhi on 14 November 1980:

Within two years of entering the bondage of indentured labour, Indian workers staged their first strike
against the working conditions in Natal. This was probably the first general strike in South African history.
http://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/speech-oliver-tambo-accepting-1979-jawaharlal-nehru-award-
international-understanding-behalf, accessed on 13 October 2013.
56
The NIC was dominated by merchants as the initial membership fee of £3 a year was too high for others.
Apparently, 85 percent of the members were merchants and 12 percent from white collar occupations. Mahida,
History of Muslims in South Africa, p. 42. The fee was reduced to 5 shillings a few years later, but the merchants
continued to be in the leadership. Victor Lawrence, Gandhi’s first secretary in Durban, wrote in his “Sixty Years
memoir” (at UNISA Documentation Centre for African Studies, Pretoria):

When the Natal Indian Congress was founded the subscription for membership was fixed at three pounds a
year or 5/- per month. Except the merchant class the other members of the Indian community were unable
to meet it because of their financial circumstances and agitated against it. I took up their case and formed a
committee and put before the officials of the Committee [of NIC] their complaint and pleaded for an
amendment of the subscription clause which has altered to 5/- per year…
57
CWMG, Vol. 3, pp. 280-81
could enter freely. The permits contained the signature of the holder or his thumb-impressions.58
Many refugees could not return because of the difficulties created by the officials in the
Transvaal. The administration promoted a Boer-British alliance and set up a Government which
was responsive only to the white voters.

Gandhi settled in Johannesburg after the war and worked as an attorney. He established the
British Indian Association (BIA) in 1903. H.O. Ally founded the Hamidia Islamic Society in
1906 and the Tamils set up the Tamil Benefit Society.

Gandhi founded Indian Opinion, a weekly newspaper, in 1903 to inform not only the Indian
community but also the Europeans in South Africa and people in India and Britain about the
position of Indians in South Africa. He developed extensive contacts with Europeans in South
Africa and with some African leaders, amongst them John Langalibalele Dube, who was to be
elected the first President of the South African Native National Congress (later African National
Congress) in 1912. In 1906, he led a Stretcher-Bearer Corps during the operation by the Natal
Government to suppress the Bambatha Rebellion against a poll tax. Though the decision to form
the Corps was controversial, it was able to provide medical help to Africans, after the whites
refused to treat the wounded Africans.59

But the gestures by Indians to demonstrate their loyalty to the rulers were in vain.

58
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 93
59
Ilanga Lase Natal, 15 November 1912
 III. PASSIVE RESISTANCE IN THE TRANSVAAL, 1906-11

And so your activity in Transvaal, as it seems to us, at the end of the world, is the most
essential work, the most important of all the work now being done in the world…

Letter by Count Leo Tolstoy to Gandhi, 1910

On 22 August 1906, the Boer-British Government of the Transvaal gazetted an Asiatic Law
Amendment Ordinance. It was ostensibly intended to register lawful Indian and Chinese
residents of the Transvaal, on the excuse that there was an influx of Asiatics into the Colony after
the end of the war with fraudulent permits.60 Asiatics were required to register again – some for
the third time.61 This time, registration was not only for adult men but for women and children
over the age of eight. They were required to give impressions of ten fingers instead of two
thumbs to get the new certificates. The registration certificate had to be carried always and
produced on demand by the police. Persons failing to produce the certificate could be arrested
and expelled from the Transvaal.

Gandhi felt that the Ordinance was not only an affront to the dignity of Indians and to the honour
of India but a step toward further measures to expel the Indians which would be followed by
other British colonies. He decided to defy the unjust law.62 He consulted Indian leaders and on
his suggestion, the Hamidia Islamic Society decided, at a meeting on 9 September, that Indians
should refuse to register under the Ordinance and suffer imprisonment if necessary. The Society
called on all members to close their businesses on 11 September when a mass meeting against
the Ordinance would be held. It also set up a committee to collect funds.63

The “hartal” (stoppage of work) was very successful. The mass meeting was held at the Empire
Theatre on 11 September. Haji Ojer Ally, Chairman of the Hamidia Islamic Society, Haji Habib,
leader of the Indian community in Pretoria and Thambi Naidoo, the leader of the Tamils,
organised mass mobilisation for the meeting.64 The meeting was reported to have been attended
by no less than three thousand out of a total Indian population of a little over ten thousand in the

60
According to the census of 1904, the Asiatic population of the Transvaal consisted of 10,805 British subjects and
1,416 aliens. Of the 10,384 Asiatics who were 15 years of age or older, 88.75 percent were men and 11.25 percent
were women. Indian Opinion, 13 April 1907.
61
Under the Boer regime Indians could enter the Transvaal by paying a registration fee of £3. After the advent of
British rule, under the Peace Preservation Ordinance, Indian entry and residence into the Transvaal was regulated by
the issuing of permits with a fee of £3. Many Indians who had left the Transvaal during the Anglo-Boer War were
denied permits even when they were willing to pay the fee. CWMG, Vol. 6, pp. 45-48.
62
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 100-101. While the Boers were blamed for the Ordinance, it was really
framed by Lionel Curtis, the Assistant Colonial Secretary of the Transvaal during the British administration, and
other British officials.
63
CWMG, Vol. 5, p. 418
64
Gandhi wrote that the Hamidia Islamic Society, composed mainly of Muslim merchants, was chiefly instrumental
in organising the meeting. Indian Opinion, 6 October 1906.
Transvaal. It adopted resolutions calling for the withdrawal of the Ordinance and for disapproval
by the British Government if it was not withdrawn. A third resolution provided for the despatch
of a deputation to London to make representations to the British Government.65

Haji Habib moved the fourth resolution that, if the Ordinance was enacted, “every British Indian
in the Transvaal shall submit himself to imprisonment and shall continue so to do until it shall
please His Most Gracious Majesty the King-Emperor, to grant relief”.66 The resolution was
seconded by H. O. Ally. It was adopted by acclamation with an oath in the name of God. To
prepare the community for the worst repression, Gandhi warned:

We might have to go to gaol, where we might be insulted. We might have to go hungry

and suffer extreme heat or cold. Hard labour might be imposed upon us. We might be
flogged by rude warders. We might be fined heavily and our property might be attached
and held up to auction. Opulent today, we might be reduced to abject poverty tomorrow.
We might be deported. Suffering from starvation and similar hardships in gaol, some of
us might fall ill and even die.67

Meetings were held in other towns and Indians everywhere took the oath. Gandhi went around
the Colony urging resistance and explaining the possible consequences.

Courting imprisonment in protest against oppressive measures was not without precedent in the
Transvaal Indian community. As indicated in the previous chapter, forty Indian traders went to
prison in Pretoria in the 1890s. In 1904 when the British authorities in the Transvaal intended to
demand that Indian traders produce proof again that they traded before the Anglo-Boer War,
Gandhi suggested that they refuse to give proof and go to prison.68 But the pledge now was in the
name of God and for resistance by the entire Indian population of the Transvaal.

The Government, recognising the strong feelings of the Muslim merchants, amended the
Ordinance when it was moved in the Legislative Council later in the year to exempt women from
registration and to raise the age of registration for children to 16. The amended Ordinance was
passed and sent to the British Government for its consent.69

Deputation to London

H. O. Ally and Gandhi went on a deputation to London, on behalf of the Indian community, from
21 October to 1 December 1906. Gandhi proved to be superb at public relations. He was able to

65
Indian Opinion, 15 September and 18 October 1906; The Star 11 June 1907; CWMG, Vol. 5, pp. 419-23.
66
Indian Opinion, 15 September 1906
67
Indian Opinion, 22 September 1906
68
Pyarelal, Mahatma Gandhi, Volume III: The Birth of Satyagraha – From Petitioning to Passive Resistance
(Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1986), p. 298.
69
Indian Opinion, 15 September and 6 October 1906; Transvaal Leader, 20 September 1906. The Government
apparently sensed the strong resentment in the Muslim community to the prospect of their women being harassed by
the police.
persuade several prominent people to introduce the deputation to the Colonial Secretary, Lord
Crewe, and the Secretary of State for India, Sir John Morley. The deputation addressed a
hundred members of Parliament – and 50 Liberal members of Parliament met the Prime Minister
in support of their representations. A South Africa British Indian Committee (SABIC) was set
up, with Lord Ampthill, former Governor of Madras, as President, to defend the rights of Indians
in South Africa.

The Chinese Association in the Transvaal sent L.M. James to England as their delegate to make
representations through the Chinese Ambassador.70

As a result of these efforts, the British Government withheld its approval to the Asiatic
Ordinance. It warned the deputation that the Transvaal would receive self-government at the
beginning of 1907 and might enact its provisions into law. It confidentially assured the
authorities in the Transvaal that a law enacted by the elected legislature would receive Royal
assent.

Enactment of “Black Act” and the Immigration Restriction Act, 1907

Self-Government was granted to the Transvaal on 1 January 1907 and its legislature, elected by
the whites, was opened on 21 March 1907. The Asiatic Law Amendment Act, commonly known
as the Asiatic Registration Act, was unanimously passed in extreme haste on 22 March, and it
received Royal assent on 30 April. This Act, denounced by Gandhi and the Indian community as
the “Black Act,” was identical to the Ordinance of 1906. An offer by the Indian community to
accept voluntary registration was spurned.71

The law came into force on 1 July 1907. Registration began district by district, beginning with
Pretoria. Indian volunteers picketed the registration offices. By the end of November, the end of
the period of registration, only 545 persons out of an Indian population of 9,000 had registered.72
The Government began to refuse licences to traders or hawkers who did not register under the
Act.

In August 1907, the Transvaal Legislature enacted the Immigration Restriction Act. It received
assent of the Imperial Government and came into force on 27 December 1907. It included an
education test in which Indian languages were not recognised.73 Even those who pass the test
were subject to the “Black Act”. The Government was authorised to forcibly deport those in
violation of the “Black Act”. The law was designed primarily against Indians and Chinese and

70
Indian Opinion, 6 October 1906; CWMG, Vol. 6, pp. 59-60.
71
Indian Opinion, 15 June 1907; Rand Daily Mail, 29 June 1907.
72
Indian Opinion, 2 November 1907
73
Any person without a good knowledge of a European language was to be treated as a prohibited immigrant.
was resented both for its restrictions specifically on Asiatics and for the implied insult to India
and China.74

The Asiatic Registration Act and the Immigration Restriction Act of 1907 affected all Indians in
the Transvaal, irrespective of religion, language or social status. The Parsis, who had enjoyed the
privileges of Europeans as regards immigration, the Muslim merchants who had tried to claim
respect by calling themselves Arabs and Tamil and Telugu-speaking hawkers were all subject to
their provisions and pledged to go together to prisons.

Indians organised a petition to the Colonial Secretary of the Transvaal, General Smuts, rejecting
the Asiatic Act. It read:

We respectfully submit that nothing short of total repeal of the Act can meet the difficult
situation that has arisen. In our humble opinion the Act is degrading to our self-respect,
offensive to our religions, and in its incidence it is such as can be thought of only in
connection with dangerous criminals. Moreover, the solemn declaration made by us
renders it imperative for us, as honest citizens of the Empire and God-fearing men, not to
submit to the provisions of the Act, irrespective of any consequences which we may have
to suffer, and which we understand to be imprisonment, banishment and/or loss or
confiscation of our property.

In making the above statement, we do not desire to shirk an enquiry into the allegations
as to surreptitious entry by British Indians on a wholesale scale, or to refuse to hold
documents that in the opinion of the Government may sufficiently identify us.

We therefore respectfully pray that the Government will be pleased to recognise British
Indians in the Transvaal as men and worthy citizens in this free and self-respecting
Colony.75

The petition was signed by no less than 4,522 persons from 29 cities and towns in the Transvaal
and was presented to the Colonial Secretary at the beginning of November 1907. Indian Opinion
noted that the number of Indians resident in the Transvaal in November 1907 did not exceed
8,000. It had gone down from about 13,000 when the struggle commenced in September 1906.76

74
Many former residents of the Transvaal, who had left the Transvaal during the Anglo-Boer War, could not obtain
permits under the “Peace Preservation Ordinance” while Europeans received them for the asking. Those who could
not return became prohibited immigrants under the Immigration Restriction Act if they did not pass an education test
in a European language. Indian Opinion, 31 August 1907 and 4 January 1908.
75
Indian Opinion, 21 September 1907
76
Indian Opinion, 2 November 1907. There are wide variations in estimates of the number of Indians in the
Transvaal. The British Indian Association wrote to General Smuts denying his statement that there were 15,000
Indians in the Transvaal and said that there were no more than 7,000. Indian Opinion, 12 October 1907. Gandhi said
in an interview to D.A. Rees in March 1908 that there were 13,000 Indians in the Transvaal but about 5,000 had left
the Colony in consequence of the Asiatic Act, leaving only about 8,000. Some were in Natal and some in Cape
Town, but the majority had returned to India. CWMG, Vol. 91, pp. 67-76.
Particularly desperate were appeals of Indian soldiers who had been brought to South Africa
during the Anglo-Boer War and given permission to settle in South Africa. They fought on the
side of the British and could not understand why the Boers who were defeated were being
allowed to humiliate them. More than a hundred former soldiers – 43 Punjabi Mahomedans, 13
Sikhs, and 54 Pathans – sent a petition titled “A Pathetic Appeal” to the British High
Commissioner of the Transvaal asking for protection. They wrote:

With the exception of a few, all are at present without employment, largely because of
the struggle against the Asiatic Registration Act. In some cases, the employers have
dismissed them for non-registration, and, in other cases, on application for employment,
your petitioners have been told that they could get it, if they allowed themselves to be
registered under the new Act.

In the humble opinion of your Petitioners, it is not possible for them to submit to the
Asiatic Act, inasmuch as it subjects them to humiliation never experienced by them in
India, and reduces them to a state which is incompatible with their self-respect and
dignity as soldiers.77

When they found that the High Commissioner could do little, they sent an even more pathetic
petition on 11 January 1908 to the Secretary of State for the Colonies in London, Lord Elgin:

It seems to your petitioners that the requiring of the 10 digit impressions and the four
digit simultaneous impressions and the necessity of disclosing one’s mother’s name and
wife’s name are methods of identification which operate as a gross insult to your
petitioners, and is contrary to the tenets of their religion…

Is it possible that His Majesty’s loyal and patriotic old soldiers, who fought in many
battles for the sake of the Empire, cannot be protected from insult and degradation?...
Further, His Majesty’s old Indian soldiers in the Transvaal decline to degrade themselves
to the level of servile menials by submitting under compulsion to a form of registration
against their religion. His Majesty’s Indian soldiers cannot, consistent with the dignity of
a soldier, degrade themselves by being compelled to register in such a manner, and,
should His Majesty’s Government be unable to obtain just treatment for the King
Emperor’s Indian soldiers in the Transvaal, then they ask as men and British Indian
soldiers , who are proud to have risked their lives in the cause of the Empire and have
braved the privations of war, to be spared the degradation of imprisonment or
deportation, and further wish that the King Emperor will command that they be shot by
Generals Botha and Smuts on one of the battlefields of South Africa, where they have
been under fire whilst serving their King Emperor and the British Empire.78

77
Indian Opinion, 30 November 1907
78
Indian Opinion, 25 January 1908. Apparently no reply was received.
The small Parsi community which, like the Europeans, had not been required to obtain permits to
enter the Transvaal, was also outraged.79

Indian-Chinese Co-operation

These anti-Asiatic laws also affected the small Chinese community in the Transvaal.

There were about three thousand free Chinese in the Transvaal before the Anglo-Boer War.
Their number decreased to a little over a thousand by 1907. 80 About a hundred of these were
British subjects and the rest were citizens of China. They were traders, gardeners and
laundrymen. Nine hundred of them signed a declaration supporting passive resistance against the
Asiatic Act.81

The Chinese defied the Asiatic Act under the leadership of Leung Quinn,82 following the
example of the Indian community.83 Hardly any Chinese registered under the Act.84

They held a meeting, attended by about 400 Chinese, on 30 December 1907 to thank Gandhi for
the services rendered by him in the crisis which faced the Asiatic communities. At another
meeting, the Chinese Association appointed Henry S.L. Polak, an associate of Gandhi, the
Honorary Adviser to the Association.

Representatives of the Chinese Association attended Indian meetings and Indians attended
Chinese meetings devoted to resistance.85

79
Indian Opinion, 1 February 1908
80
Over 60,000 Chinese labourers had been recruited between 1904 and 1907 to work in the Transvaal mines. They
had been ill-treated. For instance, in 1905, Lord Milner, the British administrator, permitted the flogging of Chinese
labourers by mine managers. The recruitment of Chinese labour became a major issue in British politics. All the
labourers were repatriated between 1907 and 1910. Peter Richardson, Chinese Mine Labour in the Transvaal
(London: The Macmillan Press, Ltd., 1982).
81
Interview with Leung Quinn in Indian Opinion, 31 August 1907.
82
Mr. Quinn was Chairman of the Chinese Association and the Cantonese Club. He told the court at his trial on 28
December 1907 that he had come to the Transvaal in 1896 and had obtained a permit from the Boer Government of
the time. He left in 1901 and returned in 1903, obtaining a permit under the Peace Preservation Ordinance. He was a
storekeeper. He did not take out a permit because the Asiatic Act was disgraceful to himself and his nation. He had
translated the law to his countrymen and had been expecting prosecution. Indian Opinion, 4 January 1908; Rand
Daily Mail, 1 August 1907 and 31 January 1908; Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 154-157; CWMG, Vol. 8,
pp. 98-100.
83
Indian Opinion reported on 20 April 1907 that Chinese leaders met at Mr. Gandhi’s office on 13 April and
resolved to support the Indian community. CWMG, Vol. 6, p. 427. Ebrahim Aswat said at a mass meeting that
Indians had exhorted the Chinese to fight. Indian Opinion, 7 December 1907.
84
Only four Chinese registered. One retracted and returned his form and one, Chow Kwai, committed suicide.
Indian Opinion, 23 November 1907; CWMG, Vol. 7, pp. 375-76.
85
Indian Opinion, 7 December 1907 and 4 January 1908; CWMG, Vol. 7, p. 396.
First Phase of Passive Resistance in the Transvaal

The first phase of the passive resistance began in 1907 with the boycott of registration and the
picketing of registration offices.

Gandhi went around the main centres of the Transvaal with other leaders, urging Indians to
boycott registration and go to prison. Explaining non-violent resistance, he said that they should
gladly suffer penalties imposed by courts, and that there should be no violence even if subjected
to violence. He offered to provide legal defence without charge to the resisters. But if he and his
associates were not available, the resisters should not engage counsel. He stressed that the
resisters should not offer bail or pay any fine as the purpose was to go to prison.86

Indian Opinion reported on 13 July 1907 that a Tamil postmaster preferred to resign his post
rather than take out the certificate. The Punjabi assistant of Mr. Chamney, the Registrar of
Asiatics, was said to have flatly refused to take out the certificate.87

Five employees of a pottery – Murugan, Armugum, Harry, Venkatapen and Muthu - were asked
to leave their jobs if they did not take out register. They gave up their jobs.88 Many waiters lost
their jobs.89 Central South African Railway at Standerton summarily dismissed forty Indian
employees in December for not registering under the Black Act and they were thrown out of
their homes.90

Some white merchants stopped supplying goods to Indian merchants on credit.91

Ram Sunder Pandit, a Hindu priest in Germiston who had campaigned against the Black Act,
was arrested on 8 November 1907 for failing to produce a registration certificate under the Act
and sentenced to imprisonment for one month. G.P. Vyas and other pickets in Pretoria were
arrested and charged on 13 November with incitement and assault – for threatening an Indian
who wanted to register; the charges had to be withdrawn when the Indian denied the assault.

The Government decided to imprison the leaders in the hope that the movement would then
collapse. On 28 December 1907, twenty-five Indians and three Chinese, including Gandhi,
appeared before courts in Johannesburg and Pretoria and were ordered to leave the Transvaal
within a few days. Gandhi was sentenced to two months on 10 January 1908 for defying the
order while several others were sentenced to three months with hard labour and fines.92 Many
more were imprisoned in subsequent days.

86
Indian Opinion, 27 July and 30 November 1907
87
Indian Opinion, 13 July 1907; CWMG, Vol. 7, pp. 97-98.
88
Indian Opinion, 19 October 1907
89
Indian Opinion, 21 December 1907
90
The Transvaal Leader, 12 November 1907; Indian Opinion, 28 December 1907 and 4 January 1908.
91
Indian Opinion, 24 August 1907
92
Rand Daily Mail, 11 January 1908; Indian Opinion, 4 January and 7 March 1908; CWMG, Vol. 7, pp. 465-68.
The British Indian Association sent a cable on 25 January to the South Africa British Indian
Committee in London giving a summary of developments concerning the enforcement of the
Asiatic Registration Act. It reported:

There were, on that day, 200 Indians in gaol, 120 under notice to leave the Colony, and 20 warned to
appear before the Magistrate for failing to register. There were 3 Chinese in gaol and 38 under notice.
Many more arrests were expected, the towns affected being Johannesburg, Pretoria, Pietersburg,
Heidelberg, Vereeniging, Krugersdorp, Barberton, Germiston, Potchefstroom, and Roodepoort. The arrests
include all the officials of the British Indian Association, the Hamidia Islamic Society, and the Transvaal
Chinese Association. Hindus, Mahomedans, Parsis, Christians, a barrister, merchants, traders, hawkers,
agents, clerks, interpreters, Government officials were affected. Colonial born Indians, Indians who were
born in South Africa and have children born here, are not exempt. A minimum estimate of the assets
belonging to those arrested and which were imperilled in Johannesburg alone were £150,000. Many
families were left on the mercy of the community. Some merchants of 20 years’ standing were to be
imprisoned. The victims include greybeards and youths of tender years, two old soldiers bearing medals of
several campaigns, leaders of the Ambulance Corps that took part in the Boer War, and the Stretcher Bearer
Corps in the Natal Rebellion, and many members who had cheerfully lost heavily during the war. Half the
Indian population had already left the Transvaal rather than register. Hundreds of municipal, railway, and
Government employees had been discharged owing to non-registration. The Asiatic community was
determined to continue the struggle to the bitter end.93

Two of the merchants who had mobilised people for the meeting on 11 September 1906 and
proposed the resolution on defiance of the Asiatic Act had left the Transvaal before the arrests of
leaders took place. H.O. Ally moved with his family to Cape Town in August 1907 explaining
that his health would not permit imprisonment and that he was not prepared to register under the
Asiatic Act. Haji Habib went to Durban to avoid registration or imprisonment.94

In their absence, Gandhi, who had been an adviser to the Indian community and to the
movement, was thrust into leadership.

Albert Cartwright, an editor, obtained permission to meet Gandhi in jail and undertook to
promote an agreement.95 He prepared a draft of a letter to General Smuts, Colonial Secretary. It
was revised by Gandhi and signed on 28 January by Gandhi, Thambi Naidoo, leader of the
Tamils, and Leong Quinn, leader of the Chinese. They offered to organise voluntary registration
and accepted thumb impressions if they were essential for identification.96 They wrote:

Our opposition has never been directed so much against the fingerprint requirements of the Regulations
under the Act—in so far as such finger-prints were deemed necessary for the identification of Asiatics who
could not very well be otherwise identified—as against the element of compulsion contained in the Act
itself. On that ground we have repeatedly offered to undergo voluntary registration if the Act were

93
Indian Opinion, 1 February 1908
94
Indian Opinion, 31 August 1907 and 22 February 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 99-101.
95
Cartwright had been detained by the British authorities in Cape Town in 1901 for his criticism of the war against
the Boers. He had therefore easy access to the Boer politicians and may have been encouraged by General Smuts to
contact Gandhi in prison.
96
Rand Daily Mail, 31 January 1908; Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 154-57; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 40-42.
 repealed. And even now at this late hour we would urge on the Government the adoption as far as possible
of the course more than once proposed by us.

We recognise that it is not possible during the Parliamentary recess to repeal the Act, and we have noted
your repeated public declarations that there is no likelihood of the Act being repealed….

… we would once more respectfully suggest to the Government that all Asiatics over the age of sixteen
years should be allowed within a certain limited period, say three months, to register themselves, and that
to all who so register, the Act be not applied, and that the Government take whatever steps they deem
advisable to legalise such registration. Such mode of registration should apply to those also who being out
of the Colony may return and otherwise possess the rights of re-entry….

Should the Government agree to these suggestions and accept registration on these terms, we assume that
all further prosecutions or punishments under the Act will be suspended during the period set aside for
registration. We on our part again would undertake to use all our influence to induce our compatriots to
register and withdraw all countenance from those who refuse to register or are not legally entitled to
register.97

General Smuts met Gandhi and accepted the offer. Gandhi believed, from his conversation with
Smuts, that the Asiatic Act would be repealed when most Indians registered voluntarily. Over
200 prisoners were released from prison on 31 January and pending prosecutions were
withdrawn. Indians were allowed to trade without licences until the next session of Parliament.98

At a meeting that night, Gandhi informed the community of the settlement offered and strongly
urged them to accept it. All accepted, except a group of Pathans. At a larger meeting in front of
the Hamidia Mosque on 9 February, there was again strong opposition by the Pathans to giving
their finger impressions under voluntary registration.99 They were not convinced by Gandhi’s
statement that there was no dishonour in giving finger impressions when registration was not
compulsory. They threatened that the first person who registered with finger impressions would
be killed.100

Gandhi decided to be the first to register with thumb prints. As he was going from his office to
the registration office which opened on 10 February, accompanied by Essop Mia, Chairman of
the British Indian Association and Thambi Naidoo, he was severely assaulted by a few Pathans.
He was bedridden for many days. Thambi Naidoo and Essop Mia tried to shield Gandhi and
were also assaulted.

Gandhi regarded the agreement with Smuts a great victory for what he began to call “satyagraha”
in Gujarati from January 1908. He wrote in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion (8 February
1908):

97
CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 40-41
98
Indian Opinion, 8 February 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 65-70.
99
The Pathans apparently had strong feelings as they had fought with the victorious British army during the Anglo-
Boer War and were being subjected to humiliation by the defeated Boers. Indian Opinion, 15 February 1908.
100
Indian Opinion, 22 February 1908. Gandhi’s interview to D.A. Rees in CWMG, Vol. 91, pp. 67-76.
 The Transvaal Indians, we believe, have emerged completely victorious… We shall not
come across many instances of this kind in world history… The Government has now
promised not to apply the law to Indians on the condition that the objective of the law
should be secured by the Indians themselves acting of their free will, that is, without the
compulsion of that law. This condition means voluntary registration. The Indian
community has time and again offered to register on its own. The Government has now at
last accepted the proposal and agreed not to apply the new law to those who register
voluntarily… It has not gone yet, but the Indians who were imprisoned have been
released with the assurance that it will go. All the newspapers, without an exception, are
astonished. The whites are dumbfounded and wonder how all this came about…

Every Indian should by now be convinced that satyagraha, or passive resistance, is an

infallible remedy…101

Gandhi registered from his sick bed and, soon after recovery, worked hard to encourage the
Indian community to register. By the end of May, more than eight thousand Indians voluntarily
applied for registration – and most of them gave fingerprints. Six thousand received certificates.

The Chinese community held a meeting on 20 March to present addresses to the Rev. Chas A.
Phillips, the Rev. J.J. Doke, Henry Polak and Gandhi for their contribution to the excellent
settlement.102 They gave expensive presents to Albert Cartwright, David Pollock, Mr. and Mrs.
Polak and L.W. Ritch. The address to Gandhi said:

It was thanks to your political acumen that this excellent settlement was effected. You
were the only one who could have achieved this, and we are very grateful to you for what
you have done. But for you, we would have lost. But we revere you especially for your
good qualities of character, which, we believe, ennobled our campaign, with the result
that Asiatic communities are treated today with respect.103

But General Smuts denied that he had offered to repeal the Asiatic Act. In talks with Gandhi
during May-June, he agreed to the repeal of the Asiatic Act after amending the Immigration
Restriction Act. But he did not agree to the admission of Indians who had left the Transvaal
during the War or to the admission of educated persons needed by the Indian community in the
future. The Immigration Act would remain a class legislation with provisions applying to
Asiatics only.104

Smuts was later prepared to agree to allow Indians who had resided for three years in the
Transvaal and could produce documentation in support, but was adamant that there should be no

101
Indian Opinion, 8 February 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 59-61.
102
An address to L.W. Ritch, Secretary of South Africa British Indian Committee, was read at the meeting and sent
to London. Indian Opinion, 28 March 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 162-67.
103
Indian Opinion, 28 March 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 163.
104
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 158-73.
further Asiatic immigration. That meant that no professionals such as doctors, lawyers,
accountants etc. needed by the community would be allowed.

Still trying to secure a compromise, Essop Mia, the Chairman of BIA, wrote to General Smuts on
9 July that the education test under the Immigration Act could be made very severe. In other
words, the law would be of general application so that there is no insult to India, but only a few
educated Indians would be admitted in the administration of the Act. But that was not accepted
by General Smuts as he was determined to stop all further immigration of Asiatics.105

Police began to arrest hawkers without licences. The Government had stopped such arrests since
the agreement at the end of January, but police were instructed to resume arrests after the end of
June.106

Satyagraha resumed. Essop Mia wrote to The Star that Indians would begin unlicensed hawking
as “protest and penance”. A prosperous businessman, he went hawking without a licence as the
first resister, and visited the houses of prominent whites to sell fruit.107 The Chinese Association
also decided on resistance. Chairman Quinn and other Chinese began hawking in Johannesburg.

On 16 August 1908, at a rally near the Hamidia Mosque, over two thousand registration
certificates and trading licences were collected and burnt in a huge cauldron “saturated with
paraffin and set ablaze by Mr. Essop Mia” in a demonstration of defiance.108 More certificates
and licences were burnt at a mass meeting on 23 August.109 The Times of London called it the
“the birth of a new spirit among the hitherto submissive races of Asia”.110

Offer of a Compromise by the Government

On 18 August Gandhi was invited to a high-level meeting to discuss the situation. It was
attended by General Botha, the Prime Minister, General Smuts, the Minister of Interior, and
other members of the Government as well as opposition members of Parliament. Mr. Hosken,
Mr. Cartwright and Mr. Quinn were also present.

After a three-hour discussion, the Government agreed to a number of concessions to meet the
objections of the Indians and Chinese to the Asiatic Act. The Act would be retained, but only as
a dead letter, and would not apply to those who registered or would register voluntarily. Those
who had resided in the Transvaal for three years before the Anglo-Boer War would be permitted

105
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 158-73; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 295-97.
106
Indian Opinion, 25 July 1908
107
Indian Opinion, 18 July 1908
108
Indian Opinion, 22 August 1908.
109
This demonstration was probably inspired by the swadeshi movement of 1905 in India, during which foreign
cloth was burnt in bonfires and people courted imprisonment.
110
Indian Opinion, 22 August 1908
to enter the Transvaal. A well-formed signature or a thumb impression would be accepted in
applications for licences.

A mass meeting of the Indian community was convened to discuss the offer by the Government.
Gandhi urged the meeting to accept it if the Government would make provision for the entry of a
few highly educated Indians. The community, however, insisted that the Asiatic Act must be
repealed.111

As the offer was rejected by the community, the Parliament passed the Asiatics’ Registration
Bill, incorporating the concessions by the Government.

Second Phase of Passive Resistance

The resistance from then on was not for the personal interests of the resisters, but against an
insult to Indians and India in the Asiatic Act and the Immigration Restriction Act which treated
Indians as less than equal.112

About two thousand Indians courted imprisonment within the next year.113

Hawkers, mostly Tamils, constituted a large group of resisters. Though poor, they contributed
£20 to the passive resistance fund in October 1908.114

The youth were most determined. Many volunteered before they were eighteen. Even twelve-
year-old children tried to defy the law and court arrest. Fathers and sons were in the prison at the
same time.

In October 1908, 17 children were sentenced, along with 36 adults, for re-crossing into the
Transvaal after being deported to Portuguese territory.115

Hira Nulji, age 12, crossed into the Transvaal from Natal at Volksrust. He was sentenced to 14
days.116

111
For further details, see Indian Opinion, 22 and 29 August 1908.
112
As Lord Ampthill said in his introduction to the first biography of Gandhi by J.J. Doke in 1909:

They [the Indians of the Transvaal] are not selfishly resisting a tax or insiduously striving for new
privileges, they are merely trying to regain that which has been taken from them – the honour of their
community.

Joseph J. Doke, Gandhi: An Indian Patriot in South Africa (London, 1909, reprinted by Publications Division of
Government of India in New Delhi in 1994), p. 2
113
Indian Opinion, 3 July 1909
114
Indian Opinion, 24 October 1908
115
Ibid.
116
Indian Opinion, 10 and 17 October 1908
Mohanlal Manjee, age 14, whose father was in prison and brother was deported to India, went
hawking without licence but was discharged with a warning. He went hawking again and was
sentenced to ten days with hard labour.117

Varadan Chettiar, son of the Chairman of the Tamil Benefit Society, served four terms of
imprisonment by the age of 19. Kuppusamy, son of veteran resister Thambi Naidoo, went
hawking with Manilal Gandhi after turning 16, and served three terms in prison in the Transvaal.
Manilal Gandhi started going to prison when he was 17 and was engaged in passive resistance
most of his life.118

Chinasamy Paul, 16, was deported from the Transvaal to India in 1910.119

Perumal, a minor son of V. Krishnasamy Naidoo, was deported with his father to India. When
they returned to Durban and crossed the Transvaal border, they were detained.120

Manikum Pillay, 17, crossed the Natal-Transvaal border with Gandhi and a group of Indians
from Natal, and was arrested.121

The resisters demonstrated great enthusiasm. Some of them asked the magistrates to sentence
them to longer terms.122

Mr. Fakira, a resister who went to prison several times, was sentenced in March 1909 to seven
days with hard labour for hawking without a licence. He asked the magistrate to sentence him to
one month, and added that he was also without a registration certificate and should be sentenced
to another three months. The magistrate declined to entertain his plea.123

On 24 June 1909, 60 Indians were sentenced in Pretoria to three months. The Transvaal Leader
reported that several of the accused laughed as they left the court and thanked the magistrate.124

117
Indian Opinion, 11 and 18 September 1909
118
Indian Opinion, 25 December 1909 and 22 January 1910. Later, during the last phase of resistance, Sorabji
Rustomjee and three students at Phoenix – Gokuldas Hansraj, Kuppusami (Moonlight) Mudaliar and Revashanker
Ratanshi Sodha – went to prison before they were 18.
119
Indian Opinion, 4 May 1910
120
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1910
121
Indian Opinion, 5 and 19 March 1910
122
Earlier, on 25 January 1908, 15 Indians and 11 Chinese were sentenced in Pretoria to three months with hard
labour for not registering under the Asiatic Act and defying the order to leave the Transvaal. One of the accused,
Hoosen Mustapha, told the court that the usual three month sentence was too short and asked it to make the sentence
three years. Another accused on hearing the sentence called out: “Why not six months? I would be more satisfied.”
Indian Opinion, 1 February 1908.
123
Indian Opinion, 20 March 1909
124
Indian Opinion, 3 July 1909
Indians workers came under pressure by their employers. Waiters at the Goldfields Hotel were
served with notices that they would be dismissed if they failed to furnish “duplicate registration
certificates”. The employer had been warned by the police that if he continued to employ
unregistered Indians he would be liable for a fine of £100. The waiters refused to register and
informed the employer that they were ready to be dismissed if the need arose.125

V. Ragloo, a cook at the officers’ mess at the Houtpoort jail, Heidelberg, was ordered to register
and he refused; he was dismissed and was not even paid the wages due to him.126Indian waiters
at Trocadero Restaurant, workers at a European cigar factory and an employee of Heath’s Hotel
were dismissed. They were later arrested and the court ordered that they be deported.127

Women were not invited to join the struggle as they were exempted from the Asiatic Act, but
they supported the movement and suffered much as the men, the breadwinners in most cases,
went to prison.128

Former residents of the Transvaal living in Natal and educated Indians joined the resistance by
crossing the border from Natal to the Transvaal. Sorabji Shapurji, a bookkeeper from Natal,
entered the Transvaal on 24 June 1908 to test the Immigration Restriction Act. He was
prosecuted for failing to produce a registration certificate under the Asiatic Act and the judge
ordered him on 10 July to leave the Colony within seven days. He disobeyed and argued that as a
British subject, he had the right to remain in the Transvaal. On 16 July, he was sentenced to one
month with hard labour under the Peace Preservation Ordinance.129

Dawad Mahomed, Parsee Rustomjee and M. C. Anglia, well-to-do merchants from Natal with
domicile and trading rights in the Transvaal, entered the Transvaal soon after, together with
several pre-war residents and educated Indians. They were deported to Natal with a warning and
re-entered; they were then sentenced to three months with hard labour. Several other groups
from Natal, encouraged by Gandhi, followed and served imprisonment.130

Ebrahim Osman, brother of Dada Osman, a well- known merchant in Durban, was imprisoned in
August 1908. He held a permit but refused to give duplicate thumb impressions. He was charged
under the Asiatic Act and was given the option of a fine or 14 days’ imprisonment without hard

125
Indian Opinion, 20 March 1909
126
Indian Opinion, 15 May 1909
127
Indian Opinion, 9 and 16 April 1910
128
See Chapter VI, “Women in the Frontline”.
129
Indian Opinion, 14 November 1908
130
Indian Opinion, 29 August 1908. For instance, on 7 December 1909, six educated Indians, accompanied by
Gandhi, crossed the Natal-Transvaal border: Joseph Royeppen, a barrister; Samuel Joseph, headmaster; David
Andrew, a clerk and interpreter; Abdul Gafar Fajandar, Acting Chairman of the British Indian Association; Ramlal
Singh, a clerk; and Manilal, Gandhi’s son. Twelve more resisters crossed the border on 11 March 1910: Kaji
Dadamian, Subramaney Achary, Rambory, Pragji Khandubhai Desai, Tulsi Jutha Soni, Essop Moosa Kolia, Kara
Nanji Soni, Mahabeer Ramden, Barjor Singh, Mahomed Ebrahim, Govindsamy Tomy, and Manikum Pillay. Indian
Opinion 25 December 1909 and 19 March 1910.
labour. He chose the latter.131 Omarji Saleji, the Vice-chairman of the Hamidia Islamic Society,
65 years of age, courted arrest in 1909 by destroying his registration certificate. He was
imprisoned for three months.132

Gandhi himself was sentenced to two months with hard labour on 14 October 1908 and to three
months with hard labour in February 1909.

The Chinese community in the Transvaal also offered resistance from August 1908. In 1908 four
Chinese - Kan Tong, Ah Wing, Long Lee and Ho Sing - were charged for failing to comply with
the Asiatic Registration Act.133 In March 1909 the Chinese community held a meeting in support
of the movement and to honour Leong Quinn, its leader, who was imprisoned. The following
resolution was adopted at the meeting:

This meeting of Chinese passive resisters in congratulating Mr. Leung Quinn upon being
sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard labour for the sake of conscience and
honour hereby determines to continue the struggle until the Transvaal Government shall
decide to treat the resident Chinese population with that justice and respect that are due to
subjects of a nation in treaty alliance with the British Empire.134

The meeting decided to send congratulations to Kasturba Gandhi on her husband’s

imprisonment.

By the end of 1908, most of the resisters began to be sentenced to three months with hard labour
and some to six months. The usual sentence for hawking without licence was only one or two
weeks with hard labour. But the government began to charge the hawkers with failing to produce
the registration certificate under the Asiatic Act, which provided for a longer sentence.

The authorities tried to intimidate the merchants and traders who had not abandoned their pledge.
They were sentenced to fines, without option of prison, and their goods were confiscated or
auctioned.135 European merchants refused to sell goods on credit to Indian shopkeepers unless
they dissociated themselves from the passive resistance.

131
Indian Opinion, 29 August 1908
132
Indian Opinion, 6 March 1909
133
Indian Opinion, 5 September 1908
134
Indian Opinion, 13 March 1909
135
Gandhi had not expected that the Government would resort to such measures. He wrote in the Gujarati section of
Indian Opinion (30 November 1907):

There is no need to say anything about the business of a person sent to gaol. He will have made
arrangements in advance for it. The Government will not be able to force anyone to close down his shop.
Nor can it auction his goods to recover the fine. It also does not appear likely that all the persons in a shop
will be arrested at the same time. Even while in gaol, one can look after one’s business: one may write
letters or send messages…” (CWMG, Vol. 7, p. 392).
The magistrate in Boksburg ordered the confiscation of the house of Mr. Moses, valued £300-
400 (buildings and household items including tables, benches, lamp, box, stove and saucepan)
and the house of Thomas Poonsamy valued at £200, in lieu of a fine of £2 each.136

European creditors demanded in concert that Cachalia, the Chairman of the British Indian
Association, pay back their loans immediately or abandon passive resistance. He was forced to
relinquish his estate into the hands of his creditors. E.I. Aswat, who succeeded him as Acting
Chairman, declared that he would follow the example of Cachalia.137 Their determination
stopped the European creditors from harassing others.

In the prisons, Indians were provided the rations for Africans, especially mealie pap, which they
were not used to. Many Indian prisoners were transferred to Diepkloof prison where conditions
were particularly harsh.138

Swamy Nagappan Padayachy, a young resister, was sent to the Johannesburg prison road-camp
and ordered to break stone from early morning in the bitter cold. He was struck by a warden and
his body was covered with bruises. He contracted double pneumonia and died on 6 July 1909,
soon after release.139

The Government, in collusion with the Portuguese authorities, began to send Indians without
registration certificates to Delagoa Bay for deportation to India. The deportees included Indians
born in South Africa. Indians with domicile rights in Natal were deported to India instead of
Natal. A number of Chinese were also deported with the Indians to Colombo in Ceylon which
was not their home country. These deportations were arbitrary and illegal as the persons were not
brought before courts. The conditions in Delagoa Bay and on the boats were deplorable. The
families of deportees were often left destitute and had to be supported by the community.

Gandhi sent Gabriel Isaac to Delagoa Bay to look after the deportees and wrote to India to ensure
that they would be received and assisted.140 Polak met the deportees who were landed in
Colombo and helped them to return to South Africa.

British Indian Conciliation Committee

Haji Habib, Haji Ojer Ally and other Indians, who had avoided imprisonment, set up a British
Indian Conciliation Committee in June 1909 to secure a solution without passive resistance. Haji
Habib was elected Chairman and George Godfrey, a lawyer, Honorary Secretary. The

136
Indian Opinion, 5 March 1910
137
Indian Opinion, 30 January and 6 February 1909
138
See Chapter VII, “Prison Conditions and Deportations”.
139
See Chapter VII. “Prison Conditions and Deportations” and Part II, “Biographical Notes on Some of the
Resisters”.
140
Indian Opinion, 21 August 1909 and 5 March 1910; see also Chapter VII, “Prison Conditions and Deportations”.
Committee decided to send a deputation to General Smuts to petition for the acceptance of the
demands of the Indian community and the release of the prisoners.141 The members agreed that
they would support passive resistance if the deputation failed.

A deputation of the Committee was received by General Smuts in the same month. According to
Indian Opinion (26 June 1909), they asked that the Asiatic Act be repealed, and that educated
Indians be admitted and exempted from thumb impressions. They also requested redress of other
grievances.142 General Smuts told them that the Asiatic Act would not be repealed though it
would not be enforced. Permission would be given in deserving cases for educated Asiatics to
enter the Transvaal but the Immigration Restriction Act would not be amended to remove the
distinction between whites and Asiatics.

Gandhi considered that the Conciliation Committee had failed and should dissolve itself.143

Second Deputation to London and the Formation of the Union of South Africa

The four colonies – Cape, Natal, the Transvaal and the Free State - decided in 1909 to unite to
form the Union of South Africa. General Botha and General Smuts went to London to ensure
smooth passage of the Union of South Africa Bill. Delegations were sent to London by the
Africans and the Coloured people to try to protect their interests.

The British Indian Association decided to send delegations to Britain and India to acquaint the
authorities and the public with the true situation with regard to the struggle. The decision was
endorsed at a mass meeting in June.144

A.M. Cachalia, Haji Habib, V.A. Chettiar and Gandhi were to constitute the deputation to
London. The deputation to India was to consist of N.A. Cama, N. Gopal Naidoo, E.S. Coovadia
and H.S.L. Polak. A few members opposed the decision to send only passive resisters in the
deputations and to include Polak, a European, in the deputation to India.145 The Government
promptly arrested Cachalia, Chettiar, Cama, Gopal Naidoo and Coovadia.146 Only Gandhi and
Haji Habib147 went to London and H.S.L. Polak to India.148

Gandhi wrote in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion (19 June 1909):

141
Indian Opinion, 12 June 1909
142
Indian Opinion, 26 June 1909
143
CWMG, Vol. 9, pp. 261-64
144
Cape Times, 24 June 1909; Indian Opinion, 31 July 1909.
145
Indian Opinion, 19 June 1909
146
Ibid.
147
Haji Habib was included in the delegation as he had agreed to join the resisters. But he did not court
imprisonment.
148
Indian Opinion, 21 August 1909
 The significant thing is that it has been decided to send a deputation consisting of satyagrahis. It appears
somewhat incongruous that those who have been defying laws should go to England to seek redress.
Hence, one can understand why there was a difference of opinion on this point.

This deputation cannot be defended as being consistent with the principles of satyagraha. Satyagrahis must
only suffer. They should depend on God alone. A satyagrahi’s success consists in the very fact of his
offering satyagraha. But all satyagrahis do not have the same spirit and the same trust in God. Moreover,
many Indians have not been able to continue satyagraha. They are nonetheless with the satyagrahis. They
want our struggle to come to an early conclusion….

Sending deputations to both countries cannot but bring some benefit. Our struggle is not properly
understood either in England or in India. If it can be properly explained in both the countries, that by itself
will surely mean much. It will lead to increased help from both countries, and to that extent the duration of
the struggle may be shortened….

…we must ask the community not to build high hopes on it. It is on pure satyagraha that we should really
depend.149

The mission to London was mainly concerned with discrimination in the Immigration Restriction
Act of the Transvaal and the admission of educated Indians under the Immigration Restriction
Act. Gandhi approached Lord Ampthill, Lord Crewe, the Colonial Secretary, and others to try to
persuade Smuts to reach an agreement with the Indian community. Gandhi was willing to accept
that the number can be restricted administratively so long as the law was untainted by explicit
racial discrimination. Smuts agreed to the repeal of the Asiatic Act and to admit six educated
Indians a year as permanent residents, but refused to accept any change to the law to remove
reference to Asiatics. The efforts towards an agreement failed.150

For Gandhi, this was a matter of honour for India. He could not accept a settlement in which
Indians were not accepted, even in theory, as equals. He pointed out that Indians enjoyed
equality in the eye of the law with Europeans in respect of the right of entry during the Boer and
British administrations until the Asiatic Registration Act and the Immigration Restriction Act
were enacted in 1907.151

In a statement given to the press in London on 5 November 1909, Gandhi and Haji Habib said:

… the admission of educated Indians on sufferance is useless because the struggle is not so much to secure
the admission of a few individuals as to conserve national honour. It is the unnecessary legal racial
disability which makes the situation so degrading and affords an abiding source of irritation to the whole
Indian nation.

They (Indians) submit that, by a judicious administration of the Immigration Act, all but a few – say six
highly educated Indians per year – may be prevented from entering the Colony. 152

149
Indian Opinion, 19 June 1909
150
Indian Opinion, 11 December 1909
151
Indian Opinion, 13 November 1909
152
CWMG, Vol. 9, pp. 518-19
Speaking at a farewell meeting in London on 12 November 1909, Gandhi said that people in the
Transvaal had chosen to go through sufferings for the principle of equality, the very bed-rock on
which the foundations of the British Constitution rested. It would be impossible for him and his
countrymen to owe allegiance to an Empire in which they were not accepted, even in theory, as
equals.

The Chinese did not send a delegation to London. Instead, in May 1910, Leung Quinn, Chairman
of the Chinese Association, sent a petition to the Chinese ambassador in London in which he
described the Asiatic Registration Act as “degrading, insulting and derogatory to our national
honour.” Out of a total population of approximately 900 Chinese, he wrote, over 150 had
suffered imprisonment for three months with hard labour. The prison life had been very onerous
as they were classed with the “Natives” whose manners, customs and diet were extremely
different from those of the Chinese. The Chinese community had become reduced to poverty
owing to the struggle. Mr. Quinn appealed to the ambassador to move the British Government to
have the obnoxious act repealed, to secure recognition of the right of Chinese subjects to enter
the Transvaal on the same terms as Europeans, and to obtain relief from illegal deportations and
imprisonments.153

Dwindling of the Ranks of Resisters

The number of resisters had already dwindled before the deputation went to London. A large
majority of those who defied the law were only prepared to go to prison once – for one or two
weeks for hawking without licence. Most of the community obtained registration certificates
under the Asiatic Act. By December 1908, 7,412 Asiatics had registered voluntarily.154

But the Tamils, a minority among the Indians in the Transvaal, had not weakened. Indian
Opinion reported on 20 June 1909, on the eve of the departure of the deputation, that 75 more
Tamils had been arrested. “There are now hardly any adults left in the Pretoria Location.”

A few months earlier, Gandhi had made an appeal to the Tamil community to stand firm:

The struggle has now reached the most critical stage. Whilst the majority of the other sections of the
community have fallen, being too weak, the majority of the Tamils and the Parsis have stood firm. The
brunt of the battle must, therefore, fall upon their shoulders… You have discharged yourselves brilliantly
hitherto.155

He received a letter in London on 4 October 1909 from Thambi Naidoo, the veteran passive
resister, that the Tamils were prepared to continue the resistance. He wrote:

153
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
154
Pretoria News, 2 December 1908; Indian Opinion, 12 December 1908.
155
Indian Opinion, 6 March 1909
 … I beg to inform you that all Tamil prisoners discharged from the prison during your absence are ready to
go to gaol again & again until the Government will grant us our request. I was in Pretoria on the 22nd and
23rd of last month in order to receive the Tamil prisoners who were discharged on those dates and I did
receive them with a bleeding heart. I could not recognise more than about 15 men out of the 60 prisoners
who were released. The reason for this was that they were so thin and weak, some of them nothing but skin
& bone, but in spite of this suffering that they have to undergo they were all prepared to go back to gaol
today…156

But the number of those willing to continue resistance had fallen to less than one hundred. The
authorities expected the movement to fizzle out. But Gandhi had faith that even a few
determined satyagrahis would ultimately prevail, though the struggle would last longer.

However, Gandhi faced a severe financial problem. He had borrowed money to continue
publishing Indian Opinion, as he had no income after he left law practice and devoted himself to
the resistance. The needs for assistance to resisters and their families had increased as many
resisters had become paupers. The office of SABIC in London had to be maintained.
Contributions from inside South Africa dried up.157 But help came in time from India.

Support from India158

During his visits to India in 1896 and 1901-02, Gandhi had met many leaders of public opinion
and publicised the Indian grievances in Natal and the Transvaal. He had developed particularly
close relations with Professor Gopal Krishna Gokhale, a highly respected Indian leader who later
became a member of the Viceroy’s Legislative Council. He had met Gokhale in 1896 and stayed
with him for a month in Calcutta 1901-02. He admired Gokhale’s personality and his concern for
morality in politics. He came to regard Gokhale as his mentor. Gokhale developed a keen interest
in the position of Indians in South Africa and Gandhi kept him informed of developments.

In 1909, when Polak was sent as a one-man deputation to India, Gandhi advised him to act under
the guidance of Gokhale. Polak was very effective in explaining the nature of the struggle in
South Africa. His speeches and writings were given wide publicity by the Indian press. He was
greatly helped in his mission by Gokhale and by G. A. Natesan, editor of Indian Review in
Madras.

156
From Gandhi archives at Sabarmati, SN 5107.
157
Earlier, considerable sums of money were donated by South Africans. For instance, Dawad Mahomed, Parsee
Rustomjee and N.C. Anglia collected funds, in between their prison terms, in Johannesburg, Krugersdorp,
Heidelberg, Standerton and Pretoria and raised almost £400 in about five days. Indian Opinion, 12 September 1908.

Gandhi wrote in a letter to Ratan Tata on 1 April 1912: “The financial sacrifice made by the community during the
struggle which has extended over a period of four years has been very considerable, and it has been my agreeable
experience to notice that those who have continuously gone to gaol for the sake of their and their country’s honour
have been also the men who have cheerfully spent most in aid of the struggle.” Indian Opinion, 6 April 1912.
158
For further details on support from India, see Chapter VIII, “National and International Support to the Struggle”.
Public opinion all over India was aroused by reports from South Africa and was united in support
of the struggle in the Transvaal as on no other issue. Financial contributions for the struggle
poured in. At the session of the Indian National Congress in Lahore in December 1909, delegates
were so moved by Gokhale’s speech on the resolution on South Africa that they contributed
18,000 rupees on the spot. Many women donated their jewelry to the South Africa Fund. At the
session of All India Muslim League, delegates contributed three thousand rupees. 159

As soon as Gandhi returned from London to Cape Town in November 1909, he received a cable
from Gokhale that Sir Ratan Tata had contributed 25,000 rupees.160 He had sent a cheque to
Gokhale along with a letter in which he said:

Have read with deep disappointment and regret the news that negotiations for a compromise on the
Transvaal question have fallen through and that Mr. Gandhi has left for South Africa to resume the
struggle…

I have been following with close interest the proceedings of public meetings that are being held in this
country to give expression to our feelings in the matter, but it seems to me that the struggle has now
reached a stage when our appreciation of it must take the form not merely of expression of sympathy, but
also of substantial monetary help… For myself I feel I should lose no more time in doing my duty by our
brave and suffering brethren in the Transvaal, and I have therefore great pleasure in enclosing a cheque for
Rs. 25,000 … the money to be spent on relieving destitution and in aid of the struggle generally.161

Mr. Tata’s contribution encouraged others to start fund-raising for the struggle in South Africa.

More Repression against the Resisters

The formation of Union of South Africa on 31 May 1910 resulted not in a more liberal attitude
by the authorities but in more repression.

The Coloured people observed 31 May, the Union Day, as a day of humiliation and prayer.
Gandhi, in a statement to the press, described the suffering of the Asiatics and said that if that
continued, the Union would only mean “a combination of hostile forces arrayed against them.”162

The Government continued deportation of Indians from the Transvaal to India.163 It appeared
that the authorities wanted to get rid of the Indians through repression and inducements.
Municipalities in the Transvaal began passing resolutions asking the Government to expel Indian
traders after paying compensation. Gandhi warned against acceptance of such proposals by any
traders. He wrote in Indian Opinion on 10 October 1910:

159
Indian Opinion, 22 January 1910
160
He made two more contributions of the same amount in 1910 and 1912. Indian Opinion, 4 December 1909, 12
February, 10 and 17 December 1910, 10 August 1912; CWMG, Vol. 11, p. 299.
161
Indian Opinion, 22 January 1910
162
Indian Opinion, 11 June 1910
163
See Chapter VII, “Prison Conditions and Deportations”.
 …we shall prove ourselves cowards if we allow the Government to drive us out. We think we have as
much right to be in this land as the whites have. From one point of view, we have a better right. The
negroes alone are the original inhabitants of this land. We have not seized the land from them by force; we
live here with their goodwill. The whites, on the other hand, have occupied the country forcibly and
appropriated it to themselves. That, of course, does not prove their right to it. A large number even from
among them believe that they will have to fight again to defend their occupation. But we shall say no more
about this. One will reap as one sows.164

This was the strongest denunciation by Gandhi of white domination in South Africa.

Provisional Agreement of 1911

But early in 1911, prospects for a settlement appeared. The resisters were tired after the long
struggle and Gandhi, as always, sought a negotiated settlement. On the other hand, the Union
Government was under pressure from Britain. It was anxious to calm the situation before the
Coronation of King George V which was to be followed by an Imperial Conference where
delegates from India were certain to bring up the treatment of Indians in South Africa.

Gandhi entered into correspondence with General Smuts as an immigration bill for the Union
was under consideration. Smuts was responsive to Indians demands. He assured Gandhi that he
intended to introduce legislation in the next session of Parliament which would grant legal
equality for all immigrants and repeal the Asiatic Act. Immigration of educated Indians would be
restricted by administrative means to six annually, rather than by legislation, as Gandhi had often
suggested as a compromise. Seven educated Indians suggested by Gandhi, as well as three
Mahomedans, would soon be given temporary authorisation to remain in the Transvaal.

Passive resisters and deportees would be allowed to register. When assurance was received that
passive resistance would be suspended, resisters would be released from prison.165

Well educated and well known Indians would not be required to give finger or thumb
impressions while taking out licences if they could sign their names clearly in English.

These assurances formed a provisional settlement of 20 May 1911.166 The second phase of
passive resistance came to an end.

164
Indian Opinion, 10 October 1910
165
The agreement was approved at a mass meeting after heated discussion as “there was intense distrust as to the
intentions of the Government.” Indian Opinion, 6 May 1911; CWMG, Vol. 11, pp.56-57.

The correspondence does not contain information on the release of Chinese passive resisters, but they were also
released. Gandhi indicated that there were then more Chinese than Indian resisters in prison. Indian Opinion, 27
May 1911.
166
For the correspondence between Gandhi and the Acting Secretary of Interior (on behalf of General Smuts), see
Indian Opinion, 29 April to 27 May 1911. While this was called a provisional settlement, Smuts seems to have
regarded it as a final settlement. The Acting Secretary of Interior wrote to Gandhi on 19 May: ‘The Minister trusts
By then, as Cachalia wrote to General Smuts on 12 September 1913,

… over 3,500 imprisonments were suffered by my countrymen during the struggle, over
100 deportations to India took place and even two deaths occurred…167

The Indians gained confidence and some respect from the Europeans. They were no more
regarded by the latter as mere coolies. But the agreement did not improve their economic
position or alleviate their many disabilities.

Gandhi wrote in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion (3 June 1911) under the title “What has
Satyagraha Achieved?”

A number of Indians sometimes question if satyagraha has achieved anything. All that they can see is that
people were tortured in gaol and put up with the suffering, and the utmost that was achieved in the end was
theoretical equality of rights in the matter of new immigrants which is unintelligible to most and unavailing
in practice. The only outcome of any value is that [a few] highly educated men will enter the Transvaal
every year whose services we may have no occasion to use.

He then listed 29 gains resulting from the campaign. Below are a few of those.

1. The Indian community’s pledge has been redeemed…

2. The obnoxious Act will be repealed.
3. Public opinion has been roused all over India about our disabilities.
4. The entire world has learnt of our struggle and has admired the Indians’ courage.
5. A law has been passed [in India] to prohibit the emigration of indentured labour to Natal.
6. It is impossible that the Committee of European Sympathisers with Hosken as Chairman would have
been called into being otherwise. The Committee is now likely to be useful to us in other matters as
well.
7. The prestige of the Indian community has risen and those who were wont to despise us have now come
to respect us.
8. The Government realises that we have become invincible.
9. The Indian community, once timorous, has now become brave, and those who were too afraid even to
make a mild request now speak out in a ringing voice.
10. By placing its trust in God, the community has demonstrated to the world the supreme value of
religion.168

Gandhi wrote to Gokhale on 19 May that since the provisional settlement met the demands of
passive resistance which concerned national honour, the community could devote its attention to

that the acceptance of the requests now made will be regarded by the Asiatic community as a final settlement of the
questions involved.” Indian Opinion, 27 May 1911.
167
Indian Opinion, 20 September 1913. According to a minute by Botha in 1910, the number of Indians imprisoned
in 1906-10 for noncompliance with the registration laws was 751, and for trading and hawking without a licence,
1,373. During the period from 1 January 1906 to 30 January 1910, the sentences were: simple imprisonment, 320;
imprisonment with hard labour for less than three months, 166; deportations to Portuguese territory and then to
India, 257; deportations to Mauritius, 3. R.A. Huttenback, Gandhi in South Africa: British Imperialism and the
Indian Question, 1860-1914. (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1971), p. 264n.
168
Indian Opinion, 3 June 1911; CWMG, Vol. 11, pp. 98-104. The numbers here do not correspond to the numbers
in the original.
disabilities which affected its material position such as restrictions on trade and landownership.
He said in this connection:
In Natal, the inhuman annual tax exacted from freed indentured Indians, their wives, and their little
children, male and female, is a burden that cannot but oppress the conscience of every Indian who has any
knowledge of the tax.169

Three Pound Tax in Natal

As the number of Indians grew in Natal, with many of the ex-indentured Indians (known as “free
Indians”) settling in the province, some Europeans started agitation against the influx of Indians.
They spread fear that the Indians would compete with Europeans in trade and jobs, and threaten
European dominance of the Colony.170 To satisfy both this movement and desire of many
employers for more Indian labour, the authorities decided to tax the Indians who remained in the
Colony after indenture. Indian workers who had given the best years of their lives to develop
Natal would be faced with the choice between returning to India and accepting re-indenture for
the rest of their lives.

Indentured workers were originally offered land and security after the end of the indenture, but
only a few received plots of land. The provision of land was abolished in 1891. Ex-indentured
workers were, however, able to lease land from Europeans, become market gardeners and
educate their children.

In 1895, Natal sent a delegation to India to propose a levy of £25 on Indians who did not return
to India or re-indenture. The Indian Government agreed to a levy of £3 on the understanding that
the non-payment of the levy would not be regarded as a criminal offence. The tax, called a
licence, was enacted in 1896 and came into operation in 1901.171

The tax was oppressive as the indentured labourers earned only six pounds a year. They were
required to pay £3, in addition to the £1 poll tax that all males had to pay. The Natal Indian
Congress protested against the tax but to no avail. Instead, under the Indian Immigration Act of
1903, the tax was extended to wives of the labourers,172 as well as male children over 16 and
female children over 13. The tax became prohibitive.

169
CWMG, Vol. 11, p. 81
170
In fact, Indian education was limited. Those who passed civil service examinations were denied jobs in
Government service.
171
Indian Opinion, 11 November 1911 and 24 September 1913; Joshi, The Tyranny of Colour, pp. 55-56. The tax
was similar to the poll tax imposed on Africans to force them to work in the white-owned mines or farms, but the
amount of tax levied on ex-indentured Indians was far higher.
172
Indentured women labourers received half the wages of men.
Many ex-indentured labourers stayed on in Natal but were not paying the tax as they could not
afford it.173 In order to collect the tax, the government passed a law in 1905 prohibiting
employers from employing Indians who did not produce the receipt for the tax. The employers
were required to deduct the tax from the wages.

The Government tried to recover the tax by civil process, by auctioning the meagre possessions
of the labourers, but could not imprison them. It soon devised a way around this. The magistrates
would order the families to pay the tax and if they did not pay, they would be charged with
contempt of court and sent to prison.

The tax forced women into prostitution and subjected them to constant harassment by the police.
An Indian wrote in September 1908:

I know of a poor Indian woman, who was employed in Berea as a nurse; and as her earnings did not meet
the demands made upon her she had to give herself to a man... The constables were constantly after her.
This poor woman was arrested by the Sydenham Police very often in 1906, sometimes two or three times in
a month… she had to go and sleep a night in the cell and return in the morning… 174

Many young men, especially those born in South Africa (knows as “colonial-born Indians”),
took up the issue from 1906. They sent petitions and held meetings denouncing the tax.175

Indian Opinion wrote on 29 August 1908:

To put an annual tax of £3 on a boy of 16 or a girl of 13 is iniquitous in itself, but when we know what the
effects of this tax are, we are led to marvel that the Government of this Colony can still call itself Christian.
In the existing economic circumstances of the Colony, it is a known fact that the imposition of the tax
compels the younger generation of Indian immigrants to live a life of servitude from the very first days of
arrival at an age of discretion… In the case of the girls and women, the outlook is horrible, for the
temptation to forego their womanhood must necessarily be tremendous… The Protector of Indian
Immigrants himself admits the utter impossibility of an indentured Indian being able to save sufficient to
enable him to return to India and live there upon the savings of five years of unexpectedly hard toil. In his
last Report, he shows how the average savings of the Indian returning time expired man scarcely exceeded
£8…

In 1912 a bill was moved in the Natal Legislative Assembly to abolish the £3 tax on women.176 It
was recommended by the Indian Immigration Commission and proposed by the Natal
Government. It was supported by Sir Liege Hulett, a leading planter. But the Assembly adopted
an amendment to give discretion to magistrates to relieve poor Indian women from the payment

173
According to the report of the Protector of Indian Immigrants, between October 1901 and the end of 1906, 21,943
men and women completed their first term of indenture and became liable to the tax if they remained in the Natal,
but 8,131 were unaccounted for. Report in Natal Mercury reproduced in Indian Opinion, 16 November 1907. Some
of these had probably moved to the Transvaal.
174
Indian Opinion, 5 September 1908
175
Indian Opinion, 16 November 1907 and 29 August 1908
176
Indian Immigration (Licences) Act Amendment Bill
of licence money.177 The women had to go through the humiliation of appealing to the magistrate
and, if he refused suspension of the tax, of being forced to re-indenture.178

Many Europeans in Natal recognised the futility and the injustice of the tax. Natal Mercury said
in an editorial on 17 November 1911 that the tax “is a disgrace to any civilised country, and a
foul blot on the name of British administration”.

It is a tax that every right-minded man and woman in South Africa must condemn as immoral and
flagrantly unjust.179

Indian Opinion publicised the inequity of the tax and the agitation against it. Gandhi and Polak,
who was editor of the paper, suggested that the youth in Natal prepare for passive resistance as in
the Transvaal as petitions had no effect without some force behind them.180 But it was not easy to
organise the indentured workers.

The South Africa British Indian Committee in London (SABIC) took up the issue with the
British Government.

But Gandhi, preoccupied with the passive resistance in the Transvaal until 1911, could not pay
much attention to action against other grievances of the Indians in the Transvaal and Natal. After
the provisional agreement in the Transvaal, he wrote on 27 November 1911 to Albert West,
manager of Indian Opinion, suggesting a well prepared campaign against the £3 tax.

With reference to the £3 tax, the first step to take is not to advise the men to refuse to pay the tax, but for
the Congress to send a petition to the Prime Minister, signed by all the Indians in Natal - say 15,000
signatures. There should be a mass meeting held. The Congress should then ask the Indians in the other
Provinces to support. We must then await the reply from the Prime Minister. Then there should be a
petition to Parliament next year, and, if Parliament rejects the petition, there should be an appeal to the
Imperial Government by the Congress aided by the other Associations in South Africa. Finally, the refusal
to pay the tax. Then, undoubtedly, the Congress should undertake to feed the wives and families of those
who may be imprisoned. The men would undoubtedly go to gaol, if there is a body of earnest workers. For
this purpose, either you will have to be in Durban continuously, or someone else will. The thing cannot be
taken up haphazard. If the men were asked to go to gaol today, I do not think you would find anybody
taking up the suggestion, but, if the preliminary steps as described above, are taken, by the time a final
reply is received the men will have been thoroughly prepared to face the music. I know, too, that the thing
is quite capable of being done, but one man at least must be prepared to devote the whole of his time to the
matter.181

Visit of Gopal Krishna Gokhale to South Africa

177
Immigration of Indians had practically stopped by then and the number of Indian traders had declined from 4,000
in 1895 to 1.040 by 1908. Statement by P.S. Aiyar, reported in Indian Opinion, 12 September 1908.
178
Indian Opinion, 26 October 1912
179
Natal Mercury, 17 November 1911
180
Gandhi wrote in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion on 3 October 1908: “…the main duty of Natal Indians in
this matter is to start an agitation on a big scale, to adopt satyagraha if necessary, and bring the system of indenture
to an end.” CWMG, Vol. 9, p. 83.
181
CWMG, Vol. 96, pp. 93-95
Gopal Krishna Gokhale visited South Africa, on the invitation of Gandhi, from 22 October to 18
November 1912. The British and Indian Governments welcomed his visit, in the hope that he
could mediate between Gandhi and the South African Government, as there was a growing
movement in India demanding firm action by the two Governments against South Africa.

Gokhale had studied the problem of Indians in South Africa, including the plight of indentured
labour, for several years. In February 1910, he had proposed in the Viceroy’s Legislative Council
that recruitment of indentured labour to Natal be prohibited. Aware of the strength of feeling in
India,182 the Government accepted the proposal and it was passed unanimously. Export of labour
to Natal was stopped, effective 1 July 1911. Though this measure was proposed as a retaliation
against Natal for the ill-treatment of Indians, it was hoped that it would end of the bogey of
Indians swamping the whites and lead to better treatment of Indians already settled in South
Africa.

Gokhale was treated with great respect by the South African Government at the request of the
British Government. He visited all cities and towns with Indian populations. The Gokhale
Reception Committees arranged impressive receptions which were attended by many Europeans.
Mayors of cities chaired meetings to welcome him.183

Gokhale met many groups of Indians as well as whites in order to study the situation in all its
aspects. He also called on John Langalibalele Dube, elected earlier that year as the first
President of the South African Native National Congress (later African National Congress), at
the Ohlange Institute near Phoenix and was warmly welcomed by him as well as the staff and
students.

Polak wrote in the special issue of Indian Opinion on Gokhale’s visit:

He came to study the situation on the spot, to encourage his countrymen in the performance of their duty to
India and to the Empire, to suggest remedies for their disabilities, to reassure the European Colonists that
their fears as to the numerical and political complexion of the country were appreciated and allowed for,
and to recall them to a recognition of their responsibilities to the State and to their voteless Indian
colonists.184

On 10 November, thousands of poor Indians attended a meeting at Lord’s Ground in Durban and
presented their grievances to him. One of their main grievances was the annual £3 tax imposed
by the Natal Government on indentured workers and their wives and children after the end of the
five-year contract. It was causing enormous suffering.185

182
Gokhale said in his speech in the Legislative Council: “Nothing had ever evoked more bitter feelings in India
than the continued ill-treatment of Indians in South Africa.” Indian Opinion, 9 April 1910.
183
Indian Opinion, 22 November and 7 December 1912
184
Special issue of Indian Opinion on “Hon. Mr. G.K. Gokhale’s Visit to South Africa, 1912”.
185
Indian Opinion, 26 October 1912; Ilangse Lase Natal, 15 November 1912; Indian Opinion, 8 February 1913.
According to official figures which Indian Opinion obtained from the Indian Immigration Trust Board and published
A few days later Gokhale was received by Prime Minister Botha, Smuts and Abraham Fischer,
the new Minister of Interior. He was assured at a two-hour meeting that the Asiatic Registration
Act would be repealed, racial bar would be removed from the Immigration Restriction Act and
the £3 tax would be abolished.

The visit of Gokhale drew special attention to the problem of the £3 tax in Natal.186

on 15 February 1908, there were then 20,657 indentured workers and 4,104 re-indentured. The number of the latter
increased since then as the contracts of the former expired.
186
Indian Opinion, 26 October and 2 November 1912
 IV. FINAL STAGE OF THE STRUGGLE, 1913-14
Satyagraha by Men and Women and Strike by Indian Workers

…the last stage commenced with sixteen men and women who sought imprisonment. This
was followed by a perfect storm. The whole community rose like a surging wave. Without
organisation, without propaganda, all – nearly 40,000 – courted imprisonment. Nearly
ten thousand were actually imprisoned.

- Gandhi in Young India, 20 April 1921

Gandhi had hoped, in the light of assurances by the Government to Gopal Krishna Gokhale, that
a settlement satisfactory to the Indian community could be reached soon. He closed the Tolstoy
Farm in January 1913 and moved to the Phoenix Settlement near Durban. He intended to
leave for India in a few months. But events in 1913 made the renewal of the resistance
unavoidable.

The planters and other employers in Natal were anxious to obtain more Indian labour and
favoured the continuation of the £3 tax in order to pressure the ex-indentured workers to re-
indenture as India had prohibited further export of labour to Natal. Many other whites in Natal
did not see the usefulness of the tax which provided little revenue and was ineffective and unfair.
The members of Parliament from Natal were divided.

The Botha-Smuts Government chose to succumb to the lobbying of the planters.

Gandhi regarded the failure to abolish the £3 tax and the breach of promise to Gokhale as a
matter of honour for India and Indians in South Africa. He considered calling on the Indian
workers to strike without going through the long preparation he had suggested to Albert West in
1911.

Validity of Indian Marriages – a New Issue

On 14 March, Justice Malcolm Searle of the Cape Supreme Court ruled in the case of Mariam
Bai that marriages performed according to the rites of a religion which permitted polygamy were
not legally valid in South Africa.187 As Gandhi wrote:

This terrible judgment thus nullified in South Africa at a stroke of the pen all marriages
celebrated according to the Hindu, Musulman and Zoroastrian rites. The many married

187
See Chapter VI, “Women in the Frontline”.
 Indian women in South Africa in terms of this judgment ceased to rank as the wives of
their husbands and were degraded to the rank of concubines, while their progeny were
deprived of their right to inherit the parent’s property. This was an insufferable situation
for women no less than men, and the Indians in South Africa were deeply agitated.188

A mass meeting in Johannesburg on 30 March 1913 passed a resolution requesting the

Government to introduce legislation recognising the validity of non-Christian marriages, and
declaring that unless that was done "it will become the bounden duty of the community, for the
protection of its womanhood and its honour, to adopt passive resistance".189 The Government
refused the request for remedial legislation and said that it did not propose to disturb existing
practices in spite of the Searle judgment. That was, of course, not acceptable to the Indian
community as it would leave the status of Indian wives totally uncertain, subject to the whims of
the authorities.

In May, Sonja Schlesin, the Honorary Secretary of the Transvaal Indian Women's Association, sent
a telegram to the Minister of Interior, General Smuts, informing him that the Association had
come to the conclusion that the honour of Indian womanhood was affected by the Searle
judgment and that unless the law was amended to recognise the validity of Indian marriages, the
women would offer passive resistance.190

Subsequently, on the proposal of Morris Alexander, Parliament adopted an amendment to the

Immigration Bill recognising non-Christian marriages solemnised in India. But because of hasty
drafting it did not recognise monogamous marriages solemnised by Indian priests in South
Africa.

Gandhi explained the position in an article in Indian Opinion on 1 October 1913. He pointed out
that before the Searle judgment Indian wives were recognised as lawful married wives of their
husbands. But an official of the Union Government, in pursuit of its policy of greater repression
of Indians, challenged the entry of a Muslim woman, Miriam Bai, at the Cape. Justice Searle,
called upon to decide the issue, pronounced that marriages performed according to the rites of a
religion that allows polygamy were not legal in South Africa. In the light of this and other
judgments which followed, “suddenly non-Christian Indians found that, in South Africa, their
wives occupied merely the position of concubines and their children were considered
illegitimate.” The demands of the community were three-fold:

Legalisation of monogamous marriages already celebrated and to be celebrated in South Africa;

The term “monogamous” to include marriages celebrated according to the rites of religions that may not
prohibit polygamy, so long as the woman whose union is to be recognised is the only wife of her husband;

188
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 276
189
Indian Opinion, 5 April 1913
190
See Chapter VI, “Women in the Frontline”.
 The admission of existing plural wives of domiciled Indians without granting such wives a legal status
apart from full residential rights.191

"The £3 Tax"

As stated earlier, the Government failed to abolish the £3 tax. It claimed that at the meeting
with Gokhale, it had only promised to consult the Natal legislators about the abolition of the
tax. After consulting some of the legislators, it decided not to abolish the tax but to take an
administrative decision not to collect it from wives of former indentured workers. The Indian
community could not accept this breach of promise to the eminent leader of India.

Moreover, the tax was causing immense suffering to the poor Indians. Many Indians had been
imprisoned. Some Indian women were driven to prostitution.

Gandhi called it a “blood tax”.192 It was not a tax to obtain revenue but a penalty. The
Government was in breach of its promise to the Indian Government that people who could not
pay the tax would not be imprisoned. Under South African law, if a debtor shows that he had
been unable, through want of means, to discharge a debt which he was ordered to pay, he could
not be imprisoned. But in most cases, the Magistrates, under the influence of the all-powerful
planters, disbelieved the evidence as to poverty and sentenced the men to be imprisoned for non-
payment.

The latest case in point is that of Sarjoo193. He has not paid for the last three years. He paid what he could
and then pleaded inability. But the plea was not accepted and he had to serve imprisonment with hard
labour for 30 days. And even this imprisonment does not free him from payment. If he is believed by a
police officer to have means, he can be re-arrested and re-sentenced unless he pays the tax.194

Gandhi wrote in an article in Indian Opinion on 20 September 1913:

The £3 tax is the sorest question from many points of view. It is a burden imposed upon a most helpless
class and it is a tax which was universally condemned during Mr. Gokhale’s stay last year in South Africa
and, as Lord Ampthill most emphatically states, “the Ministers in South Africa definitely promised Mr.
Gokhale that this £3 poll-tax should be removed and Ministers told the Governor-General that they had
given him this promise”. We hold that a promise given to Mr. Gokhale is a promise given to the Indian
community. It, therefore, becomes our sacred duty to offer passive resistance until the tax is repealed.

The abolition of the £3 tax was added to the demands of the resistance.

191
These wives were less than one hundred. Indian Opinion, 1 October 1913.
192
Indian Opinion, 24 September 1913
193
An ex-indentured Indian who had not paid his tax arrears. Maganlal Gandhi was summoned for employing him.
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 205.
194
Indian Opinion, 24 September 1913
Immigration Act of 1913

It may be recalled that, in the provisional agreement of 1911, the Government promised that the
Asiatic Registration Act of the Transvaal would be repealed, that there would be no “racial bar”
in legislation of the Union of South Africa and that existing rights would be maintained. Later
that year, it proposed an immigration bill for the entire Union which would have repealed the
Asiatic Registration Act. The bill was not fully satisfactory to the Indian community. Because
of opposition from anti-Indian members of Parliament, the Government did not proceed
with it in 1911.

It presented another immigration bill in 1913. In the Parliament, a few members friendly to
the Indian community were able to secure some amendments. The bill as finally adopted on
13 June was an improvement in some respects but did not preserve the existing rights of
Natal and Cape Indians and did not remove the “racial bar” involved in the prohibition
against residence of Indians in the Orange Free State. The bill received the assent of the
Governor-General on the next day and the Immigration Act came into force on 1 August.

Meanwhile, the administration of existing laws had become harsher. To quote Gandhi:

Formerly Indian wives were admitted without fuss and without much questioning. Now the Government
have instructed Immigration Officers to demand closest proof, and then, too, there are all kinds of quibbles
raised… Then, take the unreasonable deposit of £25 required from men who want to prove their domicile
as against £10 which used to be demanded before. Visiting passes which used to be issued fairly liberally
are now being granted in a most niggardly spirit. We know of cases in which sons have been refused
permits to visit their parents and business people to visit other provinces to collect their debts… The
tendency of the administration is to wipe out the resident Indian population by making its life in South
Africa as intolerable as possible. The administration of the Gold Law and the Townships Act in the
Transvaal and of the trade licensing laws in Natal and the Cape has been simply scandalous. 195

Gandhi entered into correspondence with General Smuts to ensure that existing rights were
preserved under the Immigration Act, but no agreement could be reached.

Gandhi’s Consultation with his Associates

Gandhi was convinced by the beginning of April that the Government had no intention to satisfy
Indian requests or even to implement the provisional agreement of 1911. He went to
Johannesburg to consult his associates about the renewal of Satyagraha.

Pragji Desai, one of his associates, recalled that immediately on arrival in Johannesburg,
Gandhi called a meeting of about a dozen old passive resisters who had proved their mettle
in the previous campaigns. This was the gist of what he said:

195
Indian Opinion, 20 September 1913
 The legality of our marriages and the three pound poll tax have become religious questions to me. With
me they are life and death questions. A fire is raging in my heart. These two acts must be repealed. They
involve the honour of our great country. This time no mass meetings are to sbe held, no resolutions are to be
passed, no deputations are to be sent anywhere. We are not going to beg and • collect money from anybody.
We will not carry on any press propaganda. I know that the spirit of the community is at its lowest ebb, but
that does not worry me. We have proclaimed to the world that in the code of satyagraha there is no such word
as "defeat". Can truth ever suffer defeat? I certainly want every one of you •to join the struggle. But this
time my conditions are very strict. If you wish to line up with me, you must first of all forget your wife,
children and other members of the family. You must forget even India. You must decide to fight, though
nonviolently, till death. If you join me, well and good… If you don't join, I •have decided to carry on the
struggle single-handed but with the utmost vigour… I must do or die.

All the satyagrahis who were present agreed to join the struggle.196

The meeting discussed whether women should be invited to take part in the struggle, as the
Searle judgement affected the women. After a full discussion, it decided to invite them to court
imprisonment.197

After his return to Phoenix, Gandhi informed the inmates about the implications of the Searle
judgment. Kasturba Gandhi was the first to volunteer, despite her poor health.198 Indian Opinion
reported on 1 October 1913:

The ladies [in Phoenix] were allowed to join the struggle after great effort was made by them to take part in
it. When Mrs. Gandhi understood the marriage difficulty, she was incensed and said to Mr. Gandhi: “Then I
am not your wife, according to the laws of this country.” Mr. Gandhi replied that that was so and added that
their children were not their heirs. “Then,” she said, “let us go to India.” Mr. Gandhi replied that that would
be cowardly and that it would not solve the difficulty. “Could I not, then, join the struggle and be
imprisoned myself?” Mr. Gandhi told her that she could but that it was not a small matter. Her health was
not good, she had not known that type of hardship and it would be disgraceful if, after her joining the
struggle, she weakened. But Mrs. Gandhi was not to be moved. The other ladies, so closely related and
living on the Settlement, would not be gainsaid. They insisted that, apart from their own convictions, just as
strong as Mrs. Gandhi’s, they could not possibly remain out and allow Mrs. Gandhi to go to jail.

Pragji Desai, “Satyagraha in South Africa” in Chandrashanker Shukla, Reminiscences of Gandhiji by Forty-eight
196

Contributors (Bombay: Vora and Co., 1951).

197
In July, passive resistance was launched in the Orange Free State by African and Coloured women against an
Ordinance requiring women over sixteen to carry passes. Women demonstrated in several cities defying the law,
returned the passes and confronted the police. Hundreds of women were arrested. Because of the determination of
the women, the authorities of the province let the Ordinance expire in 1919. Indian Opinion of 2 August 1913, in a
front-page article, hailed “Native Women’s Brave Stand”.

It would appear that the African women were influenced by the Indian resistance in the Transvaal. Julia Wells, We
have done with Pleading: The Women’s Anti-pass Campaign (Johannesburg: Ravan Press, 1991), p. 31. They in turn
perhaps encouraged the resistance of Indian women in 1913.
198
Gandhi made an error in Satyagraha in South Africa, written from memory many years later, in stating that he
had spoken to Kasturba after other women in Phoenix had agreed to court imprisonment. He wrote to Gokhale on
April 19, 1913: “Mrs. Gandhi made the offer on her own initiative…” Raojibhai M. Patel, an inmate of the Ashram
and a member of the first batch of satyagrahis from Phoenix, was present during the conversation between Gandhi
and Katsurba. He wrote in Gandhiji ni Sadhana (second edition) that he had pointed out the error to Gandhi and that
Gandhi had agreed, after consulting Kasturba, to correct the text.
Decision to Renew Passive Resistance and Invitation to Workers to Suspend Work

A mass meeting held by the British Indian Association on 28 April 1913, attended by about 700
people at the Hamidia Hall in Johannesburg, adopted a resolution that if the Indian demands were
not acceded to, passive resistance would be revived.199 The meeting was chaired by A.M.
Cachalia, Chairman of the Association, who said that the Immigration Bill of 1913 “cuts at the
very root of existence and must be resisted by those affected by it at any cost”. He stated that
if the Government did not heed to their demands, “they were bound, after exhausting all their
resources by way of petition, etc., to take up the well-tried weapon of passive resistance.” 200
The following resolution was passed unanimously:

This mass meeting of British Indians hereby endorses the action of the Committee of the British Indian
Association in forwarding to the Government its objections against the Immigration Bill and, inasmuch
as it effects the honour, the religious sentiment and the very existence of the Indian community in South
Africa, solemnly resolves that, in the event of the Government not conceding the request, Passive
Resistance, which has remained under suspense since 1911, be revived and continued, until the sufferings
of the Passive Resisters shall have proved to the Government and the Europeans of South Africa the
earnestness of the community and, therefore, the necessity of granting relief. 201

The resolution was proposed by Joseph Royeppen and seconded by Imam Saheb A.K. Bawazeer
(Chairman, Hamidia Islamic Society). It was supported by P.K. Naidoo (Secretary, Tamil
benefit Society), Dadoo 202 (Krugersdorp), Dharman Naicker, E.S. Coovadia (Treasurer,
Hamidia Islamic Society), Bhikhabhai Patel (Secretary, Patidar Association), M.P. Fancy
(Secretary, Hamidia Islamic Society), Jeevan Premji (Chairman, Patidar Association), Tekchand,
E.M. Salooji and Kalila Singh (Germiston). The meeting was attended by European supporters,
amongst them Lewis Walter Ritch and Hermann Kallenbach.203

Gandhi began correspondence with the Government to find a solution, but no agreement seemed
possible. He wrote to the Assistant Secretary for Interior on 3 September:

… if the negotiations now going on prove abortive, the struggle will be revived on a wider issue. Several
most important items have been omitted from my correspondence for the purpose of securing a settlement
and in order to show that we are not pining for a revival of the struggle. 204

After it was clear that the negotiations had failed, he sent a telegram to the Secretary for Interior
on 10 September that revival of struggle had become imperative.205

199
The decision was taken by British Indian Association of the Transvaal alone as the Natal Indian Congress was
divided and members of its leadership opposed passive resistance. Indian Opinion, 3 May 1913.
200
Ibid.
201
Ibid.
202
Father of Dr. Yusuf M. Dadoo, a prominent leader of the liberation movement from the 1930s.
203
Indian Opinion, 3 May 1913
204
Indian Opinion, 13 September 1913
Cachalia then wrote a long letter, on behalf of the BIA, to the Secretary for Interior on 12
September informing him that “it has been most reluctantly and with the utmost regret decided to
revive passive resistance, owing to the inability or unwillingness of the Government to concede
the points submitted by Mr. Gandhi in his letters to you…”206 He recalled the satyagraha in the
Transvaal, the provisional settlement and the breach of promise by the Government. He wrote:

As is well known, over 3,500 imprisonments were suffered by my countrymen during the struggle, over
100 deportations to India took place, and even two deaths occurred, owing to the suffering gone through
during the crisis. Several families were rendered homeless, and they had to be supported from public funds.
Then came the provisional settlement of 1911, which the Indians thought not only promised them what they
had been suffering for but also meant an attitude of friendliness towards them such that, almost complete
prohibition of Indian immigration being obtained, 207 the resident Indian population would be free from the
state of uncertainty it had lived in and might look forward to a steady improvement in its status, as a
permanent element of the new nation that was forming in South Africa. Moreover, the inauguration of the
Union gave it some hope, though it filled it equally with misgivings, and threw on the passive resisters a
responsibility for the whole of the Union instead of for the Transvaal only. But the community was soon
disillusioned. The administration of existing laws specially affecting it grew steadily harsher… What has
been termed the “northern” spirit began to pervade the administration in Natal and the Cape. Thus the spirit
of the settlement certainly began to be broken as soon as it was effected.

Mr. Cachalia then referred to the visit of Gopal Krishna Gokhale and said:

… declarations were made by responsible statesmen inducing the expectation that a satisfactory
(Immigration) Bill would be passed during the ensuing session, and that the iniquitous and admittedly
unjust tax of £3 on certain ex-indentured men and women would be withdrawn. The Hon’ble Mr. Gokhale
declared at public meetings that he had every confidence that the tax would be abolished both for men and
women.

But the last session dashed all hope to the ground. The Draft Immigration Bill broke almost every condition
of the settlement of 1911, and it showed that the community was to expect nothing from the Government…
The attempt of the Government to remit the £3 tax only on women showed also that they, at any rate, were
not prepared to remove it from men. 208

Despite the hostile spirit of the Government, Cachalia continued, Mr. Gandhi was authorised to
enter into negotiations for a settlement by submitting proposals which, if accepted, would have
just, but only just, sufficed to fulfill the letter of the provisional settlement of 1911. The
Government not only rejected most of Gandhi’s proposals, but were showing by their
administration of the new Immigration Act that it was their desire not only to keep out new
immigrants, but also to prevent domiciled residents from re-entering, and to put obstacles in the
way of wives of domiciled Indians entering the respective Provinces. In the circumstances, there
was now no course left open to the community but to take up passive resistance again, which

205
Ibid.
206
Rand Daily Mail, 15 September 1913
207
India prohibited export of indentured labour to Natal from 1 July 1911.
208
Rand Daily Mail, 15 September 1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 184-85.
now naturally would not be confined to the Transvaal alone, and which, on this occasion, would
be taken up by women as well as men.

Mr. Cachalia concluded:

The leaders of the community fully realise their responsibility in the matter. They know also what they and
their countrymen will have to suffer. But they feel that, as an unrepresented and voiceless community
which has been so much misunderstood in the past and which is labouring under a curious but strong race
prejudice, it can only defend its honour and status by a process of sacrifice and self-suffering….

In conclusion, I beg to state that the struggle will be continued so long as:

(1) a racial bar disfigures the Immigration Act;

(2) the rights existing prior to the passing of the Act are not restored and maintained;

(3) the £3 tax upon ex-indentured men, women, and children is not removed;

(4) the status of women married in South Africa is not secured;

(5) generally, so long as a spirit of generosity and justice does not pervade the administration of the existing
laws referred to herein.209

Gandhi wrote in Indian Opinion that if the Government continued its hostility and if the
Europeans of South Africa continue to pass resolutions demanding their destruction by a process
of compulsory civic starvation, “we must meet them by showing that we are capable of dying for
our honour and an honourable existence in South Africa, not by fighting them bodily, but by a
process of voluntary suffering which at once purifies and dignifies.”210

On 28 September, Gandhi informed the Government that Indian workers would be invited to
suspend work until the Government agreed to take steps to abolish the £3 tax. He wrote to the
Secretary of Interior on 28 September 1913:

But what I would like to impress upon the Government is the gravity of the step we are about to take. I
know that it is fraught with danger. I know also that, once taken, it may be difficult to control the spread of
the movement beyond the limits one may set. I know also what responsibility lies on my shoulders in
advising such a momentous step, but I feel that it is not possible for me to refrain from advising a step
which I consider to be necessary, to be of educational value and, in the end, to be valuable both to the
Indian community and to the State. This step consists in actively, persistently and continuously asking
those who are liable to pay the £3 tax to decline to do so and to suffer the penalties for non-payment and,
what is more important, in asking those who are now serving indenture and who will, therefore, be liable to
pay the £3 tax on completion of their indenture to strike work until the tax is withdrawn. 211

209
Ibid.
210
Indian Opinion, 20 September 1913
211
Indian Opinion, 22 and 29 October 1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 214-15. It was rather daring of Gandhi to think of
a strike by indentured workers soon after Africans strikes had been ruthlessly suppressed. In January 1911, Africans
workers at three gold mines went on strike. They were forced back to work by the police and white miners; many
were jailed. African mineworkers struck work in 1913 demanding a raise in pay; police armed with bayonets and
In a statement explaining the Indian position,212 given to the press and published in Indian
Opinion on 15 October, it was made clear that

Indians do not fight for equal political rights. They recognise that, in view of the existing prejudice, fresh
immigration from India should be strictly limited, provision being made for the entrance of a sufficient
number annually for reasonable wear and tear…

The statement noted that meetings in support of Cachalia’s letter had been held at Johannesburg
(representing all the principal towns in the Transvaal), Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London,
Woodstock, Durban, Maritzburg, Tongaat, Verulam, and other centres.

Gandhi did not expect large numbers of people to court imprisonment. "What they might lack in
numbers”, he said, “would be made up by the earnestness and the unconquerable will of the
few." Those who could not go to prison could help by holding meetings, organising
demonstrations, collecting subscriptions, helping the families of prisoners, etc.213

The Pioneer Party from Phoenix

On 15 September 1913, twelve men and four women left the Phoenix Settlement to defy the
immigration law of the Transvaal. They boarded the train in Durban for Volksrust in the
Transvaal, to be arrested for crossing the provincial boundary. The group included five members
of Gandhi’s family. It consisted of:

Mrs. Kasturba Gandhi, wife of M.K. Gandhi

Chhaganlal Khushalchand Gandhi, nephew of M.K. Gandhi, Joint -- manager

and Gujarati editor of Indian Opinion

Mrs. Kashi Chhaganlal Gandhi, wife of Chhaganlal Gandhi

Mrs. Santok Maganlal Gandhi, wife of Maganlal Gandhi, nephew of M.K. Gandhi

Mrs. Jayakunvar (Jeki) Manilal Doctor, daughter of Pranjivan Mehta, a friend of

M.K. Gandhi

Ramdas Mohandas Gandhi, third son of M.K. Gandhi

Parsee Rustomjee, businessman and a prominent satyagrahi

rifles drove them down in to the shafts. Many workers were sentenced to six months in prison. “The 1913
Mineworkers’ Strike” at http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/1913-mineworkers%E2%80%99-strike, accessed on 2
October 2013.
212
Indian Opinion does not indicate the organisation which issued the statement. It was probably a statement by the
British Indian Association.
213
Indian Opinion, 3 May 1913
 Solomon Royeppen, educated Indian, nephew of Joseph Royeppen

Rugoo Govindoo, a machinist and compositor in the Phoenix Press

V. Govindarajulu (Rajoo, Govindaswami), student at Phoenix school

Raojibhai Manibhai Patel, teacher and compositor at Phoenix

Maganbhai Haribhai Patel, teacher at Phoenix school

Revashankar Sodha, son of Ratanshi, a satyagrahi, and Rambhabai, student at Phoenix

school

Sivpujan Budree, son of Ahir Budree, a satyagrahi, student at Phoenix school

Gokuldas Hansraj, student at Phoenix school

Coopoosamy Moonlight Mudaliar, son of Mr. and Mrs. Peter Moonlight Mudaliar,
satyagrahis, student at Phoenix school214

There was no announcement of the departure of the group for Volksrust. It refused to give names
to the Immigration Officer at Volksrust to avoid the possibility that the relatives of Gandhi may
be recognised and not arrested.215 Chhaganlal Gandhi, acting on behalf of the group, made the
following statement to the Immigration Officer:

I, on behalf of the party travelling with me, make this declaration that I am travelling with a party of 12
men (adults) and 4 women and we are entering the Transvaal now without any documentary reasons for
doing so and that we are not prepared to undergo the education test nor any other test required by the
present law (being practically Passive Resisters against the said law). Further that we, being passive
resisters, refuse to recognise any of the provisions of the existing law. 216

Members of the group were arrested at Volksrust on 16 September, charged on 18 September

under the Immigration Act of 1913 as “prohibited immigrants” and deported to Natal on 22
September. They were rearrested on re-crossing border and sentenced to three months’
imprisonment with hard labour.

The authorities at Volksrust had no accommodation at the police station for the resisters. Local
Indian merchants, among them Valli Peerbhoy, A.M. Badat, S.M. Munshi and Mrs. G.A. Bayat,

214
Indian Opinion, 1 October 1913
215
Gandhi himself was not arrested on several occasions when he crossed the Transvaal border as the Government
wished to avoid publicity abroad.
216
Indian Opinion, 20 September 1913
provided accommodation and fresh food until they were moved to the prison in
Pietermaritzburg.217

Bai Fatima, wife of Sheik Mehtab, a childhood friend of Gandhi, decided on her own to court
arrest. Her mother Hanifa Bibi, her seven-year-old son218 and her servant Akoon, decided to go
with her. It was extraordinary for Muslim women at the time to break the purdah and engage in
political activities. They left Durban on 8 October for Volksrust and the adults were sentenced to
three months with hard labour.219 The judge refused to let the boy accompany his mother. He
stayed with A.M. Badat until his father could take him back to Durban.

Satyagraha in the Transvaal

Gandhi left Durban for Johannesburg on 26 September 1913 and addressed a mass meeting on
28 September. Resistance in the Transvaal began the next day.

On 29 September 1913, S.B. Medh, Pragji Desai and Manilal Gandhi borrowed some ragged
clothes from hawkers and went hawking with heavily laden baskets on their heads with fruit and
vegetables. They were sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment with hard labour.220 On 8 October,
after they served their term in prison, they were marched, handcuffed, from the prison at the Fort
to the courthouse and charged under the Asiatic Registration Act. The case was remanded.221
After release, they again sought arrest by hawking. This time they were accompanied by Dahya
Parbhu, Bhaga Mancha, Soopia Pillay, Annamaly, Khusal Morar and Verasamy Francis. They
were all arrested and sentenced to 10 days’ imprisonment with hard labour.222 The charges under
the Asiatic Act were withdrawn on 16 October on instructions from the Government. On their
release, they discovered that the Government was no longer prosecuting unlicensed hawkers223
and proceeded to Natal. Wearing dhotis and pagrees (turbans) they crossed the Natal border on
23 October.

Rajoo Narsoo and Willy Morgan spent 14 days in prison for hawking without licence. They were
marched handcuffed from prison to the court on 9 October for trial under the Asiatic Act. The
charges against them were also withdrawn on 16 October.224 They then went to Natal.

217
Indian Opinion, 20 September and 1 October 1913
218
He was an adopted son and was named Khan.
219
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
220
Indian Opinion, 8 October 1913
221
Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913
222
Ibid.
223
The Government decided in the middle of October not to arrest hawkers. The satyagrahis, most of them veterans
of the earlier Transvaal satyagraha, were disappointed and proceeded to Natal or the Cape to get arrested by crossing
the border into the Transvaal or to help the Indian workers on strike in Natal in protest against the £3 tax.
224
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913
On 13 October, P.K. Naidoo, Jiwan Premji (Chairman, Patidar Association), Mawji Premji
(Vice-president), Kunverji Dulabhbhai, Dayal Parbhu, Jivanji Devji, Morar Kanji, Parbhu
Chhana, T. Coopoosamy Naidoo, Narayansamy and Krishnasamy went hawking without permit.
But they were not arrested.225

On 22 October, Bhaga Dhana, Narsai Ranchand and Sana Kalan went out hawking but failed to
get arrested. They later assisted with the passive resistance fund.226

In Germiston, ten men (Bhawani Dayal, Pujari Gulabdas, L.B. Singh, Ragbeer Singh, S.M.
Singh, Gaysidin Maharaj, Tiloki Singh, Lahoria M Singh, H. Singh and R.S. Singh) and 6
women (Mrs. Somar, Mrs. Mandar, Mrs. Bandu, Mrs. Behari, Mrs. Doowat and Mrs. Maharaj)
went hawking on the streets but were not arrested. They then went to the platform of the railway
station and hawked. They were charged with trading on railway premises, but were soon
released. Seven of the men, led by Bhawani Dayal, then took the train to Natal to continue their
resistance.227

Beginning of Strike of Coal Miners near Newcastle228

The decision of the Government to refrain from arrests in the Transvaal had results it did not
anticipate. Eleven women volunteers from the Transvaal, mostly Tamils, with six small children,
went to Viljoen’s Drift in the Orange Free State with Hermann Kallenbach on 2 October and
returned to the Transvaal near Vereeniging, expecting to be arrested for crossing the Transvaal
border.229 They were left free. They then spent a few days in Vereeniging hawking without
licence and were again not arrested. E.I. Asvat and other merchants in Vereeniging provided
hospitality and paid fares for them to go by train to Charlestown on the Natal side of the border
with the Transvaal.230 They were accompanied by Thambi Naidoo. Bhawani Dayal and six other
resisters joined them in Germiston.231

225
Ibid.
226
Ibid.
227
Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913
228
On the strike of Indian workers in Natal, see also Surendra Bhana and Goolam Vahed, “The Satyagraha
Campaign, 1913 to 1914” in The Making of a Social Reformer: Gandhi in South Africa, 1893-1914 (Delhi:
Manohar, 2005); and Maureen Swan, “The 1913 Natal Indian Strike” in Journal of Southern African Studies, 10
(2), April 1984, pp. 239-58.
229
This first group of Transvaal women satyagrahis consisted of: Mrs. N. Pillay (Parenithama), mother-in-law of
Thambi Naidoo, the oldest of women satyagrahis; Mrs. Thambi Naidoo (Veerammal); Mrs. N.S. Pillay (Lachimi),
sister-in-law of Veerammal; Mrs. A. Perumal Naidoo; Miss Minachi Pillay; Mrs. M.B. Pillay; Mrs. K. Chinsamy
Pillay; Mrs. M. Tommy Ramalingam; Mrs. K. Murugasa Pillay; Miss Baikum Murugasa Pillay; Mrs. P.K. Naidoo;
Mrs. Bhawani Dayal (Jagrani). All but Mrs. Dayal were Tamils.
230
Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913. The instructions to the resisters were that in towns where the passive resisters
courted arrest but were not arrested, the Indian community should be requested to provide fares for the next
destination. If they did not, the resisters should walk to the next destination. Ibid.
231
Jagrani, wife of Bhawani Dayal, was one of the women passive resisters.
When the party reached Volksrust later in the day, the authorities took them off the train and told
them that they were detained but not arrested. They insisted in vain that the authorities find
lodging and food for them. Badat and other Indian merchants provided them hospitality. The
authorities told them the next day that they could go where they pleased.232

They took the train to Charlestown on the Natal side of the border. Gandhi and Kallenbach were
also going on that train to Durban in a third class compartment. Thambi Naidoo and Bhawani
Dayal got into the compartment and were able to consult Gandhi in the ten minutes between
Volksrust and Charlestown. Gandhi advised them to proceed to Newcastle if they were not
arrested in Charlestown and persuade the coal miners to strike. They did not know if the strike
would take place, but felt that the women would at least be arrested for inciting the miners to
strike.233

The party went from Charlestown to Newcastle on 13 October, and stayed at the home of
Jesudasen Lazarus, a strong supporter of the satyagraha. Mr. Lazarus, Mrs. Lazarus and her
sister, Miss Thomas, were most hospitable.

On the same day, 13 October, a meeting of Indian residents of Newcastle was held in St.
Oswald’s School. About 200 were present. I. Seedat was elected to the chair. Thambi Naidoo,
Bhawani Dayal, Mrs. P.K. Naidoo, Mrs. Thambi Naidoo and Lazarus were among the speakers.
The meeting unanimously adopted a resolution, moved by Lazarus, endorsing the passive
resistance movement. It elected a committee with Seedat as Chairman. Lazarus was elected a
member of the committee. At the meeting the following offered to court imprisonment:
Moonsamy Naidoo (Railway Sirdar), M.R. Chetty, Simon Ephraim and R.M. Kurrian.234

On 14 October, Thambi Naidoo, Bhawani Dayal and Ramnarain Singh, together with the women
resisters from the Transvaal, went to the railway barracks in Newcastle. When they were
explaining the £3 tax to the Indian workers, the station master threatened to charge them with
incitement to cause disturbance. The three men were taken to the Charge Office and to prison.
Though the women tried to get charged, they were ignored. The men were discharged the next
day.235

The party went to Fairleigh Colliery on 15 October. All 36 Indians in the mine agreed to strike
the next day.236

Kallenbach stopped in Newcastle on 16 October on the way from Durban to Johannesburg. He

wrote in his diary:237

232
Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913
233
Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work , pp. 636-37. She cited the autobiography of Bhawani Dayal Sannyasi,
published in Hindi, as the source for this information.
234
Natal Witness, 18 October 1913; Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913.
235
Ibid.
236
Natal Mercury, 22 October 1913. Indian Opinion reported on 22 October that about 78 Indians struck work at
Fairfield Colliery the next day. Four were arrested and sentenced to two weeks with hard labour.
 There I visited the Indian merchants (about 25 in number). They gathered in the evening and I explained to
them the whole situation as it stood at the moment. At 9 o’clock, I left with two guides and eight coal
miners to explain the whole campaign to 200 more miners (approximately 12 miles north of Newcastle). 238
However, police spies phoned the management of this mine about our intention and hence these miners
were kept by force underground. Seven of the 8 miners whom we sent to announce our arrival were
arrested… Police and two managers threatened us with an instant arrest. Our calmness, lack of fear and the
inner force to accept anything that comes, put them on their mettle, and they permitted us to remain outside
their mine boundary, observed by a policeman on the horseback. 239

A goods train happened to pass by and they returned to Newcastle after midnight.

On 17 October, the movement spread beyond expectations. E.P. Ephraim of Newcastle, a

correspondent of Indian Opinion, reported:

The appearance of the ladies simply acts like a charm and the men obey the advice given them without any
great argument being required.240

Indian workers at Newcastle, Cambrian and Durban Navigation Collieries came out that day.241
The next day, Henry Polak arrived in Newcastle. He saw the Magistrate and mine managers and
explained that the Indians did not want to create a disturbance, that there would be no
intimidation and that the strike would end when the £3 tax problem was resolved. More collieries
struck work.

Indian traders in Newcastle assisted the strikers with food and accommodation. They supplied
cooking pots, bags of rice and dholl (dal), and vegetables. Many individuals served as
volunteers.242 Indian Opinion reported on 22 October:

Mr. Dwarkasingh, a leading storekeeper of Newcastle, has agreed to waive all his book debts against those
of his customers who are on strike or in gaol.

A meeting was held at Dannhauser under the chairmanship of Mr. Sheikh Ameer. Over 1,000 Indians were
present and all decided to strike. The news spread throughout the district like wildfire.

European opinion in Newcastle is almost unanimous in regard to the justice of the demand of the strikers.
Many agree that the strike was the only course left open…

237
Kallenbach sent extracts from his diary for the period between 14 September and 17 November 1913 to his sister
Jeanette Sammel. These extracts are reproduced in Isa Sarid and Christian Bartolf, Hermann Kallenbach, Mahatma
Gandhi’s Friend in South Africa: A Concise Biography (Selbstverlag, Berlin: Gandhi-Informations-Zentrum, 1997).
238
Ballengeich mine
239
Kallenbach diary in Sarid and Bartolf, Hermann Kallenbach.
240
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913. The £3 tax had been resented by the workers for several years and they
welcomed wider support which they expected when Thambi Naidoo and the women arrived. The workers had some
experience of strike action. On 7 April 1911, about 450 Indian men, women and children struck work at the
Burnside Colliery and went to the Magistrate’s Court to complain about their grievances. The Magistrate sentenced
more than twenty leaders to prison and ordered the rest to return to work. But the others refused to leave the Court
and their colleagues were released in the afternoon. Indian Opinion, 22 April 1911.
241
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913
242
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
 A party of 15 proceeded from Newcastle on Saturday243 to Volksrust to court arrest.

The Transvaal ladies are engaged in looking after the wants of the women and children…

Stormy weather prevails and our correspondent says it was a most pathetic sight to see the women and
children trudging patiently into Newcastle.

A prominent auctioneer of Newcastle, a stranger to Mr. Naidoo, expressed his feelings to him, saying that
he was in full sympathy with the movement and that, if the Indians stand and fight, he would assist
financially….

The Transvaal ladies and men took up hawking on Thursday. 244 The Police would not arrest them. In reply
to some people who complained to the Chief Constable, the latter said that there was no room in the gaol.

The women passive resisters from the Transvaal were finally arrested in Newcastle on 21
October under the Vagrancy Act as “idle, disorderly or suspicious persons.” They were
sentenced to the maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment with hard labour245 and sent
to the prison in Pietermaritzburg with the six children. On 29 October, a second batch of women
passive resisters from the Transvaal, accompanied by Thambi Naidoo, left Johannesburg for the
strike area.246

Gandhi had not made preparations for the strike. He had perhaps in mind that the colonial-born
youth and the resisters would explain the tax to the miners so that the strike could begin after his
arrival in Newcastle. But even before he arrived on 17 November, hundreds of coal miners had
come out on strike and hundreds more were coming to Newcastle daily.247

Gandhi also stayed with the Lazarus family.248 He was surprised at the response of the workers
to the call for a strike.

243
18 October
244
14 October
245
“In sentencing, the Magistrate made insulting references to Mr. Polak, who was watching the proceedings, and
told the ladies he hoped that the strikers would later retaliate upon them. Much indignation was felt amongst the
local Indians at the Magistrate’s bitter language to the ladies.” Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913.
246
Natal Mercury 22 October 1913; Indian Opinion, 5 November and 24 December 1913. This second group of
Transvaal women passive resisters consisted of: Miss Bismith, Mrs. Kabuthar, Mrs. R. Moonsamy Mudaliar, Miss
Valliamma Moonsamy Mudaliar, Mrs. Peter Moonlight Mudaliar, Mrs. Govindsamy Naidoo, Mrs. V.S. Pillay and
Mrs. Shivaprasad. After going around the mining area, they went to Durban and courted arrest, but were released on
reaching the jail. They were arrested in December when they crossed the Transvaal border and sentenced to three
months with hard labour. They were sent to the prison in Pietermaritzburg where the first group of Transvaal women
resisters were confined.
247
Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work, p. 642
248
Gandhi wrote:

“… Mr. D. Lazarus, a middle-class Christian Tamilian, who owned a small plot of land and a house
consisting of two or three rooms… He not only sheltered me but he devoted his all to the cause. My
stopping there converted his house into a caravanserai. All sorts and conditions of men would come and go
and the premises at all times would present the appearance of an ocean of heads.” (Satyagraha in South
Africa, p. 287).
 I may say that, though I had hoped that the strike would come about, I had never expected that the response
would be so spontaneous, sudden and large. 249

Indians constituted one-third of the work force on the coal mines which totalled about 11,000.
The majority of the Indians were indentured and were not yet liable for the payment of the £3
tax.250 But they joined the strike in sympathy with those who completed indenture, and as they
themselves would be liable to tax in the future. 251

Sergeant W. Mann of the South African Military Rifles (SAMR) reported to the Attorney
General on 25 October 1913:

They are merely taking up an attitude of “Passive Resistance” and they have not, so far created any
disturbance, and are remaining quietly at the various compounds where they have struck work. 252

Government officials and mine-owners were concerned about the impact the strike would have
on coal output. They were perhaps even more concerned that if the £3 tax was abolished, the
success of the Indians might induce the Africans to strike.253

Gandhi proceeded to address miners, exhort them to strike voluntarily and urge them to remain
nonviolent and refrain from intimidation of non-strikers.

He had to interrupt his stay in Newcastle and go to Durban to attend a mass meeting of the Natal
Indian Congress (NIC) on 19 October. At that meeting, one of the secretaries of the NIC attacked
him for causing an erosion of the position of Indian merchants and for giving special importance
to his white associates, Kallenbach and Polak. Gandhi saw that there was a group hostile to him.
He requested the Chairman to dissolve the meeting. Those who supported passive resistance
marched to the residence of Parsee Rustomjee and formed the Natal Indian Association (NIA)
with Dawad Mahomed as President, Omar Haji Amod Jhaveri and L. Gabriel as joint honorary
secretaries, and E.M. Paruk as Treasurer. At its next meeting on 26 October, NIA offered its
warm congratulations and encouragement to the strikers against the £3 tax, set up a passive

249
Rand Daily Mail, 23 October 1913
250
At the end of 1912, 11 Collieries employed a total of 3,635 Indian men, 3,020 indentured and 615 “free Indians”.
By the end of 1913, a total of 3,705 were employed on 12 Collieries, 2,854 indentured and 851 “free Indians”.
Reports of the Protector of Indian Immigrants for the year ended 31st December 1912 and the year ended 31st
December 1913.
251
Talana Museum, Dundee, Monthly Report of the Deputy Commissioner of Mines, Province of Natal, for the
Month of October 1913. The workers had many serious complaints about their employers and working conditions,
but the strike was only on the issue of the tax. According to the monthly Report of the Deputy Commissioner of
Mines, the workers were “in sympathy with the free Indian who is liable for the tax”.
252
Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, Sgt W. Mann (SAMR) to Attorney General, 25 October 1913, AGO 756/1913,
Vol. I/8/146.
253
Africans were also employed on the mines, and many miners lived in barracks at the mines. Talana Museum,
Dundee, Minutes of Emergency Meeting of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 20 October 1913; Talana Museum,
Monthly Report of the Deputy Commissioner of Mines, Province of Natal, for the Month of October 1913.
resistance fund and undertook to provide for the maintenance of the strikers by every means in
its power.254

The strike continued to spread. Gandhi issued a Manifesto on 22 October highlighting the
importance of abolishing the tax as a pre-condition for workers to return to work:

To All Whom it May Concern

Indentured and ex-indentured Indians have been and are being advised to strike work and to court
imprisonment until the Government promise to repeal the £3 tax in terms of their promise to the Hon.
Gokahle C.I.E. The advice has been necessary also as a demonstration against the statement made by the
Government that the majority of the European employers of Indian labour are against the repeal of the tax.
The undersigned appeals to the European employers to assist on repeal of this iniquitous tax. As soon as the
promise of repeal is received men on strike will be advised to resume work.

(Sgd) MK Gandhi

Dannhauser, 22 October 1913255

The strike spread from Newcastle to collieries near Dundee. On 23 October, 300 miners at St.
George’s Colliery, 850 at Natal Navigation, 500 at Glencoe, 100 at Hatting Spruit and 300 at
New Shaft were out on strike. Railway workers, both at Glencoe and Hatting Spruit, were also
out.256 The Dundee and District Courier reported on 23 October:

“The Collieries at Newcastle, Dannhauser, Ingagane and Hatting Spruit as well as the railways to that point
are affected and nearly the whole of the Indians employed are out. There is no disorder…”

On 25 October, Gandhi estimated that nearly 3,000 workers were on strike.257

On 28 October, Gandhi and C.R. Naidoo addressed a large crowd of men, women and children
at the Hindu Temple grounds in Dundee. According to Naidoo, 3,000 Indians were present. By
29 October, approximately 500 Indians at the Dundee Coal Company and Burnside mines struck
work and they were followed by about 300 employed at the South African Collieries. 258

On 29 October, Indian workers at the Cambrian and Durban Navigation mines left in a body and
proceeded towards Newcastle. Workers from Natal Navigation mine also went on strike.259

The strike overshadowed the satyagraha and the £3 tax overshadowed the other demands of the
satyagraha. The strike was in the headlines every day in the local newspapers while the courting
of imprisonment by satyagrahis was hardly reported.

254
Rand Daily Mail, 23 October 1913; Natal Mercury, 27 October 1913.
255
Talana Museum, Dundee, Minutes of Emergency Meeting of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 24 October 1913
256
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
257
Ibid. Also Natal Mercury, 27 October 1913.
258
Natal Mercury, 29 October 1913
259
Dundee and District Courier, 30 October 1913; Natal Mercury, 30 October 1913.
The authorities began to arrest workers whom they considered ringleaders. At Fairleigh Colliery,
13 strikers were sentenced to two months with hard labour.260 At Dannhauser, 22 Indian workers
at South African Railways struck work on 20 October and were imprisoned at Newcastle. Of the 22,
14 indentured men were sentenced to prison for seven days and eight free Indians to three
months with hard labour. Five waiters from the Commercial Hotel261 and three employees at the
Cottage Hospital262 were sentenced to two months for striking. Sixteen of the strikers at Newcastle
Colliery were sentenced on 21 October for two months with hard labour.

On 25 October, a joint meeting of leading employers of Indian labour - coal, sugar and
agricultural industries - was held at the Chamber of Commerce in Durban. Gandhi was invited to
the meeting to present his views. He made it quite clear to the employers that the present strike in
coal mines was due to the failure of the Union Government to honour the promise given by
them repeatedly that the annual £3 tax would be repealed. He told them that the strike would
end when they could secure the abolition of the £3 tax.263

The strike gave an opportunity to the employers to declare their opposition to the inhuman tax
and persuade the Government to abolish it. But, instead, the employers sought Government
support to repress the workers.264

The mine owners sent a telegram on the same day to the Minister of Interior, General Smuts,
asking whether the Union Government had given an assurance regarding the abolition of the tax
on men, women and children. Smuts replied:

… Government never gave such promise as Mr. Gandhi alleges, either to Mr. Gokhale or anybody
elsewhere. Mr. Gokhale at interview with some members of Government, made strong point of repeal of £3
tax. Government replied that tax was unimportant from revenue point of view, but was imposed as matter
of policy in Natal. Government promised to consult Natal members of Parliament, and if they had no
objection on grounds of policy, Government would take question of repeal into favourable consideration.
Government carried out their promise by consulting Natal members, the majority of whom objected to
repeal of tax, otherwise than affecting women and children. Government feel that promise of repeal under
present state of affairs would be a public disaster, with consequences which none can foresee, and are not
disposed to consider it.265

260
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913. They were: Moonsamy, Chinnappen, Valoo Govinder, Pauliah, Kassava
Naidoo, Rajoo, Bhagavathee, Suboodoo, Thavasee, Mariemuthu, Moonsamy, Reddy and Applesamy.
261
Ibid. C.V. Aboo, I.T. John, Saunpaul, Rushpaul and Nagappen.
262
Ibid. R.D. Moonsamy, Jimmie Benjamin and R.K. Packiree.
263
Natal Mercury, 27 October 1913; Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913.
264
For the response of the mine owners and mine managers to the strike and their correspondence with the
Government, see: (a) Minutes of the Emergency Meetings of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 22 October to 18
November 1913; and (b) Minutes of meetings of Natal Mine Managers’ Association, 20 October to 21 November
1913. These documents are available at Talana Museum in Dundee.
265
Talana Museum, Dundee, Minutes of Emergency Meeting of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 28 October 1913;
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913.
Prime Minister Botha endorsed the statement of Smuts in a speech at Nylstroom.266

In reply to an enquiry from the Natal Indian Association about the statement by Smuts, Gokhale
wired:
Definite assurance repeal tax. Asked for authority to make an announcement. The Ministers said it was
necessary to mention the matter at first to the Natal members, and suggested, I should merely state that
Ministers had promised most favourable consideration.267

Indian Opinion, as well as local newspapers, published the statement by Gokhale and other
evidence contradicting the statement of General Smuts and showing that the consultation with
Natal legislators was a farce.268

On instruction from the Coal Miners Association, the mine managers tried to assemble the
workers and persuade them to return to work, offering pay for the days lost in strike, but the
workers said that they would take instructions only from Gandhi. The mine owners then began to
stop rations to the striking miners. The magistrates tried many workers identified by the mine
managers and sentenced them to imprisonment.

The mine owners pressed the Government to arrest the strikers and send them back to the mines.
The Government, however, preferred to wait as it expected the strike to fizzle out once the
strikers lacked food and accommodation. On 30 October the Coal Owners’ Society received a
“Confidential” telegram from the Minister of Interior which read as follows:

Yours yesterday it is evident the Indians are courting arrest because in that way they would be fed. The
Government would have to look after them and they know there would be serious difficulties caused in
respect of gaol accommodation. For the present therefore the best policy seems to be to meet them with
their own tactics and let them proceed where they like. A sufficient force of Police will be at the various
points to preserve the law order. Lack of food should soon compel them to return to work. This of course does
not apply to ringleaders who will be dealt with so far as laws allow but for cases of this kind Natal Laws are
very deficient. Kindly treat this confidentially. 269

The employers were not satisfied as they were losing money. They continued to send telegrams
asking the Government to deploy police or armed forces to quell the strike. The demands
increased after the strike began to spread to the sugar plantations. The Natal Mine Managers’
Association sent a telegram to the Minster of Interior and the Minister of Justice as follows:

Under instructions of Magistrate Dundee Mines have despatched compound Managers and Sirdars to
Charlestown270 to identify their respective deserting Indians stop. Indians cannot be recovered unless
adequate Police force accompanies batches to Mines from Charlestown we therefore strongly urge that this
be provided stop. We intend prosecuting all Indians now but would like sentences deferred on those Indians

266
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
267
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
268
Indian Opinion, 5 and 12 November 1913
269
Natal Mine Managers’ Association Reports, 31 October 1913
270
By then, Indian workers on strike had marched to Charlestown. See “The Great March” below.
 agreeing to resume work at once and doing so, if they resume to work sentences to be passed and worked
out at Mines under adequate Police supervision to be provided immediately at each Mine stop. Unless
Police are actually placed on property Mine will not be able to keep Indians at work stop. Mines will
provide suitable gaol accommodation on lines similarly adopted for convict Natives after Native Rebellion
of 1906, and will if necessary pay cost of Police force escorting Indians from Charlestown and those acting
as Guards at Mines. We will also ration Indians serving sentences at Mines stop. If you approve foregoing
instruct Magistrates and Police accordingly advising us of Government’s decision. 271

The Minister of Interior responded to the telegram stating that a large concentration of South
African Mounted Rifles (SAMR) under General Lukin were being deployed in the "perturbed
area”. General Lukin was also instructed to proceed to Durban to make arrangements as he
deemed necessary.272 The police arrangements were in the hands of the SAMR at Dundee and if
that was not adequate reinforcements could easily be sent from the Transvaal Police without
delay. A force of 16 White and 20 Coloured Constables was stationed at Hatting Spruit.273

Meanwhile, even before the meeting with the mine owners, Gandhi recognised that the presence
of thousands of strikers in Newcastle threatened health problems and that the workers might
come under pressure from the mine owners. He decided, after consulting his associates, to lead
the workers out of Newcastle and take them to the Tolstoy Farm in the Transvaal. He explained
the situation to the workers and they agreed to march. He hoped that the Government would
arrest and take charge of the workers or agree to abolish the £3 tax when it saw the determination
of the workers.

The Great March

On 29 October, Gandhi led 250 strikers – mostly from the Ballengeich mine - on a march to
Charlestown, a town about 35 miles north of Newcastle, situated on the Natal side of the Natal-
Transvaal border. They covered the distance in two days on meagre rations. By that time, Indians
were on strike in all coal mines except for Elandalaagte.

Kallenbach arrived in Newcastle shortly before the march to guide the strike leaders, inform the
striking miners of Gandhi’s instructions as to their behaviour during the struggle, and to help
women and children to go to Charlestown by train. He related the developments in Newcastle in
his diary.274

After Gandhi left on the march on 29 October, Kallenbach wrote, about 150 men and about 400
women and children remained in Newcastle. They were joined by about 300 men and women
during the course of the day. On 30 October, Thambi Naidoo led about 250 strikers on the march

271
Natal Mine Managers’ Reports, 10 November 1913
272
General Lukin arrived in Durban on 11 November.
273
Minutes of an Adjourned Meeting of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 15 November 1913; Natal Mine Managers’
Association, Minutes of Meeting, 21 November 1913.
274
Kallenbach diary in Sarid and Bartolf, Hermann Kallenbach, pp. 38-61.
to Charlestown. On this day another 500 men, women and children joined the movement from
adjoining mines. On 31 October, a passive resister led the march with about 250 strikers.275
Kallenbach sent about 400 women and children by train to Charlestown. About 650 miners
arrived in Newcastle. The next day, Kallenbach was charged with violation of health regulations
for arranging a temporary outdoor kitchen to feed thousands of workers, but was acquitted on a
formality. On this day about 280 workers were marching and Kallenbach sent 350 by train to
Charlestown. On 2 November, 200 were marching and 250 took the train to Charlestown; 600
more arrived in Newcastle. On 3 November, while he was meeting the Chief Magistrate, the
manager of Ballengeich mine came in and reported in an excited manner that unrest had also
broken out among the Africans on his and other coal mines.276 On this day another 250 miners
marched, 300 took the train and 150 new strikers arrived in Newcastle.

Reuter reported on 3 November that 1,500 Indians were concentrated in Charlestown by the
previous day.

Charlestown Indian merchants assisted in every possible way, and put their premises at the disposal of the
resisters. The resisters throughout Sunday were most orderly, and there were no disturbances. There have
been no further arrests by the police. A hundred and fifty who were arrested by the police on Thursday
were all from Ballengeich Colliery.

A lot of stores have been forwarded from the depot at Newcastle, where rations have been consigned from
voluntary contributions in Durban.277

Indian merchants in Charlestown assisted the strikers with food and clothing. The mosque
grounds were used for cooking purposes.

Kallenbach left for Johannesburg and Pretoria on 3 November to arrange for the delivery of
tents. Returning to Newcastle on 5 November, he led 600 strikers on the march to Charlestown.
About 300 more marched and one hundred more arrived in Newcastle. When he arrived in
Charlestown there were three thousand strikers although there was shelter for only about 1,500.
Gandhi and Kallenbach spent the night under the open sky in the field among a number of
strikers.

Gandhi cabled Gokhale from Charlestown that 5,000 workers were on strike, of whom 4,000 had
to be fed, including 300 women and 600 children. Three hundred were in jail and 200 more had
been arrested.278

Natal Mercury reported on 5 November that almost all the strikers had left Newcastle.

275
Leaders of groups of marchers included: Thambi Naidoo, Albert Christopher, A.D. Pillay and P.K. Naidoo.
276
On the coal mines, only about one-third of the miners were Indians; the rest were Africans. Gandhi made it clear
that the movement would not be encouraging the African miners to strike.
277
Natal Witness, 4 November 1913
278
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 257
Gandhi described the march of the first group led by him in an article which he began writing on
his voyage from Cape Town to London in July 1914:

Each person was given enough cooked rice and dal to last for two days. Everyone carried his or her things
in a bundle. The following conditions were read out to them:

1. It was probable that I would be arrested. Even if this happened, they were to march on until arrested
themselves. Though every effort would be made to provide them with meals, etc., on the way, they should
not mind, if by chance, food was not available on some days.

2. For the duration of the struggle, they should abstain from drinks.

3. They must not retreat even in the face of death.

4. They should expect no shelter for night halts during the march, but should sleep on the grass.

5. No trees or plants on the way should be harmed in the least nor should any article belonging to others be
touched.

6. If the Government’s police came to arrest anyone, the latter should willingly surrender.

7. No resistance should be offered to the police or any others; on the contrary, beating should be patiently
borne and no attempt should be made to protect oneself by offering violence in return.

8. They should cheerfully bear the hardships in gaol and live there as if the gaol was a palace.

There were persons of every caste and community in this pilgrim-band…

On the very first night, we had the experience of sleeping out on the grass. On the way, warrants were
received for the arrest of about 150 persons and they surrendered themselves readily. A single police officer
had come to make the arrests. He had no assistant; how the arrested men were to be taken away became a
problem. We were only six miles from Charlestown. So I suggested to the officer that these persons could
proceed along with me and that he should take them into custody at Charlestown, or do whatever he
thought fit after obtaining instructions from his superiors. The officer agreed and left us. We arrived at
Charlestown. This is a very small township, with a population of barely 1,000. There is only one main road
and the Indian population is negligible. The whites were amazed, therefore, at the sight of our party. At no
time had so many Indians appeared in Charlestown. There was no train ready to convey the prisoners to
Newcastle. Where could the police keep them? There was not enough room for all these arrested persons at
the Charlestown police station. And so, the police handed them over to me and agreed to pay for their food.
This is no small tribute to satyagraha. In the ordinary course of things, how could people arrested from
among us be placed in our charge? If some of them had escaped, the responsibility would not have been
ours. But everyone knew that it was the job of the satyagrahis to court arrest and they had, therefore, full
confidence in us. The arrested men thus stayed with us for four days more. When the police were ready to
take charge of them, they went away willingly.

More and more people were being recruited to our party. On some days 400 would join, on others even
more. Many arrived on foot, while women came mostly by train. These were put up wherever there was
space in the houses of Indian merchants of Charlestown. The local Corporation also offered us houses. The
whites did not give us the slightest trouble. On the contrary, they went out of their way to help us. One Dr.
Briscoe took it upon himself to give us free medical aid and, when we proceeded beyond Charlestown, he
 gave us gratis some expensive medicines and useful instruments. 279 Our food was cooked in the mosque
premises. The fire had to remain lit all the twenty-four hours. The cooks came from among the strikers.
During the final days, four to five thousand persons were being fed. Yet these workers never lost heart. In
the morning, the meal consisted of mealie pap with sugar and some bread. In the evening they had rice, dal
and vegetables. Most people in South Africa eat thrice a day. The indentured labourers always have three
meals, but during the struggle they remained content with only two. They like to have small delicacies with
their meals, but these, too, they gave up at this time.

What to do with these huge crowds of people became a problem. If they were kept somehow in
Charlestown, there was the likelihood of an epidemic breaking out. Moreover, it was not desirable that so
many thousands accustomed to hard work should be kept in a state of idleness. It needs to be mentioned
here that, although so many poor people had come together in Charlestown, not one of them committed a
theft. The police had never to be called and they had no extra work on our account. However, it seemed
best not to keep waiting in Charlestown. It was therefore decided to proceed to the Transvaal and, if not
arrested, to go on ultimately to Tolstoy Farm. Before commencing the march, the Government was
informed that we were proceeding to the Transvaal to court arrest, that we had no desire to stay there or to
claim any rights, but that, so long as the Government did not arrest us, we would continue our march and
finally stay on Tolstoy Farm. If, however, the Government promised to withdraw the £ 3 tax, we were
willing to return. But the Government was in no mood to consider this notice. It was misled by its
informants who assured it that the strikers would soon be exhausted. 280

Meanwhile, the local authorities were arresting miners at the request of mine managers and
sentencing them. They expected that the strikers, who were now deprived of rations of food from
their employers, would return to work, but only a small number did.

On 3 November, 160 Indians were arrested at Ballengeich Colliery and brought before the
Magistrate but sentence was deferred so as to allow the Indians the opportunity of returning to
work; 60 had already returned during the last week of October. An Indian who was discovered
trespassing on the property for the purpose of receiving rations was arrested and sentenced to
imprisonment. Two Indians had been discovered harbouring some of the indentured Indians and
proceedings were instituted against them.281

Indian Opinion reported on 29 October:

An ex-indentured Indian (Syed Ebrahim), working on one of the mines, having struck work, went to the
mine compound to fetch water. He was immediately dragged by the compound manager to his office and
severely assaulted. The marks made by the stick on his back were visible as though they had been brand-
marks. The stick having been broken in the use, the poor man was kicked about. He was also fisted in the
mouth, so much so that he bled profusely. Syed Ebrahim is a man of powerful build and more than a match
for the compound manager, but as a true passive resister, he bore the pain heroically. He is now being
looked after by the community at Newcastle.

279
Dr. Brisco, District Health Officer in Charlestown, donated £4 worth of medicines.
280
Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, AGO 1/8/146, 224/A1913; D84, 7 November 1913, Deputy-Protector to
Attorney-General; Golden Number of Indian Opinion, 1914, Souvenir of the Passive Resistance Movement of South
Africa 1906-1914 (Phoenix: Indian Opinion Press, 1914) .
281
Minutes of Emergency Meeting of the Natal Coal Owners’ Society, 3 November 1913. Mr. Lazarus was brought
before the Court at Newcastle on 29 November and was charged with harbouring indentured immigrants. He was
later discharged.
By 5 November 26 Indians employed at St. George’s Collieries, Hatting Spruit, were charged
before the Resident Magistrate in Dundee for refusing to perform labour. Others were charged
with absence from work, for being away from 25 October to 5 November. All the accused were
represented by Advocate J. W. Godfrey. They all pleaded guilty and refused to return to work
unless the Government gave a definite assurance that the £3 tax would be repealed:

A fine of £5 each was imposed upon five of the free Indians, and a writ of execution was ordered to be
issued to attach their cattle for payment of the fine. These Indians accepted the situation cheerfully, saying
that they would rather face death than continue to pay the tax. 282

The women and children were discharged and ordered to return to work. The Prosecutor asked
that deferred sentences be imposed on the other 17 Indians. Godfrey objected saying that the
magistrate should impose the penalty required by the law, especially as none of the Indians
would return to work. The Magistrate addressed the Indians at length to persuade them to return
to work. He assured them that their grievances would be forwarded, with the support of the
employers, to the proper quarter. The Indians listened attentively, and then unanimously replied:

All we know is that we shall not resume work till this £3 tax is repealed. You may do what you like with
us. We have not had anything to eat for the past three days, and we can only die once. 283

The Magistrate sentenced them to seven days’ imprisonment with hard labour. The prisoners
immediately shouted out in chorus: “What’s the use of seven days? Why don’t you give us five
or six months?”284

Natal Witness reported on 6 November that 160 Indians were then in gaol; in addition 338
Indians had been arrested but they had not been detained owing to the absence of prison
accommodation.

Gandhi wrote from Charlestown to the Secretary for Justice, Pretoria, on 31 October:

I have the honour to inform you that over 207 men and women have surrendered themselves for arrest on a
warrant from the Natal Police, but, as the Government have no accommodation for them and facility for
feeding them, they are being fed and housed by the Indian Committee here at Government expense. The
majority were arrested yesterday, but no transport has yet been provided. There is a large number of women
and children.285

Gandhi repeatedly informed the Government that he was anxious to avoid a march into the
Transvaal and invited the Government to arrest the strikers and take charge of them. But there
was no response. The Government hoped that the movement would fizzle out when Gandhi was
unable to support the marchers. The Governor-General reported in a despatch to the Colonial
Office on 6 November:

282
Natal Witness, 6 November 1913
283
Ibid.
284
Ibid.
285
Indian Opinion, 12 November 1913
 You will observe that Mr. Gandhi appears to be disconcerted by the inaction of the Government, and to have made
representations to the effect that it was their duty to arrest the demonstrators and to provide them with board and
lodging. On Monday last General Smuts explained his policy to my Secretary. He said that his refusal to interfere with
many of the Passive Resisters in the Transvaal had led to a collapse, for the time being at any rate, of the movement,
and he thought that a similar policy of laissez-faire might produce similar results in the case of the Natal strikers. Mr.
Gandhi appears to be in a position of much difficulty. Like Frankenstein he found his monster an uncomfortable
creation, and he would be glad to be relieved of further responsibility for its support. The Department had been anxious
to arrest him, but this course had not commended itself to the Ministerial mind. If Mr. Gandhi were arrested, he would
be able to disclaim further responsibility for the maintenance of his army of strikers. So long as he remained at liberty,
the Indians would look to him to provide for their necessities. General Smuts therefore proposed to adhere to his policy
of non-interference, and he would place no obstacles in the way of strikers entering the Transvaal. They did not belong
to the trading classes and could do little harm. Moreover, there would be no difficulty in returning most, if not all, of
them to Natal later on. At present they were quite peaceable, and if later on, under the stress of hunger or hardship, they
became lawless, they could easily be dealt with. It was not unlikely that in the end, when the supply of provisions
began to fail, they would ask to be sent back to their work in Natal, and he would then be prepared to provide transport
for their return. He doubted whether Mr. Gandhi would agitate among the workers on the sugar estates unless the strike
on the coal mines proved successful. The number of strikers now on the march is estimated at 4,000. Mr. Gorges 286 told
my Secretary today, that this morning a body of about 2,400, including approximately 130 women and 40 children, had
crossed into the Transvaal. They would be allowed to proceed, in the hope that when they were well inside the
Province, Mr. Kallenbach and Mr. Polak might be tempted by the supineness of the Authorities to lead further bodies of
men across the frontier. Those two gentlemen, whom the Department were particularly anxious to secure, would then
be arrested on a charge of aiding and abetting the entry of prohibited immigrants into the Province. The rank and file
would, so far as possible, be left undisturbed. The detention of Mr. Polak was particularly desirable, as he had been
designated to proceed to India for the collection of funds.287

But General Smuts miscalculated the determination of the workers and the support to the
movement in South Africa and in India.

March into the Transvaal and Arrests of Leaders and Workers

Early in the morning on 6 November Gandhi led 2,037 men, 127 women and 57 children across
the border at Volksrust, approximately five miles beyond Charlestown.288 He informed Gokhale
of the plan for the march and cabled:

… endurance and distress are great. Several births have occurred in the concentration camps which have
been formed. Two deaths of babies occurred during the march. 289

About 40 men and 500 women and children were left behind in Charlestown.290 Another 500
persons from Burnside Colliery were kept back there under an order of arrest.

The march from Charlestown to Tolstoy Farm was planned in 8 stages, with the marchers
reaching the Tolstoy Farm on 13 November. Food depots had been set up at each stop.

286
Secretary for Interior
287
Colonial Office records 551/45, in CWMG, Vol. 12, Appendix X.
288
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 303
289
Times of India, 7 November 1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 259.
290
Natal Witness, 6 November 1913. The plan was that men would march and that women and children would take
the train direct to Tolstoy Farm. But a number of women insisted on accompanying their husbands.
Gandhi was arrested near Palmford station on 6 November, taken to court at Volksrust and
charged with aiding and abetting persons to enter the Transvaal without permits.291 He applied
for a remand and bail for humanitarian reasons as he was responsible for the safety of the
marchers. Despite objections by the Prosecutor, the Assistant Magistrate granted the application,
adjourned the case until 13 November and fixed the bail at 50 pounds which was paid by the
local merchants.292

Reuter reported in a despatch from Standerton on 8 November that about two thousand Indians
arrived that morning under the leadership of Gandhi. They rested by the river where
refreshments were issued and then started march for Val. “The crowd is very orderly, and under
perfect control.”293

The manager of Hatting Spruit Colliery, accompanied by two Natal Police, reached Standerton
on 7 November with warrants for the arrest of 85 workers from the Colliery. 294

Gandhi was arrested again at Standerton on 8 November, immediately taken to court and charged
with the same offence as two days earlier. He told the court that he was already on bail and asked
for bail to enable him to take the marchers to their destination. The Magistrate released Gandhi,
fixed the bail at 50 pounds and remanded the case until 21 November.295

On the same day, five associates of Gandhi – P.K. Naidoo, Behareelal Maharaj, Ramnarain
Singh, Rajoo Narsoo and Rahim Khan - were charged with the same offence as Gandhi. Four of
them had come from Johannesburg to Natal to help with the march. The Magistrate said he
would give the judgment on Monday, 10 November.296

Gandhi was arrested for the third time in Teakworth, near Greylingstad, on a Dundee warrant
charging him with inciting strikes. He was taken to Heidelberg for the night and then to Dundee
where he was sentenced on 11 November to nine months’ imprisonment with hard labour. He
sent a message to the strikers through his counsel, Advocate J. W. Godfrey:

No cessation of the strike without the repeal of the £3 tax. The Government, having imprisoned me, can
gracefully make a declaration regarding the repeal.297

Further, in a message to Indians before he was taken to Dundee jail on 11 November, Gandhi
said:

291
The Government had until then refrained from arresting Gandhi in order to avoid publicity which might provoke
protests in India and Britain.
292
Transvaal Leader, 4 November 1913; The Star, Johannesburg, 8 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 12 November
1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 261.
293
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 261
294
Ibid.
295
The indictment was cancelled later.
296
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913; Natal Witness, 12 November 1913.
297
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
 The courage that the indentured labourers have shown and the suffering they have gone through have been
boundless. How many men will be ready to foot 24 miles a day on one and a half pounds of bread and a
little sugar? This is what our poor brethren have done. They have suffered horses’ kicks. They have silently
endured kicks and blows by whites. Women have walked in the heat of the noon, two-month-old babies in
arms and bundles on head. Everyone has braved the rigours of weather, heat and cold and rain.

To what end? For India.298

In Gandhi’s absence, Polak, who had arrived in Teakworth to consult him before a planned visit
to India, led the marchers to Balfour, the next stop. On 10 November, the Government declared
the marchers prohibited immigrants and sent three special trains to Balfour to take them to the
Newcastle area.

Natal Witness reported from Balfour on 13 November:

Balfour is a small dorp right out on the veld, with but little accommodation, and dismal enough. The
Indians arrived in straggling fashion, in no order, some 500 leading in the first contingent in a bunch. The
others followed at intervals, a long, straggling line of weary and footsore travellers, who were still filing
and limping in at 3 p.m., when the police were rounding up the hindmost. There were only some 12 or so
women among them, who were in a better condition, the rest of the women had been left behind at
Charlestown and Volksrust…

The mounted police from Heidelberg arrived almost simultaneously with the first batch of Indians, and
were under the command of Captain Fall. At 10:30 the Indians were still trooping steadily in. They all
stopped at Balfour of their own accord. They were generally too exhausted to tramp any further. Here they
were supplied with food – rice, bread and biscuits – by a big merchant, and they practically collapsed,
dead-tired, as they filed into the yard or squatted down outside. They were very hungry, and eagerly
devoured the food, many falling asleep as soon as they had eaten. At 10:30 a.m., the first “special” from
Boksburg, composed of an old carriage and trucks, and with 20 foot police from Boksburg on board
steamed in. Two more “specials” arrived very shortly after. The Indians were encamped only some two
hundred yards from the station.

The Indians were very tired and footsore, reported Reuter. They were sleeping in the open and
suffered from the cold. They wanted to be arrested, not sent back to the mines.299

They agreed to board the trains only after Polak advised them to do so and indicated that they
would be arrested. The mine managers were waiting in Charlestown for the trains to arrive and
took charge of the miners in their mines. The trains then proceeded to Dannhauser. The men
were given no food on the trains and they had no water for hours.300

Polak and Kallenbach were also arrested soon after. Gandhi was moved to Volksrust jail and
sentenced on 14 November to a further three months’ imprisonment. He was transferred to

298
Ibid.
299
Some of the marchers had been left behind on the route, in charge of local merchants, as they were footsore and
tired. Natal Witness, 13 November 1913.
300
Indian Opinion, 12 November 1913; Natal Witness, 4 and 13 November 1913.
Pietermaritzburg jail on 18 November and, after a few days, moved to the prison in
Bloemfontein. Kallenbach was sentenced on 15 November and Polak on 17 November, each for
three months.301

The Governor-General had approved the designation of the following Indian compounds of the
collieries situated in the districts of Dundee and Newcastle as outstations of jails with effect from
11 November:

Outstations to the Dundee jail: Burnside Collieries, Shafts No. 1 and 2 of South African Collieries,
Wallsend Malangeni Collieries, Natal Navigation Collieries, Shafts No. 1, 2 and 3 of Glencoe Collieries,
St. George’s Collieries, Hatting Spruit Collieries.

Outstation to the Newcastle jail: Western side of the compound of Ballingeich Collieries. 302

The European employees on the mines were enrolled as special constables.

The Government had thus responded to the resolution of 8 November by the Mine Managers’
Association requesting that Indians who were sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour be
sent back to their mines to serve their terms working in the mines as the Africans were treated
during the “Native Rebellion.”303

In the mining areas, a further batch of 165 Indians belonging to the Burnside mine were charged
in Dundee on 9 November with absenting themselves from work. They all pleaded guilty. The
Magistrate remanded their cases for one week, and hoped that in the meantime they would
decide to return to work. They decided to remain out on strike until the £3 tax was repealed.
They went to the Indian temple in the evening and were addressed by J. W. Godfrey, Thambi
Naidoo and C.R. Naidoo who explained that the strike was voluntary and there should be no
intimidation. They slept at the temple and in the early hours of the morning left Dundee for
Newcastle.

Ten more Indians belonging to Burnside Collieries were brought in later in the evening. They
complained that the police in charge had treated them very roughly and frightened them by
attempting to ride over them with horses. They had been put into the train at Hatting Spruit and
compelled to pay their own railway fares although they were prisoners.

301
Dundee and District Courier, 13 November 1913; Natal Witness, 14 November 1913.
302
Natal Witness, 11 and 18 November 1913; British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa, BP2/2 (20),
Enclosures 3 &4.
303
Natal Mine Managers’ Association, Minutes of Meeting, 8 November 1913. The reference was to the Bambatha
rebellion of 1906 when the Zulu people revolted against a new tax. The rebellion was suppressed brutally.

At the next session of Parliament, two members denounced the practice of imprisoning strikers for forced labour to
the employers as setting a dangerous precedent. Indian Opinion, 25 March 1914.
Miners returning from the “Great March” were keen to court arrest and suffer imprisonment but
not to be left to the mercy of their employers and forced to work in the mines. They were
deceived and there were soon reports of strikers being whipped, flogged and being forced to
work underground.

At Ballengeich, Indian miners arrested on the “Great March” were told to construct a prison
fence. They objected, and approximately 200 of them commenced at once to march away in the
direction of the Newcastle jail. Many strikers complained that the manager of Ballengeich mine
took part in thrashing retreating Indians.304

Indian Opinion reported on 19 November:

The Indian Association received telegrams from Newcastle stating that the men on the Ballengeich mine
had been brutally whipped in consequence of their refusal to work. Some were unconscious. The
Ballengeich men were charged before the Court and 50 were sentenced to three months’ hard labour and
136 to six months. Eight ringleaders were sent to Maritzburg gaol and the rest were locked in the mine
compound which had been proclaimed as a gaol and surrounded by a fence of wire netting.

From Dundee a telegram stated that there were allegations of serious assaults upon passive resisters at
Burnside by native police, instigated by and in the presence of the compound manager of the S.A. Colliery
who with the police actively assaulted the men. One woman was in the hospital and others were seriously
injured….

A further message states that Mr. J.W. Cross, Dundee, and Mr. D.G. Giles, Newcastle, Magistrates, warned
Indians refusing to work that they would be starved and thereafter mercilessly flogged under gaol
regulations into submission and forcibly driven underground with the lash.

George Liggett, compound Manager of the Durban Navigation Collieries, was fined ten shillings
for assaulting an Indian woman named Kathija.305 On 22 December Liggett was charged again
for assaulting Valangeri, a passive resister . He pleaded guilty and was fined
£1.306

Indian Opinion made inquiries into allegations of ill-treatment on the mines and reported on 26
November that it was satisfied, in spite of denials of officials, that serious assaults had taken
place.

Men were brought back from their march into the Transvaal, and they were quite prepared to go to prison,
but when the Ballengeich men were brought to their own mine and saw the wire lying on the ground ready
for the making of the fence which they themselves were to be compelled to erect to form a prison, they
naturally objected, and it is stated that 200 of them commenced at once to march away in the direction of
Newcastle gaol. It was then that the serious assaults complained of and described by many different
witnesses took place. It was admitted to Mr. Ritch by Mr. Hutt, the manager of the Ballengeich mine, that

304
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913; Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, Attorney General’s Office (AGO) Vol.
1/8/146, 764/13, Alleged Flogging of Indians at the Ballengeich Colliery.
305
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
306
Indian Opinion, 11 January 1914
 he took part in this cruel work of thrashing the retreating Indians. Still the Magistrate at Newcastle denies
in toto all the allegations of ill-treatment and states that the trouble commenced by the Indians attacking the
Europeans.

The strike spread to the few mines which were not affected earlier. There were alarming reports
in the press about a riot by the Indian workers in Ladysmith.

According to Natal Witness, apparently based on information from the army and police, about
one thousand Indians, their wives and children deserted from Elandalaagte Collieries and
marched to Ladysmith on 18 November. The Magistrate addressed them and they agreed to
return to the barracks if their colleagues who were in jail serving seven days were released. The
Magistrate agreed and the prisoners came forward. When the police were ready to escort them to
their barracks, 150 more strikers arrived. They were stopped by the police, who advised them to
return, but they burst through the cordon of police. A riot ensued and practically all the
Indian miners attacked the police with sticks, rocks and other articles. The European police
plunged their horses into the “fanatics”, and the native constables attacked the strikers with
their sticks. The Indians fought them with iron standards, sticks and rocks. In the ensuing
clash some Indians escaped into shops, hotels and other houses – and then into the side
streets. No loss of life was reported. Three Indians suffered broken arms. One European
police officer was injured and his horse had a bad cut.

The Deputy Mayor then appealed for volunteers with firearms to assemble in front of the Town
Hall to assist with the protection of public property and the maintenance of peace and order.
Scores of citizens assembled at the Town Hall armed with revolvers, shot-guns and rifles.
Striking Indians later assembled at the “rioters’ camp” in Forbes Street and were addressed by
David Harris, General Manager of Elandalaagte Collieries. The strikers later agreed to return to
the mine.307

This report, however, seems far from the truth. Another report indicated that David Harris, the
Mine Manager, was known for his fiery temper. While the miners were proceeding to the
Magistrate’s court in Murchison Street in Ladysmith, he tried, accompanied by mounted police,
to order the miners to return to the barracks.

The Indian strikers went and squatted passively at the side of the yard. Suddenly the police and Carbineers
were ordered to charge and dashed forward fielding batons. Austin, the Magistr ate had called to David
Harris and had a restraining hand on his shoulder. Harris was known as “Bullneck” to his workers, a
strong powerful man. In his anger he was ready to make “mincemeat” of the rioters…

As the police charged with flailing batons the Indians fled, leaving papers, food, clothing and even
suitcases scattered about the yard. They were pursued the length of Murchison Street. Harris was fuming

307
Natal Witness, 19 November 1913; Natal Advertiser 24 November 1913; Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, AGO
1/8/146, 224A/1913.
 and the Magistrate Austin “wisely took Harris for a cooling drink at the Royal”. By the time he returned
home in his old chain driven car the Indians were marching meekly back. There seems to have been no
more trouble thereafter. 308

Strike Spreads beyond Coal-mining Area

The strike spread beyond the coal mining area into plantations and cities, and developed into a
general strike of almost 40,000 workers.309 This strike was not planned by Gandhi or promoted
by the Natal Indian Association.

Gandhi was reported to have said on 25 October, in reply to a question by the correspondent of
Natal Mercury in Durban: “If the conference (with the employers) ends in a fiasco, we shall
certainly endeavour to widen the area of the strike, but I am totally unable to say what response
we shall have. Wherever indentured Indians or ex-indentured Indians are working as labourers
we shall advise that they should strike.”310

About the same time Kallenbach said in an interview in Johannesburg that the leaders of the
movement would not have the least compunction about asking all Indians on the sugar
plantations, etc., to come out. Thousands of them could be taken to a farm belonging to Ahir
Budree, a satyagrahi then in prison, who had placed his farm of 600 acres at the disposal of the
movement. They could work at growing vegetables. Others could be taken to the Tolstoy Farm
and the Phoenix Settlement.311

But Gandhi decided against calling for strikes outside the coal mining area as he was
overwhelmed by the extent of the strike in the collieries and realised the practical problems of
taking care of large numbers of strikers.312 This was disclosed in a letter he wrote to Marshall
Campbell on 26 December but was apparently not communicated widely.

308
Talana Museum, Dundee, Klip River Annals 1913
309
The strike began to spread to some sugar and tea plantations and to the railways even before Gandhi left on the
“Great March”. But it was after his arrest that it assumed major proportions. The strikers demanded the abolition of
the £3 tax and the release of Gandhi from prison.

310
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
311
Ibid.
312
Gandhi wrote in a telegram to Gokhale at the beginning of November that four thousand strikers had to be fed,
including 300 women and 600 children. The Times of India, 5 November 1913, from CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 257.
Polak wrote in a letter to Lord Ampthill on 12 November 1913, from Volksrust jail:

... the spread of the strike along the Coast, on the plantations, is wholly spontaneous, and indeed, strongly
against our advice as we did not wish it to get beyond manageable proportions. CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 596.
Gandhi had known Marshall Campbell, Chairman of Directors of Natal Estates, a large sugar
plantation.313 He was a liberal Senator and was opposed to the £3 tax. He was away in England
during the strike. After he returned, Gandhi wrote to him explaining what had happened:

Will you allow me to tell you how deeply concerned I was when I learnt that your men were among the
first to strike on the coast? At an important meeting, when I was actually asked why I would not advocate a
strike on the sugar plantations also, I replied that we were endeavouring to confine the area to the collieries
only, in the hope that the strike on the collieries would be a sufficient demonstration to secure relief. Whilst
I was at Newcastle organising relief for the collieries’ men who had come out I was asked by my co-
workers in Durban what answer to give to the coastal Indians who wanted to join the movement, and I
emphatically told them that the time was not ripe for them to do so. Later, too, when I was again
approached, I made the same statement, and one of my last letters before my arrest was that, as we were so
much indebted to you for your efforts to bring about the repeal of the £3 tax legislation, your men should be
the last to be called out; but I was absolutely certain that after my arrest the workers found it impossible to
control the men, the movement became not only spontaneous, but it assumed gigantic proportions.314

Indian Opinion had written in an editorial on 12 November 1913:

The outbreak on the North Coast sugar estates is embarrassing but at the same time there is nothing to be
surprised at in the news that these people, hearing the news of the Great March and of their leader’s arrest,
should desire to join their brethren, and so a large number are on strike.

Progress of the Strike in the Sugar Plantations and the Countryside315

As the news about the strike on the coal mines, the Great March and the arrest of Gandhi spread,
workers on the sugar plantations and other installations began to strike, under their own
leadership, demanding the abolition of the £3 tax and the release of Gandhi from prison. They
were orderly and nonviolent until intense provocation by the army, the police and the employers
led to clashes.

The Government was aware of the danger of violence when Gandhi and his colleagues were
imprisoned and it may have felt that it would be easier to suppress the movement if it resorted to
violence. A mass meeting of Indians, held in Johannesburg on 16 November, expressed dismay
at the situation created by the imprisonment of trusted leaders. Indians had been placed in a
position of danger to themselves and to those concerned, it pointed out, as they were likely to act
in extreme situations upon their own initiative. The meeting called for the release of Gandhi and

313
In August 1905, Marshall Campbell had hosted a reception at which Gandhi met John Langalibalele Dube,
African educator who was elected the first President-General of the African National Congress in 1912.
314
Natal Mercury, 5 January 1914; Indian Opinion, 7 January 1914.
315
Information in this section is mainly from local newspapers, especially Natal Mercury and Natal Witness and
archival sources.
other leaders and negotiations for a settlement “to arrest the growing situation, which is
calculated to result in a conflict with armed force.”316

The strike spread rapidly and the Government sent reinforcements to the South African Mounted
Rifles (SAMR) and Police under the command of General Lukin. The SAMR was stationed at
Verulam to confine men to the estates, in case they showed any intention of marching or
intimidating fellow workers. Almost daily fresh reinforcements of police were drafted into the
district and men were stationed on each estate. When strikes first manifested on the estates on the
North Coast, planters enrolled a corps of special police and drew a cordon around the estates.317

The SAMR and the police began to force workers to return to the barracks and that created
tension and some conflicts. The Natal Indian Association tried to calm the situation and persuade
the workers to return to the barracks.

The situation became more serious when General Lukin, at the request of the planters, obtained
permission to confine workers to the estates and even arrest those who refused to return to work.
The planters began to stop rations to starve the workers into submission, thereby provoking the
workers to desperation.

The white-owned press began to publish alarming reports, based on briefings by the army, the
police and the employers, of riots by the strikers.

The progress of the strike, the repression by the Government, the violence by the employers and
the clashes between the armed forces and strikers are briefly reviewed below on the basis of
reports in the white-owned daily newspapers, Indian Opinion and other sources.

Workers at the Umhloti Valley Sugar Company struck work on 7 November and marched the
next day to Verulam. Mr. Dickinson, a local solicitor, addressed them and they returned to the
estate in the evening.

Soon after, all the men at Umhloti Valley, Lavoipierre’s, Arde’s and Garland’s refused to work
and proceeded to Verulam. They were joined by others from Tongaat where men from four
estates struck work. There were approximately 1,500 strikers at Verulam. They were orderly and
encamped in the open on the other side of the river. The Natal Indian Association sent them
bread from Durban. Talwantsingh, Dhanji Ramji, Hemraj and Raghavji Rugnath were assisting
them in keeping order and feeding them. The strikers were firm that they would not return to
work until the £3 tax was repealed.318

316
Natal Witness, 18 November 1913
317
British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa BP2/2 (20), General Smuts to Lord Gladstone, Pretoria,
15 November 1913, Enclosure 6; Natal Advertiser, 21 November 1913.
318
Indian Opinion, 12 and 19 November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 14 November 1913; Natal Mercury 19 November
1913.
General Lukin ordered the workers to return to the estates. Gandhi wrote in Satyagraha in South
Africa about the bravery of Sorabji Rustomjee which averted bloodshed:

Many labourers came out (on strike) in Verulam and would not return in spite of all the
efforts of the authorities. General Lukin was present on the scene with his soldiers and was
about to order his men to open fire. Brave Sorabji, son of the late Parsi Rustomji then
hardly 18 years of age, had reached here from Durban. He seized the reins of the
General’s horse and exclaimed, “You must not order firing. I undertake to induce my
people peacefully to return to work.” General Lukin was charmed with the young man’s
courage and gave him time to try his method of love. Sorabji reasoned with the labourers
who came round and returned to their work. Thus a number of murders were prevented
by the presence of mind, valour and loving kindness of one young man.319

General Lukin, however, described the scene as follows:

Yesterday a certain number of Indians on the estates refused to work. They attempted to
get into Verulam but were turned back by the police. There were some 1,000 strikers
assembled in Verulam. These were got back to their respective estates by the SAMR, and
detachments have been stationed at these estates to prevent intimidation, and also to
protect property. It is hoped that the men will be kept on the estates; in fact, they will be
kept on the estates, and now the only question is: Will they return to work?320

Most workers returned to the barracks but refused to work.

At Tongaat 1,500 Indians went on strike. Boulle Acutt and Stirling addressed a large meeting of
Indians urging them to return to work but the workers refused, saying that they would not return
until the £3 tax was repealed and Gandhi was released from prison. General Lukin offered
protection to indentured Indians who feared intimidation and who wanted to work, but one of the
“ringleaders” replied, “The police could shoot them if they choose but they would not work”.321
Food was sent from Durban to the strikers at Tongaat.

On 12 November, Indians employed in the Blackburn, Ottawa and Crerrin estates went on strike
and a force of SAMR was patrolling the neighbourhood. Indians at La Merci estate came out on
strike and attempted to march towards Verulam. Police tried to persuade them to go back and

319
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 316-317. Indian Opinion and other papers reported that Sorabji
Rustomji and other members of the Natal Indian Association addressed the workers and advised them to keep order
and remain in the barracks. Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913; Natal Advertiser and Natal Witness, 13 November
1913.
320
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
321
Ibid. Also Natal Advertiser, 14 November 1913.
when they did not, charged them with sticks.322 Eight strikers were injured near Drummond
Hotel and three sent to hospital.323
Meanwhile, on 10 November, about 130 Indians employed on the South African Railways
(SAR) in Ladysmith went on strike. Over seventy Indians were “locked out” by South African
Railways and had no homes. They decided to march to the Transvaal and some merchants
supplied provisions. They were arrested at Dannhauser, taken by train to Ladysmith and
assembled at the District Police Office. When they were asked who their leader was they said
they had none, they were individually and collectively leaders.

The Indians were imprisoned in Ladysmith on 13 November. The press reported that the prison
was overcrowded with 150 Indians and Africans while it could only house about 50. The Indian
prisoners were taken the next day to the Courthouse where they were greeted by their wives and
families, "all of who were gaily dressed, as if attending a festival”. After mid-day 23 free Indians
were prosecuted under the Masters and Servants Act and they were each fined 30 shillings or
imprisonment for one month; they opted for prison. The imprisonment deprived the wives and
children of food and shelter. The women “frantically held on to their husbands and had to be
removed by the police”. According to a Natal Witness correspondent, "When the Indians were
being admitted to gaol this afternoon, about fifty Indian women rushed the small escort and
endeavored to rescue their men.” They began to throw rocks at the gate and to hold the escorts.
The escorts were able to subdue the women and secure all the prisoners.324

In the afternoon 43 indentured Indians were sentenced. They preferred to go to jail for seven
days rather than return to work or pay fine.325

By 14 November, 2,000 men struck work at Avoca.

On 15 November, 120 Indians on Chick’s Estate – between Umgeni and Greenwood Park, near
Durban - struck work. They attempted to march to Durban but a cordon of soldiers with rifles
and police barred their way. They were told firmly that they would not be allowed to go to
Durban. They returned to the estate, but refused to work. They were quite orderly and there were
no incidents of violence. The employees at Coronation Brick Works also struck work.

On 17 November, all works employing Indians at Umgeni district were at a standstill because of
the strike. Indians on the Umzinto Estates struck work on 17 November. According to a press
despatch, all Indians employed on the railway on the North Coast were on strike on 17
November. All Indians employed in industries in South Coast Junction were on strike. On the

322
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913; Natal Mercury, 13 November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 13 November 1913. A
press despatch on 12 November reported that the owner of La Merci went to Verulam requesting either better
protection or else the complete withdrawal of troops, as the uniforms enraged the Indians.
323
Natal Witness, 12 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913.
324
Natal Witness, 15 November 1913
325
Ibid.
two sides of the Umhlatuzan River, more than 1,300 Indians were employed and they were on
strike. Indians at Umbilo were also on strike.326

L.W. Ritch, an associate of Gandhi, said in an interview to the Transvaal Leader, published on
18 November, that the strikers on sugar and tea estates numbered twelve to thirteen thousand.
Except at Verulam, the employers were not providing rations to the workers. At Verulam a
week’s rations were provided and the workers immediately downed tools. Private stores around
the estates were closed, and the workers could not obtain food. Supplies of food were sent by the
British Indian Association, but the labourers were not allowed to have them. The employers were
trying to starve the strikers into submission.

By 19 November Indian workers on strike on the sugar estates at Mount Edgecombe, Verulam,
Avoca, South Coast Junction, Tongaat, Isipingo and Hulett’s tea estate totalled close to
13,000.327

Indians employed at the Blackburn, Ottawa and Crerrin estates also went on strike and a force of
SAMR was sent to patrol the neighbourhood.

The strike also spread along the South Coast. By mid-November Indian workers employed in the
various industries on the South Coast districts were on strike. The number of strikers on the
Junction Districts, Clairwood, was 1,506; South Coast Junction, 1,808; Jacob’s Ironwork, 50;
and Candle, Soap and Glue Factory, 200. Natal Witness reported on 19 November that all South
Coast Junction Indian residents were on strike, “walking up and down in street with good brave
stick in the hand. Up to date they kept good respect for the police...”328 At Umhlatuzan, 556
Indians employed in the various iron, candle, soap and glue factories, besides many Indians in
private employment, were all “out”. Approximately 688 Indians employed in the South African
Refineries, Hulett’s Refinery, the Chemical Works, Wright’s Cement Works and pottery works
were on strike. At Umbilo many of the Chair Factory hands, as well as the Indians employed at
the South African Fertiliser Co., and the Mill and Elevator Company, left work. Police
reinforcements were quickly despatched to the area. A body of the South African Police drawn
from Pretoria, Johannesburg, the East and West Rand under the command of Major Trew, the
District Commandant of the South African Police at Pretoria, arrived at South Coast Junction and
they encamped on the foothill ground opposite the South Coast Police Station. There were 62
mounted officers all armed and ready for any emergency in the area.329

According to Indian Opinion of 19 November, “there must be no less than 20,000 Indians on
strike along the coast.” It added:

326
Natal Witness, 16, 19 and 20 November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 21 November 1913.
327
Natal Witness, 20 November 1913
328
Natal Witness, 19 November 1913
329
Ibid. Also Natal Advertiser, 21 November 1913.
 Several thousand indentured Indians went out on strike last week and by Saturday (15 November) there
was scarcely an Indian working on the plantations from Umgeni to Tongaat.

It reported on 26 November that about 3,000 Indians working for Reynolds Bros., struck work on
21 November and that others in the district followed suit.

On 26 November, the Natal Advertiser reported that practically all the Indians were out along the
sugar line of Natal and Zululand.

By the end of November nearly 10,000 workers were on strike on Natal’s North Coast.

The workers were considerate of the interests of the employers until the latter conspired with the
authorities to starve them into submission. Indian Opinion reported on 19 November, quoting
Natal Mercury, that about 1,500 out of 2,700 Indian workers at Mount Edgecombe had struck
work, while the rest remained, by arrangement with the management, to bring to the mill and
crush all the cane that had been cut. It was reported that someone set fire to the cane field and, on
instructions from the manager, W. A. Campbell, all the strikers returned to work and succeeded
in putting out the fire. At the request of Campbell, three members of the Natal Indian Association
- A Moosa, Abdul Hak and Sheikh Mehtab - visited Mount Edgecombe and addressed the
strikers appealing to them to keep order and remain in their barracks. According to Indian
Opinion:

…Mr. Campbell said that the strikers were quite orderly and respectful to him… Indians declared that their
quarrel was with the Government, and not with the employers, and it must be said that the coolies have
been very considerate with the employers, for it was their evident intention to cause as little damage and
loss to them as possible.330

Yet, at a meeting of the planters with General Lukin, William Campbell proposed that the
strikers should be compelled by the troops to return to work. General Lukin obtained permission
from the Government to use force to prevent movement of strikers along the roads and to confine
the men to the estates. Reinforcements to the SAMR were introduced for the purpose.331

Rations were stopped by the employers at Avoca, La Mercy and Tongaat by 14 November. 332 On
some estates rations were issued to the men on strike, with the stipulation that they would not
leave the estate without a permit.333 On some estates no rations were provided to striking
workers. For example at the Umhloti Valley Sugar Company estate at Mount Moreland the vast
majority of Indians struck work: only about 70 men out of the approximately 700 men were
working. The rest remained quietly at the barracks. No food was given to the striking men and
they were not allowed to leave the estate.

330
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
331
Natal Advertiser, 13 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913.
332
Natal Witness, 14 November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 15 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913.
333
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
Thambi Naidoo and Sorabji Rustomjee sent a telegram to the Government, on behalf of the Natal
Indian Association, that “it was not possible to allow the people to starve and that if food was not
supplied to them, the Association would consider it their duty to supply food to those who
needed it.”334 The Government responded that the Association could provide rations upon the
consent of General Lukin. After receiving permission from General Lukin, Naidoo and
Rustomjee, with several assistants, set off to deliver rations in the North Coast strike area. They
took large quantities of rice in trolleys.335 Some of the mine owners tried to prevent the
distribution of food, and this had to be done later under police protection. For example, Charlie
Jackson, a planter on the North Coast, refused to allow members of the Natal Indian
Association to distribute rations on his estate. The manager of Lovoirpierre’s estate
allegedly threw away the oil, salt and chillies supplied by the Association.336

General Lukin stopped the delivery food a few days later on the excuse that the men from the
NIA were encouraging the workers to strike.337 Representatives of the NIA met General Lukin
on 9 December. He was adamant that he would not allow any member of the NIA to go to an
estate without the permission of the employer. He finally agreed that police would inform NIA of
the estates where employers were refusing rations to striking workers and state the approximate
numbers. The NIA could then forward rations to the estates. The police would take charge of the
food and arrange with a representative of the strikers to distribute it. This representative would
not be allowed to leave the property or come in contact with NIA. In the case of strikers who
refuse to accept rations from the employers, police would not inform NIA or help in distribution
of food from others.338

Refugees at Phoenix

As noted earlier, a number of men and women from the Phoenix Settlement courted
imprisonment in the satyagraha. Gandhi asked Albert West and Maganlal Gandhi, the joint
managing editors of Indian Opinion and joint managers of Phoenix Settlement, to refrain from
courting imprisonment. Mr. West was to keep Gokhale informed of the developments.

Indian workers from the North Coast began coming to the Phoenix Settlement from 21
November for protection as they were afraid of being thrashed by their employers. Albert West
informed the magistrate of the Division and the employers that the workers refused to work but
were willing to be arrested. As the number of people arriving at the Settlement greatly increased,
he sent telegrams to the Chief Magistrate of Durban and to the Minister of Interior:

334
Natal Mercury, 19 November 1913
335
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
336
Indian Opinion, 3 and 17 December 1913
337
The NIA denied advising the strikers to stay out. They stated that the men struck work out of their own accord.
338
Indian Opinion, 3, 10 and 17 December 1913
 Hundreds starving Indians coming to the settlement seeking protection and food. We are allowing them to
remain on understanding that they are liable to arrest. Most of the people belong Natal Estates and they
declare they are driven away. Suggest Government allow people remain quietly here until disturbance is
over, Government to supply food and take charge camp. Anxious assist Government keep order and avoid
injury or loss of life. We have hundred acres land and water supply. On Saturday, when ten people arrived,
informed Campbell and Magistrate Verulam stating people willing to be arrested but afraid ill-treatment.
Assistant Managers came and asked people return, but they refused. Magistrate had not replied Saturday’s
telegram.

A reply was received from the Minister that there was no foundation for the fear of ill-
treatment.339

On 25 November, West was arrested at his home and charged with harbouring indentured
Indians. Close to two hundred workers were then residing on the Settlement. West was taken to
the prison in Durban at 5.30 p.m. and was given no food until the next morning when a warder
pushed a tin of mealie pap and some dirty white bread into his cell. He was charged the next day
before the Verulam Magistrate and the case was remanded for a week.340

Soon after the arrest of West, Lieutenant Clark, accompanied by estate managers and a force of
mounted police, came to the Settlement. He told Maganlal Gandhi that he had instructions to
send the people to their respective estates. He guaranteed them full protection from harm if they
remained peacefully in their barracks and requested Maganlal to explain these instructions to the
people. After Maganlal explained in Hindustani, the people, escorted by the police, began to
move away without any disturbance.341

When West returned from Verulam on 2 December, with his wife, mother-in-law and two
children, he was insulted at the station and threatened with violence by G. T. Todd, the manager
of the Phoenix Wattle Plantation. Fortunately, a rifleman arrived and escorted them to the
Settlement.342 West sued Todd at the Magistrate’s Court at Verulam. The Magistrate ordered the
accused to be bound over, in the sum of £5, to keep the peace for a period of six months.343

Todd had threatened violence because West had assisted Soorzai, an employee in the plantation
who had been flogged by Todd, in making a deposition before a Magistrate.344

Soorzai (or Amhalaram as he was officially known) had arrived in the Phoenix Settlement on 27
November and informed West that he had been flogged with a sjambok and ill-treated in other
ways. His back showed several swollen ridges. He was paralysed on one side and could scarcely
walk. His weeping wife with her little child stood near, together with several of his co-workers

339
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
340
The charges against West were later dropped. Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913.
341
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
342
Ibid.
343
Indian Opinion, 14 January 1914
344
Ibid.
who had witnessed the assault. West asked a Corporal of the Police to take the case in hand, but
he refused. The next morning a messenger was sent with Soorzai to Verulam where a petition
was drawn up and signed before the Magistrate.

On 1 December a policeman and another man came and took Soorzai and his wife away, after
informing Maganlal Gandhi that they would be treated at a hospital. Instead Mrs. Soorzai was at
the barracks of her employer and Soorzai was taken to court and charged with desertion. The
case was remanded and he was sent to prison. On 10 December he passed away in Verulam
hospital.345

Repression by Government and Violence by Employers

Meanwhile, the magistrates were busy sentencing the workers on strike.

On 10 November twelve men were arrested for being absent from roll-call and sentenced to
seven days with hard labour.

On 25 November at Verulam, 126 men from the estates of A.G. Harvey, J.W. Sykes and Charlie
Jackson were sentenced to seven days in prison with hard labour.346

On 26 November, 108 men from the estates of F.S. Garland, Olkins, Virginia, Tongaat Sugar
Company and Wilkinson were sentenced to seven days with hard labour. Five men from the
Tongaat Sugar Company were sentenced to 20 days in prison. Three of Wilkinson’s men were
sent to prison for 14 days. The men were emphatic that unless the tax was removed and Gandhi
liberated, they would not work. Six of the Tongaat men had been severely injured, their bodies
being swollen and smeared with blood. A number of women came crying to the Court and said
that they had been shut up in their barracks whilst their husbands were beaten. They had
managed somehow to escape.347

On 28 November, 360 men from Umhloti Valley Sugar Company were brought to Verulam
under escort and locked up. From the estates of Harvey and Sykes 134 men were sent to prison
for seven days.348

345
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913. The same afternoon the body was brought to Durban station and was
followed by some four hundred people to the Umgeni crematorium. Amongst those who followed the hearse were
the wife and children of the deceased; Omar Hajee Amod Johari, Albert Christopher, Sorabji Rustomjee and other
members of the Natal Indian Association; Imam A.K. Bawazeer, Chairman of the Hamidia Islamic Society of
Johannesburg; Thambi Naidoo, Chairman of the Tamil Benefit Society; Miss Sonja Schlesin, Honorary Secretary of
the Transvaal Indian Women’s Association; Mr. and Mrs. West and Mrs. Pywell from Phoenix Settlement; Miss
Elizabeth Molteno, a European sympathiser; Mrs. V.S. Pillay and other women satyagrahis from the Transvaal; and
some seventy strikers from Verulam.
346
Ibid.
347
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
348
Indian Opinion, 3 and 10 December 1913
On 30 November, police attacked peaceful Indians and several were injured - three of whom
were hospitalised.

Batches of 10 to 40 men were arrested at various estates and at Park Rynie there were clashes
between Indians and the police.349 On G.R. Reed’s estate in Isipingo on the South Coast
Junction, 94 Indians were arrested and charged in Durban for absenting themselves from roll-call
without leave. All but two pleaded guilty. The charges against five were withdrawn and others
were sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment with hard labour. Ten free Indians were found
guilty of failing to perform their stipulated work and were sentenced to six weeks’ imprisonment
with hard labour. On Crook’s Estate Indians also resisted and attempted to defy the police. On 26
November, at the Durban and District Police Court, 94 strikers from Platt’s sugar estate at
Isipingo were charged for refusing to work and sent to prison for seven days.350

Indian Opinion reported that in Verulam alone, 1,774 workers were brought before the Court
between 10 November and 10 December for refusing to work. About 200 were discharged to suit
the convenience of their employers and the rest were sent to prison.351

On 2 January 1914, a party of 85 strikers marched from Durban to New Germany, near
Pinetown, and encamped on property belonging to Parsee Rustomjee. They had come earlier
from various mines and estates. Twenty-nine women and ten children went there by train. Later
in the day 76 of the men were arrested for being absent without leave and brought before the
Magistrate in Pinetown. They were sentenced to a fine of 10 shillings or seven days in prison
with hard labour.352

There were also many incidents of assault by planters. At the end of November two
“Mohammedan gentlemen” on an afternoon stroll were assaulted at Verulam by a planter – W.G.
Armstrong. One of them, Mahomed Seepye, was a Moulvi (priest) who had arrived from
Pietermaritzburg to officiate a marriage.353 Armstrong was driving in a carriage and thrashed
Seepye, suspecting him to be an “agitator”. Several witnesses testified against Armstrong. He
was committed for trial and was granted a bail of £100 on a charge of assault with intent to do
grievous bodily harm.354

With the enormous repression by the Government and the stopping of rations to the striking
workers, the strike was brought under control by early December. The Minister of Interior issued
a statement that on 11 December 24,004 workers were working in the coal area and the area of

349
Indian Opinion, 26 November, and 10 and 17 December 1913
350
Indian Opinion, 26 November and 3 December 1913
351
Indian Opinion, 26 November and 17 December 1913
352
Indian Opinion, 14 January 1914
353
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
354
Indian Opinion, 28 January 1914
plantations; hundreds of workers were in prison and 621 were on strike. The Natal Indian
Association was supplying food to some 300 workers.355

Dev Narain and Yenketappah were charged in Durban on 14 November with incitement to strike.
The case was remanded.356 S. W. Shroff and C.R. Naidoo, as well as four Indians from Isipingo
and two from the South Coast Junction, were also charged with incitement. All charges of
incitement were withdrawn by the Prosecutors after the end of the strike in December.357

Reports of Violence by Indian Workers

As mentioned earlier, there were alarmist reports in the press about intimidation and violence by
the strikers. These reports, implying that Indians with sticks attacked soldiers and police who
were armed with rifles and bayonets, defy imagination. But the few serious cases mentioned in
the press should be noted.

Avoca: The press reported a fight between the police and strikers at Avoca around 15 November,
alleging that Indians began destroying properties near the barracks. Indian Opinion said that the
men had no fuel and were prevented from going away from the barracks to search for it. They
took what they could find.358

Beneva: On 25 November, there was violence at Hawksworth’s Beneva estate at Esperanza.

According to the official account published in the press, Indians advanced against the police in a
threatening way and the police fired at the leader killing him. When the Indians continued to
advance, the police fired a second volley with their rifles. Two Indians were killed and 22
Indians injured. Nine were taken to hospital and one of them died during the night. The press
reports were somewhat contradictory. The Transvaal Leader reported that while the Indians had
cane knives, they refrained from using them.359 An official enquiry was held but not a single
Indian was allowed to give evidence.360

The main witness was a South African Police Officer, R.W. Davidson, who had reported to the
Officer Commanding, S.A.P. Umzinto, that he went with his police to the estate and, at the
request of Mr. Hawksworth, called the Indians to the office and asked them if they were willing
to return to work. They all decided not to work. He then ordered them to go to Umzinto. They
did not want to go to Umzinto as they believed they would be beaten by the police on the way. A
few of them lied down in front of the barracks on their backs and asked the police to kill them
there as they would not go. An Indian hit police horses and policemen with a stick, and others

355
Report by Reuter in Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
356
Natal Witness, 14 November 1913
357
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913
358
Natal Advertiser, 14 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913.
359
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913; Transvaal Leader, 27 November 1913.
360
Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913
began to do the same. The order was then given to fire and two volleys were fired. During this
incident one policeman was seriously stabbed in the thigh; 3 Indians were killed and 10 were
wounded. The police fired altogether 10 rounds of revolver and 45 rounds of rifle ammunition.
Nine of the ringleaders were arrested and sent under escort to Umzinto prison.361

Illovo: At Illovo a small party of strikers went to the police station. When ordered back, it was
alleged, they returned to the barracks and came back with 200 others. When the police barred the
road, the ringleaders jumped forward waving sticks. The police with their staves drove them
back. Another gang of 200 came and a struggle ensued. The Indians ran to the nearby cane-fields
and the river. Lieutenant Kunhardt, in charge of the police, received a blow on the abdomen and
one of his troopers was slightly injured.362

Mount Edgecombe: The most serious case was at Mount Edgecombe. On 27 November at least
6 Indians were killed and 55 were severely wounded, two with assegais. Several women were
beaten.

An inquest was held by the Assistant Magistrate, Mr. Rossler, at Verulam. C.B. Clarke, the Chief
Witness, was the leader of 16 non-commissioned officers and men, and three Native constables,
who went to Mount Edgecombe at the request of W. Campbell, managing director of the Natal
Estates, to arrest Indians who refused to work. He said he went with Colin Campbell to
Blackburn barracks of the estate. The workers agreed to work when ordered by Clarke. Then
they proceeded to Hillhead barracks, about ten miles away, for the same purpose. There some
workers refused to work and allegedly attacked the party when it tried to arrest them. There was
further conflict when the men refused to go to Umgeni as ordered by Clarke. The officers fired
and arrested the ringleaders. As they proceeded toward Mount Edgecombe, a large body of
Indians from Blackburn were coming towards them with sticks. The party fired at them. Four
Indians were dead – two at Hillhead and two on the road. Altogether 84 rounds were fired.

During this incident, the casualties at Blackburn and Hillhead barracks of Natal Estates were as
follows: three Europeans - Corporals Bridges and Sparkes, and General Unwin – were seriously
wounded; five Indians killed and 29 wounded, some seriously. One Indian woman among the
strikers was shot in the ankle, and one horse was killed and another wounded. Pancham, an
Indian labourer, was shot in the right leg and Hoosenigadu in the left shoulder. Striking Indians
killed were: Pachiappan and Ragavan between Blackburn and Hillhead barracks, and Selvan,
Guruvadu and Subbrayya Gouden at Hillhead barracks. Colin Campbell denied shooting Selvan.

361
Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, AGO 1/8/146, 756/13; Local History Museum, Durban, Passive Resistance,
File no. 57254; Natal Mercury, 27 November 1913; Transvaal Leader, 8 December 1913; British Library, The
Governor General to the Secretary of State, 31 December 1913, Enclosure 3, South African Police Camp, Umzinto,
to Major H.F. Trew, Officer Commanding South Coast, Natal.
362
Natal Witness, 16 November 1913
The District Surgeon submitted a detailed report on the deaths of the five Indians and affirmed
that they were shot from the back.363

Depositions were also taken from Indian labourers who made serious allegations against Colin
Campbell. Parsaraman and Kistnasamy stated that Campbell asked Selvan if he was going to
work and he replied, “The whole of Natal has struck, and when they go back to work, we will
start too.” Campbell then beckoned the man to come forward and hold the horse. As he was on
the verge of catching the horse Campbell hit Selvan with a stick and he fell down. Two African
constables of the estate handcuffed Selvan and dragged him a short distance and then one of
them stabbed him with an assegai. As soon as he was stabbed the women began to scream and
almost immediately revolver shots were fired.

Selvan’s eldest son, Antonimuthu (also known as Salvum), gave sworn testimony that his father
was stabbed with an assegai before any firing. The doctor, who examined the body many days
after Selvan died, did not corroborate this. Antonimuthu was charged with perjury, but the
charges were later withdrawn.364

The magistrate exonerated Colin Campbell.365

Strike in Durban

The strike spread to Durban on 17 November. Indian workers of the municipal corporation,
Addington Hospital, African Boating Company, Chiazzari and Company, sugar refinery, and the
dock went on strike. Some of the Indians working for Railways were also not working. The press
reported that groups of men could be seen in street corners but nothing of disturbing nature had
occurred.

Natal Witness reported on 18 November that Indian waiters from the hotels, cafes and tea-rooms
in Durban went on strike. “Practically all the hotel staffs have been depleted and cold dinners
will be the rule in Durban.” Along Grey Street, Commercial Road and even outside Borough
Market, pockets of Indians were being addressed by leaders. The “Dhoby” (laundryman) was
also on strike in many areas of Durban. A Natal Witness headline on 19 November read “No
Dhoby Washing Day at Home”, “Many a European man went home last night to find the lady of
the house doing the weekly washing, as the dhoby had not put in an appearance.” Domestic
workers also went on strike.

363
Natal Archives, Pietermaritzburg, AGO 1/8/147, 12A/1914; AGO 1/8/146, 252A/1913; Natal Witness, 19
November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 27 and 28 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913; Transvaal
Leader, 18 December 1913.
364
Selvan’s wife and son went to India. Gandhi arranged a small grant to Mrs. Selvan. Antonimuthu stayed in
Gandhi’s Ashram.
365
Indian Opinion, 24 December 1913 and 14 January 1914
By the evening of the 18th, according to the press, not a single Indian hawker or farmer’s cart
attended the market. The strike was as complete as it could be. It was estimated that about 8,000
Indians were on strike in Durban. According to the Chief Magistrate of Durban, Percy Binns, the
"strike was practically universal amongst the Indians in the Borough”.366

A mass meeting of about 3,000 Indians was held by the Natal Indian Association on 18
November at Sydenham Road, adjacent to the racecourse. Dawad Mahomed and L. Gabriel
urged strikers to remain orderly and preserve the good name of the community. Gabriel asked
striking hospital attendants and sanitary workers to return to their duties as it was not part of
passive resistance to engage in acts which might cause injury to others. Albert Christopher,
leader of the Colonial-born youth, urged them to support the indentured and ex-indentured
workers in their efforts to secure the repeal of the £3 tax. The meeting called on the Government
to repeal the tax, and the Imperial and Indian Governments to intervene to avert greater hardship.

Hospital and sanitation workers went back to work after the meeting. It was reported that the
Natal Indian Association also urged the newspaper boys to return to work so that the public
could be informed of the strike.367

The Government’s reaction was to escalate repression.

On 19 November, five members of the Natal Indian Association – A. M. Moosa, Abdul Hak
Kajee, I.M. Lazarus, Arjoon Singh and S. Emamally – were charged with abetting the strike. The
next day Sorabji Rustomjee, Albert Christopher and R. Bhugwan were charged with the same
offence. The case was remanded and they were released on a bail of £100 each.368 The case
was remanded again and after the end of the strike, the Attorney-General decided to withdraw
the charges.

Percy Binns, the Chief Magistrate, and General Lukin attended a committee meeting of the Town
Council to discuss the “industrial unrest” in Durban. At the meeting it was decided that the only
way to deal with the current situation was to make "wholesale arrests”. According to Binns,

this course appeared to me to be necessary for two reasons:

1. That the Indians had to see that the Government was in a position to make its power felt, and so afford
evidence to those willing to work that there was not only the power to punish, but also to protect.
2. It was necessary to show to the natives that there existed at hand the necessary force to handle any number
of strikers.369

366
British Library, Report of the Indian strike in the Division of Durban, 4 December 1913
367
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913; Natal Witness, 19 November 1913; Natal Advertiser, 19 November 1913;
C.G. Henning, The Indentured Indian in Natal 1860-1917 (Delhi: Promilla &Co., 1993), p. 183.
368
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
369
British Library, Report of the Indian strike in the Division of Durban, 4 December 1913.
They put their plan into action, starting with the workers on the Railways. General Lukin
supplied 60 mounted troops of the SAMR and about 30 African troopers as well as a strong force
of Borough police to the railway barracks.

The barracks was quickly surrounded.370 The Indians, numbering about 500 came out.
Eyewitnesses said that the police treated the Indian workers brutally and dragged them from their
rooms.371 Inspector Alexander, who commanded the force, told them through an interpreter that
those who desired to work would receive a police escort into town and others would be arrested.
One hundred and thirty-three strikers – 120 of whom were indentured and 13 “free Indians” –
refused to work and were arrested. They were taken to court and charged on 19 November. The
chief witness, V. Fenton, Labour Clerk for the Province of Natal for the South African Railways,
testified that he had tried to persuade the men to return to work. They had replied that their
”king” had told them to strike and that they would not return to work till the “king”, who was
now in prison, was released. They also wanted the £3 tax repealed. Eighty-six indentured
workers pleaded guilty and were sentenced to seven days in prison with hard labour; 13 were
discharged upon reasonable excuse. Eighteen “free Indians” were fined £3 or six weeks in prison
with hard labour.372

Representatives of the Natal Indian Association were present in the court. NIA instructed A. R.
Mitchell to defend the strikers. Mr. Mitchell said that mounted police had been brought to
compel the men to work and the use of force had done more harm than good. The Government,
he said, had no right to compel them to work.

Binns visited the Harbour and addressed the striking workers, but they refused to work. On 20
November, 264 Indians from the Harbour were brought before the court. Two hundred were
charged with absenting themselves from roll-call without leave. When the charge was interpreted
to them, “with one accord they sung out that they were guilty”. Some of them said that they were
prepared to keep going to prison till the £3 tax was repealed. They filed out into the Courtyard
and the rest of the men were charged with the same offence. Their spokesman said in Hindustani:
“The £3 tax presses heavily upon us. We want the Magistrate to enderavour to get the £3 tax
removed, and also to get Mr. Gandhi released from prison.” The Magistrate sentenced all the
men to seven days in prison with hard labour.373

370
Natal Advertiser, 20, 24 and 26 November 1913. Natal Mercury reported on 22 November that on the previous
day at daybreak the Indian quarters at the Magazine Barracks of the Durban Corporation were surrounded by 56
mounted police, 12 European Constables and about 170 “Native” police. The manoeuvre reminded one of a well-
planned attack upon an army of trained soldiers instead of, what it really was, an act of coercion against a number of
defenceless labourers who simply claimed the right to refrain from work as a protest against the £3 tax.
371
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
372
Natal Advertiser, 19 November 1913; Natal Witness, 22 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913;
British Library, Report of the Indian strike in the Division of Durban, 4 December 1913.
373
Ibid.
Binns also visited the African Boating Company to address the workers but heard the same
reasons for striking as the railway workers. Reinforcements were brought in from the SAMR and
they also enlisted the help of the water police. The workers were escorted to the town by the
police and SAMR. Most of the strike leaders were arrested.

Seventeen employees of the Associated Stevedoring Company were arrested for refusing to
work.

On 21 November the authorities claimed that the strike in Durban had been broken. A large
number of employees of the Corporation and about a quarter of the men employed by the
Railways returned to work. About 400 Indians employed by the Borough Engineer‘s Department
spontaneously returned to work. Smaller establishments like hotels and tea-rooms were also
equally successful. A majority of Indians employed at the Royal Hotel, Marine Hotel, Durban
Clubs, many stores and private houses returned to work. A large number of farmers with
vegetables attended the market. The Chief Constable said that 75% of the Indian labour force in
Durban returned to work.

During the strike some employers enlisted the services of Africans as waiters and domestic
servants. Some hotels employed whites or Africans to replace the Indians. “The general wish is
expressed that Jim may take the place of Sam forever.”374

Many employers, including the Railways, did not take all the strikers back.

Strike in Pietermaritzburg

On 15 November, a mass meeting of 1,500 Indians was held in Pietermaritzburg on the grounds
of the Indian temple on Williams Street. It elected an executive committee to carry on passive
resistance, with the following officers: V. R. Pillay, President; N.B. Naik, Vice-President; and
Ismail Amod Bayat, Treasurer. The members of the executive were: Rostan Khan, C. Dada, S.
R. Naidoo, S. C. Naidoo, A. F. Peters, Jugdoe, D. R. Teni.

The meeting adopted by acclamation a resolution pledging to go on strike if the £3 tax was not
repealed by noon next Saturday. The resolution was proposed by N.B. Naik and seconded by
D.P. Desai. The meeting also resolved to organise a march to the Transvaal if an unsatisfactory
reply was received.375

The Mayor of Pietermaritzburg was seriously concerned about the outbreak of epidemics if staff
at essential services went on strike. He met Indian leaders, including the members of the

374
Natal Witness, 19 and 22 November 1913; British Library, Report of the Indian strike in the Division of Durban,
4 December 1913.
375
Natal Witness, 11 October and 16 November 1913; Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913.
executive committee of passive resistance, on 21 November and appealed to them to use their
influence to avert a strike. They told him it was not their intention that the sanitary workers
should come out on strike as Indians would suffer as much as Europeans or more from an
epidemic. They promised to do all they could to influence the Indian employees of the Sanitary
Department to stick to their posts.376

On 22 November, another mass meeting, attended by four or five thousand people, was
addressed by Thambi Naidoo and P.K. Naidoo. The meeting adopted a resolution calling for a
general strike from Saturday, 29 November afternoon, with the stipulation that employees at
sanitary, hospital and electric light departments and Asylum Indians continue to carry on their
work. Towards the close of the meeting Thambi Naidoo was notified that a member of the
Criminal Investigation Department had arrived with a warrant for his arrest issued in Durban. He
exhorted the audience to have no fear as he was not afraid to go to prison for the cause. He
proceeded to warn the crowd not to initiate any acts of violence, but to remain passive resisters
and obey the commands of law and order. Let us, he said, suffer for the cause, but on no account
resort to acts of aggression or violation of the law.377

Five thousand people went on strike on 29 November.

P.K. Naidoo, N.B. Naik and Dukhi were arrested on 30 November. They were released on bail
which was set at £200 each when they refused to give an undertaking to refrain from taking part
in the movement while out.378

Indians employed in railway construction work at Hilton Road (about 400) struck work. They
were stopped while on their way to Pietermaritzburg and persuaded to return to work. Indians on
the wattle plantations at Hilton Road also stopped work in sympathy with the railway workers.379

Satyagraha Continues

The passive resisters were not only promoting the strike of Indian workers for the abolition of the
£3 tax, and providing assistance to them, but continued to defy unjust laws and court
imprisonment in support of all the demands of the satyagraha.

When the authorities in the Transvaal stopped arresting satyagrahis who went hawking without
licence, they entered the Transvaal from Natal or the Cape and succeeded in getting imprisoned.

376
Natal Witness, 22 November 1913
377
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913, Natal Advertiser, 28 November 1913. Thambi Naidoo was arrested after the
meeting and taken to Durban. Bail was refused as he declined to give an undertaking that he would refrain from
taking part in passive resistance while out. His case was remanded.
378
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
379
Natal Witness, 15 and 22 November 1913
Manilal Gandhi, Soopia Pillay, Annamaly, Vera Francis and Bhaga Mancha were sentenced on
29 October to three months with hard labour for crossing the Transvaal border at Volksrust. S.B.
Medh received a similar sentence the next day.380

P.K. Naidoo, T. Coopoosamy Naidoo, Willie Morgan, Rajoo Narsoo, and M. Ruthnam Pillay
crossed the Cape-Transvaal border on 18 October at Fourteen Points. They were deported to the
Cape border and returned immediately. They were arrested and the next day their cases were
remanded to 29 October when they were found guilty. But on 4 November, on instructions from
the Government, they were discharged and told to appear when called upon to receive their
sentences.381

N. Dookhie, M.R. Pillay, Antony Sebastian, Pappah and Ramkissoon of Durban and Newcastle
were deported on 24 October when they entered the Transvaal at Volksrust. They re-entered the
Transvaal and were sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard labour.382

On 27 October, the following men were arrested at Volksrust for defying immigration laws:
Hanmanth Vengetsamy from Pietermaritzburg, Dominie Francis, Kandasamy Vadivel Moodley,
Shenmagam Dorasamy, Joseph Mariam and Gayadin Maharaj from Durban.383

Indian Opinion reported on 29 October that ten passive resisters from Newcastle were arrested at
Volksrust and sentenced to three months in prison.

Police stopped arrests at Volksrust for some time. Chetty, Lal Mahomed and others who had
been arrested were discharged.384

On 7 November, V.R. Vartak, Chairman of the Awakened Indian Society of Cape Town, was
sentenced to a fine of £5 pounds or 10 days’ imprisonment without hard labour for hawking
without a permit.385

In the middle of November, 37 resisters crossed the Transvaal border at Volksrust and were
sentenced to three months with hard labour. This party included Hurbat Singh, a 70-year-old man
who had been a labourer for thirty years. He left his farm and proceeded to the border to offer
resistance. He died in prison on 5 January. 386

On 19 November, Jamnadas Gandhi was arrested and released at Kimberley. He crossed the
Transvaal border from Kimberley on the same day with Ramaswami Padiachy, Pakiri Naidoo,
Rahim Jhina and N.A. Thali. They were given three days’ notice to leave and were deported on

380
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
381
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
382
Indian Opinion, 22 and 29 October 1913
383
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
384
Ibid.
385
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
386
Indian Opinion, 7 January 1914. See Part II, “Biographical Notes on Some of the Resisters”.
23 November. They returned on 25 November reinforced by six more passive resisters: Narotam
Poona, Morar Govind, Ebrahim Kadir and A. Sami from Windsorton and Jhinabhai Desai and
Bhana B. Patel from Kimberley. They were all sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with
hard labour.387

On 2 December, twenty-five men, including Frank and Willie Morgan, crossed the Transvaal
border from Charlestown and were sentenced to three months with hard labour.388

On 12 December, Mahomed Ebrahim Kunkey, veteran passive resister of Johannesburg, was

sentenced to three months with hard labour for crossing the Transvaal border from Natal.389

On 18 December, Mrs. R. Moonsamy, Mrs. Bismith, Mrs. Shivaprasad and Mrs. Kabuthar, and
31 other passive resisters crossed the Transvaal border from Natal at Volksrust and were
sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard labour. On 22 December, Mrs. V.S. Pillay,
Mrs. Peter Moonlight Mudaliar, Mrs. Govindsamy Naidoo, and 43 other passive resisters were
similarly sentenced at Volksrust.390 The women in the two groups were Tamil women
satyagrahis from the Transvaal.

Also on 22 December, the following passive resisters crossed the border of the Transvaal at
Volksrust and were sentenced to three months’ imprisonment: S. Bob Khan, Letchymanam,
Rathana Moodley, Armuga Naiker, Armuga Padayachy, M. Moonsamy Pather, M. Soopan
Moodaley, Jeram Ranchod, L.B. Naik, Sellapa Naidoo, Rajoo Naidoo, Valoo Pillay and Josey. 391

Community Support

The Indian community all over the Union rallied in support of passive resistance and in protest
against the £3 tax. Meetings in support of passive resistance were held in Newcastle, Durban,
Ladysmith, Tongaat, Verulam, Pietermaritzburg, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London,
Woodstock, Kimberley, Johannesburg and Pretoria. Those outside prison not only adopted

387
Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913
388
Ibid.
389
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
390
Indian Opinion, 24 December 1913
391
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913. Gandhi, Polak and Kallenbach wrote, in their letter to the Minister of
Interior on 21 December, that on their release from prison:

We found, too, that by way of further protest,[against the composition of the Indian Inquiry Commission]
36 passive resisters, of whom five were women, had crossed the Volksrust border from Natal, and had been
arrested and received imprisonment. In their statement to the Court, we understand, they informed the
presiding Magistrate that their object in courting arrest was to lodge a respectful protest against the partisan
character which had been given to the Commission, and we found further that two other parties of passive
resisters had already left for Volksrust for the same purpose. CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 279.
resolutions and sent telegrams to the Government, but made generous donations both in cash and
kind to support the movement and assist the strikers.

The Newcastle Passive Resistance Committee collected food for the strikers and found sleeping
accommodation for them.392 It engaged the medical services of Dr. Cooper to attend to strike
patients. Mahomed Shaffee and Jaffer and Dawood of Newcastle contributed goods towards the
maintenance of the strikers in the town. A storekeeper in Newcastle, Dwarkasingh, agreed to
waive all his book debts against those of his customers who were on strike or imprisoned.393 A
local resident wrote in November 1913:

We had to house them (Indian workers) here, there and everywhere. We lodged them in private houses,
sheds, stables, sample-rooms, and certain houses that were placed at our disposal out of kindness and pity.
Mrs. Smith, proprietress of the Bridge Hotel, gave us a nice large hall free of charge. We haven’t been on
any occasion but one refused any house that was empty either by Europeans or Indians.394

In Durban, a committee was formed, with Dawad Mahomed as Chairman, for the purpose of
collecting funds and foodstuffs for the strikers. Many merchants contributed. Large amounts of
rice and dholl were collected and sent by rail to Newcastle. Supplies were sent from there to the
strikers on the “Great March”. The Colonial-born Indian Association, consisting of young
Indians born in South Africa, was very active in collecting donations and providing assistance to
the strikers.395

A Christian Indian in service in Durban sent a sovereign and promised to contribute ten shillings
per month as long as the struggle lasted. Cheques for amounts ranging between £5 and £10 were
received at the Indian Opinion office in Phoenix. Mr. Rawat, proprietor of a bioscope in Durban,
gave the proceeds from a performance on 3 November to the passive resistance fund. The
amount raised was £30-8- 9.

The strikers also received considerable help from Indian communities on the route of the “Great
March”. Mr. Sidaat of Ingogo supplied tea and biscuits to strikers en route to Volksrust. Natal
Witness reported on 4 November:

Charlestown Indian merchants assisted in every possible way, and put their premises at the disposal of the
resisters…

During the march in the Transvaal, local merchants, among them A.M. Badat, proceeded ahead
of the marchers by train and supplied the strikers with bread on their arrival. Valli Peerbhai
offered his carriage for the transportation of stores. N.C. Desai attended to striking indentured
labourers. He offered tea, sandwiches and shelter to men and women and children. The Indian
community in Standerton supplied one thousand tins of jam and entertained the marchers

392
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
393
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913
394
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
395
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
generously with refreshments and accommodation. At the Vaal Station, M.R. Patel housed the
sick and injured. 396

In Tongaat, a group of six passive resisters – Kalidas Gandhi, A. Naidoo, Pirmal Naidoo, Janki,
Abdul Sahi and Surajpalsingh (the last three were £3 tax payers) - left at the end of September
for Volksrust and were sentenced to imprisonment. The Tongaat community rallied to assist their
families. Valji Lalla and M.K. Kothare inaugurated a fund to support the families. Ayob Sayan
donated the sum of £6-5-0 and thirty men from the Tongaat community promised to give each
half a bag of rice, some dholl and a bottle of oil.397

In Ladysmith the community established a committee to raise funds to support the families of
passive resisters.398

In Johannesburg, during the Diwali Festival in November 1913, hundreds of Hindus and
Muslims gathered at the West End Bioscope Hall. A collection was made for the passive
resistance fund and donations of jewellery and other items were auctioned.399 David Morgan
gave a benefit performance at the Bioscope Hall at Vrededorp for the passive resistance fund and
raised £20.400

In the Cape Province, the East London Hindu Society contributed £20-10-3 toward the passive
resistance fund.401 In Port Elizabeth a meeting of the Mauritian and Colonial Born Hindu Benefit
Society raised £20 for the passive resistance fund.402 The British Indian Association of
Oudtshoorn, Cape Province, held a meeting on 1 December and donated £21 to the movement.403
East London Hindu Society contributed £20-10-3 to the passive resistance fund.404

The Shri Hindi Jagyasa Sabha and its members contributed £21 to the passive resistance fund405
and the Indians of Salisbury (Rhodesia) contributed £14.406

There were wide protests when Gandhi was imprisoned. The business community in Pretoria
suspended work on 12 November and sent a cable to the Viceroy of India and Gopal Krishna
Gokhale asking them to intervene with the Imperial Government. It read:

396
Indian Opinion, 5 and 12 November 1913
397
Indian Opinion, 15 and 29 October 1913
398
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
399
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
400
Indian Opinion, 12 November 1913
401
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
402
Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913
403
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
404
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
405
Ibid.
406
Ibid.
 That the meeting of British Indians residents of Pretoria strongly condemns the drastic action of the Union
Government in sentencing Mr. Gandhi a true patriot and arresting Messrs. Polak and Kallenbach ,
European sympathisers with the Indian cause, while fighting for the Indian community in the Union of
South Africa. That this meeting strongly supports the action of Mr. Gandhi in reviving passive resistance,
which is the only remedy for voiceless subjects of the British empire in this country… 407

In Kimberley, 18 November was observed as a day of mourning and protest against the
conviction of Gandhi, Polak and Kallenbach. Produce was delivered by farmers in the market but
the Indians were absent and half the stuff was left unsold.408

Demand for a Commission of Inquiry

In view of the alarming reports of brutality against passive resisters and strikers, Gopal Krishna
Gokhale called for an impartial commission of inquiry with Indian representation. The Indian
community supported the demand at mass meetings in Durban, Johannesburg, Pietermaritzburg,
Newcastle and other centres.

Public opinion in India was outraged at reports on the treatment of women in prison and the
violence against striking workers, and there were protests all over the country.409 Lord Hardinge,
the Viceroy, wrote to the Governor-General of South Africa, Lord Gladstone, expressing his
concern over the violence against the Indians. Gladstone denied any ill-treatment. Lord Hardinge
then felt it necessary to make a public statement expressing sympathy with the Indian passive
resisters and supporting the demand of Gokhale for an impartial investigation with Indian
representation, to assuage Indian opinion.410 In a speech in Madras on 24 November, he referred
to demands for retaliation against South Africa and said:

407
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913; Natal Witness, 18 November 1913.
408
Natal Witness, 18 November 1913
409
Gokhale said in a telegram to Natal Indian Association: “India thrilling with indignation. Protests being sent to
Government here and England from all parts against inhuman torture of countrymen in South Africa”. It was read at
the mass meeting in Durban on 18 November. Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913.
410
Lord Hardinge explained in his reminiscences:

For three years previously India had been singularly patient over the unfair treatment of Indians in South
Africa by the Union Government, and the protests of the Government of India had been practically ignored
both by the Dominions Office at home and the Union Government, who seemed to regard India as a
negligible quantity. Harassed by invidious and unjust laws, the Indians in South Africa had taken matters
into their own hands by organising passive resistance to these laws. The South African authorities adopted
retaliatory measures and reports reached India of the flogging of passive resisters and strikers, and their
imprisonment in the mines. The result was that a flame of protest and resentment broke out all over India
and the situation was becoming extremely grave. Some people said that there had been no movement like it
since the Mutiny. I must say I was personally exasperated at the action of the Union Government and the
inaction of the Dominions Office, and this feeling came to a boiling-point as I read, while in the train on
my way to Madras, the official telegrams recounting the sufferings of the Indians in South Africa. My
Indian Years 1910-1916: The Reminiscences of Lord Hardinge of Penshurst (London: John Murray, 1948),
pp. 90-91.
 … unfortunately it is not easy to find means whereby India can make its indignation felt by those holding
the reins of Government in South Africa.

Recently your compatriots in South Africa have taken matters into their own hands, organising passive
resistance to laws which they consider invidious and unjust, an opinion which we, who are watching their
struggles from afar, cannot but share. They violated those laws with a full knowledge of the penalties
involved, and are ready with all courage and patience to endure the penalties. In all this they have the deep
and burning sympathy of India and also of those who, like myself, without being Indians, sympathise with
the people of this country, but the most recent developments have taken a most serious turn. We have seen
the widest publicity given to allegations that passive resistance is dealt with by measures which would not
be tolerated for a moment in any country claiming to be civilised… I feel that if the South African
Government desires to justify itself in the eyes of India and the world, the only course open is to appoint a
strong impartial committee, wherein Indian interests will be represented, to conduct the most searching
inquiry…411

The British Government, though displeased with the statement of Lord Hardinge, expressed
support for an impartial inquiry.412 It could not ignore the mass protests all over India, the
largest colony. Sentiment in Britain, as reflected by major newspapers, was very critical of the
South African Government.

Under pressure from Britain and India, the South African Government announced in early
December the appointment of an Indian Enquiry Commission, but without Indian representation:

To inquire into and report as to the disturbances in connection with the recent strike of Indians in Natal, the
causes and circumstances which led to that strike and those disturbances, the amount of force used in the
suppression of the disturbances, and the necessity for the use of such force, and as to any acts of violence
alleged to have been committed upon prisoners sentenced in connection with the strike.

To make recommendations in respect of any of the above matters. 413

The Commission was composed of Sir William Solomon, a judge, as Chairman, and two
members who were notoriously anti-Indian - Ewald Esselen, a leading member of the Bar in the
Transvaal, and J.S. Wylie, a member of the Provincial Executive of Natal. Esselen had
expressed anti-Asiatic views on public platforms. Colonel Wylie was a member of the Defence
Force and could not be expected to be neutral in an investigation of brutality by it. He was a legal
adviser to many plantation owners. In a statement to Natal Witness, he had stated that he
considered the presence of Indians who completed their contracts and their families in Natal was
not in the best interests of the province, and was, therefore, “not in favour of the tax being
repealed.”414 Moreover, in 1896 when Gandhi was returning to Natal with his family, he had
advised people to sink ships bringing free Indians.

411
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
412
Report of a meeting of an Indian deputation with Lord Crew, the Secretary of State for India, in Indian Opinion,
31 December 1913
413
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
414
Ibid.
Mass meetings were held in Durban, Johannesburg, Cape Town, Pietermaritzburg, Kimberley
and Potchefstroom expressing satisfaction at the appointment of the Commission but protesting
its composition. They called on the Government to add two members to the Commission – Sir
James Rose-Innes and W. Schreiner, K.C. - in whom Indians have confidence.415 For instance, a
mass meeting of 1,500 Indians, held in mid-December at the Recreation Grounds in Durban,
resolved:

That this mass meeting of British Indians assembled at Durban places on record its
emphatic protest against the constitution of the Commission appointed to enquire into the
strike and the ill-treatment of Indians participating in the strike and urges that some
representatives be specially nominated by the India community.416

415
Ibid.
416
Ibid.
 V. NEGOTIATIONS AND SETTLEMENT417

The Indian Inquiry Commission held its first sitting in Pretoria on 18 December 1913. It
recommended, with a view to enabling this inquiry to be as thorough as possible, and, inasmuch
as the strike of Indians in Natal was at an end, that Gandhi, Polak, Kallenbach and any other
leaders in prison should be immediately released.

Gandhi, Polak and Kallenbach had been brought to Pretoria and were released immediately after
the Commission’s recommendation.418 They came to know of the protests of the Indian
community against the composition of the Commission. At a reception at Gaiety Theatre in
Johannesburg the same evening, they expressed their doubts about the wisdom of giving
evidence before the Commission and said that they would make a final decision after reaching
Durban.419

In an interview to Natal Mercury soon after arrival in Durban, Gandhi said that Europeans
known to possess no anti-Asiatic bias should be appointed to the Commission to counter-balance
the influence of Esselen and Colonel Wiley. Unless the Government acceded to this reasonable
demand, he said, “we have decided not to give any evidence before them, and we shall resume
activities in order to seek re-arrest and re-imprisonment”.420

On 21 December, Gandhi addressed a mass meeting held under the auspices of the Natal Indian
Association, attended by about six to seven thousand persons. He was very firm that the
Commission could not be accepted unless additional members were appointed. He was cheered
by the audience when he concluded:

… if the Government does not grant our request, this is the proposition I wish to place
before you this morning: That all of us, on the first day of the New Year, should be ready
again to suffer battle, again to suffer imprisonment and march out. (Applause.) That is the
only process of purification and will be a substantial mourning both inwardly and
outwardly [for those who were killed] which will bear justification before our God…”421

He described it as “essentially a religious struggle”.422

Gandhi stressed the right of Indians to be consulted when their interests were affected. He said:

417
The correspondence referred to in this chapter is from CWMG, Volume 12.
418
Apparently no other leaders were released.
419
Indian Opinion, 24 and 31 December 1913
420
Natal Mercury, 22 December 1913
421
Ibid.
422
Ibid.
 They were fighting for so many grievances, and the underlying spirit of the struggle was
to obtain recognition on the part of the Government of the right of consultation in
anything which appertained to Indian interests. Unless the Government was prepared to
condescend to that extent, unless they were prepared to ascertain and respect the Indian
sentiments, it was not possible for Indians, as loyal but manly citizens of the Empire, to
render obedience to their Commissions or laws which they might have passed over their
heads.423

The meeting adopted three resolutions which were probably drafted by Gandhi: first, that the
community should not give evidence before the Commission because it was not consulted about
its composition; second, to request the Government to add to the membership W.P. Schreiner
and Sir James Rose-Innes or two other Europeans acceptable to the Indian community; and third,
to request the Government to release all passive resistance prisoners. If the Commission was
expanded and prisoners released, the community would undertake to suspend passive resistance
until the publication of the findings of the Commission. If the Government refused to comply
with these requests, the community would be obliged at once to prosecute the struggle with
renewed vigour and determination.424

On the same day, Gandhi, Polak and Kallenbach addressed a letter to the Minister of Interior
conveying the views of the community. They said that if the additional members proposed by
the Indian community were appointed and if the resisters imprisoned in ordinary prisons or in
mining compounds were released, they would advise the community to suspend passive
resistance pending the Commission’s finding. To tender evidence before the Commission,
however, members of the community would have to have full and free permission to enter the
different estates and collieries where Indians were employed, in order to collect evidence.425

On 24 December, the Acting Secretary of Interior, H.B. Shawe, sent a reply that the Minister was
unable to accept their conditions.
The Commission was intended to be impartial and judicial in character, and in constituting it the
Government consulted neither the Indian community nor the coal owners and Sugar Planters’
Association of Natal, nor could the Government for a moment, following the course you propose,
give colour to the unwarranted reflections you make on two of the Commissioners appointed. The
course you propose to pursue is noted and deeply regretted, not the least so in the interests of the
Indian community which cannot but be profoundly affected by the lawless character of your

423
Natal Mercury, 22 December 1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 275.
424
Ibid. The audience apparently took an oath, but it is not clear from reports what was covered by the oath. It is
hard to understand why Gandhi proposed an oath in the name of God after the sad experience with the pledge of 11
September 1906 which was violated even by those who proposed it.

According to C.F. Andrews, there were more than 4,000 in the prisons of Natal at the beginning of 1914, and
Gandhi had the pledge of the community that, if the struggle were re-opened, this number would be raised to 20,000.
C.F. Andrews, “Mr. Gandhi and the Commission” in Modern Review, Calcutta, July 1914.
425
Indian Opinion, 24 December 1913; Natal Mercury, 24 December 1913.
 procedure, and the gratuitous infliction of grave suffering on the innocent, both white and Indian,
and the consequent exasperation of public opinion throughout the Union.426

The letter was given to the press before it reached Gandhi.

Meanwhile, two of the greatest friends of the Indian community of South Africa in India and
Britain expressed serious concern at the decision to boycott the Commission. Gokhale cabled
Gandhi on 21 December, soon after he read Gandhi’s interview to Natal Mercury, that
“boycotting inquiry will be grave mistake, alienating sympathy Government of India and many
friends England”.427 He suggested that Gandhi “draw up protest against Esselen and Wylie,
explaining fully objection to both and appear under protest”, as the inquiry offered an
opportunity to offer evidence in support of allegations of cruelty.428 Lord Ampthill sent a similar
message through L.W. Ritch:
Tell Gandhi that in my judgment his present attitude will alienate sympathies now obtained after ten years patient
persistence, will place friends here and in India in false position and will wreck cause. Peremptory tone not in
accordance with spirit of passive resistance. Earnestly exhort him to meet half way undoubted wish for settlement.429

In cables to Lord Ampthill on 23 and 29 December and to Gokhale on 24 December, Gandhi

explained that the declaration made in God’s name at the Durban mass meeting was irrevocable.
He confided that the feeling in the community was so strong that anyone who advised accepting
the Commission without addition of members, especially he, would be justifiably killed.430

Gandhi was faced with a dilemma. Abandoning the march would be resented by the Indian
community while proceeding with it would alienate sympathy of influential friends in India and
Britain. Moreover, there was likelihood of violence by Europeans and the Government if
resistance was resumed.431 Help came from several directions.

A number of church leaders met Gandhi on 24 December and offered to use their influence
toward conciliation. At their suggestion, Gandhi promised reasonable postponement of the
march.

Gokhale asked Gandhi in a cable on 26 December if the oath of the Indians included January 1st
as the definite date for the renewal of the struggle. Gandhi replied on the same day that it did not.
He sent a second cable to Gokhale on the same day that "march will be postponed almost
certainly".432

426
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913
427
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 283
428
Ibid.
429
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 293
430
CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 305-07
431
C.F. Andrews, who had been sent by Gokhale to South Africa to assist the Indians, informed Gandhi that
Europeans had told him: “If the Indians go out again, there will be shooting.” C .F. Andrews, “Mr. Gandhi and the
Commission” in Modern Review, Calcutta, July 1914.
432
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 297
The next day – 27 December - he agreed to the suggestion of Gokhale to postpone the march
until a week after the arrival of Sir Benjamin Robertson, a senior civil servant who was being
sent by Lord Hardinge to assist the Indian community. Gokhale himself had requested C.F.
Andrews to go to South Africa.433 Gandhi cabled Gokhale on 27 December: "Miss Hobhouse,
staunch friend Government, has just wired asking me suspend march and she is intervening."434
She had requested him to postpone the march for 15 days. 435 She wrote to General Smuts on 29
December urging him to settle the Indian problem.

Gandhi told a mass meeting in Pietermaritzburg on 27 December that negotiations of an

important character were proceeding and the march might not take place until 15 January. 436 His
co-workers were sent around and leaflets were circulated to inform the community in Natal about
the postponement.

Meanwhile, Gandhi found a conciliatory tone in the reply of 24 December from the Minister of
Interior. He was perhaps thinking of the statement that the Commission was judicial in character
and that the planters were not consulted in deciding its composition. He replied immediately
after reading it in the press, affirming his desire to avoid infliction of suffering on whites and
Indians and to prevent losses to employers of Indian labour “for some of whom I entertain high
regard”.437 He requested an appointment to meet the Minister and submit suggestions which
might remove the deadlock without loss of dignity for Government or honour for Indians. At the
request of the Minister, he explained that he would agree to the addition to the Commission of
one additional member to be selected by Indians and another to be selected by the planters.
Alternatively, there could be a one-man Commission with Judge Solomon alone but limited to
reporting on allegations of violence and ill-treatment during the strike.438

General Smuts, for his part, was under pressure from India and Britain to compromise. The strike
of Indian workers had substantial effect on the economy. The proposed march was likely to
cause even more severe problems, as Gandhi expected that 5,000 people would join the march
and that their ranks might swell to 20,000.439 The reply of the Minister was also conciliatory.

433
C.F. Andrews, a British clergymen, was a great friend of India. He donated one-third of his life’s savings to help
the struggle of the Indians in South Africa. When Albert West was arrested, Gokhale requested him to go to South
Africa and help the community. W.W. Pearson, another churchman, accompanied him and investigated the
conditions of Indian workers in South Africa. See W.W. Pearson, “Report of My Visit to South Africa” in Modern
Review, Calcutta, June 1914.
434
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 301
435
Miss Hobhouse had appealed to Gandhi as a “humble woman” to postpone the march for fifteen days. According
to Raojibhai Patel, in his book Gandhiji ni Sadhana, Gandhi consulted his colleagues on the appeal of Miss
Hobhouse and decided to postpone the march by fifteen days. Whether it was due to the appeal of Miss Hobhouse or
the telegram from Gokhale or both, a crisis was averted.
436
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913
437
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 294
438
Gandhi’s telegram to the Minister of the Interior, 29 December 1913. CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 302-03.
439
Gandhi’s cable to Gokhale, 26 December 1913. CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 297.
Provisional Agreement, 21 January 1914

Gandhi went to Pretoria on 9 January together with C.F. Andrews, who had arrived in Durban on
2 January, but the talks with General Smuts were delayed until 16 January as he was preoccupied
with a strike on the railways. Gandhi presented his proposals on the Commission as well as
grievances which led to the passive resistance. He reaffirmed that only two issues – the marriage
question and the £3 tax – needed legislation. Others could be settled administratively.

General Smuts rejected any change in the composition of the Commission. He said that the
Government wished to settle the Indian question soon and that it needed the report by the
Commission to facilitate approval of the settlement by the Parliament. He hinted that the
Commission would be sympathetic and that there should be no difficulty in meeting the requests
of Gandhi.

But they had to find a solution which would enable Gandhi to keep his oath and convince the
Indian community to suspend passive resistance. Andrews proved to be very helpful in enabling
General Smuts and the Governor-General to understand Gandhi’s concerns and his thinking.440

The Governor-General, Lord Gladstone, in a confidential report on 22 January to the British

Secretary of State for the Colonies, wrote:

I am glad to be able to report that the prospects of an early settlement of the principal points at issue
between my Government and the Indian community in this country have distinctly improved during the
past week….

Numerous personal interviews have taken place between General Smuts and Mr. Gandhi, General Smuts
and Sir Benjamin Robertson, and Sir Benjamin Robertson and Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Andrews also has had
conversations both with the Minister and with Sir Benjamin Robertson. General Smuts has shown a most
patient and conciliatory temper. In spite of a series of conflicts extending over many years, he retains a
sympathetic interest in Mr. Gandhi as an unusual type of humanity, whose peculiarities, however
inconvenient they may be to the Minister, are not devoid of attraction for the student… It is no easy task for
a European to conduct negotiations with Mr. Gandhi. The workings of his conscience are inscrutable to the
occidental mind and produce complications in wholly unexpected places. His ethical and intellectual
attitude, based as it appears to be on a curious compound of mysticism and astuteness, baffles the ordinary
processes of thought. Nevertheless, a tolerably practical understanding has been reached. 441

A provisional agreement was reached on 21 January by an exchange of letters. Lord Gladstone,

in another cable to the Secretary of State on 22 January, reported:

440
CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 324-26
441
CWMG, Vol. 12, p.324n
 … while Mr. Gandhi receives no assurances, the Government expressed their desire for an early settlement.

Mr. Gandhi and his friends will not appear before the Commission, but in recognition of the opportunities
of consultation which General Smuts had afforded by consenting to receive Mr. Gandhi, they offer to assist
Sir Benjamin Robertson in the preparation of his evidence. Passive resistance is to be suspended pending
the report of the Commission and the introduction of legislation. The release of bona fide passive resisters
now serving sentence is asked for, and the Minister explains that this had already been done by the
Government… 442

Gandhi described the agreement as a joint work of Andrews and himself.443

The provisional agreement was unanimously endorsed at mass meetings in Durban, Pretoria,
Johannesburg and other centers.444 This is how Gandhi explained the agreement at the mass
meeting in Durban on 25 January:

The net effect of the letter written to him by the Government and their reply was, in his opinion, that they
had accepted the principle of consultation, that they had recognised the motive of the community in
dropping the question of the allegations altogether, that they recognised the community’s motive in not
leading evidence before the Commission, that they had given an assurance that they wished to settle the
matter in accordance with the community’s submission, and they wanted to do this through the
Commission, but they felt that the community’s demands were so reasonable and had been so sanctified
and strengthened by the suffering that it had undergone during the past months, that there should be no
difficulty in securing the recommendation from the Commission… From every point of view, the
agreement was good, dignified, and worthy of acceptance. 445

A total of 124 passive resistance prisoners were released between 10 and 13 February.446
Valliamma, a girl of 16 or 17 who had been ill in prison, died soon after release.

Indians’ Relief Act, 1914

The Solomon Commission reported to the Government on 7 March. It dismissed charges of

brutality by the army and the police.447 It considered the points on which Gandhi sought relief in

442
CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 610-11
443
Gandhi’s cable to Gokhale, 22 January 1914. Andrews had held a two-hour meeting with the Governor-General
while Gandhi was waiting for an interview with General Smuts and briefed him on Gandhi’s thinking. The
Governor-General felt that the situation seemed hopeful and conveyed the gist of his conversation to General Smuts.
When the agreement was delayed because of one sentence that Gandhi wanted, Andrews went to General Smuts
early in the morning on 21 January and got his approval. CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 330; Rand Daily Mail, 23 and 24
January 1914.
444
Gandhi’s cable to Gokhale, 26 January 1914. CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 336.
445
Indian Opinion, 28 January 1914
446
Eighteen prisoners from Durban, 34 from the Point, 8 from Newcastle and 11 from Port Elizabeth. Indian
Opinion, 18 February 1914.
447
Indian Opinion said in an editorial on 25 March that the Natal Indian Association had over three hundred
affidavits. If evidence was led on acts of brutality and on Indian grievances, the report of the Commission would
have been delayed for months. These affidavits were not presented to the Commission and have not been traced.
his letter of 21 January as they were the cause of the strike and passive resistance.448 It
recommended legislation to solve the problem of recognition of Indian marriages and to abolish
the £3 tax. All its recommendations were in harmony with the requests of Gandhi.449

The Government accepted the recommendations of the Commission and published the Indians’
Relief Bill on 28 May 1914 on the two issues requiring legislative action – the marriage question
and the £3 tax. General Smuts received Gandhi on 30 May and accepted a few amendments
suggested by him.

There was opposition in the Parliament to the Bill, especially by members from Natal and the
Orange Free State. Prime Minister Botha said, during the second reading of the Bill, that his
Government would stand or fall by this legislation. Both houses of Parliament passed the Bill on
26 June and it received the assent of the Governor-General on 1 July.450

General Smuts and Gandhi discussed on 27 June the other issues to be dealt with by
administrative action and reached an agreement by an exchange of letters on 30 June.

E. M. Gorges, in his letter on behalf of the Minister, confirmed agreement on the points raised by
Gandhi, and said that all the recommendations by the Indian inquiry Commission, not included
in the Indians’ Relief Bill, would be adopted by the Government.451

With regard to the administration of existing laws, the Minister desires me to say that it always has been
and will continue to be the desire of the Government to see that they are administered in a just manner and
with due regard to vested rights.

In conclusion, General Smuts desires me to say that it is, of course, understood, and he wishes no doubts on
the subject to remain, that the placing of the Indians’ Relief Bill on the Statute Book of the Union, coupled
with the fulfilment of the assurances he is giving in this letter in regard to the other matters referred to
herein, touched upon at the recent interviews, will constitute a complete and final settlement of the
controversy which has unfortunately existed for so long, and will be unreservedly accepted as such by the
Indian community.452

Gandhi, in his reply, confirmed that Indians’ Relief Bill and this letter “finally closes the passive
resistance struggle which commenced in the September of 1906 and which to the Indian
community cost much physical suffering and pecuniary loss and to the Government much

448
The points were: the Orange Free State question; the Cape Colony question; the Marriage question; repeal of
the £3 tax; and an assurance that existing laws, especially those affecting Indians, will be administered justly and
with due regard to vested rights. Other grievances of the Indian community were not within the terms of reference of
the Commission.
449
A summary of the report is in Indian Opinion, 25 March 1914.
450
The full title of the Act is “The Indians’ Relief Act, Act No. 22 of 1914, to Make Provision for the Redress of
Certain Grievances and the Removal of Certain Disabilities of His Majesty’s Indian Subjects in the Union and Other
Matters Incidental thereto.” The short title is “Indians’ Relief Act, 1914”.
451
Indian Opinion, 1 July 1914; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 438.
452
Indian Opinion, 8 July 1914
anxious thought and consideration.”453 But he was careful to add that the agreement did not
cover all the Indian grievances:

As the Minister is aware, some of my countrymen have wished me to go further. They are dissatisfied that
the trade licences laws of the different provinces, the Transvaal Gold Law, the Transvaal Townships Act 2,
the Transvaal Law 3 of 1885 have not been altered, so as to give them full rights of residence, trade and
ownership of land. Some of them are dissatisfied that full inter-provincial migration is not permitted, and
some are dissatisfied that, on the marriage question, the Relief Bill goes no further than it does… it will not
be denied that some day or other these matters will require further and sympathetic consideration by the
Government. Complete satisfaction cannot be expected until full civic rights have been conceded to the
resident Indian population. I have told my countrymen that they will have to exercise patience and by all
honourable means at their disposal educate public opinion so as to enable the Government of the day to go
further than the present correspondence does…

Meanwhile, if the generous spirit that the Government have applied to the treatment of the problem during
the past few months continues to be applied, as promised in your letter, in the administration of the existing
laws, I am quite certain that the Indian community throughout the Union will be able to enjoy some
measure of peace and never be a source of trouble to the Government .454

Gandhi wrote in Indian Opinion on 8 July 1914: “The struggle that went on for eight years has
come to an end, and such an end as, we believe, hardly any other movement in modern times has
been crowned with.” However, while Smuts regarded the settlement as a final settlement of the
Indian problem, Gandhi considered it as only a settlement of grievances which led to the passive
resistance and the strike.

Then followed a series of farewell meetings for Gandhi, in which many influential Europeans,
including mayors, participated. Gandhi was satisfied that there was a welcome change in the
attitude of the Government as well of European citizens.

On 27 June there was a congratulatory meeting of Indian and European friends in Cape Town on
the adoption of legislation by the Parliament. Senator Marshall Campbell and Hugh M. Meyler,
M. L. A., expressed pleasure at the removal of £3 tax and other outstanding disabilities of the
Indians in South Africa.455

As to the Bill, Gandhi pointed out that it was a settlement of present difficulties. He felt that his
countrymen in South Africa, after their struggle of eight years, were entitled to a reasonable
period of peace. If the present spirit continued, he had no doubt the Government would be able to
solve the problems which still remained in regard to their Indian subjects. He said:

We do not aspire to social equality, and I dare say our social evolution lies along different lines. We have
stated so repeatedly - that we shall not at present ask for the whole franchise. We understand who is the

453
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 438
454
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 438-39
455
When Senator Marshall Campbell and Mrs. Campbell returned to Natal, over one thousand indentured Indians
and others in Mount Edgecombe gave him a welcome and read an address thanking him for helping to get the £3 tax
abolished. Indian Opinion, 22 July 1914.
 predominant race here. In the process of time, when we have deserved it, we shall get the franchise also. I
dare say, but that is not a question of practical politics. …

There would be no further influx of Indians into South Africa and the only question was the fair and just
treatment of the Indian population that was in South Africa so that they have “the ability and opportunity of
living here in absolute peace, and with honour and dignity”.456

Gandhi then went to Durban, Johannesburg and Pretoria where meetings were held to bid him
farewell as he was soon to leave South Africa. His statement at the meetings that the settlement
was the Magna Carta for the Indians in South Africa led to misunderstandings, and he repeatedly
pointed to its limitations.

There were some in the Indian community who were very critical of the settlement. Gandhi was
pilloried at a meeting in Johannesburg on 15 July by Muslim merchants who complained that it
did not take the interests of the merchants into account and recognise the right of Muslims to
polygamy. The meeting was chaired by Essop Mia, a former Chairman of the British Indian
Association, and H.O. Ally was the strident critic of Gandhi.457 Gandhi was also informed of the
danger of assassination.

But the great majority of Indians, especially the indentured workers and those formerly
indentured, were happy with the outcome of the struggle and grateful to Gandhi for his
leadership.

The Settlement did not confer any new rights to Indians. The £3 tax had been imposed after
Gandhi had arrived in South Africa. The non-recognition of Indian marriages became a problem
only in 1913. Yet, the undoing of these gross violations of human rights, was a great
achievement of passive resistance after much sacrifice and suffering.

Continued Discrimination against Indians

Gandhi was far too optimistic on other points which depended on the goodwill of the whites and
their government. The agreement did not address the serious grievances of indentured workers
concerning ill-treatment by employers and restrictions on their freedom. It did not eliminate the
prohibition against Indians settling in the Orange Free State. Indians continued to require permits
to travel from one province to another, and this restriction continued for another half a century.
Indian traders were severely restricted by laws and their administration.

The “generous spirit” promised by the Government did not last even for a decade. Anti-Asiatic
agitation was organised by rabid racists in the European community and successive governments
enacted new anti-Asiatic measures to appease them.

456
Natal Mercury, 29 and 30 June 1914
457
Rand Daily Mail, 16 July 1914, reproduced in CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 489-93.
Gandhi said, in his farewell letter of 18 July 1914, that the promise made by General Smuts to
administer the existing laws justly gave the community “breathing time” but warned that the
laws were so defective that they could again be turned into engines of oppression. He continued:

… we are entitled to full rights of trade, inter-provincial migration, and ownership of landed property being
restored in the not distant future. I leave South Africa in the hope that the healthy tone that pervades the
European community in South Africa today will continue, and that it will enable Europeans to recognise
the inherent justice of our submission…458

He was confident that if the Indian community maintained its unity, truthfulness and courage,
and educated the Europeans, it might realise, in 15 years, complete freedom of trade, full rights
of ownership of land in all provinces, and freedom of movement from one province to another.459

While his hopes were too optimistic to be fulfilled, he was perhaps on firmer ground when he
claimed as he did at a Muslim meeting in Johannesburg on 15 June:

If they had not fought for the past eight years, no trace would have been left here of Indians as a self-
respecting community.460

Indians suffered greatly even after the Settlement. Many workers lost their meagre savings. The
Protector of Indian Immigrants reported in 1913:

... the loss to the Indians through the Strike would, in my opinion, considerably exceed £30,000, between
17,000 and 19,000 men being affected. It is not only the loss of wages, however, but money was withdrawn
from the Government Savings Bank, and from their employers, and other private persons, with whom they
had deposited it for safekeeping, or even for investment. Indeed, many women who took part in the
procession to the Transvaal sold their jewellery, and one couple spent as much as £20 in this way. 461

Indian workers were replaced by Africans in the coal mines. Many Indians were not re-employed
after the strike by hotels, restaurants and other businesses and on the Railways. C.F. Andrews
wrote after a second visit to South Africa in 1919-20:

Instead of the Indian labourers in Natal recovering themselves rapidly after the indentured recruiting had
been stopped and they themselves had been set free, I found them actually in a worse economic position
than they were on my former visit. Reckoning into the account the rise in prices of all commodities their
wages were actually of less purchasing value in 1920 than they had been in 1913-14. Even their outward
condition showed this. They were more miserable, more discontented, more pitiously anxious to be sent
back to India.

… the average wage of the Indian had been decreasing. 462

In a letter to J.B. Petit, Joint Secretary of South African Indian Fund in Bombay on 16 June
1915, Gandhi said:

458
Indian Opinion, 28 July 1914; CWMG, Vol. 12, pp 501-2.
459
CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 484, 492
460
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 491
461
Report of the Protector of Indian Immigrants for the year ended 31 st December 1913
462
Young India, 16 June 1920
 We have only fought for removal of legal disabilities as to Immigration, but administratively it tells more
heavily upon us than other nations. In accepting administrative inequality, we have given due regard to
existing conditions and prejudices. We fought to keep the theory of the British Constitution intact so that
practice may some day approach the theory as near as possible. There are still certain laws in South Africa,
for instance, the Law 3 of 1885, Trade Licence Laws of the Cape and Natal which continue to cause worry.
Administration of the Immigration Law is not all it should be. For these, however, Passive Resistance… is
at present inapplicable, its application being confined to grievances which are generally felt in a community
and are known to hurt its self-respect or conscience. Any of our grievances referred to by me may any day
advance to that stage. Till then only the ordinary remedies of petition, etc., can be and are at present being
applied.

He continued:

Letters received from South Africa show that difficulties are being experienced in some cases acutely by
our countrymen and if not much has been heard of them in India just now, it is because of the extraordinary
self-restraint of our countrymen in South Africa during the crisis that has overtaken the Empire. 463

There was some respite during the First World War when the Indian community supplied
soldiers, but anti-Asiatic agitation began immediately after the end of the war. The political
parties vied with each other to appease the anti-Asiatic groups.

The continued discrimination against Indians does not detract from the world historic importance
of the struggle waged by them. In South Africa, the satyagraha of 1906-14 became a valuable
heritage of the Indian community, instilling pride in them and inspiring them in later struggles. It
had a significant influence on other communities.

463
CWMG, Vol. 13, p. 110
 VI. WOMEN IN THE FRONTLINE464
The women’s bravery was beyond words.
- Gandhi in Satyagraha in South Africa

When the story of British Indian Passive Resistance is written, one of the brightest chapters will deal
with the heroism of our women.
- Indian Opinion, 28 September 1909

Women did not court imprisonment during the defiance in the Transvaal. But they not only
suffered greatly but provided invaluable support to the movement. To quote Indian Opinion:

The imprisonment of a large proportion of the Tamil community had imposed great hardships on many
families. In some cases, the sufferings outside the prison gates have equalled the sufferings within…

They have seen their husbands and sons imprisoned, they have taken up the duties of life which do not
usually fall to a women’s lot and have borne the heaviest burdens to make it possible for those they love to
be true to conscience. They have felt the grip of hunger, and yet through all they have never wavered. All
honour to them! They are worthy helpmeets of a band of stalwarts! Just now some twenty-three families are
destitute. Their bread winners are among the hundred odd Tamils now in prison, and the stress of
endurance falls with peculiar weight on these women and children.465

Gandhi, in Satyagraha in South Africa, recalled the support and commitment of Indian women
during the defiance in the Transvaal:

Some brave women had already offered to participate, and when Satyagrahis went to jail for hawking
without a licence, their wives had expressed a desire to follow suit. But we did not think it proper to send
women to jail in a foreign land. There seemed to be no adequate reason for sending them into the firing
line, and I for my part could not summon courage enough to take them to the front. Another argument was,
that it would be derogatory to our manhood if we sacrificed our women in resisting a law, which was
directed only against men.466

Yet the women were very much involved in the struggle as their husbands, sons or brothers were
in prison. Satyagraha galvanised women into collective action and several women’s
organisations were formed. These organisations became platforms for denouncing the
Government’s racial policies and for mobilising support amongst women for the struggle. They
encouraged the resisters and collected funds to help families in need.

464
See also, Kalpana Hiralal, “Our Plucky Sisters who have Dared to Fight: Indian Women and the Satyagraha
Movement in South Africa”, The Oriental Anthropologist, 9 (1), 2009, pp. 1-22; “Rethinking Gender and Agency in
the Satyagraha Movement of 1913”, Journal of Social Sciences, 25 (1-3), 2010, pp. 71-80; R. Mongia, “Gender and
the Historiography of Gandhian Satyagraha in South Africa”, Gender and History, 18, 2006, pp. 130-49.
465
Indian Opinion, 28 September 1909
466
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 275. While women were exempted from the requirement in the Asiatic
Registration Act, they were subject to the Immigration Restriction Act. There were perhaps other reasons to limit the
resistance to men only. The Muslim women at the time could not participate in public activity because of the social
norms. And there were doubts whether women could take the rigours of prison life.
Indian Opinion, in an article on 8 February 1908, cited two cases of women pressing their
husbands to fulfill the pledge taken on 11 September 1906:

One of the men arrested at Pietersburg was in Pretoria when the Pretoria men were sentenced so
barbarously. Terrified at the thought of heavy penalties, including hard labour, he hastily proceeded to
Natal where his wife lay upon a bed of sickness whence she might never again arise. Upon his arrival in
Durban, however, she demanded of him the cause of his departure from the Transvaal, and when she heard
the cause peremptorily ordered him to return by the next train and submit to his punishment. He returned,
surrendered to the police in Pietersburg, and was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment with hard
labour. Another man, in Pretoria, who had disobeyed the magisterial order to leave the Colony, was to
appear before the Court to receive sentence. His courage began to leave him, but his wife informed him that
if he were a coward, she would don his clothes and herself receive punishment on his behalf. He went to
gaol. The Madrasi women of Pretoria informed their husbands, sons and brothers, who had undertaken
picket duty, that they need not be alarmed for them. If the men were arrested and sent to gaol, they
themselves would at once take their places in the pickets’ ranks and warn the people of the perils awaiting
them… In the light, then, of these incidents, who shall say that the Transvaal Indian community was
without its heroines?

One of the earliest Indian women’s organisations was the Durban Indian Women’s Association,
founded in 1907. Its work largely revolved around “moral and intellectual education”. It
campaigned to establish a girls’ school as there was none for Indian girls in Natal.467 It was not
politically inclined, but did not hesitate to protest against discrimination and exploitation. The
Association sent a petition to the Parliament of Natal in 1908 against the £3 tax, stating:

Your Petitioners regard with great shame and sorrow that women who are in default of payment are
sentenced to imprisonment, and the very dread of being marched up to the Court and gaol is enough to
numb their intellect and cause terror, to escape from which the aforesaid Act fosters in them a temptation to
barter their female modesty and virtue.

The aforesaid Act has been a source of breaking up many a home, alienating the affection of husband and
wife, besides separating child from mother.

There is no precedent in the legislation of any other country under the British flag where women are taxed
for the privilege of living with their husbands or under the protection of their natural guardians. 468

The Association also sent a petition to the Natal Government but received no reply.469

In the Transvaal, about fifty women – representing every section of the Indian community and
including wives of prominent satyagrahis – met on 11 March 1909 at the Hamidia Islamic Hall in
Johannesburg. Mrs. K. Murugasa Pillay chaired the meeting. Mrs. Packirisamy Naidoo spoke
eloquently about the hardships women endured during the campaign. She stated, “homes had
been rendered desolate, their husbands and sons had been torn from them and in some cases they
had not even enough to eat”. Nevertheless, she encouraged women to “support their husbands
and if necessary spur them on”. “There cannot be any possibility of happiness or comfort or

467
Indian Opinion, 6 November 1909
468
Indian Opinion, 3 October 1908
469
Indian Opinion, 6 November 1909
security for us, unless this cause wins, and so we must help to fight in the only way we can, by
uncomplainingly enduring and encouraging our sons and husbands to continue till the end”.470
Mrs. Hazurasingh of Germiston said that if the Government imprisoned their husbands, it should
imprison the women too.471 The Chairwoman read a letter from Mrs. Kasturba Gandhi, then in
Phoenix, who stated that, “had she wings”, she would have flown to the meeting, and expressed
her desire to be associated with everything done at the meeting.472 The meeting approved the
following letter to be sent to the Transvaal papers473:

Sir,

A meeting of Indian women recently held in Johannesburg has desired us, on their behalf, as well as on our
own, to write to the Transvaal papers. This meeting consisted of women of all ages, classes and religions,
many of whom are at the present time without their husbands and sons, who are serving terms of
imprisonment for the right to live and be free. Women everywhere and at all times have had to suffer in this
way, that their children may live upright, honest and free lives; and we will suffer and endure for our
children in like manner. There cannot be any possibility of happiness or comfort or security for us, unless
this cause wins, and so we must help to fight in the only way we can, by uncomplainingly enduring and
encouraging our sons and husbands to continue till the end.

Nearly all of us wish most devoutly that we could be with our husbands in gaol-we have no joy outside.
And for those of us who have not enough to eat for ourselves and children, can we not look to British
women for a little sympathy? Women in England are suffering imprisonment for the right to vote; we are
enduring much greater sorrow for the simplest of all rights, the right to live as we believe our religion
teaches us to do.

We are, etc.

Sd.) Mrs. Imam A.K. Bawazeer

Mrs. M.K. Gandhi
Mrs. D.N. Cama
Mrs. D. Ernest
Johannesburg Mrs T. Naidoo

Meetings of wives and relatives of resisters were often held in the Transvaal to consider the
situation and to discuss action such as assistance to needy families of resisters. Indian Opinion
reported on one such meeting on 3 March 1909.474

In July 1909 the women signed a petition to the Queen which read:

470
Indian Opinion, 20 March 1909
471
Mrs. Hazurasingh had presided over a mass meeting of Indian women held in Germiston in 1908 to protest
against discriminatory laws.
472
Indian Opinion, 20 March 1909
473
It was decided at a previous meeting to send a letter and a committee of six was set up to draft the letter. The text
of the letter was published in Indian Opinion on 20 March 1909.
474
Indian Opinion, 6 March 1909
 That your Petitioners are the wives, mothers or daughters of British Indians who have suffered or still are
suffering imprisonment in the Transvaal in connection with the Asiatic struggle that has been unfortunately
going on in the Transvaal.

Your Petitioners believe the struggle on the part of the British Indians to be righteous and for the honour of
their race.

Your Petitioners are further aware that those Indians who have been continually courting imprisonment are
bound by a solemn oath not to submit to the Asiatic Act of the Transvaal Parliament until the grievances
which have dictated the oath are redressed.

Your Petitioners have felt bound to encourage their sons, husbands or fathers, as the case may be, in
observing their obligation.

Owing to the above, your Petitioners have in many cases been obliged to suffer not only the pangs of
separation but privation. Many Indian families have been reduced to poverty during the struggle.

Your petitioners are aware that under the British Constitution Your Majesty cannot directly intervene on
behalf of the sufferers. But your Petitioners respectfully lay their case before Your Gracious Majesty in the
hope that it may be possible for Your Majesty to use your influence unofficially as mother or wife feeling
for mothers or wives and help to end a situation that has become most acute.

The points required by the sufferers are the repeal of a law which is no longer required by the Government
and the removal of a racial bar in the immigration law of the Colony, so that it may be possible for the most
highly educated Indians to enter the Colony on the same terms as any other immigrants. Your Petitioners
respectfully hope that their humble prayer will be taken into consideration by your Gracious Majesty. And
for this act of justice and mercy your petitioners shall for ever pray, etc. 475

These meetings led to the formation of the Transvaal Indian Women’s Association on 25 March
1909 at Hamidia Hall. The Association consisted mainly of members of families of passive
resisters. Mrs. V. Rama Moodaly was elected chairperson.476 Miss Sonja Schlesin, former
secretary of Gandhi who devoted herself to the Indian cause, was elected Honorary Secretary.477
In 1910 it protested the persecution of Mrs. Rambhabai Sodha by the immigration authorities in
the Transvaal.

Mrs. Sodha (1893-1928) had arrived in Natal in 1905 with her husband, Ratanshi Mulji. Ratanshi
had participated in the satyagraha and was imprisoned several times in the Transvaal. He was
reduced to poverty and lost his home in Tongaat on the north coast of Natal. He decided to send
his wife and three children – two sons aged 12 and 3, and a daughter of eighteen months - to
Tolstoy Farm. Gandhi telegraphed the Immigration Officer at Pretoria informing him that he
would be accompanied by Mrs. Sodha and her three children. The Immigration Officer refused
Mrs. Sodha entry to the Transvaal on the ground that her husband was not a registered Indian
immigrant. When Mrs. Sodha tried to enter the Transvaal she was stopped, taken to the police
station and asked to appear in Court. Carrying her baby daughter in her arms, she walked to the

475
Indian Opinion, 3 July 1909
476
Her husband had served three months in prison with hard labour. Indian Opinion, 15 May 1909.
477
Indian Opinion, 10 April 1909 and 28 October 1911
Courthouse accompanied by Gandhi. There was complete silence in court as Mrs. Sodha stepped
into the prisoner’s dock. She was released on £10 bail. Gandhi again wrote to the Immigration
Officer indicating to him that Mrs. Sodha did not seek permanent domicile in the Transvaal, that
her stay at Tolstoy Farm was temporary and that at the termination of the passive resistance she
would be returning to Natal. The Immigration Officer replied to Gandhi in a telegram: “Mrs.
Sodha cannot be allowed proceed Transvaal. She will be treated as prohibited immigrant unless
she returns Natal immediately”.478

Fifty members of the Women’s Association met at the offices of the British Indian Association
under the presidency of Mrs. Rama Moodaly in order to discuss the case. The following
resolution was unanimously passed:

This meeting of Transvaal Indian women hereby offers its indignant protest against the prosecution of Mrs.
R.M. Sodha, to whom it tenders its sincere sympathy, and earnestly appeals to the Union Government to
withdraw the proceedings instituted against her.

The meeting adopted another resolution moved from the Chair:

In the event of their appeal to the Union Government being rejected, those present pledge themselves to
seek every opportunity of being imprisoned and thus sharing the sufferings of Mrs. Sodha. 479

These two resolutions were telegraphed to the Prime Minister.480

Indian Opinion commented:

Nothing less was to be expected of the Transvaal Indian women than that they should follow the example
of their brave husbands or other relatives and offer to court imprisonment with their sister, Rambhabai
Sodha, should she be, as there is very little doubt she will be, imprisoned owing to the prosecution that is
pending against her. It is perhaps as well that, in the semi-religious struggle that is going on in the
Transvaal, the women of the community should have the privilege of taking their full and direct share in it.
We congratulate Mrs. Rama Moodaly and her brave companions on the firm stand they have taken in this
matter.481

Mrs. Sodha was sentenced to one month in prison.482

The spirit of the women was demonstrated in a heartrending incident reported by Indian Opinion
on 12 February 1910:

478
Indian Opinion, 12 November 1910. Mrs. Sodha did not know a European language.
479
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1910
480
The meeting also passed a resolution, acknowledging the support given by the women’s meeting in Bombay on
26 August 1910. The resolution read as follows: ‘This meeting of Transvaal Indian women hereby tenders its warm
and grateful thanks to the women of Bombay for their generous support and sisterly sympathy given to the families
of the Transvaal Indian passive resisters in their time of trial”. Indian Opinion, 26 November 1910.
481
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1910
482
After the provisional agreement of May 1911, she was allowed to stay in the Transvaal.
 …in Mr. Gandhi’s office, Mrs. Amacanoo and Mrs. Packirsamy removed all the ornaments from their
persons and vowed not to wear them again till the fight was over. They took off everything, their ear-rings,
nose-rings, necklaces, bangles and rings. They took off even their wedding necklaces. This was no ordinary
thing to have done. Mrs. Packirsamy removed her ornaments, saying that it was impossible for her to wear
them when Packirsamy’s eldest son was about to go to gaol and Mr. Packirsamy himself was likely to be
arrested soon.

The Transvaal Indian Women’s Association appears to have spurred other women to organise.
Less than a month after its formation, on 3 April 1909, Indian women in Germiston met at
Location Hall and resolved to form an organisation similar to the Transvaal Indian Women’s
Association (TIWA). They agreed to meet fortnightly to discuss matters relating to the
struggle.483 A few months later a group of women from families involved in the satyagraha met
in Pretoria at the home of Mrs. V.S. Pillay to discuss the impact of the satyagraha on their
families. Mrs. Tomy chaired the meeting. Among those present was Miss Schlesin, Secretary of
the TIWA. Women had “sad tales to tell of the emaciated condition in which they found their
husbands or sons on visiting day…”484 They resolved to form an association and to meet
fortnightly.485

In 1912 the Transvaal Indian Women’s Association held a reception in honour of Gopal Krishna
Gokhale, who was on a visit to South Africa, at the Independent School, Main Street,
Johannesburg. They presented Gokhale with a casket of teak containing a silver writing set, a
tablecloth which had the names of two Indians who died during the struggle in the Transvaal and
a picture entitled “Thoughts of Home” by M Appavu. Miss Bhaikum Morgan read the following
address at the meeting:

Dear Sir,

We, on behalf of the Indian Women of the Transvaal, desire to pay our respectful tribute to you. When
hours were darkest with us and our homes were desolate, it was a comfort to think that you, so far away,
were watching over us, befriending our husbands, sons and brothers, many of whom were strangers in a
strange land. We know, too, of your work in connection with the abolition of the indentured labour system
with its incidents which so nearly touches the honour of our woman-hood. And we know what you are
doing in the cause of woman’s education. For all this and many other noble acts too numerous to record we
are deeply grateful to you; and we pray Heaven’s blessing on your work. 486

In response to their address, Gokhale said he knew what they had to go through during the dark
days of the struggle. According to Indian Opinion, he continued:

As he was speaking he could almost see before his eyes a great meeting that was held in the Town Hall of
Bombay, at which their delegate, Mr. Henry Polak, described to the people of India the suffering and
disgrace to which they had been reduced in the struggle. At that meeting hardly an eye was dry or a heart

483
Indian Opinion, 10 April 1909
484
Indian Opinion, 7 August 1909
485
The following women were elected to office at the meeting: President: Mrs. V.S. Pillay; Vice-Presidents: Mrs.
Tomy and Mrs. Anthony; Secretary: Mrs. Supoo Naidoo. Indian Opinion, 7 August 1909.
486
Indian Opinion, 9 November 1912
 untouched by their sacrifice and suffering… The Indian women of the Transvaal had come forward
courageously to take part in the struggle, to cheer their menfolk and send them forth, and it had been an
object lesson to their sisters in India… He felt in every fibre of his being that a great destiny awaited their
land (India); in that destiny the women of India would play a great part, and the women of the Transvaal
had set an example for them.487

On his visit to Durban he was warmly received by women’s groups. The Indian Women of
Durban gave the following address:

It is perhaps the women who, even more than the men of the community, can appreciate the enormous
value to the Motherland, to South Africa, and to humanity at large, of your successful labours to put an end
to the system of indentured recruitment in India so far as this Province is concerned. The Indian women
have marked with intensest interest your efforts to uplift the people of India of all ranks and both sexes, by
means of well-applied education, without which they feel it would be impossible for any Indian nation to
be effectively built up. On behalf of the Indian women we fervently pray that the mighty may restore you to
complete health, and that in His mercy He may give you length of years to continue your patriotic and self-
sacrificing work for the Motherland and to see your efforts crowned with success….. 488

The judgment of Justice Malcolm Searle of the Cape Supreme Court on 14 March 1913 denying
legitimacy to marriages under religions which allow polygamy – that is, almost all Indian
marriages - posed a direct challenge to Indian women. The judgment had broad implications. It
degraded the legal status of Indian women within Hindu, Muslim and Parsee marriages, by
branding the wives as concubines. Second, it sought to illegitimate the children of such
marriages and deprived the rights of a wife and her children with regard to ownership and
inheritance on the death of her spouse. Third, it practically prohibited the immigration of Indian
wives to South Africa. The judgment was a special affront to women as it affected women more
than men.489

The Transvaal Indian Women’s Association boldly protested the judgment. Sonja Schlesin sent a
telegram, on behalf of the Association, to the Minister of Interior, General Smuts, calling for a
legislative remedy to restore the situation before the Searle judgment, failing which they would
embark on passive resistance. The telegram read as follows:

Committee Transvaal Indian Women’s Association has carefully considered position, in the light of the
Searle judgment, of Indian women resident in South Africa or entitled to enter therein with their husbands
possessing rights of residence in the Union, and has come to the conclusion that the honour of Indian
womanhood is affected by that judgment. Committee therefore respectfully trusts that the Government will
be pleased to amend the law so as to recognise the validity of Indian marriages which have been duly
consecrated according to the religious customs of the parties and are recognised as legal in India. I am also
to inform the Government that the earnestness of the Association is such that, if the Government cannot see
its way to comply with the request, they would offer passive resistance and in common with the male

487
Ibid.
488
Indian Opinion, 16 November 1912
489
Indian Opinion, 10 May, 1 October and 8 October 1913
 members of the community suffer imprisonment rather than suffer the indignity to which in their opinion
the Searle judgment subjects them.490

The prospect of women engaging in passive resistance now became a reality. The editorial of
Indian Opinion on 10 May was full of praise and admiration for the women for their bold
decision:

We congratulate our plucky sisters, who have dared to fight the Government rather than submit to the
insult offered by the Searle judgment. They will cover themselves and land of their birth, as, indeed, of
their adoption, with glory, if they remain true to their resolve to the end.

The inclusion of women in the satyagraha was discussed at a meeting convened by Gandhi in
Johannesburg with his close associates, many of whom were stalwarts during the earlier
campaign. They agreed that women should be invited to participate in the struggle and court
imprisonment. 491

While the Transvaal women were ready to offer satyagraha, Gandhi had some doubts as to
whether the women in the Phoenix Settlement had the capacity to endure imprisonment.

They had not the training or experience of the Transvaal sisters. Moreover, most of them were related to
me, and might think of going to jail only on account of my influence with them. 492

But these doubts were soon eliminated. When Gandhi returned to Phoenix, Kasturba insisted on
going to prison and other women joined her.

The first group to offer satyagraha consisted of 16 individuals who went from the Phoenix
Settlement on 15 September 1913 to the Transvaal border to court arrest. It included four
women: Kasturba Gandhi; Mrs. Kashi Chhaganlal Gandhi and Mrs. Santok Maganlal Gandhi,
wives of two nephews of Gandhi; and Mrs. Jayakunwar Manilal Doctor, daughter of Pranjivan
Mehta, a friend of Gandhi from his student days in London.

They were sentenced to three months imprisonment with hard labour.

The savage sentence on women engaged in peaceful protest stirred India. Sir Pherozeshah
Mehta, the prominent leader of Bombay who was known as “the lion of Bombay” and who had
not supported the satyagraha until then, roared in a speech at Bombay Town Hall that “his blood

490
Indian Opinion, 10 May 1913. Indian Opinion added: “We understand that the above telegram was sent after
over forty Indian ladies in Johannesburg, professing the Hindu, Mahomedan and the Christian faiths, had decided
upon sending it. Most of them have emphatically declared their intention of braving imprisonment, should the
Government decline to grant their prayer.”
491
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 277; Pragji Desai, “Satyagraha in South Africa”.
492
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 279
boiled at the thought of these women lying in jail herded with ordinary criminals, and India
could not sleep over the matter any longer.”493

Gandhi then went to Johannesburg and addressed a meeting of women. A group of eleven
women, along with six babies who had not yet been weaned or were incapable of being looked
after, formed the first batch of volunteers.494 The women were all Tamils except for Jagrani
Dayal. Several of them were members of the family or relatives of Thambi Naidoo. Mrs. Thambi
Naidoo was pregnant.

After failing to get arrested in the Transvaal, they crossed the Natal border. They were advised
by Gandhi to go to Newcastle, explain the position regarding the £3 tax to the coal miners and
encourage them to suspend work until the Government assured them that the tax would be
abolished.495

Meanwhile, the arrest of Kasturba and other women in the pioneer party encouraged other
women to court arrest.

Bai Fatima Sheik Mehtab decided to court arrest in solidarity with the women resisters. She was
the first Muslim woman to become a passive resister at a time when Muslim women were
secluded and did not engage in political activities. She left Durban on 8 October for Volksrust,
accompanied by her mother, Hanifa Bibi, and her seven-year-old son, as well as Akoon, a
servant and family friend. The adults were arrested at Volksrust and sentenced to three months
with hard labour.496 Indian Opinion (22 October 1913) carried a letter by Mrs. Mehtab to “Indian
Brothers and Sisters” giving three reasons for her going to prison: the marriage issue; the
Government’s breach of the promise to Gokhale to abolish the £3 tax; and the need for Indians to
defend their institutions. She said that, because of the crisis, she was breaking the purdah which
she had long observed.497

493
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 283
494
The women were: Mrs. A. Perumal Naidoo; Miss Minachi Pillay; Mrs. Thambi Naidoo (Veerammal); Mrs. N.
Pillay, mother of Veerammal and N. S. Pillay, oldest of the women satyagrahis; Mrs. N. S. Pillay (Lachimi), sister-
in-law of Veerammal; Mrs. Chinsamy Pillay; Mrs. Tommy Ramalingam; Mrs. K. Murugasa Pillay; Miss Baikum
Murugasa Pillay; Mrs. P.K. Naidoo; and Mrs. Bhawani Dayal (Jagrani). The children were Miss Seshama Naidoo,
Miss Rajuma Pillay, Miss Angela Pillay, Sababady Pillay, Ramdutt B. Dayal and Veloo Naidoo. The oldest was
under two years and the youngest five months old. Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913 and 28 January 1914.
495
Indian Opinion, 8 October 1913
496
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913; Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 297. The child was not allowed to
accompany his mother to prison despite his pleas. Mr. Badat, a local merchant, took care of him until he could be
sent home to his father. For more information on Mrs. Mehtab, see Martin Green, Gandhi: Voice of New Age
Revolution (New York: Continuum, 1993), pp. 204-05.
497
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913; Martin Green, Gandhi, p. 205.
In Germiston, a town in the Transvaal, six women joined ten men in trying to court arrest. The
women were: Mrs. Bandu; Mrs. Behari; Mrs. Doowat; Mrs. Gaysidin Maharaj; Mrs. Mandar;
and Mrs. T. Somar. They first hawked fresh fruit and vegetables on the main street but were not
arrested. They proceeded to the platform of the Central Railway Station and began hawking.
They were then arrested. A Transvaal Leader correspondent described the scene at the railway
station at Germiston:

Excitement reigned for a while at Germiston railway station this morning. From 50 to 60 Indians, male and
female, took possession of the central section of the spacious new platform. About 20 of them carried
hawkers’ baskets, containing a few bunches of bananas, a pineapple or two, or a few handfuls of monkey
nuts, which they offered for sale to the white people assembled. As hawking on railway premises is
prohibited the police intervened. It then transpired that the affair was a passive resistance demonstration. 498

To their disappointment they were soon released.

Three Germiston women – Mrs. Nanden, Mrs. Bandu and Mrs. Thai – arrived in Charleston in
Natal to seek arrest by re-crossing the border, when the provisional settlement made that
unnecessary.499

Women’s Role in Promoting the Strike of Indian Workers in the Coal Mines

The women from the Transvaal played a pivotal role in promoting the strike of Indian workers.
Gandhi acknowledged that if the Transvaal women had been arrested in Vereeniging, “the strike
might not have taken place, at any rate it would never have reached the proportions it finally did”.500

The eleven women stayed at the home of Jesudasen Lazarus, a strong supporter of passive resistance.
Lazaraus, his wife and her sister Miss Thomas, did all they could to provide comfort to the
women and to the workers on strike. The Lazarus family home was to become the headquarters
of the resistance in Newcastle. Food had to be cooked there for hundreds of indentured
labourers.501 Gandhi recalled:

The kitchen fire would know no rest day and night. Mrs. Lazarus would drudge like a slave all day long,
and yet her face as well as her husband’s would always be lit with a smile as with perpetual sunshine. 502

Soon after arrival, Mrs. Thambi Naidoo and Mrs. P.K. Naidoo spoke at a meeting of Indian residents
of Newcastle which decided to support passive resistance. Next day, they went to the Railway
Barracks with Thambi Naidoo, Bhawani Dayal and Ramnarain Singh to advise the workers to
suspend work for the removal of the £3 tax. Only the men were arrested. Thambi Naidoo described
the determination of the women:

498
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
499
Indian Opinion, 25 February 1914
500
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 511
501
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 512
502
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 288
 The poor ladies tried their utmost to get arrested but they could not succeed. They forced their way into the
barracks and called upon all women and men to come out, thinking, if they did so, they also would be
arrested, and they told the sergeant who came to arrest us that they were also advising these people. But
the sergeant took no notice of them…503

The men were soon released from prison, and the party then went around the coal mines moving
among the labourers and addressing meetings.504

Within a week of their arrival in Newcastle, hundreds of workers came out on strike. Gandhi said in a
telegram to Gokhale on 21 October:

….some bravest women desperately courting arrest. Strike due largely their influence.505

He later recalled:

The plan was that in Newcastle the women should meet the indentured labourers and their wives,
give them a true idea of their conditions and persuade them to go on strike on the issue of the £3 tax.
The strike was to commence on my arrival at Newcastle. But the mere presence of these women was
like a lighted match-stick to dry fuel. Women who had never before slept except on soft beds and had
seldom so much as opened their mouths, now delivered public speeches among the indentured
labourers. The latter were roused and, even before I arrived, were all for commencing the strike. 506

When more and more workers and their families came to Newcastle, the Transvaal women
looked after the needs of women and children. They were arrested on 21 October and charged
under the Vagrancy Act as “idle, disorderly or suspicious persons”. They admitted that they had
come to Newcastle peacefully to advise the Indians on the mines to suspend work until the
Government had given an undertaking to repeal the £3 tax. They were sentenced to three months
with hard labour.

The local Indians were enraged by the disrespectful manner in which the women were treated in
Court. On 21 October the Newcastle Passive Resistance Committee passed the following
resolution:

This meeting of the Newcastle Passive Resistance Committee indignantly protests against the insulting
language used by the Assistant Magistrate to-day towards the Indian ladies sentenced by him when he
expressed the hope that the Indian labourers who have suspended work on account of the non-repeal of the
£3 tax would later on retaliate upon these ladies.. 507

503
Indian Opinion, 22 October 1913
504
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 512
505
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 244
506
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 512
507
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
As soon as the first batch of Transvaal women resisters were imprisoned, a second batch of eight
Transvaal women, including Valliamma, barely 16 or 17 years old, arrived in the strike area.508
Their mission was also “to go among the indentured workers in Natal and explain the position to
them.” Reinforced later by two women from Germiston,509 they worked among labourers at
Newcastle, Dundee, Dannhauser, Durban, Maritzburg and other places. They were arrested when
they hawked in Durban without permits, but to their great disappointment, they were discharged
on reaching prison. In another attempt to go to prison they crossed the border from Natal to the
Transvaal. They were deported to Natal but re-crossed the border and were sentenced to three
months with hard labour.510

Women in the “Great March”

The plan for the march of Indian workers from Newcastle to the Transvaal envisaged that the
men would go by foot while women and children would be transported by train. But many
women insisted on joining the march with their children and endured great hardship on this long
march. Two women in their early twenties lost their infants during the march. One died “of
exposure” due to inclement weather and the other “fell from the arms of its mother while she was
crossing a spruit (a small tributary stream) and drowned”.511 Undeterred by this tragedy they
continued with the march. One of them said: “We must not pine for the dead who will not come
back to us for all our sorrow. It is the living for whom we must work.”512

At Charlestown, about 35 miles from Newcastle which was reached in two days, the local Indian
merchants and their wives provided shelter to the women and children in their homes, while the
men had to sleep in an open field. On 6 November, 127 women and 57 children left Charlestown
with 2,037 men and crossed the border at Volksrust. On reaching Palmford, a town about seven
miles from Volksrust, Gandhi recalled:

Some of the women were thoroughly exhausted by the march. They had dared to carry their children in
their arms, but it was impossible for them to proceed further. 513

Women in Prison514

508
They arrived in Ingogo with Thambi Naidoo. On the same train were the first batch of Transvaal women bound
for the Pietermaritzburg prison.
509
Indian Opinion did not report their arrival in Natal or their activities. It reported their departure after release, and
gave only the name of Mrs. Somar. Indian Opinion, 25 February 1914.
510
Mrs. R. Moonsamy Mudaliar, Miss Valliamma Moonsamy Mudaliar, Mrs. Bismith, Mrs. Shivaprasad and Mrs.
Kabuthar were sentenced on 18 December. Mrs. V.S. Pillay, Mrs. Peter Moonlight Mudaliar and Mrs. Govindsamy
Naidoo were sentenced on 22 December. Indian Opinion, 24 December 1913. Mrs. Veerasamy joined this group of
women with her child but she was recognised by the immigration officer and not arrested. She returned to
Charlestown to assist the strikers’ families.
511
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 297
512
Ibid.
513
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 302.
In the prisons, women satyagrahis were incarcerated with ordinary criminals. In Newcastle,
women were forcibly vaccinated by having their blouses removed. This practice was stopped
after Gandhi sent a telegram to the Minister of Interior on 30 October.515

Prison food was of the worst quality. Staple food such as beans was undercooked and at times
cockroaches and maggots were found in food. Family and friends were not allowed to bring
home-cooked meals. Several women suffered from dysentery as a result of the poor quality of
food. The women went on a hunger strike for four days in protest. Gandhi recalled:
The women’s bravery was beyond words. They were all kept in Maritzburg jail, where they were
considerably harassed. Their food was of the worst quality and they were given laundry work as their task.
No food was permitted to be given them from outside nearly till the end of their term. One sister was under
a religious vow to restrict herself to a particular diet. After great difficulty the jail authorities allowed her
that diet, but the food supplied was unfit for human consumption. The sister badly needed olive oil. She did
not get it at first, and when she got it, it was old and rancid. She offered to get it at her own expense but was
told that jail was no hotel, and she must take what food was given her. When this sister was released she
was a mere skeleton and her life was saved only by a great effort… 516

Kasturba was hanging between life and death for several weeks. Valliamma, a young girl of
sixteen or seventeen who was suffering from illness in prison, was offered early release by the
authorities but declined and died soon after her release. Mrs. Mehtab’s health deteriorated and
she died at an early age. But none of the women were shaken in their resolve by the harsh
conditions in prison.

Local Indian women’s organisations in Durban and the Transvaal enthusiastically supported the
resistance. On 21 December 1913, at a meeting held by the Transvaal Indian Women’s
Association in Boksburg, a resolution was passed unanimously pledging support for the
movement. A fund was set up to assist striking families.517

Another meeting was held towards the end of December at the Star Picture Palace, Vrededorp,
attended by approximately 300 women and chaired by Mrs. Rama Moodley. It adopted the
following resolution:

This meeting of the Indian women of the Transvaal congratulates Messrs. Gandhi, Kallenbach and Polak
upon their release from prison. This meeting respectfully urges the Government to comply with the request
put by the Indian leaders in regard to the Commission appointed. This meeting places on record that unless
the request put by leaders be granted the present passive resistance struggle will continue to the bitter
end.518

514
See also Chapter VII, “Prison Conditions and Deportations”.
515
Indian Opinion, 5 November 1913
516
Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, p. 283. The reference was apparently to his wife Kasturba.
517
Indian Opinion, 7 January 1914
518
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913
It was resolved that each woman present at the meeting should contribute 5 shillings to the
Passive Resistance Fund. About 150 women at the meeting offered their services should it be
necessary to go to Natal and join the struggle.

Kasturba Gandhi, Elizabeth Molteno and Emily Hobhouse

As mentioned earlier, Emily Hobhouse helped greatly in promoting a settlement between the
Indian community and the South African Government.519

Elizabeth Molteno, a member of one of the most prominent families in the Cape, had opposed
the Anglo-Boer War and became a friend of Emily Hobhouse, an Englishwoman who as highly
respected by the Boers for her courageous opposition to the Anglo-Boer War and her assistance
to Boer women and children suffering in concentration camps. She went to live in London and
met Gandhi during his visit to London in 1909.520

Returning to South Africa in 1912, she bought a cottage in Ohlange, near Phoenix, and provided
valuable moral support to the Indian struggle at a crucial time. She visited Phoenix Settlement
many times, comforted Soorzai’s wife, spent a long time with Kasturba Gandhi enquiring about
her health and conditions in prison, and spoke at meetings welcoming women resisters on their
release. She wrote to Botha, whom she knew, expressing distress that Indian women had been
imprisoned for protesting against laws which invalidated marriages which they considered
sacred.521

Emily Hobhouse arrived in South Africa to attend the unveiling of a memorial in Bloemfontein
for Boer women, but was forced to remain in Cape Town because of illness. At the suggestion of
Miss Molteno, Miss Hobhouse sent a telegram to Gandhi to reach him before the mass meeting
in Pietermaritzburg on 27 December, appealing to him as a “humble woman” to postpone the

519
Emily Hobhouse (1860-1926), daughter of a churchman in Britain, dedicated herself to the movement in Britain
against the Anglo-Boer War. Her visits to the concentration camps in South Africa where Boer women and children
were confined - and thousands perished - and her campaign in Britain to help the victims of this dirty war had much
to do with the ending of the war. She earned the reverence of the Boer people and the great respect of Boer leaders
like General Louis Botha and General Jan Christiaan Smuts. She had a great regard for India. She had met many
Indians at the home of her uncle, Lord (Arthur) Hobhouse, who was a Law Member of the Council of the
Government of India and later of the Privy Council.

520
Gandhi wrote from London in September 1909:

About our struggle, we have had discussions with Mrs. Saul Solomon, wife of Mr. Saul Solomon, a former
Minister in the Cape, and with the daughter of the late Sir John Molteno. Though both these ladies are
South Africans, they have much sympathy and are bold enough to offer their help. (Indian Opinion, 10
September 1909).
521
Catherine Corder and Martin Plaut, “Gandhi’s Decisive South African 1913 Campaign: A Personal Perspective
from the Letters of Betty Molteno”, in South African Historical Journal, 2013. Accessed at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02582473.2013.862565.
march for fifteen days. To quote Alice Green:

It was to the effect that her personal sympathy was intense but that she would venture to advise patience. It
would not do to alienate sympathy and even endanger the very cause itself. Could he not wait until the
meeting of Parliament before having recourse to further resistance? Even yet English women had not
achieved full freedom. She used much gentler language than this, but that was the gist of it. She told him also
that everything was being followed with much sympathy and feeling.522

When Gandhi agreed to the postponement of the march, Miss Hobhouse wrote a letter to General
Smuts recalling her special connection with India through her uncle. She said that as a woman
without a vote, she sympathised with other voteless folk as the Indians. She then pressed him to
meet and talk to Gandhi:

You see January 15 is the date now proposed for another march. Before then some way should be found of
giving private assurance to the leaders that satisfaction is coming to them. Their grievance is really moral...
never will governmental physical force prevail against a great moral and spiritual upheaval. Wasted time and
wasted energy, dear Oom Jannie...523

General Smuts could not possibly ignore an appeal from her. On his invitation, Gandhi went to
Pretoria on 9 January. C.F. Andrews, who accompanied Gandhi to Pretoria, wrote:

There can be no doubt that during the days that followed the influence of Miss Hobhouse with the Boer
leaders did much to pave the way to a reconciliation. While we were in Pretoria she wrote again and again
both to Mr. Gandhi and myself. She thus kept herself in touch with the whole negotiations and took part in
them.524

Gandhi was surprised to see a great change in the attitude of General Smuts. A provisional
agreement was reached quickly.

Gandhi and Kasturba went to Cape Town in mid-February to bid farewell to C.F. Andrews and
to follow the developments on the Indian question. Kasturba's condition deteriorated and gave
cause for grave concern.

Miss Molteno and Miss Greene frequently visited the Gandhis at the home of Dr. A.H. Gool
where they stayed and enquired about her health. Miss Molteno arranged for the Gandhis to meet
Miss Hobhouse who was staying at Groote Schuur, the residence of Prime Minister Louis Botha.
There they met Mrs. Botha, as well as Mrs. Gladstone, wife of the Governor-General, who were
both friendly and considerate. A few days later Miss Hobhouse invited Gandhi again for a
discussion at Groote Schuur - and General and Mrs. Botha joined them.525

522
E.S. Reddy, “Some Remarkable European Women who Helped Gandhiji” in The Leader, Durban, Gandhi
commemorative issue, June 4, 1993. See http://www.mkgandhi.org/ebks/Gandhijis_vision_of_free_south_africa-
.pdf, p. 72.
523
Ibid.
524
C.F. Andrews, "Mr. Gandhi at Phoenix" in Modern Review, Calcutta, May 1914
525
Gandhi had written many times to General Botha for an interview but without success.
When the Indians’ Relief Bill came before Parliament it was reported that Prime Minister Botha
threatened to resign if the Bill was not passed. Why did he take the adoption of a bill to end
injustices to a small, voteless and vulnerable community as a matter of vital importance? Was he
thinking of Miss Hobhouse and the meeting with Gandhi and Kasturba whose health had been
shattered in prison?

When Miss Hobhouse died, Gandhi wrote in an obituary in Young India on 15 July 1926:

She played no mean part at the settlement of 1914...

Let the women of India treasure the memory of this great Englishwoman.
 VII. PRISON CONDITIONS AND DEPORTATIONS

The Government of the Transvaal and later the Government of the Union of South Africa
resorted to severe punishments in order to break the non-violent resistance.

The courts routinely sentenced the Indians to imprisonment with hard labour. Those convicted to
imprisonment were lodged in prison with African criminals. They were not used to the prison
diet of mealie meal. Indian Opinion asked on 3 October 1908, “Should prisoners be starved into
submission?”

The situation was worse in the final stage of the struggle in 1913-14. Men and women were
forced to resort to hunger strikes because of the conditions in prisons. The passive resisters
accepted the harsh sentences, but when the prison authorities added to the penalties, they felt it
proper to protest.

Scores of men were deported from the Transvaal to India in miserable conditions on the decks of
ships with little allowance for food. As most of them were the breadwinners of the families, their
wives and children were left destitute.

The Indian workers on strike in 1913 were assaulted and treated with brutality by the army,
police and employers. Several were killed or wounded.

Prison Conditions in the Transvaal

As noted earlier, Nagappan was sent to a prison road camp in Johannesburg and ordered to
break stone from early morning in the bitter cold; he died of double pneumonia soon after
release. Jhinabhai Desai fainted from hard labour in Volksrust prison in 1908.526 U. M. Shelat,
who served a six month sentence from June to December 1909, was reduced in weight from 139
pounds to 110, looking weak and emaciated. He had been confined to a solitary cell and placed
on reduced diet for having refused to carry slop pails.527 On his next term in prison he was again
placed in solitary confinement for refusing to carry slop pails and warned by the Governor of the
prison that if he persisted, he was liable to receive lashes.528

526
Indian Opinion, 17 October 1908
527
Indian Opinion, 1 January 1910. He claimed that as a Brahmin he could not carry slop pails. A.M. Cachalia, the
Chairman of BIA, wrote to the Director of Prisons on 22 March 1910: “As to the sanitary services of the prison,
regard being had to the special prejudices of British Indians in this matter, before passive resistance commenced,
Indian prisoners were exempted from sanitary service. It was only after their removal to Diepkloof that this hardship
was imposed upon them…” Indian Opinion, 26 March 1910.
528
Indian Opinion, 11 June 1910
The following are a few of the accounts of prison conditions published in Indian Opinion.

Affidavits by two passive resisters who were in prison with Nagappan – Veeramuthu and I.A.A.
Moodaly - were published in Indian Opinion on 10 July 1909. Veeramuthu had been sentenced
to 14 days with hard labour and Moodaly to ten days for hawking without licence. They said that
on 22 June, ten prisoners had been taken from the Johannesburg Fort prison to a road camp. At
the camp they received no other food than mealie-pap. They were allowed only one blanket and
mat each although it was bitterly cold in the tents. They were not allowed water for washing or
cleaning their teeth. They were treated roughly by the native warders.

Nagappan became very ill on the 26th. When this was reported to the Chief Warder, the latter
ordered that he work in the yard of the encampment under the charge of Johannes. Nagappan
was struck a fearful blow with a sjambok by Johannes. The next day, a Sunday, he could not take
any food. Veeramuthu took him to the Chief Warder who exclaimed, “Let him die like the other
b…” He ordered Nagappan to take a pick and shovel and go with the others on the road.
Nagappan went on the road on Monday and Tuesday but was unable to work. He was discharged
on Wednesday when his prison term ended. He was very ill and could not walk without help.

Dr. W. Godfrey, who performed an autopsy, signed a death certificate that Nagappan had been ill
for nine days and had bruises all over his body. The cause of death was acute double pneumonia
and heart failure.529

Syed Ali, a trader, was sentenced on 10 August 1908 to seven days with hard labour for trading
without a licence. He was imprisoned in Boksburg prison. He wrote to the British Indian
Association:

I was… given some clothes to wear, but I did not get any sandals. I, therefore, asked the gaoler for sandals.
At first he said “no”, and then he gave me torn sandals. I asked for socks, and he used abusive language
(untranslatable). I asked again, and he said, “Look here I will sjambok you.” I was then frightened.

On the 20th August the work given me was that of carrying and emptying closet buckets. I complained to
the gaoler about this work, and I received a kick and slaps. I still persisted in my complaint, and told him
that I would be glad to break stones but would like to be relieved from the work of carrying and emptying
these buckets. I was then kicked again. I became helpless and I had to carry those buckets.

On the 22nd August, Saturday, I was again kept in cold water for nearly half an hour. It was extremely cold.
I was shivering… I then became feverish. My chest became bad. On the 25 th I was discharged… And ever
since I have been ill, and I have been discharging blood from the chest, and am under medical advice… 530

529
Indian Opinion, 10 July 1909
530
Indian Opinion, 26 September 1908
E.I. Aswat, a respected merchant in Vereeniging and a leader of the BIA, was sentenced to
imprisonment for one week in November 1908. He was also ordered to remove the buckets from
the cell and, for religious reasons, he refused. According to a complaint by H.S.L. Polak on
behalf of the BIA,

…when he refused again, the warder caught hold of him, pushed him towards the buckets, caught him by
the back of his neck, and thrust his head down, apparently with the intention of thrusting it into the bucket.
Mr. Aswat tried to save himself by leaning his hands upon the edge of the bucket, and as he did so, the
bucket fell down. Immediately afterwards, the warder pushed Mr. Aswat towards the other bucket with the
same result. Mr. Aswat says he was then thrown to the ground by the warder. He got up, and was thrown
down again, and, whilst on the ground, his warder kicked him twice.” 531

Parsee Rustomjee, a leading merchant in Durban, was sentenced to six months with hard labour
on 11 February 1909 and again to a similar term on 11 August 1909 for crossing the Natal-
Transvaal border. In a letter to the press after his release, he complained about treatment during
his incarceration in Diepkloof.532 He was not only handcuffed but his leg was tied to another
prisoner by a heavy leg iron when he was transferred from Johannesburg to Diepkloof. In
Diepkloof, he was forced to remove the cap he was required to wear for religious reasons. He
was given hard labour despite his health and the medical officer ignored his complaints. His
eyesight was affected and he lost 73 pounds in weight during his imprisonments lasting a year. It
was only after several complaints that he was removed to the prison at Johannesburg where the
treatment was better.533

Sorabji Shapurji Adajania was given only light labour during his first imprisonment in Volksrust,
on medical orders, and was not called upon to carry heavy weights as he suffered from rupture
and dislocation of one arm and from acceleration of the heart. During his second imprisonment,
the warder, who knew the medical orders, ordered him to fill two five-gallon buckets with water
and carry them some distance to water plants. He was forced to do this for two days until the
Medical Officer came and instructed that he should not be given any heavy work. The warder
then brought a charge of indiscipline against Sorabji and the magistrate punished him with spare
diet.

Subsequently while being removed from Volksburg to Johannesburg Fort prison, he was
handcuffed together with S.B. Medh and Harilal Gandhi and marched a distance of over a mile

531
Indian Opinion, 19 December 1908. The correspondence refers to E.M. Aswat, but the prisoner was apparently
E.I. Aswat. The Director of Prisons replied that Mr. Aswat was knocked down as there was a certain amount of
jostling when the prisoners did not obey the order to carry the buckets in the cell. He denied that Mr. Aswat was
assaulted. Ibid.
532
Many passive resisters were transferred from 1909 to Diepkloof where conditions were very harsh. Visitors were
allowed only once in three months. Indian Opinion, 16 April 1910.
533
Indian Opinion, 19 February 1910. The complaint of Rustomjee led to a question in British Parliament. Indian
Opinion, 13 April 1910.
carrying a heavy bundle to the railway station and again in Johannesburg from the station to
prison.534

Joseph Royeppen, a barrister who had recently returned after spending nine years in England,
reported after release from prison:

…My dressing-room was an open draughty passage. After dressing I was removed to the main entrance and
was made to stand upon the cold cement floor with bare feet for well upon an hour. The next experience
was about the most horrid tit-bit of all. An officer came to lock my hands, and, as he did so, he positively
fumed with rage. He tightened the irons upon my wrist to such painful extent that I was compelled to
apprise him of the fact. “I would like to tighten it round your neck” was the reply as he loosened the cuffs.
He was able between gasps to express the wish that I, with the rest of my countrymen, would be put aboard
some derelict, put to sea and the bottom of the craft knocked off. Another boasting His Majesty’s uniform
came along and indulging in sundry invectives of the same order, marched us to a wagon that stood some
way off. We reached the wagon over the sharp stones in funeral march time, but found mounting thereon
difficult by reason of the prisoners being coupled. The wagon conveyed wet manure which oozed through
the canvas upon which we sat. The stench was overpowering. Observing we were barefooted, the officer
ordered the driver as follows:- “Put the beggars down when you get out the town and make them walk the
whole way to Diepkloof.” We were driven through some of the principal streets of the town barefooted and
bare-headed and ere long the sun began to tell upon our closely cropped heads. Out of town, we were made
to jump out, but this was no small acrobatic feat for the need for the locked couple reaching terra firma
simultaneously is obvious. For the first time I commenced a march barefoot and a two mile tramp over
rough ground found the spirit willing but the flesh weak. Calling a halt we declared the predicament,
boarded the wagon and were landed at the prison gates. Straightway an official gave us a foretaste of what
was in store for us. Eighteen hours we had gone without food, and were deaf and faint from the gnawings
of hunger, when we were ordered to carry a muid of potatoes. Gamely we essayed a manifest impossibility
when I detected the officer wink to a brother out of barbarous delight at our discomfiture. That was insult
added to injury and we dropped the bag in resentment. The prison-diet as follows: Breakfast at 6 AM., 8
ozs mealie-meal; lunch 6 hours later 6 ozs. rice and 6 ozs. vegetables; supper 5 hours after consists of 2
ozs. mealie-meal and 4 ozs. bread.535

Deportations from the Transvaal

The Government resorted to deportation of Indian residents to India via Portuguese territory
(Mozambique) as another form of punishment.

Initially passive resisters were initially ordered by the courts to leave the Transvaal and they
were deported to Natal. Almost all of them defied the orders or returned from Natal and were
sentenced, usually for three or six months with hard labour. But from October 1908, the
Government began to detain some resisters without registration certificates and deport them,
without resort to courts, to Delagoa Bay under Portuguese administration.536 After a few months,

534
Indian Opinion, 30 April 1910. The bundle consisted of personal clothing, books and blanket, as well as items
belonging to the warder.
535
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
536
Under the Asiatic Registration Act of 1907 those who did not register were to be given notice to leave the
Transvaal. But under the Immigration Restriction Act of 1907, they could be detained and forcibly deported.
it reached a secret agreement with the Portuguese authorities under which deportees from the
Transvaal would be held in Delagoa Bay and shipped to India.

In October 1908, 57 adults and 17 minors were deported from the Barberton prison in the
Transvaal to Delagoa Bay. Fifty-four of them returned immediately; they were arrested and
sentenced to three months with hard labour.537

In January 1909, 11 Indians were deported from Krugersdorp to Portuguese territory. U.M.
Shelat, a leading passive resister, travelled with them. They returned to the Transvaal and were
sentenced to two months.538

Systematic deportations to India began in 1909 in collusion with the Portuguese authorities. The
deportations were arbitrary and illegal, as the persons were not brought before the courts. The
cases were tried administratively in semi-secrecy and there was no appeal to the Supreme Court.
Indians born in South Africa, as well as those with residence rights in Natal were sent to Delagoa
Bay and held there by the Portuguese authorities until they could be deported to Bombay or
Colombo.539 A number of Chinese were also deported to Colombo where they were strangers.

The families of deportees were left behind without the breadwinners. For example, a passive
resister, “Moothoo,” was ordered to be deported. He was “a very old man” and was forced to
leave behind “a blind and aged wife with no one to care for her”.540

In May 1909, 16 Indian hawkers were deported to Bombay on board the Kaiser for failing to
comply with the Registration Act. The men were first imprisoned in the Transvaal and later
placed on aboard the Kaiser to be deported to India. The captain of the ship was given £1 each
for supplying food to the “prisoners.” The men complained of insufficient food whilst on board
the ship during their 22 days’ voyage to Bombay. On arrival in Bombay they stated at a press
conference:

We are here in the same unwashed clothes with which we went to gaol. We need money in order to go to
our native place, which can be done only if the Bombay public help us. We are dependent on others even
for food.541

Fifty-nine Indians were sent from Delagoa Bay to India by Umhloti on 14 April 1910. Indian
Opinion reported:

537
Indian Opinion, 15 and 24 October 1908
538
Indian Opinion, 30 January and 6 February 1909
539
Transvaal was not competent to make a secret agreement with a foreign power. Gandhi denounced the “criminal
indifference” of the British Government in not protecting the British Indians being smuggled away from Delagoa
Bay. Indian Opinion, 26 March 1910.
540
Indian Opinion, 5 March 1910
541
Indian Opinion, 26 June 1909
 No ship has so far agreed to carry these brave men to India. Some of the young Indians who have been sent
away were born in this country, some have lived here from their childhood and some have left their
families here. Some, moreover, are residents of Natal or, being educated, are entitled to go over there. It is
the extreme limit of tyranny that all these men have been sent away to India. Many of these Indians had
taken out voluntary registers.542

Twenty-four Indians and 26 Chinese passive resisters were deported by S.S. Umfuli on 18 May
1910.543

Subramanya Amari, a passive resister and one of the deportees, gave an account of deportation
to a Madras newspaper. A commission agent in Natal, he had been arrested for entering the
Transvaal from Natal and insisting on his right to entry as an educated Indian. He was kept in
prison in Pretoria for more than a month. On 10 April 1910 he was taken to Delagoa Bay in the
custody of Transvaal police and pushed over the frontier. The Portuguese police kept him in
custody until they could get a steamer to agree to take deportees to India. Several of the steamer
agents declined to take them out of deference to feelings of people in India. On 14 April about
sixty of the Transvaal Indians were sent on board Umholi. They were brought as deck
passengers. The steamer company allowed only one pound per person for food for the whole
voyage of 29 days. One of the deportees, Noorali, fell ill during the voyage. He was held on a
plank on the deck in the open and was not taken to the hospital. He died within two days of his
arrival in Bombay. Thirty of the deported men returned to South Africa, 26 to Durban and four
to East London, on 10 April.544

Indian Opinion commented on 19 March 1910:

Indians who are born in South Africa are being deported to India. Sons are torn from their parents, fathers
from their sons and husbands from wives. Wage earners are picked up and sent away to India, leaving their
dependents to God’s mercy. Men who have been for twenty years in the Transvaal are being deported. Such
cases are probably without parallel in the world. 545

Gandhi wrote to Gokhale on 25 April 1910:

I cannot write about these deportations with sufficient restraint. All these men are domiciled in the
Transvaal; some of them are domiciled also in Natal; some, again, have a right to enter Natal, being able to
pass the education test imposed under the immigration law of that Colony. Some are mere lads born in the
Transvaal or other parts of South Africa, and many have left behind them families that have been reared in
this country. I come into constant touch with the brave wives, sisters or mothers of the deported men. I
once asked them whether they would like to go with the deported to India, and they indignantly remarked:
“How can we? We were brought to this country as children, and we do not know anybody in India. We
would rather perish here than go to India, which is a foreign land to us.” However regrettable this attitude

542
Indian Opinion, 23 April 1910
543
Indian Opinion, 28 May 1910
544
Indian Review, Madras, May 1910, and Indian Opinion, 16 July 1910. Indian Review of June 1910 has brief
particulars about 80 of the deportees.
545
Indian Opinion, 19 March 1910
 of mind may be from a national standpoint, the fact remains that these men and women are rooted to the
South African soil. Many of these men before the struggle commenced earned a decent living. Some of
them had stores, some were trolley-contractors, and others were hawkers, cigar-makers, waiters, etc., the
employees earning a minimum wage of £6 and a maximum of £15, whereas the trolley-contractors and
others who followed an independent calling earned as much as from £20 to £30 per month. All these are
now reduced to poverty, and their families receive from the Passive Resistance Fund the barest sustenance
money…. In my opinion, the fact is that, having failed to break the proud spirit of the brave Tamils, the
Asiatic Department has now embarked upon a plan of extermination, and of taxing our pecuniary resources
to the uttermost.546

The deportees, most of them from south India, were helped in Bombay by Morarji Gokuldas,
Kalyandas and G.K. Gandhi of the South Africa Committee who arranged for them to travel to
Madras where they were guests of the Indian South African League. R.S. Chokalingam Pillai,
one of the deportees, wrote to Indian Opinion that they were comfortably lodged and were well
taken care of. They were taken on sightseeing tours in Madras. Some of the deportees went to
their ancestral villages in Tanjore district. G.A. Natesan, Joint Secretary of the League, “has
practically remained with us both during the day and the night, and has been exceedingly kind to
us.”547

Polak wrote:

… I have to recall the loving service that Natesan gave to the South African Indian and Chinese deportees
whom I had been able to rescue at Colombo and divert to Madras. I well remember how he devoted himself to
them, day and night, during the whole of their stay in that hospitable City; how he sometimes slept and ate with
them, though some of them were possibly untouchables; how he fraternised with them; helped them to restore
confidence in themselves and pride in the cause they represented; and then I remember clearly how, when he
came to the station to bid farewell on their journey to Bombay, and thence back to South Africa with me, he
burst into tears as the train left the station. 548

G.A. Natesan said in his speech to the annual session of the Indian National Congress in
Allahabad in December 1910:
I have heard from deportees accounts of the difficulties and hardships to which they have been subjected on
the steamer, on the way to Bombay and Colombo, and it was my misfortune to see them arrive in Madras,
many of them ill-clad and with tattered clothes, some attached seriously with malaria, and others suffering
from the effects of a pestilential fever, which seems to be peculiar only to Delagoa Bay…. the Indian South
African League had to clothe these people, buy shirts, dhoties, and take several of the deportees to the
doctor every day for treatment.549

On 31 August 1910, 61 Indians and 22 Chinese who had been deported to India returned to
Durban with Polak. Thirty-two of them were allowed to land in Natal as their claim to residence
in Natal or the Transvaal was accepted. Nineteen Chinese were sent back to Bombay though

546
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
547
Indian Opinion, 9 July 1910
548
Souvenir of the Sashtiabdha-poorthi of the Hon. Mr. G. A. Natesan, Thursday, 24 th August 1933, Madras.
549
Indian Opinion, 4 February 1911
they produced Transvaal registration certificates.550 The ship sailed with the 32 other deportees
to Port Elizabeth and Cape Town where a few of them were allowed to land. Most of the others
were taken to Durban again on the return voyage of the ship. They were left without boots, hats
and even sufficient clothing as their clothes were stolen in Port Elizabeth. Polak applied to the
Supreme Court in Natal and obtained an interdict to prevent deportation of the men until the
Court could investigate their claims to residence in the Transvaal. But the immigration
authorities ignored the interdict and sent them away to Delagoa Bay. Gandhi obtained an order
by the Supreme Court in the Transvaal that duplicate registration certificates should be issued
for them and they were landed in Delagoa Bay instead of being returned to India. The
proceedings proved that the deportations to India, as well as the second deportation of 19
Chinese to India, were illegal. The men who landed went to the Transvaal and were jailed for
three months as passive resisters.551

A. Narayansamy, a young Indian, died in Delagoa Bay of enteritis, having been exposed on the
deck for two months without proper clothing. Gandhi wrote in a letter to the South Africa British
Indian Committee:

I do not consider this a death in the ordinary course. It is undoubtedly a legalised murder.552

Prison Conditions of Satyagrahis in 1913

In 1913, the number of satyagrahis was much smaller, perhaps three or four hundred, as the
strike of tens of thousands of Indian workers became the focus of the struggle. The satyagrahis
now included a number of women. Again most resisters, including women with children, were
sentenced to three months with hard labour. Many of them, including all the women, served their
sentences in Pietermaritzburg.

The prison conditions were deplorable. The women were given heavy labour. They had to go on
a hunger strike as they could not eat the mealie meal that was given to them. Kasturba Gandhi,
who was on a fruit diet because of her delicate health, was not allowed to receive fruit from
outside. She came out of prison shattered in health and her life was in danger for several
months. Valliamma, a young woman from the Transvaal was apparently ill when sentenced to
prison, and died soon after release. Prison conditions affected the health of Bai Fatima and her
mother Bai Hanifa; they died at an early age.553

S. B. Medh, Pragji K. Desai and Manilal M. Gandhi were sentenced to a short term of

550
They returned to South Africa in February 1911. Indian Opinion, 4 February 1911.
551
H.S.L. Polak, “The Fate of the Transvaal Deportees” in Indian Review, Madras, December 1910.
552
Indian Opinion, 23 April, 21 May and 18 November 1910, See Part II, “Biographical Notes on Some of the
Resisters”.
553
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 287; Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, pp. 282-85.
imprisonment for hawking in Johannesburg. They complained:

During our previous incarceration we were always supplied with ghee…but this time none was supplied to
us… Dr. Visser called us “b… coolies” because we would not indecently expose ourselves in public, but
requested that our medical examination should be conducted privately… 554

Bhawani Dayal and his wife Jagrani were both in prison in Pietermaritzburg. Bhawani recorded
his experiences and those of many men and women imprisoned in 1913.

Prison cells were dark and damp. Many cells were infested with “blood-sucking bugs” which hardly
allowed the prisoners to sleep in comfort. Prisoners were awoken at 3 a.m. in the morning to enter the
latrines, followed by a bath. At 5 a.m. they were taken for breakfast. Breakfast consisted of black tea and
mealie meal porridge. Their working hours were between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Lunch consisted of rice and
beans or rice and curry. During supper they were given curry, hand-made bread and coffee. Only on
Sundays, non-vegetarians were given a small portion of meat. All prisoners were given two thin blankets,
one to sleep on and the other to cover their bodies. Men were subjected to hard labour - breaking stones.
They had to work under the supervision of prison warders who at times were verbally abusive. If passive
resisters slackened in their chores they were called “coolies” and often whipped.

Jagrani together with her one and a half year old son, Ramdutt, Valliamma Munuswami and Kasturba
Gandhi were all imprisoned in Pietermaritzburg. Women prisoners were treated very harshly. Often
uncomplimentary language was hurled at the women inmates. They worked in the prison gardens planting
carrots and other vegetables, which were used to prepare prison meals. The women prisoners used to wash
their own clothes. Jagrani would often wash Kasturba’s clothes while she attended to Jagrani’s six month
old son, Ramdutt.555

Sixty men in the Pietermaritzburg prison, including Parsee Rustomjee, Manilal Gandhi and
Ramlal Gandhi, had to go on hunger strike in protest against prison conditions.556 After the
Government agreed to the demands of the prisoners, and the hunger strike ended, the 60
prisoners were moved to the prison in Durban where the conditions were no better. In response
to protests, the Government carried out an internal investigation, As usual, the officials
concerned denied or minimised the complaints.

The Superintendent of the prison reported to the Director of Prisons on 2 December: 557

Prisoners from Pietermaritzburg were not issued with sandals and socks; there is no provision in regulations

554
Indian Opinion, 15 October 1913
555
Indian Opinion, 22 April 1922; Swami Bhawani Dayal Sannyasi, Pravasi Ki Atmakatha (The Autobiography of a
Settler) (Rajhans Publications: New Delhi, 1947), translated from Hindi; Karma Yogi Swami Bhawani Dayal
Sanyasi, In Commemoration of Swami Dayal Sanyasi, Veda Jyoti –Souvenir Brochure September/October 1992,
p.12; Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha At Work, pp. 634-37; Interview with Pandit Mahendra Dayal, grandson of Jagrani
and Bhawani Dayal, in Durban on 7 October 2010. Our sincere thanks to Mr. Dayal for the translation and the
photographs.
556
Gandhiji ni Sadhana by Raojibhai M. Patel has an account of the hunger strike. The Natal Indian Association
was informed that approximately 60 passive resistance prisoners were on hunger strike and were being transferred
from Pietermaritzburg. The main grievances of the passive resisters were that sandals and socks, which they were
previously allowed to wear, were denied to them, that they were provided with only one blanket and dirty clothes
and that the ghee given to them was uneatable”. Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913.
557
British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa, BP2/2 (20), Telegram, Prisons, Pretoria, to
Superintendent, Durban, 2 December 1913, p. 13
 or prison service orders for the issue of these articles to this class of prisoner, consequently, we have no
stock of same on hand. The custom is to issue only to those who have been accustomed to wear them or on
Medical Officer’s instructions; prisoners who have complained were informed by men that if necessary
these articles would be issued when we were in a position to supply them…. It is true that only one blanket
was issued, Medical Officer considered this sufficient; owing to climatic conditions and health reasons
blankets were issued as usual from stock in store. … four complaints of assaults by native warders were
reported to me by prisoners; full enquiries are being instituted, but apparently the assaults consist of the
warders having placed their hands on prisoners and pushing them. Worn clothing was issued to these men,
but this was unavoidable owing to large influx of prisoners and unfavourable weather for drying purposes;
clean clothing is now being issued. On the 29th ultimo complaints were received by me that ration of ghee
issued on Friday was uneatable. I obtained expert advice and found ghee was not good. Contractor was
immediately instructed to have this replaced. I have had no complaints since then… the complaints were
made by four agitators or leaders.”

The district surgeon, W.H. Addison, also visited the prison on 2 December and reported:

The Indian ration consisting of brown bread, white bread, and thin porridge, was good, fresh and
wholesome food. The brown rice ration was good and wholesome food, but in my opinion might have been
prepared a little better, as I found a few weevils in some of the tins. The ghee, as far as I could judge,
without tasting it was good, but I disliked the way it was served up, wrapped in old South African Railway
condemned papers.558

After the prisoners were released on 22 December 1913, Gandhi wrote a letter to the Natal
Advertiser on the prison conditions.

Having known most of these passive resisters for a number of years and come into close contact with them,
I can say that they are not the men to make baseless allegations. Mr. Rustomjee, an old and respected
resident of South Africa, was also in this batch. He took a leading part in the previous campaigns and had
experience of the gaols in Volksrust, Heidelberg, Diepkloof and Johannesburg. This time, on being
sentenced at Volksrust, he was brought to the Pietermaritzburg Gaol and later removed to the Durban Gaol.
He had a taste of the Maritzburg Gaol, but his experience in the Durban Gaol, he tells me, was the worst.

Mr. Rustomjee declares, and he is supported by other passive resisters, that the Native warders used to
assault them, with no fear of consequences. One, Mr. P. K. Desai, was assaulted so violently that the blow
sent him reeling to the ground and from there he was dragged to his cell. The treatment of the injuries kept
him in the hospital for eleven days. Mr. Rustomjee and his fellow-prisoners had to resort to a fast to secure
him [permission to wear] his shirt and sacred thread. A good Parsi will not move a single step in the
absence of these two things. Mr. Rustomjee was also assaulted twice by Native warders. The matter was
brought to the notice of the superintendent, but to no purpose. A youngster was beaten for standing out of
line.

On one occasion, several passive resisters went on a fast to register a strong protest against such treatment.
At the end of four days of complete fasting, the boy referred to above was forcibly fed while he kept
shrieking in protest all the time. Even the prison doctor in charge is reported to have condemned this
display of barbarism and stated that he did not accept responsibility for the forcible feeding. The fact that
the prisoner was a vegetarian was ignored: the milk which was fed to him was mixed with eggs.

558
British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa, BP2/2 (20), The Governor-General to the Secretary of
State, 31 December 1913, Report by the District Surgeon, Dr. W.H. Addison, Durban, 2 December 1913, p. 4
 The prisoners were supplied dirty clothes which could be a menace to their health. The food was poor and
was served, half-cooked, in rusted tin bowls, and the prisoners report that in consequence many of them got
dysentery. Some are troubled by it even now in gaol. Cockroaches and insects were found in the food, and,
when the matter was reported to the officer, his reply was that a prison was no hotel and that even in a hotel
one found insects in food.

Most of the passive resisters were men of good education. Though well used to reading, they were not
given books to read from the prison libraries nor permitted to read any of their own.

Despite protests, all the gaol officers, from the highest to the lowest, used to address the passive resisters as
“coolies”. The more they resented this, the more obstinate the officers became. They [also] report that the
present doctor pays no attention to their health. During these three months, the magistrate visited the gaol
only once. He did not listen to the complaints of the prisoners. Indian prisoners are generally allowed
sandals and socks. In this gaol most of them did not get these; even women were not given any. Quite often
the prisoners were supplied only one blanket each, and that a torn one. They were refused permission to see
their lawyers and were not even allowed to write to the Director of Prisons. 559

Treatment of Indian Workers on Strike

In November 1913, it may be recalled, the coal miners on the “Great March” were arrested and
taken back to the mines. Some of the mines were declared outstations of Dundee and Newcastle
prisons and the miners were placed at the mercy of the mine managers. On 20 November, the
Indian Barracks of the South African Boating Company in Point Road, Durban, was declared an
outstation of the Durban gaol.

Alarming reports soon appeared of flogging of Indian miners by mine owners to force them to go
back to work. There were strong protests from the Indian community and the Indian Government
expressed concern.

On 25 November 1913, Lord Gladstone, the Governor-General, sent a telegram to the Prime
Minister, General Louis Botha, expressing his concern:

I earnestly hope that General Smuts will himself make searching enquiry at prison out-stations; have Indian
complaints brought before him; as far as possible afford public demonstration of falsity of statements; and
take necessary action if illegal violence on part of gaolers and warders has in fact occurred. I need scarcely
point out to you that it is of the first importance to Indian Government that official denials should be
followed by responsible statement of Minister after inquiry on the spot, and that I am only asking for what
South Africa itself has right to expect.560

The Director of Prisons, C.P. Batho, called for a report from the Inspector of Prisons,

559
Indian Opinion, 7 January 1914; CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 284-86. The letter was not published by the Natal
Advertiser on the ground that a commission of inquiry had been appointed. A translation of the letter was published
in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion. The above is a re-translation from Gujarati.
560
British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa, BP2/2 (20), Telegram from Lord Gladstone to General
Botha, 25 November 1913
Pietermaritzburg, G. Mardall. The latter sent the following preliminary report on 30 November
1913561:

1) Indian prisoner Nargiah, alias Nagadu, died from natural causes, but there is evidence indicating that
he was subjected when in custody to rough treatment when on journeys between mine out-station and
Newcastle when in a state of feebleness five days before his death.
2) Floggings and assaults on Indians took place at Ballengeich out-station on the 11th of November, when
Indians in custody, prior to conviction tried to leave mine for Newcastle, they being unaware at the
time that the mine compound had been made a Government gaol.
3) Since conviction by the Magistrate, Newcastle, on 12 November, Indians have shown no unwillingness
to perform their tasks and no violence has been used to compel them to work…

But reports of violence continued to be received from the mines and from workers in plantations
and railways. The Natal Indian Association obtained hundreds of affidavits and asked for access
to the estates and collieries to collect more evidence.562

In January 1914, when General Smuts rejected the request to expand the Indian Inquiry
Commission to include a European acceptable to the Indian community, the community decided
not to appear before the Commission. The affidavits were, therefore, not submitted to the
Commission and were not published.

561
British Library, Despatches on Indians in South Africa, BP2/2 (20), Inspector of Prisons, Pietermaritzburg, to
Director of Prisons, 30 November 1913, pp. 12-13
562
Indian Opinion, 24 December 1913
 VIII. NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT TO THE
STRUGGLE

In a non-violent struggle, support from the camp of the adversary, and from others who can
influence or exert effective pressure on the adversary, is essential to reduce the suffering of the
resisters and facilitate attainment of the objectives of the struggle.

In the case of Indians in South Africa, it was necessary to gain support from members of the
European community, and from the Imperial Government in London as well as the British
people. Solidarity from India, the ancestral homeland of the resisters, was crucial not only
because the Indian people could provide encouragement and necessary material support but also
because the British Government was sensitive public opinion in India, its largest Colony.

During his services to the Indian community from 1894 to 1906, Gandhi had already obtained
support from many Europeans, especially churchmen and journalists, for the Indian cause. He
published the weekly Indian Opinion from 1903 to inform people in South Africa, India and
Britain about the plight of the Indians, and gave copies of the English edition free to Europeans
in South Africa.

He was in correspondence with Dadabhai Naoroji, a Liberal Party member of British Parliament
from 1892 to 1895, who was very helpful in taking up the Indian grievances with the British
Government and in Parliament. When his term ended, Gandhi was also in contact with Sir
Mancherji Bhownaggree, Unionist Party M.P. from 1895 to 1906, who was equally helpful.
Members of the Committee of the Indian National Congress in London also lent support.563

On his visit to India in 1896, Gandhi publicised the plight of Indians in South Africa and met
many public leaders and editors. This visit promoted an understanding of Indian grievances in
South Africa by leaders of the Indian National Congress and even editors of British-owned
newspapers.

Gandhi was again in India in 1901-02 and attended the session of the Indian National Congress
in Calcutta. Gopal Krishna Gokhale, an eminent leader and member of the Viceroy’s Council,
was impressed by the sincerity of Gandhi and his report on the difficulties faced by Indians in
South Africa. He was to become a very effective supporter of the struggle of Indians in South
Africa.

563
Indian Opinion, 11 June 1904, 19 September 1908, 22 January and 10 December 1910; Joshi, The Tyranny of
Colour, pp. 57-58.
Indian merchants in Natal and the Transvaal, mostly Muslims, contributed to Indian support by
conveying their grievances to prominent merchants in India.

Both the Indian National Congress and the All India Muslim League, as well as other public
organisations, expressed solidarity with the Indians in South Africa when they decided in 1906 to
undertake passive resistance. Their solidarity developed into a powerful force and obliged the
British Viceroy of India, in an extraordinary move, to declare support for the struggle in South
Africa.564

Europeans in South Africa

Many Europeans expressed support to the Indian struggle and provided practical assistance.565
Their support was highly valued by the Indian community which held a banquet in Johannesburg
on 14 March 1908 to express its appreciation to them. The invitees included: Mr. and Mrs.
Charles Phillips; Mr. and Mrs. J.J. Doke; Albert Cartwright, editor of The Leader; David
Pollock566; Mr. and Mrs. Vogl; Gabriel Isaac; Mr. Brittlebank; The Rev. Mr. Perry; Hermann
Kallenbach; J.W. McIntyre, solicitor’s clerk doing articles with Gandhi; Miss Sonja Schlesin,
private secretary of Gandhi; Mr. and Mrs. H.S.L. Polak; Mr. Brown; Mr. Proctor, the agent of
Reuter; Vera Stent, editor of Pretoria News; Mr. Edwards; Mr. Lichtenstein, a lawyer; Mr.
Lewis; Mr. Hofmeyr, a lawyer; and Howard Pim.567

Later that year, a Committee of European Sympathisers was set up under the chairmanship of
William Hosken, a former member of the Transvaal Legislative Assembly and former President
of the Chamber of Commerce. Hosken and other members were of great assistance both during
the resistance in the Transvaal and during the renewed resistance in the Union of South Africa in
1913.

Members of the Committee included Rev. J.J. Doke, pastor of the Central Baptist Church,
Chairman of the Social Reform Committee of the Witwatersrand Church Council and the first
biographer of Gandhi; Rev. Charles Phillips, minister of the Ebenezer Congregational Church
and President of the Association of Clergymen; Rev. Thomas Perry, pastor of the Baptist Church
in Troyville; Rev. John Howard, pastor of the Wesleyan Methodist Church; Dr. N. Dudley Ross
of St. George’s Presbyterian Church; Albert Cartwright, editor of Transvaal Leader; T.R.
Haddon; C.E. Nelson, General Secretary of the Theosophical Society of South Africa; John A.

564
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
565
Gandhi wrote in Satyagraha in South Africa about several European supporters. Sushila Nayar devoted a chapter
in her book Satyagraha at Work to biographies of twenty “European Sympathisers and Supporters”. Golden
Number of Indian Opinion, 1914, recognises many European supporters. See also C.F. Andrews, “Helpers in the
Struggle” in Modern Review, Calcutta, September 1914 and October 1914.
566
Mr. Pollock said at the banquet: “The Indian community has opened the gates of freedom to the entire Coloured
population.” Indian Opinion, 21 March 1908.
567
Indian Opinion, 21 March 1908
Rogers; A. Brown; David Pollock; H. Robins; A.S. Judd; Hermann Kallenbach; H.S.L. Polak;
and R.J. Hall. 568

Henry S.L. Polak and his wife Millie Polak, Hermann Kallenbach, Albert West and his family,
Sonja Schlesin, L.W. Ritch and Gabriel Isaac fully identified themselves with the Indian cause.
Messrs. Polak, Kallenbach, West and Isaac suffered imprisonment as a result.

Kallenbach bought a large farm and made it available to Gandhi to settle former prisoners and
their families. He escorted the first batch of Transvaal women to the Orange Free State and
provided great assistance in making arrangements for the “Great March” of Indian workers in
1913.569

Polak acted as a lawyer for the resisters, edited Indian Opinion for some time and went to India
as a representative of the Transvaal Indian community, He was most successful in promoting
publicity and collection of funds in India for the struggle. He looked after Indians and Chinese
deported from the Transvaal to India and Ceylon and accompanied some of the deportees to
Durban.570

Albert West, joint manager of Indian Opinion, helped workers who sought refuge in the Phoenix
Settlement during the strike in 1913 and kept Gokhale informed of developments concerning the
struggle.571

Gabriel Isaac looked after Indians sent by the Transvaal Government to Delagoa Bay for
deportation and, in 1913, assisted Indian strikers at a camp in Pinetown.572

Sonja Schlesin organised the wives of passive resisters and acted as Honorary Secretary of the
Transvaal Indian Women’s Association. She tended to women and children in the “Great March”
at Charlestown and Volksrust. She advised and assisted the resisters, especially during Gandhi’s
incarceration.573

Albert Cartwright, editor of the Transvaal Leader, was instrumental in promoting in January
1908 a provisional settlement which provided for the release of all resisters from prison and
voluntary registration by Indians.

568
Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work, pp. 450-88, and Indian Opinion, 19 August 1914.
569
Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work, p. 460; Gillian Berning, Gandhi Letters: From Upper House to Lower House
1906-1914 (Durban: Local History Museum, 1994), p. 39.
570
Berning, Gandhi Letters, p. 51
571
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913; Berning, Gandhi Letters, p. 42.
572
Berning, Gandhi Letters, p. 47; Commemorating the Centenary of Phoenix Settlement 1904-2004 (Gandhi
Development Trust, Durban, 2004), p. 24.
573
Indian Opinion, 12 November 1913 and 19 August 1914; Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work, p. 457; Berning,
Gandhi Letters, p. 50.
Vera Stent, editor of Pretoria News, Reverend Dewdney Drew, editor of The Friend,
Bloemfontein, supported the Indian cause, undeterred by threats of Europeans.574

During the strike of Indian workers in 1913, a number of leaders of the churches called on the
Government to abolish the iniquitous £3 tax. They included the Reverend A. A. Baillie, the
Reverend Dr. Booth, the Bishop of Pretoria and the Reverend H.A. Batts, President of the South
African Baptist Union.

Indian Opinion reported on 12 November 1913 that the Missionary Conference in

Johannesburg, on the motion of the Rev. A.A. Baillie, adopted a resolution that "in the
interests of the religious and social welfare of the Indian community, the £3 tax on ex-
indentured Indians should be repealed." The Rev. Dr. Booth seconded the resolution and
the Bishop of Pretoria supported it. The Rev. H.J. Batts, in a letter to the Press, supported
the Indian struggle and called for the repeal of the £3 tax.

The Pretoria Socialist Society sent a telegram to Gandhi in October 191 conveying “sympathetic
greetings to Indian strikers wishing them success”.575 The Social Democratic Party (SDP) of
Durban adopted a resolution which read:

This meeting of the Durban SDP express their entire sympathy with the Indian workers in their
present struggle for the repeal of the obnoxious and useless £3 tax and endorse their action of
withholding their labour as the only means left them to that end. Further we strongly protest
against the arbitrary and cowardly methods adopted by the Government in compelling Indian
prisoners to work out their sentences on their employers' property.576

The Transvaal Federation of Trades sent a telegram of sympathy.577 Earlier, Mr. Bain, Secretary
of the Federation, said at an Indian meeting in Johannesburg on 12 November 1913:

Your struggle is our struggle, and the injury done to the most humble of your race is an injury done to
humanity. Therefore we must fight for human rights, whether they are human rights for the white race or
human rights for the coloured race matters not at all. 578

Influential supporters in the Parliament included John Xavier Merriman, former Prime Minister
of the Cape, 1908-10, and Chairman of “Fair Play to Indians”; Marshall Campbell, a Natal
planter, and Hugh M. Meyler from Natal who supported the abolition of the £3 tax; Morris
Alexander, a liberal Jewish Parliamentarian who often supported the Indians.

574
Golden Number of Indian Opinion, 1914.
575
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913
576
Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913
577
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
578
Indian Opinion, 19 November 1913
The following are some of the others reported by Gandhi and Indian Opinion as having provided
help to the struggle. Dr. Briscoe, District Health Officer in Charlestown, gave medical advice to
Indian strikers on the “Great March” and donated medicines for them. L.H. Greene, a Socialist in
Pietermaritzburg, was outspoken in promoting and supporting the strike of Indian workers and
was imprisoned.579 Littman Brown, a white businessman in Johannesburg, gave two donations to
the Indian cause. Mrs. Smith, owner of Bridge Hotel, Newcastle, gave a large hall to shelter
striking workers and their families and J.L. Wides of Verulam donated food for the passive
resisters.580 W.M. Vogl, a Johannesburg draper, and his wife were very sympathetic to Indians.
Mrs. Vogl helped the Transvaal Indian Women’s Association, conducted classes for Indian
women organised Indian bazaars. Mrs. Mary Drew, sister of Lord Gladstone, Governor-General,
gave Gandhi £5 to be used for any public purpose.581 Also Archdeacon Gregson582, Israelstram
and Knox.

Reference was made in Chapter VI to the crucial support provided by three women – Elizabeth
Molteno, Alice Greene and Emily Hobhouse in 1913-14. Another woman who supported the
struggle was Olive Schreiner, the most prominent South African writer of the time.583 In 1909,
when Gandhi was leaving on a deputation to Britain, she went to the ship in Cape Town with her
sister and, in defiance of the racist prejudices, shook hands with Gandhi and expressed sympathy
for the Indian cause. Gandhi was thrilled. He wrote:

She performed this ceremony most heartily in the presence of a huge crowd and both the sisters were quite
for a few minutes with us. Fancy the author of Dreams paying a tribute to passive resistance.584

She was instrumental in persuading her brother, William Phillip Schreiner, a prominent liberal
parliamentarian, to support the Indian cause.585

Gandhi, enthused by the settlement in 1914, the presence of prominent Europeans in farewell
meetings to him, and the courtesy shown to him by many Europeans, exaggerated European
sympathy with Indian aspirations. He was asked at a meeting in Poona in February 1915, after
his return to India, what made the South African Government to yield.

… he replied that it was the favourable European public opinion in the Colony which made it possible for
the Passive Resistance Movement to succeed. He recognised the value of the representations of the Indian
Government and the Imperial Government, but he thought all these would not have availed much, had the
passive resisters not the advantage of the sympathy of the general European public towards their cause. The
passive resisters, weak, indigent and unarmed as they were; could not have marched in the way they did in

579
Indian Opinion, 10 and 17 December 1913
580
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1913 and 7 January 1914
581
Indian Opinion, 15 April 1914
582
CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 314
583
See note on Mahatma in Olive Schreiner letters online, at
http://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=personae&entry=26#TOP
584
CWMG, Vol. 9, p. 287
585
Indian Opinion, 2 January 1909 and 30 September 1914
 a foreign and alien country had not the tacit sympathy of the general population been on their side. In their
march they emptied tanks of water belonging to the Europeans with impunity and even without much
remonstrance, and that was saying much in a country where water was very deficient. Some of the white
settlers even helped the marching party with food. One of the passive resisters was tempted to steal a
blanket but he was not prosecuted by the European owner but generously forgiven. That showed the
attitude of the general public of white settlers. The Bantoos, that is, the original settlers, were not at all
hostile, but favourable, if anything, to the Indian cause. 586

Prime Minister Botha had to threaten resignation to secure support from several members of
Parliament, especially from Natal and the Free State, for the settlement. There was only a little
respite for Indians after the settlement. Anti-Indian agitation grew after the First World War and
anti-Indian laws began to be enacted.

Other Communities in South Africa

There was close cooperation between Indian and Chinese passive resisters as they were both
defying the same anti-Asiatic laws.

The Conference of the African Political Organisation (mainly of Coloured people) adopted a
resolution in December 1907 expressing sympathy for the Indians.587 Dr. Abdullah Abdurahman,
leader of the Coloured community, expressed admiration for the Indian passive resistance. He
declared in his presidential address to the A.P.O. in 1913:

If a handful of Indians, in a matter of conscience, can so firmly resist what they consider injustice, what
could the coloured races not do if they were to adopt this practice of passive resistance? We must all admire
what these British Indians have shown, and are showing, in their determination to maintain what they deem
to be their rights.588

Several Coloured leaders and branches of A.P.O. expressed support for the Indian resistance.
The Coloured people of Oudtshoorn contributed £5 to the passive resistance fund.589 They could
understand the position of Indians as their rights had also been whittled down when the Union of
South Africa was established.

Gandhi did not seek active support among the Africans though African leaders watched Indian
resistance with interest and Pixley ka Isaka Seme, a founder of the African National Congress,
consulted Gandhi.590

586
CWMG, Vol. 13, pp. 20-21
587
Indian Opinion, 11 January 1908
588
R.E. van der Ross (ed.), Say It Out Loud: The APO Presidential Addresses and other Major Political Speeches
1906-1940 of Dr. Abdullah Abdurahman (Bellville: The Western Cape Institute of Historical Research, University
of the Western Cape, 1990), p. 54; Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913.
589
Indian Opinion, 25 March 1914
590
Indian Opinion, 29 July 1911; Anil Nauriya, “Gandhi and Some Contemporary African Leaders from Kwazulu-
Natal” in Natalia, 42, 2012, pp. 45-64; Effie Seftel and Judy Nasatyr (eds.), The Adventures of Life: Reminiscences
of Pauline Podlashuk (Johannesburg: Pan Macmillan, 2010), pp. 69-75.

Some writers have criticised Gandhi for not undertaking joint action with Africans and leading them. They ignore
the fact that only the Europeans could undo the anti-Asiatic laws and any joint action by Indians and Africans would
have scared European opinion and led to disastrous consequences. Moreover, while Indians sought only civil rights
Government and People of Britain

Gandhi was able to establish contacts with many prominent people in Britain during his visit on a
deputation to London with H.O. Ally in 1906 after the enactment of the Asiatic Ordinance by the
Transvaal Government. Several prominent persons introduced the deputation to the Secretary of
State for the Colonies and the Secretary of State for India. The deputation addressed members of
Parliament and 50 Liberal Party members conveyed to their Government their support to the
Indian cause.

Before the deputation left London, a South Africa British Indian Committee (SABIC) was
established with Lord Ampthill as Chairman. It became a powerful lobby for the Indians in South
Africa. Lewis W. Ritch, who was appointed Secretary of SABIC and paid by contributions from
the Indian community, was untiring in publicising the difficulties of the Indians, writing letters to
the press and countering misinformation from the authorities in South Africa.

SABIC was able to inform the British public about the just demands of the Indians, raise the
question in Parliament and organise deputations to the British Government. When Gandhi visited
London on a second deputation in 1909, Lord Ampthill contacted not only the British
Government but also the ministers from the Transvaal – Prime Minister Louis Botha and Interior
Minister J.C. Smuts – to try to promote a settlement.591

Gandhi encouraged action by South African Indian students in Britain and secured support from
others like Miss Florence Winterbottom, Corresponding Secretary of the Union of Ethical
Societies, who became a consistent friend. She moved a resolution expressing sympathy with the
British Indians in South Africa at a well-attended meeting of East India Association held in
Caxton Hall on 26 November 1906. She also raised funds in aid of the Indian struggle.592

The Conference of the Union of Ethical Societies in London on 24 December 1913 passed the
following resolution:

That this conference of the Union of Ethical Societies held on November 22 nd, 1913, views with the gravest
concern the unjust treatment inflicted upon Indian subjects of the Crown by the dominant white races of
South Africa, and it urges His Majesty’s Government, and those in authority in South Africa and in India,
to take immediate steps for securing the release from prison of Messrs Gandhi, Polak and Kallenbach, and

at that time, the Africans had greater claims. The suggestion that a small immigrant community of Indians should
provide leadership to the sons and daughters of the soil shows scant respect to the Africans from whom Chief
Luthuli, Nelson Mandela and other great leaders emerged.
591
Indian Opinion, 6 October 1906 and 12 June 1909. For information on prominent individuals who supported the
Indian cause in Britain, please see James D. Hunt, Gandhi in London (New Delhi: Promilla & Co., Publishers,
revised edition, 1993).
592
Sushila Nayar, Satyagraha at Work, pp. 484-85; Berning, Gandhi Letters, p. 50.
 for the removal of the grievances under which Indian fellow subjects labour in the Union of South
Africa.593

The British press was mostly sympathetic to the Indian cause.

Support from India

The Indian National Congress had been concerned about the plight of Indians in South Africa
from the 1890s. It responded quickly to the Asiatic Act in the Transvaal in 1907 and other
organisations soon joined in condemning that law.

In June 1907, a meeting of ten thousand people in Madras passed a resolution calling for
retaliation against the Transvaal.594

In September 1907, the British Indian Association received a cable from Gokhale that he was
following the struggle closely and with deepest sympathy and admiration.595 Surendranath
Banerjee, another prominent leader of the Indian National Congress, also sent a message of
support. These were a source of great encouragement to the movement in the Transvaal. Indian
Opinion commented in its editorial on 28 September:

It is no small thing to receive cables from these trusted representatives of the people of India. Both of them
have dedicated their lives to the Indian cause, and both command unrivalled influence in India. It is,
therefore, reasonable to suppose that the Indian question in the Transvaal will soon occupy a most
prominent place in Indian politics. Lord Ampthill truly said the other day that nothing has wounded so
deeply Indian sentiment as the grievances of British Indians in South Africa. We need the encouragement
received from India. On this question, there are no parties in India, there is no division of opinion, all –
Hindu, Mahomedan, Parsee and Christian – alike realise the very painful and humiliating position occupied
by Indians in the Transvaal. Anglo-Indian opinion is just as solid as Indian opinion; no one has spoken so
strongly against the treatment as The Englishman in Calcutta and the Times of India in Bombay.

Omar Haji Amod Johari attended the session of the Indian National Congress in Surat in
December 1907 as the delegate from Natal. After the end of the formal session, a majority of the
delegates remained behind to discuss the grievances of the Transvaal Indians. Johari spoke about
the sufferings and indignities inflicted by the Asiatic Registration Act which reduced Indians to
the level of culprits and vagabonds. He expressed fear that Natal might follow the example of the
Transvaal and appealed for action for the repeal of the Asiatic Act. Surendranath Banerjee, one
the most prominent leaders of the Congress, read drafts of telegrams to the Viceroy and to the
Colonial Office in London asking the Imperial Government to intervene.596

593
Indian Opinion, 31 December 1913
594
Indian Opinion, 29 June 1907
595
Indian Opinion, 28 September 1907
596
Indian Opinion, 8 February 1908
Public meetings were held in India protesting the Asiatic Registration Act. A large public meting
in Bombay on 29 January 1908, chaired by the Aga Khan, appealed to the Imperial Government
to intervene or allow India to retaliate against South Africans. Gokhale asked at a meeting of the
Viceroy’s Executive Council on 3 February whether the Indian Government was aware of “the
depth and intensity of feeling” at the injustice and indignity against the Transvaal Indians.

The Indian community in the Transvaal sent H.S.L. Polak as its delegate to India in 1909.
Working under the guidance of Gopal Krishna Gokhale and with help from G.A. Natesan, the
editor of Indian Review and public leader in Madras, he was able to secure wide publicity and
support for the Indian struggle in the Transvaal.

Natesan, next only to Gokhale, was the greatest supporter of the Indian struggle. He publicised
the struggle in Indian Review. He published two pamphlets by Polak on the disabilities of Indians
in South Africa597 and distributed the biography of Gandhi by the Reverend J. J. Doke. He
collected substantial amounts of money for the struggle and was able to obtain contributions
from the Nizam of Hyderabad, the Maharaja of Mysore and the Maharaja of Bikaner.598 He was
one of the founders and the Secretary of the Indian South African League, Madras, formed in
1909.599

Public organisations not only held large meetings in several cities to denounce the oppression of
the Indians in the Transvaal and demand action by the British Government to protect the British
subjects, but began to collect funds for the passive resistance.600

When Gandhi returned from London to Cape Town on 30 November 1909, he found a donation
of 25.000 rupees from Ratan J. Tata, the industrialist, sent through Gokhale to aid the struggle in
the Transvaal. 601 Tata made two more donations in 1910 and 1912.602

Gokhale cabled Gandhi in early December 1909 inquiring what funds were required, and Gandhi
stated in reply on 6 December:

Present requirements thousand pounds. Expect imprisonment before end month. Much more required
later.603

On the same day he wrote a letter to Gokhale explaining how the donations which had been
received were being dealt with. He wrote that the debt incurred by him personally in maintaining
597
The Indians in South Africa: Helots within the Empire and how they are Treated and The Tragedy of Empire and
The Treatment of British Indians in the Transvaal, published by G.A. Natesan and Co., of Madras.
598
Indian Opinion, 12 February and 10 December 1910
599
Indian Opinion, 20 November 1909
600
Indian Opinion, 12 February, 10 and 17 December 1910.
601
Indian Opinion, 22 January 1910
602
Indian Opinion, 10 December 1910 and 17 December 1913
603
CWMG, Vol. 10, p. 349. The receipts and expenditures of the British Indian Association for the period 1 April to
31 October 1909 were published in Indian Opinion on 25 December 1909. They indicated contributions of over
£750 from inside South Africa. The cost of the deputation to London in 1909, about £550, was covered by these
contributions. But the needs were increasing and the movement needed financial assistance from India.
the Phoenix Settlement and publishing Indian Opinion, £1,200, was paid out of the amount
received from Gokhale with his permission. Monthly expenses were approximately as follows:
office in Johannesburg, £50; SABIC office in London, £40; Indian Opinion, £50; and assistance
to distressed families, £25.604 They were expected to increase substantially in view of increased
repression and the needs of families of resisters.605

There was more active fund-raising in India from December 1909 as the suffering of passive
resisters and their families and the needs to carry on the struggle became known. Gandhi’s
declarations that the struggle was to remove the insult to India in Transvaal legislation appealed
to the patriotic sentiment in India.

In that month, Jehangir Bomanjee Petit, a rich Parsi merchant prominent in public affairs of
Bombay, made an appeal for contributions in the Bombay press. He wrote:

… all India is convinced of the justice of their cause and watches their progress with the keenest possible
interest. One cannot help feeling, however, that the time has now come when something more substantial
should be done to help them in maintaining to the bitter end the magnificent stand they have hitherto made
in the cause of India… The praiseworthy example of Mr. Tata should be immediately followed if we are to
be of any assistance to our countrymen in the Transvaal just at a moment when they are most in need of
it.606

He offered to collect and transmit donations to the Transvaal.607 A South African Indian Fund
was set up in Bombay with Petit as Joint Secretary.

The Indian National Congress, at its annual session in Lahore that month, heard C.R. Naidoo and
Lutchman Panday of Natal. Gokhale moved a resolution which read in part:

This Congress expresses its great admiration of the intense patriotism, courage and self-sacrifice of the
Indians in the Transvaal – Mahomedan and Hindu, Zoroastrian and Christian – who are heroically
suffering persecution in the interests of their country and are carrying on their peaceful and selfless struggle
for elementary civil rights against heavy and overwhelming odds. This Congress offers its warmest
congratulations to Mr. M.K. Gandhi and his brave, faithful associates and calls upon all Indians, of
whatever race or creed, to help them unstintedly with funds, and, in this connection, the Congress begs to
convey to Mr. R.J. Tata its high appreciation of the patriotic instincts which have inspired his munificent
donation of Rs. 25,000 to his countrymen in South Africa in their hour of need and trial. This Congress
begs earnestly to press upon the Government of India the necessity of prohibiting the recruitment of

604
Gandhi’s letter of 25 April 1910 to Gokhale. Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910; CWMG, Vol. 10, pp. 96-98. Gandhi
had spent nearly £5,000, during his stay in Johannesburg, for Indian Opinion and Phoenix Settlement. He had no
income, however, since he gave up legal practice and devoted himself to the resistance. His family was being
supported by Hermann Kallenbach. Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910.
605
Gandhi wrote in the Guajarati section of Indian Opinion (5 March 1910) that a separate account called the
“Passive Resistance Fund” had been opened and was being operated by him. Gokhale and Petit had written to him
leaving the disbursement of the Fund to his discretion. “Mr. Cachalia and other satyagrahis are being consulted
about all this expenditure and accounts of the same are forwarded to Professor Gokhale and to the Secretary of the
Fund, Mr. Petit.” CWMG, Vol. 10, p. 175.
606
Indian Opinion, 22 January 1910
607
Ibid. He had already cabled £400 to Gandhi in December 1909. Indian Opinion, 1 January 1910.
 indentured labour for any portion of the South African Union and of dealing with the authorities there in
the same manner in which the latter deal with Indian interests…”608

He stressed that

the struggle was not so much between the Transvaal Indians and the Transvaal Government as between
Indians of India, whose very honour was at stake, and the Transvaal Government. 609

Praising the passive resistance of the Transvaal Indians, he said:

Passive resistance meant a struggle in defence, a fight with moral and spiritual force in which the divine is
pitched against the brutal, suffering against oppression, faith against aggression, righteousness against
injustice, right against wrong, soul force against brute force. 610

Reuter reported from Lahore on 29 December 1909:

Mr. [Surendranath] Banerjee made an eloquent appeal for funds, and the audience frantically responded,
and threw showers of notes and gold.

Women tore off their rings and bangles, which were also thrown upon the platform.

Nearly fifteen thousand rupees were collected and will be cabled to Mr. Gandhi. 611

On 31 January 1910, the All India Muslim League Conference adopted a resolution expressing
admiration for and sympathy with the struggle in South Africa, and calling on all Indian Muslims
to help the cause with funds and in other ways. The League decided to donate 1,000 rupees from
its funds. Other donations amounted to 2,650 rupees.612

Public meetings were held in all major cities in India and were addressed by prominent public
leaders who denounced the Transvaal Government, criticised the British Government for its
inaction and urged the Indian Government to retaliate against the Transvaal. Funds were
collected at these meetings for the passive resistance fund. An interesting feature of these
meetings was that they were often chaired or addressed by princes who were normally wary of
any criticism of Britain.

Motilal Nehru presided over a public meeting convened by the United Provinces Association in
Allahabad on 10 January to protest against the treatment of Indians in South Africa. Pandit
Madan Mohan Malaviya appealed for funds and over four thousand rupees were subscribed.613

608
Indian Opinion, 12 February 1910
609
Ibid.
610
Ibid. Praise for passive resistance in South Africa by Gokhale, leader of the “moderates” in India who abhorred
defiance of laws, was significant as he helped to rally their support to the Indian struggle in South Africa.
611
Indian Opinion, 1 January and 12 February 1910
612
Indian Opinion, 12 March 1910
613
Ibid.
An Indian South African League was formed in Calcutta at a mass meeting on 3 December 1909
to mobilise public opinion and collect funds.614 An Indian Women’s Transvaal League was
formed in Calcutta that month.615

In Madras, the Indian South Africa League was established at a large meeting in January 1910.
The Rt. Rev. Henry Whitehead, the Lord Bishop of Madras, was elected President.616

Mrs. Jehangir B. Petit chaired a public meeting of women in Bombay on 26 August 1910 to
express sympathy to the families of passive resisters and to support them.617

In a letter to Gokhale on 25 April 1910618, Gandhi gave a detailed accounting of the funds
received and their utilisation. He wrote that £5,269-10-7 was received since December 1908. Of
this £4,253-3-4 came from Bombay, £750 from Rangoon,619 £135-8-2 from London and smaller
amounts from Mozambique, Zanzibar and Lourenco Marques. Of the Bombay fund £3,914-10-0
was for carrying on the struggle generally, and £338-13-4 had been earmarked for relief of
distress among the passive resisters or their dependants. The remittances from Rangoon and
London had been entirely earmarked to the relief of distress only.620

The funds were banked to a separate account, called the Passive Resistance Fund Account. The
account was operated by Gandhi and disbursements were made in consultation with A.M.
Cachalia and other passive resisters. The funds had been used economically. The expenditures up
to 20 April were £2,249-18-7, and there was a balance of £3,019-12-0.621 The monthly expenses
for relieving distress had increased from £25 in December to nearly £160 per month. Gandhi
estimated that the average monthly expense would increase to £333.622

Ratan Tata sent the second of his three contributions of 25,000 rupees and wrote to Gandhi on 18
November 1910:

…when I think of the vast importance of this question, and the magnificent stand which a handful of our
countrymen in the Transvaal have made and are making for the honour of the Motherland I feel constrained
to say that the support which India has so far lent to her brave sons and daughters in their heroic and most
righteous struggle in a distant land has not been adequate…

…I think it is the clear duty of all in India at this juncture to do what lies in their power – to give those who
are engaged in this supremely important struggle the confident feeling that the vigorous and sustained
support, both material and moral, of their countrymen in India is behind them.

614
Indian Opinion, 22 January 1910
615
Ibid.
616
Ibid.
617
Indian Opinion, 26 November 1910
618
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
619
Funds were collected in Rangoon by Pranjivan Mehta, a friend and benefactor of Gandhi.
620
Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910
621
The expenditures were: Indian Opinion debt, £1,200; relief, £499-11-11; London office, £175-15-0; and local
expenses, £374-11-8. Indian Opinion, 7 May 1910.
622
Ibd.
 If the cheque which I enclose herein will in any degree be instrumental in giving you and your fellow
workers this feeling, my object in sending it will have been accomplished. 623

When passive resistance was resumed in September 1913 and thousands of Indian workers came
out on strike in October, the needs for assistance greatly increased. Gandhi estimated during the
“Great March” that the movement required £7,000 a month and that local contributions in
provisions and cash were expected to come up to £1,000.624 The needs further increased when
the strike spread to plantations and cities. The Government, as noted earlier, refrained from
arresting all the strikers in the hope that the movement would collapse for lack of funds.

The Indian community rose to the occasion and donated a large amount of foodstuffs and a
considerable amount of cash. But the needs were beyond the capacity of the small Indian
community.

The savage sentence of three months with hard labour imposed on Kasturba Gandhi and other
women resisters and the brutality against Indian workers on strike aroused India as no issue did
since the “Indian Mutiny” of 1857. The Aga Khan said at a large public meeting called by the
Sheriff of Bombay on 10 December:

It is no exaggeration to say that in the modern history of India, it is impossible to find a parallel to the
intensity of feeling to which Indians have been stirred by the painful occurrences in South Africa. The
solidarity of public opinion in regard to this most difficult and vexatious question is indeed striking, and the
fact that the requisition to the Sheriff to convene the meeting is signed by representatives of all the
communities furnishes eloquent testimony to the complete unanimity of opinion that prevails in India as to
the unjust and harsh treatment to which our fellow subjects in South Africa have been subjected. 625

Meetings were held all over India, even in remote districts, and tens of thousands of people of all
classes made contributions to the passive resistance fund.626 Many Indians, including Jawaharlal
Nehru, began their political career in this solidarity movement.

Gokhale cut short his visit to England and returned to India in October 1913 despite his impaired
health and founded the Bombay South Africa League.627 He urged the British Government to
close the Indian Public Services to South Africans and refuse to purchase South African gold for
the Indian Treasury.628

623
Indian Opinion, 12 February and 10 December 1910; Indian Review, Madras, February 1911. Ratan Tata
announced his third contribution of Rs. 25,000 in July 1912. Indian Opinion, 10 August 1912; CWMG, Vol. 12, p.
299.
624
Times of India, 7 November 1913; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 259.
625
Indian Opinion, 28 January 1914
626
Reuter, quoted in Indian Opinion, 10 December 1913
627
Indian Opinion, 29 October 1913
628
Ibid.
He addressed a large meeting in Lahore in November 1913 and a sum of £2,000 was raised. C.F.
Andrews, a British churchman, offered his life’s savings of £300, but Gokhale would accept only
one thousand rupees (about £75).629

Ramsay Macdonald, who was then on a visit to India, wrote in the Daily Chronicle of London:

I attended various meetings - as a mere spectator - called for the purpose of collecting money and passing
resolutions about the South African situation, and I have rarely been so impressed by the earnestness and
determination of masses of men. Mahomedans vied with the Hindus in their speeches and offers of help,
and I should not be at all surprised if, in time to come, this will mark a very decided departure in Indian
politics. Its general effect is to make Indians feel that they were not a part of the Empire, and that they
receive no protection from it.630

Natesan cabled the British Indian Association from Madras on 18 November:

Monster meeting emphatically protested against cruel treatment of Indians; demanded Imperial
Government immediately intervene; Government India advised retaliation; Boer perfidy condemned,
appeal for £3000, first thousand cabling. 631

On 27 November the Natal Indian Association received the following cable from Agra:

Demonstration Agra with you heart and soul. Raising funds. Rev. Davies President. 632

A mass meeting of four thousand people was held in Calcutta on 3 December. The Maharaja of
Burdwan presided. More than Rs. 15,000 was collected.633

Women’s organisations were active in this movement of solidarity.

A large meeting of women in Bombay on 20 November, chaired by Lady J.B. Petit, sent a
message of sympathy to the resisters in South Africa and decided to collect funds “to support our
brave sisters.”634 The women declared:

In the struggle which has ensued it cannot but be a matter of pride to us that the Indian women in that part
of the country have joined with fearless courage and enthusiasm, braving all hardships and tribulations to
which such action exposes them. All honour to these brave women for their self-sacrificing and suffering
spirit! Who would have believed that Indian women were capable of such heroic conduct, standing
shoulder to shoulder with their husbands, fathers and brothers! Really and truly our hearts bleed for them
and go out to them in this their hour of harm, pain and suffering. They have had the courage to leave behind
them their families and their children, unprotected, unprovided for, and starving. It is our duty to go to their
help in such time.635

629
Hugh Tinker, The Ordeal of Love: C.F. Andrews and India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 77
630
Quoted in Indian Opinion, 18 March 1914
631
Natal Witness, 20 November 1913
632
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
633
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913
634
Indian Opinion, 7 January 1914
635
Ibd.
A committee of prominent women was set up to collect funds for the purpose of “alleviating the
distress of our suffering sisters in South Africa and of helping the Indian cause in that Colony
generally”.636

Mrs. Jamnabai N Sakkai, President of the Gujarati Hindu Stri Mandal in Bombay, wrote to South
Africa:

Bombay Gujarati Hindu Stri Mandal appreciates Indian ladies’ part passive resistance, sympathises, urges
vigorous continuance. Whole India with resisters. 637

A meeting in Benares on 30 December 1913, chaired by Mrs. Annie Besant, supported the Indian
strike and expressed dissatisfaction with the composition of the Indian Inquiry Commission.638

A conference of women, held in Karachi on 31 December, under the chairmanship of Mrs.

Haradevibai, supported the men and women in the struggle in South Africa and made an appeal
for funds to assist them.639

A meeting of women in Ahmedabad, chaired by Miss Dhanbai Wadia, took similar action.640

While tens of thousands of people contributed to assist the struggle in South Africa, only the
names of these major donors are available:641

Sir Ratan J. Tata, Rs. 75,000

J.B. Petit, £400

The Aga Khan, £660 (Rs. 10,000)

The Gaekwar of Baroda, £360, and his wife, Rs. 5,500

Sir Dorabji Tata, Rs. 10,000 and Lady Tata, Rs. 2,000

Thakore Saheb of Gondal, Rs. 10,000 and the Ranee Saheb, Rs. 2,000

The Nizam of Hyderabad, Rs. 5,000

Maharaja of Mysore, Rs. 2,500

Maharaja of Bikaner, Rs. 1,000

636
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913 and 7 January 1914
637
Indian Opinion, 3 December 1913
638
Indian Opinion, 18 February 1914
639
Indian Opinion, 18 February 1914
640
Ibid.
641
Indian Opinion, 17 December 1913, 28 January, 18 February, 11 March and 8 July 1914. Some of them may
have made additional contributions. One pound was about 15 rupees. The Bishops of Calcutta and Madras, Sir
Murray Hammik, former Acting Governor of Madras, and Ramsay MacDonald, a leader of the British Labour Party,
also contributed but the amounts of contributions are not available. Indian Opinion, 11 March 1914.
 Maharaja of Cooch Behar, Rs. 1,000

C.F. Andrews, Rs. 1,000

S. Srinivasa Iyengar, Rs. 500

Sir Valentin Chirol, member of the Indian Public Service Commission, £5

Seva Sadan, Bombay, Rs. 50

On 3 November 1914, the subscribers to the South African Indian Fund met in Bombay. J.B.
Petit, the Secretary reported that there was a balance of almost 118,000 rupees. The meeting
appointed a committee of trustees of the Fund and authorised them to form an association for
safeguarding the interests of Indians abroad.642 The Imperial Citizenship Association was formed
soon after.

On 7 May 1915, Gandhi addressed the Indian South African League in Madras. He said that
there were nearly thirty passive resisters and members of their families in India, including the
wives and children of two men shot in the course of the struggle, who needed support. He
suggested that the small balance with the League be devoted to their assistance and that the
League could be dissolved. The League then passed a resolution dissolving itself and placing the
balance at Gandhi’s disposal.643

On 16 June 1915, Gandhi sent to J.B. Petit an account of the income and expenditure in
connection with the passive resistance in South Africa.644 The passive resistance fund had
received a total of £27,324-0-7. The contributions came from:

Bombay - £18,901-6-9

Madras - £4,035-0-0

Rangoon - £2,136-0-6

Nairobi - £150-0-0

Zanzibar - £33-6-8645

London - £386-11-10

Of this amount, £3,000 was allocated for Phoenix Settlement and Valliamma Hall but was

642
Indian Opinion, 30 December 1914
643
CWMG, Vol. 13, pp. 76-78
644
CWMG, Vol. 13, pp. 107-113
645
Indian Opinion of 5 March 1910 reported that a sum of £59-3-6 was sent by Cowasji Dinshaw Brothers of
Zanzibar who collected for the passive resistance fund in the island.
unspent. There was a balance of £4,300-2-11.646

Other Countries

The passive resistance received support and contributions from Indians in other countries such as
Zanzibar, Kenya and Mozambique.647

The Springfield Daily Republican in America published on 24 August 1909 a long letter by
Myron H. Phelps, a New York barrister and supporter of Indian freedom, on the grievances of
Indians in South Africa and their passive resistance. Mr. Phelps had met Gandhi and Haji Habib
in London in 1909. A national magazine published a story on the saga of Mrs. Rambhabhai
Sodha.

646
CWMG, Vol. 13, pp. 107-113
647
Ibid.
 WORLD SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SATYAGRAHA IN SOUTH AFRICA
The struggle of the small Indian community in South Africa for its dignity and the honour of
India, and against racist laws, led to the evolution of Gandhi into a militant fighter for justice and
the exponent of a philosophy and strategy for resistance against oppression.

Soon after he returned to India, he transformed the Indian National Congress which had been
mainly an organisation of the elite into one for all the people of the country. With the lessons
learnt in South Africa, he was able to build a mass movement, mobilising the peasants and
workers, as well as professionals, students, businessmen and others. The non-violent struggle of
millions of people, against the most powerful imperial Power, inspired people around the world
and continues to inspire them in the present century.

In 1994, F. W. de Klerk, then President of South Africa, referred to one major contribution of
Gandhi in the struggle he led in South Africa:

He (Gandhi) was one of the first voices to be raised against racism. At that time racism was an integral and
unquestioned aspect of the global imperialist world view. European imperial powers believed that they had
a manifest right and duty to rule the “less developed” peoples of Africa and Asia. In a dignified and
determined manner, Mahatma Gandhi questioned this belief. The anti-racism position that he adopted has,
since the early years of this century, become part of the accepted morality of the world. Where racism was
once almost the reflex reaction to inter-group relations, it is now thoroughly discredited and is openly
advocated only by the most extremist minorities. The role that Mahatma played in bringing about the
transformation of global attitudes in this regard cannot be overestimated. 648

As it was through Gandhi that the struggle in South Africa had a wider impact, it is necessary to
recall the evolution of Gandhi in South Africa.

Gandhi – Made in South Africa

Gandhi said often that he was born in India and made in South Africa. He told the Kanpur
Congress in 1925 that "Indians of South Africa claim that they have given me to you. I accept
that claim. It is perfectly true that whatever service I have been able to render... to India, comes
from South Africa."649 When Dr. Y.M. Dadoo and Dr. G.M. Naicker, leaders of the Indian
passive resistance in South Africa, met him in Bihar on 11 April 1947, he told them: It was after
I went to South Africa that I became what I am now.650

648
Fatima Meer (ed.), The South African Gandhi: An Abstract of the Speeches and Writings of M.K. Gandhi 1893-
1914 (Durban: Madiba Publishers, second edition, 1996), p. 426
649
CWMG, Vol. 29, p. 358
650
CWMG, Vol. 87, p. 257
Gandhi had arrived in South Africa in 1893, after a brief and unsuccessful career as a barrister in
India, accepting a small salary of £100 a year, hoping to find better prospects in that country.

That was a critical time for Indians in South Africa. They had made a great contribution to the
economy of Natal, transforming it from a barren land into a “Green Colony”. But some whites
began to see them as a menace and started an anti-Indian campaign. Though a small minority, the
Indians complicated the racial situation in the Colony. The Indian traders and educated youth
competed with whites. They claimed rights as British subjects, and sought to bring pressure on
the Governments of Natal and the Transvaal through India and Britain. But above all, the whites
feared that the Indians could encourage the Africans to resist racist tyranny and undermine white
rule. The Governments began to subject Indians to discriminatory laws and tried to reduce their
status to that of the Africans.

A year after his arrival, the merchants in Durban offered Gandhi a retainer of at least £300 a year
to enable him to defend the interests of the community. He enrolled as a barrister, rented a house
at Beach Grove and entertained Europeans and Indians. He was conscious of his status as a
barrister. He was not immune to the prejudices prevalent among Indian merchants and Europeans
against the Africans. He also carried some prejudices against poor Indians.

He devoted much time to the welfare and improvement of the Indian community. He organised
debates and other programmes for young Indians - most of them Natal-born and educated - and
encouraged sports. He gave legal services to poor Indians at no charge and did volunteer work as
a compounder in a hospital. He gained respect as a public-spirited barrister.

He prepared many petitions to the authorities in Natal and Britain and wrote numerous letters to
the press in defence of Indians. He tried to promote understanding and support for them among
the whites, and in India and Britain. But all the efforts to break the wall of prejudice against
Indians by rational arguments, appeals, petitions and deputations failed. In fact, Indians were
subjected to new humiliations while Gandhi was attempting to gain respect for Indians.

In Natal, the Government enacted laws and regulations to harass Indian traders. It imposed an
exorbitant tax on former indentured labourers, their wives and children to force them to re-
indenture for the rest of their lives or leave South Africa. Youth and women’s groups began an
agitation from 1906 against this inhuman tax which caused great suffering.

In the Transvaal, after the end of the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), the British administration
was more oppressive than the previous Boer Government in segregating Indians and restricting
their trade. Many Indians who left the Colony during the war could not return while the whites
could come freely into the Transvaal. Britain then forged an alliance of whites – Boer and British
– to perpetuate white domination. The Indian community reached the limit of its patience when
the Asiatic Ordinance was introduced in 1906 and transformed into an Asiatic Registration Act
in 1907.
Gandhi, who had left for India in 1901, returned next year at the request of the Indian
community. He settled in Johannesburg where he set up a successful practice as an attorney. He
founded Indian Opinion and became a more effective publicist for the Indian community. He
also founded the Phoenix Settlement in 1904 for his experiments in simple living and came in
contact with John Langalibalele Dube, founder of the Ohlange Institute, and other Africans.

In 1906 he went to Natal and led a Stretcher-Bearer Corps during the military operation by the
whites against the Bambatha rebellion, though his sympathies were with the Africans who were
resisting a new poll tax.651 He hoped that the dominant whites would recognise that the Indians
were responsible citizens deserving of civic rights.

When the Corps was disbanded, he made two crucial decisions - the vow of brahmacharya
(celibacy) and a letter to his brother that he had no interest in worldly possessions – so that he
could devote his life entirely to public service.

The Asiatic Ordinance, gazetted a few days after his return to the Transvaal, came as a shock652
and transformed him from a mere public servant to a fighter. He decided to defy, whatever the
cost. He soon became the leader of the Indian community. He abandoned his legal practice in
1908, when Hermann Kallenbach undertook to look after the simple needs of himself and his
family, so that he could devote all his attention to the struggle of the Indian community against
humiliation.

During his stay in Johannesburg, and especially after the beginning of the struggle, he came in
contact with many liberal whites. He came to know Olive Schreiner, the most prominent writer
who opposed racism. He became acquainted with Africans who were soon to lead a national
movement for their rights. He spoke at meetings of theosophists and socialists. Many liberal
churchmen and editors were persuaded by him to support the Indian cause. He developed close
association with Albert West, Henry Polak, Hermann Kallenbach and others who were to join
him in the struggle for the rights of Indians.

His outlook broadened and he developed a vision for a new South Africa. Speaking in a debate at
the YMCA in Johannesburg on 18 May 1908, he said:

651
Gandhi did not understand the scale of the rebellion or the cruelty of white militia. His justification for raising an
ambulance corps seems strange today. He wrote in Indian Opinion of 14 April 1906:

It is not for us to say whether the revolt of the Kaffirs is justified or not. We are in Natal by virtue of British
power. Our very existence depends upon it. It is therefore our duty to render whatever help we can.”
(CWMG, Vol. 5, p. 282).

Prabhudas Gandhi recalled in his memoir that his family feared African hostility, but fortunately there was no attack
on the family. Prabhudas Gandhi, My Childhood with Gandhiji (Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House, 1957).
652
The Stretcher-bearer Corps was on duty from 22 to 19 July 1906. The Transvaal Government informed the
Legislative Council of its intention to introduce a bill to re-register Asiatics, and the British Indian Association
protested immediately. The Asiatic Ordinance was published in the Gazette on 22 August.
 My own observations and experience, as you know, are confined very largely to British Indians, my own
fellow-countrymen, but in studying the Indian question, I have endeavoured to study the question as it
affects the Africans and the Chinese… South Africa would probably be a howling wilderness without the
Africans.

He called for justice to the Africans, and concluded:

If we look into the future, is it not a heritage we have to leave to posterity, that all the different races
commingle and produce a civilisation that perhaps the world has not yet seen? There are difficulties and
misunderstandings, but I do believe, in the words of the sacred hymn, “We shall know each other better
when the mists have rolled away.”653

But Gandhi did not regard himself as a South African and referred to Indians in the country as
“settlers”. He exhorted Indians about their motherland, India, and never suggested that they
identify with Africa, though he was aware that for most Indians South Africa was the only
home.654 He followed the national movement in India and even considered in 1909 the
possibility of election as President of the Indian National Congress.

Throughout the struggle, Gandhi emphasised that it was not so much for the rights of the Indians
in South Africa as for the honour of the "motherland". Significantly, the first biography of
Gandhi in 1909, by the Rev. J.J. Doke, was entitled "An Indian Patriot in South Africa".655

Gandhi was inspired by the heroism of the resisters even as they were inspired by his example.
The courage and sacrifice of women, who responded to his invitation to join the resistance in its
final phase, was particularly striking. He had admired the tenacity of the women in the
suffragette movement in Britain. He was perhaps also conscious of the sacrifices of Boer women
during the Anglo-Boer War.656 Yet his call to the Indian women was bold and their response
magnificent.

Equally impressive was the discipline and steadfastness of the poor workers. Gandhi declared:

These men and women are the salt of India; on them will be built the Indian nation that is to be. 657

653
Indian Opinion, 6 June 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 242-46.
654
On the eve of his departure, however, he referred to colonial-born Indians, a small minority, as the permanent
Indian settlers in South Africa and praised Valliamma, Nagappan and other Colonial-borns. He said at a farewell
meeting on 9 July 1914:

It was they [the Colonial-borns] who were the permanent Indian settlers of South Africa. To the Colonial-
borns South Africa was their birth-place and home…” (Indian Opinion, 9 September 1914; CWMG, Vol.
12, p. 454).
655
Gandhi approved this biography, and arranged for its publication in London and distribution in India.
656
Gandhi said in a speech to college students in Lahore in 1920: "Every woman in the Transvaal was a Rani of
Jhansi. When will our women be so brave?" (CWMG, Vol. 18, p. 364).
657
Speech in London on 8 August 1914, CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 524. Gandhi had written already in December 1908:
The Gandhi who left South Africa for India was an inspiring leader of the masses, fearless and
selfless, with a vision for South Africa, India and the world.

Evolution of Non-violent Resistance and Invention of Satyagraha

In his speeches in the Transvaal before the start of resistance, Gandhi asked the people to remain
non-violent, accept the penalty under the law, refuse to pay any fine and go to prison.658 He
believed that if most Indians went to prison, the Government would be obliged to rescind the
Asiatic Registration Act.

The press described the Indian movement as “passive resistance,” similar to that of the
suffragettes in Britain. But Gandhi was reluctant to use that term as it implied confrontation. He
wrote to Rand Daily Mail on 1 July 1907:

… in my opinion, it is really not resistance but a policy of communal suffering. 659

But he later accepted the term “passive resistance.”

In January 1908, on the eve of his first jail term, he invented the term “Satyagraha” to describe
the movement in his Gujarati writings, while in the English section of Indian Opinion and in all
his English writings, it remained “passive resistance.”660

Gandhi wrote in the Gujarati section of Indian Opinion on 11 January 1908:

Though the phrase does not exhaust the connotation of the word "passive", we shall use
satyagraha till a word is available which deserves the prize.661

…As the satyagraha campaign progresses, we see that it is the poor alone who can join it. The rich find the
burden of their wealth too heavy; they are not able to carry the burden of truth. (Indian Opinion, 19
December 1908; CWMG, Vol. 9, p. 114).

658
There was no serious danger of violence by the small Indian community in the Transvaal. Gandhi perhaps wished
to stress that the Indian movement was different from the armed resistance by the Africans during the Bambatha
rebellion and the terrorist movement in India.
659
Indian Opinion, 6 July 1907; CWMG, Vol. 7, p. 67. He wrote in Indian Opinion of 20 September 1913 that the
hostility of the Government and the Europeans must be met “by a process of voluntary suffering which at once
purifies and dignifies”.
660
Gandhi’s account in Satyagraha in South Africa is not quite correct. He had invited suggestions for a “suitable
equivalent” to passive resistance. Maganlal Gandhi suggested sadagraha and Gandhi decided on satyagraha. That
term was never used in his English writings until he left South Africa. He used the terms “passive resistance” in
English and “satyagraha” in Gujarati as equivalents and continued to praise the British suffragettes. It was only
some years after he returned to India that he elaborated on the distinction between the two terms.
661
CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 23. Indian Opinion had offered 10 booklets on the Asiatic Registration Act for the best
suggestion for a Gujarati equivalent of “passive resistance”.
The invention of the term “satyagraha” inspired Gandhi to speculate on the ideal form of
struggle, its uses and efficacy. He was greatly encouraged when a provisional agreement was
reached with General Smuts in the same month and all prisoners were released. He considered it
a complete victory and wrote:

We shall not come across many instances of this kind in world history….

Every Indian should by now be convinced that satyagraha, or passive resistance, is an infallible remedy. It
can cure the most dangerous of ailments.662

He saw great potential for it in India.

It is only because we do not appreciate the marvel of satyagraha that we live in India as a poor and
cowardly race, not only in our relations with the Government but in our personal relations as well. Certain
customs which are palpably evil are kept alive in our country mainly because we lack in [the spirit of]
satyagraha.663

The agreement with Smuts came apart. The Government resorted to measures he had not
expected, such as long prison terms with hard labour, auctioning of property and arbitrary
deportations to India. But that did not shake Gandhi’s faith in satyagraha.

In Indian Opinion of 29 May and 5 June 1909, he elaborated on the attributes of an ideal
satyagrahi. The satyagrahi should have “the strength that flows from truthfulness”. He should be
fearless and indifferent to wealth. He should break away from family attachments. He should
learn to live in jail as if it were a palace.

… he alone can offer satyagraha who has true faith in religion…664

Most of those who had participated in the struggle were blissfully ignorant of the
attributes of a satyagrahi.665

Gandhi was aware that the resisters in South Africa were far from ideal satyagrahis. He wrote to
W.J. Wybergh on 10 May 1910: “Purest passive resistance can exist only in theory”.666

I am free to admit that all passive resisters are not fired with the spirit of love or of truth. Some of us are
undoubtedly not free from vindictiveness and the spirit of hatred, but the desire in us all is to cure ourselves
of hatred and enmity.667

662
Indian Opinion, 8 February 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, pp. 60-61.
663
Indian Opinion, 22 February 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 92.
664
Indian Opinion, 29 May 1909; CWMG, Vol. 9, pp 224-27.
665
Indian Opinion had English and Gujarati sections. Most of the subscribers were Gujaratis. They were a majority
in the Indian community in the Transvaal but a minority in South Africa as a whole.
666
Indian Opinion, 21 May 1910; CWMG, Vol. 10, p. 249.
667
Ibid.
He freely admitted that he himself was not a pure satyagrahi, but striving to be one.668

He began to change his advice to the resisters in the light of his utopia.

For instance, in the initial period of registration under the Asiatic Act, Gandhi called those who
registered “black legs,” “piano players,”669 “blackfaced ones, traitors to the community and
cowards.”670 He supported ostracism of the “black legs” by the community and published their
names in Indian Opinion.

But after the provisional agreement at the end of January 1908, he refrained from such attacks.
He wrote in Indian Opinion on 8 February 1908:

We have been describing blacklegs as black-faced people. That was done deliberately and without anger…

Now that the struggle is at an end, it will be improper to use any such description. …671

During the later phases of the movement, he refrained from criticism of people who could not
offer passive resistance and invited them to support the movement, especially by providing help
to the families of prisoners.

When resistance began, he offered to defend all resisters free of charge and spent much of his
time in courts, even pleading for release on technical grounds. But he wrote in August 1908:

But the best way is to have no lawyer and go to jail straight away and undergo whatever sentence is
passed…672

He continued to defend resisters. H.S.L. Polak, George Godfrey, Mr. Berrange, Mr.
Lechtenstein, and Mr. W.J. MacIntyre also defended some resisters free of charge in the
Transvaal. At Dundee, Natal, G.W. Godfrey defended many resisters in 1913, including Gandhi
himself.673

But Gandhi told a mass meeting of Indians held in Durban on 25 January 1914:

668
After he left South Africa, Gandhi went to London and organised an Indian Ambulance Corps during the First
World War. In reply to a question by Pragji Desai, one of his associates in South Africa, he wrote on 15 November
1914:
A satyagrahi cannot support war directly or indirectly. There are no two opinions about that. I am not such
a perfect satyagrahi. I am trying to be one. Meanwhile, one should go as far as one can…

So long as I have not developed absolute fearlessness, I cannot be a perfect satyagrahi. I am striving
incessantly to achieve it, and will continue to do so. (CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 554-55).
669
The reference is to the giving of ten finger prints to obtain a certificate.
670
See for instance Indian Opinion, 26 October 1907.
671
CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 62
672
Indian Opinion, 8 August 1908; CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 433.
673
The utilisation of a lawyer provided an opportunity to Gandhi to send a message to the people.
 They were not passive resisters of the purest type. They had, for example, taken advantage of law and
defended actions in law courts; pure passive resisters would not have done that… 674

When merchants were concerned about their property being confiscated by the Government, he
advised them in September 1908:

The best course for these persons is to sell their shops nominally… to whites and carry on trade in the name
of these whites. Mr. Gabriel Isaac is prepared for this. The auctioning of goods can be prevented in this
manner.675

L.W. Ritch, another associate of Gandhi, also held stores in trust for Indian traders.676

But Gandhi wrote in Indian Opinion of 9 January 1909:

One may transfer one’s business to another’s name if it cannot be helped. But this is only the last resort, fit
enough for half-cowards. We hope that those who are resolved to be lions, who are brave satyagrahis, will
never take out licences in the names of third parties, but help the cause of the community by winding up
their businesses and embracing poverty for the present…677

A few days before his departure from South Africa, Gandhi described his understanding of
satyagraha in an article on “The Theory and Practice of Passive Resistance”. He concluded:

… a perfect Passive Resister has to be almost, if not entirely, a perfect man… it [spirit of passive
resistance] is a force which, if it became universal, would revolutionise social ideals and do away with
despotisms and the ever-growing militarism under which the nations of the West are groaning and are
being almost crushed to death, and which fairly promises to overwhelm even the nations of the East… one
of the reasons for my departure to India is still further to realise, as I already do in part, my own
imperfection as a Passive Resister, and then to try to perfect myself, for I believe that it is in India that the
nearest approach to perfection is most possible.678

While he saw satyagraha as an ideal which was hard to reach, he used the term “satyagrahis”
liberally to refer to all resisters in South Africa, including the workers on plantations who had
not pledged non-violence. In the book written in 1924, Gandhi described the struggle in South
Africa as Satyagraha in South Africa. He contrasted satyagraha and passive resistance.

He said later that what he had led until then was mass non-violence. He wrote in Harijan on 28
March 1936:

I have nothing new to teach the world. Truth and Non-violence are as old as the hills. All I have done is to
try experiments in both on as vast a scale as I could.

He told a Chinese visitor in 1940:

674
Indian Opinion, 28 January 1914; CWMG, Vol. 12, p. 335.
675
Indian Opinion, 5 September 1908; CWMG, Vol. 9, p. 2.
676
Indian Opinion, 12 August 1911
677
CWMG, Vol. 9, p. 132. Only a few merchants and traders were prepared to embrace poverty.

678
Golden Number of Indian Opinion, 1914, p. 9; CWMG, Vol. 12, pp. 461-62.
 … non-violence, applied to very large masses of mankind, is a new experiment in the history of the world. I
am buoyed up by my faith in its efficacy. 679

Gandhi in India

In South Africa, Gandhi had many detractors. But in India he was admired by all for his
sacrifice, his leadership and his patriotic fervour in defending the honour of India and Indians.
He became the leader of the struggle in India at the end of the First World War. He was
recognised as the only leader who could mobilise the whole nation in a mass struggle.

Gandhi, who was known in South Africa as Gandhibhai and enjoyed an intimacy with his
colleagues, became a “Mahatma” to his discomfort. He wrote to Sonja Schlesin, his private
secretary in South Africa, on 2 June 1919:

Satyagraha is going on merrily. Civil disobedience is expected to commence very soon. How I often wish
you were here for more reasons than one! But I must plough the lonely furrow. It often makes me sad when
I think of all my helpers of South Africa. I have no Doke here. I have no Kallenbach. Don’t know where he
is at the present moment. Polak in England. No counterpart of Cachalia or Sorabji. Impossible to get the
second edition of Rustomji. Strange as it may appear, I feel lonelier here than in South Africa. This does
not mean that I am without co-workers. But between the majority of them and me, there is not that perfect
correspondence which used to exist in South Africa. I do not enjoy the same sense of security which you all
gave me there.680

But he was successful in bringing millions of peasants and workers into the movement. The
resisters did not employ lawyers and pleaded guilty in court. Those who did not participate in the
movement were not vilified or boycotted.

As in South Africa, non-violent resistance included not only the courting of prison but meetings,
demonstrations, marches, bonfires, boycotts and strikes.

The term “passive resistance” was not used to describe the main stages of the struggle in India.
They were called “non-cooperation movement”, civil disobedience”, and “Quit India
movement”. The term “satyagraha” was often used, but it appeared in the title of the national
campaigns only in the “individual satyagraha” of 1940-41 when individuals approved by Gandhi
violated the law to assert freedom of speech and the right of India to be consulted about
participation in the Second World War.

When riots between Hindus and Muslims took place before the independence of India and
Pakistan, Gandhi concluded that the movement in India had been passive resistance, not
satyagraha. He said at his prayer meeting on 4 July 1947:

679
D.G. Tendulkar, Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (New Delhi: Publications Division,
Government of India, 1969), Vol. 5, p. 273
680
CWMG, Vol. 15, p. 341
 … the violence the people had been harbouring in their hearts has now suddenly erupted.

Our passive resistance has not been a complete failure. We have all but won freedom. 681

Kingsley Martin, editor of New Statesman and Nation, wrote in his report of an interview with
Gandhi in January 1948:

Gandhi explained how the freedom movement had not been a non-violent movement in the highest sense of
the term… He felt that non-violence during the struggle for independence was an expedient, i.e., resistance
to the white man was undertaken in a non-violent manner simply because we had no military strength with
which to offer battle.682

In India, as in South Africa, non-violence as a method of struggle had numerous adherents, not
satyagraha as a faith and a way of life.683 Jawaharlal Nehru wrote in his Autobiography:

We were moved by these [Gandhi’s] arguments, but for us and for the National Congress as a whole the
non-violent method was not, and could not be, a religion or an unchallengeable creed or dogma. It could
only be a policy and a method promising certain results, and by those results it would have to be finally
judged.684

Non-violent Resistance after Gandhi

The influence of Gandhi and his philosophy of satyagraha on numerous non-violent movements
and their leaders, as well other prominent persons all over the world, has been well recorded.685
Only a few comments need be made here.

681
CWMG, Vol. 88, p. 274. See also his speeches at prayer meetings on 24 December 1947 and 15 January 1948.
682
Harijan, 20 June 1948; CWMG, Vol. 90, p. 502.
683
In 1960, Moulvi Ismail Cachalia, son of Gandhi’s associate A.M. Cachalia, appeared as a witness for Ahmed
Kathrada in the trial of the leaders of the freedom movement of South Africa. The Prosecutor tried to press him to
admit that the resistance by the South African Indian Congress was not satyagraha but only a political tactic. The
Moulvi replied:

In India Mahatma Gandhi believed in satyagraha as a creed, whereas the Indian National Congress and the
vast majority of the people in the National Congress who adopted satyagraha as a method to achieve
India's freedom only believed in the method of satyagraha for the purposes of achieving their
independence… And similarly, as the Indian National Congress accepted the position, we in South Africa,
the South African Indian Congress, accepted on a similar basis - that means that until we achieve our aims
here we are not going to accept the position of violence in any shape or form... E.S. Reddy (ed.) Indian
South Africans in Struggle for National Liberation: Evidence of Movi Ismail Ahmad Cachalia in the South
African Treason Trial, June 21-28, 1960 (New Delhi: Sanchar Publishing House, 1993), pp. 97-99).

684
Jawaharlal Nehru, An Autobiography (New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund, Oxford University Press,
1980), p. 84
685
See for instance Anne Sibley O’Brien and Perry Edmond O’Brien, After Gandhi: One Hundred Years of
Nonviolent Resistance (Watertown, MA, United States of America, Charlesbridge, 2009).
Since the death of Gandhi, the term “passive resistance,” the cause of much confusion, fell into
disuse. Leaders of non-violent movements referred to “active non-violence,” “positive action” or
“direct action.” When African and Indian Congresses launched a non-violent mass movement in
South Africa in 1952, they called it “Campaign of Defiance against Unjust Laws” which is
perhaps closer to what Gandhi had led in South Africa and India.

The Civil Rights Movement in the United States, led by the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King,
Jr., was perhaps the only movement which had a large religious element as its leadership
consisted mostly of clergy. Like other non-violent movements it adapted the philosophy of
Gandhi to the conditions in America and the Christian traditions of African-Americans. It
utilised the law and the courts because of the special situation in the United States where the
laws in some States imposed racist oppression while the Federal laws called for equality. It
organised training camps for volunteers to enable them to withstand the violence by the police
and racist whites in the southern States.

However imperfect in terms of Gandhi’s concept of satyagraha, the non-violent movements have
been a great force for freedom, justice and peace.

Regrettably, however, some of the movements adopted non-violent methods purely as a tactic
during the struggle and did not seek reconciliation at the end. Success of the struggles led to
conflicts and civil wars. In other cases, as in the recent “Arab Spring”, mass resistance against
oppression was initiated by votaries of non-violence but was disrupted by forces wedded to
hatred and violence. The leaders of non-violent movements need to exercise utmost vigilance to
prevent the “hijacking” of the resistance.

South Africa after the Departure of Gandhi

After Gandhi left South Africa, General Smuts was reported to have said: “The saint has left our
shores – hopefully never to return.”

Smuts had reason to be relieved. The Indian community lacked effective leadership after the
departure of Gandhi and the deaths of some of the leading resisters.

But Gandhi left behind him a great heritage. The mass struggle of the Indians, non-violent in its
method and reconciliation among its goals, had a lasting impact on the oppressed people, and
even some whites, in South Africa.

There was a resurgence of anti-Asiatic agitation soon after the end of the First World War.
Extremist racist groups agitated for measures to make the life of Indians so miserable that they
would choose to leave South Africa. Both the major political parties vied with each other in
proposing anti-Indian legislation. The assurances given to Gandhi about generous spirit in the
administration of laws were forgotten. The National Party decided in the 1920s that “Indians are
a foreign and outlandish element which is unassimilable”.

F. W. de Klerk, President of South Africa, wrote in 1994:

It is ironic that the country where Gandhi first raised his voice against the colour bar was one of the last to
abandon racial discrimination in its legislation. The racism generally prevailing in the imperial milieu of
the turn of the century was, in South Africa, codified into law. It was against these laws – and particularly
the laws that discriminated against the Indian community – that Gandhi protested and ultimately launched
his campaign of passive resistance. It was upon such laws that the edifice of apartheid was subsequently
constructed – in the mistaken belief that this was the only manner in which the identities and interests of
South Africa’s population groups could be protected.686

The Indians now looked to Gandhi again for help. He sent C.F. Andrews and Mrs. Sarojini Naidu
to help lift their morale. Round table conferences between the South African and Indian
Governments could only delay the march of racist legislation. In the 1920s, the Indian
Government set up a mission in South Africa, headed by an Agent, to look after the Indian
community. The Agents discouraged cooperation by Indians with Africans and warned that if
they allied with the Africans, the Indian Government would no longer support them.

Indian organisations were ineffective, torn by rivalries among the leaders. They were constantly
seeking alleviation of discrimination instead of resisting all discrimination.

Meanwhile, changes were taking place in the Indian community. During Gandhi’s time, most of
the Indians had been born in India and many of them, especially the merchants, maintained roots
in India. The struggle was for civil rights, as for aliens, not for franchise or equality.

But by the 1930s, a majority of Indians were born in South Africa and were mostly in urban
areas. Many Indians were organised in trade unions and were influenced by radical ideas. They
claimed the rights of citizenship and recognised that this could only be achieved by a joint
struggle with the African majority. They were able to take over the leadership of the Indian
Congresses in the 1940s.

Meanwhile, non-violent resistance had also been attempted by other communities in South
Africa.

In May 1913, shortly before Indian women joined active resistance, African and Coloured
women in the Orange Free State began non-violent resistance against the imposition of passes on
women. The Government was obliged to stop arrests under the pass laws in July 1917.687

686
Fatima Meer, The South African Gandhi, pp. 426-27
687
Julia Wells, We have Done With Pleading – The Women’s 1913 Anti-pass Campaign (Johannesburg: Ravan
Press, 1991), p. 36.
In March 1919, African men in the Transvaal began defiance of pass laws which restricted their
freedom of movement. They threw sacks of passes at pass offices. The demonstrations were
entirely peaceful. But the police attacked the crowds, injuring thousands of Africans, including
women.688 White vigilantes shot at Africans with impunity. Thousands of Africans were
sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour or to lashes. The resistance could not be sustained;
the national organisation was divided and there was little support from the whites. The rest of the
world was unaware of the struggle and the repression.689

At the Non-European Conference in 1930, several delegates proposed passive resistance if the
Riotous Assemblies Amendment Bill should become law. There was a heated discussion. Dr. A.
Abdurahman, the Leader of the Coloured people and a friend of Gandhi, opposed the proposal
and said:

You must have a leader who is prepared to make sacrifices, such as Gandhi in India. We have not such a
man.690

By the 1940s such leaders emerged among the Indians and Africans. Dr. Yusuf M. Dadoo, a
Communist, was elected President of the Transvaal Indian Congress, and Dr. G.M. Naicker, a
Gandhian, was elected President of the Natal Indian Congress. An alliance was forged between
Communists and Gandhians – both committed to militant action against apartheid and to unity
with other communities under African leadership. Militant leaders emerged from the African
Youth League of the African National Congress - notably Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and
Oliver Tambo - who dedicated their lives to the liberation of the country.

The Indian passive resistance of 1946-48, supported by many African leaders, was inspired by
the satyagraha of 1906-14. Two thousand persons, including many women, went to prison.
While only two Muslim women courted imprisonment earlier, many Muslim women now joined
the resistance. Among the resisters were two women who had participated in the earlier struggle
– Mrs. P.K. Naidoo and Mrs. Veerama Pather. Committees of European sympathisers were
formed in Durban and Johannesburg. Seventy non-Indians – 15 Africans, 47 Coloured people
and 8 Europeans –went to prison in solidarity with Indians.

Gandhi, who was distressed with the violence in India at that time, was gratified that satyagraha
was being tried in the land of its birth. He said in a speech at a prayer meeting on 7 July 1946:

688
William Hosken was an eye witness to police brutality.
689
E.S. Reddy, “Campaign against Pass Laws in the Transvaal in 1919”, at
http://www.scribd.com/doc/95491005/00-1919-Passive-Resistance-Article-4-March-1972, accessed on 23
December 2013.
690
Thomas Karis and Gwendolen M. Carter (eds.) From Protest to Challenge: A Documentary History of African
Politics in South Africa 1882-1964, (Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1973), Volume 1, p. 268. Dr.
Abdurahman had said earlier in 1910: “To my mind the whole native problem could be solved if the coloureds,
natives and Indians would also take to passive resistance… South Africa would collapse in twenty-four hours if we
stood together”. Julia Wells, We have Done with Pleading, p. 31.
 The South African struggle may appear to be insignificant today but it is charged with momentous
consequences.691

He said on 20 July:

It was a matter of pride for India that the children of indentured labourers and traders - many of them
descendants of Harijans - were proving themselves such brave satyagrahis.692

The African National Congress adopted a Programme of Action on 17 December 1949

envisaging the use of “immediate and active boycott, strike, civil disobedience, non-cooperation
and such other means.”693 Mandela wrote in his autobiography:

The Indian campaign became a model for the type of protest that we in the Youth League were calling for.
It instilled a spirit of defiance and radicalism among the people, broke the fear of prison, and boosted the
popularity and influence of the NIC and the TIC. They reminded us that the freedom struggle was not
merely a question of making speeches, holding meetings, passing resolutions and sending deputations, but
of meticulous organisation, militant mass action and, above all, the willingness to suffer and sacrifice. The
Indians’ campaign harkened back to the 1913 passive resistance campaign in which Mahatma Gandhi led a
tumultuous procession of Indians crossing illegally from Natal to the Transvaal. 694

The African National Congress and the South African Indian Congress jointly launched in 1952
the non-violent Defiance Campaign in which 8,000 people of all racial origins went to prison.

This was the beginning of mass struggles for freedom in South Africa to which Indians
contributed more than their share. The movement for sanctions against South Africa from 1958
and the breach of apartheid laws by the mass democratic movement of the 1980s, which were
crucial for the defeat of apartheid rule, were in harmony with the struggles led by Gandhi in
South Africa and India.

Equally important was the spirit of reconciliation after the defeat of apartheid. Nelson Mandela
said in his message to the conference in New Delhi on the centenary of passive resistance in the
Transvaal:

691
The Hindu, 8 July 1946, and Harijan, 14 July 1946; CWMG, Vol. 84, p. 423.

692
Harijan, 21 July 1946; CWMG, Vol. 84, pp. 430-431.

693
Thomad Karis and Gwendolen M. Carter (eds.) From Protest to Challenge: A Documentary History of African
Politics in South Africa 1882-1964, (Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1973), Volume 2, p. 338.
694
Long Walk to Freedom: The Autobiography of Nelson Mandela (London: Abacus, 1998), p. 119. Mandela, the
Secretary of the African Youth League, said at a meeting on the fiftieth anniversary of the Indian passive resistance:
“The campaign’s success and its lessons influenced our thinking as we drew up the 1949 Programme of Action
which ushered in the momentous decade of the roaring fifties”. He was familiar with the Indian passive resistance.
Then a student at the University of Witwatersrand, he had among his friends, J.N. Singh and Ismail Meer, members
of the leadership in Natal and the Transvaal. Through them, he met many other leaders of the resistance such as Dr.
Yusuf Dadoo, Yusuf Cachalia, Naran Naidoo and Ahmed Kathrada. Zainab Asvat, one of the first women resisters,
was also a student in the medical school at the university; she interrupted her studies to court imprisonment
 Gandhi’s philosophy contributed in no small measure to bringing about a peaceful transformation in South
Africa and in healing the destructive human divisions that had been spawned by the abhorrent practice of
apartheid.

The non-violent resistance led by Gandhi in South Africa at the beginning of the twentieth
century, as developed and refined by him in India, and adapted by the Indian passive resistance
in South Africa in 1946-48, the Civil Rights Movement in the United States and the liberation
struggle in South Africa are a heritage that humanity needs to cherish.