Factors that led to a split in the Indian National Congress in 1907

The closing decade of the 19th century and early years of 20th century witnessed the emergence of a new and younger group within the Indian National Congress which was sharply critical of the ideology and methods of the old leadership.

These angry young men advocated the adoption of Swaraj as the goal of the congress to be achieved by more self- reliant and independent methods.

The new group came to be called the extremist party in contrast to the older one which began to be referred to as the moderate party. Although there were lot of difference between the two groups regarding the methods and technique to counter the imperialist force, the British, but the main reasons of split in 1907₄were mainly the partition of Bengal.

The agitation against the partition of Bengal made a deep impact on the Indian National Congress. All sections at the National Congress united in opposing the partition. At its session of 1905, Gokhale, the president of the Congress, roundly condemned the partition as well as the reactionary regime of Curzon. The National Congress also supported the Swadeshi and Boycott movement of Bengal.

There was much public debate and disagreement between the moderate and the extremist nationalists. The latter wanted to extend the Swadeshi and Boycott movements from Bengal to the rest of the country and to extend the Boycott to every form of associations with the colonial government. The moderates wanted to confine the Boycott Movement in Bengal and even there to limit it to the boycott of foreign goods.

There was a tussle between the two groups for the presidentship of the National Congress for that year (1906). In the end Dadabhai Naoroji, respected by all nationalists as a great patriot, was chosen as a compromise. Dadabhai electrified the nationalist ranks by openly declaring in his presidential address that the goal of the Indian national movement was “Self-government” or Swaraj like that of the United Kingdom or the colonies”.

But the differences dividing the two wings of the nationalist movement could not be kept in check for long. Many of the moderate nationalists did not keep pace with events. The other hand was not willing to be held back. The split between the two came at the Surat Session of the National Congress in December 1907. The moderate leaders having captured the machinery of the congress excluded the militant elements from it.

But in long run the split did not prove useful to either party. The moderate leaders lost touch with younger generation of nationalists. The British Government played the game of ‘Divide and Rule’. While suppressing the militant nationalists, it tried to win over moderate nationalists’ opinion so that the militant nationalist could be isolated and suppressed.

To placate the moderate nationalists, it announced constitutional concessions through the Indian Council Act of 1909 which are known as the Marley-Minto Reforms of 1909. In 1911, the government also announced the annulment of the partition of Bengal. Western and Eastern Bengal were to be resented while a new province consisting of Bihar and Orissa was to be created. At the same time the seat of the central government was shifted from Calcutta to Delhi.

The moderate Nationalist did not fully support the Morely-Minto Reforms. They soon released that the reform had not really granted much. But they decided to cooperate with government in working the reforms. This cooperation with the government and their opposition to the programme of the militant nationalists proved very costly to them. They gradually lost the respect and support of the public and were reduced to a small political group.

The Morely-Minto reform introduced the separate electorates under which all Muslims were grouped in separate constituencies from which Muslim alone could be elected. It checked the progress of India’s unification which had been a continuous historical process. It became a potent factor in the growth of communalism-both Muslim and Hindu- in the country.

During the First World War, the Indian nationalist leaders including Lokamanya Tilak, who had been released in June 1914, decided to support the War effort of the government in the mistaken belief that grateful Britain would repay India’s loyalty with gratitude and enable India to take a long step forward on the road to self-government. They did not realize fully that the different powers were fighting the First World War precisely to safeguard their existing colonies.

Now the Indian leaders fully realized that government was not likely to give any concession unless popular pressure was brought to bear upon it. The war period also witnessed the soaring prices of the daily necessities of life and heavy taxation. The nationalist leaders were getting ready to join any militarist movement of protest. Consequently the war years were the yeass of intense nationalist political agitation.

But this mass agitation could not be carried out under the leadership of Indian National Congress, which had become, under the moderate leadership a passive and inert political organization with no political work among the people to its credit. Therefore two Home Rule Leagues were started in 1915-16, one under the leadership of Lokmanya Tilak and the other under the leadership of Annie Besant and S. Subramanaya Iyer.

The two Home Rule Leagues worked in cooperation and carried out intense propaganda all over the country in favour of the demand for grant of Home Rule or self-government to India after the War. Many moderate nationalists, who were dissatisfied with the Congress inactivity, joined the Home Rule agitation.

The war period also witnessed the growth of the revolutionary movement. The terrorist groups spread from Bengal and Maharashtra to the whole of northern India. Moreover many Indians began to plan a violent rebellion to overthrow British rule.

The nationalists soon saw that disunity in their ranks was injuring their cause and that they must put up a united front before the government. The growing nationalist feelings in the country and the urge for national unity produced two historic developments at the Lucknow Session of Indian National Congress in 1916. Firstly the two wings of Congress were reunited.

The old controversies had lost their meaning and the split in the congress had led to political inactivity. Tilak, released from jail in 1914, immediately saw the change in the situation and set out to unify the two streams of Congress. On the other hand, the rising tide of nationalism compelled the old leaders to welcome back into the Congress Lokmanya Tilak and other militant nationalists.

The Lucknow Congress was the first united congress since 1907. For the period of almost 9 years, the Indian national movement was directionless and without planned motive and got a severe setback, and a period of unrest and stagnation.

But one another development was the unity of congress and Muslim league. They forgot their differences and put up common political demands before the government.