Birth of Anti-Colonialism

Chapter V
Birth of Anti-colonialism
From the beginning of the twentieth century a new political consciousness arose in
French India especially after the partition of Bengal (1905),1 the launching of Swadeshi2 and
Boycott movements and the out break of revolutionary terrorism in British India. The French
Indian settlements could not remain unaffected by the movement for independence starting to
pervade British India. But the settlements did not revolt then against France; very astutely,
the Indian nationalists used French Indian territories as a base to fight against British
imperialism.3 The French settlements in India served as a convenient place of refugee for
political conspirators and Indian nationalists.4 Just as Pondicherry was chosen by the Indian
nationalists of Madras as a secure place for safe political shelter, the political activists of
Bengal had similarly chosen Chandernagore for the same purpose. It can be asked why
French Indian settlements were one of the key places for the anti-British movements. It was
due to their exceptional situation of being French territories which gave them three major
advantages. Firstly, French India was a land of refuge where Indian nationalists who were
wanted in British India found shelter and enjoyed peace and relative liberty of action. The
second advantage was its special postal service. The French post was largely used by the
Indian nationalists; not so much for their correspondence but for receiving literature
1
A new Province was created consisting of East Bengal and Assam with Dacca as its capital. The major portion
of the Muslims population of Bengal was located around Dacca, the ancient city of the Moghuls (1.8 crore
Muslims out of 3.1). Bengal had 5.3 crore people of whom 4.3 crore were Hindus and 1 crore were Muslims.
Since 1903, the announcement of this measure had provoked the agitation of the revolutionary leadership. By
the time the partition became effective in 1905, the movement expanded into a mass movement.
2
Production of home manufacture and boycott of foreign goods.
3
Georgette David, “Chandernagore et le swadeshisme au début du XXe siècle-L’affaire Charu Chandra Roy”,
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
4
File No: 44-52, Ministry of External Affaires, Confidential, 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi.
221
considered to be seditious by the British authorities of India. Finally, in French India, the
purchase of firearms was free.5
Unable to face the repression of the British Indian government, Sri Motilal came and
settled down in Chandernagore where he founded an ashram during his life time. This ashram
became a centre of welcome for revolutionaries who were wanted in Calcutta. Sri Aurobindo
lived there hidden for thirty nine days before embarking for Pondicherry. The famous Tamil
poet, Subramania Brarathi, stayed in Pondicherry for ten years and continued the publication
of his journal, ‘The India’.6 A secret society called “India Office”7 came to exist in the house
at 58, Rue de mission étrangères, Pondicherry from where ‘The India’ was printed and
revolutionary leaders kept in touch with the centres of agitation in Europe and America,
especially with Tirumalaichary in London, Shyamji Krishna Varma and Madame Cama in
Paris,8 who had regularly sent seditious literature to the India Office members. Seditious
literature banned in British India, like Gaelic American, Indian Sociologist, New York Call,
and Evening Post from different cites like London, Paris, and New York and Egyptian Pan
Islamic papers, The Moayyad and Luna had been brought clandestinely to Pondicherry and
Chandernagore through post and smuggled later on into British Indian territories for
distribution. Besides the importation of seditious literature through post, it was reported that
arms were brought into British India via Pondicherry and Chandernagore from Paris.9
According to the British intelligence report Chandernagore was a source of arms for the
Bengali revolutionaries. A network of importation of arms of Saint-Etienne, especially
5
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
6
File No: 44-52, Home Department, 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi (worked its tone was considered to be violent than
that of any other papers in the Madras presidency).
7
The most important members of the society were V. V. S. Iyer, C. Subramania Bharathi, Srinivasa Chari, S.
Nagasami Iyer, K.R. Appadurai Iyer, G. S. Dikshit @ S.Gurusami Iyer and Madasami Pillai.
8
File No: 44-52, Home Department, 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi.
9
File No: 40, Political-B, July 1908 & F. No: 44-52, Home Department, Political 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi.
222
revolver, was established. It was said that “Every middle class Bengali home in
Chandernagore had got at least a gun and a revolver.”10
The intense spread of the revolutionary movement had its impact on French India
also. In 1907 and especially in 1908, bombs exploded everywhere leading to strong concerns
among British authorities and to real threat for the European population. In November 1907,
two aborted attempts were made against the life of the Lieutenant Governor, Lord Fraser,
near Chandernagore. In December, another, partially successful one took place in
Midnapore.11 Much to the excitement for the local European population in Chandernagore, on
11th April 1908 a bomb was thrown into the residence of the Mayor of Chandernagore.12 The
mayor at that time, a French businessman, Tardivel, was a controversial person. He was
accused of being interested only in his own personal affairs. He was said to have allocated
free of charge for his jute factory a plot of land which had been denied to many others but
most of all, he was blamed for his attitude towards the local population. He faced stiff
competition from Bholanath Das, the Bengali leader. There was a heated verbal exchange
between them and the local population. 13 In April 1908, a bomb was thrown into the dining
room of the mayor when he was getting ready to eat. However, it did not threaten the entire
French authorities in Chandernagore, as claimed by the governor of French India, and
understood that it was mainly against someone who was generally hated and it was a sort of
trial run for other attacks planned for British India. The British Indian Government believed
that it was in Pondicherry that Vanchi Aiyar had received lessons in revolver shooting and
10
File No: 20, Home Department, 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi.
11
File No: 28-29, Home Department, May 1912, N.A.I, New Delhi.
12
It was resolved that the Mayor of Chandernagore should be taught a lesson by the followers of Charu Chandra
Roy Professor of Dupliex College at Chandernagore of Manicktolla group. (File No: 28-29, Home Department,
May 1912, N.A.I, New Delhi).
13
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
223
acquired there the Belgian revolver with which Ashe, Collector of Tinnevelly district, was
assassinated.14
The activities of the Indian nationalists had brought about the spread of nationalist
sentiments in French India, giving rise to a new consciousness in the minds of French Indian
people. Nationalism in French India, although Indian generated or inspired, was unique in
character. The nationalist upsurge was essentially generated by the political and social
changes introduced in the traditional way of life under the impact of colonial policy of
assimilation brought into the territories primarily by the French. The problems emerging
under this impact, such as dissatisfaction with the existing political and social order and the
introduction of new and conflicting values, proved conducive to the growth of nationalism.
The anti-European feelings brought the Swadeshis of British India and the Comité
Radical-Socialist of French India (with Matri Boumi and Soujanaranjany as its mouthpiece)
closer to each other. Both the parties preached socialism in a subdued manner. Journals like
Soujanaranjany, Vijaya, Balabarati, Darma, Suryodayam and Swadesamitran published
from Pondicherry, Nyayabhimani, issued from Karaikal and Swadin Bharat an anti-British
journal printed in Chandernagore regularly preached an anti-European tone.15 The “Radical
Society” at Chandernagore led by Bonomali Pal, Bholanath Das, Sadhucharan Mukharjee and
Satish Sur, who had never been able to tolerate the tutelage of Pondicherry and started an
agitation demanding an equal number of representatives in Chandernagore Municipal board.
They also demanded in the Conseil général at Pondicherry that the revenue of Chandernagore
14
File No: 2, Foreign and Political Department, Confidential-B, 1914, N.A.I, New Delhi.
15
File No: 44-52, Home Department, 1909, N.A.I, New Delhi.
224
should be spent on Chandernagore, since Chandernagore contributed a major share in the
colonial budget next to Pondicherry.16
In order to properly understand the feelings of the inhabitants of Chandernagore and
of the political issues which agitated them in 1908, one must place them in the governance of
Chandernagore from distant Pondicherry. The headquarters were no doubt distance in space,
Chandernagore being three day’s journey away by sea or land; but there was a distance in the
minds of the administrators too, which made of it a kind of colony of a colony. The
inhabitants of Chandernagore were proud Bengalis who chafed at being administered and
politically dominated by civil servants coming from Pondicherry. They bitterly complained
about the lack of clean drinking water, which regularly led to epidemic of cholera, the
flooding of the Hoogly river due to the absence of dykes, and of the insufficiency of police
forces stationed there, they always ran the risk being invaded at night by the gangsters of
Calcutta. The elected members of Chandernagore argued their case but in vain to the Conseil
général that Chandernagore made large contribution to the revenues of the colony next to
Pondicherry and that they received only a meagre portion of the allocated budget. Later, they
would even go so far as to claim, in vain in Paris, financial autonomy. The inadequate
knowledge of French, which led to the denial of administrative posts for Chandernagorians
and increasing unemployment problem, was responsible to a great extent for increasing the
gap between Pondicherry and Chandernagore. Moreover, the Swadeshi spirit with which the
elected members of Chandernagore were imbued, which was completely alien to the
representatives of other settlements was responsible for creating between them a climate of
mutual contempt and suspicion. In other words, there was not much understanding between
16
Georges Tailleur, Chandernagor ou le lit de Dupleix. Le premier maillon de la chaine, Frontiganan: Africa
Nostra, 1979, p. 24.
225
Chandernagore and other French settlements in the south. Chandernagore, thus, had been the
unloved, abandoned child of French India.17
While offering political asylum to the Indian nationalists the French administration at
the same time was forced to reckon with the British. The settlements had become a headache
to the British as well as the French authorities. The affair of Charu Chandra Roy, an
embarrassment for the administrator and diplomats, brought out the ambiguity of the situation
in the settlements, the play of forces between France, the colony and British India. The wave
of political unrest which swept over Bengal in 1906-07 evoked a ready response in
Chandernagore and gradually anti-European attitude began to thrive in which some students
of the Dupleix College participated under the leadership of Charu Chandra Roy, a French
subject and Deputy Director of College Dupleix, some of them were acquainted with the
process of manufactures of explosives and started creating troubles. In May 1908 the
Government of Bengal asked the administrator of Chandernagore to arrest Charu Chandra
Roy and the French administrator handed him over to the British police under some
misinterpretation of the existing Extradition Treaties by the Bengal Government, which
raised a great deal of criticism. This arrest provoked a wave of protests with ample
repercussion in France. The points taken up were the innocence of Charu Chandra Roy, his
honorability, the circumstances of his arrest and the fact of the extradition of a Frenchman.18
After exchange of heated report, telegrams, demands for explanations between the Governor
of French India, the French Ministry of the Colonies, Foreign Affairs and the French
Embassy in London, Charu Chandra Roy was released from the British police custody.19
17
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
18
File No: 152-61, Home Judicial, 1908 and file No: 15-16, Home Political-A, 19013, N.A.I, New Delhi.
19
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
226
The British press went on accusing France as responsible for terrorism in British India
to the extent that the “anarchist’s agitation in India which caused intense concern to the
British Government, was probably directed from Paris.”20 Britain appealed to France “in
India, where French interests are largely inseparable from those of England, it is time that
French possessions ceased being the shelter of the discontented in British-India.”21 Due to
vehement British protest, the government of French India issued an Ordinance on 18th
September 1907 forbidding illegal carriage of arms. This order led to an outcry in
Chandernagore. The inhabitants were worried about the insecurity of the town which would,
if one were to believe them, be invaded by the gangsters of Calcutta. They claimed the right
to defend themselves and underlined also the insufficiency of the police forces. In the face of
these protests, the order was rescinded but a ruling strictly limiting and taxing the carriage of
firearms was put into place soon after.22 England even proposed to France the exchange of
territories in Chandernagore for British Indian territories around Pondicherry “on account of
inconveniences experienced in connection with rights on the river (Hoogly), the extradition
of bad characters and the smuggling of opium and arms”, but this idea was summarily
rejected by the inhabitants of Chandernagore.23 However the outbreak of World War I had
brought England and France closer together and as a member of the Entente Cordiale the
French Indian administration had to take strong measures against the anti-British propaganda.
Accordingly the Decree of 22nd August 1914 suppressed the freedom of press. An Ordinance
22nd September of the same year banned all publications coming from foreign countries into
20
The Morning Post, 14, January 1909.
21
The Madras Times, 10, September 1910.
22
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
23
The Madras Times, 10, September 1910.
227
French Indian settlements24 and a strict vigilance was mounted on the Indian nationalists
residing in French India.
If there was one settlement, which France desired more than any other to give up, it
was Chandernagore. In addition to the political struggles which were witnessed by
Pondicherry, Karaikal, Mahe and Yanam one saw in this settlement the manifestation of
militant nationalism which was more and more vicious and the infringements of French
sovereignty by the forces of the British in the pursuit of Bengali terrorists who found refuge
there. Governor Martineau confirmed the judgement of Bourgourd when he stated that
everyone knew and recognised that Chandernagore was a French town only in name: all its
interests were British and could only be British.25
Beginnings of the Nationalist Trend in Politics
After Shanmugam Vellayuda Modeliar, power shifted to his contemporary Gaston
Pierre, a French man who formed the ‘Radical Party’ to challenge the hegemony of Gaebelé
and his ‘Clerical Party’. According to Governor Alfred Martineau, the Gaebelé party, which
was an assemblage of the Europeans, the Créoles, the Topas, the renonçants and fifteen to
eighteen thousand Hindus and Muslims, was “a party of conciliation and of understanding
between the interests of Europeans and of Indians; its name changed and it became the Indo-
European Party.” The Pierre party consisted of two to three thousand Indians, who, according
to Martineau, had no hatred for France, because in the situation of encirclement of the British,
“this hatred would have been sterile;” but he also observed that they did not love France
either and, as much by their preoccupation to avoid all contact with their compatriots as by
their distant aspirations and their certain desires, they constituted a nationalist Indian party of
24
25
RFHO, No. 78, 1991, pp. 89-103.
228
which Mr. Pierre had been the leader since the death of Shanmugam.26 For political gain the
Gaebelé party upheld the policy of “material and moral improvement of the Pariahs”, one
could not deny that its leaders of having played a dangerous role in setting up the Pariahs
against the “people of caste”, the Muslims and Christians against the Hindus with the aim of
eliminating radicals and nationalists of maintaining itself in power.
The French administration believed that the ‘integration of Pariahs into Hindu
society’ not being possible, so they endeavoured therefore to ensure for them a separate
development. According to Governor Angoulvant, the economic development of the colony
should have been of benefit to the Pariahs and to all the deprived people of the colony. It was
hoped that, affluence and education would help pull Pariahs out of the state of abjectness in
which they still found themselves and that the prejudices against them would diminish. But it
was not denied that this policy for the time sanctioned the segregation of which the Pariahs
were victims. Every time the French administration came forward to do some measures in
favour of Pariahs, which ended in violent reactions from the caste Indians.27
The Pariah community in Pondicherry revolted in 1830 and 1848 demanding special
amelioration programmes for improving their status. Since the Third Republic’s constitution
extended to French Indian settlements, on 12th March 1872 a petition addressed to the French
Senate and the Chamber of Deputies demanded,
“Que la nouvelle constitution déclare clairement et expressément que tous les sujets
indigènes de l’Inde française pourront être élus membres des différents conseils sans
distinction de caste et que tous seront admissibles aux mêmes emplois et dans toutes
les écoles publiques du gouvernement sans distinction de caste.”28
26
The 19th and 20th Century Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry Branch.
27 The 19th and 20th Century Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry Branch.
28
“Let the new constitution declare clearly and equivocally that all the native subjects of French India will be
elected members of various councils irrespective of caste and that all will be eligible for the same jobs and the
public schools of the government will be open to all without distinction of caste.” (A. Ignace, Le progrès social
dans l’Inde, Karaikal: Imprimérie Moderne p. 29.)
229
Their demand earned little success in admission to police and public services, opened Calve
College for Pariahs and establishment of separate schools for Pariahs. After La Porte’s
intervention in politics, some Pariahs were admitted to the judicial services and temple
administration committees. The French administration believed that the nomination of a
Pariah in the post of Thassildar (village administrator), members elected from Conseil
général, Conseils locaux and municipalities and admission of Pariah members in Chamber of
Commerce would improve the conditions of Pariahs in the settlement. However, in reality,
these Pariahs elected from the renonçants and Christians ended only in favour of the French
party. Shanmugam and Alype attacked vehemently for the ‘French party deliberately setting
the Pariahs against the Hindus so as to weaken his power’.29
The colonial budget of 1907 allotted 15,000 rupees for ‘material and moral
improvement of the Pariahs and the decree of 23rd January 1907 provided 3,500 rupees
supplementary for construction of drinking water wells in different paracherrys (Pariah
villages) in Pondicherry. The decree of 18th February 1907 authorised 9,000 rupees for the
construction of 81 wells in different villages. The decree of 27th April and 15th May
authorised construction of new roads in villages and at the end of 1907, 54 Pariah villages in
Pondicherry were facilitated with drinking water wells. The decree of 26th November 1907
ordered the admission of Pariah children’s in all the public schools and in April 1908 four
new schools were constructed. Moreover, despite apposition from Gaston Pierre, Governor
Angoulvant, approved 1, 92,896 rupees in 1906 and 1, 92,245 rupees in 1907 for the
development of the colony, including construction of railways, ports, roads, irrigations etc.,30
29
The 19th and 20th Century Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry.
30
La Dépêche Colonial illustrée, 15th and 30th, September 1907.
230
In addition the decree of 25th December 1907, which re-arranged the commune
divisions and increased its number from 10 to 17,31 and admitted autonomy of communes,
Angoulvant estimated that the partition of rural communes would contribute to the political
emancipation of Pariahs. In 1908, agitations against the pro-French party of Gaebelé took
place in Karaikal. The re-arrangement of the communes Villianor, Bahor, Olgarat,
Nedungadu and Grand-Aldeé caused agitations from the Retty, Vellaja and the landlords,
their hegemony in the rural villages was now under threat, and they began to agitate against
the administrative measures. The rural communes Villianor and Bahor, which were
controlled by Shanmugam, were passed into the hands of French party. Gaston Pierre was the
principle victim of the decree; he lost his mayor position to Gaebelé. The Pariahs polled
massively for Lemaire and Gaebelé, supporting the ‘Clerical Party’ to capture the local
assemblies. Angoulvant commented, “The oppressed, who put all their trust and hope in the
governmental action, would see in the use of violence a cure for the evils.”32
A.Ignace affirms the success of the French Party in power and he wrote in 1908,
“La solution des questions politiques et économiques ne souffre plus de retard. Le

programme de réformes tracé par la profession de foi de Monsieur Lemaire a déjà
reçu un commencement d’exécution. Les travaux d’utilité générale marchent avec
activité, quelques-uns même sont achevés”. L’aisance et le confort commencent à se
répandre à Pondichéry:
“L’usine électrique établie par la municipalité de Pondichéry, tout en illuminant la

ville, pourvoit aux besoins d’éclairages et de ventilation des maisons particulières.
Les adductions d’eau de Pondichéry et Chandernagore sont entreprises à la grande
satisfaction de la population ouvrière.
En un mot, un régime de progrès réel et efficace, remplaçant une période de 25 ans

d’oppression et de stérilité, vient d’ouvrir dans la colonie une nouvelle ère de mieux-
être qui confinera sûrement à une ère de prospérité.”33
31
See table No. 2.1.4, Chapter II.
32
33
“The solution for political and economic issues does not deserve (cannot be further delayed) further delay. The
reform agenda outlined by the profession of faith Mr.Lemaire has already received a beginning of execution.
231
In the senatorial election held on 3rd January 1909 to decide the successor of Jules
Godin, Lemaire’s choice fell on Etienne Flandin, the later was an astute and successful
parliamentarian, and his concern for the judicial organisation in the colony was well-known.
A shrewd politician with tenacity, a convinced secularist, he supported the separation of the
church from the state. He was anti-missionary in the field of education and believed in
secular education. All these convictions and ideas were attributed to Gaebelé and his
supporters in the French Indian settlements. This added to Flandin’s political stature, a fact
expressed by his election victory obtaining 85 out of 105 votes defeating Godin (who secured
20 votes).34
The municipal election, held on 6th June 1909 in Pondicherry, for the position of late
Shanmugam, was the real testing ground for the radicals and clericals to prove their strength.
The radicals proposed Couttia Sababadypoulle, a friend of Shanmugam, and the clericals
backed Louis Sinnaya. This election provoked such emotion in the colony; the Christians
affirmed the victory of Sinnaya and considered that ‘this victory would give symbolic
emancipation of Pariahs’. The radicals viewed the choice of Sinnaya as ‘directing Pariahs
and Christians against the high-castes Hindus’. Lemaire, Gaebelé and Goubert, the three
pillars of the Clerical Party, succeeded in opening a crack in the Vannia community, which
formed considerable voter’s strength in Pondicherry. The Vannias now had two leaders in
Mandjinicavoundin and Sadassivanaicker. Sadassiva, the chief supporter of Lemaire, pledged
to use all his energy to crush the radicals. Every election booth on the election day was
The works of general use functions actively, some even completed. The affluence and convenience start to
spread through Pondicherry.”
“The power plant established by the Pondicherry municipality, while illuminating the city, caters to the needs of
lighting and ventilation of houses. The water supply of Pondicherry and Chandernagore are undertaken to the
great satisfaction of the working class population.”
“In a word, a system of real and effective progress, replacing a 25 year period of oppression and infertility, has
just opened in the colony a new era of improved standard of living which will confine surely to an era of
prosperity.” (Ignace, A., La Prochaine élection législative dans l’Inde, Karaikal, p. 27.)
34
232
identified as a spot of communal violence, caste war engaged Vannias against Vannias,
Vannias against fishermen and Pariahs, high-caste against Pariahs and different castes and
different religions. The pro-French ‘Clerical Party’ was accused of desperate attempt to
spread communalism in Pondicherry. Nandagobalu, the assistant mayor of Pondicherry and
the leader of Pariahs, with the aid of armed police created terror in Pondicherry; about two
hundred men raided the houses of the supporters of Sadassiva, Louis Sinnaya and Couttia
Sababady. Muthialpet and Kalapet, adjoining areas of Pondicherry, were the centres of
violence, in which some were dead, many were wounded and the inhabitants were forced to
take refuge in British Indian territory. Rigging, irregularities, intimidations and violence was
the order of the day.35 Despite heavy opposition and large scale violence, Louis Sinnaya
secured his victory by winning a huge margin. The Pariahs polled massively for his win. The
following were results of the election:
Total voters: 41,239

Voted: 17,934 (43.5%)
Votes obtained
Louis Sinnaya: 14,334 (79.9%)

Couttia Sababadypoulle: 3,593 (20.1%)36
The radicals wanted to “avenge their last defeat and to regain in part the influence
they had lost to the advantage of the Europeans.”37 Once more, they put the unity of electoral
lists at the centre of their concerns. They repeated that the Indians, who were by far the most
numerous, must not be subordinate to a tiny minority of Europeans. Governor Rognon was
35
36
37
233
convinced that these radical Indians, who so skilfully invoked Republican principles to
restore their hegemony, were in contact with the nationalists of British India.38
After a reversal of fortunes during the elections in 1909, the radicals placed their
hopes in the new electoral reform. They were not in despair of obtaining the unity of lists,
which would allow them to perhaps re-conquer the majority in the different electoral
councils. There chief argument was that out of the 12 seats of Pondicherry in the Conseil
général, native members elected only 6 members representing a population of 1,69,086 (in
1908) and 6 seats were reserved for 560 Europeans. For Félix Falk, the duality of lists, which
was based on a racial distinction, had “a strong odour of the Old Régime and is reminiscent of
the era of ghettoes and of corporations.” It was contrary to Republican principles and was
humiliating for Indians considered “overall as being an inferior product of the human
mind.”39 Henri Mager, Minister of Colonies, was aware that the unity of lists would be a fatal
blow to French influence in the colony. But it was, according to him, what should be aimed
at. In the interests of the colony, one must “remove from the centre of affairs the few
Europeans who, in order to satisfy their personal interests, moral as well as material, have
taken to maintaining the status quo.”40 Governor Lévecque considered this demand as
premature. According to him, one must recognise that the European or the assimilated
element, however small it might be from different point of view, held in this country too
important a place for it not to be allowed to distinguish itself from the great Brahmanic mass
which was confused and ignorant one way or other.41
38
Jacques Weber, Les établissements français en Inde au XIX siècle (1816-1914), Vol. 4, Paris: Librairie de
l’Inde, 1988, p. 2079.
39
Félix Falk, Situation politique de l’Inde française, pp. 41.
40
Alfred Martineau, Les débuts du suffrage universel dans L’Inde.
41
234
The deputy election in 1910 presented an opportunity to the radicals to re-conquer
their lost position. For the first time, the Indian nationalist elements in Pondicherry forged a
unity in among the Vannia community. For Gaston Pierre, Lemaire and Gaebelé were making
use of the division among the Hindus while the caste war between Vannias and fishermen in
Kalapet area was used by the Clerical Party. As a result Sadassiva realised the need for an
alliance with the fishermen.42 Mandjinicavoundin called for unity among the Vannias.
Lévecque opined:
“L’on aurait fait intervenir, tant auprès de lui qu’auprès des Vannias qui étaient
appelés à jouer un rôle dans cette affaire, les grands castes de Madras, Trichinopoly
et Madura. C’est sous la menace de ces hauts et redoutables représentants de la caste
que M. Sadassivanayagar aurait exercé une action différente de celle que le parti
politique auquel il appartient attendait de lui.”43
Meanwhile difference of opinion arouse between Sadassiva and Gaebelé over the
appointment of a magistrate of peace, the later in favour of Pariah Catholics. Moreover Paul
Blysen, the candidate of the clericals, was an old friend of Sadassiva, who had supported
Blysen against Alype in 1893 and Henrique in 1898 for the post of the deputy. Radicals
believed that these factors called for unity among Vannias as well as an alliance between
Vannias, Vellajas and Rettys, who would form a formidable force among the Hindus.44
In the deputy election which was held on 24th April 1910 Gaston Pierre proposed the
candidature Paul Blysen, with the support of high-caste leaders Sadassivanaicker, Nallur
Sadasiva Chettiar, Coutiah Dourassamy Pillai and others, against the ‘Clerical Party’
candidate Lemaire who was supported by Gaebelé, Cornet, Vallabadasou, Gnanedicome,
Gnanou Diagou, Nandagobalu and others. The latter was a combination of Renonçants,
42
43
“The upper castes of Madras, Trichnopoly and Madura would have to be brought, so close to him, as close to
Vannias who were called upon to play a role in this case. It was under the threat of high and fearsome
representatives of the caste that Mr. Sadassivanayagar would have exercised an action different from what his
political party expected of him.” (The 19th and 20th Century Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry.)
44
235
Christians, Muslims, Pariahs and Europeans. Compelled by the administration, Sadassiva left
Pondicherry and decided to wait for the results of the deputy election. On the day of his
departure, he declared to Lévecque that he would fight with all his energy against Lemaire in
order to make Hinduism triumph over Catholicism.45 Because of the memory of large scale
violence which occurred during his previous tenure, which remained fresh in the memory of
the inhabitants, Lemaire (17,453 votes) lost his seat to Blysen (20,580 votes).
Table 5.1 Results of the Deputy Election Results in Pondicherry Settlement in 1910
Communes Mayors of Political Parties Paul Blysen Lemaire
Pondicherry Clerical Party 457 (6.3%) 6,752 (93.7%)
Olgarat Radical Party 3,535 (84.8%) 634 (15.2%)
Mudaliarpet Clerical Party 35 (1%) 3,332 (99%)
Ariankuppam Clerical Party 792 (43.9%) 1,010 (56.1%)
Villianor Radical Party 3,516 (91.1%) 345 (8.9%)
Tirubuvanai Radical Party 3,401 (97.1%) 102 (2.9%)
Bahor Radical Party 2,230 (78.8%) 601 (21.2%)
Nettapakkam Radical Party 2,412 (90.1%) 266 (9.9%)
Total 16.378 (55.7%) 13,042 (44.3%)
Source: The 19th and 20th Century documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry.
Like in the past this election also witnessed violence and irregularities in the electoral
process. The British Indian press at Calcutta observed, “The reports from Pondicherry speak
of ballot-boxes forcibly carried off from the booths, armed bands patrolling outlying districts
to terrorize recalcitrant voters, moderate centres “held up”, villages raided, and men, women,
and children assaulted.”46 Trouble broke out everywhere in Pondicherry even before the
election day. On 14th April the house of mayor of Pondicherry was attacked by a mob,
Lévecque criticised Gaebelé was responsible for such aggression. The vehicle of Emile
Goudart, a friend of Gaebelé was circled and attacked by henchmen and in the ensuing
conflict a person was murdered. Troubles soon spread to the textile mills, where the labourers
collided with each other leaving two persons dead and seventeen severely wounded. The
French administration found Paul Goubert was responsible for making troubles in
45
46
236
Kirepalayam. The radical Sinnatamby was charged with employment of British Indians to
make troubles in Pondicherry. Lévecque reported violence on the polling day: “Yesterday,
many incidents at Pondicherry and Mudaliarpet communes. There were fights, blows and
violent quarrels about polls. Some people were wounded, blows were exchanged, and there
were a few fatal injuries.”47
In a long petition to the Minister of Colonies, Paul Blysen accused the supporters of Henri
Gaebelé, Paul Goubert, Nandagobalu, Narayanassamynaik, Pourouchottamanaik and Louis
Sinnaya of recruiting an ‘army of crimes’ from British India to create such terror in
Pondicherry.48 Lemaire accused Sinnatamby for the intimidation of voters in the rural
communes and targeted attacks on Pariahs. The Commissioner of Police issued orders to
arrest henchmen who created troubles. In a telegram to the minister, de Nateuil blamed the
governor’s attitude: “Serious troubles were caused by governor’s attitude. Many were
wounded, all ours. Several friendly villages damaged with, some police officers encouraging
criminals.”49
Larger acquisition was that, people from British Indian territories of Pallamcottah,
Trichinopoly, Madurai and Tinnevelly, had been brought here to vote for Paul Blysen.50 One
of the pamphlets which were circulated about May 1910 affirmed this:
“It is a known fact that our success in the recent election of the Deputy is due to our
“Swadesis” of British India. Therefore, we should gain an upper hand over the French
European party in French India and try to root them out as soon as possible just as our
brethren in British India are working with a desire to see that the British do not govern
them… As this idea did not strike the late Shanmuga Velayuda Modeliar while he was
interested in political affairs, he was unsuccessful in his attempts during the latter part
of his life. Truly, we should have been defeated by these whites, had it not been for
47
48
49
50
237
the help we received from people from Palamcottah, Trichinopoly, Madura and
Tinnevelly and who worked for our cause with about 3,000 at Karaikal, 1,000 at
Odayanarakkarai village and 100 at Vambakeerapalayam (Pondicherry). All these
outsiders being the real sons of our Bharata Mata worked and helped us without
caring for their lives in the least and won success for us. We should be grateful to
them for ever…We should help them in their need.”51
Under pressure Lévecque announced the election results, proclaiming the victory of
Poul Blysen with a majority of twenty thousand votes, even before he received full reports of
the secondary establishments and section officers. The supports of Lemaire protested against
the announcement of the election results. In a report to the Minister of Colonies, Lévecque
exposed the mechanism of electoral manipulation. According to him the mayors of the
communes controlled by respective political parties manipulated the election results with
great care and vigour. Gaston Pierre directed the mayors of the municipalities Olgarat,
Villianor, Tirubuvanai, Bahor and Nettapakkam to manipulate elections results in favour of
Blysen. The municipalities of Pondicherry and Mudaliarpet controlled by Gaebelé and Le
Faucherur and the municipality of Ariankuppam were under a Chautre who was in favour of
Lemaire. According to the governor, Gaebelé tuned Nandagobalou to secure the votes of the
coolies of Couruoussoucoupam and Narayanassamynaik, Pourouchottamanaik and Louis
Sinnaya were directed to obtain votes of the labourers of the textile mills of Gaebelé and
Savana in favour of Lemaire. The settlement of Yanam, controlled by Bezavada Bapanaya,
acted in favour of Lemaire. Due to the support of Muslims, Lemaire secured more votes in
Karaikal. The radicals in Chandernagore and Mahe voted in clear majority for Blysen.52 The
journal ‘Annales coloniales’ observed:
“pour l’intéressante population (indienne) qui a réussi à secouer le joug odieux de ce

grand trafiquer (Chanemougam) dont le nom restera intimement lié aux plus
51
52
238
colossales fraudes électorales qui aient jamais déshonoré le suffrage universel en
France et dans le monde civilisé.”53
Political situation in Chandernagore was changing in a dizzy pace. Poul Blysen
visited Chandernagore on the marrow of the deputy election and by making all sorts of
promises to the voters he succeeded in getting himself elected. The Englishman alleged that
he allied himself with the political extremists of Chandernagore in his bid to win the election.
The election of a Socialist as a deputy to the French National Assembly was undoubtedly a
matter of great political significance. This socialist member was ready to discuss any matter
in the chamber at the “bidding” of his electors. The French administrator of the settlement
was afraid lest the Socialist deputy might question his competence in the chamber and land
him in an embarrassing position.54 The election of a Socialist deputy to the Chamber of
Deputies emboldened the leaders of the ‘Radical Society’, like Bonomali Pal and Bholanath
Das, could tamper with the administrative machinery of Chandernagore and it eventually
became a tool in their hands. A police report from British India describes the state of the
French administration of the settlement as follows:
“Bonomali and Bholanath practically govern Chandernagore. The Kotwal (Police

Officer) Dhruba Das Kole, the Post Master of the British Post Office in
Chandernagore, Gobardhan Das, and the Head Clerk of the Deputy Collector and
French Post Master, Satcowri Nandi, who are local men, are entirely in the hands of
Bonomali and Bolomath. The Kotwal has the control of the Arms Act Department.
The British Post Master is a cocaine-smuggler and he must necessarily maintain
friendly relations with the influential men of the locality. He has been in
Chandernagore for many years (some say 15 years) and his transfer has always been
thought inexpedient on the ground that he knows French and deals with letters, etc.,
from Paris which come through the British Post Office. In respect of these letters he is
very useful to the people of Chandernagore. The Deputy Collector’s head clerk deals
with the contents of French Mail Bag. Formerly, the French Mail Bag used to be
opened by the Deputy Collector himself, but the present Deputy Collector had
53
“For the population (Indian) who managed to shake off the odius yoke of this great trafickker (Chanemougam)
whose name will remain closely linked to the most colossal election frauds which had ever disgraced the
universal suffrage in France and in the civilized world.” (Annales coloniales, 12, May 1910.)
54
File No: 28-29, Home Political-A, 1912, N.A.I, New Delhi.
239
delegated the duty to his head clerk. With those men in their hands, Bonomali and
Bolomath can import everything into Chandernagore.”55
Dominated entirely by the Bengali swadeshis, they started to regard the settlement ‘as a
miniature Bengali Raj’ and to have a mayor of their own nationality. The police report further
stated:
“Since M.Tardival left, the Administrateur has not appointed any Mayor in
Chandernagore and is doing the work himself because he is afraid because if he orders
an election, a Bengali will get in. The French have six votes and the Bengalis have six
votes and the Administrateur a casting vote, but one of the Frenchmen, an Agent of
the Ralli Brothers, who does business with the Bengalis, votes for them, and whereas
Bengalis always voted for a Frenchman as Mayor, now they want a Mayor of their
own race...”56
In Karaikal, confrontations on the communal nature took place between the Hindus
and the Muslims. The Muslim population in Tirunallar commune refused permission of entry
to Hindus festival processions and funerals in their street where a mosque is situated. The
Hindu-Muslim conflicts started early in 1905, in which some were dead and many wounded,
after a long discussion between the leaders of the two temporary peaces was restored. It was
at the time of deputy election in 1910 a new political glamour was added to these conflicts
that ‘the Hindus were indentified as supporters of Paul Blysen and the Muslims as supporters
of Lemaire’.57 The aggression of Muslims was again provoked at the time of the grand
festival of Tirunallar temple and violence soon spread to the whole territory. Because of the
majority of Hindus, violence was engaged for a long time and caused serious damages. Many
were severely wounded and hospitalised. Governor Lévecque held Carreau, the administrator
of Karaikal and a supporter of Lemaire responsible for the aggression of Muslims. According
to the Governor:
55
56
57
240
“Les musulmans sont très audacieux; rien ne les retient pour satisfaire leurs
vengeances personnelles, leurs haines politiques et religieuses. A Karaikal, ils se
sentent soutenus ; l’administrateur, M. Carreau, ne tient pas la balance égale entre
les éléments brahmaniques et les musulmans que tant de raisons divisent
actuellement. C’est lui qui a entretenu la division pour soutenir la politique de M.
Lemaire ; c’est en s’appuyant sur les musulmans, qui ne reculent ni devant le coup de
force ni devant des sacrifices d’argent, qu’il comptait faire triompher a Karaikal la
politique de son parti.”58
Martineau who succeeded Lévecque, as governor visited Karaikal to restore peace and
where he identified, apart from the religious and political reasons, the clash of personalities
was as a motive for these confrontations. A decree of 19th September 1910 banned, on the
entire territory of Karaikal, “the carrying of arms of any kind and principally of any firearms,
sticks and projectiles of whichever kind.”59 The Hindus, in a petition dated 7th December
1910 sent to the minister, protested that this decree was contrary to the policy of progress
defined nearly forty years ago by Admiral Pothau, a policy that was beginning precisely to
bear fruit.60 According to the petitioners, the Hindus had resolutely embarked on the path of
progress, thanks to his marvellously gifted nature. The petitioners further said that owing to
Western civilisation, the nature of the land, the economic traditions of the countries, the
religious ideas, the moral sentiments, as well as the social habits and the political aspirations
of a great many classes of the population had changed, which led, according to them, a
British statesman to say, “marvellous in its past and its present, India cannot fail to surprise
Europe in the near future.”61 However, the decree of 19th September made certain effects in
58
“Muslims are very daring; nothing stops them to carry out their personal vendettas, their political and
religious hatreds. In Karaikal, they feel supported: the administrator, Mr.Carreau, does not use the same scales
the Brahmin and Muslim elements, who have so many reasons for division now. It was he who kept the rift to
support the policy of Mr.Lemaire; it is by supporting the Muslims, who will neither yield to force nor be allured
with money that he planned to ensure success for the policy of his party at Karaikal.” (The 19th and 20th Century
Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry.)
59
Journal official des établissements français de l’Inde, 20, September 1910.
60
61
241
the settlement, which brought the Hindus and the Muslims closer together on the occasion of
the festival of Mangoes and peace was restored.
As the head of the colony Martineau’s prime task was to curtail political violence in
the colony. According to a report, between 1906 and 1911 there were 8 political
assassinations and 44 were severely wounded.62 The motive of the political parties and
rivalries of the leaders was responsible for this large scale violence. The morality of the
political parities was such that Governor Martineau could not rule out the hypothesis that here
in the East and even the Far East the history of these countries was full of intrigues and of
plots where men did not hesitate to organise their friends and “where they will leave the
odious parts for their adversaries while themselves assuming the morally beneficial part.”63
Senator Flandin accused Blysen’s association with swadeshis of British India as the cause of
‘anti-French’ activities in the settlements. He affirmed that boycott of European merchandise
and observation of hartals (strikes), a method used by the Indian nationalists and extremists
against the British-India government, had considerable impact in Pondicherry and Karaikal.
He also accused that the gathering of the British Indian nationalists, especially Bengali
swadeshis for Pierre’s cause was the reason for targeted terrorism against the supporters of
Gaebelé and innocent people.64 Martineau concluded that the inadequacy of the police force,
an awkward situation posted on French Indian settlements by the British Indian government,
caused irrepressible violence in the settlements. Pondicherry, covering an area of 29,145
hectares and having 1, 84,840 habitants, was supervised by a few European officers and 191
Indian police personals, a ratio of one per 967 habitants and 152 hectares. The situation in
Karaikal was even worse with only a European officer and 70 Indian police supervising an
62
63
64
242
area of 13,515 hectares and 56,595 habitants.65 The European population felt more insecure
than the Indian population. The capability of Indian police personnel and their attachment to
the local population, castes and religion, according to the governor, was not satisfactory.
Moreover the integrity of judges and functionaries was also questionable. Martineau felt that
the political influence on the officials forced them to be impartial and insincere. The
government in Paris did little contribution to remove these difficulties. In 1911 the French
government recruited 263 additional police personnel, among them 158 were allotted to
Pondicherry (129 for white town and 29 for black town) and 105 to rural communes.66
As claimed by the French administration the local assemblies’ elections in 1911 was
relatively calm. In reality, there was a political assassination on 12th April 1911;
Deivagassamany a supporter of Pierre, in Karaikal was brutally murdered. Alliamarecar, a
Muslim belonged to Gaebelé party was accused of this conspiracy. In the same year in the
violence related to elections three persons were dead and 9 were hospitalised. The Clerical
Party under Gaebelé succeeded in gaining clear majority in all the local assemblies (see tables
no. 5.2 and 5.3). In Grand-Aldeé commune, where the political assassination of
Deivagassamany was engaged, Cattapoullemarecar, a supporter of Gaebelé, was elected by
pitting the Muslims and against the Muslims in the Pierre party. For radicals this was a
revenge for accusation.67 Out of 17 municipalities, the ‘Clerical Party’ captured 9, the
radicals secured 4 and 3 went to the neutrals. In the Conseil général elections Gaebelé party
bagged 21 seats and 7 went for Pierre. From 1908 to 1928 the Clerical Party otherwise known
as the Gaebelé party unleashed its power by manipulating votes according to the situation in
French India as it was done by Shanmugam Vellayuda Modeliar in the past.
65
66
67
243
Table 5.2 Results of the Mayor Elections in September 1911
Communes Name of the Elected Mayors Political Parties
Pondicherry Henri Gaebelé Clerical Party
Olgarat Calivarada-Sinivassacavoundin Neutral
Mudaliarpet Pourouchottamanaiker Clerical Party
Ariankuppam Gnanou Diagoumodeliar Clerical Party
Villianor Kessavacavoundin Radical Party
Tirubuvanai Sa-Velayoudacavoundin Neutral
Bahor Mouttou-Souppourayaretttiar Clerical Party
Nettapakkam Ramassamyrettiar Radical Party
Karaikal Nemours De Rozario Clerical Party
Grand-Aldeé ? Radical Party
Neravy Darmalingapoulle Neutral
Tirunallar Singaraveloupoulle Clerical Party
Nedungadu Savariouttou-Vanniasingarayer Clerical Party
Cottucherry Vinguidassalapoulle Clerical Party
Chandernagore Municipal commission
Mahe Pouna Ramotty Radical Party
Yanam Samatom Latchiminarsaya Clerical Party
Balance: Clerical Party 9; Radical Party 4; Neutrals 3
Source: The 19th and 20th Century Documents, N.A.I, Pondicherry.
Table 5.3 Results of the Conseil général Elections in October 1911

1st List 2nd List Total
Settlements Clericals Radicals Clericals Radicals Clericals Radicals
Pondicherry 6 0 6 0 12 0
Karaikal 3 1 2 2 5 3
Chandernagore 2 0 0 2 2 2
Mahe 1 0 0 1 1 1
Yanam 0 0 1 1 1 1
Total 12 1 9 6 21 7
The deputy election in 1914 rallied around a sense of patriotism for France. The chief
issue in the election was the threat of forcible annexation posted on French Indian settlements
by the government of British India. There were altogether five candidates Blysen, Lemaire, J.
La Porte, Richard and Radjamanicame. The candidates travelled in their respective
constituencies, even before the election date was announced. They met various caste and
religious leaders and wooed them to their side. The renewal of alliance between the Vannias
under late Sadassiva and Gaebelé enabled Paul Blysen to switch over to the side of the
‘Clerical Party’. In the eyes of Governor Martineau,
“Mr. Gabelé owes his authority to the rectitude of his mind, to the loyalty of his
commitments, to his respect for rights acquired even by his opponents: except for a
244
period of two years, he was a lifetime friend of Sadassiva and it was he who inherited
almost the whole influence of the latter with the Vannias.”68
Moreover the Christians under Gnanou Diagou convinced Gaebelé to abandon Lemaire. For
Gnanou Diagou, Lemaire was no longer useful for the Christians’ benefit.69 Meanwhile a
difference of opinion arose between two high-caste leaders Couttia Sababadypoulle of
Pondicherry and Ramassamypoulle of Karaikal over an election in Karaikal. The later held to
the position of ‘Karaikal for Karaikalians’ and opposed the candidature of Lemaire proposed
by Pondicherrians. In March 1914 Gaebelé convened a congress of elected members of
Conseil général, Conseils locaux, Mayors and Assistant Mayors of the communes and
decided on Paul Blysen as their candidate.70 The premier consequence of the meeting was the
detachment of Cornet and the Pariahs under Nandagobalou, the Assistant Mayor of
Pondicherry, from the French party and their alignment with Gaston Pierre. There was
another reason for the choice of Blysen. The deputy refused to be an instrument in the hands
of the electors under Gaston Pierre. When, Lemaire visited Paris in 1912, Blysen exposed the
political vengeance of radicals. A secret alliance of Lemaire, Blysen and senator Flandin was
thus set in Paris.71
Lemaire, who according to Martineau, for ten years succeeded in destroying the
hegemony of Indians under Shanmugam and got elected in 1910 due to the combination of
Gaebelé and Vannias, having no option, was forced to side with the ‘radical Indians’. Once,
Lemaire had accused them of being swedeshis, nationalists and the disciples of
Shanmugam.72 Lemaire had only one option to woo the radicals, according to his election
manifesto, with promised that his election would bring a unification of electoral lists and
68
69
70
71
72
245
proportional representation for Indians.73 The dramatic happening in the election was the
appearance of J. La Porte, son of Ponnuthambi ‘La Porte’ under the banner of ‘Republican
Radical-Socialist independent’. He was inspired by Radical Socialists of Cochin-China,
endorsed the idea of ‘India for Indians’ and opposed the election of European candidates in
India.74 He tried to attract both the descents of Ponnuthambi and Shanmugam propounding
‘vive la France républicaine’ and ‘vive la patrie hindoue’ and accused that the European
elements in the colony destroyed everything that was Indian. Apart from these political
manoeuvres, since the chief issue in the election was the threat of British occupation, the
election manifestos of all the candidates pronounced that the removal of the threat posted on
the inhabitants of French India was their prime concern.
In the deputy election held on 26th April 1914, Paul Blysen secured 33,155 votes
defeated J.B.P. Lemaire, who secured only 5,628; votes (see Table 5.4). Blysen obtained 94.3% of
the Olgarat, 98.4% of the Tirunallar, 99.8% of Mudaliarpet and Bahor commune votes. The
combination of Europeans, Christians, Muslims, Pariahs, Vannias and the small dissidents of
high-castes polled massively for Paul Blysen who continued to be elected as deputy until
1924.
Table 5.4 Results of the Deputy Election in April 1914

Settlements Total voted Blysen Lemaire La Porte Richard
Pondicherry 29,566 25,835 (87.4%) 3,348 (11.3%) 357 12
Karaikal 7,038 5,288 (75.2%) 1,719 (24.4%) 9 10
Chandernagore 885 545 (61.6%) 127 (14.4%) 1 208
Mahe 1,169 1,169 (90.5%) 122 (9.5%) 0 0
Yanam 318 318 (51.2%) 302 (48.6%) 1 0
Total 39,394 33,155 (84.2%) 5,618(14.3%) 368 230
Source: Sukhabhaviridhini, 5, May 1914.
73
74
246
World War I and the Labour Unrest
The outbreak of World War I (1914-1919) suspended all the political activities in
French India. Emergency decrees were passed. The governor of French India had instructed
the administrators in all the secondary settlements to follow a policy of caution and co-
operation with the British India government. French India was forced to depend in every
respect on British India. There was a fear among the population that the British government
of India would forbid the import of necessaries into French India and even would demand the
settlements being incorporated into the neighbouring British provinces. 75 British asked for
extradition of Indian nationalists who took refuge in French Indian settlements. The French
Indian administration, largely controlled by Gaebelé, opposed the British demand for
extradition.
During the war period (1914-1919) French India passed through a time of political
turmoil and economic difficulties. The economy of French India was weak. Due to the
stoppage of financial support from metropolitan France, its budget had to depend on receipts
from salt and opium and revenue from alcohol and tobacco which constituted 45% of the
total receipts. In order to meet out the financial difficulties and the cost of the War, the
French Indian administration imposed new taxes. Land tax was increased by 100 percent,
new taxes like income tax, service tax and tool tax were introduced and a tax on occupied
buildings was imposed; stamp duty was increased and bills of lading were taxed. The expense
of budget was reduced and other developmental works were stopped. Trade activities came to
a standstill. The textile mills in Pondicherry closed indefinitely due to the high price of cotton
and shortage of coal supply. Trade both inland and overseas came to a standstill and that led
75
247
to sharp increase in price values of food grains and starvation. The paper currency lost its
value due to shortage of metal coins. Famines and epidemics troubled people.76
Despite, these war difficulties imposed on the inhabitants, the people of French India
rallied for France and professed loyalty to the French cause. A general mobilisation in 1914
took place against this background of strengthening ties between the inhabitants of French
India and France. In spite of their meagre resources, the settlements sent 1, 30,000 rupees
financial aid to metropolitan France. As soon as the French colonial forces were put into
place, over a thousand of French Indian volunteers, mostly renonçants took part and fought
for the France, their mother country. On the day the treaty of peace was signed, they
participated together in the general euphoria and exhilaration. French Indian soldiers were
embraced by Parisians. All those who took part in the war were no longer the same men
when they returned. France was no longer a mythical country for them whose history and
geography once studied in books. It somewhat became their own country whose people and
landscape filled their memories.77 These experiences thus strengthened individual links of
friendship between the inhabitants of the settlements and the French.
France came out of World War I not as a powerful country. Her economy was weak
and her politics was unstable. This had its impact on French India. The policy of ‘moral and
material progress of the colony’, endorsed before the war, was suspended indefinitely due to
lack of financial aid. The administrators of French India had brief tenures in office. Between
1914 and 1939 there were no less than twenty governors. Moreover the trend of politics in
French India did not permit the governors to work independently. Largely influenced by the
local political elite, if a Governor or an administrator had declined to toe the heels of the
76
Le Patriote, 19, December 1922.
77
David Annoussamy, L’intermède français en Inde, Pondichéry: Institut Français de Pondichéry, 2005, p. 137.
248
deputy or senator they had to face transfer and quit the place. The result was that the French
administration languished and no vigorous policy could be taken.
The War had tremendous repercussions on people in French India. Abnormal political
and economic conditions caused an insistent demand for better conditions. There was popular
demand for (i) transfer of corrupt civil servants and justices in all the departments; (ii)
demand for electoral reforms, particularly the abolition of the existing two-list electoral
system and proportional representation of electoral seats in the local assemblies (iii) the
introduction of universal suffrage for men and women with one list; (iv) cutting down the
share of local budget spent for officials’ salaries (the total amount of the budget in 1922 was
26,90,400 rupees of which the salary of government servants amounted to 14,43,645 rupees,
representing more than 53% of the budget); (v) equal distribution of salaries along with
Europeans (vi) removal of tax burden imposed during war period (vii) demand for removal of
customs barrier and (viii) right to form associations. 78
During the post war period the French administration had to face the problem of
challenge against its authority as the growth of Indian nationalism affected the native
population of French India. The French administrators followed the draconian methods of
suppression and oppression, with the aid of the decrees promulgated during the war time, to
stamp out the seeds of Indian nationalism from the soil of French Indian settlements. Thus the
ideological basis of Indian nationalism was taking deep roots even in the early twentieth
century. It is a unique factor that mass mobilization in the French settlements was achieved
through labour unrest. The labour force in the textile mills in Pondicherry had a substantial
population and was experienced enough to form the basis of a mass movement against the
mill management and French colonial rule. Though sporadic incidents of labour unrest were
78
Le Patriote, 19, December 1922.
249
witnessed even by the turn of the 1880s in the four textile mills of Pondicherry, organised
form of protest came into existence only in the 1920s.79
Among all the working sections of French India like textile workers, handloom
weavers, household workers, seashore labourers, toddy toppers and others, the textile workers
were the first to organize their struggle against exploitation of the mill owners in
Pondicherry.80 Since the promulgation of the decree of 11th January 1892, regarding
establishment of textile industries in Pondicherry, Pondicherry attracted capitalists from
British India. There were four major textile mills81 established in Pondicherry employing
about 8,000 labours representing 4 to 5% of the population. 82 Other than this, there were
about 7,000 traditional handlooms at Pondicherry. Most of the mill workers at that time
belonged to the deprived castes, but were not the castes of labourers. Due to their rural
background, illiteracy and little bargaining power, and more with their supposed ‘superstition
and ignorance’, they were employed as forced, bonded, and child labourers. Further the
working conditions of labours were bad. For instance, the mill workers had to work 12 hours
per day and compulsorily 24 days in a month. They had to work all the days including
Sunday, there was no security of job, and their wages were relatively very low.83 In an article
published in the ‘Bulletin du comité de l’Asie française’ in 1905 under the title “l’agriculture
79
Geetha, S., “The Role of Tamil Journals in the French India Labour Movement of 1930s,” Proceedings of the
26th Annual session of the S.I.H.C, Bangalore, 2006, pp. 644-652.
80
French India Thozilalar Satta Thittangal, 1937.
81
Textile Mill Production in 1900
Mills labours Number of cotton tissues production in bales
Savana 3,500 400
Gaebelé 1,000 200
Cossépaléom 500 120
Anglo-French 2,500 ?
Total 7,500
82
The number was estimated 2,410 in 1880 and 7,500 in 1900. In Chandernagore, the Jute mill in Gondolpara
employed 2,150 (in 1900) labours representing 9.5% of the 22,663 population.
83
8 to 9 Annas (40 to 45 centimes) for men, 5 Annas (25 centimes) for women and 1 Anna (5 centimes) for
children and their wages were assessed on two basic factors (i) work with machine help/related work was
250
et l’industrie dans l’Inde française”, Doctor Charles Valentino exposed the living conditions
of the labourers in the mills in the following manner:
“La situation des ouvriers est intolérable. Sans parler de la situation des adultes, dont
les salaires sont souvent trop petits pour l’énorme travail exigé, il convient d’appeler
l’attention du gouvernement sur l’exploitation des enfants, laquelle ne connaît pas de
bornes. On fait travailler dans ces filatures, dont la température atteint souvent
jusqu'à 47° et dans lesquelles aucune disposition sanitaire n’est prise, ni pour aspirer
les poussières, ni pour ventiler, des enfants de dix, neuf et même huit ans, pendant
onze heures, et on leur donne comme salaire quotidien de deux à trois sous.”84
Valentino further noticed attitudes of the investors of British India,
“Il fait bien se rendre compte (...) que les directeurs anglais de l’usine Rodier ne sont
pas venus mettre leur usine sur notre territoire pour le plaisir de faire gagner nos
populations, mais, précisément, pour échapper aux obligations anglaises et
augmenter par la leurs bénéfices.”85
Another condemnation was the political use of labourers. Like in the rural communes
the agriculturalists were used as voting mass for Rettys and Vellajas, in the urban areas
labourers were used for political purpose. The Indian party accused the leading industrialists
and chiefs of the pro-French party Henri Gaebelé and Ernest Cornet for exploiting Indians by
bringing Pariahs to work in their mills to vote for the party.86 As such the labourer lived
under the constant threat of dismissal if they agitated against the mill management. Whenever
workers started an agitation the mill management put it down with the help of local police
and French administration. Moreover, during this period their attempt to improve their
conditions rarely met with success. The uselessness and failure of the open professional
assessed at piece rate and (ii) work without machine help was assessed at a fixed rate of wages,
(Sukhabhaviridhini, 23, November 1922).
84
“The situation of the workers is intolerable. Without mentioning the situation of the adults, whose salaries are
often too small for the enormous work required, it should be drawn the attention of the government the
exploitation of the children, which know no bounds. They are made to work in the mills, the temperature of
which reaches up to 47degrees and in which no sanitary measures were taken neither to suck up dust not to
ventilate them, children of ten, nine and even eight years, toil for eleven hours, and they are given two to three
sous as daily wages.” (Bulletin du comité de l’Asie française, August 1905.)
85 “It is good to realize (…) that the English managers of Rodier mill did not come to set up their factory on our
territory for the sake of making people earn their living, but precisely for eluding form the English duties and
increasing profits this way.” (Bulletin du comité de l’Asie française, August 1905.)
86
251
schools established in 1896 were also quite obvious. The French had established industrial
schools. However, because manual labour was not well regarded in India, the students whom
these schools recruited were also of the low-castes. They were in fact not able to compete
with those who had hereditary training. As such the low-caste labourers were thus
condemned to be workers of inferior quality and pushed into unskilled labour. Moreover
physical weakening of the body, which resulted from malnutrition and from an excess of
alcoholic drinks and constrained difficult living conditions, made them vulnerable to the
onslaught of epidemics. Even if the number of free medical consultation was in rapid
increase, many Indians were weary of western medicine and took to it only as a last resort.87
‘La Dépêche Colonial Illustrée’ wrote in 1907, the Indian Pariah certainly took less care of
himself than the Kanak of Oceania or the African “negro”. Also everyday, in the free
dispensaries, there was an uninterrupted procession of wounds several months old, of varied
ulcers and of endless suppurations. All these lesions brought with them general health
problems, deformities, vicious scars, and functional impotence; the patient generally decided
to consult the doctor only after having exhausted the entire series of applications of empirical
schemes.88
World War I caused severe shortage in the supply of cotton for the mills in
Pondicherry. The imports of bad quality cotton increased weavers’ work burden and the
amount of damaged product. Consequently the mill managements began to impose fine on
damaged products.89 So the only option presented to the labourers was to quit their job or
revolt against the managements. Series of strikes were organised in the 1920s demanding for
better conditions: (i) an increase in their wages; (ii) reduction of working hours; (iii) weekly
87
88
La Dépêche Colonial illustrée, 30, September 1907.
89
Sukhabhaviridhini, 19, December 1914.
252
holidays and (iv) improved sanitary conditions.90 The journals in Pondicherry regularly
published articles condemning the arrogant mentality of the mill management and calling on
the workers to organise themselves into trade union. It advised the mill workers to demand
reduction of working hours and other facilities enjoyed by their counterparts in France.91 The
occurrence of famine92 in 1916 made a long term impact on the labourers’ living conditions.
With the intervention of French administration the mill management agreed to increase the
wages a little and to supply rice at a concessional rate. They also ensured the suspension of
all the fines imposed on the labourers. A labour fund was established in the mills to look after
the welfare of the labourers.93 The years from 1920 to 1925 constituted the worst period for
labourers in the mills. The misappropriation of labour fund and the political rivalries
established in the mills caused frequent strikes, lockouts and violence in the mills. The police
force was frequently used to threaten the labourers. In February 1920 there were clashes
between the labourers and the police. There was also a clash between the management and
the labourers in the Savana and Anglo-French mills. In this violence two workers were killed,
many were arrested and the labourers were forced to take refuge in British India.94 The
‘Morning post’ condemned this incident and accused the investors of exploiting the labour
force in Pondicherry. The French Indian deputy Paul Blysen ordered an enquiry about the
incident. Following this incident a committee was set up, including labour leaders and mill
managements, to form 14 rules and regulations of the mills.95 In the absence of ‘proper labour
protection laws’, the mill managements continued to exploit the labour force in Pondicherry.
90
Sukhabhaviridhini, 30, April 1920.
91
Sri Soudjanarandjani, 13, May 1920.
92
On 22 and 23 November 1916 a severe cyclone affected Pondicherry and Karaikal which resulted in 307 were
died and causes famine.
93
Sukhabhaviridhini, 11, November 1919.
94
Sukhabhaviridhini, 15, February, 1 and 15, March 1922.
95
Sukhabhaviridhini, 15, March 1922.
253
The worldwide economic depression in 1930s affected the textile productions in
French India by (i) the imposition of customs barriers (ii) cut-throat competition; and (iii)
decline of overseas market for textile products leading to decline in the demand for cotton
cloths from Pondicherry.96 For the above reasons the mill managements took measures to
reduce their cost of production. This was done through retrenchment of workers and through
reduction of their wages. The mill workers organised a series of strikes and block outs and
put forward their legitimate demands (i) eight hours work; (ii) right to collective bargaining;
(iii) increase in wages; (iv) weekly holidays; and (v) right to form workers unions.97
The changing socio-political atmosphere clearly affected the course of the labour
movement in Pondicherry. The workers were attracted by an individual leader, a group of
leaders or by social organisations like ‘French India Youth Association’ and ‘Harijan Seva
Sangh’. In September 1931, a French India Labour Conference was held at Odiyansalai
maidan in Pondicherry. It was arranged at the initiative of Selvaraju Chettiar by his followers.
Leaders from Madras presidency like P. Subburayan and Kanaga Sankara Kannappan
addressed the conference. This conference was the first labour conference in the history of
French India.98 In the absence of labourers’ laws, the French Indian administration did not
come forward to solve the workers problems. The members instigated the workers to form
secret unions to fight for their rights.99 These committees began to function indirectly and
took important decisions regarding their struggle against the management to improve their
working conditions.
96
Sudandiram, 9, December 1939.
97
Subbiah, V., Saga of Freedom of French India: Testament of My Life, Madras: New Century Book House,
1990, p.81.
98
Puduvai Murasu, 14, September 1931.
99
Subbiah, V., Sudandiram Pon Vizha Malar: 1934-1984, Pondicherry, 1984, p.7.
254
Meanwhile, in June 1936, Front Populaire headed by Leon Blum, consisting of
Communists and Socialists formed a coalition government in France. This pro (left)
Communist government in France aroused great expectations among the workers of the mills
in French India. In this hope they went on ‘stay in-strike’ again on 25th and 26th July 1936.
Consequently, the situation became tense. The governor, Léon Solomiac (1934-1936) sent the
French police to control the situation. A worker of the Rodier mill was killed in the violence.
The police then moved to the Savanna mill, where the situation had become tense due to
spreading of the news that a worker had been killed in the Rodier mill. In order to control the
situation the governor gave shooting order to the police. It resulted in the killing of twelve
workers and some workers were severely injured.100 In order to meet the situation and to meet
the increasing militancy of the labour movement, the third company of the eleventh regiment
of Infanterie Coloniale was brought to Pondicherry. It stayed on up to 1939.101
The tragedy of 1936 was reported to France. Paris ordered an immediate enquiry and
took action. The French Indian governor, Léon Solomiac was called back to France. Justin
Godart, senator representing French India, came to Pondicherry as a special delegate of
workers in French India. He submitted a report to the government of France. On the basis of
his recommendations, the coalition government of France introduced a worker’s law by the
Decree of 6th April 1937.102 The law reduced the working hour to 8 hours, abolished child
labour, granted weekly holidays, women workers were made eligible to take 8 weeks of
maternity leave and most importantly the law recognised the formation of worker unions in
industrial organisations.103 Thus the workers movement in French India marched one step
ahead of similar movements in Asia so for as working hours was concerned. The victory
100
1990, pp.81-83.
101
Francis Cyril Antony, ed., Gazetteer of India: Union Territory of Pondicherry, Vol. II, Pondicherry, 1982,
p.1015.
102
103
255
achieved by the textile workers, had inspired other sections of the working class to form their
own associations. The intensification of labour movement had its impact on politics in French
India.
Emergence of Anti-colonialism
In the twentieth century French India was influenced more and more by the growing
Indian nationalism, official programs of the Indian National Congress and the activities of
nationalist leaders. The French Indian settlements saw the growth of a number of associations
in line with social and political prospects. In 1934 there were 141 registered associations
representing 2, 86,410 population of the settlements.104 Every 232 persons were attached with
any one of the associations.105 Since the caste system was the determining feature of the
population, associations like Société progressive de l’Inde française, Société progressiste des
Renonçants Valangaimougattars, Réveil social, La jeunesse Républicaine, Relèvement social,
Solidarité des dames de l’Inde française, Gramapunaruttaranam, Vanniya kula kshatriyas
sangam, Kammalar sangam, etc., provided solidarity to the castes and caste based politics.106
In line with nationalist tendencies associations were organised to carry out much
needed social reforms. The period between 1900 and 1920 witnessed renewed agitation for
equality among the Christians. The extremists, Babilone and Latour were in the forefront of
this agitation and they demanded to pull down the walls separating the Christians based on
high-castes and low-castes, in public places like Churches, cemetery, theatres, etc. Besides
the Clairon brothers, Lazare, Francois Lesel, Horace and Noël and others played a significant
104
In French India, every association consisting of more than twenty members must be formally authorized by
the Governor on the condition that they would not discuss any political matters.
105
Annuaire des établissements français dans l’Inde pour l’année, 1935, pp. 454-458.
106
Annuaire des établissements français dans l’Inde pour l’année, 1935, pp. 454-458.
256
role in the movement for equality among the French citizens in the settlements.107 As part of
the ‘Self-Respect Movement’, which ravaged the political scenario in the 1920s and 1930s in
the neighbouring Madras Presidency, in 1931, E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker, the leader of the
‘Self-Respect Movement’ visited Pondicherry. His radical ideas on social reforms found
followers in Bharathi Dasan and Noël. Bharathi Dasan propagated the need for a change in
the social structure through his poems in the journal Desa Sevakan. Noël wrote a series of
articles in his journal Puduvai Murasu condemning the Church and clergy for upholding
caste distinctions in Churches. V. Subbiah and his band of youth organized a Youth League
otherwise called ‘Jeunesses de l’Inde française’ in the year 1931, along with the ‘Student’s
Associations’ of Colonial College and Calve College. They organised strikes for the
introduction of compulsory primary education in French and in the mother tongue of the
settlements concerned. In line with the ‘Civil-Disobedience Movement’ launched by
Mahatma Gandhi in 1930, the ‘Youth League’ organised its first conference in 1931. They
demanded withdrawal of the British from India, conformed its solidarity with the Indian
National Congress and as regards French India they demanded political and social reforms,
especially suppression of reserved seats for Europeans and demanded a united list.
Mahatma Gandhi organised a separate organisation called ‘Harijana Seva Sangh’ as a
part of the Sathyagraha movement in order to obliterate social oppression and removal
untouchability in British India. The ‘Youth League’ founded and led by V. Subbiah and
others took up the issue of untouchability and stared a ‘Harijana Seva Sangh’ in French India
in Pondicherry on 6th December 1933.108 A branch was started in Karaikal with Arangasamy
Naicker as President. A similar organisation the ‘Deena Poshaka Samajan’ was started in
107
Emmanuel Divien, “Social and Religious Reform Movements in Pondicherry in the Nineteenth and
Twentieth Centuries”, in S.P. Sen (ed.), “Social and Religious Reform Movements in the Nineteenth and
Twentieth Centuries”, Calcutta, 1979, p. 399.
108
The actual founder of the Harijana Seva Sangh at Pondicherry was Savarinathan and the active members
were V. Subbiah, L.J.X. Durai samy, R.L.Purushothama Reddiar, K. Sivaprahasam and others (Subbiah, V.,
Saga of Freedom of French India: Testament of My Life, Madras: New Century Book House, 1990, pp. 27-33).
257
Yanam in 1931, popularised education for low-castes. ‘Harijana Seva Sangh’ popularised
charka, kadhi, organised reading rooms and extended its helping hand to the labour
movement. The movement against casteism gained momentum and had its impact on the
French administration. A decree promulgated on 15th July 1937, directed that the mention of
caste in the civil records (birth, marriage and death), notary deeds and the mention of caste in
government performs shall be discarded. 109 In 1940 the Pariahs appealed to the government
that the villages which they inhabited were known as ‘Cherry’, and since this nomenclature
identified with their low status, they appealed that the suffix to the village names should be
changed into ‘Peth’. The proposal was accepted by a local order issued on 20th August 1940,
that the expression ‘Cherry’, ‘Paracherry’, ‘Paraterou’, ‘Pallacherry’, ‘Sakiliparaterou’,
‘Vettiaparacherry’, ect., be known thereafter as ‘Peth’ throughout French India, excepting
Pondicherry commune, Cottucherry, Melcottucherry, Neivatcherry and Agara-neiva-tcherry
(in Karaikal).110
Mahatma Gandhi visited Pondicherry and Karaikal in 1934 and Jawaharlal Nehru
visited Pondicherry in October 1936. Their presence infused a sprit of nationalism among the
population. Nehru’s great concern was the labour situation in Pondicherry. During his visit to
Paris in 1937 he met various political leaders and rendered some helping hand to initiate
labour laws and change the police and judicial officers, who were hostile to the population in
Pondicherry.111 However both the leaders who had a wide exposure to liberal thoughts of
Europe cherished great appreciation for the French culture and values. During their visit to
Pondicherry, they had not failed to appreciate the noble ideas of equality and fraternity
enshrined in the French constitution and the presence of well advanced democratic political
109
Journal officiel de l’Inde française, 1937, pp. 915-916.
110
Journal officiel de l’Inde française, 1940, p.968.
111
Jawaharlal Nehru Correspondence, 1903-1947: A Catalogue, Nehru Memorial Museum & Library, Vikas
Publishing House, 1988 & 1991, New Delhi, pp. 655 and 702.
258
institutions in the settlements.112 In line with the Indian National Congress an association
called the ‘British Indian Association’ was established in Karaikal in 1938 and its aim was to
safeguard migrated Indians’ rights in the French Indian settlements. Thus the seeds of
opposition to the French colonial administration were sown and the persistent demands for
liberal rights and privileges yielded rich dividend in the 1930s.
Upto1928 the politics of French India was in the hands of Henri Gaebelé. In the
deputy election, held on 30th November 1919, Blysen succeeded by obtaining1, 034 votes
over Lemaire (see Table 5.5). This lean margin was justified by two factors, the economic
hardship created by the World War I and the death of Gaston Pierre, the leader of the Indian
Party, in December 1918. The rise of prices of food grains and non availability of crop seeds
in the rural communes, made the agriculturalists to oppose Blysen. Moreover the stoppage of
trade activities during the war years badly affected the Muslim traders in Karaikal. The
sympathy factor on the sudden death of Gaston Pierre unified high-castes to vote for
Lemaire.113 However the opposition party members refused to accept the results of the
election. They accused Gaebelé party of creating violence, in which two were shot dead, and
large scale electoral frauds in Pondicherry. Final decision of the election result was left to
Paris. The Chamber of Deputies voted in favour of Blysen on political reason and he was
declared as the deputy of French India in December 1919.
112
Hindu, 18, February 1934.
113
Sukhabhaviridhini, 5, December 1919.
259
Table 5.5 Results of the Deputy Elections in November 1919
Communes Blysen Lemaire
Pondicherry 3,368 1,932
Olgarat 3,038 1,104
Mudaliarpet 1,058 1,459
Ariankuppam 1,248 180
Villianor 870 2,077
Tirubuvanai 573 2,244
Bahor 581 1,590
Nettapakkam 1,128 953
Karaikal 438 1,861
Grand-Aldeé 609 246
Neravy 605 326
Tirunallar 1,142 83
Nedungadu 145 455
Cottucherry 667 111
Chandernagore 145 452
Mahe 834 14
Yanam 28 356
Total 16,477 15,443
Source: Sukhabhaviridhini, 5, December 1919.
Etienne Flandin was elected as senator for the second term in 1920 on the support of
Gaebelé. He secured 100 votes out of 104 total votes. On the death of Flandin in 1922,
Gaebelé succeeded as Senator by obtaining 103 votes out of 108 votes. However Paul Blysen
was nominated to complete the remaining term of Gaebelé on the latter’s resignation in end
of 1924. Gabriel Angoulvant, the erstwhile governor of French India, was elected as the
deputy of French India on 9th March 1924 on the support of Gaebelé. Such was the control of
Gaebelé, according to his adversaries; he ran the administration as his family business by
entirely dominating the politics and economy of the colony.114 His three sons, Albert, Fnitz
and Robert were respectively the Presidents of the Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber of
Agriculture and of the Conseil général.
Gaebelé’s regime (1908-1928) saw some positive tendency in the economic
development of the settlements. The textile industries got a boom in production and found a
rich market in Senegal and Indo-China. The movement of commerce reached its peak at 350
114
Rama Paria, Carnets du Malabar, Pondichéry.
260
million francs in 1926, 1927 and 1928. In 1921 permission was granted to the starting of the
Standard Oil Company, the Burmah Oil Company and the Asiatic Petroleum Company to
supply petrol in Pondicherry. Paris allotted a subvention of 11, 25,000 francs to reconstruct
the pier which was damaged during the 1916 cyclone. Between 1919 and 1934 a sum of 7
million francs was spent for the public development works. The Conseil général in
November 1925 authorised 7, 00,000 rupees for the construction of roads, improve irrigation,
repair public buildings etc., From the total allotted 7,00,000 rupees, Pondicherry settlement
shared 52.8%, Karaikal and Chandernagore 17.5%, Yanam 7.1% and Mahe shared 4.3%.115
However opposition was built on the relative importance of Pondicherry compared to other
settlements. The opposition accused the pro-French party that Pondicherry only benefited
from the budget so as to serve for the benefit of the European population otherwise other
settlements were forced to sustain the burden of newly imposed taxes.116
An opposition to Gaebelé’s power politics was formed by Sellane Naicker, a
nationalist and the leader of the Vannia caste, along with Joseph David, Benjamin Thiroux,
Thomas Aroul and others. They formed a ‘Popular Party’ otherwise known as ‘Franco-Hindu
Party’ in 1922. The members of this opposition group were often described as subversive
elements, as sympathisers of the Indian National Congress, Communists and as anti-French
by the ‘Gaebelé Party’. 117 The ‘Franco-Hindu Party’ defeated the pro-French ‘Gaebelé Party’
in 1928. In the election which was held in 1928, Jean Coponat the ‘Franco-Hindu Party’
candidate was declared as deputy elected by a majority of more than 38,000 votes defeating
the opposition Gabriel Angoulvant.118 In the same year, Eugene Le Moignic who also had the
115
Jacques Weber, Pondichéry et les comptoirs de l’Inde après-Dupleix: La démocratie au pays des castes,
Paris, 1996, pp. 328- 329.
116
Georges Tailleur, Chandernagor ou le lit de Dupleix. Le premier maillon de la chaine, Frontiganan: Africa
Nostra, 1979, p. 28.
117
Francis Cyril Antony, ed., Gazetteer of India: Union Territory of Pondicherry, Vol. I, Pondicherry, 1982, p.
242.
118
Sri Soudjanarandjani, 26, April 1928.
261
support of Sellane was elected as senator. The ‘Franco-Hindu Party’ also registered landslide
victory in the Conseil général, Conseils locaux and municipal elections. The ‘Franco-Hindu
Party’ had the backing of educated section of the population, especially composed of the
lawyers, refused allegiance to the European officials and the interests of European investors.
The party succeeded in bringing back 4, 00,000 rupees ‘salt subsidy’, which was paid by the
British Indian government to France every year, for the benefit of the colony. When the
inflation touched an all time high indexes in the 1930s the French government enhanced the
salary structure of the officials in France.119 When, the local French employees also
demanded similar salary in French India, fully aware that any such increase would result in
additional tax burden for the local population, the ‘Franco-Hindu Party’ passed a resolution in
the Conseil général cutting the salaries of European officials and reducing the tax burden of
the inhabitants.120 During this time again an unsuccessful attempt was made to unite the two-
list voters into one single list. These measures created internal dissentions within the ‘Franco-
Hindu Party’ and resulted in the split of the party in 1934. One fraction was under Sellane
and the other was under David. The latter had the support of the deputy, senator and the
governor and established a sort of personal rule for the hegemony of the French as had been
done by Gaebelé in the past. Sellane took the support of the ‘Gaebelé Party’ as part of a
political manoeuvre and lost in the local assembly elections, held on 21st October 1934.121
The faction headed by Joseph David known as ‘David’s Party’ held sway for about ten years
from 1934 to 1944. Sellane was thrown to the background and his supporters were harassed.
On the one hand the labour movement provided the common base for a mass movement in
Pondicherry. On the other side Sellane organised an anti-colonial agitation against the
imperialist behaviour of the French in India.
119
120
Procès-verbaux établissements français dans L’Inde Conseil général, 1933.
121
262
The combination of David and Aroul of Karaikal had unleashed a reign of terror
respectively in Pondicherry and Karaikal. This party, according to the British Consul General
report, failed to gain the support of both the agriculturists and labourers. In order to
strengthen its position it had to depend on the support of civil servants who in turn were
benefiting through corruption and smugglings. With the connivance of the French authorities,
the merchants who supported the French administration were able to import diamond and
luxurious goods free of duty from foreign countries and smuggled them across the border of
British India.122 David and his associates found that the labour forces were developed into a
significant political force of the Indian National Congress and Communist ideologies that
would challenge the authority of the French administration. They organised the anti-social
elements and political thugs to assault the textile labourers and their supporters and cause
terror among the people with the active connivance of the French police. The labourers
organised their defence squad to retaliate hired henchmen of the political party who operated
with the active support of the French police and the officials.123
The economic redress and liberal sanctions achieved by the labour movement gave a
fillip to the nationalists to form their political party. The foundation of ‘Mahajana Sabha’ at
Pondicherry in August 1937 by Marie Xavrey, Dorairaj and R. L. Purushothama Reddiar,
was followed by a similar branch at Karaikal by Arangasamy Naicker, Savary Pillai, Vion de
Pazanear and Leon Saint Jean and in Mahe by I. K. Kumaran. Various associations like,
Labour unions, Student associations, Youth associations, Merchants associations, Peasants
associations and Women’s associations were brought under the ideologies of the Indian
122
File No: 159-X (secret), Local report, Ministry of External Affairs, 1939; N.A.I, New Delhi.
123
1990, pp. 145-147.
263
National Congress and Communists.124 The activities of ‘Mahajana Sabha’ were monitored
by the representation of Indian National Congress V.V. Giri, the close associate of Jawaharlal
Nehru and then the President of India in 1969.
The ‘Mahajana Sabha’ evolved soon to challenge the position of ‘David’s Party’ in
politics. The ‘Mahajana Sabha Party’ wanted to do away with the powers of the governor
under the Ordonnance Organique (1840), to remove the existing two list voter system and to
ensure the conduct of free and fair elections.125 It put up its candidates against ‘David’s Party’
in elections for the Conseil général, Conseils locaux and municipalities, which were held in
May and October 1937. This election was organised in the background that a few months
earlier the Indian National Congress in British-India took the decision in the working
committee (which had met in 1937) to contest the election to Provincial Assembly under the
Government of India Act of 1935, on 18th March 1937. The official programme the Congress
stated, “It desires to make it clear that office is to be accepted and utilised for the purpose of
working, in accordance with the lines laid down in the Congress election manifesto and to
further in every possible way, the Congress policy of combating the new Act on the one hand
and of presenting the construction programme on the other.”126 The Congress candidates
were returned in a massive majority in several states including the Madras presidency. This
gave sufficient impetus to the ‘Mahajana Sabha’ in French India to participate in the election
on the nationalist way to express anti-colonial struggle. The slogans raised by the ‘Mahajana
Sabha’ were ‘India for Indians’ and ‘forward movement to join with mother India’.127
124
1990, pp. 145-147.
125
1990, p. 146.
126
All India Congress: Annual Report, 1937.
127
264
Governor Horace Crocicchia, who held a high opinion on David and Aroul
combination and in order to prevent the growing Indian nationalists influence in French
Indian politics and to ensure the triumph of pro-French party, played a destructive role in
establishing division among the supporters of ‘Mahajana Sabha’. The fishermen community,
under Selvarajalu Chettiar, which formed a considerable population in the costal areas of
Pondicherry, was an easy-pray to the political mechanisation of the governor. Crocicchia had
succeeded in mobilising the politically backward communities under the hold of Selvarajalu
against the political henchmen under the leadership of the ‘Mahajana Sabha’. Similarly rival
unions called ‘Christian Textile Workers Union’ and ‘Vannia labour Union’ were established
in order to prevent the growing Communist influence among the working class.128
French India passed through a period of violence and political gangsterism. David, the
President of Conseil général and the Mayor of Pondicherry, had a major responsibility for
creating such a lawless situation. He was alleged to have made free use of the police force
and the administrative machinery to suppress all remnants of opposition. Violence broke out
even before the day of election. On 7th October 1937 an election campaign was organised in
Mudaliarpet commune an area concentrated with the labour population, which was under the
control of the mayor who belonged to the ‘David’s Party’. The labour unions already decided
to counter the election campaigns. Troubles were expected and the police force deployed,
even before the day, under the head of Inspector Daddala of Yanam to ensure safety of the
inhabitants. Already in January 1937, a dastardly attempt was made on the life of David. He
was fired upon and wounded. It was accused that V. Subbiah was behind the attack. To
ensure the safety of the leaders, on the campaign day, about 400 fishermen belongs to
Selvarajalu, who were offered new clothes as their pay, marched to the commune armed with
128
1990, pp. 148-49.
265
sticks and bags of stones. When the gang reached the commune, they started pelting with
stones and it created terror in the commune. A militant labour force that was numerous raided
the municipal office where the meeting was conducted and clashed with the supporters of
‘David’s Party’. This terror operation was engaged throughout the day. David and Selvarajalu
narrowly escaped from the attack and they were all locked up inside the municipal office
premises. The police force was deployed to rescue the leaders by thrashing the mob.129
Violence soon spread to other areas, Selvarajalu, who was a fallen soldier in the battle of
Mudaliarpet commune embarked on a wild venture to mobilise the fishermen to wage an
‘armed battle’ against the inhabitants of Ariankuppam (an area of highly concentrated
population of Vannia caste), for allegedly offering asylum to the militant labourers. The
fishermen of Veerampattinam, the contiguous village situated to the east of Ariankuppam,
armed with bombs and sticks waged a sudden attack on the people of the Ariankuppam and
Kakayanthope villages. This battle continued for several days and caused heavy loss to the
properties. Many were wounded and a few died.
With the support of Governor Crocicchia and due to large scale electoral frauds and
violence ‘David’s Party’ registered success in the elections. Nevertheless, the ‘Mahajana
Sabha’ gained in Karaikal while ‘David’s Party’ came out successful in Pondicherry. The
contradictory electoral results and the rivalry between the two parties left the settlements in
the grip of violence. Having lost faith in French administration the labour force led by the
leaders of ‘Mahajana Sabha’ refused to accept the results of the election and formed a front,
in line with the non-cooperation of Mahatma Gandhi, against the French administration. They
captured many municipalities in Pondicherry and established parallel administration by
violating all the municipal rules with regard to civil registration of births and deaths. The
129
File No: 159-X (secret), Local Report, Ministry of External Affairs, 1939; N.A.I, New Delhi.
266
village Panchayats worked as local courts deciding civil and criminal cases in order to avoid
French courts.130
The political rivalry reached its culmination when, on 16th December 1937
Selvarajalu was assassinated by a dismissed mill worker. The murder of Selvarajalu Chettiar,
transformed the political violence into caste war in Ariankuppam, Mudaliarpet and at
Pondicherry (which was controlled by David’s henchmen). Clashes between the political
parties, burning of houses, assaults on opponents and civic restlessness increased, with the
mobilisation of women with baskets of stones, men to throw stones and small boys to shout
abuse, encouragement and direction. In this violence several were dead, many were wounded
and a large number of people had to quit French India and take shelter in adjoining British
Indian territories. In Karaikal too clashes took place and a few persons were murdered in
Mahe.131
The visit of Jawaharlal Nehru and Krishna Menon in France in 1938 ensured the
replacement of ‘the brutal repression of Crocicchia’s regime’.132 Peace was restored in
French India after the arrival of Governor Louis Bonvin on 26th September 1938. His first
task was to restore political peace in French India. Bonvin was different from his
predecessors. He refused to be in any one’s pocket and expressed a complete indifference to
local politics. Municipal elections were abandoned by the decree passed on 18th February
1938 and replaced by Municipal commissions appointed by the governor for five years.133 A
local Order promulgated on 4th February 1939 reorganised the local military force, the
Cipahis de l’Inde. The police force was increased to the ratio of 1:500 of population.134 V.
130
1990, pp. 166-67.
131
File No: 159-X (secret), Local Report, Ministry of External Affairs, 1939; N.A.I, New Delhi.
132
Bombay Chronicle, 1, August 1938.
133
Journal officiel des établissements français dans l’Inde, 1938, pp. 122, 306-7, 324-325 and 452-456.
134
L’Inde Française dans la Guerre, Pondichéry: Imprimerie du Gouvernement.
267
Subbiah, the labour leader had been arrested by the British Indian police at Madras and
interned in the Vellore jail on 11th January 1939. The French administration had made no
arrangement to save him because according to official opinion, if V. Subbiah was released, he
would be murdered, and the political temperature would then again rise to a boiling point.135
On 1st May 1939, a demonstration of 5,000 labourers was held demanding the release of V.
Subbiah. In June 1939, he was released and he returned to Pondicherry in 1940. Bonvin’s
ban on the Communist organisation of September 1939 was also withdrawn.136 There was
constant trouble in the central jail at Pondicherry. The political prisoners in the jail went on
hunger-strike for their release. They were all released on certain conditions and promises.
The local press which was hurling its thunderbolts against the French administration was
muzzled and fettered with restrictions. The period of World War II saw the decline of
‘David’s Party’ and its regime practically came to an end after the death of Joseph David in
1944.
Nationalist activism grew stronger in the colony. However, the outbreak of World
War II (1939-1944) and the consequences of war changed the composition of the anti-French
movement into nationalist movement, which managed in a relatively short time to gain a
solid footing among the masses. The events of the war years strengthened natives’
nationalism in several ways. France’s defeat, occupation and virtual separation from her
colony reduced both her prestige and her authority. The war offered a suitable opportunity for
French colonies for demanding autonomy or even independence. In British India the Indian
nationalists mounted a systematic campaign of anti-western and anti-colonial propaganda and
sought also with great skill to accommodate nationalist aspirations. The launching of the
“Quit India” movement in August 1942 had assumed an unprecedented dimension. The
135
F. No: 159-X (secret), Local Report, Ministry of External Affairs, 1939; N.A.I, New Delhi.
136
Journal officiel des établissements français dans l’Inde, 1939, pp. 974-975.
268
Indian National Army’s trail, the Royal Indian Navy’s revolt, and organization of numerous
strikes and propagandas gave a further boost to anti-imperialist consciousness.137 It awakened
expectations which were immediately identified with the expulsion of foreigners and the
breaking of the old ties of loyalty. The “inferiority complexes” inherent in the “colonial
situation” were cured and the determination to achieve self-government strengthened.
137
Bipan Chandra, India’s Struggle for Independence 1857-1947, New Delhi: Penguin Books, 1989, pp. 481-
486.
269

Birth of Anti-Colonialism

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Birth of Anti-Colonialism

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Chapter V

purchase of firearms was free.5

Bengali revolutionaries. A network of importation of arms of Saint-Etienne, especially

Chandernagore had got at least a gun and a revolver.”10

near Chandernagore. In December, another, partially successful one took place in

French authorities in Chandernagore, as claimed by the governor of French India, and

Soujanaranjany, Vijaya, Balabarati, Darma, Suryodayam and Swadesamitran published

journal printed in Chandernagore regularly preached an anti-European tone.15 The “Radical

agitation demanding an equal number of representatives in Chandernagore Municipal board.

colonial budget next to Pondicherry.16

In order to properly understand the feelings of the inhabitants of Chandernagore and

unloved, abandoned child of French India.17

Government of Bengal asked the administrator of Chandernagore to arrest Charu Chandra

misinterpretation of the existing Extradition Treaties by the Bengal Government, which

residing in French India.

was Chandernagore. In addition to the political struggles which were witnessed by

interests were British and could only be British.25

Beginnings of the Nationalist Trend in Politics

After Shanmugam Vellayuda Modeliar, power shifted to his contemporary Gaston

eliminating radicals and nationalists of maintaining itself in power.

development. According to Governor Angoulvant, the economic development of the colony

Senate and the Chamber of Deputies demanded,

administration committees. The French administration believed that the nomination of a

the Pariahs against the Hindus so as to weaken his power’.29

supplementary for construction of drinking water wells in different paracherrys (Pariah

place in Karaikal. The re-arrangement of the communes Villianor, Bahor, Olgarat,

“La solution des questions politiques et économiques ne souffre plus de retard. Le

“L’usine électrique établie par la municipalité de Pondichéry, tout en illuminant la

En un mot, un régime de progrès réel et efficace, remplaçant une période de 25 ans

Mandjinicavoundin and Sadassivanaicker. Sadassiva, the chief supporter of Lemaire, pledged

spread communalism in Pondicherry. Nandagobalu, the assistant mayor of Pondicherry and

following were results of the election:

Total voters: 41,239

Louis Sinnaya: 14,334 (79.9%)

which was confused and ignorant one way or other.41

candidate Lemaire who was supported by Gaebelé, Cornet, Vallabadasou, Gnanedicome,

were a few fatal injuries.”47

Gaebelé, Paul Goubert, Nandagobalu, Narayanassamynaik, Pourouchottamanaik and Louis

Villianor, Tirubuvanai, Bahor and Nettapakkam to manipulate elections results in favour of

Blysen. The municipalities of Pondicherry and Mudaliarpet controlled by Gaebelé and Le

coolies of Couruoussoucoupam and Narayanassamynaik, Pourouchottamanaik and Louis

Savana in favour of Lemaire. The settlement of Yanam, controlled by Bezavada Bapanaya,

journal ‘Annales coloniales’ observed:

“pour l’intéressante population (indienne) qui a réussi à secouer le joug odieux de ce

Political situation in Chandernagore was changing in a dizzy pace. Poul Blysen

him in an embarrassing position.54 The election of a Socialist deputy to the Chamber of

French administration of the settlement as follows:

“Bonomali and Bholanath practically govern Chandernagore. The Kotwal (Police

the festival of Mangoes and peace was restored.

‘anti-French’ activities in the settlements. He affirmed that boycott of European merchandise

caused irrepressible violence in the settlements. Pondicherry, covering an area of 29,145

Deivagassamany a supporter of Pierre, in Karaikal was brutally murdered. Alliamarecar, a

Deivagassamany was engaged, Cattapoullemarecar, a supporter of Gaebelé, was elected by

French India as it was done by Shanmugam Vellayuda Modeliar in the past.

Table 5.3 Results of the Conseil général Elections in October 1911

La Porte, Richard and Radjamanicame. The candidates travelled in their respective

‘Clerical Party’. In the eyes of Governor Martineau,

difference of opinion arose between two high-caste leaders Couttia Sababadypoulle of

by Pondicherrians. In March 1914 Gaebelé convened a congress of elected members of

thus set in Paris.71

Radical-Socialist independent’. He was inspired by Radical Socialists of Cochin-China,

the inhabitants of French India was their prime concern.

Table 5.4 Results of the Deputy Election in April 1914

friendship between the inhabitants of the settlements and the French.