The Indian Ghadar Movement South East Asian, Japanese and Canadian Connection

Copyright M.S Ahluvalia

The history of Indian nationalist movement witnessed many important features in the first two decades of the twentieth century, which were aimed at revolutionary conspiracies with a view to overthrow the British Government in India by violent means. Massive studies on the theme from the Indian National Congress point of view, have concentrated more on leading Congress personalities during this phase. The Indian people and the Indian subjects, who shared the view of freeing India by revolutionary means, have received less attention.

The differences in character and nature of the freedom movement of both the groups can be studied in different phases- the first phase from 1857 to 1905, followed by the second phase from 1905 to 1920 and final phase from 1920 to 1947. Of these three phases the second phase may be termed a “Second Revolution” which undoubtedly marked a new trend in the Indian nationalist movement.

The ‘Second Revolution’

The general view of the moderates in Congress, as is well known, was centered on the belief that the safest and surest road to achieve the goal of independence was through the confidence and good wishes of the British. The other groups, however, such as ‘Bengal revolutionaries’ and ‘Punjab revolutionaries’ did not believe in the policy of pacification but rightly believed that in order to win freedom, they needed to put pressure on the British rulers through various means including violence. The Ghadar movement, which this brief paper tries to discuss has to be seen in this context.

The Indian revolutionary movement during the first two decades of the twentieth century, declined to some extent within India due to repressive measures imposed by the British India. The British employed all it available pressure to the revolutionary movement within the sub-continent. When pressure increased by the day, the Indian revolutionaries fled abroad and renewed their revolutionary work from their new basis, especially in North America and Europe.

The movement made rapid strides in foreign lands from the Indian settlers. It will therefore, not be an exaggeration to say that during the period of First World War, the Indian revolutionaries in Canada and America became dominant actors in the Indian nationalist movement. Under the banner of Ghadar Party and co-operation with its Indian Committee in Berlin, the revolutionaries absorbed all possible aggressive and violent methods as means of liberating India from the British.

The geneses of the movement

Sardar Sohan Singh Bhakna was one of the founder members and was elected as its first President, while Lala Hardyal was its General Secretary and Pt. Kanshi Ram its Treasurer. The party which was formed around November 1913 had its headquarters at San Francisco, with branches at Tokyo, Shanghai, Manila, Hong-Kong, Jakarta, Sumatra and Malay States and various other parts of South-East Asia, from Chiangmai in the north, to the remote island of Mindanao in the Philippines.

The Ghadar Movement and the South East Asian connection

The territories of continental Asia and the offshore Philippines and the Indonesian archipelagos, which lie to the south of China and east of India (politically referred to as SEA) was always a part of Indian civilization and was always attracting for Indians to migrate there since the beginning of the Christian era. India and SEA had thus well-established relationship and had settlers from South India as well as from North India. When the Ghadar emissaries arrived in SEA to bolster support from Indian residents, it were mostly the north Indians, mostly Punjabi Sikhs, Pathans and Indian Muslims from South India, showed an eagerness to join the movement. Most of them not only supported the movement but also played an active part as revolutionaries. It was, however, the Punjabi Sikhs and Pathans, who were not only ambitious and had aggressive outlook, but also had the experience of being in the Indian Army. Thy were absorbed in SEA, most of whom found their niches in the rank of military, police and as watchmen/security guards.

Most of the Sikhs were either invited by their relatives, who previously had come and settled in various parts of SEA, which promised good prospects to the immigrants. The other important factor was that it was easier and cost a lot less than the one to the USA and Canada. It is estimated that a trip from Punjab to SEA in 1911 only cost about Rs. 12. The journey would begin from Amritsar to Calcutta by train. From Calcutta, they would sail to Malay States, as Calcutta was the nearest and most convenient port with a regular steam-ship operating between Indian and Malay States. (1)

There were two other routes commonly used by the immigrants in their odyssey to SEA. The first was an overland route and other via the open seas. The overland route ran through Bengal, Assam, Manipur, thereby reaching Siam, or it was possible to pass through southern Siam and onto the Malay States. The sea route was a bit longer, sailing to Sumatra, Java, through Strait of Borneo, finally reaching Borneo and the Philippines. (2)

It is interesting to note that by the time the First World War broke out, the Indian communities, especially the Sikhs, were well established in South East Asia. The first Punjabi Sikh settled in Manila around 1902. Some Sikhs learnt that, as an American colony Philippines can provide them with golden opportunity to enter the USA. Since then the Sikhs maintained a slow but steady, stream of migration to the Philippines. (3) Many of them who had settled both in Sumatra and the Philippines were deeply involved in the revolutionary movement to overthrow the British rule at home. (4)

In Siam, the Sikhs are mostly concentrated in Bangkok, Chiangmai and Phuket and most of them have secure business, particularly in and textile industries. The Sikh population and Bangkok had grown to a sizeable number so much so as to warrant a Gurudwara which they built there. By he second decade of twentieth century the Sikh community was widely spread throughout Siam with several Gurudwaras. The largest Punjabi Sikh communities, however, were settled in Malay States and Singapore, mostly employed as policemen and army personnel. In Singapore, the Sikhs began to arrive around 1875 and by 1912 there was a Sikh Gurudwara at 175 Queen Street. (5)

Looking at this development, it is not surprising that the Indians, particularly the Sikhs were well established in SEA during the second decade of the twentieth century. For example when First World War broke out, the Indian population in Thailand alone, rose to 2000 and most of whom were Sikhs. A large number of them also settled in Sumatra and Philippines, Deli, Medan and on the west coast of Sumatra. It is interesting to note that they were heavily involved in revolutionary movement to overthrow the British rule in India. With their concentration in Southeast Asia, several branches of the Ghadar party sprang to life.

Ghadar Network in Southeast Asia

The Ghadar party branches in the Southeast Asia region developed adequate links with the party headquarters in San Francisco. At the same time there was a sincere attempt on the part of the revolutionaries, that ghadarwallahs would never succeed in entering India without establishing a network of Ghadar branches in Southeast Asia. The establishment of branches therefore, became a priority in the Ghadar thinking. (6)

Most of the Ghadar branches were established in neutral territories such as Manila, DEI and Siam, which proved safe harems for their activities. (7) Again the report of Lahore Conspiracy case indicates that’ Before the departure of the main body of men from USA and Canada, a certain numbers of Ghadarites were sent to various parts of SEA with a similar objective to establish branches of the Party, subscribe money and so forth. (8)

The circulation of revolutionary literature

During the First World War, the Ghadarites used SEA as a base of their activities in their endeavourer to liberate India from the British rule. From its headquarters at San Francisco, the Ghadar Party began publishing a newspaper, ghadar (rebellion), which was circulated in Indian expatriate communities all over the world. The first editorial of the Ghadar paper declared: “Today there begins in foreign lands, but in our own country’s language, a war against the British Raj. What is our name? Ghadar. What is our work? Ghadar. Where will ghadar break out? In India. The time will soon come when the rifles and blood will take the place of pen and ink.”

The second method used by the revolutionaries to achieve their objective of establishing Ghadar branches throughout SEA. The revolutionary literature came in to SEA via the mail from San Francisco, which in turn, came to Hong Kong and Tokyo. It was freely distributed through the Ghadar branches in Manila, Batavia, Bangkok and Sumatra. This medium was also used for transmission of revolutionary literature to India till the Siamese Government prohibited it in 1916.

II

The Ghadar Movement- Japanese and Canadian connection

Lala Hardyal was arrested in 1914 in San Francisco on the charges of rebellion. Soon he slipped out of America and out of the movement. However, the Ghadar Party in Canada decided to test the government’s tough entry restrictions against Indian immigrants. They chartered a Japanese ship Komagata Maru, to bring 376 Sikhs from Hong Kong and Far East to Vancouver.

It was thus a two-pronged strategy of the Ghadarites. In the first place it included sending emissaries from its headquarters to Southeast Asia to pass on the ‘true story’ about the British rule in India and secondly to incite them to join the rebellion and also by supplying arms and ammunition to the revolutionaries. There is no denying the fact that without the Ghadar branches in SEA region, the Ghadarites would have found it very difficult to continue their mission.

The First World War gave an opportunity to the Ghadarites to appeal for the achievement of independence of India with arms. Immediately after the beginning of the war, the Party appealed to its members to return to India for this purpose. Many of them used Japanese ships. Many of them used Japanese ships including Tosa Maru and Komagata Maru. It is rightly believed that the Komagata Maru mirrored the modern history of Japan and her expansionist phase. In that process the ship came across Indian Nationalism.

The First World War provided a ‘golden chance’ to Japan to expand her political and economic interest in Asia. Japan occupied Tsintao of China with the British co-operation and did not hesitate to suppress the Indian mutiny in Singapore at the request of the British. It may not be accidental that many Ghadarites used Japanese ships. (9)

Immediately after the war, there was a propaganda call of the Ghadar party which appealed the achievement of independence of India with arms. It appealed its members to return to India for this purpose. At the same time just before the war, the Party even tried to exert its influence on the passengers of Komagata Maru.

The Komagata Maru Voyage

In order to test the government’s tough entry restrictions against the Indian immigrants the Ghadarites chartered a Japanese ship Komagata Maru to bring 376 passengers from Hong Kong and Far East to Vancouver. (10) The original name of Komagata Maru ship was Sicilia which was built by C. Connell and Co., Glasgow in 1890. It was earlier used as a cargo ship. The ship changed several hands. In 1914 its owner was Shinei Kisen Soshi Kaisha.(11)

A majority of the passengers, originally farmers, who boarded the Komagata Maru ship, had left their military service recently. In other words, they were rather’ loyal subjects’ of the British Raj and the purpose of their journey was not political, but to get jobs after landing at Vancouver. It the same time, it is a well-known fact that the copies of the Ghadar, an organ of the Ghadar Party, were freely distributed inside the ship.

Shiosaki Yokichi, an owner and Engineer of the Komagata Maru, who observed the whole course of ship journey, asserts that Indian soldiers and policemen in Hong Kong came to the forefront in the movement against delay of the Governor of Hong Kong in giving a certificate of departure to the ship. He added that their action forced the Government to permit her voyage, as they feared the riot of the Indian passengers including military and policemen. (12)

The Komagata Maru reached Vancouver on 23rd May 1914. As is well known, the Canadian authorities refused the landing of the Indian passengers on the pretext of lack of through tickets from their home country and $ 200 for each passenger. The Canadian authorities tried to expel the Komagata Maru by all means including the Canadian cruiser, the Rainbow. Finally, the passengers agreed to leave Vancouver on July 23rd, 1914. The difficulties that the Indian passengers faced in these two months and their sympathizers struggle are well known.

Impact of Komagata Maru incident on Japan

The Japanese reacted to the Komagata Maru incident in the final stage when the relations between the Canadian Government and the Indian passengers reached a critical phase. This is amply proved by the newspaper reports in the Japanese newspapers. However, the newspaper reports indicate only the anxiety about the lives of the ship captain and other crew of the Komagata Maru.

The Japanese newspaper reports, such as Osaka Asahi Shimbun, indicate that they basically tried to keep ‘neutral’ in this matter perhaps because they understood that it was a problem between the Canadian Government and the Indian passengers, though the Japanese ship accidentally came to the scene. However, it is to be noted that at least Japanese journalism did not take hostile attitudes towards the Indian passengers in spite of the trial that the Japanese captain and crew faced.

This is also known from the attitude of the Japanese mission in Vancouver. The Japanese Foreign Minister instructed the Japanese Consul that ‘the Japanese Government has nothing to do with this matter as the hiring of the ship is a purely private matter’. (13)

It may appear logical that the problem of the payment for chartering charge attracted the attention of the Japanese Government. However, what the government was seriously concerned was the fate of the Japanese ship and her crew. After the Komagata Maru left Vancouver, the Japanese Consul in Vancouver reported to the Kato (Japanese Foreign Minister) that the captain was not worried about the coming voyage and that the Indian passengers had not shown any harmful feelings. It is worth mentioning that there existed practical judgment and efforts to promote mutual understanding between the Indian passengers and the Japanese crew. This view is indirectly supported by Sohan Singh Josh’s remark that the “attitude of the Japanese was not anti-Indian”. (14)

The Return Journey

The Komagata Maru reached Yokohama at 7.30 a.m. on 15th August 1914. (15) Already the Ghadar Party had rendered all possible help to the passengers of Komagata Maru ship in various ways. Sardar Sohan Singh Bhakna, the Ghadar Party President, reached Yokohama before the ship arrived. He was sent by the party to meet the passengers of the Komagata Maru and spread the revolutionary message of the party. He met them with the object of laying a programme of Party for the Ghadar in India and supplied them with arms and ammunition. (16)

The ship reached Kobe at 8. a.m. on 20th August, 1914. Here the Indian residents consisted mainly of Sindhis and Punjabis who welcomed the passengers. Here Jawahar Mal, A Sindhi student, organized processions of the passengers, and they marched 150 strong around the city. Gurdit Singh (who had chartered the ship), riding a Rickshaw loaded with garlands, ending up at the British Consulate, besieging the Consul General Foster. (17).

Gurdit Singh had a commanding personality and was a fiery speaker in Punjabi and made highly inspiring speeches in the course of his voyage, especially in Hong Kong and Shanghai Gurudwaras. He was readily accepted as their leader not only by the passengers of the Komagata Maru but all those who came into his contact.

The Governor’s House at Hong Kong did not permit the landing of passengers in view of times, and the ship was forced to leave for Calcutta from Kobe at on 3rd September, 1914 at 4.40 p.m., as per the report which appeared in Osaka Asahi Shimbun on 4th September.

The Japanese scholars, who have worked on the Komagata Maru incident are of the of the view that at this stage of history ‘Japanese public opinion had not yet understood the Komagata Maru incident as their own problem, and similarly the Japanese crew of the ship wanted to get rid of the problem while they were in Japan. (18) In this sense the Komasgata Maru incident was a case which involved a divergent point of Indian Nationalism and Japanese Nationalism.

According to general Japanese understanding, the British Government and Indian passengers were the two interested parties, while the Japanese ship was accidentally chartered in this case. It was, however, the Japan Chronicle in Kobe, which devoted the largest space to the Komagata Maru affair and even carried an article on the ‘pitiable condition of the Indian passengers’. (19)

The Komagata Maru reached Singapore on 16th September,1914. It stayed up to three days but the passengers, including Gurdit Singh, were not allowed to land. It appears that the British authorities in Singapore wanted to isolate the Indian community in the Indian army in Singapore from ‘outside influence’. (20)

The Komagata Maru entered the mouth of Hoogly on 26 September, 1914. Police and Intelligence officials searched arms and copies of the Ghadar inside the ship for the next two days. On 29th when the ship reached Budge Budge near Calcutta, the passengers were told to board a special train to Punjab. Their stay in Calcutta was not allowed. However, the passengers refused it. (21) On this day there was firing from both sides of the police and the passengers and about 20 passengers lost life in this firing. (22) The remaining persons were arrested and sent back to Punjab where they were interned. The local community leaders sided with the British and disowned the Ghadarites as ‘fallen Sikhs’ and criminals and helped the police to track them down.

In desperation the Ghadarites called their leader, the Bengal revolutionary Rash Bihari Bose who managed the stage for some time and incited the Ghadarites for mutiny. However, with the help of CID, the Ghadar leaders were arrested. The trail of the Ghadar leaders was a farce. Normal legal processes were dispensed with and a special tribunal, with arbitrary authority was constituted. Forty-five Ghadarites were executed and more than 200 sentenced to long-term imprisonments. Sohan Singh Bhakna was sentenced to death but Lord Hardinge commuted the sentence to transportation for life. He was sent to Andamans and was tortured several times when he went on hunger strike against the atrocities of the jail officials.

Conclusion

The Komagata Maru incident has become a part of the Freedom Struggle in India, supported by the informal network of the Indian community and the Ghadar Party Movement. However, the Government and public opinion thought that this incident was basically the problem between the British Government and the Indian passengers though a Japanese ship was involved in the matter. This might explain the reason for their ‘neutral stance.’ At the same time, the Komagata Maru incident meant the first contact between the Japanese people and the Indian Nationalists.

The Komagata Maru incident and the Ghadar movement is the first revolutionary movement of modern India after the mutiny of 1857. It marks one of the ‘golden achievements’ in India’s fight for freedom. Unfortunately, the whole movement has not been studied in its totality. There are still some aspects which are to be clarified about this movement and historical Komagata Maru incident.

NOTES & REFERENCES

1. For details see M. S. Sidhu, “Sikh Migration to Malaya (Peninsula Malaysia), Journal of Sikh Studies, Vol. X, No. 1, February 1983, p, 112.

2. See S. Swarup,” Indians Historical Relations with South East Asia”, The Modern Review, Vol. CXVII, No. 5, November, 1965, p. 388. See also “Indians in Southeast Asia”, Link, Sept. 4, 1987.)

3. Ajit Singh Rye,” Indians in the Philippines” in I.J. Bahadur Singh (ed.) Indians in Southeast Asia, (New Delhi, 1982), p. 148; For example when the First world War broke out, the Indian population in Thailand was not less than 2000, consisting mostly of the Sikhs, vide A.C. Bose, Indian Revolutionaries Abroad,1905-1922, p.71.

4. Vide, F.O. 115/1908, “Despatch from J.B. Rentier, British Consulate General, Manila to Viceroy”, 11th November, 1915, cited in A.M. Dali,’ Ghadar Movement in Southeast Asia’, paper contributed at the 17th Conference of the International Association of Historians of Asia, Dhaka, Bangladesh in December, 2002. The present author has drawn most of his conclusions about the Ghadar movement in Southeast Asia from Dr. Dali’s paper which he orally presented at the above conference in the session which was chaired by the author of this paper)

5. Mehrvan Singh,” Sikh Institutions Overseas: Singapore”, The Sikh Review, Vol. 38, No. 1, January,1990, p. 48.)

6. Mehrvan Singh,” Sikh Institutions Overseas: Singapore”, The Sikh Review, Vol. 38, No. 1, January,1990, p. 48.

7.F.O 228/2702,”Despatch from David Petrie to J. Jordan, British Consulate General, Peking”, 16th August,1916.

8.Vide F.O. 228/2700,”Report of the Lahore Conspiracy Case”, December,1916. According to this report, among the Ghadarites who were sent to various parts of SEA, included Gurdit Singh, Jaggat Singh, Bhagat Singh, Naubhu Singh, Dhanpat Singh and Harnam Singh.

9.Vide F.O. 228/2700,”Report of the Lahore Conspiracy Case”, December,1916. According to this report, among the Ghadarites who were sent to various parts of SEA, included Gurdit Singh, Jaggat Singh, Bhagat Singh, Naubhu Singh, Dhanpat Singh and Harnam Singh.

10. Of the 376 passengers 24 were Muslims, 12 Hindus and 340 Sikhs. The Muslims were from Shahpur in West Punjab and most of the Sikhs were originally from the districts of Amritsar, Patiala, Ferozepur, Ludhiana, Jalandhar and Lahore, vide Hugh Curator, The Voyage of the Komagata Maru- The Sikh Challenge to Canada’s Colour Bar, Delhi, 1979,pp. 29,33.

11. Vide Osaka Asahi Shimbun, 23 July, 1914, cited in, Sho Kuwajima, “The Komagata Maru, Singapore and Japan”, paper contributed at IAHA, Dhaka,18-22 December, 2002.

12. See for details Yoshida Sadao, Komagata Maru Jiken (Komagata Maru Incident) Osaka, 1960,pp. 78-79.

13.Vide Kato to Hori, 16 June, 1914, Foreign Record Office, cited in Sho Kuwajima, op. cit., p. 11, and fn.8.

14. Vide Sohan Singh Josh, Hindustan Gadar Party- A Short History, New Delhi, 1970, p. 40.

15. As reported by the Japanese News Paper Tokyo Mainichi Shimbun, dated 16th August, 1914.

16. Vide Sohan Singh Josh, Baba Sohan Singh Bhakna- Life of the Founder of the Ghadar Party, New Delhi, 1970, p. 40. From Ykoham, Sohan Singh followed the Komagata Maru and, after some vicissitudes, reached Calcutta. The police was on the alert and arrested Sohan Singh on board the ship before he could land and escape. He was taken first to Ludhiana and then to Multan jail. While in detention, great pressure was put on him to turn and approver in the First Lahore Conspiracy Case, but he refused to betray his comrades. For a brief biography of Sohan Singh Bhakna see, S.P. Sen (ed.) Dictionary of National Biography (Clacutta,1972)), vol. I, pp.160-162.

17.Hugh Johnston, op. cit., p. 93

18.Sho Kuwajima, op. cit., pp.5-6.

19.The paper reported: “ Meanwhile the position of the Indian passengers is pitiable. They are all-destitute, and have not even the money to buy fruit and fresh vegetables in Kobe. On board ship they have been refused light and steam for cooking purposes…. The food on the board is of the poorest kind, and consists almost entirely of pulses. They have not even means to telegraph to India for help…. As for Mr. Gurdit Singh, he is practically a ruined man, for this enterprise has made huge inroads into his wealth. It is a lamentable story….” Japan Chronicle, 27 August, 1914. For a brief biographical sketch of Baba Gurdit Singh, see, S.P. Sen (ed). op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 122-124.

20. The Governor Arthur Young observed that “ At this time I may say, the passage of Komagata Maru through Singapore was a recent event, though the ship had no communication with the land. Yet it left a bad effect.” C.O. 273/423, No. 169, The Colonial Office Correspondence to the Straits Settlements, Public Record Office, London. Copy available in Central Library, National University, Singapore.

21.Hugh Johnston, op. cit., pp. 96-98

22. According to Sumit Sarkar, 22 were killed. Vide Sumit Sarkar, Modern India 1885-1947 (New Delhi, 1983), p. 148. According to other estimate 18 passengers lost their lives. See Bipin Chandra et. al., India’s Struggle for Freedom (New delhi,1988),p. 153.