CHAPTER - VI

COMNUNISTS AND TRADE UNIONS: BEGINNINGS TO 1937

The role of the communists and their association with

trade unionism in Madras have hardly received historians'

attention. 1 To some extent this has been confounded by

a distinct lack of analysis distinguishing between the

"Congress Socialists" and the nationalists. 2 The fo:rmer had

developed a set of trade union tactics distinctly different

from the moderate trade unions penetrating into the

unorganised workers such as toddy tappers and mobilising

them for political and economic strtiggles. 3 Though

differences existed between various trade unions in terms of

ideology those differences were for some time sidelined and

a joint front was forged in the 1937 provincial elections.

This was to prove a major achievement not only of the moderate

trade union leaders but also of the communists and the

Congress.

In this Chapter there are two sections: Section I

deals with the ideological origins of the communist groups

and their li~ited influence and Section II discusses the

1. E.D. Murphy, Unions in Conflict, A Comparative Study of Four South Indian Textile Centres, 1918-1939, pp. 135-37.

2. c.s. Krishna brings his study upto 1933 and avoids the discussion of subtle differences between t-lahatma Gandhi and Singaravelu who was to influence the later communist leaders in Tamil Nadu. See his book, Labour 1·1ovement in Tamil Nadu, 1918-1933, (calcutta, 1989), pP. 178-90.

3. This is discussed in the next chapter.

292

question of labour representation in the central and

provincial Assemblies, which they achieved in 1937.

Origins of Leftist Influence

The origin of the conmunist influence can be traced in

the Madras Presidency to the arrival of Singaravelu Chetti

on the labour scene. M. Singaravelu Chetti who is generally

called "the first communist in South Asia " 4 came to be

involved in the labour strikes of the British owned

Buckingham and Carnatic Mills. His major contribution lay

in the articles he had written to The Hindu and the Swadesa-

mi tran on the nature and character of the struggles of the

workers. 5 Through these nationalist organs he attempted,

accordi1 ;o his biographers, "to analyse and interpret

practice

factor j

movemen1

workers

the wor~

the wor~

consciOt

with" he

' _every event of the strike. This- is the key

~valuating him as a leader of the working class

ad struggles of this period". 6

'ritiD:JS and speeches at the meetings of the

'lect an ap~al to the workers to "fraternise with

" {American and other countries). 7 He ex:pected

to transcend barriers of "trade union

ss" and acquire "class consciousness". "To start

.t the message simply, "you think about your union.

4. K. Murugesan and c. Subrama.niam, Singaravelu, First Communist in South India (New Delhi, 1976 ).

5. Articles he authored are reproduced in the book cited above.

6. 1J2!2., p. 38.

7. Ibid., Appendix Ie

293

Try to understand why and what for the union has been

organised.. Then learn about various unions in the city ..

Finally get yourselves acquainted about the workers of the

State, then about the whole of India and lastly about the

workers of the other countries. Secondly study the

history of these unions. If you follow all these things you

can realise clearly what is fraternity and you can also

realise that workers of the world are brother~ 8 He

believed firmly in cormnunism which he defined , in his letter

to Mahatma Gandhi, ownership of "land and vi tal industries

in common for the common use and benefit of all the workers

in the country, will bring a real measure of contentment and

independence to our people~. 9 He wanted the ongoing anti­

colonial non-cooperation against the political autocracy to

be also followed for the fight against "capi talisti'c- _,.,_ .. ·

autocracy". 10 He argued ... our Swaraj politics do not admit of

any form of compromise in matters essential to freedom in

politics as well as freedom in industry .... 11

Singaravelu also founded the Labour-kisan Party in

1923 and an alliance between the industrial labour and the

peasants was considered as an important means of carrying

a. Ibid,

9. The Hindu, dtd. 24/5/1921

1 0 • 1!?.!.2. 11. Ibid.

294

out struggles successfully. 12 But his ideology did not find

favour with the moderate leaders such as Thiru~ Vi. Ka and

others who were in the trade union movement. 13

Singaravelu believed nevertheless firmly in Gandhian

method of struggle against the colonial power. Non-violence,

he told the assembled delegates at the Gaya Session of the

Indian National Congress, should be the method of struggle.

"We", he addressed, "send them (those "comrades" differing

from Gandhian method of struggle) our message that not only

we believe in non-violent non-cooperation.o. but that we are

going to use non-violent non-cooperation against the British

domination here" • 14 But he differed from Gandhian rrethods

in one respect. He suggested that "the workers in India

should be made a part of our Congress organisation"~ And he

wanted the Congress to lead the nation under non-violent

non-cooperation so far as to serve national strikes •••

withoot resorting to national strikes I do not think we shall

be able to severe by a hair's breadth the British domination

in India. I therefore request you (not only) to deal with .

Indian Trade Union Congress but to go direct to the workers

12. Ibid., pp. 40-41.

13. As early as 1920 Thiru. Vi. Ka desired changes in the working class conditions which, if not ameliorated, would contribute to a Bol.Sh.llik type government.

14. K. Murugesan, op. cit., p. 165.

295

and organise labour unions in the country as part of our

Congress institution" • 15 This significant argument in favour

of the workers for national liberation was again taken up by

only his followers; Congress nationalists hardly took a keen

interest in the mobilisation of the workers in Madras and

other parts of Tamil Nadu focussing 6 however, mainly on

questions other than labour. 16

But his contribution to the cause of communism lay in

ways he had contributed to involve others in propagating

communist ideals. In Singaravelu, E.V. Ramaswamy, the founder

of the Self-Respect League, found a competent person to draw

up a new progranme for the party Samadharma ( Conmunist) Party

of South India which was not desired by his co-worker,

Ramanathan. The programme chalked out by Singaravelu was to

dynamise the Sarnadharma Party for some time till E. V. R~ was

arrested by the colonial government. The Samadharma Party

aimed at achieving political independence for the country

through constitutional methods, advocating nationalising of

all means of production, distribution and public transport,

ameliorating the conditions of the industrial and the

agricultural labourers and working with redoubled vigour for

the original aims of the Self-Respect Movement. 17

appeared Singaravelu's articles/in the Self-Respect League organ,

Kudi Arasu~ popularisJng communism. His article entitled

15. Ibid., pp. 165-66.

16. See reactions of B. Shiva Rao in this Chapter.

17. Kudi Arasu, 1 January 1933 quoted in E. sa.Viswanathan, "The Political career of E. v. Ramaswami Naicker, A Study in the Politics of Tamil Nadu, 1920-49", Ph.D. Thesis, Australian National University, Canbera, 1973. A copy in .the JNU Library is available.

296

"Capitalism and Communism" defined communism as "communal

proprietorship, distribution of the fruits of labour and

profits amorq all people", 18 the predominance of the popular

voice" and appealed to the workers to strike hard to establish

a communist rule in the country. 19 This was in line with the

Manifesto of the Communist Party of India. The Manifesto

of the communist Party to the Ahmedabad Session of the National

Congress held in 1921 said: "If the Congress would lead tbe

revolution, which is shakirq India to its very foundation,

let it not p1t faith in mere demonstrations and temporary wild

enthusiasm. Let it make the immediate demands of the trade

unions its Own demands; let it make the programme of the

Kishan Sabha its own programme; and the time will soon ccrne

when the Congress will not stop before any obstacle; it will

be backed by the irresistable strength of the entire pop.tlation

consciously fighting for their material interests•. 20

The influence of Singaravelu and his communist teachings

on the self-respecters were immediate. They popularised the

celebration of May Day by organising rallies and convening

public meetings. Self-Respect Youth Leagues celebrated it as

a festive day, taking a pledge "to unite the labourers and

the depressed classes and lead them to socialism by rousing

18. Kudi Arasu, 12 November 1932.

19. Ibid.

20. B. T. Ranadi ve, "The Role of Cornnunists in the Freedom Struggle in India 11

, Social Scientist, Vol. 12, Sept. 1984, p. 7.

297

their spirit~~ 21 E.V.R. himself addressed over 50 meetings

in a month in 1933 to celebrate May Dayc In the same yearg

he, calling on Self-Respect and socialist association to

celebrate May Day, said:

An imperialism and capitalism reign supreme everywhere, all the legitimate rights of the labourers have been ignored and this evil has specially becane rooted in India, which has been rotting in slavery for many years. The capitalists have returned to p1nish labourers in the name of retrenchment,--reduction of operatives and more hours of work. 0 Labourers: All of you should join together on May Day to demonstrate the strength of your unity - For the purpose of securing the right of the working classes, strive on this day to acquire the necessary courage, strength and unity for bringing down the mighty capitalist group and imperialism and establishing a labour government on a socialistic basis.22

Singaravelu as a communist trade union leader was lesf

significant in the Madras city trade unions though in the

192il Burma Oil Canpany strike, he was seen by the Government

as the man behirrl the violence and continuation of the

strike. 23 Singaravelu was a prominent figure in the South

Indian Railway strike which was conducted in the backdrop of

the management's retrenchment policy and the transfer of the

office to the Golden Rock. 24 Though the workers were united

and conducted the strike for ten days the workers were

incapaciated by the pcompt actions of the Government. The

leaders Singaravelu and Mukunda Lal Sircar were arrested on

21. Pahuttari vu, 1 May 1933, quoted in ~o

22. _illg.,, 14 May 1933. NMR quoted in .!E!2•4> p. 173.

23 ..

24.

See Strike of Burma Oil canpany·· in the last chapter.

c. Krishna, Labour Movement in Tamil Nadu 1918-1933 (Unpublished Pfi.b.tfiesls, JNO# 1985). K. ~rugesan, op. cit., pp. 48-58.

298

23rd July 1928. The round-up of the members of the whole

Executive Canmi ttee and the strike conmi ttee followed soon

after. Prosecutions were launched against them and

sentences ranging upto 10 years were awarded though later

the tenns of imprisonment were reduced.

After this strike~ the role of Singaravelu in the

labour movement became less significant and by 1934 he

retired from the active labour movement. Mukundalal Sircar

carried on his communist activities. In the middle of the

thirties young comnunists with dedication emerged and notable

among them were A.s.K. Ayyangar, P. Ramamurthi, K. Murugesan,

P. Manickam and P. Jeevanandam, all of them later emerging

as strong trade union leaders in Madras and outside. 25

The conmunists had from the beginning had to contend

with the reformist trend in the labour movement. 26 The first

All India Trade Union Congress was held in Bombay in 1920.

Lala Lajpat Rai~ the prominent nationalist became the President

of the AITUCo The Nagpur session of the Indian National

Congress was significant in its approval of a resolution on

Labour, which defined and defended the aims and objects of

the trade unions. The resolution reads as follows:

25. c.A. Perumal and V.K. Padmanabhan, "Carurunism in Tamil Nadu, 1917-1947", Journal of Madras University, vol. LIV, No. 2, July 1982.

26. s. Sen, Workiffi Class of India, History of Emergence and Movement 1830-1970 (Calcutta, 1977), pp. 167-68.

299

"This congress expresses its fullest sympathy with the workers in India in their struggle for securing their legitimate rights through the organisation of trade unions, and places on record its condemnation of the brutal policy of treating the lives of Indian worker as of no account under the false pretext of preserving law and order. The congress is of opinion that Indian labour should be organised with a view to improve and pranote their well-being and secure to them first rights and also to prevent the exploitation (i) of Indian labour (ii) of Indian resources by foreign agencies: and that the All India Congress Committee should appoint a Conmittee to take effective steps on that behalf". 27

The labour resolution was significant insofar as

it demanded the securing of "the legitimate rights through

the organisation of trade unions". The moderate objects of

the resolution were also clear and soon differences between

the moderate and the communist organisations emerged as to

. the tactics and strategies of the working class struggles

in the depression and after. 28 Trade Unions as central

instruments of the struggles were seen differently by

different organisations. 29 In 1932 when there was a trade

union unity conference in Madras, differences between

various organisations crystaliz·ed~ The conference was held

under the chairmanship of Jamnadas M. Mehta. About 70 Union

leaders representing workers all over the country were

present. 30 Prominent among those present at the conference

27Q s. Sen, op. cit.~ pp. 221-222.

28. s. Sen, Op. cit., p. 222c

29. Ibid.

30. G.O. 1815, L. 27/8/32. P.W. & L.

300

were Chitnis from Bombay; Aftab Ali who represented the

Bengal Trade Union Federation (with 16 affiliated Unions);

v. v. Giri and Bo Shiva Rao from Madras; N.M. Joshi,

B.R. Bakhale and other representatives drawn from Lahore,

Nagpur and Jharia, etc. A majority of the delegates,

total number being 70, were from Madras. The minutes that

were discussed and later on passed as resolutions reflect

the ideological differences over the p!rpose of trade unions

in the country. As far as the clause 2 which referred to

the freedom of the country from foreign yoke was concerned,

there was no disagreement. The resolution, forging a

platform of unity, was as follows:

complete national freedom will alone bring about political and economic emancipation of the working class. Therefore the working class will put itself at the head of every genuine national struggle for freedom.31

But there was no such consensus on the question of

the short and long-term goals of trade unionso Differences

between the representatives reflected the ideological

positions of the trade unions represented at 'the platform

of unity" conference. V.L. Sastri, who represented the

Madras Corporation Workers Union, sought an amendment to

clause 1 to define trade unions as "an organ of class

evolution• was withdrawn for want of a seconder. Shiva Rao

attempted to give trade union a definition which smacked

of reformist and evolutionary character. "Trade union is 11,

his amendment ran, 11an instrument for the protection arx:i

31. ~-

301

advancement of the rights and interests of the workers

by democratic and evolutionary methods". 32 Despite the

overwhelmdng presence of the Madras representatives,

Shiva Rao's amendment was opposed by 25 votes against 11~

Following this,. Mr. Chitnis who represented Girni

Khamagar Union Dock workers Union and other 4 unions, moved

an amendment to Clause I, which gave a class character to

the trade unions. His amendment is worth full quotation.

"a trade union is an organ of class struggle; its basic task therefore is to organise the workers for advancing and defending their rights and interests; and although collective bargaining is a necessary implication of a trade union and negotiation, representations and other methods of collective bargaining must remain an integral part of trade union activities, labour and capital can not be reconciled in the capitalistic system".33

This was a classic statement of the purposes of

the trade unions which had both "economism" and

uncomprcmising "class for itself" interests<D 34 Though the

resolution above was not contested rigour of the resolution

was diluted to some extent by N.M. Joshi's amendment which

ran as "program of platfonn of unity will not exclude

cooperation with other classes whenever such cooperation

is necessary in the interests of workers". 35 With this

3 2. Ibid.

33. Ibid.

34. This formed the part of the prograrrme of the communis· party and at every meeting of the workers resolutions ~nd speeches emphasizi[XJ irreconcilability of capital and labour were made.

35. G.O. 1815. L. 27/8/32, P.W. & L. TNA.

sub-clause to the main resolution, it was carried by 22

votes against e. It was a remarkable victory for the

leftist influence in the trade unions. But explicit

support from the Madras based trade union leaders was

absent1 a certain V.RoSo Man! representing the Massey &

Coe 0 S Labour Union sided with the -militant• section of

the trade union cOD]ress. 36 The absence of any veteran

trade union leaders such as G. Selvapathy Chetti or

VoVo Giri who were prominent in Madras was a notable feature

of the Congress proceedings.

The passing of the resolution supporting the

communist line represented by Chitnis did not eliminate the

differences of opinion between the diverse groups. And

N.Mo Joshi had to appeal to the working conmittee "to

enter into discussions with the representatives of other

organisations, if necessary, for facilitating the

reconciliation of differing points of view". Differences

continued to persist in the trade unions and even N.M. Joshi

went to the extent of framing a constitution refusing

communists admission specificallyo 37

But ideological differences were not confined merely

to the corrrnunists and the moderate groups. The same would

also be found in the ranks of the reformist unions where

despite attempts to reconcile differences the divide remained

unbridgeable. The Madras Provincial Central Labour Board

36. ~-

37. Ibid.

303

38 of which the President was Thiru. Vi~ Ka, represented the

"defunct" or "insignificant"39 unions as the government

noted in its report~ But from the beginning the Board

was not effective enough to establish its hold over the

diverse unions in the city. This is clear fran the

cc:mnents of B. Shiva Rao, himself one of the Vice-Presidents

of the Board that •the Madras Central Labour Board with

which their Union (the MLU) ha_s sought affiliation was not

quite as representative a body as sane of its office

bearers claim it to be". 40

Apart from this attempt at the coordinate Central

Labour Board, attempt was also made on 16th January 1934

for the formation of a new labour political party. 41 The

objects of the new party were stated in broader terms.

(1) to estalbish a Swaraj constitution on a socialistic

basis (2) to socialise and nationalise the means of

production, distribution and exchange (3) to fight for

freedom of speech, freedom of press and freedom of

association, and {4) to establish equality of rights, adult

38. The other members were Vice Presidents, P.R.K. Sarma; R. Sabapathi Mudaliar; B. Shiva Rao; Treasurer; P.V. Subramanya Mudaliar; Secretaries, M.s. Kotiswaran and c. Basu Dev~ G.o. 2437. L. 21/11/32 (Confdl.), P.W. & L. TNA.

39. a.o. 657, 27 .4.36. Devel opnent. TAA. It is difficult to estimate its influence in Madras as one has no further information about the history.

40. a.o. 1525. L. 20.7 .32. P.w. &L. TAA.

41. a.o. 397. L. 16.2.34. P.w. & L. TNA.

304

suffrage and free primary education; means to achieve

these objects were by peaceful and democratic methodso 42

There was no mention of •classes• in the objects of the

constitution adopted at the meeting held on 30th January

1934. The President of the Labour Political Party was

T0 V. Kalyana Sundara Mudaliar, also the President of the

Madras Central Labour Boarde Despite its lofty ideals

and association of the prominent leaders with the Madras

Provincial Labour Party, it had got into deep troubles. 43

The party laid emphasis on the capture of power and

position, "the wrestling of the first from the unwilling

hands of the capitalists". 44 Nevertheless the party of the

moderate groups made no concrete criticism of the Congress

nationalists in the trade unions though there were instances

of the leaders criticising the Indian National Congress Party~~

A well-formulated ideological argument against the

Congress was formulated by R~ Raja Vadivelu in a

pamphlet dated 3.4.35e It was written as an appeal to the

press workers in Madras with the title "work to be done by

the workers in the printing presses". 46 P. Raj a Vadi velu

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

~-Unity in the ranks of the labourers eluded the party. Attempts to reach consensus failedo See for details G.O. 1550. L. 19~ 7.1934. P.W. & L. TNA.

Ibide, certain leaders also saw only the selfish Interests of the leaders associated with the Madras Provincial Labour Party, G.o. 1312,L. 16/6/34, P.W. & L. TNA.

This was in times of Municipal elections,

G.O. 931, 1 Sept 1935 (Confdl.). TNA.

305

who later identified himself with P. Ramamoorthi, A.s.K.

Ayyangar# etc. held the view that the Congress was an

organisation Of the capitalists. "Congressmen are

capitalists. They are bent upon giving as much hours

of work as possible to workers and giving them as low a

wage as possible and increasing their (own ccmforts) as

best as they could". 47 This was a reference to the Congress

nationalists such as c.R. Srinivasan, editor of the

Swadesarni tran. The pamphlet went a step further and made

comparison-between the Nazis in Germany and the congress

in India in tenns of similar methods used for political

rnobilisation. 48 The pamphlet further said "The Congress

Wl.nt to use the workers as a means to capture the seats

in the legislative assembly and become Ministers and also

want to retain the seats already captured by the help of

the workers who (sic), they want to crush". 49 This was also,

the pamphlet pointed out, the method adopted by the German

Nazis before they came to power. 50

One reference that related directly to the workers

struggle was the adoption of direct action including strike

and picketing besides mobilising public support by means

47. Ibid., p. 4.

48. ~., p. s. 49. Ibid., p. s. so. There is no mention of this extreme criticism of

the Congress in the biography of Si~g~ravelu by his

306

of demonstrationso 51 This became the characteristic feature

of the strikes conducted by the communists as against the

moderate leaders • methods or dependence on the Government

for the resolution of conflicts c

II

Communists and Trade Unions. A real beginnio;;J along

communist lines was made in the printing presses of the

Madras city. At the instance .-Of A.s.K. Ayyangar and

P. Manickam communists of Madras resolved to start a

union in the George Town area called the Madras Press

Workers Union.. In the beginning itself the carmunists

faced a rough weather from the govermnentc At the end of

the first meeting itself on the day of the union formation

A.s.K. AyyaD:Jar, the President of the newly formed Union,

was arrested for'seditious" speech he made at the

beginning and prosecuted "successfully" under Section 12.

52 K,A., I, P.C.

In the face of such pranpt action by the government,

and also for the execution of trade union goals, a centrally

coordinated body was planned. The communists organized a

central coordination of all trade unions in Madras at the

Provincial level. Notable communists were elected as union

51. The Madras Provincial Labour Board passed a resolution at the meeting held on 19.5.32, which was attended by SiD:Jaravelu chetti and Mukundalal Sircar, that''if the Government should deny the only effective weapon of picketing black-leg labour, they are indirectly helping the employer". G.o. 1322. L. 20.6.32. P.w. & L. TNA.

52. No, 101, H.F,M. pp. 101-12.

307

office bearers of the Provincial Committee. The President

of the Canmi ttee was P. Jeevanandam, Vice-President, A.s.K.

AyyaDJar (then in jail) and other 6 executive members

including P. Raja Vadivelu, the pamphleteer. 53 These

members were, however, prepared to work within the

organisation of the All India Trade Union Congress in Madras

Presidency in a coordinated manner.

In 1932, s. Hukundalal Sircar, General Secretary of the

All India Trade Union Congress made strenous efforts, s'aid

the Government report, to organise provincial branches in

Madras, but the efforts were defeated by the arrest of

Sircar for an NoffenceN under section 117 I.P.c. read with

54 section 188, I.P.c. Though primarily 12 local unions were

affiliated to the AITUC, no major change was noticed in the

trade unions. The government always was on its heels to arrest

persons connected with trade unions. Even after his release

the government trotted out another charge against Mukundalal

Sircar and arrested him under section 124-A. It was only in

1936 when the All India Press Workers Federation was held a

sort of coordinated effort was made to bring communist

dominated unions under one umbrella. The Madras Press workers

Union dominated by the communists ~-~ affiliated to the

Federation. The other unions that were represented at the

conference were Madras Tramways and Electric Supply Workers

Union, Madras Alumdnium workers Union, Madras Snuff Workers

Union, Madras Southern Mahratta Railway Employees Union. 55

54. ~-

55. f!?.!S.

308

The communists' early penetration into the press workers and

other relatively literate class of workers, though small in

nwnber, shows that the corrmunists pinned their hOJ:eS on this

class of workers as being the transmitters of their ideology

and cause.. In fact their influence was felt in the strikes

of press workers and the Tramway workers in the period

1937-39.56

Even before this, a joint effort was made to bring the

various unions together, however, under the auspices of the

Madras Branch of the All India Trade Union Congress, a

p.tblic meeting was held on 1st May 1933 to celebrate May Day.

Singaravelu who already was known as the first holster of a

red-flag on May Day in 1923, addressed the workers and

explained the significance of the Day. He also announced

that communism as obtaining in Russia was the form of

Government .best sui ted to the Indians. He founded the

party called the "Sarna Dharma Party" in South India,. the

programme of which was considered identical with that of the

communistse The resolution passed at the May Day 1933 may

illustrate the broad principles of M. Singaravelu. These

were:

( 1) this rreeting expresses its sympathy with and extends

its greetings to the working classes in India and

abroad in the struggle against the capitalist system.

56. See Chapter IV.

309

(2) this meeting reiterates its birth in the Trade Union

being an organ of class struggleo

(3) welcomes the All India Trade Union Congress as the

vanguard of the Indian Working classes.

(4) and warns the workers to be free from the yoke of

treacherous leaders and declares that the emancipation

of the working classes must be achieved by the working

classes themselves. 57

Despite this comprehensive formulation of workers'

interests and tactics, the influence of the communists in

the Trade Unions had not J;ervaded deep and there was rm.1ch

ground to be coveredo

Though the communist branch in Tamil Nadu had a small

following in the state, the leaders planned to broaden

their influence among the proletariat of the industrial

class and the peasants. The materials seized from the

houses of v.K. Narasimhan, Rajavadivelu, K.s. Bhashyam and

So Venugopal show that they were attempting to make inroads

into the places where there was no trade union and J;easant's

organisation in a "lawful" manner.

The prescribed material titled "A Letter to the

Canmunist Ccmrades in the Tamil Nadu" began the sentence

as follows: "Legalism is a detested term in our literature.

57. G. O. 13 58. L. 22/6/193 3. P. W. & L. TNA.

•

.:HU

Illegal organisations play the greatest part. A canbination

of legal activities with illegal ones appears to be

absolutely essential in the present stage of our class

struggle in Tamil Nadu".

This dilemma of the ccmnunists to carry on "illegal

activities" under the cover of "legal organisation" was

based on the recognition that the Government of Madras and

the other opposing forces had becone "extremely alive to the

- 58 danger of corrrnunism" in the Presidency. The leaflet made

a proposal (not actually implemented) to set up separate

organisations for peasants and industrial workers:

"Kudiyanawan Munnetra Sangam•• (Peasants • Progress

Association) with an organ of its own .. Kudiyanawan .. and a

labour organisation "under some harmless Tamil name with its

own organ .. Tolilali ~~~ 9 (worker)

This latter force, it was argued in the leaflet, once

completely organised into one immense organisation under the

guidance of communists, "can be easily converted into the

vanguard of the revolution". ..But" cautioned the leaflet,

"a few communists should be pliable enough to forget their

communism for a time and organize the labourers on Trade Union

lines. Till the organisation is complete, they must behave

1 1 f d ni . nd thi "60 on y as e t tra e u on~sts a as no ng more ••• The

role of the communists among the peasants must be, in the

initial stages, along economic lines: "the peasant organisation

58. File No. 44/84/34 p. 8, NAI.

59. Ibid., p. 9.

60. Ibid., p. 9.

Poll. Home Dept. Govt. of India,

311

should deal with the economic problems of the peasants,

intercede on their behalf whenever they are oppressed, help

them against Marwaris, Pathans and Chettis and do what

other similar things could be done for them. When once

the whole of the peasantry is organised, the Aland for the

peasants" campaign should commence".61

A leaflet entitled NHow to organise the Peasants of

Tamil Nadu" focussed attention on peasants' question. It

called for an unexecuted conference at Salem of peasants

for drafting a constitution.

The constitution, it said, "be within the bounds of

law, let the objects be vague and indefinite so as to amplify 62 them in the future 11

• The orga ni za ti on of the :r;::ea sa nts

must be carried out by "a dedicated cadre of cOITlmunists who

should be as far as possible known communists or young and

impressible lads in utter poverty who can be easily coverted

to the communist creed". 63 Though this well-thought out

programme was not immediately put into execution, the

leaflets reveal the cautious course with which the communists

were prepared to go to peasants and industrial proletariats

for purposes of struggle against the colonial power and for

establishment of a communist rule. Another important feature

62. "How to Organise the Peasants of Tamil Nadu", enclosed in the File No. cited above. p. 11.

63. ili,g.

312

was that there was hardly a criticism of the Congress

ideology specifically in spite of the general attack that

attached to uthe bourgeoisen. 64

But developments in the following months showed that

the Government Of Madras was girding its loins to liquidate

the influence of communists in the Madras Presidency by

savage repressive laws, framed in the early 20's of the

19th century.

Besides, there was also a small communist body called

The Young Workers League which drew its attention because of

Amir Haider Khan's association with the body. The Chief

Secretary's report to the Secretary to the Government of

India sought permission to ban the Young Workers League. The

aims and objects of the League according to its platform

of action are as follows:

The Young Workers League stands for the complete independence of this country from foreign yoke which is only possible by mobilising and organising all the workers, peasants and other anti-imperialist forces; thereby overthrowing British imperialism and its allies by mass action, and establishing a workers and peasants republic in India.65

The League kept itself in contact with the Communist

International and carried on its contact with the Central

Committee of the Communist Party of India, Bombay. In the

64. See the following pages.

65. Government of Madras, Chief Secretary's letter dtd. 29 August 1934 to Secretary to the Govt. of India. File No. cited above. p. 29.

313

initial period,. the Government of Madras was hesitant to

take severe action against the League, for it wanted to take

action in association with other Presidenciesp since such

action was considered more lasting in the liquidation of

communist forces.66

But one person who was put under constant surveillance of

the colonial government for his political activities was

Amir Hyder Khan, described as dangerous "communist

67 organiser". He was a Punjabi whose association with the

communist party dates from 1925 when he was sent by the

Ghadar Party, San Francisco, for training in Moscow.68

In Madras, he established a local branch of the Young

workers League in 1931, as a nucleus of a Communist ~rty,

started study circles and formed cells in three important

mills.69 He planned to make Madras instead of Bombay the

communist centre for India. After one year's watch, the

Madras Criminal Investigation Dept. arrested and prosecuted

him for the issue of seditious leaflets. In the course of

66. Ibid.

67. Telegram of the Madras Government dtd. 3 Sept. 1934 to Home Dept., Simla.

68. Confidential report of Chief Secretary, dtd. 3rd Sept. 1934, Madras Govt. to Secretary to the Govt. of Indiao File No. cited above.

69. Ibid. There is reference to particular mills.

314

his trial, "he openly avowed that he was a canmunist and

that it was his aim to destroy the established system of

70 Governrnent 11• For that he was convicted and sentenced

to two years rigorous imprisonment. While in Salem Jail,

undergoing terms of imprisonment, he wrote a letter to Spratt,

which reveals his deep canmunist comrni trnent. He regretted

in his letter that the conununistsin Bombay were not

establishing their contact with Madras and not doing what

was required of them. "Therefore", he asked Spratt,

"you (Spratt) should insist on our Bombay comrades for all

around support to Madras and nOthing more will console me

than Bombay fulfilling its obligation to Madras. 71 After his

release in 1934, he met his old associates in Madras and told

them that "their tactics must be changed and that most of

the members must engage in open activities and try to win

over members of the Labour Party, the Congress Socialist

Party, and Self-Respect League". 72

We do not have full information about the individuals

associated with Amir Hyder Khan, though he was known to not

70e Madras Chief Secretary's Report, 3 Sept. 1934.

71e Letter dtd. 15 Sept. 1934 from Amir Haider Khan, Central Jail, Coimbatore to Spratt, enclosed in the File No. 44/84/34. Harne. Poll. Dept. NAI.

72. .!.£!.2., Po 39.

315

more than half a dozen trusted rrembers of the Young workers'

League. 73 Seizure of materials from persons such as

V.H~ Narasimhan, Rajavadivelu, K.s. Bashyam and s. Venugopal

show that at least these members were closely associated with

him, though V.K. Narasimhan told the police that he had

received the materials by post from an unknown person.74

Though these individuals we do not come across in the later

period from 1935 to 1939 prominently in the labour front,

their preference to work in secrecy or underground in the

face of every vigilant colonial government further narrowed

down their sphere of activities in Madras and other parts

of the Presidency. The attitude of the Madras government

towards the corrmunists can be grasped by its stand on Amir

Hyder Khan~ "He is demonstrably a most capable organiser1 and

that his recent imprisonment has not taught him the error

of his ways except in so far as he has decided to work still

deeper underground in the future. Amir Haider Khan is

clearly a menace to the peace, not only of the Madras

Presidency, but, indirectly, of the rest of India as well.u"75

73. Govt. of Madras Chief Secretary's report dtd. 3 Sept. 1934 to Secretary to Government of India. File No. cited above.

74. Confidential Report of the Special Branch, Criminal Investigation Dept. 2nd Sept. 1934. Enclosed in the file cited above.

75. Appendix to correspondence, enclosed in the file cited above, p. 40.

316

The description of the colonial state apparatus as "semi-76 supressi ve" minimises the savage repressive measures

against the communists in particular. Even if not incrimina­

tory evidence was found or forthcoming a person could be

interned under the Criminal Law Amendment Act77 or the

Madras Regulation Act 41 of 1819. In fact# the Government of

Madras proceeded to intern Amir Haider Khan second time under

the Regulation 14 of 1819 for his preferred Secret Communist

activities. 78

But the arbitrary arrest of leaders on the pretext of

dangerous propaganda was not even acceptable to a certain

section of learned judges. When the Govt. of Madras arrested

and attempted to prosecute Nimbakar, the Meerut fame communist,

for his speech in Madras, Justice King did not approve of

his arrest and prosecution.79 This seemed to block the

Government's move to tighten the grip over communist

activities. In view of stern government measures results of

the communists' activities were not considerable. The Madras

Provincial Corrmi ttee of the communist party of India reported

to the Central Commdttees the modest progress that was made

in the Madras Trade Unions. It said "at Madras contact with

76. Bipan Chandra, "Struggle for the Ideological Transfor­mation of the National Congress in the 1930s" in Social Scientist, vol. 14, August-Sept. 1986, p. 27.

77. See notes by officials in File No. 44/88/34 Poll. Home Dept., pp. 4-5, NAI.

78. Ibid., p. 40.

79. See for details, File No. 7/15-1935, Poll. Home Dept. NAI.

317

a number of workers belonging to various professions is

established". 80 This might refer to the Aluminium Workers,

Tramway workers and the Press workers. But the party work

was not smoothly carried on as there was no "capable" wholetime

party worker to direct the work. 81 This factor contributed

to the negligible influence of the communists in Madras. The

report took pride in the fact however that at a provincial

workers • conference called by the "reformists", 8'our people

opposed the policy of class collaboration advocated by the

President. He was hooted out. But it is significant to

note that delegates from Trichy supported the communists than

those from Madras, who were generally reformdsts.82

The report makes a perfunctory reference to the

activities of the communists and it is difficult to assess

exactly its influence in the working class circles. The report

said, the communists had contact with workers and strikes

were success fully led~ But "spontaneity" was a feature of

those strikes. 83 Practical problems of Union formation

remained uppermost in their minds. Though there was four

month's propaganda among the workers, unions were difficult

to fonn. They admitted "cent per cent union is not possible

80. No. 931, 1 Sept. 1935 (confdl~)

81. Ibid.

82. Ibid. II

83. Ibid., Though they admitted that their: propaganda with regard to wage cut and Ahmedabad workers• wage standard provision have played its role".

318

yet". 84 Much more realistic assessment was the admission

by the Communists themselves that formation of unions among

the workers led to victimisation by the employers of the

workers. The result was the formation of "sectional unions

among the workers•.85 There were divisions in the already

established unions such as the municipal workers • unions.

Sane of the scavergers of the Madras Corporation fonned

"the Labour •s protection League•_ canposed mostly of Telugus.

They fell under the influence of the cOimlunists and attempted

to remove P.R.K. Sarma and others who were leaders of the

Madras Corporation Workers Union. 86

The formation of a sectional union on communist lines

was a part of the lon;Jer programme of the All India Congress

Socialist Party. Organisation of peasant and labour uhions;

entry into such Unions where they existe:r:for the p.trpose of

developing and participating in the day-today economic and

political struggles; intensification of the class struggle 87 of the masses, etc., formed the part of the party prcgrarnme.

In accordance with their programmatic plan, the

communists were able to permeate the already established

Unions. The Aluminium Workers Union, the Tramway Company

Union fell under their control. They started a sort of

84.

85.

86.

No. 931 Ibid.

G.O. 2046.

1 September 1935 (Confdl.).

L. 17/9/35. P.w. & L.

87. Other programmes and demands included the right to form unions, to strike and to picket; canpulsory recognition of unions by employer~ etc. no. 931. 1 Seot 1935 (confdl).

319

general union called the Tholilalar Ayykia Sangam (the

United workers' League).

But the activities of the communists were carried out

in the hostile environment. The Government kept a close

vigilance over the activities of the communist groups. It

had clamped down even repressive laws on the communists. In

1934, the Communist Party of India with its sub-committees

and branches and the Young Workers League, Madras, were

proscribed under the C.L.A. Act of 1908. 88 Amir Haider

Khan who was attempting to form a provincial branch of the

Communist Party of India was interffned under the Madras

Prisoners Regulation 11 of 1819. 89 This however did not

prevent the spread of communist influence as his followers

were able to receive instructions from Bombay and form

provincial branches in the Madras Presidencyo 90

Moreover even the expression of certain views on the

classes or the government would lead to prosecution of the

leaders, in particular, of the co11U1lunist party. The

Government kept in readiness the section 153A of the Indian

Penal Code to prosecute leaders on the ground of causing or

tending to cause hatred among the classes of "His Majesty's

Subjects ... 91 The government thought of prosecuting

88. Ibid.

89. Ibid.

90. Ibid.

91. 839. 28.9.33. (Confdl.), TNA.

320

E.v. Ramaswami Naicker for his denunciation of the government

and advocacy of the Russian type government for India.92 But

the government dropped the idea since the words used by E. v .R.

did not denote .. a well-defined and readily ascertainable

group• and lacked 11Scme element of :permanence or stability in 93 the group". But this was not the case with the communists

who had a well--defined concept of class struggle and who

advocated militant course of action against the government

for which they were prosecuted and sent to jai1.94

Nevertheless, E.V.R. 's editorial writing entitled

"Why Today•s Government should be Overthrown" in the Kudi Arasu

of 1 November 1933 brought the government to clamp down

the paper and arrest him. On 30 December 1933, E.V.R. was

clapped into prison for writing that editorial and was

charged with inviting the people to overthrow the constituted

authority by force. He did not challenge the charge. Instead

92. Speeches such as the following one did not come under the Section of 153 .A, so held the Ag. Advocate-General, ~hen we say that this country should be benefitted and that t~ present system of government. Should go we do not want the wrong government, if, under it, no good will result to the person who works very hard, what is the use of doing away with the existing government and introducing Rama 's government if the labourers subjected to hardships as of old". Speech of E.V.R. dtd. 7.2.33 in 839, 28.9.33. (Confdl).TNA.

93. Ag. Advocate General's comment dated 9 May 1933 in G.O. 839. 28.9.33 (Confdl). TNA.

94. We have seen above how A.s.K. Ayyangar was arrested immediately after his formation of the union of the Madras Press Workers.

321

he preferred to send a written statement to the court

this effect:

For the last 7 or 8 years I have been propagating the principles of socialism in a democratic way with the aim of bringing about social and economic equality among the people. This is in no way offence. Whether the government takes any proceedings against me or not this has given me an opportunity to show to my followers that they should also be prepared to face such repressive

95 measures that might be let loose by the government.

In the place of the Kudi Arasu a new organ Puratchi

(Revolt) was established and it professed to carry on the

task. Its main object was not "to get rid of white

capitalists and the rule of the whites and replace them by

black capitalists and the rule of blacks, but to get rid of

the capitalists as a class and all religions to secure to all

people equality in life irrespective of sex or status". 96

But in fact this profession was not maintained and the

paper increasingly came to display the whole cause of the

movement as reforrnistic and as meant to work within the bounds

of law. This tactical move on their part was consciously

made to stave of£ Government's heavy hand. But the influence

of the Self-Respect movement was felt in another quarter.

The increasingly pro-government attitude of the Self-Respect

movement disturbed the committed leaders in the movement.

In June 1936, P. Jeevanandam formed the Tamil Nadu Self-

Respect Sa~adharma Party, a break away group of Self-Respecter

95.

96.

Periyar's 89th Birthday Commemoration Souvenir, p. 77, quoted ins. Ea.Viswanathan, QP.. cit., pp. 174-75.

Puratchi, 26 Nov. 1933 quoted in s. Ea.Viswanathan, op. c1t., p. 175.

322

socialists. ~ Unable to prevent the amalgamation of the Self­

Respecters movement and the justice party by E.V.R.,

P. Jeevanandam led a small band of Self-Respecters into the

Tamil Nadu Coo;;Jress SOcialist Party which was dcminated by

the communists.97

But the unique feature Of the ex-Self-Respecters who

made up one important group within the Tamil Nadu communist

movement was that they had considered as their aim the total

reform of Tamil society. In this transforrration hCMever the

anti-Brahman aspects of Self-Respect were submerged and the

ex-self-Respecters began to work in the canmunist movement

alongside Brahmans who with similar aims were drawn into

communism through the National Congress. 98

II

CLAMOOR FOR I.ABOOR REPRESENTATION •

One of the persistent demands of the articulate trade

unions was for the provision of representation of labour

interests in the Central Assembly and Provincial Assemblies.

Though by 1935 Government of India Act labour representation

was minimally obtained in 1937, it had not enabled labour to

alter the structure of the obnoxious laws regulating capital

and labour relations. This was inspite of the fact that the

97. E.D. Murphy, op. cit., p. 135.

98. !E.!,g.

323

Indian National Congress with which trade unions had been long

associated was in the saddle. Differences between the

Congress and labour that were submerged under the mantle of

anti-imperialism during the elections emerged which showed

a widened rift between the Congress and trade unions.

One of the persistent demands that was raised and passed

at the workers meetings concerned the representation of labour

in the Central and Provincial legislatures. Since the India

Act of 1919 only one representative, N.M. Joshi was nominated

as a representative of labour "interests". 99 The Report of

the Franchise Committee did not consider the direct election

of representatives of 11classes" or "interests" worth

undertaking. Its argument is worth quoting in full.

In assignin;; the number of seats in each council to which non official representatives may be appointed by nomination we have been guided by the existence of important classes or interests which could not be expected to obtain representation by any profitable system of election ••• 100

The same Report acknowledged the special representation

for labour but it was only in areas "where the industrial

conditions seeiTL likely to give rise to labour problem". 101

99. s. Bhattacharya argues that in bureaucratic language "interest representation" was a surrogate for "class representation". "The Colonial State, capital and Labour Bombay 1919-1931" in s. Bhattacharya and Ramila Thapar, Situating Indian History, pp. 171-193.

100. The Report of the Franchise Committee (Lord Southborough) to the Governor General in Council 26 Feb 1919, para 24 (Calcutta 1919), p. 15 quoted s. Bhattacharya, op. cit. p. 174.

101. Ibid.

324

In 1926 the Government of India increased the number of labour

representatives from 6 to 10. Bombay secured three, Bengal

two1 the Punjab, Bihar and Orissa, Burma, the Central

Provinces and Assam one each. 102 The Government was well

aware that this modest increase still fell short of the

demaoos made by the Irrlian Trade Union congress. 103

The issue of the labour representation was left in

cold storage till the Royal Commission on Labour took up

the matter and recommended labour representation. 104 This was

one of the reasons which led the Franchise Committee headed

by Lord Lothian and one Labour leader, R.R. Bakhale in 1932

to recommend labour representation through registered trade

unions and special labour constituencies. 105

We do not have a sufficient evidence to analyse as to

why in the discussions between the bureaucrats there was no

mention of Madras as deserving a special labour representation

unlike Bombay or Calcutta. 106 There were representatives from

102. File No. 1541 (16) of 1930, Dept. of Industry and Labour, NAI; s. Bhattacharya, op. cit., p. 176.

103. Home Dept. Memorandum in File No. 1541 (16) of 1930, Deptt. of Industry and Labour, NAI.

104. G.o. 3010. L. 1/12/31 P.W .. & L. TNA.

105. s. Bhattacharya, op. cit., p. 178.

106. However ccmmunal representation for "depressed classes" was increased from 5 to 10 in the Madras Legislative Assembly. See File No. L. 1541 (16) of 1930, Dept. Of I and L.

325

the Madras chamber of commerce who decided even on the

State Aid to small scale industries in the Madras Presidency.

Three representatives one each elected by the Madras

chamber of commerce, South Indian Chamber of Commerce and

the Madras Traders Association sat on the Board of Industry

that decided the grant of aid to small scale industries in

the Madras Presidency. 107 At a well attended workers mass

meeting held on 22 June 1926, the Madras Labour Union passed

a resolution which reads as follows:

"this meeting of the MLU demands special representation for labour both in the legislative council and in the Legislative Asse~bly to the extent of 12 seats in the former and two seats in the latter in this Presidency and further, is of opinion that this representation should be not by means of ncmination by the Government, but by election through properly constituted trade unions in the Presidency".108

This was an excessive demand as far as the government

of India was concerned. Its declared policy as early as

1925 was "H.E. in Council is of opinion that there was no

case for giving urban factory labourers a separate electorate

and separate representation". 109 Besides this, the

government's public order dated 26.10.22 made things much

more complicated depriving the states of any say in the

electoral alteration. The order said "the franchise as settlec

107. File No. I. 228 (13) 228

of 1929, Dept. of I and L. NAI: 1930, Dept. of I and L. ~~I. File No. I.

108. G.O. 284, 13.7.1926. Law ~Legislative) TNA.

109. The Madras Government had communicated to the Government of India. G.O. 3010 P. W. & L. G.O. 284, 13.7.1926 (Legislative) TNA.

this problem L. 1/12/31.

Law

---------

3 26

by the rules made under the government of India Act (1919)

should not be altered for the first ten years". 110 In that

case alteration could be effected only in 1930 or 1931.

The Home Department of the Government of India prepared

a memorandum which highlights interestingly some of the

problems of labour representation. A.G. Clow in the Dept.

of Industry and Labour Government of India expressed the

opinion that labour representati~n could be secured by two

ways: one method was through trade unions electing one or two . representatives. Bombay was considered ideal place for this

test. Second was the direct election of representatives by

the workers in the industrial establishments which employed

more than 500 workers. Hoogly in calcutta was cited as a

proper constituency since it was -·inhabited by the workers

generally. The other areas did not have that much promise

of election. 111 His argument for labour representation was

the acknowledgement of the fact" e •• so long as the present

system of giving direct representation to chambers of

commerce, etc. continues, it is only right that special

arrangements should be made to secure labour representatives"; 12

The entry of the Swaraj Party to the Central

Legislative caused some consternation to the bureaucrats.

The memorandum reflected this. The Swaraj Party was

"strongly influenced by capital" and it did "regulate its

110. Ibid.

111. A.G •. Clow's note dtd. 16.10.1928 in File No. 1541 (16) of 1930. Dept. of I and L. NAI.

112. !.Q!2.

327

tactics with regard to the effect of the proceedings of the

Hoose on business interests". In ether words the entry of

the Swaraj party meant 11 a distinct strengthening of the

influence of employers, the class from which the Swaraj

Party derives its strongest support". 113 Their strength

was considered to be overwhelming and was not matched by

labour. "The efforts on behalf of labour to op~se or

modify the various proposals for the imposition of protective

tariffs met with comparatively small support. But the

Government were still in a position to hold the balance

between Partisans on both sides••. 114

The old policy of treating trade unions as dominated

by outsiders influenced the thinking on the question of

labour representation. It was considered "not necessary ..

to consider even the question whether it would be better to

secure labour representation by lowering the franchise or

by election by labour organisations. The reason was simple

in their view: 11 labour organisations in the country

represent but a small proportion of the labourers in India

and these organisations are run almost entirely by persons

who do not belong to the labruring classes". 115 This

argument was to lose force in the coming years as pressure

from trade unions for labour representation mounted. In

1932 Shiva Rao while addressing the workers at the meeting

(on 21st January 1932) mentioned the points he raised at the

113. The Home Department memorandum relating to the present representation of commerce, labour, education and the other interests in the Provincial and central Legis­latives in File No. 1541 (16) of 1930.Dept. of I & L,NAL

114. Ibid.

115. lli£.

328

Table Conference: viz universal adult franchise and adequate

representation for labour in the new government. The

resolution passed at the meeting will reflect the intent of

the workers. "This meeting of the Madras Labour Union views

with alarm the proposal before the Madras franchise committee

to enfranchise only 10% of the total population and expresses

its conviction that the denial of the franchise or the grant

of inadequate representation to the workers in ttls country

in the legislatures would make the constitution unacceptable

to themt and this meeting expresses its deep disappointment

on the absence of Labour representative in the franchise

commdttee appointed by His Majesty's Governmentq. 116

TRADE UNIONS 1 9\RTICIB\TION IN ELECTION:

The growth of trade unions registered under the Trade

Union Act, 1926 did not mark a steady increase. In 1932-33

there were about 34 trade unions in existence and in

1933-34 there was an addition of four more unions. But by

1934-35 it declined to 32 diving further into a record of

low 26 in 1935-3~ 1 fhough the list registered about 56 unions

in a11. 118

116. G.O. 4241 L. 19/2/1932. P.W. & L. Home Deptt. Memorandum, TNA.

117. G. O. 598.

118. G. O. 155.

12/3/37.

19/1/37.

Development. TNA.

Development. TNA.

329

Many of the unions whose registration was cancelled by

the CQ'llmissioner of Labour were defaulters in not submitting

their returns or in failing to comply with the trade union

Act provisions. But the main trouble was the lack of

subscriptions from the workers. This even the MLU

comparatively well organised union faced. 119 Some of the

Unions' survival was ensured only by the means other than

1 20 persuasion.

Some of the unions also enforced some "coercive"121 ·

rules demand! ng a pranpt payment of subscriptions. If a

person continued to be in arrears with his subscriptions for

a particular period which was three months, he would forfeit

his earlier amount. This was effectively enforced by the

most of the unions such as the Madras Labour Union,

Buckingham and Carnatic l•'..ill Employees Union, the Madras

Port Trust t 122 e c. It was these unions which were declared

as eligible constituents of the labour constituency.

119. File No. 878(14), 1928. Dept. of I and L. NAI.

120. B. Shi va Rao even suggested that a new rule should be formed to the effect that the Union should give help only to those members who paid their subscriptions for at least three months. Ibid.

121. Marcus Olson, The 1 ic of collective Action ublic goods and the theory of groups Harvard University Fre s s, 197 3) , pr:. 6 G -9 7.

12 2 • G • 0. 12 3 9 -4 0 • 12/5/38. Development. TNA.

330

The government of India order of 1936 provided that a

"recognised" trade union meaning a registered union under

the Trade Union Act for electoral purposes should have at

least 250 ordinary members who paid their subscriptions for

123· the whole of the year. This was a very restrictive

procedure which affected the unions under the influence of

the socialists.

The following list of unions "recognized" for electoral

purposes might illustrate the fact that the Madras Pressmen

Union and Tramway union where communist influence was strong

were not able to organize a membership of about 250 members

to be eligible for participation in elections~ 124

123. Ccmmissioner of Labour, Madras, 7 Sept 1936 in G. o. 598 12/3/1937 Developmente TNA.

12~. Some of the conditions for "recognition" of Union for electoral purposes are (a) a bona-fide trade union existing wholly or mainly for industrial or provident purposes; and (b) have been in existence for at l2ast two years and have been registered as a trade upion for at least one year; and (c) have had throughout the financial year preceding that in which the certificate was given at least two hundred and fifty ordinary members who had paid subscriptions for the members who had paid subscriptions for whole of that year; and had compiled with any requirements imposed by or under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 with respect to the inspection of its books by the registrar of trade unions and with respect to the audit of its accounts. G.o. 1431 1239-40.

29/7/1937. Public (elections); G.O. 12/5/38. Development. TNA.

331

Sl. Name of Union Date of No. Registration

1o The Madras Labour Union 24th June 1927

2. P.W.D. Workers Union, Madras 7th April 1928

3. Madras and Southern Mahratta 12th May 1928 Railway Employees Union, Madras

4. The Madras Aluminium Labour 1st Aug 1928

s.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11..

Union, Madras

Madras Port Trust workers Union, Madras

western India Match Factory Workers• Union, ~~dras

Madras Corporation Workers Union, Madras

Nellirnarala Jute Mill Workers• Union, Nellirnaraa

Madras Presidency Tannery Workers Unions, Madras

South Indian Railway Workers Union, Tirichinopoly.

Ramachandra Puram Taluk Labour Union, Ramachandra Puram

21st Mar 1930

12th April '1930

18th April 193 2

3rd June 193 2

11th Feb 1933

3rd Nov 1933

7th March 1934

Except the Madras Aluminium Labour Union where the

communists were able t0 permeate but could not dominate

and also the Madras Corr..-oration Workers Union where the

communists sowed the seeds of Cammunism, 125 the rest of the

125. This could be one of the reasons for the communists to campaign for the Congress candidates rather than stay away from the elections.

332

unions were influenced by reformism. It is difficult to

write an individual history of the unions except that we

can glean from the meetings and speeches of the leaders

general ideological leaning~ of the leaders and their

influence on the unions.

The M.L.U.

The Madras Labour Union -had a long history of

struggle, fran the beginning of its existence. The

European's management of the mills and the unionisation of

the workers by the "outsiders" forced an implacable

hostility to the MLU's existence. The Government also

viewed the Union with suspicion some times amounting to

suspecting the bona fides of the leaders' intentions.

Repression and court injunction against the union leaders

brought about caution which became the hallmark of the

union leadership, steering clear of politics as well.

But as early as November 1918, Mrs. Besant opposed

the suggestion that workers should b~iven political

education and that politics and labour should be linked

together. Her fear was due to the fact that 11 the association

(MLU) would run a risk of being nipped in the bud by the

Governme:;t". 126

126. Extract from the fortnightly report of the Government of Madras dtd. 1 Nov 1918, Home Poll. Deposit. Political Progs. March 1919, Nos. 242-9, NAI.

333

However the ideology of t~e Home Rule Movement held

sway over the labourers up to 1919. From 1920 onwards with

the spread of the nationalist movement cracks within the

labour movement developed. v.o. Chidambaram Pillai with

a mandate from the Congress founded the South Indian

Railways Employees Union in February 1920 in collaboration

12'7 with s. Kasturi Ranga Ayyangar. With the foundation of

that Union, diff:=>rences between the old labour union leaders

and the newly emerging leaders surfaced. The older group

which included Thiru. Vi. Ka and others in the New India

camp opposed linking of labour with politics. Thiru.Vi.Ka

seemed to have told that the congress refused to support

labourers in times of strikes and crisis and came to

labourers only to seek support for itself. 128

In fact even M.K. Gandhi's encounter with the workers

was not a source of strength to the latter. Addressing the

tramway workers when on strike, he said

"whether your dema:;ds ar2 reasonable or not, I cannot say new. If your demands are genuine and not solved through negotiations, strike is the only weapon ••••• However there should not be any room for a show of vengeance against capitalis~s or against those who sup:r::·ort the Manac}ement ".129

127. ~wadesamitran, 17 ?eb 1921; Home-Poll. Deposit 19 August 1920, File No. 111, August 1920. NAI.

128. :::>w:tdesami tran, 13 Feb 1920.

129. Swadesamitran, 21 Apr 1919.

334

and ended his speech with the words "God bless ycu all".

On the whole the Congress and Gandhi steered clear of

labour questions in Madras though his comments more or less

as a spectator than as a participant, tended to interpret

his gospel of non-violence in a manner that militated

against class struggle. 130

But for such occasional lapse into factionalism or

Gandhi • s over-cautious approach to Labour troubles,

permanent dissensions did not occur in the labour movement.

There was a continuous support from the Congress to the

strikes and the labour movement. Thiru.Vi. Ka maintained

strong ideological attachment towards the Indian National

Congress. Thiru. Vi. Ka 's opposition to linking labour with

politics was a cautious step to avoid a major confrontation

with the government as the labour movement was still in an

131 infant stage.

The Trade Union Act of 1926 inspite of its restrictive

features gave a new fillip to trade unions in Madras and

the MLU was registered under the Act with immunity from

legal proceedings against the union or its leaders. 132 The

130. s. Bhattacharya argues that "in the years 191.9.-22 while the Congress was reaching out to the urban working classes. Gandhi as a result of his personal intervention in Bombay Working class political action, became rather wary of using the working classes in the non­coop:!ration movement". s. Bhattacharya, "the colonial working class arrl the Anti-imperialist struggle" in Indian Historical Review, vol. XII (1-2 July 1985-January 1986), p. 273.

See rrrJ M. Fhil dissertation, Chapter 4.

But still injunction could be secured by an employer against the union activities or restraining the acti­vities of the Union.

33 5

exit of B.P. Wadia who had dominated the Union in the

years following the first world War till the court's

injunction gave way to B. Shiva Rao, also a theosophist

connected with the Adyar Society. He was more conciliatory

in tone than B.P. wadia and intellectual in understanding

complexities of labour questions. 133 He sat on the

Royal Commission on Labour as an Assistant Commissioner

in the Royal Commission sittings at Madras and his

persistent questions on the positive advantages arising

out of the MLU reveal more than his belief in the existence

of the Union as a positive contributor to the development

of industrial relations between capital and labour.134

Being a theosophist, he advocated a separate political

labour party for workers rather than identify himself with 13.

the Congress organisation. 5 B. Shiva Rao lashed at the

congress organisation and wanted the workers to keep

themselves away from it. Also he wanted the workers not to

align with the Justice Party either. Though he provided

no explanation for such distance in the pre-depression

period, his association with the Home rulers at Adyar made

him suspect the intentions of the Congress Party. He made

it a matter of faith by explicitly stating that "I will never

133. His book reveals the depth of his understanding and sympathetic consideration of the workers problems in the country. See his book. The Indian Industrial worker (London, 1939).

134. Royal Commissicbn on Labour, vol. VII, Part II, pp. 173-174, pp. 188-89.

13-5. The Labour Canmissioner 's report for January 1927, File No. L. 878(14) of 1928. Department of I and L. NAI.

-

336

join the congress" • 136 He criticised the Congress members

for their double role: wearing khaddar outside their house

and using foreign made materials at hane, and felt that

137 amounted to "insincerity and dishonesty" on their part.

But this extreme view was not shared by all the trade union

leaders - in particular Thiru. Vi. Ka and others. Thiru. Vi .Ka

in spite of his initial hesitant stand, wanted the

138 association of the workers and the Congress. This brought

him into conflict with the Congress. The Congress refused

to accept his candidature in the Madras corporation elections

unless he accepted the Congress creed, 139 the sitting

councillor and the Congress member checkmating him. 140 Only

G. SelvaP9thy Chetti had to contest and was declared

elected and his victory was considered in labour circles

as a great triumph for the union".141

The defeated candidate

was Bhaktavasalam Naidu, the Congress candidate.

In the. 1927 Municipal elections in Madras city the

Swaraj suffered a disastrous set-back winning only four of

the nine seats it contested. Significantly ·four of the five

defeats were in the Municipal divisions where the vote of

136. Swadesamitran, 22 April 1937.

13 7. Ibid.

138. Ibid. The sane dtd paper criticised strongly the vie,.,s of Shiva Rao editorially. He said that "the workers should have a national outlook which will come only through their associaticn with a national organisation such as the Congress organisation. The Congress does not represent one class but all classes". See the editorial, ibid.

139. The Labour Commissioner's report for June 1927, ~·

140. For March 1927, Ibid.

141. For August 1927, Ibid.

337

the industrial workers was effective. 142

B. Shiva Rao•s political line of thinking ran along

the line of economic and also apolitics. He even advocated

that labour was above party politics but would support those

who supported it irrespective of the parties to which they

belonged. The Swaraj Party was invited to demonstrate

his principle, which it did by the band of the speakers

such as s. Srinivasa Ayyangar, A. Rangaswami Ayyangar,

Venkatachalam Chetti and a host of others.14 3 The Justice

Party though it did not share the platform with the Swaraj

:party, pranised to address the workers meeting in July. 14~4

But there was no such meeting and difference between the

Justice Party and trade unions were as wide as they were

between the Congress and trade unions.

Inspite of such limited vision about labour B~ Shiva

Rao often stressed the point of labour's participation in

Municipal and Council elections. 145 Elections to the Madras

14 2. E.D,. Murphy, op. cit., p. 105.

143. For June 1926, File Noe 878 (13) of 1927. Dept. of I and L. NAI.

14 4. Ibid.

145. B. Shiva Rao wanted the workers to elect labour leaders and asked them to make one of the vice-presidents of the MLU, v. Chakka~l Chetti to became the Mayer of the Madras Corporation. G.O. 2468. L. 13/11/33. P. W. & L. TNA.

Corporation were not difficult to win for the labour

candidates. G~ Selvapathy Chetti who had a long :p.tblic

career was elected twice to the Madras Corporation. 14P His

pop!larity was so high that he would win even the general

division in the corporation elections, leaving labour seat

to R.A. Raj agopal Naidu in North laboor constituency. 14 7

Once G. Selvapathy defeated even the opposition of the

Madras and Southern Mahratta Railway employees union, Madras.

This was a remarkable victory over the Union which had

reformists like v.v. Giri and others. v. Chakkari Chetti

even rose to become an alderman of the Madras Corporation

which was a tribute to his role in the Labour Movement. 148

The rift between the Labour leaders and the Congress

was always not discernable and cracks were visible only

in times of the elections. Certainly labour's independent

policies seem to perpetuate differences between the Congress

and the labourers. 149 The Congress often went the whole hog

in deciding on the candidates to be fielded in the labour

146. Ibid., G.O. 930~ L. 27/4/33~ P. W. & L. TNA.

147. G.O. 4796. 31.10.36, L.S.G. TNA.

14'8. G.O. 3952. 2/10/37. L & M. TNA.

14-9. At one of the meetings of the MLU, Manikotiswara Mudaliar announced that G. Selvapathy had to withdraw his candida'blre from the Legislative council Elections in view of the fact that "some greatmen of India were for · the boycott of Legislatures and his standing mig-ht bring in trouble between the Labourers and the Congressmen". For August 1930, 870 (17) Of 1931. Department of Industry and Labour. NAI.

339

constituencies to the City Council, which brought in sharp

criticism from labour leaders including P. Ramamurthy, a

150 Congress Socialist. ·

The MLU did not maintain a rigid independent policy

which was otherwise seen so by the Congress Committee. The

Madras Labour Union at meetings 15 ~ exhorted the workers

to vote for the congress candidates in the elections to the

Madras legislative Council. This shift in the MLUs

political stand culminated in the open declaration that

labourers should cooperate with the Indian National

152 Congress. G. Selvapathy Chetty was accepted as the

Congress candidate for the ensuing election to the Madras

Legislative Assembly.

G~ER INDIVIDUAL UNIONS

But the individual histories of the other Unions do

not provide similar ideological positions. B. Shiva Rao

made his influence felt in the ~adras Port Trust Workers

Union which was registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926.

Shiva Rao was urging the workers to strengthen the Union

and also exhorting them to 11 agitate" for an amendment of the

~~dras Port Trust Act so as to secure representation of

153 labour on the Trust. · But his influence was not very

1so. G.o. 1£?.63. 22/10/1936. Deve 1 opne nt.

151. 1.3.1935: 1.9.35; 15.3.35: 18.3.35: 26.3.35,

TNA.

G.c. 978. L. 16.4.1935 P.w. & L. TNA. A number of these hectic meetings were held only when ~-v:er ..

the election started, otherwise meetings were very poorly attended. Sometimes 30 to 50 members. Only during the time of strike the nUmbers would swell.

152. The Hindu, 23 January 1937.

153. G.O. 1211. L. 14/4/1930. P.W. & L. TNA.

340

effective as one worker was heard saying at one of the

workers meetings: "an European employer was always better

than an Indian or another man observing that ••the Swaraj ••

Congress was fighting for what would-be a "Swaraj of Indian

merchants and capitalists:154

Though this might be an exception, this comment

reflects the sense of frustration among certain sections

of the workers. It is understandable as an aftermath

of the strike of the Pressmen in the Andhra Patrika and

their treatment by the "nationalist" management. 155 Unlike

the Madras Labour Union, the heterogenous Unions presented

a s,I:ectacle of factionalism . between various trade union

leaders. 156 Differences between the leaders crystalized in

the different oppositional camps. The Madras Central Labour

Board which was an umbrella organisation of the different

unions was under the control of P.R.K. Sarma, who spread

his influence in various unions. Though the Madras Central

Labour Board (MCLB) was in existence earlier, it became

defun·c t , the late 20 • s. The credit for revival of it goes

to B. Shiva Rao who suggested that its resusistation would

154- G.O. 1066. 2.7.36. Developnent. TNA. The meeting was held on 4/5/36.

155. No. 101, H.F.M: G.O. 118. L. 16/1/31. P.W. & L: For later developments in 1937, G.O. 350, 12.2.37 Development. TNA.

156 ~ Sometimes even the workers shc:Med disenchantment with the functioning of the Union leaders. The corporation workers questioned the secretary of the union as to the funds of the union; : revolt was common among the Port Trust Workers as well. For Corporation worker' difficulties; see G.o. 3237, L. 17/11/30 P.w. & L: (we do not get full biographical picture about him)·. G.O. 2046. L. 17/9/35. P.W. & L. TNA.

341

coordinate the activities of the various labour unions. 157

158 c. Basu Dev, M.L.c. The President of the Madras

Aluminium Labour Union suggested the revival of the MCLB for

similar reasons •159 A formal inauguration of the MCLB took

place on 3rd March 1930. V.M. Ramaswami Mudalbr was elected

the President of the Board with P.R.K. Sarma as Vice-160 President. The objects of the Board among others were:

to coordinate the work of the affiliated unions on

breadlines of policy and method without detriment to the

freedom of individual unions; to settle disputes and mediate

in any matter that might be referred to the Board;

To organise dep.1tation, make representations and carry

on propaganda for the pop.1larisation of labour questions. 161

It was modest constitutional body but it set its

teeth against the communist influence in the trade union

157. File No. 878{16) of 1930. Dept. of I and L. The meeting was held on 13.10.29. NAI.

158. For a biographical note see E.D. Murphy, op. cit., p. 108.

159. His idea was that "with the object of organising a South Indian Labour Federation whose object would be to bring in all labour unions in the Presidency into its fold and acts as the mouth piece for the entire labour in the province". G.o. 118. L. 16/1/31. P.w. & L. TNA.

160. G. Selvapathy Chetti and c. Basu Dev as "Honorary Secretaries. G.o. 1211, L. 14/4/1930, P.w. & L. TNA.

161. Labour Gazette, 1 June 1930- Its constitution made mention of "Socialist" politics and it pledged to contest the elections both to the Madras corporation and the Madras Legislative Assembly. For the details G.O. 1550. L. 19/7/34, P.W. & L. TNA.

342

162 circles. The association of c. Natesa Mudaliar, M.L.c.

and N.M. Ramaswami Mudaliar M.L.c. added a conservative

tinge to the MCLB. At the meeting held on 28 December

1930 the MCLB passed a resolution against communism, which

reads as follows:

"This meeting of the labourers of Madras is emphatically of opinion that communism is inimical to the best interests of labour and strongly disapproves its introduction into trade union movement and desires that this attitude against communism should be emphasized on the Trade Union Congress and vigorous steps taken to eliminate it from that institution" .163

This anti-communist attitude was understandable in

the wake of the experience of the Banbay text! le workers

and the Southern Indian Railway employees strike under the

Communists• influence.

162. Two years later B. Shiva Rao had to withdraw his support in despair stating "the Madras Central Labour Board with which their union {MLU) has sought affiliation was not quite as representative a body as some of its office bearers claim it to be". G.O. 1525 L. 20/7/32 P.W. & L. TNA.

163. G.O. 118. L. 16/1/31. P.W. & L. 'INA. But its political constitution "Madras Political Barty" later Madras Provincial Labour Political party adopted on 13.8.1933 expressed lofty goals such e:s .. socialisation of all means of production,

distribution and exchange and establishment of a 11Swaraj" constitution on socialistic lines. G.O. 1855, L. 26.8.33. P.W. & L. TNA.

343

The Congress had its own wing in Madras called the

Madras Young Men's Labour League, T. Prakasam, a prominent

congressite, was associated with it but from the inception

it had appealed to the workers to join the Indian National

Congress. Its labour goals were not dissimilar to other

bodies. 1~ Yet the Tamil Nadu Congress hostility to the

All-India Congress socialist party which was formed in 1934

to act as a left-wing pressure group within the Congress,

was obvious, in particular that of c. Rajagopalachari and

Satyamurthy. In fact in July 1936, when P. Ramamurthy

invited A. Patwardhan, the prominent socialist member of the

All-India Congress Working Committee, to Madras to help

form a provincial branch, A. Patwardhan was refused the

facilities of the Congress office and for this the Congress

came under criticism even from Jawaharlal Nehru.165 The

MLU, inspite of its isolationist and sometimes critical

approach towards the Congress received support from the

Madras Young men's Labour League which asked the workers

to support the candidature of G. Selvapathy Chetti aoo

Rajagopal Naidu the Congress candidate for the municipal

'1 166 counc1. •

1f 4• At the annual Conference meeting, it passed a resolution 1) "This Congress requests the government to appoint a committee consisting of the representatives of labour, of employer and one representative of government to enquire into the condition of workers as they are subjected to frequent dismissals", 2) This conference requests the government to instit~te a five year plan on the lines adopted by America and Russia to relieve unemployment". G.O. 1170. L. 20/5/35, P.W. & L. TNA.

165. E.D. Murphy, op. cit., p. 137.

166. G.O. 1863, 22.10.36. Development TNA.

344

The MCLB had not only anti-communist attitude; it

even preached its gospel against the Congress and

G. Selvapathy Chetti. G •. Selva_pathy Chetti was

considered as a disruptive force in the labour ranks as he

was planning a counter labour party to the Madras

Provincial Labour Party, the hand maid of P.R.K. Sarma. 167

A. Ranganathan, Secretary of the Madras Provincial Labour

Party went a step further and -argued that there was a

"regrettable tendency" to cause a split in the labour

ranks, which was the result of the disruptive forces among

the workers themselves. 16S

Anti-congress feeling was expressed at the time of

elections. P.R.K. sarma asked the workers to elect

s. Parthasarathy standing on the platform of the MCLB and

reject the Congress candidate, 169 R.A. Rajagopal Naidu.

But both of them were declared elected in the municipal

elections in 1936. 170

167. For may 1934, P.W. & L. TNA.

G. O. 1312 L. 16/6/34.

168o The Hindu. 7 August 1934. This is contrary to evidences. The leaders were more disunited than the workers. Ideological differences between unions were not very sharp. It is difficult to understand why there were so many federations, which however reflect the disunity of the leaders than that of the workers.

169. G.o. 2080.

110. G.o. 4796.

18/11/36.

3/10/36.

Developnent.

L.S.G.

TNA.

TNA.

Opposed to this group was the South Indian Labour

Political Party with G. Selvapathy Chetti and

G. Ramanuj alu Naidu. They launched their propaganda

against the MCLB and its party, Madras Provincial Labour

Ferty "stigmatising the leaders of that party as a small

clique identifying themselves with the employers and

17t capitalists"... Perhaps reference was to the Congress

which was seen as a party of capite! ists and merchants.

B. Shiva Rao who himself gave an intellectual direction to -

the various unions appealed to the labourers not to give

room to the men inside the movement apparently pointing

to P.R.K. Sarma and other communists since they pretending

to be leaders, were really breaking up the whole movement. 172

Ideological differences were a constant feature of the

workers disunity. In 1935 there was a dispute over the

election of the President of the Madras Presidency Workers

Party at its Conference held in Madras. The post was offered

to a veteran nationalist v.o. Chidambaram Pillai who

declining to take it, instead, offered it to c. Basu Dev.

c. Basu Dev was a well-known critic of the Congress ideology

but became more inclined towards the workers. He was able

to carve out a niche for himself among the workers because

of his espousal of labour interests in the Legislative Council.

171 • G • 0. 15 50 • L. 19/7/1934. P.W. & L. TNA.

172. G.O. 657. L. 15/3/34. P.W. & L. TNA. His appeal in general was to the effect that in the face of outsider's intervention in the Union's activities the workers themselves must take care of the Union's function giving no roan for leaders manoeuvre. o.o. 1169. L. 22/5/34, P.w. & L. TNA.

346

Even G. Selvapathi Chetti asked the workers to support his

bill for workers employment security, though it was not

even considered by the Government of Madras. His election

as the President created a rift in the relations between

P. Vardharajalu Naidu and others. P. Varadharajalu Naidu '

left the meeting, questioning the election. But otherwise,

P. Varadharajalu Naidu was himself a moderate leader. At

the same meeting, he told the gathering of workers, ttwe

want, first and foremost, Swaraj. If we demand that we must

distribute property all groups will rise and crush the

working class".173 This was in response to Chida.rnbaram

Pillai•s speech that the workers must get their due,

that is, fair wage for their work in factories and other

employment.

One of the glaring aspects of the trade union movement

was the virtual absence of the leaders emerging from the

rank and file, a phencmenon already referred to in the

earlier chapter. 174 Except the communist's dominated unions

where the workers had a part in the Union affairs such as

the Tramways, the other unions were in the hands of the

"outsiders". This phenomenon is noted by an official report

of the Commissioner of Labour, which though much exaggerated

reflects the situation. The report noted for 1935-36.

173• Swadesamitran, 11 March 1935.

17Jt. See Chapter S. Also s. Bhattacharya, "Outsider: a historical note" in Ashok M1 tra, Essays in honour of C---- C'--

347

"Though a decade has elapsed since the introduction of the Act (the trade union Registration Act of 1926), genuine trade unionism seems to have gained but little ground in this ptovince. Subscriping members of a Union rarely take a keen interest in its affairs and Unions are in many cases managed and led by the honorary members who form a majority in the executive. Honorary members frequently act on selfish motives and have not the interests of members really at heart. The spread of real trade unionism will take place only when paying members take a keen interest in the working of their Union and call on the service of honorary members only in special circumstances"17S

A notable feature of this report is the failure to mention

the victimisation of the workers, which factor more than

anything else pushed the workers more closely into the fold

of the leaders in the political movement. Illiteracy and

poor organisation despite the lOn;J existence of the unions

added to the problems further. 176 Disunity which we have

already discussed between various unions, however, did not

hamper the closing of the ranks between the leaders and the

manifestation of this solidarity was the fielding of the 1..,.,.

candidates unitedly on the Congress platform.

175 • G. o. 15 5 , 19 January 1937. Development. TNA.

176;• s. Bhattacharya, "the Outsiders, a historical note" in Ashok Mitra, Essays in honour of Samar Sen, pp. 97-98.

117. It is difficult to get a picture how this happened. Possible answer is the recognition of the individual leader's strength in their respective unions and the need for a common fight against the justice party which was however defunct and among the labourers its position was less than what it was among the general public.

348

CUTCOME OF THE ELECTION

Under the India ,\ct of 1935 two seats were reserved for

labour constituency: one was for textile labourers and the

other for the Railway Employees178 in the Madras City. The

Madras Labour Union was declared as a recognised constituent

union of the textile workers. \·lhile the MLS, MREU, Madras

was considered a constituent of the Railway's Constituency,

the South Indian Railway Workers• Union, Trichinopoly, was

not considered a part of it. The order cancelling the

registration of the said Union was considered to be "a

judicial" one which though the commissioner of Labour had

179 passed was not competent to revoke. Apart from the labour

constituencies, there was a separate constituency for those

workers in the Madras city such as: Dock and Madras Harbour

Factory Labour (excluding Perennial Textile and Railway who

had separate constituencies) factories (other than textile

111ills and railway workshors) situated in the city of Madras

and the Chinglepet district. 180 '

The fall o-,.Ji ng candidates were pitted against each other

i~ the Legislative ~ssembly elections.

Railway Trade Union

G. Krishna murthy (Cong.)

vs

c. Chengalvarayan

17 8. G • 0. 12 3 9 -4 0 •

179. G.O. 1431

Total votes

1,343 181

12/5/38. Development. TNA.

29/7/1937 Public (elections) TNA.

180. Fort St. George Gazette, March 2, 1937.

18l.Of which 626 belonged to the M. and S.M. Railways Union, Madras Mail, Feb 16, 1937.

Textile Workers Union

G. Selvapathy Chetti (Cong)

Non Union Labour

P.R.K. Sarma (Cong)

349

Total Votes

1,019

vs. c. Venkatachala Naidu. 18:2

vs. s. Rajag~pa1 18 3

(Provincial Labour Party)

Elections to the Provincial Legislative Assembly saw

the realignment of forces in the political arena.

c. Rajagopalachari maintained that the Congress encompassed

all-classes. He did not have any objection to entry of some

individuals from other political organisations. At an

election meeting held on January 8," 1937, he answered that 184

••the Congress is willing to enroll and take back all individua~.

In fact, Venkatachala Naidu who was a Justice Party member

and who was elected from one division to the Corporation of

Madras on Justice Party Platform regretted that he was for

many years in the Justice Party without being aware of its

ideology. And he appealed to the workers "to wind up the

185 Justice party and begin a new work". G. Selvapathi Chetti

noted that "only when Swaraj comes difficulties of the poor

will be eradicated". But at most of the meetings, the Justice

182. c. Venkatachala Naidu was a worker in the Buckingham and Carnatic Mills. He was considered as a stooge of the management.

183. s. Rajagopal was a worker in the Aluminium factory.

184. swadesamitran, 8 January, 1937.

185. ~., 7 January 1937.

350

Party and the Government were the target of attack. Even in

Labour constituencies focus was on Swaraj rather than

. f 1 b 186 1nterests o a our.

G. Krishnamurthi was General Secretary of the M.L.s.M.

Railway Union and Go Selvapathy Chetti of the MLU. Both

were prominent trade unionists. G. Selvapathy's opponent was

a less known figure with little background in labour disputes.

Similar was the case with other opponents of G. Krishnamurthi

and P.R.K. Sarma. The result was not in doubt as the

candidates on the Congress ticket started their vigorous

campaign · extolling the National Congress and expecting much

f h h - i f 1 i i 18-7

rom t e Congress w en t was orm ng a m n stry.

Communists, as their declared policy of anti-imperialism dictated,

joined the campaign in favour of the National Congress

candidates. Though their influence in the trade union circles

was much limited due to their late arrival and also the

repressive state apparatus, they were able to mobilise some

18'8 of the unions on the side of the congress candidates.

But one remarkable feature was the change of the leaders'

ideological camp. P.R.K. Sarma who was on the MCLB and was

campaigning against the Congress earlier, was now fielded

187.

Ibid. Despite his long association with the Labour ~rnent in Madras, G. Selvapathy did not take any special interest in labour interests in his electioneering. Electioneering was geared to drub the 3ustice Party and show to the Colonial Government the united strength of all the classes.

G. o. 511, 2/3/193 7. Devel opnent, TNA. The MLU held in the month of January 1937 itself five meetings. Other unions as well did the same.

1 P.Q _ See this Chanter_

351

against a candidate who was a worker in the Aluminium

Factory. If one goes by the Unions' criticism of P.R.K.Sarma

at the election meetings, he was not popular among the

workers. 189 But this was not reflected in the result. The

result announced established the clear victory of the

Congress candidates.

The candidates and the number of votes polled are given

below: 190

Textile Labour Constituency

G. Selvapathy Chetti (Cong.)

c. Venka tachala Naidu (I )

Invalid

Railway Labour Constituency

G. Krishnamurthi (Cong.)

c. Chengalvarayan (I)

General Labour

P.R.K. Sanna (Cong .)

849

15

3

867

940

64

1004

4,782

s. Rajagopal (Provincial Labour Party) 1,724

Invalid 4

6,510

Though G. Selvapathy's and G. Krishnamurthy's results

establish a clear sweep over the workers, P.R.K. Sarma's

189. In particular the MCLB and Madras Harbour and Port Trust workers• Union. G.o. 511 2/3/1937, Development. TNA.

1·9n.. Madras Mail, 23 Feb 1937.

352

result despite it's registering a considerable victory does

reveal a sense of revolt among the workers, in particular

\oJhen the relatively obscure worker was able to poll about

one third to the total votes cast.

The election results nevertheless proved the popularity

of the Congress and the United National Front against

imperialism. Anti-imperialism was the staple stuff of the

campaign in the Madras city~ But, as the Communist, central

organ of the Communist Party of India, ~ated in its long

editorial, the result "is by no means an endorsement by the

people of the policy of the dominant Congress Right Wing.

On the contrary, it is a severe indictment of the passive,

capitulatory policy. The Right wing is afraid of struggle

of mass action, but the nation by rallying round the Congress

banner expressed its will for action. The Right wing

deprecates anti-zamindar struggle, but militant anti-Zamindar

peasant movement in Bihar, UP and Orissa ensured Congress

-,1119 1 triumph. Unity between the Congress on one side and the

con;1ress Socialists and trade union leaders on the other was

only tactical and did not subsume differences existing within

the respective individual organisations. The Congress

Socialists and trade union leaders maintained an independent

policy with respect to their own organisations. P. Ramamurthy

and others who were "Congress Socialists" were in fact making

their dent in trade union circles in Coimbatore and Madras

191. "The Present Situation and Our Tasks", The Communist, Vol. 1, No. 18, June 1937, p. 5.

353

using methods distinctly different from the Congress techniques

of agitation and mobilisation. Government of India looked

with suspicion on Congress Socialists. The Report prepared

in 1939 records their view that "nevertheless the socla.ist

groups in Andhra, Tamil Nadu, Orissa etc., are, in fact,

nothing but c.P.I. units in disguise and considerable success

can be claimed by the c.P.I ...... 192 Open confrontation

between the Congress ministry and the cOmmUnists ~ and later

trade union leaders was inevitable when the communists were

out to mobilise classes on class lines.

CONCLUSION:

Inspite of the various groupings pursuing different

ideological positions, trade unions were by the middle of

1935 grouping themselves into a coherent section of trade

unions with identical interests and goals. Communist leaders

as well as moderate trade unionists such as B. Shiva Rao were

shapiiX] trade unions not only for economic· obj 6cti v:es but also

on a common platform of anti-imperialism; more particularly

communist leaders targetted the Government as imperialist

and colonial. Their ideological position (which were entirely

different from the moderate leaders) invited the heavy

handed repression by the colonial state. From time to time

the leaders were rendered ineffective due to repression and

banning of communist literature. Nevertheless the tactics of

19~. A Note on Communist Activity in India, in File No. 7/3/39, Home. Poll. Dept. NAI.

354

the common front adopted by the communists along with the

moderate trade union leaders and the Congress nationalists

proved more successful in the elections of 1937. But

ideological differences which were papered over during the

elections surfaced in the coming months when the Congress

ministry came to face a series of strikes. This is the

subject of the next Chapter, the Seventh, on the period

1937-1939.