My Life

My Life - Oswald Mosleyamiss, as a sign of derision of the shoot provided for the Maharajah's guests. Again, ittook some hard work to return to grace and favour.One Englishman at least well understood India and the Indians: a clergyman, C. F.Andrews, who was an intimate friend of Gandhi's. This Englishman of saintlycharacter introduced me to the Indian saint. I entered the room to find Gandhi inkadda—the cloth he used to spin—sitting cross-legged on the floor. I too sat downcross-legged opposite to him, instead of using the chair provided for the European,which seemed too pompous in the circumstances. He was a sympathetic personality ofsubtle intelligence who in appearance, mind and sense of humour reminded meirresistibly of Lord Hugh Cecil; perhaps because he was another ardent metaphysicianwith a sense of fun. He invited me to a private conference then being held betweenHindus and Moslems to try to make a united front; he was Chairman. At the firstsession a roaring row developed between the Hindus and the Moslem Ali brothers,two mountainous men in flowing robes. Throughout the uproar Gandhi sat on hischair on a dais, dissolved in helpless laughter, overwhelmed by the comical absurdityof human nature. Not the intervention of the Chairman, but the sinking of the suneventually restored order. At the ordained moment the Ali brothers stopped short,whirled round to face the appropriate direction and flopped down on their knees withtheir foreheads in the dust. After the specified interval, up they jumped and launchedthe row again, full roar, just where they had left off.I later wrote a report on the Indian situation which was privately circulated amongBritish politicians. It made two main points: the first that we could stay in India aslong as we wished without so much trouble as some anticipated; Hindus and Moslemswere hopelessly divided; never had divide et impera been so easy, for it had happenednaturally. Further, if we did go, there would be bloodshed on a great scale. The firstpoint was proved by the ultimate division of the country. The second was tragicallyproved when we left, and nearly a million were killed in the riot and massacre whichfollowed.I tried to put the economic problem in a nutshell with the phrase: India needs a mogulwith a tractor and a deep plough. After a study of Indian agriculture and the landtenure system it was evident that starvation would be perennial until that great plainwas deeply ploughed and sown with cereals, but every form of social and religiouscustom stood in the way. When a man died his holding was divided among his familyinto small plots surrounded by low banks. These bunns were sacred and must not betouched, so no plough could cross them. The peasants were scratching about insidetheir plots with the wooden instruments they had used for millenia. The system ofzeminder land holding in Bengal was in some respects even worse. Add to this theproblem of the large population of sacred cows—cows with free feeding range, evento eat vegetables off market stalls—and it is not difficult to observe the basic problemof Indian economics. Nor was it hard to deduce that a far stronger government wouldbe required to cut through the tangle than anything the West at that time was able toproduce. Hence my remark about the mogul with the tractor; it is all too easy tosurmise who this may now be.I studied Indian agriculture through the University of Rabindranath Tagore; it wascalled Santiniketan, the abode of peace. Situated in the middle of the great plain, theskyline encircled it on all sides like the inverted bowl of Persian poetry. Unfortunately105 of 424