Amritsar Massacre

I

Introduction

Amritsar Massacre, massacre of Indian civilians by soldiers of the British Empire in Jallianwalabagh, in the city of Amritsar, on April 13, 1919. The massacre marked a point of no return in Indian politics: it terminated the age of compromise and basic faith in the decency and fair-mindedness of the British rulers so far as politicized Indians were concerned. The massacre and its aftermath signalled the real beginning of mass agitation against British rule in India.

II

Background

Political India had eagerly cooperated with the British during World War I and was expecting rewards in the form of a substantial devolution of power, if not self-government. Secretary of State for India Edwin S. Montagu's declaration of August 1917, promising reforms that would lead to the 'progressive realization of responsible government', enhanced these hopes. In this context, there was great resentment when the Anarchical and Revolutionary Crimes Act (1919), popularly known as the Rowlatt Act after Sir Sydney Rowlatt who chaired the Committee that drew up the legislation, was passed: it gave the government powers of detention without trial to cope with the threat of revolutionary violence. All sections of Indian political opinion protested and Mohandas Gandhi launched his first all-India mass civil disobedience campaign to defy the new law. It led to some localized violence in Bombay and Delhi.

Punjab, a main source of recruitment during the war, was ruled by the hardliner, lieutenant-governor Sir Michael O'Dwyer, who deeply distrusted the political classes. His methods of forced recruitment along with economic distress during the war had bred widespread disaffection in Punjab. His decision to crush the budding agitation led to the arrest of two popular local leaders, Satyapal and Kitchlew; Gandhi was stopped from entering Punjab. In Amritsar, following two hartals (national days of protest with shops and businesses closed) on March 30 and April 5, a protesting crowd went berserk on April 10, looted British-owned banks, murdered British civilians, and beat up a woman missionary, Marcella Sherwood. Police shootings led to a number of deaths and Sir Miles Irving, the Deputy Commissioner, decided to hand over control of the city to the military, specifically to General Edward H. Dyer, another hardliner, and Amritsar was placed under martial law.

III

Jallianwalabagh and the Aftermath

April 13 was Baisakhi, an important religious festival that had attracted people from the surrounding countryside to Amritsar, many of whom gathered in Jallianwalabagh, an open space or “park” surrounded by houses on all sides. Dyer had published an order banning all public meetings, yet a protest meeting to be held in the Bagh had been called. Hans Raj, a somewhat shifty character who had contacts with the police and later turned approver, was one of its prominent organizers. This has led to allegations that he was an agent provocateur and that the massacre that followed was preplanned. It is certain that a large section of the people who gathered at Jallianwalabagh were not aware of the prohibitory order. Shortly before dusk, Dyer marched to the Bagh, placed his soldiers at the narrow entrance and, without any warning or order to disperse, started firing into the crowd. More than 1,600 rounds were fired, all aimed at the crowd. No exact figures are available for the number of casualties: government sources put the number of deaths at 300 and of the wounded at over 1,000. The Congress Enquiry Committee placed the casualties at over 1,500, with some 1,000 dead. Dyer left the scene with no arrangements for dealing with the wounded.

The operation of the martial law, which lasted three months, included humiliating punishments, such as forcing all Indians to crawl when passing through the street where Sherwood had been beaten. People were picked up arbitrarily, tied to frames set up on crossroads, and whipped.

The British Government, which had inadequate information as to what was happening, eventually appointed a Committee of Enquiry chaired by Lord William Hunter. Its Majority Report was signed only by the European Members, the three Indian members drawing up a different report, with conclusions very similar to those of the Congress Enquiry Committee. Even the Majority Report, which disappointed and embittered Indians, concluded that Dyer had acted with unnecessary harshness and the General was in effect dismissed. But British public opinion was overwhelmingly in his favour both in Britain and India. A newspaper raised funds to help and honour him, a debate in the House of Lords lavished praises on him as the saviour of Punjab, and when he died he was buried with full military honours.

IV

Legacy

The British reaction to the massacre, even more than the event itself, hardened Indian attitudes and was one major factor behind Gandhi's decision to launch a campaign of non-cooperation, which eventually resulted in independence in 1947. An eyewitness to the massacre, Udham Singh, had taken a vow to avenge the atrocity and in March 1940 he shot Sir Michael O'Dwyer at a meeting in Caxton Hall, London. Singh was tried and hanged. More than 20 years later, his bodily remains were taken back to India. Jallianwalabagh, a bare and unattractive plot of land, has been transformed by the Indian Government into a park, a memorial to the massacred.