CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger...

39
138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations between the French and Indian governments over the future of French India were carried on through diplomatic channels over a long period of time. Throughout the diplomatic manoeuvrings, India placed emphasis on the legality of her rights in French settlements in India and the illegality of France’s claims. France, arguing at a different level of abstraction, laid great weight on its long years of cultural collaboration. After discussions between the two governments, as has been already discussed in the previous chapter, both the governments of India and France had agreed that a referendum would decide the future of the French settlements in India. A referendum is a regular feature in the political process of many nations. Under democratic conditions, the voters are provided with the opportunity to express a choice between alternatives. In the French case the referendum is an institutionalized political process. Well-defined procedures exist for its uses which are written into the constitution of the nation. Article 27 of the French Constitution is significant. According to this article, treaties “that involve the cession, exchange or addition of territories shall not become final until they have been ratified by a legislative act” and “no cession, no exchange and no addition of territory shall be valid without the consent of the populations concerned.” 1 The French demand for a referendum can be seen as an attempt to remain in sovereignty and to gain legitimacy through constitutional method. In the case of India, the British did not have recourse 1 Journal officiel de l’Inde français dans l’Inde, 1948, p.780.

Transcript of CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger...

Page 1: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

138

CHAPTER - IV

Merger and Anti-merger Alignments

Negotiations between the French and Indian governments over the future of

French India were carried on through diplomatic channels over a long period of time.

Throughout the diplomatic manoeuvrings, India placed emphasis on the legality of her

rights in French settlements in India and the illegality of France’s claims. France,

arguing at a different level of abstraction, laid great weight on its long years of

cultural collaboration. After discussions between the two governments, as has been

already discussed in the previous chapter, both the governments of India and France

had agreed that a referendum would decide the future of the French settlements in

India.

A referendum is a regular feature in the political process of many nations.

Under democratic conditions, the voters are provided with the opportunity to express

a choice between alternatives. In the French case the referendum is an

institutionalized political process. Well-defined procedures exist for its uses which are

written into the constitution of the nation. Article 27 of the French Constitution is

significant. According to this article, treaties “that involve the cession, exchange or

addition of territories shall not become final until they have been ratified by a

legislative act” and “no cession, no exchange and no addition of territory shall be

valid without the consent of the populations concerned.”1 The French demand for a

referendum can be seen as an attempt to remain in sovereignty and to gain legitimacy

through constitutional method. In the case of India, the British did not have recourse

1 Journal officiel de l’Inde français dans l’Inde, 1948, p.780.

Page 2: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

139

to a referendum to transfer power to the Indian people. In free India a referendum was

not a case of regular occurrence. There was no constitutional provision for its use as

its constitution was still in a premature stage. Moreover there was no referendum in

India for British withdrawal from India. These difficulties India had to face, especially

when the United Nations Commission on India and Pakistan recommended the

conduct of a plebiscite in Kashmir.2

The basic issue of the French Indian problem was not whether, or not, a

referendum should be held but how a referendum should be held. However the terms

of a referendum were not yet settled and difficulty was expected in designing

mutually satisfying methods and controls. For example, what should be done with

regard to Indian nationals living in French India and how to determine the opinion of

French Indian citizens living in the other French colonies? Should a single majority

dispose of the whole settlements, or should the vote be on a regional basis to make

merger possible in the event of conflicting trends in different settlements? Such

matters were to be determined by the political climate existing between India and

France and when the question of settling these details was taken up, differences began

to widen. It was surprising that the government of India entered into such an

agreement which was full of pitfalls and which was so vague in details. It is necessary

to note here that it was the French Constitutional requisite that made India accepts the

French proposition for a referendum.

However, the Indo-French agreement was concretized by exchange of letters

between the two governments. Daniel Levi, the French Ambassador in New Delhi,

wrote to Indian Prime Minister Nehru on 29th June 1948 that, “ the date of

2 Another problematic territory, as both India and Pakistan claimed their succession over Kashmir (Talbot Phillips, “Kashmir and Hyderabad,” World Politics, vol-I, No.3, April 1949, p.331).

Page 3: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

140

consultation will be fixed for Chandernagore by the Municipal assembly of the free

town; for the four other establishments by their Municipal councils grouped in one

single assembly. To this end these Municipal assemblies will be entirely renewed and

new elections will be held at dates to be fixed as soon as possible.”3 Prime Minister

Nehru replied to the Ambassador on the same day that,

My Government note with satisfaction that the principles embodied in the Declaration (made in the French National Assembly on June 8, 1948) are in agreement with their view that the future of French establishments in India should be determined at the earliest opportunity in accordance with the freely expressed desire of their inhabitants… My Government cordially share the French Government’s desire that the referendum by which the people of French India are to be consulted should be held in an atmosphere free from passion or hatred and without application of internal or external pressure.4

Immediately after this the government of India, in a communication of 1st July

1948, drew the attention of French government to the necessity of ensuring that the

forthcoming elections should be held in an atmosphere free from passion or hatred

and without the apprehension of internal or external pressure and suggested to the

French government to make a public announcement guaranteeing complete freedom

of press and speech in French India during the elections. For this, the government of

India urged the French government to suspend the operation of the French India

Décret no. 46-432 until the elections were over.5 At the same time it requested the

French government to “repeal or suspend any other legislation or executive measures

which might prejudice the holding of free and fair elections.”6 As regards the

referendum itself the government of India, proposed that the referendum should be

conducted jointly by the French and Indian observers. The French government 3 Cited in N. V. Rajkumar. The Problem of French India. New Delhi: All- India Congress Committee, 1951, p.26. 4 Cited in N. V. Rajkumar. The Problem of French India. New Delhi: All- India Congress Committee, 1951, p.26. 5 This act restricted activities which had as their object “the injuring of national territory” (Journal officiel de l’Inde Français, 1948). 6 Selected works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vol.8, p.308

Page 4: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

141

remained indifferent to the Indian government’s suggestions and had given only

verbal assurance through Levi to Nehru of free and fair elections and of neutrality on

the part of the French authorities. In accordance with the general Indo-French

agreement on the future of the settlements, elections to the Municipal assemblies in

French India were to be held immediately. The electoral roll needed revision.7 The

Municipal assemblies thus elected would fix the date of consultation and the

modalities of referendum.

French India at the Crossroads

Indo-French declaration earned mixed reactions from the press and the French

Indian political elite. Most of the Indian press welcomed the 8th June 1948 Indo-

French agreement because they considered that there was no other feasible alternative

solution for the existing nebulous and unhappy position.8 It also observed that in

French India elections were always violent and accompanied by rigging, terrorization

and such being the case how under these unusual conditions free and fair elections

could take place in the settlements. However, they appealed to the people of French

India to vote in favour of Indian Union.9 The Assemblée Représentative which met at

Pondicherry on 9th June 1948 unanimously accepted the French parliamentary

declaration prepared on the basis of the Indian accord.10 The French India National

Congress considered India’s move with regard to referendum in French India as

“unwise and uncalled for”, and strongly disapproved of the very idea of holding a

referendum as it was an insult and a challenge to the moral right of the people to

7 A minimum period of six months was necessary for the execution of this work. 8 The Hindu, 12 June 1948. 9 Dinamani, 11 June 1948. 10procès –verbaux etablishments français dans l’ Inde Assemblée Représentive de l’inde Française, 9 Juin 1948, de la session extraordinaire, pp.225-226.

Page 5: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

142

rejoin their own kith and kin (India).11 To quote R. L. Purushotama Reddiar, “French

India does not like her freedom to be put in auction between Paris and Delhi by a

handful of local mercenaries performing a dilatory gamble.”12 It set up a committee

consisting of R. L. Purushothama Reddiar, S. R. Subramaniam, K. Sivaprakasam, C.

E. Bharathan and Nagarajan on deputation to the Indian government to explain their

sympathy and to seek clarification regarding the future status and position of French

India.13 The Mahe Socialist Party (a wing of Indian National Congress) had criticized

the Indo-French agreement of 8th June 1948 as “a fraudulent trick performed by

French Imperialism to retain its rule with the assistance of local hangers-on.”14

Whatever it might be, the French Indians immediately concerned were not consulted

by either of the governments. The French Indian population were never really given

any choice to determine their future by the French and Indian governments, except to

choose between the French and the Indian Unions. People were already tired of the

very long protracted negations which proceeded between the two governments. In the

following days they were becoming impatient, the press was highly critical and the

internal conditions of French Indian settlements worsened.

Following the Indo-French agreement and the subsequent declaration of 8th

June 1948, vast changes had taken place within the French India. As political chasm

between India and France widened, local political movements for ‘pro-merger’ and

‘anti-merger’ ideologies gained in momentum. These ‘pro-merger’ and ‘anti-merger’

ideologies were neither popular uprisings nor natural struggles against the repressive

French colonialism and love of French rule. Both the merger and anti- merger

11 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 12 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 13 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 14 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry and also J. B. P. More. Freedom Movement in French Indian: The Mahe Revolt of 1948. Tellicherry, IRISH, 2001, p.112.

Page 6: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

143

movements were staged respectively by the Indian government and the French

government through local political elite. William F.S. Miles points out that both ideas

of the pro-merger movement as a manifestation of Indian nationalism and anti-merger

as the expression of French administration are myths.15 As for as France was

concerned, French India must be retained whatever be the cost as the loss of French

India would have great repercussions in Indo-china. The two main groups involved in

the agitation were described as ‘pro-mergerists’ and ‘anti-mergerists’, representing

competition among elite groups in order to gain control over men and matter. The

merger politics was utilized by political elites to gain authority and influence over

politics to retain their political power and to safeguard their personal interests that

they had been enjoying for quite sometime. They wielded their power by a

manipulation of the elections through falsification of the electoral lists and corruption

of all sorts, backed by money and muscle. Caste and religion were important sources

of social cohesion for political parties in French India. This concept of politics does

not preclude the role of ideas; many men were inspired, stirred into action by some

great ideas, but they all aimed at gaining power, if only to implement their ideas. They

waged agitations, through the press, pamphlets, public meetings, and petitions to

settle public issues. Militants of various parties clashed against each other violently

and as a result French Indian people were forced to live in the situation of growing

violence.

However, the Indian government never really took into confidence the

political elite of French India. They were in their own way trying to find the best

15 William F.S. Miles. Imperial Burdens-Countercolonialism in Former French India. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1995, pp.57-58

Page 7: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

144

solution to the problem of French India and the future of the French Indians. The local

political elite had the potential to take sides with foreign policies and national

interests and push people of these territories to decide either against joining India and

or joining with the Indian Union. As such the French administration was fully geared

in favour of their interested parties with the aim of mobilizing anti-colonial sentiment

among the general public. Thus the appreciation of French civilization was tied at the

same time to the rejection of French colonialism.

Different political parties of French India held different views on the merger

issue. The French India National Congress and different wings of the Indian National

Congress, the Indian government firmly behind it, wanted immediate merger of five

French settlements with the Indian Union and even to unite these territories with the

adjacent Indian districts. They considered that no referendum was necessary for this

purpose.16 The French India Socialist Party advocated autonomy within the French

Union so as to use it as a bargaining chip in holding power in its hands. It was ready

to go for a referendum, if necessary, on this issue.17 Members of the party wanted to

maintain French India’s separate identity, The India Unionil Sera Maruppor Kazaham

(an Association of those who were against merger with the Indian Union) who

adopted the ideology of the Dravidian movement in South India held a different

view.18 It demanded autonomous status for French India within the French Union for

the time being in order to prevent its merger with the Indian Union, so that when

Dravidasthan becomes a reality, French India can merge with it.19 The French India

16 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 17 R.L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 18 The Dravidian movement under the leadership of Periyar E. V. Ramasamy, they advocates the very first idea of separation of South India from the Indian Union and clamoured ‘Dravidian land for the Dravidians’ and they opposed the domination of the North Indians and the Brahmins in the Indian politics and the imposition of Hindi (language) over the southern states. (Viduthalai, 8 October 1947). 19 Kouyil, 12 October 1948.

Page 8: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

145

Communist Party expressed its opinion that French India should get independence

from the French rule first, and then by stages should decide whether to join the Indian

Union or not. It felt that the government of India under Nehru was anti-Communist

and pro-Anglo-American. This ideological difference led the French India Communist

Party to support the Dravidian point of view. Altogether there were three views

proposed by various sections of the population:

(i). The French possessions must continue under the rule of France and French Union.

(ii). The French possessions must merge with independent India.

(iii). The French possessions must be a separate entity and a separate country.

The French Indian political movement began to centre on these political

views. The merger politics had brought into existence a crop of new political parties.

There arose every kind of political party and personal passion, thereby driving the

people towards hostile camps and dividing them further. A number of political parties

started to crystallize, with a view to changing the political status of French India.

Accordingly the French Indian political parties can be divided into the ‘pro-merger’

and “anti-merger” parties:

Page 9: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

146

Table 4.1 Pro-merger and Anti-merger Political Parties

Pro-merger Parties: Anti-merger parties:

French India National Congress. French India National Congress Committee. French India Student Congress. Pondicherry Town Congress. Pondicherry Merger Committee. National French India liberation Committee. French India Assembly Congress. Indian Socialist Party.

Republican Party. National Liberation Front. (Pondicherry) Democratic Party.

National Liberation Committee. Pro-Merger Committee.

Pondicherry Youth Congress. Saint Therase Street Congress.

Labour Federation. (Lambert Saravane) Bharat Yuvak Sangh. Pondicherry Bar Association. Vanniar Sangam.

Karaikal Communist Party. Karaikal National Congress. Karaikal Congress. Karaikal Jawahar Youth League. Karaikal Merger Congress. Karaikal Student Congress.

French India National Congress. (Karaikal) Karaikal Merger League.

Youth Congress.(Karaikal) M.R.P. Party: (Karaikal) Thirumalrayanpttinam National Congress. Netaji Kazhagam. (Karaikal) Karaikal Fishermen Federation. Tamil Student’s Association. (Karaikal)

National Liberation Front. (Chandernagore)

French India Dravidar Kazagam. French India Socialist Party. French India Communist Party. Progressive Democratic Party. French India Muslim League. Catholic Party. India Unionianil Sera Marupoor Kazhagam. Federation des Anciens Militaires de l’Inde Française. Sri Aurobindo Ashram. Anti-Indian Union Merger Front. Progressive Democratic Party.

Pro-French Communist.

French India Independent Socialist Party. French India Labour Federation. (Edouard Goubert) French India Labour Union Federation. ( V. Subbiah) French India Patriots Sangam. Emmanuel TETTA Party.

Comite Francophil (Renonçants). Karaikal Muslims Union.

French India Socialist Party. (Karaikal) Karaikal French Union Committee. Karaikal Muslim Educational Society. French India Socialist Party . (Mahe) French India Communist Party. (Mahe) French India Socialist Party. (Yanam) Indian Communist Party. (Chandernagore) French India People’s Welfare Protection Party. Comite Francophile Party.

Page 10: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

147

Congress Karma Parishad Party. (Chandernagore) National Democratic Front (Chandernagore). Forward Bloc (Chandernagore). Mahajana Sabha. (Mahe)

Indian Socialist Party. (Mahe)

Jaiprakash League. (Mahe) Young Socialist League. (Mahe)

Indian Socialist Students (Mahe)

Student Congress (Mahe)

Public Workers Association (Mahe)

Weavers Association (Mahe)

Fishermen’s Union (Mahe)

Praja Party. (Yanam) Yanam Merger Congress French India Central Merger Congress. Indian Socialist Party. (Yanam)

It was under these conditions that the Municipal assembly election of

Chandernagore was announced to be held on 25th July 1948.20 The grave situation in

the settlement urged French India administration to conduct an early poll in

Chandernagore. It always posed a problem to France that the French Overseas

Ministry considered the case of Chandernagore as being “totally different from that of

the other French Indian settlements.”21 Even if Chandernagore voted in favour of

integration with the Indian Union, the French hoped that at least four of the south

Indian settlements could be preserved under the French Union. As this Municipal

assembly was going to play a significant role in the forthcoming referendum the

contesting parties (the Karma Parishad, the Congress, the National Democratic Front

and the Forward Bloc) pulled up all their resources to win the election and naturally it

20 Originally the date for holding the Municipal assembly election of Chandernagore was fixed on 16th May 1948, but it was postponed due to the incompletion of voters’ list (Journal Officiel de l’Inde Française 1948, p.99). 21 The Hindu, 18 June 1948.

Page 11: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

148

generated an unprecedented enthusiasm among the people. The election was held

under quite peaceful conditions and the results were announced on 1st August 1948.

The Chandernagore election (25th July 1948) attained special significance because for

the first time in the annals of French Indian democracy the voting was held on the

basis of universal adult suffrage. The pro-merger Karma Parishad swept the poll and

it bagged 22 out of 24 seats.22 Deben Das the leader of Karma Parishad Party became

the President of the Municipal assembly of the free city of Chandernagore.

The dates for elections in other south Indian settlements were yet to be

announced, but the political elite and political parties of French India were getting

ready for it. As mentioned earlier these elections were important, because their

success would be a prelude to the success of the referendum which would decide the

future of the French Indian settlements. Moreover, the party which obtained majority

in the Municipal elections was inclined to get the approval of the population for pro-

or anti-merger, the political parties wished to capitalize on the election and use it as

the base for formation of an ideology to contest and win the forthcoming referendum.

So both the pro-merger and anti-merger groups and more importantly political elite

had planned to manipulate the forthcoming elections to serve their interests. Press

played an important role in the war that was waged between rival groups, agitating for

and against the respective governments. Outside French India the Indian newspapers

carried on a campaign of vilification against France, while in French India the French

India Socialist Party attacked the pro-mergerists with equal vigour. This party

dominated French Indian politics through a reign of terrorism. The party had a private

army of paid henchmen who found employment in the local Municipal bodies,

22 Francis Cyril Antony, ed. Gazetteer of India: Union Territory of Pondicherry. Vol.I, Pondicherry, 1982, p. 254.

Page 12: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

149

government departments and the three textile mills. The slightest semblance of

opposition was ruthlessly crushed by murder, arson, loot and intimidation and a reign

of terror was perpetually maintained.23 A reign of terror was unleashed by the

Socialist Party under the leadership of Edouard Goubert, primarily against the

Communists and secondarily against the pro-mergerists rallying around the banner of

Congress and the Merger Committees.

Sensing the outbreak of violence and to curb the violent activities of political

parties’ henchmen, Baron, the French India Governor, passed orders banning “all

public meetings, processions, campaigns of notices and pamphlets and propaganda by

vehicle, cycle or loud-speakers” in Pondicherry with effect from 22nd July 1948.24

Similar orders were also passed by the Administrators of other French Indian

settlements. After strong protest from the Indian government and Indian press the ban

order was later relaxed by an Arrêté of 18th September 1948, which stipulated banning

on processions and public meetings, except electoral gatherings, in French India.25

The Governor had also pleaded with the Overseas Ministry of France for special fund

of one million francs which he proposed to spend for eliciting information about “our

adversaries.” He also asked from Paris the presence of a French war-ship at

Pondicherry between 8th and 15th September (long before the date for elections was

announced), assuming the outbreak of violence at the time of elections and in order to

show the strength of France among the people of the settlements.26

23 File No. D.1467/50, R&I branch, Ministry of External Affairs, 1950, N.A.I., New Delhi. 24 The Hindu, 25 July 1948. 25 Journal officiel de l’Inde français, 1948, p.256. 26 Ajit K. Neogy. Decolonization of French India: Liberation movement and Indo-French Relations 1947-54. Institut Française de Pondichéry, 1997, p. 98.

Page 13: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

150

Pro-merger and Anti-merger Propaganda

Meanwhile the long expected announcement was made for the holding of

Municipal elections in the four southern French Indian settlements on 10th October

1948.27 It created a situation prejudicial to the pre-poll climate and inflaming the

passion of the people. The political parties of French India became very active, the

tempo was mounting and propaganda fever increased. The French India National

Congress maintained that the real wishes of the people could only be ascertained if the

elections are conducted in a fair and impartial manner by the French Indian

government. Its members had no faith in the assurances given by the French Indian

government. Yet, it decided to participate in the Municipal elections to prevent the

French from attempting to get their stooges elected through fraudulent means.28 There

were requests to the government of India insisting on sending observers who would

supervise the electoral proceedings and ensure that no malpractice was indulged in by

any party.

A large-scale propaganda was carried on by both the pro-mergerists and anti-

mergerists to influence the voters. The French India National Congress placed before

the people the spirit of Indian nationalism and the ideal of complete merger with

Indian Union. However, the French Indian National Congress faced the problem of

disunity as rival Congress groups were formed on the eve of Municipal elections.

Actually there were no ideological differences between the rival groups. All stood, for

immediate merger with Indian Union. Many corrupt and opportunist elements within

the Congress divided them into factions. Because of the intervention of the Indian

Consul General at Pondicherry and leaders of the Madras Provincial Congress, all the

27 Journal officiel de l’Inde français, 1948, p.247. 28 V. Subbiah. Saga of Freedom of French India: Testament of my life. Madras: New Century Book House, 1990, pp. 227-230.

Page 14: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

151

pro-merger groups planned to work together in the elections and agreed to resolve

their differences afterwards.29

To counter the pro-merger elements and to avoid merger of the settlements with

the Indian Union, an intensive propaganda campaign was inaugurated primarily by the

French India Socialist Party, French India Communist Party and by the Progressive

Democratic Party. Some alternative solution was developed within the anti-merger

groups. Muthukumarappa Reddiar, a leader of the French India Socialist Party and an

associate of Edouard Goubert held the view that merger with the Indian Union was

inevitable but that there should be a fairly long period of transition before it was

accomplished. The Communists were unlikely to win the support of the people of

French India because their influence was at the low ebb. This probably was due to the

anti-Communist measures taken by the Indian Union government. The party went

underground everywhere. Similar kind of treatment was meted out to the French India

Communist Party by the French India Socialist Party and its leader V. Subbiah went

into exile. The Communist Party’s survival was at stake. According to a press report

of September 1948, there were about 150 Communists in the Pondicherry central

prison kept as political prisoners.30 A large number of Indian Communists had taken

shelter in Mahe too. Under pressure, V. Subbiah expressed his willingness to remain

within the French Union.31 By taking such a pro-French stand, the Communists

believed that they could persuade the French government to extend the civil liberties

and laws of the constitution of the Fourth Republic to French India. In a letter to the

Minister for Overseas Empire V. Subbiah reaffirmed his support for the French Union

and assured to work for the retention of the French Indian settlements within the

29 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry. 30 Kouyil, 30 September 1948. 31 The Hindu, 9 July 1948.

Page 15: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

152

French Union. He also appealed to the Minister for Overseas Empire to postpone the

elections till November 1948 on the ground that growing atrocities were perpetrated

by the French India Socialist Party under Edouard Goubert and Muthu Pillai.32

The anti-merger groups were trying to manipulate the Municipal elections in order

to maintain the existing conditions in their favour. For this they resorted to all sort of

violence and intimidation and methods were adopted to coerce and cripple the pro-

merger groups The French administrative machinery was also used to suppress all the

pro-merger activities and to propagate pro-French propaganda.33

Vigorous propaganda was carried on among the government servants, ex-

service men, and pensioners’ beneficiaries of social service doles and dependants of

persons employed in French overseas colonies to the effect that their substantial

pensions would be stopped and they would be left in the streets if French rule were

withdrawn. The dissatisfaction of the student community points out those facilities of

French scheme of free education, scholarships and medium of education would be lost

if the merger took place. The differences between the French and Indian system of

judicial administration were also cited as a further argument against the merger. It was

put out by lawyers who had a considerable influence with the middle classes of

population, that the change over to Indian law would be a detrimental to the interests

of the people. A special appeal was directed towards the middle classes and the

mercantile community. The absence of the sales tax and the low rates of income tax

were offered as bait to the merchants. The common people were warned that the price

of all consumer goods especially rice will shoot up if French India became a part of

the Indian Union. Most importantly the peasant’s communities living in the villages

32 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry.. 33 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry.

Page 16: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

153

who occupied 70 percent of the total population were the target of the anti-merger

propaganda. Until then they remained as illiterate and innocent inhabitants of the

settlements who could not ever exercise their right to vote for right cause and were

continuously exploited by the political elite. Propaganda was carried among them by

highlighting the merit of the great efficiency in bureaucracy and administration under

the French sovereignty and warning was given to them that they would lose all

material advantages once French Indian settlements were absorbed with neighbouring

Indian territories. Another powerful propaganda which the French used to attract the

people, especially the Francophile community, was the cultural argument. According

to them the people of French India stood to benefit greatly from French culture if they

remained with French Union.34

However, the French administration came under heavy criticism from the pro-

mergerists on several grounds. Primarily, the time and circumstances in which the

Municipal elections were proposed to be conducted was unfavourable. Lord

Mountbatten, who had directed the transfer of power from Britain to the governments

of India and Pakistan, failed to resolve the princely states issues. When India attained

independence, the princely states were given the right to join either India or Pakistan.

The states of Pudducottah and Hyderabad in south India wished to remain

independent. The Indian government wanted to integrate these territories without any

troubles. But the controversies over the power readjustment inevitably accompanied

the relations between India and the princely states finally ending in the annexation of

these territories with the Indian Union by the use of repressive methods on the part of

the Indian government. The conduct of Municipal elections in four south Indian

34 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry and The French India Socialist Party manifesto in the 0.P.Ramaswamy Reddiar Papers, Nehru Memorial Library and Museum, New Delhi.

Page 17: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

154

settlements was announced under these circumstances so that situation becomes

naturally volatile in the French Indian settlements. A few days before the

announcement of Municipal elections in French India (11th September 1948), the state

of Pudducottah was annexed with the Indian Union.35 Another important event

occurred in the month of 13th September 1948 when Nehru resorted to ‘police action’

to annex the princely state of Hyderabad in spite of some international opposition.36

These incidents had repercussions in French India. The Pudducottah and

Hyderabad invasions had an adverse effect on people of the French India. Though

India determined to solve the French India problem through the non-violence method,

the people feared that French India might go the Pudducottah and the Hyderabad way.

The French India press reacted very sharply against the actions of the Indian

government. The anti-mergerists used to capitalize the whole situation especially to

win the sympathies of Muslim population. A religious minority, who were already in

search of protection and safeguards in the changing atmosphere, eventually the

Muslims were turned against the Indian Union because both the annexation of

Hyderabad and Kashmir problems made deep confusions in their minds. Without

knowing in advance the nature of the treatment that they would face in the Indian

Union the Muslims hesitated to join blindly with the newly independent Indian Union.

Moreover the Indian constitution had not yet decided to safeguard the minorities. The

Muslims of French India became staunchly pro-French and against the immediate

merger of French India with the Indian Union. Calculating all these facts the French

administration strongly believed that the whole situation might turn to their favour

and it would reflect in the upcoming elections.37

35 Kouyil, 17 September 1948. 36 Kouyil, 14 September 1948. 37 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry.

Page 18: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

155

Baron and the Anti-merger Politics

The French administration came under attack due to the modality of electoral

arrangements, made on the vicinity of Municipal elections. Baron, by his Arrêtés of

20th June and 15th September 1948, dissolved the existing Municipal assemblies of

south Indian settlements so as to conduct fresh elections.38 According to the electoral

laws and procedures of French India it was necessary to nominate temporary

committees to run the Municipal affairs. The Commissaire de la République used his

influence with the ruling elites, nominated them in the committees and retained their

support to the French administration. He thus used all the pro-French elements to

conduct the forthcoming elections. This led to manipulation of electoral process by

the ruling clique, for instance uneven distribution of electoral identity cards,

nomination of electoral officers in the polling booths etc. The controversies over the

distribution of voters’ identity cards turned into a peoples’ riot in Mahe in October

1948 which evicted the French from Mahe and brought about the fall of the French

administration in the settlement. To add fuel to fire, the electoral arrangement Arrêté

of 18th September 1948, replaced the existing single constituency system (one

candidate per constituency) by the group constituency otherwise called the ‘List

System’. Accordingly several multiple constituencies and voters were grouped into

one which elected a list of candidates from the contesting political parties.39 For

instance, the Pondicherry Municipality of several wards was grouped into two sectors

of nine each and voters would have to vote from a list of nine candidates. Actually

these measures were taken by the French administration to simplify and reduce the

electoral expense in French India. Eventually in Karaikal under the new proposed

system of grouping, 99% of the Muslim voters were placed in a group which was to

38 Journal officiel de l’Inde français, 1948, pp.104 & 247. 39 Journal officiel de l’Inde français, 1948, pp. 257-264.

Page 19: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

156

elect eight Councillors.40 This measure was taken by the French administration on the

long pending demands of the Muslim minorities for separate reservation of legislative

seats and separate electorates as done to the Renonçants in the past.41 The pro-

mergerists saw all these measures taken by the French Indian administration as a

deliberate attempt to divert the pro-merger voters and to divide the local population in

the name of religion in favour of anti-merger parties.42

The pro-merger parties were largely backed by the Indian National Congress, the

Indian Consul General at Pondicherry and the Indian press decided to fight against

forces hostile to their policy and programme and their first task was to defy the

restrictions imposed on processions and public meetings by Baron. In spite of the

warning from Mahe Administrator, the Mahajana Sabha and Indian Socialist Party of

Mahe organized a series of meetings in August and October 1948. On 9th August 1948

several leaders of the Indian Socialist Party were condemned to six months

imprisonment and a fine of 1000 francs for defying a ban on holding public meetings

which were also attended by Indian leaders.43 In Karaikal there was a disturbance at a

meeting held on 17th August 1948 which was addressed by the Indian leaders like

Subbarayan, Kamaraj and others.44 Following these incidents the French government

launched a prosecution against S. Srikanta Ramanujam, President of the Karaikal

National Congress and A. M. Sambukesan on the alleged ground that they had written

scurrilous article attacking the Karaikal police in the Dinasari (18-8-48) a daily

newspaper published from Madras exposing their atrocious behaviour during the

40 Dinamani, 28 September 1948. 41 Kouyil, 20 September 1948. 42 The Hindu, 27 September 1948. 43 Journal officiel des etablissements français dans l’Inde, 1948, p.203. 44 Kouyil, 14 September 1948.

Page 20: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

157

clashes at the meeting.45 Troubles broke out in Pondicherry as the Communists came

to be attacked by the Socialist Party. Clashes occurred between Socialists and

Communists sponsored rival unions of workers at textile mills. Political rivalry

assumed its worse form when the Socialists fatally stabbed and wounded Nandagopal,

one of their arch enemies and the leader of the Communist Workers’ Federation.46

Under these tense situations the French Ambassador in India, Daniel Levi visited

Pondicherry and Karaikal from 24th and 27th September 1948. He had discussions

with French administrators regarding election arrangements and the modalities of

conducting Municipal election in south Indian settlements. Levi in a press meet in

Pondicherry assured the determination of the French government to conduct

Municipal elections in French India on a peaceful, democratic manner. In reply to a

question regarding the Indian observers at the time of elections, he responded that he

was unaware of the situation and remarked “whether observers come from the Indian

Union or the Sun or Moon, we (the French) would set an example to the whole world

by conducting the elections and the referendum with absolute fairness and in the best

democratic manner.” He also denied possibilities of any Indian observers during the

Municipal elections.47 While answering another question as to why the French did not

withdraw from India as the British had done, the Ambassador jokingly said because

no “Quit India” slogan had come from French India.48

Very next day, on 25th September 1948 about 150 Students’ Congress activists

gathered in Pondicherry, demonstrated against Daniel Levi and took out a procession

shouting slogans like “Nehru Government is our Government,” “merger with Indian

45 The Madras Mail, 6 October 1948 and Kouyil, 8 October 1948. 46 La Voix du peuple, 5 December 1948. 47 Kouyil, 27-28 September 1948. 48 The Hindu, 27 September 1948.

Page 21: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

158

Union” and “Quit India” in defiance of the banning orders of Baron. This resulted in

clashes between police and the activists. Several of them were arrested and they were

removed from the military barracks and released at 5 to 10 miles away from

Pondicherry. In the afternoon some of the senior Congress leaders appeared in the

market places and forced the merchants to close their shops in order to protest against

the arrests of Congress activists.49 Next day, Paramel, President of Students Congress

and Munussamy, the editor of Jeunesse and six others were prosecuted and removed

to the central jail of Pondicherry.50 This seems to have had some repercussions in

Mahe. A few days later I. K. Kumaran and some other members of the Mahajana

Sabha Party were sentenced to jail for having conducted processions and meetings in

violation of the banning orders.51

However, the French administration registered its complaints with the Indian

government about the infiltration of Indian Congress volunteers from the adjoining

territory and the disturbances fomented by them in August 1948 in French Indian

settlements. The French authorities complained against the Indian press campaign

which carried out a dangerous anti-French propaganda aimed at making people

believe that the Municipal elections in French India were not a sincere expression of

the will of the people. Moreover allegations were made against the militants of the

pro-merger groups such as Perumal of Pondicherry Congress and Venkatachalapathy

of Karaikal Congress for pleading with the Indian government to provide arms, force

and financial supports to fight against the henchmen of anti-merger parties.52

49 Kouyil, 27 September 1948. 50 The Hindu, 28 September 1948. 51 The Hindu, 30 September 1948. 52 Kouyil, 8 and 22 September 1948.

Page 22: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

159

The general violence and tense atmosphere that prevailed in French India led to an

increasing fear among the pro-merger parties that the elections would be accompanied

by violence. There was thus a wide-spread apprehension that the elections, if held in

present circumstances would not be free and fair and would not reflect real public

opinion. Thus demands for cancellation or postponement of the elections were

gathering momentum. The French India Communist Party asked for postponement of

the elections on the ground that elections would be accompanied by violence. The

pro-mergerists demanded for cancellation or the presence of Indian observers at the

time of Municipal elections.53 Previously on 30th August 1948 Nehru had stated in the

Indian parliament that there would be no observers on behalf of the government of

India in the Municipal elections. However India drew the attention of the French

government to the unsatisfactory nature of the elections in these settlements in the

past as the people of these settlements were never given free choice to do as they

liked.54 After serious appeals from the pro-mergerists and the Indian press, the

government of India found that the situation was going beyond control, and so called

on the French government to postpone the elections till peace and order was restored

and suggested the presence of the Indian and neutral observers to supervise the

elections. In this regards Jugol Kishore, the Indian National Congress General

Secretary, issued the following statement at a press conference55:

It is clear that in the disturbed atmosphere which exists at present in French settlements, no fair elections are possible. The least that the French authorities can do in these circumstances is to order the postponement of these elections to a later date when proper arrangements can be made to ensure that no undue pressure is brought to bear on these peaceful people to vote in a particular manner. Judging from the events that have happened, we feel it is essential that the French Government should agree to have some Observers from India at the time the elections come off.

53 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N.A.I., Puducherry. 54 Selected works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vol.8, p.308. 55 N. V. Rajkumar. The problem of French India. New Delhi: AICC, 1951, pp. 29-30.

Page 23: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

160

Around the same time Nehru, who was then in Paris requested the French Foreign

Minister to postpone the Municipal elections and proposed the appointment of

observers for the Municipal elections as well as for the referendum.56 The government

of France was initially inclined to postpone the elections and announced on 1st

October 1948: “The Municipal elections shall take place when the external pressures

shall cease and the necessary atmosphere of complete security and total liberty of

conscience was restored”.57 Regarding the question of having observers at the time of

Municipal elections, though initially the French government raised no objection but

later refused the presence of observers at the time of Municipal elections.

At this juncture the French India administration issued the Arrêté of 8th

October 1948 to announce that the postponed elections would be held on the 24th

October 1948.58 Though, it was not a unanimous decision, the decision to hold the

election on 24th October was taken at a meeting of the Conseil du gouvernement

(other wise called as Council of Ministers) held at Pondicherry on 7th October 1948.

The Conseil was equally divided on the decision of fixing the date. Three of the six

Councillors - André, Counouma and Lakshmanaswami were opposed to holding the

elections under the present circumstances. However, the other group consisting of

Goubert, Deivasigamony and Sivasoubramania Pillai insisted on holding the elections

at the earliest. Baron exercised his casting vote in favour of Goubert’s group. This had

given rise to serious repercussions in the Conseil du gouvernement as well as among

the public. The government of India was taken by surprise on the French

government’s decision to hold the Municipal elections on 24th October in the south

Indian settlements. Lambert Saravane, the French Indian Député accused Baron of

56 N. V. Rajkumar. The problem of French India. New Delhi: AICC, 1951, p.30. 57 Kouyil, 4 September 1948. 58 Journal officiel des établissements français dans l’Inde, 1948, p. 295.

Page 24: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

161

violating “all democratic norms” by using his casting vote and remarked that there

was no real democracy in French India.59 When the differences were further widened

within Conseil du gouvernement three of the Councillors André, Deivasigamony and

Sivasoubramania Pillai led by Lambert Saravane had sent their resignation letters on

21st October, on the ground that they considered “team work has become impossible”

and that Baron’s voice was becoming “decisive” on every case.60 The French

administration delayed announcement of the resignation of the Councillors until the

elections were over due to the consideration that it might have an adverse effect on

the upcoming elections. The withdrawal of Saravane group was a great blow to the

French India administration. Since the former already possessed the support of the

intellectuals and government officials and the Communist lineage of Lambert

Saravane having a large influence among the working class (since the French India

Communist Party was in a disarray, the support of Worker’s Unions was considerably

divided between the French India Socialist Party and Saravane) the later ran over the

risk of losing ground when elections were around the corner.61 To counter this loss

Baron floated a new anti-merger party known as Progressive Democratic Party, which

consisted of pro-French Communists, Dravida Kazhagam, government servants,

retired military personnel and businessmen.

Riot in Mahe

When Municipal elections were around the corner and the election fever

reached its peak, troubles broke out in Mahe. The pro-merger parties like Mahajana

Sabha under I. K. Kumaran and Indian Socialist Party under the leadership of

Mangalat Ragavan were strong, well organized and more united. Since the time of the 59 The Hindu, 9 October 1948. 60 Journal officiel des établissements français dans l’Inde, 1948 p. 341 and The Hindu, 23 October 1948. 61 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N.A.I, Puducherry.

Page 25: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

162

signing of the Indo-French agreement (June 1948), they spearheaded their pro-merger

propaganda. On the merger issue the Mahajana Sabha at the very outset, demanded

plebiscite and not a referendum. It pleaded for holding the plebiscite not only under

the auspices of the French and Indian governments, but also demanded observers

during the elections, during preparation of the voters’ list, distribution of identity

cards and during the counting of votes in order to prevent the French administration

from intervening in the electoral processes in one form or the other.62 Since the

announcement of Municipal elections, these pro-merger parties were highly vigilant

and tense as elections in French India always were tainted with fraudulent electoral

practices and the candidates in the past were elected from Mahe with the connivance

of the French administration through electoral malpractices.63

The French Indian authorities, from July 1948 onwards, formally prohibited

all the public meetings and gatherings especially with the participation of speakers

from the Indian Union and strictly enforced it. The pro-merger parties decided to defy

the ban of Indian nationals participating in the meetings in Mahe, which was issued

earlier by Baron. It appears that in October 1948 both the Mahajana Sabha and Indian

Socialist Party organized a series of meetings. They carried out serious anti-French

intimidation campaigns in and out of Mahe with the collaboration of the Malabar

Congress and Indian Socialist Party. These measures annoyed the French

administration and defaulters were severely dealt with. Moreover the surge of large

number of Indian Communists into Mahe from the adjoining Indian territories in

search of safety and refuge actually strengthened the anti-merger forces and created

62 The Indian Express, 4 July 1948 and 4 February 1949. 63 J.B.P. More. Freedom Movement in French Indian: The Mahe Revolt of 1948. Tellicherry: IRISH, 2001, p.115.

Page 26: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

163

troubles to the pro-mergerists. Naturally tension mounted in Mahe and the situation

was highly volatile.64

Under these circumstances worse things happened in Mahe on 21st October

1948. The problem started because of the failure of the local administration to

distribute identity cards to a great number of people. Actually the distribution of

identity cards was started ten days before the date of election. House to house

distribution was done during the first seven days and undistributed cards were to be

collected from the Municipal office during the last three days. There were complaints

that a large number of people (who held pro-merger views) were denied identity cards

during house to house distribution. The names of hundreds of voters allegedly

belonging to the pro-Indian fishermen community were missing in the voters’ list and

this infuriated them further. Hundreds of voters and party workers led by I. K.

Kumaran assembled before the Municipal office on 21st October 1948 and they went

on insisting on the distribution of the cards and received an unhelpful answer from the

Mahe Mayor.65 When arguments between I. K. Kumaran and the Police

Commissioner went uncontrollable the later became violent and assaulted Kumaran

and his colleagues66. There arose a very tense situation which was getting out of

control and degenerated into rioting.

A crowd ransacked the Municipal office, seized the electoral rolls and other

records and burnt them. Events followed in quick succession. Records of civil and

criminal cases were removed from the Mahe Court which was located contiguous to

the Municipal office building and they were destroyed. The Police Commissioner was

64 J.B.P. More. Freedom Movement in French Indian: The Mahe Revolt of 1948. Tellicherry: IRISH, 2001, pp.115-158. 65 File No: D.356/50, R&I Branch, Ministry of External Affairs, N.A.I., New Delhi. 66 La Voix du Peuple, 5 December 1948.

Page 27: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

164

roughed. The militants went in procession to the police stations to disarm the armed

police and Indian national flags were hoisted on the police stations. The armed guards

of the French Administrator’s office surrendered and the Administrator and his family

became prisoners. The administrative machinery collapsed and militants took over the

police stations, the treasury and the revenue offices. The arms and ammunitions taken

away from police stations and the cash money, taken away from the treasury, were

deposited at the Mahajana Sabha office (later returned to the French administration

when order was restored).67 On the next day, i.e., 22nd October 1948, Indian national

flags were hoisted triumphantly in all administrative buildings, police stations and the

Administrator’s residency. I. K. Kumaran proclaimed the integration of Mahe with the

Indian Union. A Peoples’ Defence Committee was formed to run the administration.

Mahe members of the French Indian Assemblée Représentative, including P.

Counama, a member of the Conseil du gouvernement resigned. Five other Municipal

Councillors of Mahe also resigned.

The leaders of Mahe People’s Defence Committee sent telegrams to the Indian

national leaders asking them to take over the administration of Mahe, as the French

administration had collapsed.68 The Government of India expressed regret for the

Mahe affairs and it did not recognize the integration of Mahe as proclaimed by the

Peoples’ Defence Committee. The cruiser Duguay Trouin which was on its way to

Pondicherry from Ceylon (Sri Lanka)69 was directed to Mahe for rescuing the French

officials and their families and re-conquers Mahe and re-establishes French

sovereignty there. The cruiser reached Mahe on 26th October 1948 and anchored two

67 La Voix du peuple, 5 December, 1948. 68 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N.A.I., Puducherry. 69 It has been discussed earlier that the both Baron and Levi were in favour of dispatching a French man-of-war along the coast of Pondicherry and Karaikal on the eve of Municipal elections (chapter IV, p.12).

Comment [g1]: Cross foot note pp.

Page 28: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

165

miles off Mahe. The arrival of the French navy had created a panic in Mahe and was

followed by an exodus of inhabitants of Mahe who left the settlement with their

families fearing reprisal from French troops. The leaders and workers of the Peoples’

Defence Committee also left the place. French naval troops, accompanied by French

Indian police landed and paraded the streets of Mahe. The Captain lowered the Indian

national flag and hoisted the French flag again on the administrative office. The

Administrator was released without any damage being done to him and his family.

Mahe was re-occupied and Baron asked the people to return to their homes but it took

some time for Mahe to return to normalcy. French Indian police arrested some leaders

of the Mahajana Sabha and Socialist Party, others continued to live in Indian

territories. Some of them were sentenced to imprisonment, fines were imposed and

property confiscated.70

However, the Mahe Administrator described the riot in Mahe as a coup

d’état.71 The French officials blamed outside Indian elements for the flare-up in

Mahe. They laid the blame for those troubles squarely on the Indians, who penetrated

in large numbers into Mahe, encouraged by the Indian leaders of Madras or the

Malabar Congress Committee. The Aide-Mémoire of the Indian government rejected

the French contention that the Mahe incidents were “inspired by thousands of Indian

subjects who invaded Mahe” and considered them as a purely domestic one between

the French government and its people and asserted that the Indian Union people had

nothing to do with it.72

70 File No.D.356/50, R&I Branch, Ministry of External Affairs, N.A.I., New Delhi 71 File No. D. 658/50, R&I Branch, Ministry of External Affairs, N.A.I., New Delhi. 72 File No. D. 658/50, R&I Branch, Ministry of External Affairs, N.A.I., New Delhi.

Page 29: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

166

The French government was surprised at the takeover of Mahe by the pro-

merger activists and reacted to the riot in Mahe with great cautiousness. Baron made

the following declaration:

In the face of the bad faith of the Congressmen and the violent pressure exercised by these so-called votaries of non-violence, especially in Mahe, from where we have been systematically cut off, I insist on reminding knowing fully well of the violation of a friendly treaty, that we will respect the clauses of this (June 1948) accord, but we will act with the greatest firmness73.

Elections in Mahe were postponed indefinitely, until electoral consultation could take

place in dignity and order. Further more the Mahajana Sabha and Indian Socialist

Party was banned from participating in the Municipal elections which were held on

27th February 1949.

The Municipal elections and reactions:

Municipal elections in Pondicherry, Karaikal and Yanam were held as

scheduled on 24th October 1948. In Pondicherry 250 candidates contested the

elections, the French India National Congress put up 84, the French India Socialist

Party decided to contest all the Municipal seats and fielded 102 and the Progress

Democratic Party and Independents 64. Suddenly Lambert Saravane declared that his

“Republican Party” would denounce the elections since his efforts to have a common

front against reactionary and non-progressive forces have failed, he had decided to

keep away.74 Lambert Saravane’s withdrawal from the elections at the last moment

resulted in great advantage to the anti-mergerists under the banner of the French India

Socialist Party.

The Indian National Congress appointed its observers N.V. Rajkumar,

Secretary, Foreign Department, All India Congress Committee, and P. Subbarayan, a 73 Procès- verbaux des délibérations de l’Assemblée Représentative de l’Inde Française, deuxième session, 20 Nov. 1948. 74 The Hindu, 23 October 1948.

Page 30: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

167

former Minister of the Madras government to supervise the Municipal elections in

Pondicherry. The Provincial Congress Committees of Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Andhra

Pradesh were also instructed to send their representatives to Yanam and Karaikal and

to watch and report on the elections. Paris authorities sent Laugenie, as a special

political envoy to Pondicherry to observe and to make a report on the elections to

them.

The election was conducted during a time of increasing violence and disorder

within the French Indian settlements and the duration between the announcement of

the election and its execution was very short. It was observed that in many places the

French India Socialist Party activists were involved in booth capturing, malpractices

and intimidation of voters.75 The situation in Karaikal was so uncomfortable that the

Karaikal Congress had decided to boycott the elections.76 In Yanam, Giri

Madhavarao, a government Pleader and one of the candidates belonging to the

Congress Party was stabbed by the militants of the French India Socialist Party.

Overall, the modalities of the conduct of elections were far from satisfactory. The

Indian press and political observers were highly critical of the severe intimidation of

the electorate and a serious lack of sincerity on the part of the French authorities to

conduct a free and fair election. In any case the results of the elections were a

foregone conclusion and the French India Socialist Party scored a massive victory.

The French India National Congress and French India Communist Party filed their

cases in the Conseil de contentieux (Local Administrative Court), for the annulment

of the election results.77 The following tables and figures show the results of the

Municipal elections:

75 The Hindu, 25 October 1948 and The Indian Express, 26 October 1948. 76 Dinamani, 25 October 1948. 77 R.L.Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N.A.I., Puducherry.

Page 31: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

168

Table 4.2 Overall Results of the Municipal Elections

Settlements Population Total voters

Total seats

Voted Seats won by Parties

Pondichéry 59835 12669 18 7551(60%) Ariancoupam 35311 5303 12 4254(80%) Bahour 27991 7008 12 5379(77%) Modeliarpet 20591 7016 12 4305(61%) Nettapacom 18793 6996 12 6175(88%) Oulgaret 22396 13632 12 10491(77%) Mannadipeth 23232 10351 12 8411(81%) Po

ndic

héry

Villenour 14423 6121 12 4257(70%)

French India Socialist Party-(102) 82

French India National

Congress-(84)

Progressive Democratic Party-(64)

14. Independents-6

Karikal 23008 5421 14 4249(78%) Cotchéry 8297 3998 12 3138(78%) Grand’Aldée 9477 4087 12 3349(81%) Nédouncadou 7001 1541 12 1184(76%) Néravy 8126 3434 12 2712(78%) K

arik

al

Tirnoular 14632 4749 12 2445(51%)

French India Socialist Party-(74) 64.

Congress group-

(74)10.

Chandernagor*

44786

12840

24

-

Karma Parishad-22 Forward Bloc, NDF,

and CPI -2

Mahé*

18293

2000

12

-

French India Socialist Party-12.

Yanaon

5853

1504

12

1107(74%)

French India Socialist Party-9.

Praja Party-3. * Election was held at Chandernagor on 1st August 1948. * Election was held at Mahé on 27th February 1949. Source: Journal officiel des etablissements français dans l’Inde, 1948.

Page 32: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

169

Table 4.3 Election Results in Pondicherry Commune

Section One: 9members to be elected

Section Two: 9member to be elected

Total Voters:6,649 Total voted: 4,375

Required Majority: 2,188

Total Voters:6,220 Total voted: 3,176

Required Majority: 1,589 Socialist Party (elected) Socialist Party (elected)

H.CASSIME E.GOUBERT A.ROGER K.MOUTOUSSAMY V. SANGUERRE M.RATTINASSABADY A.RATTINAM G.TITUS P.PAJANIDICHETTIAR

4,197 4,073 4,071 4,071 4,071 4,069 4,069 4,065 4,037

C.BALASSOUPRAMANIEN V.DEIVASSIGAMANY E.TETTA R.DORERADJOU S.JAMODARIN D.AROQUIANADIN A.CARNINDRAMODELIAR R.VARADARSSOUCHETTIAR P.KICHENAPPANAIKER

2,153 2,153 2,153 2,153 2,153 2,152 2,151 1,758 1,119

Progressive Democratic Party (lost) Progressive Democratic Party (lost) RADJANEDASSE MADRID A.FLORY A.ANNASSE L.MARIETTE MOUROUGOPPA A.LAPORTE VAIJILINGAM PANADE J.APPANOU

153 127 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

PEROUMAL PERIMALAME C.GAST VARADARADJALRAMANY J.LATOUR SOUPRMANIEN KICHENASSAMYRAMANY POUNNOUSAMY V.SOUBAYA

726 726 726 726 726 726 726 726

1 Congress Party (lost) Congress Party (lost)

R.S.MANY D.PANJANYDOURESSAMY E.THAMBY SOUPAQUIRY VENOUGOBALOU PAREMANADA F.ANNASSE S.ANDRE POUROUCHAMARATTIAR A.MAGNIFIQUE

152 121 150 150 150 150 150 150

7 14

A.POUROUCHETIMAMATERRIAR DOURAIMOUNISSAMY A.NARAYANIN Mme. M.LERNIE Mme. CONDAPPA Mme. M. T. ANNAMALAI D.MARIAPPIN MOUNISSAMY DOURAI L.SAMY

293 293 293 293 293 292 292 292 291

Source: Journal officiel des etablissements français dans l’Inde, 1948.

Page 33: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

170

Page 34: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

171

Page 35: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

172

These elections were an organic part of the whole process for deciding the

future of the French settlements in India. They were not ordinary elections as the

results of the Municipal elections would determine the trends of the referendum. More

importantly the newly elected Municipalities would decide the date and the modalities

of the referendum, but complications arouse on the question of election results as

charges and counter-charges of malpractice vitiated the whole referendum process.

N. V. Rajkumar in his report maintained: “It is unsafe to be guided by the results of

the elections. It was, to say the least, nothing but the prostitution of a democratic

device to ascertain popular will.”78 Therefore, he refused to believe that the Municipal

elections served the purpose for which they were held and so opined that they should

not be recognized as first steps towards referendum. After getting an adverse report

from their representatives the All India Congress Committee too criticized the

decision of the Indian government on referendum and advised it against taking the

Municipal elections seriously.79 Nehru also expressed his dissatisfaction over the

methods in which elections were conducted in the south Indian settlements.80 Sensing

that the elections of 24th October 1948 were full of lapses and irregularities, Laugenie,

special political envoy sent to Pondicherry by the Paris authorities made a statement

on 25th October 1948: “Yesterday’s Municipal elections, whatever the procedure and

the results may be, are quite insignificant, as the French government shall resume

negotiations with the Indian government in a most healthy and cordial atmosphere”.

He also emphasized that the ensuing meeting of the French India Assemblée

Représentative should adopt a resolution favouring three-party conference, not

referendum, since “the issue cannot be decided by any particular party winning in the

78 N. V. Rajkumar. The problem of French India. New Delhi: AICC, 1951, p.59. 79 N. V. Rajkumar. The problem of French India. New Delhi: AICC, 1951, pp.1-3 and 41. 80 Selected works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vol.8, p. 308.

Page 36: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

173

Municipal elections.”81 However, the results of the Municipal elections were looked

upon by the French Indian authorities as a verdict in favour of French Union and a

victory of the Francophiles. Coste-Floret, the Minister for Overseas France interpreted

the election results to mean that the four south Indian French settlements appear

determined to remain an integral part of the French Union and issued a statement that

“France has no intention of giving up a single portion of their colonial empire whether

in India or else where.”82

Immediately after the Municipal elections an important approach on the

question of merger with Indian Union had emerged among the political elite. The

French India National Congress stood for no other alternatives and demanded the

immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the French sovereignty from all the five

French settlements in India. A split had developed among the pro-mergerists on the

necessity of a long transitory period ranging from 5 to 30 years for the adaptation of

French institutions and administrative departments with the Indian situation. This new

approach was formulated possibly with a view to clarify the long pending doubts

gathering in the minds of the French Indian people about the consequences of sudden

change over from existing French system to the Indian system. They feared that

immediate merger with the Indian Union might cause inconvenience to the merchants,

land holders, workers, government employees and pension-holders and they might

have to face difficulty by losing current privileges and fiscal advantages. One group

consisting of Leon St. Jean, Pakkirisamy and others appealed to the people to think

whether they could decide to merge immediately or after a few years following a

temporary convention.83 Already the anti-mergerists organized under one banner by

81 The Hindu, 26 October 1948. 82 Bulletin de presse Vol -II, N.A.I., Puducherry. 83 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N. A. I, Puducherry.

Page 37: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

174

the French authorities had spread the fear among the people that they would lose all

the benefits of French rule like the pension holder would be deprived of his pension,

merchants and traders would have to pay higher taxes, landholders would be

subjected to higher assessment, house-owner would have to pay house tax at an

enhanced rate and importantly the old cultural heritage would be severed etc., in the

event of fusion with Indian Union.84

The Indian National Congress fully appreciated the new approach of a

transitory period before merger and lent support to it by adopting a resolution on the

same line in its Jaipur session on 19th December 1948. This resolution stated:

The Congress realizes that during this long period, administrative, cultural, educational and judicial systems have grown up in these foreign possessions, which are different from those prevailing in the rest of India. Any change over therefore must take these factors into consideration and allow for a gradual adjustment which will not interfere with the life of the people of the areas concerned. The Congress would welcome the present cultural heritage of these possessions to be continued in so far as the people of those possessions desire and for a measure of autonomy to be granted, wherever possible, so as to enable the people of those possessions to maintain their culture and institutions with the larger frame-work of free India.85

The Jaipur resolution also strongly denounced that with the establishment of

independence in India the continued existence of foreign possessions in the country

had become anomalous, that the political incorporation of these territories with India

had become inevitable and therefore it becomes necessary for these possessions to be

politically incorporated in India. The Congress trusted that this change would brought

about soon by peaceful methods and the friendly cooperation of the governments

concerned. The Jaipur resolution clearly defined the policy of the government of

India towards the colonial powers and gave the clear answer to the tendentious

propaganda by the anti-mergerists. 84 The French India Socialist Party manifesto in the 0.P.Ramaswamy Reddiar Papers, Nehru Memorial and research centre, New Delhi, pp.1-8. 85 R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N. A. I, Puducherry.

Page 38: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

175

Meanwhile, Baron brought a new proposal in his opening speech to the French

India Assemblée Représentative on November 1948. He said, “Pondicherry in the

Indian Union is exactly a dead loss for the world. Pondicherry – I say Pondicherry to

signify an Indian town within the Indian Union-is as much for India as for France, a

link for friendship and progress.”86 This new proposal purely aimed to recoup all the

anti-mergerists under one umbrella and to strengthen the French rule in India.

Reactions came quickly, R. L. Purushothama Reddiar in a press statement said that

“the people of French India or Indians first and Indians last”, Deploring Baron’s

attitude, he retorted that “It is a pity to see the Governor pleading for the acceptance

by the French Indians of the masked sovereignty of France, under cloaks of ‘friendly

links’ and ‘cultural contacts’, in the same breadth in which he says ‘the time of

domination is over’, surely, as it appears, not meaning it.” He demanded an

immediate withdrawal of the French rule from India.87 Before his experiment could be

worked out, Baron had to vacate office and return to France.

In the final analysis, the farcical Municipal elections and its aftermath clearly

induced the pro-mergerists to harbour doubt about the sincerity of the French

government to hold the referendum in an impartial manner and led them to believe

that France was destined to delay the process under one pretext or another. So they

began to suggest the referendum should be avoided in any case. The Municipal

assembly of Chandernagore shared a similar view in a meeting on held on 4th

December 1948. A referendum, in their opinion, might cause a rift in the better

relations existing between France and India and prayed to both the governments to

86 Procès- verbaux des délibérations de l’Assemblée Représentative de l’Inde Française, deuxième session, 20 Nov. 1948, pp.6-7. 87 The Hindu, 25 November 1948 and R.L.Purushothama Reddiar Papers, N.A.I., Puducherry.

Page 39: CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignmentsshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5417/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · 138 CHAPTER - IV Merger and Anti-merger Alignments Negotiations

176

solve the problem through conversations.88 Laugenie’s suggestion for a tripartite

discussion for solving the vexed problem might also have induced the anti-mergerists

to exploit the existing situation and drive benefits from both India and France to serve

their purpose. Accordingly, from the French side the French India Socialist Party

which claimed to represent the population, demanded total autonomy to the four south

Indian settlements guaranteed jointly by India and France. For this purpose, the party

lent its support to Pakkirisamy in the election held on 16th November 1948 to elect a

member from French India to the Conseil de la République and Maurice Gaudart in

the election held on 19th December 1948 to elect a member from French India to the

Assemblée de l’union française.89 At the same time the same French India Socialist

Party passed a resolution in the French India Assemblée Représentative welcoming

the All India Congress Committee’s Jaipur resolution on foreign possessions.90 The

resolution stated, “The Representative Assembly has noted with satisfaction the

statement made at Jaipur by Pandit Nehru in regard to foreign possessions in India. It

expresses confidence in the Prime Minister and desires that the question of the French

territories in India may be settled in the best interests of all by the two interested

Governments, after consultation with the delegates of the Representative Assembly

elected under Universal Franchise.”91 Thus the French India Socialists manifested

their capability of exploiting the situation under the nationalist garb. The necessity of

a transitory period of 5 to 30 years virtually realigned the local political elite and

delayed the merger process further.

88 The Hindu, 25 November 1948. 89 Journal officiel des établissements français dans l’Inde, 1948, p. 369 and 1949, p. 15. 90 Among the 44 members of the Assembly, 24 belonging to the Socialist Party voted for the welcome resolution (R. L. Purushothama Reddiar Paper, N. A. I., Puducherry). 91 Procès- verbaux des délibérations de l’Assemblée Représentative de l’Inde Française, deuxième session, 20 Nov. 1948.