All questions of The Freedom Struggle and Modern Nationalism for OPSC OCS (Odisha) Exam

C

**British Viceroy Lord Lytton and the Intensification of Discontent Against Foreign Rule**

**Introduction:**
During the early 1880s, British rule in India faced increasing discontent and resistance from the Indian population. One of the key figures responsible for intensifying this discontent was Lord Lytton, who served as the Viceroy of India from 1876 to 1880. Lytton's policies and actions during his tenure significantly contributed to the growing dissatisfaction among Indians towards foreign rule.

**Policies and Actions:**

1. **The Vernacular Press Act:** In 1878, Lord Lytton introduced the Vernacular Press Act, which sought to control the Indian press. This act imposed strict regulations and censorship on vernacular newspapers, effectively curbing freedom of the press. The act was widely seen as an attack on the freedom of expression and a means to suppress dissenting voices, further fueling resentment among the Indian population.

2. **The Arms Act:** Under Lytton's administration, the Arms Act was passed in 1878. This act aimed to disarm the Indian population, making it more difficult for them to resist British rule. The act was perceived as an infringement on the right to bear arms and an attempt to weaken the Indian populace. It contributed to the growing sense of frustration and anger towards foreign rule.

3. **The Afghan Wars:** Lord Lytton's aggressive policies towards Afghanistan also led to increased discontent among Indians. In an attempt to counter Russian influence in the region, Lytton initiated the Second Anglo-Afghan War in 1878. The war resulted in a British victory but at a significant cost, both in terms of lives lost and financial resources expended. The Indian population resented being dragged into a conflict that seemed to serve British imperial interests rather than their own.

4. **Famine Relief Policies:** Lord Lytton's handling of the Great Famine of 1876-78 further exacerbated discontent. His administration's response to the famine was criticized for being inadequate and insensitive, leading to widespread suffering and loss of life. Many Indians felt that the British government prioritized its own interests over the welfare of the Indian people.

**Conclusion:**
Lord Lytton's tenure as Viceroy of India played a significant role in intensifying discontent against foreign rule. His policies and actions, such as the Vernacular Press Act, the Arms Act, aggressive military interventions, and inadequate famine relief measures, contributed to growing resentment and resistance among the Indian population. These factors laid the foundation for the Indian independence movement that would gain momentum in the coming decades.

Option b

C) i and iii

Society, which was established in Bengal in 1838. This society aimed to protect the interests of the landed gentry and promote their rights and privileges. It played a significant role in advocating for the rights of landowners and influencing government policies related to land reforms. The Landholders Society was one of the first organized efforts by the Indian elite to form a public association and assert their influence in colonial India.

Under the Dyarchy in the provinces during the British Raj in India, certain subjects were reserved and administered by the Governor and his Executive Council. These reserved subjects were crucial for the functioning and stability of the province. Let's examine the options given and determine which subjects were included in the reserved list.

(i) Law and order: This subject was undoubtedly included in the reserved subjects. Maintaining law and order was a key responsibility of the colonial administration, and it remained under their direct control.

(ii) Land Revenue: Land revenue collection was an important source of income for the colonial government. Therefore, it was also included in the reserved subjects and administered by the Governor and his Executive Council.

(iii) Agriculture: Agriculture, being the backbone of the Indian economy, was of great importance. However, agriculture was not reserved and remained a transferred subject under the Dyarchy. It was administered by the Indian ministers.

(iv) Education: Education was not a reserved subject under the Dyarchy. Instead, it was a transferred subject, which means it was administered by the Indian ministers and not directly controlled by the Governor and his Executive Council.

(v) Industries: Industries were included in the reserved subjects. The colonial government aimed to strengthen and control the industrial sector for its own benefit, and therefore, it was administered by the Governor and his Executive Council.

(vi) Irrigation: Like agriculture, irrigation was also a transferred subject. It was administered by the Indian ministers and not directly controlled by the Governor and his Executive Council.

Based on the above analysis, the correct answer is option (c) - (i) law and order, (ii) land revenue, and (vi) irrigation. These subjects were included in the reserved list and administered by the Governor and his Executive Council.

Correct answer is perhaps c as all the pairs are correctly match

The correct answer is option 'D': (i) Bengal, (iii) U.P., (iv) Bihar, and (vi) Assam.

Bicameralism refers to a system of government where the legislative body is divided into two separate chambers. In India, bicameralism was introduced for the first time in 1935 with the Government of India Act, 1935. This act provided for the establishment of a bicameral legislature in certain provinces.

Let's look at each province mentioned in the options:

(i) Bengal:
Under the Government of India Act, 1935, Bengal was one of the provinces where bicameralism was introduced. The legislature in Bengal consisted of two chambers - the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council.

(iii) U.P. (Uttar Pradesh):
U.P. was another province where bicameralism was introduced in 1935. The Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council constituted the bicameral legislature of U.P.

(iv) Bihar:
Bihar was also one of the provinces where bicameralism was introduced in 1935. Similar to Bengal and U.P., Bihar had a Legislative Assembly and a Legislative Council.

(vi) Assam:
Assam was the fourth province where bicameralism was introduced in 1935. The Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council formed the bicameral legislature in Assam.

Therefore, the correct answer is option 'D': (i) Bengal, (iii) U.P., (iv) Bihar, and (vi) Assam. These provinces saw the introduction of bicameralism for the first time in 1935 under the Government of India Act.

The correct sequence of events is as follows:

(i) Formation of the Interim Government by the Congress;
(ii) Cabinet Mission;
(iii) Direct Action Day by the Muslim League;
(iv) Recall of Lord Wavell and appointment of Lord Mountbatten as the Viceroy
(v) Joining of the League in the Interim Government.

Let's break down each event and understand the sequence in detail:

Formation of the Interim Government by the Congress:
After the failure of the Cripps Mission in 1942, the Congress decided to launch the Quit India Movement. As a result, several Congress leaders were arrested and imprisoned. In order to maintain the administration and provide governance, the Congress formed an Interim Government in September 1946. This government was headed by Jawaharlal Nehru and had members from both the Congress and the Muslim League.

Cabinet Mission:
The Cabinet Mission was sent to India in 1946 by the British government to propose a plan for the transfer of power from British rule to Indian hands. The mission recommended the formation of a united India with a federal structure, where power would be shared between the central government and regional provinces. The plan also allowed for the creation of separate Muslim-majority provinces if the leaders agreed.

Direct Action Day by the Muslim League:
On August 16, 1946, the Muslim League called for a Direct Action Day to protest against the rejection of their demand for a separate Muslim-majority state called Pakistan. This led to widespread violence and communal clashes between Hindus and Muslims in several cities, particularly in Calcutta (now Kolkata).

Recall of Lord Wavell and appointment of Lord Mountbatten as the Viceroy:
Due to the deteriorating communal situation and the inability to find a political solution, Lord Wavell was recalled as the Viceroy of India in 1947. He was replaced by Lord Mountbatten, who was given the task of overseeing the transfer of power and the partition of India.

Joining of the League in the Interim Government:
After the formation of the Interim Government, the Muslim League initially boycotted it. However, in October 1946, they joined the Interim Government with the aim of safeguarding the interests of the Muslim community and ensuring the creation of Pakistan.

Therefore, the correct sequence of events is (ii) Cabinet Mission, (iii) Direct Action Day by the Muslim League, (i) Formation of the Interim Government by the Congress, (iv) Recall of Lord Wavell and appointment of Lord Mountbatten as the Viceroy, and (v) Joining of the League in the Interim Government.

**Answer:**

The Vernacular Press Act was passed in 1878, making option D the correct answer. This Act was a clear manifestation of the racial bitterness of the British towards the Indian population.

**Background:**
During the colonial period, the British sought to control and manipulate public opinion in India. The Vernacular Press Act was one such legislation that aimed to suppress the Indian press, which was seen as a powerful tool for mobilizing public opinion against British rule.

**Explanation:**
The passing of the Vernacular Press Act in 1878 can be understood through the following points:

1. **Racial Bitterness:** The British administration in India harbored a deep sense of racial superiority and resentment towards the Indian population. They considered themselves as the "civilizing" force and believed that they had the right to control and manipulate public opinion in India.

2. **Suppression of the Press:** The Indian press played a crucial role in shaping public opinion and providing a platform for dissent against British rule. This Act was a direct attempt to suppress the Indian press by imposing stringent regulations and restrictions.

3. **Gagging Public Opinion:** The Vernacular Press Act gave the colonial government the power to scrutinize and censor any content published in Indian-language newspapers. It required publishers to provide a security deposit and obtain a license, making it easier for the government to control and suppress dissenting voices.

4. **Targeting Vernacular Press:** The Act specifically targeted the vernacular press, which published newspapers in local Indian languages. The British believed that the vernacular press was more effective in reaching the masses and mobilizing public opinion against colonial rule. By targeting the vernacular press, the British sought to limit the dissemination of nationalist ideas and movements.

5. **Impact and Criticism:** The Vernacular Press Act faced significant criticism from Indian nationalists and intellectuals who saw it as a direct assault on the freedom of the press and the right to free speech. It further fueled anti-British sentiments and resistance movements, as Indians saw it as yet another oppressive measure by the colonial government.

In conclusion, the Vernacular Press Act was a clear manifestation of the racial bitterness of the British towards the Indian population. It aimed to suppress public opinion and control the narrative in India, allowing the colonial government to consolidate its power and maintain control over the Indian population.

Ya option A.... We can answer it as we know Muslim league was formed during the swadeshi movement orr we can say after bengal partition for their representation so 1906....and home rule league was during 1916 when tilak released from tha jail... So by elimination we cam go for option A

**The Ilbert Bill controversy during the viceroyalty of Ripon**

The Ilbert Bill controversy refers to a significant event during the viceroyalty of Lord Ripon (1880-1884) in colonial India. The controversy revolved around the attempt to introduce a bill that aimed to reform the Indian legal system, particularly the criminal jurisdiction of British and Indian judges.

**Introduction to the Ilbert Bill**

During British colonial rule, there was a clear distinction between British and Indian subjects, particularly in matters of law and governance. Under existing laws, Indian judges were not allowed to try European offenders, while British judges had jurisdiction over both European and Indian offenders.

The Ilbert Bill, named after its author, Sir Courtenay Ilbert, who was the legal member of the Viceroy's Council, sought to address this discriminatory practice by allowing Indian judges to try European offenders in certain cases. The bill aimed to bring about equality before the law, challenging the prevailing racial hierarchy and promoting a more equitable legal system.

**The Controversy**

The introduction of the Ilbert Bill faced strong opposition from the European community in India, especially the Anglo-Indian community, which consisted of people of British descent born in India. They vehemently opposed the idea of Indian judges having jurisdiction over European offenders, fearing that it would undermine their privileged status and lead to a loss of power and influence.

The controversy quickly escalated, with the European community organizing protests, demonstrations, and even forming anti-Ilbert associations. They argued that allowing Indian judges to try European offenders would compromise British supremacy, create an unsafe environment for Europeans, and result in an erosion of their legal rights.

**Response and Reforms**

Despite the opposition, Lord Ripon and the Viceroy's Council stood firm in their support for the Ilbert Bill. They saw it as a necessary step towards ending racial discrimination and promoting equality under the law. However, in order to mitigate the opposition, certain compromises were made.

One of the compromises was the inclusion of a clause that allowed European offenders to claim a trial by jury, which was typically composed of their peers. This provision was included to address the concerns of the European community about being judged solely by Indian judges.

**Outcome of the Controversy**

Finally, after a long and heated debate, the Ilbert Bill was passed in 1883. However, the bill was significantly diluted from its original form due to the compromises made. The provision allowing Indian judges to try European offenders was limited to cases where the offender was of lower rank or the victim was an Indian. This compromise undermined the original intent of the bill, but it was still considered a step forward in promoting equality before the law.

The Ilbert Bill controversy highlighted the deep-seated racial prejudices prevalent during British colonial rule in India. It also brought attention to the need for legal reforms that would challenge discriminatory practices and promote a more just and equitable society. While the Ilbert Bill did not fully achieve its goals, it laid the groundwork for future reforms in the Indian legal system.

The correct answer is option C: iii, ii, iv, i, v. Let's understand the historical sequence of events:

(i) Resignation of the Congress Ministries:
The sequence begins with the resignation of the Congress Ministries. In response to the failure of the Cripps Mission in 1942, the Congress decided to launch the Quit India Movement. As a part of this movement, the Congress Ministries resigned from power in various provinces in August 1942.

(ii) Celebration of the Deliverance Day by the Muslim League:
After the resignation of Congress Ministries, the Muslim League celebrated Deliverance Day on October 22, 1942. This day was observed as a victory for the League as they believed that the resignation of the Congress Ministries would pave the way for the creation of a separate state for Muslims.

(iii) Lahore Resolution of the League demanding a separate state for Muslims:
Next in chronological order is the Lahore Resolution of the Muslim League. This resolution, also known as the Pakistan Resolution, was passed on March 23, 1940. It demanded the creation of independent states for Muslims in British India.

(iv) Escape of Subhas Chandra Bose from India:
After the Lahore Resolution, Subhas Chandra Bose, who was a prominent leader of the Indian National Congress, escaped from India in 1941 to seek international support for India's independence struggle. He formed the Indian National Army (INA) in collaboration with the Japanese during World War II.

(v) Quit India Resolution by the Congress:
The last event in the sequence is the Quit India Resolution passed by the Congress in August 1942. This resolution called for the immediate end of British rule in India and launched a mass civil disobedience movement against the colonial government.

Therefore, the correct historical sequence of events is iii, ii, iv, i, v.

Explanation:

The birth of the Indian National Congress in 1885 was a result of several immediate and long-term factors. The immediate factors were the events that occurred in the preceding decade, which laid the foundation for the formation of the Congress. The long-term factors were the historical, social, and cultural conditions of India that contributed to the rise of nationalism.

Immediate factors that led to the birth of the Indian National Congress were:

The Arms Act of 1878 and the Vernacular Press Act: These two acts were passed by the British government to restrict the freedom of the press and the possession of arms by Indians. These acts were seen as an attack on the fundamental rights of Indians and led to widespread protests.

The holding of the imperial durbar at Delhi in 1877 when Indian was struck by famine: The imperial durbar was a grand ceremony organized by the British government to proclaim Queen Victoria as the Empress of India. However, the ceremony was held at a time when India was struck by a severe famine, and the British government's indifference to the suffering of Indians was seen as a sign of its callousness and lack of concern for the welfare of its subjects.

Ilbert Bill controversy, 1883: The Ilbert Bill was a proposed law that would have allowed Indian judges to preside over cases involving Europeans. However, the proposal was opposed by the European community in India, who saw it as a threat to their privilege and status. The controversy led to widespread protests by Indians and highlighted the discriminatory policies of the British government.

However, the Second Anglo-Afghan War, 1870-80, was not an immediate factor that led to the birth of the Indian National Congress. The war was fought between the British Empire and the Emirate of Afghanistan over control of Afghanistan. While the war had significant political and strategic implications for the British Empire, it did not directly impact the Indian population or contribute to the rise of nationalism in India.

Understanding the Statements
The two statements relate to the formation of the Indian National Congress (INC) and the context surrounding its establishment.
Statement I: A.O. Hume's Role
- A.O. Hume, a retired British civil servant, indeed played a vital role in founding the INC in 1885.
- His intention was to create a platform for the expression of Indian political aspirations, allowing educated Indians to voice their concerns.
- Hume's involvement can be viewed as an attempt to channel rising discontent among Indians in a non-revolutionary manner.
Statement II: Safety Valve Theory
- The safety valve theory posits that the British government encouraged the formation of the INC to mitigate potential unrest and rebellion.
- By providing a legitimate political forum, the British aimed to absorb and placate the growing frustration and demands of Indian nationalists.
- This theory suggests a strategic move by colonial authorities to maintain control by offering a controlled outlet for political expression.
Correctness of the Statements
- Both statements are accurate in their assertions regarding Hume's involvement and the British intention behind the INC's formation.
- Statement II serves as a correct explanation for Statement I, highlighting the colonial strategy to prevent unrest.
Conclusion
- Therefore, the correct answer is option 'A': Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I.
- This reflects the nuanced understanding of colonial strategies and the emergence of nationalist movements in India.

Incorrect Statement Explanation:
The British Indian Government was not supportive of the Indian National Congress in its early years. In fact, the government viewed the Indian National Congress with suspicion and as a threat to British colonial rule in India. The Congress was seen as a platform for Indian nationalist sentiments and demands for self-governance, which went against British interests.

Correct Statement Explanation:
The British Indian Government did attempt to divide nationalist ranks by fostering divisions based on religion. This was a tactic used to weaken the Indian National Congress and the broader nationalist movement. The government employed a "carrot and stick" approach, offering incentives to certain religious or ethnic groups while using repression and coercion against others. This strategy aimed to create disunity and prevent a united front against British rule.

Explanation:

Early Nationalists and Creation of Public Opinion:
- The early nationalists in India were successful in creating a broad public opinion against British rule by highlighting the various injustices and exploitative practices of the British colonial administration.
- They worked towards awakening the masses and garnering support for the freedom struggle through various means such as newspapers, pamphlets, public speeches, and social reform movements.

Drain Theory and Criticism of British Economic Policies:
- One of the key strategies employed by the early nationalists was to highlight the economic exploitation of India by the British through the drain theory.
- The drain theory outlined how the British were siphoning off resources from India to Britain, leading to economic stagnation and poverty in India.
- Additionally, the early nationalists criticized British economic policies that were detrimental to the Indian economy, such as high tariffs and discriminatory trade practices.

Explanation of Assertion and Reason:
- Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are true in this context.
- The early nationalists indeed succeeded in creating a broad public opinion against British rule by focusing on various aspects of exploitation, including economic exploitation through the drain theory and criticism of British economic policies.
- Therefore, Reason (R) is the correct explanation of Assertion (A) as the highlighting of economic exploitation played a significant role in shaping public opinion against British rule.
Therefore, option 'A' is the correct answer.

Assertion (A) and Reason (R) Analysis:

Assertion (A): The early nationalists failed to draw the masses into the freedom movement.
- The assertion is true as the early nationalists, who focused on petitions and constitutional reforms, did not effectively mobilize the masses for the freedom movement.

Reason (R): They focused on petitions and constitutional reforms, believing in British justice and goodwill.
- The reason is also true as the early nationalists primarily believed in negotiating with the British through petitions and seeking reforms within the existing system, rather than engaging in mass mobilization and agitation.

Explanation:
- The assertion and reason are related as the reason provides an explanation for why the early nationalists failed to involve the masses in the freedom movement. By relying on petitions and expecting British justice and goodwill, they did not adopt more radical or mass-oriented approaches that could have sparked a larger movement.

Conclusion:
- In this context, option 'A' is correct as both the assertion and reason are true, and the reason indeed provides the correct explanation for the assertion. The early nationalists' focus on petitions and constitutional reforms, while overlooking mass mobilization, hindered their ability to draw the masses into the freedom movement.

Explanation:

Statement 1: The early nationalists did introduce the "drain theory" to explain how wealth was being extracted from India to Britain. This theory highlighted the economic exploitation by the British colonial rulers and gained popularity among Indian nationalists during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Therefore, this statement is correct.

Statement 2: The Indian Councils Act of 1892 did not significantly increase the powers of legislative councils in India, especially in financial matters. It was a relatively minor piece of legislation that made limited changes to the composition and functioning of the legislative councils. The real increase in powers came with subsequent acts like the Indian Councils Act of 1909 and the Government of India Act of 1919. Therefore, this statement is incorrect.
Therefore, only statement 1 is correct, and the correct answer is option 'A' (Only 1).

Explanation:

Statement I:
- The aim of the Indian National Congress during its initial years was indeed to establish a platform for all Indians to unite and articulate their political and economic demands.
- The INC was founded in 1885 by A.O. Hume, Dadabhai Naoroji, Dinshaw Wacha, and others with the goal of promoting a common platform for Indians to voice their concerns and grievances.
- The INC played a crucial role in bringing together people from diverse backgrounds and regions to work towards common goals such as self-governance and social reform.

Statement II:
- The formation of the INC was indeed a response to the British economic policies that were seen as detrimental to the economic interests of Indians.
- The INC emerged at a time when Indians were facing economic exploitation under British colonial rule, such as high taxes, discriminatory tariffs, and lack of economic opportunities.
- By advocating for economic reforms and representing the interests of Indians, the INC aimed to address these economic challenges and promote Indian economic development.
Therefore, both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I as the formation of the INC had broader goals beyond just responding to British economic policies.

Explanation:

Indian Councils Act of 1892:
- The Indian Councils Act of 1892, also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, was introduced by the British government in India.
- It aimed to increase Indian representation in the legislative councils and give Indians a larger role in the governance of the country.

Criticism by Nationalist Leaders:
- Nationalist leaders criticized the Indian Councils Act of 1892 for various reasons.
- They felt that the reforms were not sufficient and did not meet the demands of the Indian people for greater participation in the legislative process.
- Nationalist leaders believed that the Act did not go far enough in granting Indians equal representation and decision-making power in the legislative councils.
- They argued that the Act maintained significant British control over the legislative process and did not adequately address the aspirations of the Indian population for self-governance.

Assertion and Reason Analysis:
- The assertion that the Indian Councils Act of 1892 was criticized by nationalist leaders is true.
- The reason given, that it significantly increased the representation and powers of Indians in the legislative councils, is false.
- In reality, while the Act did increase Indian representation to some extent, nationalist leaders felt that it fell short of their expectations and demands for greater empowerment and self-governance.
Therefore, option 'C' is the correct choice as the Assertion is true but the Reason is false.