The Surat Session in 1907 was a key moment in India’s fight for freedom. It’s famous for a big reason — it showed the deep divide between two groups in the Indian National Congress. These were the Extremists and the Moderates. To know who led this important meeting, we need to understand the setting.
Back then, the Congress was filled with tension. The Extremists wanted to expand their protests beyond Bengal. The Moderates opted for a calmer, more diplomatic route. This difference in approach set the stage for a major showdown.
The session ended in what’s called the Surat split 1907. There was shouting and even physical fights among the members. This clash showed how divided they really were. The person in charge of the session had to navigate through these tough conflicts. Knowing about this leader helps us see the big picture of India’s journey to freedom.
Key Takeaways
- The Surat Session was critical in highlighting the rift between Extremists and Moderates.
- Political unrest and riots marked the atmosphere leading up to this session.
- The session saw intense confrontations among delegates, reflecting deep ideological differences.
- The split led the Extremists to form the Liberal Party post-session.
- This division significantly impacted the structure and strategies of the Indian National Congress.
Background of the Surat Session 1907
In December 1907, the Indian National Congress was in turmoil. Different groups within it clashed over how to deal with the British. The political atmosphere was charged, as reformists and those wanting immediate action couldn’t agree.
Political Climate Before the Session
The Surat session showcased deep divisions. From 1885 to 1907, moderates tried different strategies to get the British to listen. They held mass meetings and wrote petitions. However, their biggest effort, the Indian Councils Act of 1892, didn’t satisfy the people’s growing unrest.
In 1907, a split happened at the INC meeting. Moderates supported Rash Behari Ghosh, while radicals backed Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai. This fight showed the deep divide: Moderates wanted slow changes, and Radicals sought to kick the British out quickly. This disagreement led to a physical fight, disrupting the session and splitting the group for good.
Previous Indian National Congress Sessions
Looking back at past Congress sessions helps us understand these rifts. Early meetings were marked by disagreements between moderates and radicals. Gopal Krishna Gokhale and others pushed for diplomacy, while radicals, frustrated by the slow pace of change, began to rise.
This tension predicted the big split at Surat. Nationalists thought showing dissent would help win public support for freedom. The Surat session was a turning point, reshaping the INC and India’s fight for independence.
Who Presided Over the Surat Session 1907?
The 1907 Surat session was a key event in Indian history, led by Rash Behari Ghosh. It happened near the Tapti River, showing deep divides in the Indian National Congress. Ghosh, siding with the Moderates, faced pushback from the Extremists, who wanted quicker action for India’s freedom.
About 1300 delegates backed the Moderates, against the 1100 with the Nationalists. This difference showed the power struggle within the Congress. The session was called to figure out how to work together for self-governance. Big names like Lokmanya Tilak and Lala Lajpat Rai wanted to lead, hoping to shape the Congress with bolder policies.
Ghosh becoming chairman was a turning point. It made the differences between the Moderates and Extremists clear. This clash led to a deep split in the Congress. This division came after tension had been growing, notably at earlier meetings in Banaras and Calcutta.
This decision had lasting effects. The Moderates, under Ghosh, pushed for gradual change and legal methods. The Radicals wanted faster action to end British rule. This disagreement at the Surat session caused a lasting split in the Congress, changing its path in the independence movement.
Key Figures in the Surat Session
In 1907, the Surat session of the Indian National Congress (INC) became a key event. It revealed a major split between the Extremists and the Moderates. This division highlighted the battle of ideas, impacting India’s fight for freedom.
The Extremists
Leaders of radical change led the Extremists. They were prominent figures who sought immediate reform. Among them were:
- Bal Gangadhar Tilak: Known as the father of Indian unrest, he advocated for forceful resistance against British control.
- Lala Lajpat Rai: He stood out for his nationalism and courage against colonial rule.
- Bipin Chandra Pal: Pal was a strong promoter of dynamic protest strategies.
The Extremists grew unhappy with the Moderates, especially after the Partition of Bengal in 1905. Their momentum peaked during the Surat session. The refusal to let Tilak speak led to protests. This incident clearly showed the division within the Congress.
The Moderates
The Moderates took a gentler path towards change. They were:
- Rash Behari Ghosh: He sought reforms through peaceful methods and understanding with the British.
- Gopal Krishna Gokhale: Gokhale was a champion of education and gradual reform to achieve freedom.
- Pherozeshah Mehta: A proponent of moderation, he worked to keep the Congress united.
- Surendranath Banerjea: Initially, he sided with the Moderates, focusing on reform.
- Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya: He supported self-rule for India, but within legal boundaries.
The dispute between the Extremists and Moderates came to a head during the Surat session. This split resulted in expulsions and created a lasting rift within the INC. The division weakened the nationalist movement and gave the British an upper hand.
| Faction | Key Figures | Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Extremists | Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai, Bipin Chandra Pal | Radical methods: swadeshi, boycotts |
| Moderates | Rash Behari Ghosh, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Pherozeshah Mehta, Surendranath Banerjea, Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya | Constitutional methods: negotiation, gradual reform |
The Surat Split: Causes and Consequences
The Surat Split in 1907 was a key event for the Indian National Congress. Two groups within the Congress couldn’t agree because of their ideas. The Extremists wanted rapid change, while the Moderates preferred slow, steady reform. This disagreement led to a major division, showing how the Congress was at a crossroads about its future path.
Ideological Differences
The disagreement came from the different beliefs of the two sides. The Moderates were influenced by ideas from the West, advocating for change through talking and slow reforms. On the other hand, the Extremists looked to Indian history and culture for guidance, pushing for immediate action against British control. This conflict made it hard for the two groups to work together, showing the deep divide in their ideologies.
Impact on Indian National Congress
The Surat Split deeply affected the Congress for eight years. It weakened the Swadeshi movement and made it harder for the party to promote unity. Without a united front, the national movement weakened after 1908, leading to more revolutionary activities. The division played into British hands, keeping the Congress weak for over a decade.
Only in 1916 did things start to get better, with the Lucknow Session bringing the groups back together. But the effects of the split were long-lasting, leaving a mark on India’s political scene.
Aftermath of the Surat Session
In 1907, the Surat session was a key event for the Indian National Congress. It caused a big shift. Moderates took over and aimed for reforms within the British Empire. This change deepened the divide between moderates and extremists in the fight for independence.
Political Landscape Post-Surat
After Surat, things changed a lot for the national movement. Moderates, leading since 1885, now sought gradual reforms. This sidelined leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak. The Congress split weakened resistance to British rule and led to a rise in violent acts for freedom.
The split cooled the movement’s momentum by 1909, especially when Muslims got separate electorates. But by 1916, extremist leaders came back to the Congress. This shows the flexibility in the Congress. The impact of the Surat split shaped India’s political scene into the early 20th century.
