In this essay we will discuss about rise of the press in India:- 1. Concept of Rise of Press 2. Europeans and Press 3. Growth of Press in Britain 4. British and Press in India 5. Beginning of Censorship 6. Liberal Approach 7. Rise of Indian Interest 8. Rise of Vernacular Press 9. The Indigenous Press 10. Regulation of Press 11. Vernacular Press and European Values 12. Censorship Reintroduced and Other Details.
Essay Contents:
- Concept of Rise of Press
- Europeans and Press
- Growth of Press in Britain
- British and Press in India
- Beginning of Censorship
- Liberal Approach
- Rise of Indian Interest
- Rise of Vernacular Press
- The Indigenous Press
- Regulation of Press
- Vernacular Press and European Values
- Censorship Reintroduced
- Constrained Liberalism
- Struggle Between Press and Government
- The Newspapers Act
- The Indian Press Act
- Objectionable and Seditious Material
- The Indian Press Act
1. Concept of Rise of Press:
The “Press”, as it is understood today, was a blank in India before the Europeans came in. The only news- media available in the country was the “waquiah”. The “waquiah- nawises”, as the name sounds, was recording the events and their importance was more of a historical nature than the task done by the modern Press.
There was no newspaper or news reporter to report either about the “news-value” of the hostilities broke out between Sirajudaullah and the East India Company, or to expose the “battle of Plassey” which was not more than a mere “transaction” between the traitors and the foreign Commercial House.
The third battle of Panipat also remained unreported in time and therefore turned decisively against the Marathas because the Peshwa Baji Rao could know only after complete route of the Maratha army. This route sealed the fate of the Marathas and left India open to the British adventures.
The political power was changing hands; but the peasantry, which could be a resisting force, was busy, as usual, in ploughing their lands and other sections of the village society engaged in their respective jobs. Probably this might be one of the major causes that the countryside had always been proved nonentity in the political transactions even of grave consequence which took place in India.
As Mohit Moitra says: “Had there been a news-sheet in the country it could have certainly warned the people beforehand that misery and ruin would follow the triumph of a foreign capitalist company” ; the people might not have shown that much apathy.
There might have been at least a Spain against Napoleon. The real perspective of this assumption can be seen in the fact that the people always hankered to know about the “news”. It was for this reason that village singers and their ballads had a great role to play in the countryside. It was the affect of these ballads that the Rajputs could fight the foreigners for centuries.
It might be the result of these singers carrying the stories of the miseries of the people under the English that the people protested against them since beginning at different places at different times. But the absence of Press could not organize country-wide protest as was organized in European countries either against Napoleon or against the Royal Houses etc.
The sad state of affairs continued till the opening of the Press by the Europeans. It does not, however, mean that there was no news-media of importance. As stated earlier, the Mughal Emperors had appointed “waquiah-nawees”. This system was faulty and contained the potentials of oppression which the modern Press can also do.
French traveller, Francois Bernier’s (1658-68), served at the Courts of both Shahjahan and Aurangzeb, description of the “waquiah” is self- explanatory: “Thus do ruin and desolation overspread the land.
The provincial governors, as before observed, are so many ‘petty tyrants, possessing a boundless authority, and there is no one to whom the oppressed subject may appeal, he cannot hope for redress, let his injuries be even so grievous and even so frequently repeated.
It is true that the Great Mogul sends a Vakea-Navis to the various provinces, that is persons whose business it is to communicate every event that takes place, but there is generally a disgraceful collusion between these officers and the governors that their reporting seldom retains the tyranny exercised over the unhappy people.” Manucci therefore, described the waquia as the Gazettee in which waquia- nawees and the cafianavis (public and secret news writer respectively) “must once a week enter what is passing in a vaquia”, to continue in their jobs. However, there was a current going on outside the Mughal State activities which’ led to the emergence of modern press in India.
2. Europeans and Press:
The Portuguese, who were also the first to reach India, imported two presses first time in 1550. The first book, Catechism was printed in 1557 to instruct the pupils at the Jesuit Colleges of St. Paul and Rachel. Thomas Stevens, the first English Jesuit lived in India for his last forty years from 1579 to 1619. He translated the Portuguese Premier into the local language for the use of the college pupils.
Thus, was introduced the printing machinery in India. They were, however, apprehensive of the Press as news-media for spreading the liberty of thought which would go against the interests of the rulers and consequently to their interests. But the increasing importance of volume of trade between India and the European countries increased the commercial value of the news; and a regular sheet viz., “News of the Present Week” had started emerging in Britain and other European countries. The news-sheet was more of commercial value than the political value. The Press containing political value emerged in India out of the struggle of the British against the authorities in their own countries.
3. Growth of Press in Britain:
In those times, a conflict was going between the Parliament and the King in Britain. It was this struggle for sharing the power which gave birth to the political journalism which is taken for the Press in the modern times. This got further impetus when the Civil War broke out in Britain.
In the civil war, the advocates of the freedom of Press won. John Milton was the crusader for this freedom. He pronounced : “Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties”.
Defee was another who argued: “If I might give a short hint to a public writer, it would be to tell him his fate. If he regards truth, let him expect martyrdom on both sides, and then he may go on fearlessly, and this is the course I take myself.” Wilkes, Member of Parliament, reiterated that “the prerogative of the Crown is to exert the constitutional powers entrusted to it in a way, not of blind favour and partiality, but of wisdom and judgement. This is the spirit of our constitution. The people too have their prerogative, and, I hope, the fine words of Dryden will be engraven on our hearts; ‘Freedom is the English subject’s prerogative’.
The existing regime was strongly offended. They dismissed Wilkes from the Parliament. The people took the gauntlet and voted him again into the Parliament. This struggle between the people and the regime, popularly known as “Wilkes and Liberty” finally established the freedom of the Press in Britain.
After Britain became an imperial power and its citizens went to the British colonies, they also carried their rights with them. These British, popularly known as “settlers”, therefore, asserted their right to have freedom of Press in the colonies as well. They won and had, therefore, to be granted that freedom in the colonies as well.
4. British and Press in India:
Their assertion of a right to have freedom of Press in India dates from 1784. In that year the Pitt’s Act established a Board of Control representing the Government consisting of a President and five other Privy Councilors including the Chancellor of the Exchequer and one Secretary of State.
This institution opened the era of the parliamentary control of the British people of the constitutional destinies of India in place of independent control by the East India Company representing a monopoly of a few but most influential group of traders in Britain.
The opponents of the Company had been striving hard to introduce Press in India to develop a pressure both on the Company and the British Government to open India to all the Britons.
The Company as well as its employees taking the advantage of monopoly in India had made great fortunes. Their fortunes were causing a great indignation both in commercial and political circles.
They were aware of the fact that without a free press, they could not pressurize their home government to revoke the monopoly right granted to the Company in India. It became more certain after the persons, who embarked upon this enterprise in the past in India., met with a tragic fate.
William Bolts, a dismissed Dutch employee of the Company, thought of making his livelihood out of Press. With this view, in 1766, he referred to “the want of a printing press in this city (Calcutta) being of great disadvantage in business and making extremely difficult to communicate such intelligence to the community, as is of the utmost importance to every British subject”. He offered his assistance “to any person or persons who are versed in the business of printing, to manage a press, the types and utensils of which he can produce”. The Company, however, found him “unworthy” for at “many other occasions”, he “endeavoured to utter an odium upon the administration and to promote faction and discontent in the settlement.”
James Augustus Hicky was next adventurer. He came from Britain to India to amass fortune; but the success could not smile on him. Therefore, he took to printing for, as he explained in his first issue of Bengal Gazette, “I have no propensity: I was not bred to a slavish life of hard work, yet I take pleasure in enslaving my body in order to purchase freedom for my mind and soul.” His newspaper was confined to the interests of Britons who were opposed to those in power. Therefore, his attempt could not be tolerated by the Company Administration in India.
The Administration, therefore, tried to throttle this adventurer by prohibiting its circulation through postal services and ensured a struggle between the Press and the Company. Hicky argued that he “considers the liberty to Press to be essential to the very existence of an Englishman, and free Govt. The subject should have full liberty to declare his principles, and opinions, and every act which tends to coerce that liberty is tyrannical and injurious to the community.”
His adventure could not be tolerated by the then Governor General, Warren Hastings. Hicky was attacked by a contingent of 400 troops ; arrested when appeared in the Supreme Court to defend his case, sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, fined Rs.20,000 and was asked to pay Hastings Rs.5000 as damage for libel. He was also asked to offer a bail of Rs.80,000 when he was being tried on the libel counts.
Hicky himself explained his case in this letter to the Clerk of the Crown:
“The measures pursued against me are so singularly harassing and oppressive that it seem reserved for this country to beat down the senses which the Laws of England has placed to guard the subject’s liberty, in order to ruin a poor British subject and his helpless family, far removed from his King, his country and his friends, by overwhelming him with numberless indictments….â€
Besides indicting him in the Court, Hicky was not paid his dues for printing Military Regulations for the Company Government in 1792. He had to face the wrath of the Government and was reduced to severest poverty.
It appears from his letter dated 30 October 1792 to the Secretary Hay, in which he informed him that he was attacked with another “fit of disorder”. Apprehensions of his being “carried off in convulsions” obliged (him) to beg that Mr. Hay would be humane for the sake of his (Hicky’s) children.”
But it appeared that his claim to have freedom of Press was unpardonable sin to help him “in the utmost distress with a family of helpless children.” By 1795, he had to declare that “being in danger of losing my liberty and being otherwise very much distressed, I am willing to accept what the Honourable Board offers which, if paid me by this time tomorrow, may save me a very considerable expense and trouble”.
Though he was crushed for the liberty of Press even which was then confined to the British residents and was not better placed with the Indians, Hicky left his name to be remembered as the father of Indian Press. It was also his struggle which could introduce free Press in India.
Hicky’s adventure was adopted by many other fortune seekers and as a result the newspapers started multiplying. As a rival to Hicky’s Bengal Gazette, India Gazette was started by B. Messeink in November 1780. His paper had obviously the assistance and encouragement of Warren Hastings.
The Government itself started publishing Calcutta Gazette from February 1784. Next year saw Bengal journal and the Oriental Magazine or Calcutta Amusement; and the Calcutta Chronicle came into the field in January 1786.
The Madras Courier made its debut with the efforts of a Government Printer, Richard Johnston on 2 October 1785. All those papers could, however, escape the arbitrary official restrictions and deportation of the editors by avoiding criticism of the Government and the Company activities.
The Company had sufficient trouble after the Regulating Act established Supreme Court over its head. Should they go the Hicky way, the Administration obliged them to submit each published copy “to the inspection of the Secretary to the Government before their publication”. Those newspapers were “in difficulties with the Government” whose comments were resented by the officialdom.
The Bombay Gazette, for example, appeared in 1791 and met with a great difficulty on commenting upon the state of the police which were considered to reflect unjustly on the Deputy of Police. Therefore the Government “desired the editor in future to send proof-sheets of the paper to the Secretary for the inspection of the Government”. The Government also resorted to tactics of pressures.
For example, William Duane purchased the wrath of some influential during the Maratha War. He was arrested on the charge of not paying debt of a hundred rupees. “Subscribers to my Paper apologies for withdrawing their names”, he himself wrote, “the alternative had been given to them of relinquishing that or, the goodwill of persons in power, trades men attached to me by personal regard, were compelled to withhold their advertisements, they were told that to advertise with me would be to ensure the loss of custom of the same persons and all their friends ; the military, where my most numerous attachments lay, were in like manner attempted but not with the same effect….” Other newspapers on being’ benefited from Hicky’s bitter experience, assured the authorities that they would abide by the instructions and regulations issued by them.
Thus having been subservient to the purposes of Government these newspapers were given patronage by the Government. These newspapers carried the parliamentary debates, news about the continent, official orders and all the commercial and social information’s concerning exclusively to Europeans. These papers devoted scant attention to the land in which they were published.
As Margarita Barns observed:
“This was so and the fact can only be understood if we constantly remind ourselves that the raison d’etre of this press was as a vehicle of comment on the British administration of the day by those who were outside the privileged circle of the Company’s higher officers.”
Thus, the Press was used by the opponents of the company’s monopoly and the company Governments for furthering their selfish interests. However, the opponents found sympathy in Britain which caused anxiety to the company interests. They got an opportunity in the rise of Napoleon. Then, Lord Wellesley was the Governor General of India.
5. Beginning of Censorship:
He argued that the British interests were threatened in the wake of increasing danger of Napoleon. Their interests were more seriously graved by ambitious plans of Tipu Sultan and Marathas in collaboration with Napoleon to throw British out of India. Taking advantage of that grave situation, Lord Wellesley, in 1799, promulgated rules to control the whole “tribe of editors”.
The printer and editor were required to publish their names and addresses to establish their authenticity, a practice which continues to-date. Besides, all the newspapers were required to be “previously inspected by the Secretary to the Government or by a person authorized by him for that purpose.” Thus the authenticity and the censorship also took birth along with the introduction of Press in India. Non-compliance of the rules was heavily penalized.
The Government policy was revolving round the idea, as the Governor of Madras minuted, that “the principal objects of those who desire the freedom of the Press are to disseminate the worst political doctrines of the times, to bring the constitutional authorities in Europe and Asia into contempt and to provide profits for the lawyers from prosecutions of libels in courts of Justice.”
The only course available to the Company Government was the deportation of recalcitrant editors. The British were, however, adamant to enjoy the freedom of Press which had been granted in their country. It ensued a long and unending struggle. Though both the opponents and the Company were fighting for furthering their interests, the struggle was going to be educative to the persons who thought about Indian interests.
6. Liberal Approach:
This struggle reached its first climax when the Press Censor found himself “powerless in dealing with an editor who was India-born”‘. He was Heatley, the proprietor-editor of Morning Post. He refused to exclude some passages from an article as was directed by the Censor.
The then Governor General, Lord Hastings, was not in favour of censorship. The continued struggle was not politically desirable in a colony, he said, which would sow the seeds of indiscipline among the ‘natives ‘.
He desired to adopt a liberal policy which should morally compel the editors restrain in publishing such news and articles which could endanger British interests, peace and order and also personal vendetta against individual officers. Therefore, in 1818, he abolished the censorship. Instead he maintained a vigilance over the Press.
He wished the editors desisting from, “publishing animadversions on the proceedings of the Indian authorities in England, disquisitions on the political transactions of the local administrations, or offensive remarks on the public conduct in the press of the Council, the judges or the Bishop of Calcutta, discussion having a tendency to create alarm or suspicion among the natives as to any intended interference with their religion (by those who opposed missionary activities), the re-publication from English or other newspapers of passages giving under the preceding heads or otherwise calculated to affect the British power or reputation in India and private scandal or personal remarks on individuals tending to excite discussions in society.”
In nutshell, his instructions sought that the Press should not educate the people of India against the persons in power. This precaution was sought even when the Press in India was the exclusive preserve of the Europeans. Besides, it was not precipitating political problem for the imperial rulers in India.
Margarita Barns explains it as under:
Apart from parliamentary reports, there were editorials on subjects of interests to the resident Britons; on events in England, on the Army, on the reported plans of Indian rulers. In addition to this type of information we find newsletters and reports from Paris, Stockholm, Vienna, Madrid, China, Rio de Janeiro and other centres of interests …There are letters to the editor, Government notices, special news, poet corners’, advertisements and even fashion notes.
What the Company Administration resented was the criticism of the government for personal aggrandizement by rival interests was bringing disrepute to the Company in Britain and was endangering its interests in India. Therefore, the Directors of the Company in England were averse to the freedom of Press in India.
7. Rise of Indian Interest:
When the British were fighting for the freedom of Press to themselves, a new opening had also set in the journalism in India. From 1815 onward, Raja Ram Mohan had taken the uphill task of reforming superstitious and decaying Hindu society in India.
Ganga Kishore Bhattacharya, assisted by Hara Chandra Roy, a close associate of the Raja, thought of spreading the progressive ideas of the Raja. Therefore, he started a paper, Bangal Gazette in Bengali.
Their efforts were sought to be counteracted by the Baptist missionaries by using Press for the spread of Christianity. Since the Company Government was averse to interfere with the religious affairs of the subject country, the missionaries embarked upon the task with a monthly journal, Dig Darshan to “feel the official pulse”.
It was in vernacular language and contained historical and other notices as well as some items of political intelligence. Two numbers were published and as no objection appeared to be forthcoming from the Government circles, they proceeded with their preparations for their weekly paper in Bangalee to be called the Samachar Darpan.
Thus, the Press in the vernacular language was utilized as a vehicle of rival religious ideologies. Again, the Government patronage found favour with the Baptist publication which was cautions for not harming the imperial interests.
The vernacular press, however, thrived only on the support of emerging middle class, majority of who-n were out to earn imperial favour for pecuniary considerations since the wealth had started obtaining status of prestige in the society.
The Samachar Darpan aimed at popularising Christianity by making onslaughts on the prevailing religious faiths in India. To obtain government support, the Baptist publication avoided comments on political news. Rather, they printed elaborately social news. As a result that paper found the favour of Lord Hastings. His successor, Lord Amherst, subscribed for a hundred copies which were distributed to Government officers.
It was widely patronised by the leading functionaries of the Government and the chief civilians of the mofussil who subscribed to it for the valuable informations which could not be obtained through official channels. Indians who contributed to the journal did so because of its official circulation.
Thus, a bad principle got established that the Press in India could thrive by supporting ulterior motives. This concept was further strengthened when, on being refused government concession, Dig Drshan disappeared in 1827 and Samachar Darpan also ceased after its concessions were withdrawn in 1849. It were only the government papers which continued their publication unabated.
At that stage two men of courage, however, withstood the Government pressure and energetically fought against the Company Government. They opposed any restriction on the Press. It was the result of their struggle, that “independent” press could also emerge.
First of them was Buckingham. On coming to India, he found that though the existing journals and papers “professed to have the earliest intelligence of great events and each of them promised their portion of original disquisition, these journals with the exception of two or three at most are found, however, to have no sentiment, either of public or of their own”. Therefore, he planned to start his own newspaper and published a prospectus with this aim on 2 September 1822.
Therein, he announced; “The State of the Press has been a subject of surprise, of disappointment, and of regret to all strangers on their first arrival in India, and the impression of its imperfections gradually loses its force after a long residence in country, yet some of its ablest apologies and most jealous supporters acknowledge its reform to be desideratum.”
In order to keep its freedom, he thought to run his paper on public patronage. Consequently, the Calcutta Journal appeared as a bi-weekly on 2 October 1818, and as a daily from 1 May, 1819. The first issue stated with Bacon’s quotation—’ A forward retention of custom is as turbulent a thing as innovation and they that reverence too much old times are but a scorn to the new”— be its motto. Its editor’s sacred right was “to admonish Governors of their truths”. The paper carried its task scrupulously and forcefully won the favour of its readers.
In spite of the fact, that “this journal has been hitherto conducted under all the disadvantages of a combined opposition”, it has ultimately triumphed, and the dependence on the casual supplies of friends for information, now available through direct and regular channels, will give the most accurate idea of what may be hoped from it, when such obstacles are removed”.
The Calcutta Journal faced a stiff opposition from Jonn Bull in the East, a paper started by Buckingham’s adversary Rev. Samuel James Bryce with official assistance. John Bull could not even bend the forceful pen of Buckingham. Buckingham, however, met the “test” when he commented upon the appointment of Dr. Jameson to a fourth post along with the Lordship of Bishop of Calcutta.
He was warned of deportation but he ignored stating that, “if grievances brought to the notice of the Government through the Press were not to be given a hearing then only those who enjoyed the favour of the Secretaries and”‘ public officers would secure redress of their grievances.” While Buckingham was terrorized both by threats and filing of criminal suits against him, his adversary James Bryce got the prized post of Clerk to Stationery Department.
Unnerved Buckingham commented:
“The Rev. Gentlemen, named below, who, we perceive, by the-index of that useful publication, the Annual Directory, is a Doctor of Divinity, and the mediator of the Kirk Session and who, by the favour of higher powers, now combines the office of person, and clerk in the same person has no doubt, been selected for the ordous duties of this new place from the purest of motives, and strictest possible attention to the public interest.
Such a clerk, as is here required to inspect and reject whatever articles may appear objectionable to him, sound-board, a competent judge of the several sorts of paste-board, sealing wax, inkstand, sand, lead, gum, sunce, tape and leather; and one would imagine that nothing short of regular apprenticeship at Stationer’s Hall would qualify a candidate for such a situation.
All this information, however, the Rev. Gentlemen, no doubt, possesses in a more eminent degree than any other person who could be found to do the duties of such an officer, and though, at first sight, such information may seem incompatible with a theological education yet we know that the country abounds with surprising instances of that kind of genius which fits a man in a moment for any post to which he may be appointed.”
It was too much to swallow. His comments appeared in the Calcutta Journal on 8 February and he was served with an order on 2 February 1823 that he was not entitled to reside in India “from and after the 15th day of April next”. His printing license was revoked in a separate order. But he had set the ball moving and it was not possible to contain it after some more freedom was enjoyed by the journalists and their journals.
Though the Press owned by the Britons was having confrontations amongst themselves for their own conflicting interests, the problem was serious keeping in view the emerging vernacular press with the encouragement of Buckingham and enthusiastic assistant of Raja Ram Mohan Roy. Though the British were critical of the Company Administration, “majority of the British did not betray the interests of their own country in India”.
It was the economic imperialism which had created bourgeoisie in the European countries to fight the royalists. But in colonies, and their native it led to emergence of a middle class to thrive with the former’s help. To them, wealth was the criterion of prestige and social status. Their aspirations, therefore, coincided with the British bourgeoisie.
The middle class had finally to take up the gauntlet of fight for the freedom of press for furthering their economic interests. It was this aspect which was incompatible with the despotism of British imperialism.
The British desire to contain this development even in Briton’s Press ensued a long struggle between the press and Imperial Government. It had become necessary as the “middle class” in India had already started walking on this path.
8. Rise of Vernacular Press:
The Indian middle class was divided into two broad groups viz., the progressive and the conservative groups. The progressives sought westernization of the society; whereas the conservative were in favour of status quo. Both of them had seen how Buckingham’s efforts had established a powerful organ of Press and influenced both the readers and the government.
Raja Ram Mohan Roy who was then the leader of the reformist movement was much impressed that “a well edited newspaper was the best instrument to educate people and to propagate new ideas.” Therefore, he launched his own weekly, Sangbad Kaumudi in Bengali and Mirat ul-Aklibar in Persian in 1821 and 1822 respectively.
These weeklies aimed at inspiring ‘ the people to fight against socio-religious malpractices, to be acquainted with the lessons of western culture, and to inform both the ruling class and their subjects the ‘real situation’ obtaining in the country.”
He also refuted the Christian missionaries’ toll claim through his bilingual monthly journal, Brmhmanical Journal or Brahman Sebadhi. Sensing a threat from his publications, of other native leaders the middle class started newspapers in vernacular language in different cities.
These vernacular newspapers covered local events and grievances and did not spare the government of its shortcoming. These papers were particularly concerned, as the Hindu Patriot commented, about “the war between the Brahminism and Brahmoism (of the Raja), between principle and prejudice, between prescription and progress commenced.”
Bhawani Charan Banerjee, earlier an associate of the Raja, soon broke away with Sangbad Kaumudi. He joined hands with the opponents to Raja’s reforms. This conservative group had got themselves organized into Dharm Sabha.
The Sabha started its own weekly, Samachar Chandrika. ‘ The editor of the’ Chandrika’ for 25 years was Bhawani Banerji, an able Sanskrit and Bengali scholar, the leader of the Dharm Sabha of which Chandrika was the organ.”
The Chandrika, reported J. Long in his Report for the year 1855, “occasionally barks now but it is toothless; the body of Hindu reformers is too strong for it.” In spite of the setback caused by the resignation of Banerji. J. Long further reported, the Kaumudi was revived and “last to see the abolition of Sati by Lord Bentick, the actual carrying out of which was in no small degree owing to the Kaumudi and similar papers preparing the native mind for the abolition.”
These rival papers developed a healthy debate and brought forth both progressive and reactionary views to their readers. The duel of words also helped in developing democratic consciousness.
In this way the vernacular press was successful in what the Raja had stated in the prospectus to his Persian weekly, Mirat-ul-Akbhar:
“My only object is that I may lay before the public such articles of intelligence as may increase their experience, and tend to their social improvement; and to that extent of my abilities I may indicate to the rulers a knowledge of the real situation of their subjects and make the subjects acquainted with the established laws and customs of their rulers ; that the rulers may more readily find an opportunity of granting relief to the people; and the people may be put in possession of the means of ‘obtaining protection and redress from the rulersâ€.
The vernacular press was also successful in bringing a unity of approach between different groups to resist missionary onslaught on Hinduism.
The vernacular press was also educating the people about the constitutional agitation. Though the crusade was only against medievalism, which I was helpful to the British imperial interests, and was confined to a limited minority of the middle class in the urban centres, the British Company Administration had started feeling uneasy.
The criticism of Administration was not as fierce as Buckingham had let loose, but a slight imitation of the British could spark the accumulated resentment in the people against the economic exploitation and could result into a serious threat to the existence of the Company. The difficulty was also a bit complex. The Company had not the right to deport the editors of the Indian-owned newspapers.
William Butterworth Bayley, Chief Secretary to the Government minuted on 10 October 1822 that “the liberty of Press, however essential to natives of a free state, is not, in my judgement, consistent with the character of our institutions in this country and with the extraordinary nature of their interests”.
The Company Government was getting alarmed on the growth of vernacular press. Besides, the criticism of the Government was eroding the sympathy of the powerful people in Britain and endangering the interests of the Company.
It appointed Sir Thomas Munro to inquire into and suggest means for improving the relations between the Press and the Government. As was the reality, Munro found that the “freedom or restriction of the [European] press could do little good or harm, and would hardly deserve any serious attention.” They could be dealt with censorship and right of deportation.
9. The Indigenous Press:
Actually it was the indigenous press which was being regulated by the European Press and could pose the real danger. He said: “But though the danger be distant, it is nevertheless there. It could corrupt and disaffect the Indian army and work for the overthrow of the British power. It might spread among the people the principles of liberty and stimulate them to expel the strangers who rule over them and to establish a national government…. A free press and domination of strangers are things which are quite incompatible and cannot long exist together.”
10. Regulation of Press:
It was in this context that the notorious ordinance known as Adam’s Gag was proclaimed to control this emerging force.
The Ordinance laid down:
Henceforth, no one should publish a newspaper or a periodical without having obtained license from the Governor-General-in-Council, signed by the Chief Secretary. The application for a license should give the name or names of the printer and publisher, of the proprietors, their place of residence, the location of press and the title of the newspaper, magazine, register, pamphlet or other printed book or paper.
The Ordinance was contested by eminent persons like Raja Ram Mohan Roy. They petitioned that the Ordinance would preclude Indians ‘ from making the Government readily acquainted with the errors and injustice that may be committed by its Executive Officers in the various parts of the extensive country and it will also prevent the natives from communicating frankly and honestly to their Gracious Sovereign in England and his Council, the real conditions of His Majesty’s subjects in this distant part of the dominions and the treatment they experience from the local government.”
Sir Francis McNaughton, the Judge of the Supreme Court rejected the petition stating that there was much “practical liberty” for the Indians and there was a necessity to regulate the fast developing Press with no law to depart Indians and Anglo-Indian editors. It was further pointed out in the judgement that taking the advantage of absence of this provision, “Mr. Buckingham has appointed a successor who tells us he cannot be controlled by the Supreme Authority but is superior to it, it is necessary that things should be brought to their proper level.” Buckingham appealed to the Privy Council in England.
The Privy Council categorically stated that’ the inevitable consequences, even of rash and injudicious, though well meant, discussions, in daily and other newspapers and periodicals publications, circulated not only in the English language, but in the Persian, Bengali and other native tongues of all subjects of government and administration, civil, religious, military and political, could not fail to afford matter of irritation to the native powers, to disquiet and unsettle the minds of His Majesty’s native subjects, and thereby to endanger the security of the British Establishment in India.”
The Raja also appealed to the King of England, the “Liberator of Europe” against the Press Regulations. It was rejected by the King in-Council as well. In this way when the people in Europe were obtaining freedom of Press which helped them to avoid oppression and provided avenues for advancement, the Imperial Government in India muzzled the infant Indian press.
It was the most derogatory step and was calculated to prolong the imperial rule for indefinite period.
The provision became more difficult for the “high born Indians” who had, as A.L. Basham said, themselves created a gulf between the English and themselves. This-was explained by the Raja himself while closing down his paper, Mirat-ul-Akhbar. He said that it was difficult for an Indian, who “had no access to the officials as English Editors had, to secure a license.”
He further said that “to take an affidavit in open Court in the presence of respectable magistrates, is looked upon as very mean and censurable by those who watch the conduct of their neighbours and after incurring the disrepute of soliciting and suffering the dishonour of making the affidavit, the constant apprehension of the license being recalled by Government which would create such anxiety as entirely to destroy one’s peace of mind.” But the Raja by fighting against the Press had set the ball rolling for “constitutional agitation for political rights which their countrymen have learnt to value so much in the present day.”
11. Vernacular Press and European Values:
The Adam’s Regulations had throttled the press in India. Therefore the editors continued at their work with anxiety and apprehension. Their fears further heightened after William Bentick became Governor General in 1828. As Governor of Madras he had enforced rigidity upon the Press.
But after reaching Calcutta, he found that the emerging middle class was considering the British rule as a God-gift in disguise. Their fate had been tied with the success of the British. He was, therefore, of the opinion that the middle class needed some relaxation to support and further British interests.
He also found that the efforts of the Raja had created congenial atmosphere for social reforms which could go a long way in winning the confidence of the progressive section of the society. Therefore, Bentick supported them and enacted law for the abolishment of Sati.
He knew that it was the freedom of the Press, enjoyed before the enactment of Adam’s Regulations, which enabled the Company Administration to interfere with social matters for the first time in the history of India.
Therefore, Bentick allowed the Press to regain some freedom since, as the conservative organ, the Samachar Chandrika wrote in September 1831, “Lord William Bentick has utterly destroyed these fears.” They were given the belief, as the paper further said, “if any evil befall us, we shall not sit down in silence, but weep so loud that our cries may reach our sovereign.
And if we live in happiness we shall so tumultuously make known our gladness that the praises of our benefactors may sound throughout the whole world.” By his cautious approach, William Bentick won the support of the progressive press and also inspired faith in the conservative press. It gave a new impetus to the Press. In 1830, there were about 16 language newspapers and periodical in Bengal. Nineteen more papers came into being in the next three years.
The English dailies and periodicals also rose to 33 with a total subscription of 2,225. It was also the period which gifted the Press the most renowned papers of the present-day.
There are:
(i) Bombay Samachar (Gujarati), Bombay (1822);
(ii) Jam-e-Jamshed, (Gujarati). Bombay (1832);
(iii) Times of India (English), Bombay’ (1833);
(iv) Calcutta Review (English), Calcutta (1844), and
(v) Tinnevelly Diocesan Magazine (Tamil), Madras (1849).
This growth was evident in other urban centers as well. The Mumbiana Samachar in Gujarati became a daily in 1832. Two more newspapers, viz. the Mumbai Varteman and the Jam-e-Jamshed came into being. As the question of abolition of Sati had pampered the journalism in Calcutta, in Bombay it owed its growth to the controversy over Parsi calendar. The above papers supported the Shahansahis calendar.
In their opposition, the supporters of Kadmis calendar also started their own newspaper, Ebtal-e-Kabiseh. But after the English paper ‘Iris’ became the vehicle of opposite claimants, Kabiseh disappeared. In this way the growth of Press during the era of Bentick was more due to controversy over social attitudes of different sections of society.
They became the attraction of their supporters. It was this reason that this paper offered its columns for the propagation of different approaches and increases its popularity. Since there was no sound base for the existence of such papers they ceased their publication with the subsidising controversies and only those papers survived which carried different aspects of socio-economic and political problems within the framework provided by the Company Administration.
The Press, however, was not liberated of the yoke of Adam’s Regulations. The argument offered by Sir Thomas Munro, the then Governor of Madras, for continuing that yoke is quite revealing. He opposed the free Press for two important aspects.
He said that the “first is, that our sovereignty should be prolonged to the remotest possible period ; the second is that whatever we are obliged to resign it should leave the natives so far improved from their connection with us as to be capable of maintaining a free or at least, a regular government among themselves.
If these objects can ever be accomplished it can only be under a restricted Press. A free one, so far from facilitating, would render this attainment utterly impracticable.” He further said that “we are trying an experiment never yet tried in the world —maintaining a foreign domination (for indefinite period) by means of a native army.” It was being done by establishing “all respect for the European character and authority.”
The free Press, he rightly apprehended, would be exposing the real character of the European and would agitate finally the minds of the “native army” and their position would “never be secure from insurrection.” Mount Stuart Elphinstone, the enlightened governor, also shared the above views.
Therefore, Moitra rightly commented that the British contemplated “to rule India eternally and avenues for exploitation must always be kept open for them. So, they could not conceive of a Press in India which would be free to criticise the administration and to encourage people to continue their struggle to win for their country.” It is clear from the treatment meted out to Metcalf who dared to un-muzzle the Press.
After the death of Bentick, Sir Charles Metcalf became Governor General. He was totally in favour of press freedom. In spite of stiff opposition, in 1855, he repealed the Adam’s Regulations and set up a new landmark in the history of journalism in India. This action, the Directors of the Company warned, “must be considered the most unjustifiable” and were prepared lo “disallow” but for its “productive of mischievous results”.
This fear continued and the freedom of Press was not restricted till 1857, and the curb over the Press was maintained through administrative measures and pressure tactics. But the repeal of the restrictive laws also brought about a flood of newspapers and journals and language papers started coming up in all parts of the country.
The “legal” freedom helped the Press in India to attain gradually a maturity. The resurgence of 1857, however, did not provide it the opportunity to play that powerful role as it had been playing in independent countries of Europe.
Though the insurrection was the result of imperial exploitation of India, but the British Administration held the free Press responsible which “is incompatible with a despotism, however, paternal”, for this violent outburst.
12. Censorship Reintroduced:
J. Long consistently argued for encouragement to the Press and he wrote in his report (1859) that “the opinion of the Native Press may often be regarded as the safety valve which gives the warning of the danger, thus had the Delhi native newspapers of January 1857 been consulted by European functionaries, they would have seen in them how the natives were rife for revolt, and were expecting aid from Persia and Russia”.
But the Administration had not forgotten that the free Press “is incompatible with a despotism, however, paternal”. They were not to miss any opportunity to undo the good deeds of Metcalf. Lord Canning, the then Governor General, contrary to the opinion of J. Long, doubted “whether it is fully understood or known what an audacious extent sedition has been poured into the hearts of the native population of India within the last few weeks under the guise of intelligence supplied to them by the native newspapers”.
Therefore he passed an Act of 1857 which reintroduced the main features of the Adam Regulations of 1823. The Act known as the Licensing Act, made it obligatory for the papers to have a license from the Government. The Governor-General in Council was empowered to lay down conditions for the grant of such licenses.
It may be noted that this Act was passed only for one year, but it actually remained in force till 1865—it being renewed every year. In this way the work of Charles Metcalf, the messiah of Indian journalism, was undone.
13. Constrained Liberalism:
The new regulation gave a severest setback to the growing Press. Bengal Hurkaru could exist only after terminating its editor, Sidney Laxman Blanchard. Many others were charged before the Supreme Court with publishing seditious libels. Most of the Urdu Papers of North-West Provinces had already ceased publication during the resurgence itself.
The leading Bombay papers withstood the dangerous provocation by the English papers and forced the editor, George Buist of Bombay Times replaced by Robert Knight who converted the paper as an organ for the cause of the Indians those papers also protested against Canning’s Press Act and obtained public sympathy to their cause.
The Company could, however, muzzle the Press only for a temporary phase. Its own rule came to an end in 1858. After the Government of India was taken over by the Crown, the Queen made a Proclamation to restore public confidence. In the changed circumstances, Canning himself allowed sedition section to be dropped.
The repeal of sedition act gave a great impetus to the Press in India. In 1861 the Indian Press saw the birth of the Times of India after the amalgamation of the existing four newspapers, the Bombay Times, the Courier, the Standard, and the Telegraph.
Three more Anglo-Indian papers started appearing. These were Pioneer (Allahabad); the Civil and Military Gazette (Lahore) and the Statesman (Calcutta). An evening newspaper Madras Mail also made its debut. It was followed by the Hindu. Thus all the current important newspapers emerged in that decade.
During the decade of so-called “freedom of Press’ the vernacular Journalism took a nationalist turn. This turn was inaugurated by the Hindu-Patriot which emerged as a national paper. It could be possible by its fearless editor Harish Chander Mukherjee.
The editor made his paper the mouthpiece of oppressed millions and it commented, during that period, that the further would be revealing that “the atrocities’ were in most instances unreal creations of morbid imaginations; the retributive excesses were sad realities. ‘Canning’s Clemency’ will then prove the salvation of the British name as it has proved the salvation of many Indian lives.” Harish Chander Mukherjee followed the path of Hicky and Buckingham and “gave a realistic colour to his fight for justice and truth.”
The way in which he presented the cause of the peasants’ revolt against British indigo planters earned for him the immortal title of “a terror to the bureaucracy as well as to the white colonists and planters in Bengal.” Contrary to the appeasing attitude of other dailies and weeklies, especially the British papers, Harish Chander denounced the Queen’s Proclamation as a big promise with no guarantee of fulfillment.
In that way he was perhaps the first editor of India who “changed the journalistic language of protest to one of denunciation and challenge” .His virile pen inspired a mass upsurge of peasants in Bengal and brought the educated middle class nearer to the toiling peasants” It was his effort that the Government was forced to appoint an Indigo Commission to suggest steps for the improvement of the peasants’ lot.
His career was, however, cut short by his premature death at the early age of just 37 years on 14 June 1861. The weekly continued thereafter but gradually its influence diminished and itself discontinued in 1920s. The weekly, however, had heralded that national consciousness which was inevitable after wild massacres and inhuman tyranny during the resurgence which shook the faith of the people in the British character.
The Press again came under dark clouds. In 1871 France had been defeated by Purssian army; and gave birth to imperial Germany which had all the potentialities of becoming a Great Power. Britain could not do anything and tried to shield its indignation in so-called “splendid isolation”. Taking advantage of this “self-imposed” British isolation and sympathised by Bismark, the Chancellor of Imperial Germany, Russia started expanding in Asia. The British Government planned utilising India as a base to thwart Russian expansion in these regions.
It was to cause hardship to Indians. Seeing the role in the peasants’ revolt in indigo-affair the Government feared indigenous Press taking their cause. Therefore, the Government was not prepared to risk any criticism.
Lord Lytton was a staunch imperialist and true representative of Disraeli. He obtained the services of forceful statesmen and journalists to propagate Government cause and prepare the masses for their, master’s benefits. But his failings in the second Afghan war “to contain Russia” could not avoid him earning a bad name. Besides, the struggle for the freedom of Press took another turn as well. On persuasion, Robert Knight who had earned a good name resigned the editorship of the Times of India in 1872, and became the editor of the official journal, the Agricultural Gazette of India. But, there he came into conflict with the Governor- General over the famine problem in Bihar. Knight favoured prohibition of the export of grain in the times of scarcity and aired his views in a subsidised newspaper, the Indian Economist. It opened two basic questions relating to a subsidized paper and an official resorting to the Press.
The Government finally withdrew the subsidy to the Indian Economist and curtailed the freedom of officials. Sensing this restriction, Robert Knight had already resigned his editorship of the Agriculture Gazette and founded his own paper, the Statesman. He also purchased the Friend of India and incorporated that paper with the Statesman.
In deference to the wishes of the founder of the Friend of India, the Statesman to this day bears the legend, “incorporating and directly descended from the Friend of India— founded in 1818 “. However, this episode deprived the people in Government service to have unrestricted freedom.
14. Struggle Between Press and Government:
Lord Lytton became Viceroy in 1876. He sought to improve the deteriorating relations with Press. There were two schools. One school desired, as Robert Knight said, a rapprochement and suggested “setting up of a Press Bureau with a Director whose business…should be to keep himself informed of the writings of every journal, answer enquiries from the Press and generally maintain a constant and continuing relationship”.
There was another school, mainly represented by the officialdom and pro-establishment newspapers who “were strong supporters of some form of restriction” especially oil the Vernacular Press. At that juncture, his failings in the Second Afghan War could not avoid him earning a bad name.
The vernacular Press was more indignant over the massacre of native soldiers; and the Government feared erosion of native’s faith in the airing of British failures.
Therefore, Lytton favoured the official view of putting “restrictions. Accordingly, the Vernacular Press Act, 1878, was passed. It aimed at keeping “better control” over the Vernacular newspapers and strengthened the Government with more effective means of punishing and repressing additions writing calculated to produce disaffection towards the Government. Lord Lytton, however, did a great service. The restrictions provoked the indigenous journalists. They organised “one of the most successful meeting ever held in India”.
The meeting condemned the Act which “was utterly uncalled for, unduly repressive in character and inspired by sinister motives. It was a draconian piece of legislation based for the most part on the Irish Coercion Act of 1870 (which was enforced to contain Irish nationalists) and to in some respects more stringent than the latter”.
The passage of the Act again created a storm against the Government. The Statesman called it “a demoralised and scandalous rule of this order, that naturally came forward to “gag the Press”. Motilal Ghose resentfully said that “an autocratic of autocrats, Sir Ashley sought to rule Bengel with an iron hand.”
The Act was harsh. Lord Lytton, however, accepted the suggestion of Robert Knight to keep the Press informed and appointed for this purpose a Press Commissioner. The strained relations with the Press normalized after the Tory Government was defeated in Britain and Liberals came to power.
They appointed Lord Ripon who repealed all the oppressive restrictions upon the Press in 1882. But this struggle had given birth to organised meetings and nationalist movement. It paved the way for the formation of Indian National Congress in 1885.
The Liberal Government’s “liberal approach” towards the Vernacular Press was not appreciated by the British in India. It was remarked by Professor Dodwell that a free Indian Press was incompatible with imperial Government. The Press was bound to criticise the acts of omission and commission of the Government which would erode the faith of natives in general, and native army, in particular, in the Government of India.
The future events proved so. The indigenous Press became the mouthpiece of the nationalists. Their “freedom” became a “store of neck” to the imperialists. The press contributed heavily in inflaming the protest against the anti-Indian policy.
Partition of Bengal, by Lord Curzon in 1905, was made the most sensitive issue ; and brought the demand on surface of throwing the British bag and baggage out of India. It made the control of Press imperative.
15. The Newspapers (Incitement to Offences) Act, 1908:
The newspapers (Incitement to Offences) Act was accordingly passed in 1903. The Magistrates were empowered to confiscate any printed material which contained inflammatory matter. Even if the Magistrate had some doubt, he could call upon the press to explain why step should not be taken against it.
If the reply of the press was not satisfactory and the magistrate was convinced of its crime, he could direct the police to execute the order and attach the press.
In case of emergency the attachment orders could be passed even without serving a show-cause notice. An appeal against the action of the Magistrate could be made to the High Court within 15 days of the issue of such order.
Even the Local Governments were authorised to declare the; declaration of the printer and publisher, made under the Act of 1867, as null and void. The Act, as the Law Member conceded, contemplated altogether elimination of those newspapers which poured fire into the flames…. It was clearly aimed at killing the growing sense of political independence and national integrity. As a result of this measure papers like
Yugantar, Sandhya and Bandematram, which had become the mouthpiece of the emerging nationalist movement ceased their publications. Even the other papers carried on under the heavy weight of Curzon,s despotism.
The Act, as the Law Member conceded, contemplated altogether elimination of those newspapers which poured fire into the flames. As a result the Yugantar, the Sandhya, and the Bandematram, which had become the mouthpiece of the emerging nationalist movement, ceased their publications.
16. The Indian Press Act, 1910:
The British, however, could not contain the rising influence of the nationalists. They resorted to oppression rather than conciliation. The much promised and expected right to share the government was negated by the Act of 1909. Rather it sowed the seeds of communal disharmony by introducing communal franchise.
The leaders became more critical. The Government resorted to oppression rather than conciliation. It passed the Indian Press Act, 1910 to make the Newspaper Act. 1908 more stringent.
The new act compelled the publishers to deposit with Magistrate a security of not less then Rs.500/-. The Magistrate could, increase the amount of security ten times i.e. to Rs.5000/- in case of recalcitrant newspapers. He was also empowered to forfeit the security on any ground without assigning any reason.
17. Objectionable and Seditious Material:
The Act also provided the definition of the term “objectionable” and “seditious” material which was the most autocratic. The term “objectionable” included all attempts “direct or indirect, to seduce persons as employed in H.M.’s defence forces to intimidate the people to give money for revolutionary work or to prevent them from giving help in discovering and punishing revolutionary crime”.
The “seditious” material included any kind of “writings against the Indian princes, judges, executive officers and public servants.” The Act thus granted the Government the most arbitrary powers to impose severest punishment. If the Press did not abide by it, the amount of security could be increased to Rs.10,000.
The severity of the Act was observed by the Chief Justice in these words:
“The provisions of Section 4 (of the 1910 Act) are very comprehensive and its language is as wide as human ingenuity could make it. Indeed it appears to me to embrace the whole range of varying degrees of assurance from certainty on the one side, to the very limits of impossibility, on the other. It is difficult to see to what lengths the operation of this section might not be plausibly extended by an ingenious mind. They would certainly extend to writings that may even command approval. An attack on the degraded section of the public which lives on misery and shame of others would come within this widespread net, the praise of a class might not be free from risk. Much that is regarded as standard literature might undoubtedly be caught.”
Justice Abdul Rahim remarked that the Act has vested with “the local Government with a direction so large and unfettered that the keeping of printing press and the publication of newspapers became an extremely hazardous undertaking in the country”.
The wrath of the provisions was felt during the First Word War. 350 Presses and 400 publications were penalized during that period ; and an amount of £40,000 was obtained as security from the newspapers. The Press supporting Government had it hey day.
18. The Indian Press (Emergency) Act:
The act was repealed only after 1919, a year of reforms. The Press could, however, have a sigh of relief only for a decade. In its Lahore session in 1920, the Indian National Congress adopted the resolution for “swaraj”.
They started the civil disobedience movement to force British to withdraw to their home country. The national movement got the expected coverage in the Press and it highlighted the atrocities perpetrated on the nationalists. Again, the British Government resorted to muzzle the Press before it could inflame the “native” “feelings”. The Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931 was passed.
The Act sought to prevent publication of the matter which incited or encouraged murder or violence. Again, the Press was required to deposit security which could be forfeited for violating the Law. The Government could confiscate any printed material and also printing press. Printing without permission could lead to imprisonment of up to 6 months. The Provincial Governments were given very extensive powers with regard to the newspapers and presses under this Act.
These powers were actually used by them and certain printers and publishers had to suffer. For example the Liberty of Calcutta was required to deposit a security of Rs. 6,000, a major portion of which was later on forfeited. Similarly, the Bombay Chronicle had to pay a fine of Rs.3000 for having published an objectionable article by Horniman.
In 1932 the Foreign Relations Act was passed which imposed restrictions on the publication of material which affected good relations between His Majesty’s Government or the Government or the Government of the friendly foreign States. This Act was necessitated because of the repeated interference of the Indian newspapers into the administrative affairs of the neighbouring States.
To check the agitational activities in the States, the Indian States Protection Act 1934 was passed. It prevented the newspapers from criticising the administration of the princely States of India as well as to deal with the bands or organisations working on semi- military lines to spread disaffection in these States.
Certain restrictions on the freedom of Press were imposed to deal with the extraordinary situation arising during the Second World War In 1939 the Defence of India Act was passed which imposed many restrictions and controls on the press and platform. This Act and the rules framed thereunder remained in force till the end of war. Soon thereafter India got independence.
The above story of the evolution of Press in India, however, reveals that the Press was introduced in India with “selfish motives”. It was used as a pressure tactics by the opponents of the monopoly of the East India Company. The supporters of the Company counteracted those people by establishing their own press. The indigenous Press was, inviting the British, started to propagate their respective ideologies.
In the nationalist movement, this trend was further intensified. There were pro-Government papers which could not see any evil in British rule; while to opponents there was no good point. In this way the Press in India inherited the tradition of using Press for respective ends and not as a media for empirical study of the news.