Indigo (Louis Fischer) — Practice

Question 1

What was the tinkathia system? Why did the British planters want to end it and how did this create a new injustice for the peasants?

Accepted Answer

The tinkathia system: Under British indigo planters in the Champaran district of Bihar, peasants were forced to grow indigo on 3/20 (about 15%) of their land and hand over the entire indigo harvest to the planter at a fixed, low price. The peasants had no choice — the agreement was effectively forced upon them. WHY PLANTERS WANTED TO END IT: When Germany developed synthetic (artificial) indigo dyes, natural indigo became commercially unviable. The planters no longer needed the peasants' indigo. HOW IT CREATED NEW INJUSTICE: The planters told peasants they could be released from the tinkathia obligation — but ONLY if the peasants paid the planters a sum of money (a bribe/compensation) to cancel the agreements. Peasants who refused were harassed. This extortion was the immediate grievance that brought Gandhi to Champaran.

Question 2

How did Gandhi's methods at Champaran differ from conventional legal approaches? What lesson did he draw about the importance of personal investigation?

Accepted Answer

CONVENTIONAL APPROACH: Lawyers from Champaran had been to Patna and Calcutta, filed cases, and made appeals through the colonial courts — for years, with no result. The peasants were poor, the planters had legal resources and political connections, and the courts were reluctant to rule against British interests. GANDHI'S DIFFERENT APPROACH: (1) PERSONAL INVESTIGATION: Gandhi went to Champaran himself, visited the villages, and listened directly to thousands of peasants. He wanted FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE, not legal briefs. His personal presence also inspired confidence in peasants who had been told nothing could be done. (2) CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE: When ordered to leave by British authorities, Gandhi REFUSED — in writing — citing his duty to the people. He was willing to face arrest. This broke the colonial administration's assumption that it could intimidate Indian leaders. (3) POPULAR SUPPORT AS LEVERAGE: The massive crowds that gathered wherever Gandhi went made it politically costly for the British to prosecute him. The lieutenant governor eventually ordered the case dropped. (4) NEGOTIATION, NOT LITIGATION: Gandhi negotiated directly with the planters for a refund — not through courts but through direct confrontation backed by moral authority. LESSON ON PERSONAL INVESTIGATION: Gandhi later wrote that personal investigation was crucial — 'the poor, illiterate peasants needed someone to come to them, see their condition with their own eyes, and be their voice.' The journey to Champaran itself was an act of solidarity that no courtroom appearance could replace.

Question 3

Why did Gandhi refuse Charles Freer Andrews's offer to stay and help in Champaran? What does this decision reveal about Gandhi's broader philosophy regarding India's freedom movement?

Accepted Answer

THE CONTEXT: C.F. Andrews was a British Christian missionary, a close friend of Gandhi, an admirer of the Indian freedom movement, and a person of genuine moral courage who had already demonstrated his commitment to Indian causes. When Gandhi arrived in Champaran, Andrews was there and offered to stay and help. GANDHI'S REFUSAL: Gandhi told Andrews that he should go — 'we must not use a crutch.' He said it was wrong to lean on a sympathetic Englishman to fight a struggle against English authority. WHAT THIS REVEALS ABOUT GANDHI'S PHILOSOPHY: (1) SELF-RELIANCE (Swaraj begins within): The freedom movement was not just about driving out the British — it was about Indians recognising their OWN CAPACITY to resist injustice. If Gandhi needed an Englishman to stand with him against Englishmen, the psychological message would be: 'Indians cannot win this by themselves.' This would reinforce the colonial narrative of Indian inferiority. (2) THE PSYCHOLOGICAL DIMENSION OF COLONIALISM: Gandhi understood that British rule was maintained not only by military force but by the psychological SUBMISSION of the colonised. Indians had been taught — by education, by law, by social conditioning — to believe that they needed European guidance and support. Refusing Andrews's help was a symbolic rejection of this psychological dependence. (3) DIGNITY OF THE PEASANTS: The indigo farmers of Champaran had endured decades of humiliation. If they won with a British ally's help, their victory would be diluted — it could be dismissed as 'an Englishman against other Englishmen.' If they won through THEIR OWN STRUGGLE, with an Indian leader, it would be a genuine assertion of their own power. (4) BUILDING INDIGENOUS LEADERSHIP: Gandhi consistently refused to make the movement dependent on foreign sympathy — even well-meaning foreign sympathy. He wanted to build an entirely indigenous capacity for resistance that would not collapse if foreign supporters withdrew. CONCLUSION: The refusal of Andrews's help was not a rejection of Andrews as a person — Gandhi genuinely cared for him. It was a principled statement about the nature of the freedom movement: it must be Indian, owned by Indians, fought by Indians, and won by Indians. 'A crutch,' once used, creates dependency. The indigo farmers of Champaran deserved a movement that taught them they could stand on their own.

Practice — Indigo (Louis Fischer)

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities