Catching up with some of my reading on old Madras, or, at least, a Madras of about 85 years ago, I came across this story about C. Rajagopalachariar (Rajaji) and found that it was narrated without an ending. I wonder whether someone will tell me how this intriguing conflict was resolved.
Rajaji was a leading lawyer in Salem from the early 1900s and like many other professionals of the time, he became a Freemason. In due course, he was to become the Master of Lodge Salem No. 3400 which had been established under the English Constitution. Curiously, his having been a member of the Indian National Congress and having participated in the Civil Disobedience Movement leading to a spell in prison in 1921, seems to have been no impediment to his being accepted as a Freemason. But a decade later, he was again sentenced to jail for disobeying a Magistrate’s orders during the Satyagraha agitation in 1930. This time, A.Y.G. Campbell, District Grand Master, held an inquiry and issued a notice to Rajaji to appear before him in Madras to answer a charge of un-Masonic conduct reflected in his conviction. Rajaji sought time to appear, but though it was granted he still did not make an appearance by the end of January 1933 deadline. In February, Campbell issued an order which, among other things, said:
“Bro. Rajagopalachariar is a Past Master and a District Grand Deacon of Madras. His conduct was entirely inconsistent with the directions of the Ancient Charges…in so far as they relate to the obedience of the laws and constitution of the country in which we reside… He has not expressed any regret for his conduct. He is in my opinion unfit for admission to our assemblies or for the enjoyment of Masonic privileges. As, however, he may hereafter change his views and attitude towards lawfully constituted authority and I am unwilling to deprive him of the opportunity of repentance, I do not propose to recommend his expulsion, but I suspend him for an indefinite period, i.e., until he applies to have his sentence terminated and the sentence is terminated by competent authority.”
Rajaji responded, arguing that he had committed no un-Masonic action and had in no way violated the Ancient Charges of Freemasonry. The suspension order was unjustified and should be withdrawn, he concluded. Swarajya, then a Madras English daily, backed his case in an editorial in May 1933, calling Campbell's order “insulting.” Swarajya went on to stress an aspect of the order that should have been of concern to Indian Free Masons at the time: “The Masonic Lodge contains a large number of Indian members all over the country. We are not in the least interested in its doings, but if Freemasonry is to be used by officials in this country as another weapon for foreign domination, it is well that the country should know it now… From the action taken… it is now quite clear that the Masonic Lodge has admittedly allied itself with the bureaucracy in the country’s present struggle for freedom… (Indian members) should at once sever their connections with the organisation or satisfy themselves that the Masonic Lodge will not be used by the Government to attack the National movement…”
Lodge Salem thereupon expressed its solidarity with Rajaji and wrote to the District Grand Secretary that the Brethren agreed with Brother Rajagopalachariar that he had not violated any of the Ancient Charges and that therefore, the order should be withdrawn. And that is where the story I read ended. I would be delighted to hear what happened after that. Am I correct in thinking that the order was withdrawn and Rajaji then resigned from Freemasonry? More, hopefully, in due course.
