Overview
The demands of the Moderates were the working programme of the Indian National Congress in its first two decades, from its first session at Bombay in December 1885 to about 1905. The Moderates asked for a larger Indian voice in the legislative councils, a place for Indians in the higher services, lighter taxes and military spending, and protection for the press and public speech. They pressed these demands through petitions, resolutions and speeches, and their one legislative gain was the Indian Councils Act of 1892.
Moderate Phase of the Congress, 1885 to 1905
First Congress Session of 1885 and the Name Moderates
The first session of 1885 met at Bombay with seventy-two delegates from different regions and religions, mostly drawn from the Anglicised upper classes. Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee was elected its first president, and Allan Octavian Hume and Dadabhai Naoroji played leading roles. The Congress began as a forum that expressed full faith in the providential character of British rule and unswerving allegiance to the Crown. It held yearly sessions in different cities and passed resolutions that called for a dialogue with the rulers.
The name came from this style. Because the leaders placed their demands before the government as petitions and worked within the framework of law, they were called Moderates. In the first decade of the twentieth century the Moderates and the British authorities labelled those who wanted nothing less than independence as Extremists or Radicals, while those so labelled called themselves Nationalists.
Why the Moderates Trusted British Justice
The Moderates were liberals who had absorbed Western ideas of individual dignity, freedom and equality before the law, and they used these ideas to oppose autocratic rule. They believed that British rule had removed many old anomalies and that the British connection served the interests of both countries. Their aim was therefore to reform the system and give Indians a proper role in it, not to overthrow it. They did not seek immediate self-government, fearing that the government would suppress their activities, and aimed at winning freedom through a gradual process.
The Congress reasoned that greater Indian participation in governance, protection of civil rights and some social and economic reforms would calm the growing discontent among Indian subjects. This trust explains both the shape of the demands and the main criticism of them.
Demands of the Moderates: Political, Administrative, Economic and Civil Rights
Political Demands: Legislative Councils and the Budget
The first political demand was a reformed and enlarged legislative council. At its very first session the Congress passed a resolution asking for constitutional reforms, for the admission of a considerable proportion of elected members to the legislative councils and for the right to discuss the budget. Among the nine resolutions of that session were also the abolition of the India Council in London, civil service reform and a commission to enquire into the working of the Indian administration.
The Congress considered reform of the councils to be at the root of all other reforms, and the demand was repeated at every annual session, more loudly each year. Speaking at the Bombay session of 1889, Surendranath Banerjee put it plainly: "If you get that, you get everything else." The fuller Moderate list of constitutional demands was as follows.
- Expanded councils: More members in the central and provincial councils, with all legislative and financial matters, the budget included, placed before them.
- Election by the people: Members to be chosen by election, at first through bodies such as chambers of commerce and universities and in time directly.
- Control of the purse: Indian control over public money, expressed in the slogan "No taxation without representation".
- Indians in the executive: Adequate Indian representation in the executive councils of the Viceroy and of the Governors.
- Self-government: By the beginning of the twentieth century, self-government within the Empire on the model of Canada and Australia. The Calcutta session of 1906, under Naoroji, declared swaraj the goal and asked for the immediate expansion of the councils.
Administrative Demands: Indianisation, the Services and the Judiciary
The administrative demands rested on a simple idea: India should be governed by Indians, working with the British. The Congress asked for civil service reform from its first session, and it asked that the Indian Civil Service examination be held in India as well as in England, the demand known as simultaneous examinations. The list also included the wider employment of Indians in the higher grades, an increase in the powers of municipal bodies with less official control over them, the repeal of the Arms Act and the License Act, and the spread of primary education among the masses.
The Moderates also demanded a complete separation of the executive and the judiciary. They made the demand to protect Indians from arbitrary acts of the police and the bureaucracy, and they asked for an improved police system that was honest, efficient and popular. The call for Indianisation was also a protest against a service that was mostly run by Englishmen, with very few Indians in its upper ranks.
Economic Demands: Land Revenue, Salt Duty, Military Spending and Industry
The economic demands grew from the Moderates' own research into Indian poverty. They asked for a reduction of military expenditure, a lighter burden on cultivators, changes in the tenancy laws, a reduction in land revenue and the salt duty, policies to help Indian industries and handicrafts, and welfare programmes for the people.
Gokhale carried these arguments into the Imperial Legislative Council. He exposed the government's claim that budget surpluses showed a healthy economy, and showed with facts and figures how deepening poverty followed from heavy spending on the army, heavy taxation, excise duties on indigenous industries such as textiles, and a lack of irrigation for farmers.
The Moderates also spoke on questions beyond the home administration. They opposed the annexation of Burma, military actions in Afghanistan and the treatment of tribal people in the north-west, and asked for better conditions for Indians who had migrated as indentured labourers to South Africa, Malaya, Mauritius, the West Indies and British Guiana.
Civil Rights Demands: Press, Speech and Association
The Moderates defended civil rights whenever the government tried to curtail them. Their standing demands were the removal of restrictions on the freedom of speech and of the press, the restoration of individual liberties, and the right to assemble and to form associations.
Three episodes show the defence in practice, and two of them came before the Congress was founded. When the Vernacular Press Act of 1878, nicknamed the Gagging Act, curbed the Indian-language press, Pherozeshah Mehta vehemently opposed the censorship, holding that the press should be as free as possible. In 1883 Surendranath Banerjee was arrested for remarks in his paper that were held to be in contempt of court, and he became the first Indian journalist to be imprisoned; protests and hartals followed across Bengal and in cities such as Agra, Faizabad, Amritsar, Lahore and Pune. In 1897 Tilak and many other leaders were arrested for provocative speeches, and the Moderates demanded the restoration of individual liberties.
Demands at a Glance and What Came of Each
By 1905 only the council, service and expenditure demands had produced any formal change, and each was partial. Council members were recommended instead of elected, the resolution on simultaneous examinations was put into effect only in 1922, and the Welby Commission ended in a report in 1900. The demands on land revenue, the judiciary and civil rights won almost nothing in these two decades.
| Demand group | What the Moderates asked | What came of it |
|---|---|---|
| Legislative councils | More members chosen by election, discussion of the budget | Indian Councils Act of 1892, with members recommended by bodies and the budget discussed but not voted |
| Civil services | Indianisation, examination in India as well as England | House of Commons resolution of 1893; examination held in Delhi from 1922 |
| Expenditure | Lower military and administrative costs, a fair division with Britain | Welby Commission appointed in 1895; report in 1900 |
| Land revenue, salt duty, tenancy | A lighter burden on cultivators | Resolutions on revenue and tenancy largely ignored |
| Judiciary and police | Separation of executive and judiciary, an honest police | No separation of the executive and the judiciary in this period |
| Civil rights | Free press and speech, right to assemble | Leaders arrested in 1897; sedition law tightened in 1898 |
Gains of the Moderate Phase: Councils, Examinations and Expenditure
Indian Councils Act 1892: Members, Budget Debate and Questions
The Indian Councils Act of 1892 was passed after being presented to the House of Lords in 1890, in response to the nationalist movements surfacing across British India. It raised the number of additional members of the central council to between ten and sixteen. Provincial figures varied: Bombay received 8 additional members, Madras 20, Bengal 20, and the North-Western Provinces and Oudh 15.
Universities, district boards, municipalities, zamindars and chambers of commerce were empowered to recommend members to the provincial councils. In the central council, five of the additional members were recommended, one by the non-official members of each of the four provincial councils and one by the Calcutta Chamber of Commerce. The word election was carefully avoided, but because the recommendations were in practice not refused, the principle of representation had been introduced.
The Act relaxed the 1861 restrictions in two ways. Councillors could discuss, but not vote on, the annual financial statement, and could put questions on matters of public interest after giving six days' notice, without any right to ask supplementary questions. The first question was asked on 16 February 1893 by the Maharaja of Bhinga, about the hardships of supplying provisions for government officers on tour.
Why the 1892 Act Disappointed the Moderates
An official majority remained in the central council, and in the provinces as well, with a small exception in Bombay. The government could therefore always pass bills in the face of Indian opposition. Members could not move a resolution or divide the council on a financial discussion, so criticism of the budget was a speech without a vote.
The record of questions shows how narrow the opening was. In the two years 1905 and 1906 only 13 questions were asked, on the services, railways, revenue and exchange, and officials could refuse information on the ground that an answer would need lengthy preparation. Even so, the Moderates used the opening fully. Mehta, a member of the Imperial Legislative Council from 1893, was frank and vigorous in criticising government policy, and Gokhale was sometimes called the Leader of the Opposition.
Simultaneous Civil Service Examinations and the Welby Commission
Two smaller gains followed the Act. In 1893 the House of Commons passed a resolution allowing simultaneous examinations for the Indian Civil Service in London and in India. The resolution recognised the principle but did not open the service at once, since the examination was held in India, at Delhi, only from 1922.
The second gain was the appointment of the Welby Commission in 1895. Its official name was the Royal Commission on the Administration of Expenditure of India, and it was set up to investigate wasteful spending in India. Dadabhai Naoroji was a member, and Gokhale and Dinshaw Wacha gave evidence in 1897. The report of 1900 held that English costs were not to be relieved at the expense of Indian revenues. Gokhale's evidence on the financial condition of India won him praise.
Achievements of the Moderates
National Platform, Political Training and Council Debates
The most lasting achievement was the Congress itself. A permanent, all-India body met every year in a different city, and at its first session W. C. Bonnerjee described it as the National Assembly of India. The Moderates created a national awakening that made Indians conscious of the bonds of common political, economic and cultural interest, and gave the people a forum to discuss national issues.
They also trained a political public. By criticising government policies in speeches and in the councils, they popularised the ideas of democracy, civil liberties, secularism and nationalism. In 1889 a British Committee of the Congress was founded in London, followed in 1890 by India, a journal that carried the case to British opinion. Naoroji himself was the first Indian to be elected to the House of Commons, in 1892.
The training produced leaders who outlived the phase. Gokhale was the acknowledged political mentor of Gandhi, who spent a year travelling around British India on his advice before his first major public appearance in 1916.
The Economic Critique and the Drain of Wealth
The economic critique was the most valuable intellectual contribution of the Moderates. Naoroji and then other nationalists found that, instead of bringing an industrial revolution, British rule was making the country poorer and destroying its handicraft production. Naoroji formulated the drain-of-wealth theory, which became India's cornerstone argument against British rule, and his use of statistics shaped public debate. His book Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, first published in 1901, gathered the case in one volume.
The critique shifted nationalism from complaint about particular officials to analysis of the economic structure of the empire. It weakened the claim that British rule was a boon, made people see the economic character of colonialism, and established the idea that India must be ruled in the interest of Indians.
Inside the councils, the Moderates showed that a patient and informed opposition could make the government explain itself. Outside the councils, their defence of civil rights became an integral part of the national movement from its first years.
Limitations of the Moderates
Narrow Social Base and Faith in Petition
The deepest limitation was social. In its first twenty years the Congress had a very narrow social base, and its influence was confined to urban educated Indians. Its leadership came from professional groups such as lawyers, doctors, journalists and teachers, and many of its founders had been educated or had lived in Britain. They did not draw the masses into the national movement, so in these years the Congress functioned more as a stage for elite ambitions than as a party of the Indian masses.
This limited both their pressure and their claim to speak for the nation. Lord Dufferin used exactly this point when he ridiculed the Congress as representing only a microscopic minority of the Indian people. The Moderates in turn drew on Dufferin's own report of 1888 on the condition of the lower classes in Bengal, which showed that British rule had not helped the poorest.
The second limitation lay in the method and the belief behind it. The Moderates had full faith in British justice, fair play and honesty, and they depended on the generosity of the rulers instead of challenging them. Some historians argue that they misunderstood the British government, believing that the interests of the rulers and of the nationalists could be reconciled in favour of the latter.
The results were meagre. The colonial government largely ignored the resolutions of the Congress and granted only minor concessions, denying Indians any meaningful share in governance. Apart from the Act of 1892, the resolution on simultaneous examinations and the Welby Commission, the demands were not fulfilled.
Government Hostility from 1887 and Curzon's Reaction
At first officials looked on the Congress without hostility. A few government officials attended the first session, and Dufferin invited the delegates to a garden party at Calcutta in 1886. By 1887 attitudes had changed, and Dufferin used his speech of that year to attack the Congress. Officials described its leaders as disloyal babus and violent villains. In 1890 government employees were forbidden to attend Congress meetings or take part in its deliberations.
The British realised that the movement could turn into a national force. In 1898 the government amended the sedition law, Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code, which made it an offence to bring the government into hatred or contempt, and added Section 153A on promoting enmity between classes. Lord Curzon, a staunch imperialist who became Viceroy in 1899, passed the Indian Universities Act of 1904, which imposed stiff control over Indian universities, and in 1905 he announced the partition of Bengal.
Critical Assessment of the Moderates
The Extremist Critique of Petition and Prayer
Criticism of the Moderates began inside the Congress. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, a member of the Congress from 1890, found its leaders too moderate and wrote strongly against colonial oppression in his Marathi newspaper Kesari. Younger members were dissatisfied with the achievements of the Moderates and with the peaceful method of constitutional agitation. They are known as the Extremists or Assertive Nationalists, with Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai and Bipin Chandra Pal (Lal-Bal-Pal) as their best-known leaders.
They criticised the Moderate approach for relying on the goodwill of the British instead of on the people's own strength, and favoured direct action, self-respect and national unity as the basis of mass support. After the partition of Bengal in 1905 their programme was Swaraj, Swadeshi, Boycott and National Education, and at Calcutta in December 1906, under Naoroji as president, the Congress adopted all four as its objective, although Swaraj was not defined and could mean anything from self-rule within the Empire to full independence.
The Surat Split and the Moderates After 1907
The Calcutta resolutions alarmed the British authorities, who put pressure on the Moderate leaders. At Surat in December 1907 the Moderates therefore tried to step back from those resolutions and return to requests for minor administrative concessions and a gradual shift to self-government within the Empire. The Moderate leaders at Surat included Gokhale, Mehta, Banerjee and Rash Behari Ghosh. The Moderates supported Rash Behari Ghosh for president, while the Extremists wanted Lala Lajpat Rai or Tilak. When Tilak was prevented from speaking, the session dissolved into chaos, and the Nationalist camp held its own session.
The Moderates did not disappear. In 1908 Tilak was sentenced to six years of imprisonment at Mandalay, which left the political field open to the Moderates. Gokhale remained influential and, with others, played a leading role in the Morley-Minto reforms of 1909.
Balance Sheet: What to Credit and What to Fault
Historians' views differ in emphasis. The Cambridge school, led by Anil Seal, downplayed ideology, while the nationalist school gave the Congress a central place. The subaltern school, begun in the 1980s, turned attention from elite politicians to history from below.
A balanced verdict avoids two errors. One is to judge the Moderates by the standards of mass movements that came later. The other is to praise their foundations without admitting how little they won. The partition of Bengal in 1905 exposed the limits of their reformist programme.
| Achievement | Matching limitation |
|---|---|
| Created an all-India platform and national awakening | Social base limited to urban educated Indians |
| Built the economic critique and the drain theory | Remedies sought by petition to the very rulers criticised |
| Won the Councils Act of 1892, the 1893 resolution and the Welby Commission | Official majority kept; examination held in India only from 1922 |
| Defended press and civil liberties | Protests did not stop the arrests of 1897 or the sedition amendment of 1898 |
| Trained leaders such as Gandhi's mentor Gokhale | Failed to carry the younger generation, who turned to the Extremists |
Previous Year UPSC‑CSE Questions
Each Prelims question is explained option by option, and each Mains question comes with an answer outline.
- UPSC Prelims 2016What was the main reason for the split in the Indian National Congress at Surat in 1907?
How to approach this Prelims question
Approach: Surat was a clash over method. The Extremists had lost faith in the Moderates' way of negotiating with the British, the Moderates tried to step back from the Calcutta resolutions, and the presidency was contested between Rash Behari Ghosh and the Extremists' choice of Lala Lajpat Rai or Tilak.
Trap to watch: Aurobindo was an Extremist leader, but the contest at Surat was over Rash Behari Ghosh against Lajpat Rai or Tilak.
Why each option is right or wrong:
- (a) Introduction of communalism into Indian politics by Lord Minto: Wrong. That did not cause the dispute at Surat.
- (b) Extremists' lack of faith in the capacity of the moderates to negotiate with the British Government: Correct. The split was over method.
- (c) Foundation of Muslim League: Wrong. The League did not divide the Congress at Surat.
- (d) Aurobindo Ghosh's inability to be elected as the President of the Indian National Congress: Wrong. The Extremists wanted Lajpat Rai or Tilak.
Answer: (b) Extremists' lack of faith in the capacity of the moderates to negotiate with the British Government. The Extremists no longer trusted the Moderates' method of negotiation.
- UPSC Prelims 2010Four resolutions were passed at the famous Calcutta session of Indian National Congress in 1906. The question of either retention OR of rejection of these four resolutions became the cause of a split in Congress at the next Congress session held in Surat in 1907. Which one of the following was not one of those resolutions?
How to approach this Prelims question
Approach: At Calcutta in December 1906, under Naoroji, the Congress declared Swaraj, Swadeshi, Boycott and National Education its objective. Annulment of the partition of Bengal is not one of the four.
Trap to watch: The annulment of the partition was a popular demand of the time, which makes option (a) look like one of the resolutions.
Why each option is right or wrong:
- (a) Annulment of partition of Bengal: Correct. It was not one of the four objectives declared at Calcutta.
- (b) Boycott: Wrong. It was one of the four.
- (c) National education: Wrong. It was one of the four.
- (d) Swadeshi: Wrong. It was one of the four.
Answer: (a) Annulment of partition of Bengal. The four were Swaraj, Swadeshi, Boycott and National Education.
- UPSC Prelims 2008Where was the First Session of the Indian National Congress held in December 1885?
How to approach this Prelims question
Approach: The first session met at Bombay in December 1885 with seventy-two delegates, under Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee as president. Calcutta was the venue of the 1906 session under Naoroji, not of the first.
Trap to watch: Calcutta, the capital of British India, is the tempting wrong choice.
Why each option is right or wrong:
- (a) Ahmadabad: Wrong. Ahmadabad first hosted a Congress session in 1902.
- (b) Bombay: Correct. The first session met at Bombay in December 1885.
- (c) Calcutta: Wrong. Calcutta hosted the session of 1906 under Naoroji, not the first.
- (d) Delhi: Wrong. Delhi first hosted a Congress session in 1918.
Answer: (b) Bombay. The first session met at Bombay in December 1885.
- UPSC Prelims 2000Assertion and Reason:
- Assertion (A): The basic weakness of the early nationalist movement lay in its narrow social base.
- Reason (R): It fought for the narrow interests of the social groups which joined it.
How to approach this Prelims question
Approach: The assertion is true: The early Congress drew its support from urban educated Indians, a narrow base. The reason is false: The demands covered cultivators' land revenue, the salt duty, tenancy laws, military spending, Indian industry and civil rights for all, so the movement did not fight only for the interests of the groups that joined it.
Trap to watch: A narrow base does not mean narrow aims; the reason confuses who led with whom the demands served.
Why each option is right or wrong:
- (a) Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A: Wrong. R is false, since the demands were national in scope.
- (b) Both A and R are true, but R is not a correct explanation of A: Wrong. R is false.
- (c) A is true, but R is false: Correct. The base was narrow, but the demands covered cultivators, taxpayers and civil rights for all.
- (d) A is false, but R is true: Wrong. A is true, since the Congress was confined to urban educated Indians.
Answer: (c) A is true, but R is false. The social base was narrow, but the demands reached the cultivator and the taxpayer.
- UPSC Prelims 1998Assertion and Reason:
- Assertion (A): Partition of Bengal in 1905 brought to an end the Moderates' role in the Indian freedom movement.
- Reason (R): The Surat session of Indian National Congress separated the Extremists from the Moderates.
How to approach this Prelims question
Approach: Test the assertion and the reason separately. The Moderates still led the Congress after the partition of Bengal. After Surat the Extremists were out, Tilak was sentenced in 1908, and Gokhale and others played a leading role in the reforms of 1909. So the assertion is false. The Surat session of 1907 did separate the Extremists from the Moderates, so the reason is true.
Trap to watch: 1905 feels like the end of the Moderate phase, but the Moderates still led the Congress after it.
Why each option is right or wrong:
- (a) Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A: Wrong. A is false, since the Moderates stayed at the head of the Congress after 1905.
- (b) Both A and R are true, but R is NOT a correct explanation of A: Wrong. A is false for the same reason.
- (c) A is true, but R is false: Wrong. It reverses the position: A is false and R is true.
- (d) A is false, but R is true: Correct. The Moderates carried on after 1905, and Surat separated the two camps.
Answer: (d) A is false, but R is true. The Moderates' role did not end in 1905, but the Surat session did divide the camps.
- UPSC Mains 2021 GS‑ITo what extent did the role of the Moderates prepare a base for the wider freedom movement? Comment.
Answer outline
The outline sets out what the question asks, the main arguments, relevant examples and the direction of the conclusion; it is not a full model answer.
Introduction: The Moderates led the Congress from 1885 to 1905 and worked through constitutional agitation.
Body (sub-themes to develop):
- National platform: An all-India body meeting every year, a national awakening and a forum for national issues.
- Economic critique: The drain theory and the analysis of colonial poverty, which later movements used.
- Political training: Democracy, civil liberties and nationalism popularised; leaders such as Gokhale, Gandhi's mentor.
- Constitutional experience: Council debates under the Act of 1892, the Welby Commission and the British Committee.
- Limits: A narrow base and a slow method left the Extremists and later Gandhi to widen the movement.
Conclusion: To a large extent the Moderates laid the base, but a mass movement needed a different method.
- UPSC Mains 2017 GS‑IWhy did the 'Moderates' fail to carry conviction with the nation about their proclaimed ideology and political goals by the end of the nineteenth century?
Answer outline
Introduction: The Moderates sought reform within British rule by constitutional means and had full faith in British justice.
Body (sub-themes to develop):
- Narrow base: Leaders from the professions; influence confined to urban educated Indians; Dufferin's "microscopic minority".
- Meagre results: Resolutions largely ignored; only the Act of 1892, with an official majority and no vote on the budget, and the 1893 resolution.
- Misplaced faith: The government turned hostile from 1887, barred officials in 1890, tightened the sedition law in 1898, and under Curzon passed the Universities Act of 1904.
- Impatience of the young: Tilak and others found the leaders too moderate and their method too slow.
Conclusion: A narrow base, thin results and misplaced trust cost the Moderates conviction and opened the way to the Extremists.
Sources
- NCERT: Exploring Society, India and Beyond (Class VIII), India's Long Road to Independence
- NCERT: Themes in Indian History III (Class XII), Mahatma Gandhi and the Nationalist Movement
- President of India: Lecture on the history of parliamentary democracy in India, 2013
- Press Information Bureau: President's lecture on parliamentary democracy
- Press Information Bureau: Dadabhai Naoroji
- Prime Minister of India (archive): Speech at the Indian Economic Association
- Wikipedia: Early Nationalists
- Wikipedia: Indian Councils Act 1892
- Wikipedia: Indian National Congress
- Wikipedia: List of presidents of the Indian National Congress
- Wikipedia: Welby Commission
- Wikipedia: Indian Civil Service (British India)
- Wikipedia: Surat Split
- Wikipedia: Gopal Krishna Gokhale
- Wikipedia: Surendranath Banerjee
- Wikipedia: Pherozeshah Mehta
- Wikipedia: Dadabhai Naoroji
- Wikipedia: Vernacular Press Act
- Wikipedia: Lal Bal Pal
- Wikipedia: Historiography of India
- Wikipedia: Cambridge School
- Wikipedia: Subaltern Studies
- UPSC: Civil Services Examination question papers
Editorial Disclaimer
This article draws on the current NCERT textbooks, the President's lecture on parliamentary democracy, releases of the Press Information Bureau, Wikipedia and the UPSC question papers.
See more of our UPSC articles in Google Search
Add to Preferred Sources