CHAPTER III

ANDHRA MAHASABHA

SECTION-1 : ORIGIN AND GROWTH

SECTION-2 : MAJOR FACTORS FOR THE RISE OF THE MOVEMENT

SECTION-3 : AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND CONFERENCES

SECTION-4
l
: STAGES OF THE MOVEMENT AND THE NATURE OF LEADERSHIP

THE PERIOD UP TO 1920

THE PERIOD FROM 1921oT0 1937

THE PERIOD FROM 1938 TO 1953

 CHAPTER III
ANDHRA MAHASABHA
>

SECTION-1: ORIGIN AND GROWTH-

By the early 20th century, the concept of nationalism

<

and sub-nationalism gained significantly a new outlooh.

The Vandemataram Movement, a sequal to the Partition of
Bengal, strengthened the cause for the formation of states
on lingustic ba'sis. ^\/,The step motherly attitude which the

Telugu speaking people were receiving m the composite

Madras Presidency and the inadequate educational, employment

and other opportunities in addition to subordinating

their cultural identity to the composite culture of the

presidency made the people of Andhra to raise the bogy of

a separate Andhra Province like Bihar. There can be no

doubt that the Andhra Movement was * largely moulded and
t

influenced right from its inception by the ’Beheree

1. When the Government had planned to divide Bengal on

administrative grounds, the National Congress ha£
suggested for the division of the States on linguistic
basis i.e.’, all the Bengali speaking areas into one
zone and Hindi speaking areas into another zone. Or
the annulment of Bengal, the Bengali speaking areas anc
the Hindi speaking areas were kept under separate-
administrations. In doing so, race and language
played a prominent role. See for more details Chowdhary,
V.C.P., Creation of Modern Bihar, Patna: Yogeshwar
Prakashan, 1964.
 36

i
Movement. Prom 1907 onwards various issues and efforts of

the Telugu people culminated m the genesis of the Andhra

T
Mahasabha.

The movement for the creation of a separate Province

for the Andhras had its origin as noticed earlier an

a casual discussion between the members of the Young

2
Men's Literary Association of Guntur m the Year 1911-
The Andhra province issue was discussed m the Subjects
Committee of the 21st Krishna-Guntur District Conference

held at Nidadavolu m May 1912. In this Conference Vallun

Suryanarayana Rao, a lawyer from Masulipatam, argued that

the eastern districts (i.e. Coastal Telugu Districts) fre

separated from the Tamils and added to the Central Provinces

since there had been rumours m the previous years that

the districts of Ganjam, Visakhapatnam, Godavari and, Krishra

would be joined to the Central Provinces m case the office

of Lieutenant Governer was created there. Some youngmen

suggested that it would be better to agitate first for ths

1. For and Against Andhra Movement, the Standing Committee,

Krishna Swadeshi Press, Masulipatam, 1919» pp.185-
187.
2. Goshti, vol.XIX, No.2, May 1964, and also extracts from
the Government Orders and Confidential Newspaper Reports
collected as source material for the Freedom Struggle
m Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), Andhra Pradesh State
Archives, Hyderabad.
 37

formation of a Province for the Andhras comprising the Coastal

and the Ceded Districts. It was also suggested that they could
work for the unity of the contiguous eastern Telugu districts
m the Nizam's Dominion and the Telugu speaking areas in the
1
Central Provinces.
i

2
Even m 1911 there appeared some lettrs in the

Krishna Patrika advocating for a separate Province. A Confe­

rence to discuss about matters other than politics was held m

Bandar m 1908 under the leadership of Jonnavithula Gurunadham?

These moves and proposals were significant as they commanded

the attention of the Andhras. The behaviour of the young

4
lawyer, Narayana Rao of Guntur who got angry over the

appointment of a certain individual made by the sub-judge for

a petty post from his home town Kumbhakonam overlooking

several Telugu applicants might be a trivial incident, but

the depth of the problem was much deeper as Andhras began to

probe and assess the details and collect statistics and examine
the circumstances for their backwardness m various fields.

1. Narayana Rao, K.V., The Emergence of Andhra Pradesh,

Op.Cit., p.33. Also the Krishna Patrika, 19 January, 1912.
2. Venkatappayya, Konda, Sveeyacharitra, Op.Cit., p.170.
3. Hanumantha Rao, Bhattiprolu, Andhrula Charitra, welcome
press, Guntur, 1956, P-396. The present Masulipatam
town was then called Bandar.
4. Goshti, May 1964.
 38

SECTION-2: MAJOR FACTORS FOR THE RISE OP THE MOVEMENT

Heteregeneous people speaking different languages were

forced to live m composite provinces like Madras and Bombay.
The common man was put to lot of inconveniencies m the

administrative matters since

he had to depend mostly on the
1 '/
translations of Government transactions. /About this,

the Andhra Patrika observed that it was absolutely essential

that the administration should be carried out m the vernacular
of the Province so that the people could take a lively
2
interest m the affirs of the Province. There was a ready
example of Bengalis who secured unity and strength for
9

themselves by leading an independent movement along the lines

suited to their own racial and cultural development. So also
the Telugu people were entitled to agitate for such opportuni-
■5

ties and advancement. The Andras, who were twenty-two million

strong constituted the third largest community in India, had

m them potentialities of a fine sub-nationality. They had
an ancient culture. They were proud of their superb arts and

1. Narayana Rao, Chilkuri; Memorandum to linguistic Commission,

also Jwala, 3 October, 1948.
2. The Andhra Patrika, 30 May, 1933.
3. The Hindu, 28 February, 1913.
 39

i
crafts and spoke a fine language of the East.

There were Andhras who had been in public life end

occupied high positions but they were known as Madrasis
bracketed along with several other communities of South

India. To a North Indian whether one was an Andhra or a

Tamilian, or a kannadiga or a Malayalce it made no difference
for him. He called all as Madrasis. Men of outstanding
position in public life from Andhra like Veeresalmgam in

the field of Social Reforms or Nyapathi Subha Rao and Ganjam

Venkataratnam m the field of politics were only Madrasis and

nothing else. The Andhras had to think themselves for

2
this obscurity.

In the constitutional affairs and the involvement cf

Indians m the process of law making and administration the

legislative council was considered most significant. But

m the Madras Legislative Council out of the seven elected

members only two were Andhras. Again of these two one was

generally being held by a Tamilian settled m Telugu Districts

1. Janmabhumi, vol.IX, No.42, 20 September, 1928, p-7-

The population of the Andhras stated here was as m the
year 1928.
2. Sitaramayya, P. , Janmabhumi, vol.IX, No.42, 20 September*
1928, p.5.
 40

Although there was no marked Political upheaval in fhe

Andhradesa any more than m the other Provinces, still 1he
former stole a march over the rest m the regularity of
holding the District Congress meetings in various areas,

which voiced the grievances of ryots against economic

exploitation m the region etc., and resorted to constitutioral

i
methods like petitionmgj protesting and praying.

There were a number of gross inequalities between tfhe

Andhra and non-Andhra areas in the Madras Presidency. Madras,

the capital of the Presidency was not located in the Andhra

area. The disadvantages consequent on this were many. Higbar

Education including the technical and professional education

was not within the reach of the Telugu people. This denied

them many of the higher appointments m Government service

even m Andhra region. Secondly, the Anglo-Indian officers

with very little knowledge of Telugu could not properly

understand the problems of the people. Further, the grievances
of the Telugu people were not properly brought to tie
2
notice of the Government.

1. Janmabhumi, vol.IX, No.42, 20 September, 1928, p.5.

2. For more details see Seshagin Rao, Challa Deshabhimanr,
26 December, 1911.
 41

In respect of higher centres of learning, out of

thirty-one colleges m the Madras Presidency, there were only

three first grade colleges and five second grade colleges in
the Andhra area. Similarly, out of 284 Assistant Surgeons
1
there were only 12 and 4 out of 120 M.B.C.M.Degree holders.

Further, it was felt that in the administration and other

matters non-Telugu people were dominating in the Andhra

area. This disparity and negligence of the Telugu speaking
areas later gained expression in the demand for a separate

Andhra Province.

1. The Krishna Patnka, 13 December, 1913-

2. Veerayya Chowdary, Daruvuri (Ed.,), Guntur Manda_a
Sarvasvam, Yuva Karshaka Publishers, Guntur, 1959 p.402.
 42

That the educational backwardness of the Andhras m

Madras Presidency was much more than that of the Tamilians

becomes clear from the following table:

Educational imbalance
Table l1-

S. No . Nature of Total number of * Andhras

ourse students m the
Madras University

1. 2. 3. 4.

1. Ordinary Graduates 11,214 2,000

2. Law Graduates 2,350 340

3- Graduates m Medicine 440 16

4. Graduates in Engineering 122 8

On the basis of the population of'the Andhras, the figures

for the Andhras m col. no. 4 of the table should be 4,240,

oo
C
o

150, 46 respectively for

T

B.A, B.L, M.B.B.S. and B.E.,

\

courses of study. p

1. The Krishna Patnka, 13 December , 1913-

2, Ibid.
 43

Further the following table indicate the relative

position of literacy among different linguistic groups m

the Madras Presidency as seen from the census of 1901.

Table 2?

G. No . Language Males Percentage Females Percentage

group In the in the
Presidency Presidency
1. 2. 3- 4. 5- 6.

1. Anilcdhras 5,48,359 26.17 35,602 23.16

2. Tamils 12,44,069 59-37 72,273 47.01

3- Malayalees 2,23,854 10.68 40,822 26.55

4. Kannadigas 79,028 3-77 5,021 3.26

1. The Krishna Patnka, 7 June, 1913.

 L ite r a te s a t p rim ary le v e l, d u rin g 1910-11 in th e M adras P re sid e n c y
T ab le 3
/l
MALE STUDENTS GIRL STUDENTS

S .N o . L in g u is t ic g r o u p
P u b lic P e rc e n - P riv a te P e rc e n - P u b lic - P e rc e n - P riv a te P e rc e n ­
ta g e . ta g e . ta g e . ta g e .
H
3

•
•

-)
3

VI
3

r
rv

0
’I
10.

vH
vo

CM
CM

CM

0
00

•=r
■=r

JZf
■=i-

—1
•
SO

so

■=r

vo
—1
00

CO
VO

jd-
CVl
00
CO
c-

03

C-

c—
c—
cn

OS

in
in
in

Cs-
r\

r*
T am ils

CM
CO
VO

■3"

00
00

CM
CO
CM
CM

rH

■=r
c—

cn
cn

C—
03

co
in

C—
cn
in
A ndhras 1 8 .8 7 6 6 ,0 7 2 1 2 .8 1
00

tH

—1
VO

rH

00

CO
CM

-=r
VO
vo

cn
1m

c—
t—
00
cn

in
in
C-
COr\

Mai ay a le e s 76,035 2 1 .7 3
44

z?

ij-
OO
0
0

CM

■^T
■=T
00

■5T

-J.

O
0
CO
t-

C—

CO
in
cn
cn

CO
K an n ad ig as 6 ,9 5 7
t—i
■=T
CM

■=r

T—1
O
0

CM
=s-
0

CM
0

in
03

CO
CO
CO
CO

in
in
in

O riy a s 1 ,5 8 6 1.90

vo
tH

VO
CO
CM

tH
«=r

-=f
■=f

VO
•
c—

03
t—

in
in

H in d u s ta n i 23,641 9 ,6 8 3 19 3 1 .8 6

*1
The K rish n a P a tn k a , 7 Ju n e , 1913
 45

!k The strength of literacy among differnt linguistic groups

1
of the Madras Presidency*

Table 4

S. No. Area comprising of Males Females

Districts

2. 3- 4.
1.

Telugu speaking group 7,70,218 70,089

1.
2. Temil speaking group 15,11,583 1,16,435

3. Malayalam speaking group 2,81,480 53,177

4. Kannada speaking group 83,633 10,127

1. The Krishna Patnka, 7 June, 1913.

 46

In the case of higher education amongst Andhras, the

strength of college students was decreasing instead of

increasing as seen from the following table for the
years 1906 and 1911.1

Table 5

S. No. Educational No. of students No.of students

Institutions. according to according to
the year 1906 the year 1911
Census. Census.
1. 2. 3. 4.

1. Rajahmundry college 212 160

2. Bandar college 102 84

3- Barhampuram college 38 28
4. Visakhapatnam college 49 47

5. Pithapuram Rajah's
college, Kakinada 55 47 ’
6. Guntur 61 47

7. Ongole 28 15
8. Bellary 16 (Since
abolished)

1. History of Andhra Movement, vol. 1, Op.Cit., p.185.

 47

The contrasting position of the spread of educational institutions

m the Presidency as computed by Konda Venkatappayya in the year

1
1912 in the booklet Andhr&dhyamamu clearly indicates the negligence

of the Telugu speaking areas.

Table 6

S. No. Nature of the Total of No. of No. of

institution. institutions institutions mstitut ions
m the in the Telugu m the Tamil
Presidency. Districts. Districts.
1. 2. 3- 4. 5.

1. Colleges 31 8 23
2l Sanskrit
college 5 2 3
3. Secondary
schools for Boys 700 167 533
4. Secondary Schools
for Girls 42 6 36
5- Elementary
Schools for boys 30,227 13,930 16,297
6. Elementary
Schools for Girls 1,553 554 999
7- Teacher training
Schools for men 97 45 52
8. Teacher training
Schools for women 22 , 8 14
9. Industrial Schools 82 12 70
.0. Medical Colleges 4 1 3

1. Venkatappayya, Konda, Andhrodyamamu, published on behalf of

the Andhra Committee, 1912, pp.22-23.
 48

The imbalances are further evident from the

following position of students who were attending

the schools m various districts of the Madras

Presidency.

Table 7

S.No. District No. of Students

schools attending them
1. 2. 3- 4.

1. Ganj am 107 1825

2. Visakhapatnam 77 1183

3- Godavari 136 2440

4. Krishna 200 3568

5- Guntur 105 2199

6. Kurnool 77 1297

7- Bellary 17 2240

8. Anantapur 95 1374

9. Cuddapah 58 964

10. Nellore 116 1664

11. Channapatnam 133 4853

12. Chengalput 334 5920
13. North Arcot 298 7608
14. South Arcot 283 6150
 49

Table 7 (contd.)

1. 2. 3- 4.

15. Tanj avur 604 14607

16. Tiruchirapalli 220 3948

17. Madurai 607 16295

18. Tlrunalveli 462 11441

19. Coimbatore 150 3091

20. Salem 93 1862

%
21. Neelgins ••
22. Malabar 514 18129

23. South Kannadam 88 2101

TOTAL 4774 112759

1. Venkatappayya, Konda, Andhrodyamamu, Op.Cat.,

p.25. It was stated that these figures were
furnished by the Andhra Committee m the year 1912
 50

The number of appointments of Andhras made in public

services of the Presidency as computed in the year 1912 also

caused great disappointment to them. The discrimination

becomes clear from the following table.

Table 8

S.No. Description Presidency Andhr

1.
Total
2. 3- 4.

1.
I.C.S. 14 2
2. District Sessions Judges of
I.C.S. rank 5 3
3. District Sessions Judges,
i Collectors rank 3 —

4. Secretaries and Assistant

Secretaries 6 —

5. Secretaries of Revenue Board 2 1

6. Deputy Collectors 152 31
7. Forest Department 25 1
8. Survey 12 3
9. Salt 39 4
10. Revenue Settlement 8 2
11. Customs 36 4
12. Finance 9 0
13. High Court 6 0
14. Sub-Judges 36 5
15- District Munsifs 178 34
16. Registration Department 23 2
17. Police Department 41 6
00

Education Department 30 0
 51

Table 81 (contd.)

1. 2. 3. 4

19. Public Health Department 9 0

20. P.W.D. 87 9
21. Cooperative Societies 7 1

These factors stirred the Andhras into action leading

to a movement inspired by ideals which were as universal

m their application and catholic in their spirit as
2
any which even inspired a national movement.

1. Venkatappayya, Konda, Andhrodhyamamu, Op.Cit., pp.28-29

and also History of Andhra Movement, vol.l, Op.Cit., p.29.
2. For and Against the Andhras Province, published by the
Standing Committee, Krishna Swadeshi f%ess, Masulipatam,
1913, PP.135-137.
 52

SECTION-3 . AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND CONFERENCES

The foregoing account shows the discriminatory position

of the Telugu people m the Madras Presidency, therefore
this trend was focussed in the aims and objectives of the
Andhra Movement. They included :

(1) Creating among the people great love for education,

culture and high ideals and making provision for their

special educational needs by representation to the

Government and by other means;

(2) Studying the agricultural and commercial conditions

of the country and concerting measures for their

progress by creating a spirit of co-operation and by

developing mutual trust and confidence;

(3) Stimulating interest m sanitation, health anc

physical culture and suggesting the means of promoting

the physique of the present generation,

(4) Promoting the development of Telugu literature

by encouraging the publication of booksm the vernacular

which were intended to convey the principles or

modern culture and enlightenment to the masses;

 53

(5) Securing the advancement of the claims of tne

i
Telugus m public service.

A separate Andhra Province was not mentioned as one of tie

V
objectives lest some of the elders who were antogonistlc
2
to the idea keep away from the Movement. The various
District Associations and their conferences provided tie
necessary platform to the various leaders to educate
people on regional and national issues. These organisatioms

were at the town and village levels to provide contact

between the educated and the uneducated rural masses. The

main aims of these associations were to educate the

people on the need for political and social reforms. The

district conferences and political associations amorg

other things aimed at constitutional agitation and formu­

lation of constructive proposals regarding advancement ard

o
walfare of the people. When a joint conference of Guntur

and Krishna districts was held at Nidadavolu in May 1912,

the subject of Andhra Province was included in the agenda

by the Guntur District Assocition. The subject was placed

1. The Andhra Movement, The Andhra Conference Commitee-,

Guntur, 1913, pp.9-10.
2. The Krishna Pushkaram Souvenir, Op.Cit., p.470.
3. Vaikuntam, Y. , Qsmania Journal of Historical Research,
Op.Cit., p.64 and also Venkatappayya, Konda, Sveeyacharirra,
Op.Cit., p.95.
 54

before the conference for discussion but on the request of

delegates like K.V.Reddy Naidu and Peddada Sambasivarao it

was postponed to the next conference. However, the young men
of Guntur and Krishna districts took great interest m

securing a separate province for Andhras and carried on the

agitation._ The Krishna Patnka of Masulipatam, Desabhimani
, fl.
of Guntur, Andhra Patnka, The Hindustan Review. Indian

patriot, took up the cause and began to create public

opinion in'' this regard. An Andhra Conference Committee was
started at Guntur to make arrangements for a conference of all
Telugu speaking people. The Andhra Conference Committee with

Vinjamuri Bhavanacharlu as President and Konda Venkatappayya

as one of the secretaries began to work. The Secretaries

made a pronouncement as to how the movement had arisen and

what it sought to achieve. Pamphlets containing this pronounce­

ment, both m English and Telugu were circulated in all

parts of the Telugu country and the objectives of the

Andhra Movement spread to the farthest corners of the
2
ountry. The Joint Secretaries of the Andhra Conference
Committee gave the following detailed agenda for discussion

1. For and Against Andhra Movement, Op.Cit., pp.185-187.

2. Goshti, May 1964, p.49.
 55

at the ensuing Andhra Conference at Bapatla :

1. The starting of an English daily to promote the

interests of the Andhra people; -

2. Representation to the Government to withdraw
the prohibition of enlistment of the Andhras m His Majesty's

Indian Army;
3. Establishment of an association for the collection
of funds to help Telugu students desirous of receiving
training in scientific and technical subjects in India

and abroad;
H. To consider steps to be taken for the better

equipment and successful working of the National College at

Masulipatam and the Saradamketanam at Vetapalem,

5. To consider the question of the appointment of

Andhras in higher grades of Public Service;

6. To request the Government to appoint m the Telugu

Text Book Committee only those whose vernacular was Telugu;

7. To request the Government to establish a Teaching

and Residential University m the Andhra districts and

8. In addition to other problems posted for discussion
1
was the Constitution of the Andhra Conference.

1. The Freedom Struggle m Andhra Pradesh (Andhra), vol.II

Op.Cit., p.3bl. Also The Hindu, 4 November, 1912.

\
 56

While preparations were going on to hold the first

Andhra Conference m May 1913 at Bapatla, the subject of

creating a separate Andhra Province created a controversy.

It become the fashion of the day m Andhra to make a

1
reference to the movement either for it or against it.

P.Kesava Pillai of Gooty, vakil, social worker and a

member of the Madras Legislature vehemently opposed the
2
movement, whereas the 22nd Krishna District Association

Political Conference held at Masulipatam from 21st to

23rd March 1913 with Sidembi Hanumantha Rao, Public Prosecutor

of Masulipatam as Chairman of the Reception Committee and

Puranam Nagabhushanam Pantulu, Advocate of Madras as

the President of the Conference blessed the movement.

Sidembi Hanumantha Rao, who was previously holding the

opinion that formation of a separate Andhra Province

would result m regionalism, changed his ' opinion and

argued that creation of Andhra Province was most desirable

for keeping the people speaking the same language under

one Government, 3 Puranam Nagabhushanam Pantulu while

1. Goshti, May 1964, p.50.

2. Ibid., p.50.
3. The Krishna Patrika, 22 March, 1913.
 57

delivering his presidential address m the above conference

supported the Andhra Movement stressing that close affinity

could be established not just among the people who j'ointly

ate and drank alike but among those who spoke a common
1
language. In this Conference a resolution was passed to
the effect that all-round progress of Andhras could not
be achieved until a separate Andhra Province was created.
Further, the Andhra Conference Committee m their appeal

argued that the Andhra Movement was not the one newly
started by any particular individual or a body of particular
individuals but it was the result of the gradual growth of

ideas among the Telugu people for quite sometime. It

naturally sprung out of the consciousness of Telugu people,

and their earnest desire to improve themselves and to deserve

•3

a better recognition.J This appeal was a convincing reply

to those expressing doubts and fears against the Andhra

Movement.

As a consequent of the vigorous propaganda carried

out by the Andhra Conference Committee, by ’the year 1913>

1- The Krishna Patrika, 22 March, 1913.

2. The Madras Mail, 22 March, 1913-
3. History of Andhra Movement, vol.I, Op.Cit., p.160*
 58

a separate Andhra Province, Telugu language and literature

the political consciousness and National ideal* airong

Andhras gained significance and support. Thus the Anchra

Movement had its origins m the District Associations and

their activities led a political development m Andhra

which took a new dimension with the beginning of the

Andhra Movement. 2

The work of the Krishna District Association vas

further strengthened by the decision of the Guntur District

Association to hold its conference m May 1913 at Bapatla. It

was also announced to convene the first Andhra Conference

3
immediately after the Guntur District Conference. Accordingly

the first Andhra Conference was held at Bapatla on 2£th

and 27th May; 1913 under the presidency of Bayya Narasimheswara

Sarma who was popularly known as B.N.Sarma. 4 It was attended

by 800 delegates from all parts of the Telugu districts.

There were also Telugu delegates from Nagpur, Tanjavur

as well as Warangal and Nizams' dominions.^

1. Janma Bhumi, vol.IX, No.M2, September 1928, p.6.

2. Vaikuntam, Y, Qsmania Journal of Historical Research,
Op.Cit., pp.72-73.
3 Venkatappayya, Konda, Svecyacharitra, Op.Cit., p.170.
M. B.N.Sarma afterwards became member m the Viceroy's
Executive Council.
5. The Hindu, 28 May, 1913 and the Krishna Patrika, 31 May,1913.
 59

The conference venue was provided with twenty-two

gates decorated with golden letters, displaying the names of

prominent rulers, poets, heroes, heroines of the Andhra

history. The names that appeared were Krishnadevaraya,

Mantri Yugandharudu, Prataparudrudu, Venkatadri Naidu,

Potanamathyudu, Nannaya Bhattarakudu, Tikkana Somayaji,
Vidyaran yaswamy, Ramadas, Thyagaraj aryudu, Apasthambudu,
Rudramadevi, Rukmini, Damayanthi, Molla, Thaneesha, Vemana
Yogi, Rayam Bhaskarudu, Thimmarusu Mantri, Adi Vishnu,
i
Raja Raja Narendrudu, Sali Vahanudu.

The Hindu, the Muslim and the Christian representatives

offered prayers and blessed the Andhra Movement. The

proceedings of the conference began with Vandemataram

song. Konda Venkatappayya in his welcome address dealt

in detail the past history of Andhras and the greatness of

Telugu language. He felt that the gathering was like

that of the brothers of the same blood separated for long,

but seeking to unite with touching hearts because of their

common language, history and traditions and the Andhra

Movement was conceived to advance the interests of Andhras

in an organised manner. The non-participation of the Andhras
m formulating the educational policies and the lack of

1. The Krishna Patrika, 31 May, 1913.

«
 60

encouragement from the Madras Government m the mofussil

areas, resulted in the general backwardness of the Andhras.

Further, he said that the efforts of the Andhra Mahasabha

should be supplemented with those of other associations in

the country and should not run counter to them. For achieving
the progress of Andhras all the Andhras must utilise
i
their energies unstintedlyl.

In his presidential address, B.N.Sharma made a comprehen-

sive survey of the backwardness of the Andhras. He said

that the Government did not attend to the needs of the

Telugu districts to the same extent as it attended to the

Tamil districts. He also examined the merits of the demand

for the creation of a separate province but he was rather

inclined to the view that it was not the proper time for

agitation as it might do more harm than good. He further

observed that "It should also be noted that the interests

of the two northern-most districts, as they are understood

by the people therein at present, are opposed to a separation

of the kind suggested and that the Ceded Districts may not

see eye to eye with those who believe m the advantages of

a division mtc smaller groups for purposes of government.

It may be that some years hence, when either we or Government

1. The Krishna Patrika, 31 May, 1913.

 61 -

discover that the presidency is too large to be administered

efficiently by a single central power or we find that

our educational and economic interests do not receive the

attention they deserve, the districts affected would
conjointly have to consider the propriety of such a measure''1 2

At the conference V.Ramadas Pantulu moved the resolution

that: "This Conference (1) records its opinion, (a) to

ensure efficient administration and promotion of the best

interests of the people of India, Government will have
to make, sooner on later, language as the basis for provincial

administration and (b) to promote effective self-government.

(2) To appraise the Andhra Public the desirability

of focussing public opinion on the question whether Government

should be asked to constitute the Telugu Districts as

a Province". The resolution was supported by V.Satyanarayana

of Masulipatam. p On the issue of a separate province

there was heated discussion in the Subjects Committee and

also in the open Conference. Mutluru Adinarayanayya,

1. History of Freedom Struggle in Andhra Pradesh (Andhra),

Op.Cit., vol.II, pp.80-81.
2. Goshti, May 1964, p.51.
 62

appealed to postpone the issue to the next Conference. The

others who opposed' this were Ganti Venkata Ramayya, Nyapathi

Subha Rao Pantulu, Mocherla Ramachandra Rao and Gooty

Kesava Pillai. Konda Venkatappayya moved an amendment and

said that the issue might be referred to the Standing

Committee to carry out propaganda among Telugu people,

i
educate them and mould the public opinion. The same was

accepted.

A critical analysis of the results of the first

Andhra Conference shows: 1. An awakening among the Andhras

that was just then commmg up got a respectable forum for

its self-expression, 2. A demand was put forth for the

establishment of a separate University for Andhras m which,

incidentally, Telugu would be the medium of instruction.

And the need for promoting education, both literary and

technical, among Andhras was emphasised and 3. The necessity

for an Andhra Province was mooted and thrown open for

public deliberations and discussion.

To implement the various resolutions of the Mahasabha,

a representative Standing Committee was constituted with

2
Konda Venkatappayya as its Secretary.

1. Goshti, May 1964, p.52.

2. History of Andhra Movement, vol.I, Op.Cit., p.215.
 63

New hopes and aspirations began to rise among the Andhra

people. The Visakhapatnam District Conference held at
Chodavaram m June 1913 under the Presidentship of Mantha

Suryanarayana, Municipal Chairman of Vizianagaram, adopted

a resolution welcoming the Andhra Movement and expressing

satisfaction at the proposal of a separate province as a
stage incidental to the recognition of Provincial Autonomy.
The Conference also appointed a committee to focus public

opinion in the districts on the question of the Andhra

1
Province and to submit a report. A weekly paper called

the Andhra Advocate was started m Visakhapatnam for

?
carrying on propaganda on this subject.

After the Bapatla Conference the controversy on

creating a separate Andhra Province was discussed in

the press. P.Kesavapillai hailing from Rayalaseema area

wrote articles against this Movement. For the first time
he raised the Brahmin-Non-Brahmin controversy publicly
•a
which surprised many and evoked much criticism. The unwilling­

ness of certain people of Rayalaseema districts for the

creation of a separateAndhra Province was illustrated

1. History of Andhra movement, vol.I, Op.Cit.,p.208.

2. -Goshti, May 1964, p.53.
3. Ibid.,vol.XIX No.3, July 1964, p.82.
/
 64

m a cartoon published in the Krishna Patrika of 19 July,

1913. In this cartoon which can be seen next to this

page , the Rayalaseema districts were depicted as a mountain

of snow in the sea coming in the way of the ship of Andhra

Movement.

In their articles Pattabhi Sitaramayya and Challa

Seshagin Rao made it clear from the outset that the Andhra

Movement was m no sense a separatist movement. It would

not come m conflict with the national movement which
aimed at the unity of the country and its freedom from

political bondage. And further, they argued that it was

a part and parcel of the national movement inspired by

similar ideals. It could be rightly called a child of the

national movement since the Andhras were inspired by

the Vandemataram Movement. The linguistic concept gained

momentum during this period.

To end all controversy and m pursuance of the resolution

passed at the Bapatla conference, the Standing Committee

of the Andhra ' Mahasabha sent a deputation consisting
of Konda Venkatappayya, Pattabhi Sitaramayya, Mutnuri
Krishna Rao, and Valluri Suryanarayana Rao to tour important

places m the Rayalaseema districts and Nellore to create

65
 66

public opinion m favour of a separate province. The

deputation held public meeting at Nandyala, Gooty, Anantaour,

Hmdupur, Bellary, Penukonda, Cuddapah, Chittoor and
Nellore. The people of Rayalaseema welcomed the members
of the deputation and expressed sympathy with the aims

of the movement and the formation of a separate province.

At a few places doubts were also expressed about the
safeguarding the interests of the Rayalaseema districts

m the hands of the Andhras of the Northern Circars.

Most of the leading persons of those days in -the

Rayalaseema districts like Desapandya Subbarao, Mahanandayya,

Narasingarao and G. Haris arvothama Rao of Nandyala, S--V.

Narasimha Rao of Kurnool, Viruru Pitch’aiah, and K.Gundu

Rao of Cuddapah, Hatti Sivarao of Anantapur, Hatti Sankara Rao

of Dharmavaram, Kolaehalam Srmivasarao of Bellary, Nemali

Pattabhirama Rao of Madanapalle and R. B. Ramakrishna Raju

of chittoor took part m the proceedings and became active

supporters of the Movement.1

After its return from the Rayalaseema districts,

Konda Venkatappayya accompanied by Kouta Srirama Sastry,

1. Goshti, vol.XIX, No.3, June 1964, pp.82-83.

 67

a public worker visited some of the chief centres m the

N

northern districts such as Rajahmundry, Kakinada, Visakhapatnam

and Berhampore, addressed public meetings and held interviews

with the local leaders there. People m these areas were
enthusiastically m favour of a province. In the meanwhile,

a great deal of propaganda m favour of a separate province

was carried out by The Andhra, an English weekly from

Guntur published by Challa Seshagin Rao; Desabhimani of

Guntur, the Krishna Patrika of Masulipatam and the Andhra
Patnka then published at Bombay. It is also noteworthy

that a great deal of discussion on a separate province

\
was also carried out by interested persons through pre&s
in Madras. All these efforts provided an opportunity
\
to the public to acquaint themselves with the issue of tte
1 '
Andhra Province.

The second Andhra Conference was held at Vijayawaca

on 11th and 12th April 1914 under the Presidentship cf

Nyapathi Subbarao Pantulu of Rajahmundry. Of several
delegates, who attended the conference ryots formed a special
group. Chief ‘among those who were on the dias were RaoBahadur

M. Ramachandra Rao, the Zammdar of Polavaram, Dewan Bahadur

1• History of Andhra Movement. vol.I, Op.Cit., p.221.

 68

M. Admarayanaiah, Dewan Bahadur Y.Janikiramaiah, Canon

Anantam, RaoBahadur B.N.Sarma, T.Prakasam, the Zamindar of

Tiruvur, Dr.S.R.Rao, Rao Sahxb G.Venkataramaiah, S.Arunachala

Iyer, RaoBahadur K.Vecresalingam, Messrs.K.Venkatareddi,
v.Bhavanacharx, D.Suryaprakasa Rao, V.G.K.Iyengar,
P.Narayanamurthi, V.Ramadoss, N.Pattabhirama Rao, Dr.Lakshmi-
«

pathi, Pandit D.Gopalacharyulu, K.Subba Reddx, the Zamindar

of Mylavaram A.Venkatasubbier, V.Sitarama Sarma, S.Bheemasankara
1
Rao and Jogayya Pantulu.

P.Venkatappayya, Chairman of the Reception Committee,

in his welcomed address traced the origin of the Andhra

Movement and urged for the reorganisation of provinces

2
m India on linguistic conside rations. Nyapathi Subbarao

Pantulu m his presidential address said the most important

problem before them w4s how to promote a feeling of brotherli-

ness and solidarity among the Indians in general and

Andhras m particular

A specific reso ution on the formation of the Andhra

Province moved by M.Satyanarayana of Vizianagaram was

1. The Madras Mail, 13 April, 1914.

2. Ibid., 11 April, 19 4,
3- Ibid.
 69

adopted by a large majority The resolution said taat

H
to ensure efficient administration and the promotion of
the best interests of the people of India, language areas

have to be made territorial basis of provincial administration

as far as possible and that this conference is of opinion

that it is desirable to constitute the Telugu-speaking
areas of the Madras Presidency into a province'’.1 2Therefore,
3

this was a memorable Conference.

The third Andhra Conference was held at Visakhapatrsam

on the 12th and 13th of May 1915 under the Presidentship

of Raja of Panagal Panuganti Ramarayaingar. p Delegates from
^ 3
far of places like Bombay, Nagapur and AkolaJ also attended

this Conference. Bhupathiraju Venkatapathiraju, Chairman

of the Reception Committee m his welcome speech said that

"the progress the Andhra Movement has made, the success _t

has already achieved, is beyond all expectations of i~s
noble-minded organisers. Gentlemen who were once opposed to

it have been either converted or become neutral and the

supporters have become enthusiastic and have the hearty

1. Goshti, vol.XIX, No.3, July 1964, pp.83-84.

2. Rajah of Panagal wa3 then a member of Imperial Legislative
Council.
3. Akola was m Berar at that time.
 70

support of every Andhra who desires the prosperity of

i
Andhradesa".

Several other resolutions were passed at this Conference

and the resolution on the issue of a separate province said

"that it is proper and necessary to constitute the Telmgu

districts m the Madras Presidency into a separate province".

Supporting that resolution Chilakamarthi Lakshminarsimham, a

satirical poet said that, "the province question is fast

gaining strength. At the Bapatla Conference, the attitude

of the Andhras was doubtful. At Vijayawada, it was found

desirable to have an Andhra Province, though in the opinion

of the President, it was good as an ideal. When shall -we

have it? A gentleman fears that the Government will refvee

our prayer. But is the Government giving all that ue

have asked? Have they divorced the Judicial and the Executive

functions? Another gentleman has said that a desire for an

Andhra province arose from envyjf^What a bad word it is. Behind

our desire for more posts in public service there is

a philosophy. Dadabhai Naoroji and the late. W.C.Banner, e

fought for more posts for the Indians. If the Andhras get

more posts, they shall gam more experience by holding tho&e

1. History of Andhra movement, vol.I, Op.Cit., p.271.

 71

posts. When Rabindranath Tagore won the Nobel prise,

we all rejoiced. When GopalKrishna Gokhale died, India was

convulsed with grief. Where then is the possibility of

bad feelings 'springing up between the Tamils and the

Telugus if we get a Province’.... I am a poet and I prophesy

that an Andhra Province will surely come.1 2y-3

Despande Subbarao,, of Nandyal,supporting the

resolution, said that: "I have come from the Ceded Districts.

You say, we know nothing of the Andhra Movement. We do know

it. Do not pronounce an exparte judgement on our attitude.

The Ceded Districts are as enthusiastic as you are about

geeting an Andhra Province" 2 .

The fourth conference of the Andhra Mahasabha was

held at Kakmada on the 8th and 9th May, 1916. Mocher_a

Ramachandra RaoJ was the President and K.R.V.Krishna Rao,

the zamindar of. Polavaram was the Chairman of the Reception

Committee. In his address referrring to the Andhra Movement,

Krishna Rao said that "A territorial re-distribution of all

1. History of Andhra Movement, vol.I, Op.Cit., p.294.

2. Ibi<l- , p.297.
3. Mociierla Ramachandra Rao was a member of Madras Legislative
Council.
 72

■she provinces of India on linguistic and ethnic basis

is indeed logically sound and theoratically desirable and

necessary for the creation of a federated India; and

i
this will have to be done ultimately" . In his Presidential

Address Mocherla Ramachandra Rao siad that "it is a matter of

sincere satisfaction that this conference is coming to be

regarded as the annual meeting and' Andhra Movement has

perceptably contributed to the growth of public opinion in

this Presidency and that the new spirit for progress

and self-improvement visible on all sides will be turned

to practical advantage on a well-considered and co-ordinated

plan" . Further he pointed out that "this conferenceaim!to,

consolidate, and unify collective feelings among the Telugu

speaking people and to utilise for promoting progressive

political and social ideals and this work of consolidation

is, at the root of all future progress. I do not attach any

importance to the criticism that this is a separatist

movement" .

The resolution on Andhra Province moved by C.V.S.

Narasimha Raju was unanimously passed. A resolution was

1. History of Andhra Movement,, vol.I, Op.Cit., p.319.

2. Ibid., p.321.
3. Ibid., p.322.
 73

also accepted for the establishment of a separate university

for Andhras"1".2 3
The
4 5Kakinada Conference was also significant

as it exhibited a greater unanimity among the leaders

and people of the Circar Districts and Ceded districts.

The fifth Conference of the Andhra Mahasabha

was held at Nellore from 1st to 3rd June, 1917 with Ongole
Venkata Rangaiah as the Chairman of the Reception Committee
' 2
Konda Venkatappayya presided over the Conference. The same
resolutions that had been passed at Kakinada on a separate

Andhra Province and Andhra University were . passed again

at this Conference. There was a mild commotion on the

■a
Presidential address < wherein certain Telugu words were
misunderstood by the delegates. Strong arguments against

the resolution made by some delegates from Nellore could not

x prevent the main resolution. The President declared that the

resolution was passed by a majority 4 . But it gave rise to

a sharp dissension between the delegates from the Nellore

district itself and those from the Northern Circars^.

1. Kaleswara Rao, Ayyadevara, Najeevitha Katha, Nayyandhramu,

Adarsa Grandhamandali, Vijayawada, 1959, p.226.
2. Konda Venkatappayya was the Secretary of the Andhra Mahasabha
at that time.
3. Venkatappayya, Konda,Sveeyacharitra, Op.Cit., pp.192-193.
4. Kaleswara Rao, Ayyadevara, Op.Cit., p.229.
5. Government of Madras, Fortnightly Report, 18 June, 1917.
 74

of State
A
/About

for
this time,

India-in-Council,
xn August 1917

Edwin S.Montagu,
the Under-Secretary

announced in

the parliament certain constitutional reforms providing

for a better administration of India by introducing more

popular element into the Governmental institutions and making

i
it more representat'

In order to suggest reforms in the new Constitution

a special meeting of the Andhra Conference was held at

Vijayawada on 30 September 1917 under the Presidentship of

C.V.S.Narasimharaju. Ayyadevara Kaleswara Rao was the

Chairman of the Reception Committee. At this conference it

was resolved that a Committee should wait on Montagu m

'deputation and press upon him the necessity for the redistribu­

tion of Provinces on linguistic basis and the need for'the

formation of a separate Andhra Province. 2 Therefore a

deputation consisting of Nyapati SubhaRao Pantulu, Mocherla

Ramachandra Rao, Pattabhi Sitaramayya, Konda Venkatappayya

and others met Montague and Lord Chelmsford and represented

to them the case for integrating the Telugu Districts

in to a separate Andhra Province.

1. Kaleswara Rao, Ayyadevara, 0p.C$t;, p.231.

2. Ibid.
 75

The Calcutta Congress presided over by AnneBeeant

held m December 1917 granted a Congress Committee called "the

'Andhra Provincial Congress Committee' with the active

support of Lokamanya Tilak. O'f this committee , Nyapati

Subbarao Pantulu became the President and Konda Venkatappayya

the Secretary. Prom that year onwards the Andhra Provincial

Congress Committee assumed the responsibility of the Congress

1
work m Andhra .

The next Andhra Mahasabha Conference was held at

Cudddapah on 30 Mayy 1918 under the Presidentship of Nemali

Pattabhi Ramarao. Nookala Venkatasubbaiah of Pullampet ras

s

the Chairman of the Reception Committee. The President m

his address said that "I earnestly pray that my friends of

the Ceded Districts who now stand aloof both from the larger

question of creating separate provinces on linguistic basis

and from the smaller question of joining the Andhra Provincial

Congress Committee sanctioned by the Indian Congress

will kindly reconsider their position, sink all differences

and work unitedly for the attainment of the common object

which all have m view 2 .

1. Kaleswara Rao Ayyadevara, Op.Cit., p.231.

2. History of Andhra Movement, vol.I, Op.Cit., p-393.
 4

76

The first Andhra Provincial Conference of the

newly formed Andhra Provincial Congress Committee was also

held along with the Andhra 'Conference and resolutions were

passed unanimously demanding the formation of a separate

Andhra Province.-

A special session of the Andhra Provincial Conference

was held at Guntur on 17 August, 1918 under the Presidentship

of Kasmadhuni Nageswara Rao which‘was attended by several

leaders1
2. 3’.The Conference discussed at length the Montagu-
Chelmsford Scheme^. The A*ndhra Provincial Congress Committee

which met at Vijayawada o'n 8th December, 1918 and presided

over by Pattabhi Seetharamayya also considered the Montford

proposal- ’and decided to send a deputation to London.

The subsequent 7th and 8th Conferences of 1919 and

1920 were held m the Rayalaseema area at Anantapur and

Mahanandi were presided by Gadicherla Harisarvotham Rao and

1. KaleswaraRao, Ayyadevara, Op.Cit., p.230.

2. Among those present were B.ft.Sarma, B.Venkatapathi Raju,
A.S.Krishna Rao, V.Ramadoss, T.Prakasam, P.Narayanamurthy,
G.Rangayya Naidu, B.Pattabhi Seetharamayya, Y.Suryanarayana
Rao, G.Harisarvotham Rao, Mohmed Noma All Seheb, A.Kaleswara
■ Rao, V.Bhavanachary, K.Venkatappayya, Raja M.Bhujanga Rao.
3. The Andhra Patrika, 23 August, 1918.
 77

A.Ranganadha Mudaliar respectively. The same resolutions

regarding a separate province etc., were passed at both fhe

Conferences. The Provincial Congress Conferences were

also held at both these places.

/v The Andhra Provincial Conference met at Anantapur

on 23 August, 1919 resolved thatuas the decision of Provinces

on linguistic basis is essential for the realisation

by the people of the advantages of responsible Government

proposed shortly to be introduced into this country and
for securing efficiency of administration and the same

principle has been recognised m the Montford Report.

Andhra Conference requsted for the 11 northern districts an

the Madras Presidency and Madras be constituted into an

Andhra Province^.y

The Andhra ProvincialCongress Committee met

at Vijayawada on 8 December, 1919 with Pattabhi Seetharamayja

m the chair decided to send a Memorandaum on the question

of the forthcoming reforms. A meeting of the Andhra Mahasabua

Standing Committee met at Vijayawada on 25 January 1920 amd

discussed the rules under the new Reforms Act. Both the

Committees did not discuss the issue of separate Andhra

Province.

1. Mitra, H.N. (Ed.), The Indian Annual Register, 1920, p.30C.

 78

SECTION-4; STAGES OF THE MOVEMENT AND THE NATURE OP LEADERSHIP

THE PERIOD UP TO 1920

As noticed earlier the Andhra Movement, by and large

was growing steadily from 1913 to 1920. This period was
marked by some significant achievements. The Andhra Movement,

though it met with some setbacks initially owing to the

emergence of non-Brahmm movement and certain misunderstandings

among its leaders, picked up momentum and made substantial

achievements.

The persistent efforts of the Andhra Mahasatiia

resulted m the sanction of aseparate central committee

for Andhras called .the 'Andhra Provincial Congress Committee'
\

m 1917 by the Calcutta Congress and Andhra Provincial

Congress Committee was constituted in 1918 with Nyapaii

Subba Rao Pantulu as the President and Konda Venkatappayya as

the Secretary. The Congress had thus given the seal of i~s

approval to the general principle of linguistic provinces.

B.N.Sarma who was the President of the first

Andhra Conference of Bapatla held m 1913 and who later

became a Member of Imperial Legislative Council moved a.

resolution there on 6 February, 1918 recommending to
 79
1

the Governor-General - the necessity of redistributing the

i
provinces on language basis.

Again, the Indian National Congress under the

Presidentship of Mahatma Gandhi at its Nagapur session
held m December 1920, accepted the Principle of the
redistribution of provinces on linguistic basis which was

one of the objectives of the Andhra Mahasabha.

y

1. History ofAndhra Movement, vol.l, Op.Cit., pp.395-396.

also Proceedings of the Imperial Legislative Council,

for the year 1980.
 80

THE PERIOD FROM 1921 to 1937

The Andhra Mahasabha session for the year 1921 was held

at Berhampur. It was presided over by Rajah Kotagiri

Venkata Krishna Rao, the Zamindar of Gampalagudem. During
the follwmg year m 1922 the session was held at Chittoor and
it was presided over by Vedam Venkataraya Sastri.

During this period the issue of the creation of

Andhra Province was discussed in the Central Legislative

Assembly at Delhi. Jayanthi Ramayya Pantulu,'*' a member,

while moving a resolution m the Central Legislative

Assembly m 1922 on the integration of Andhra Districts

into a separate province argued that uowing to the diverse

elements which it comprised, the Madras Presidency was

unsuitable as an administrative unit'! Under responsible

government, provinces should be homogeneous. The Madras

Presidency was m any case too large for efficient administra­

tion. A compact unit could be formed of Telugu areas

from the country extending along the east coast from

Ganjam almost to Madras. The revenues of the Andhra Province

would be about half the revenues of the Madras Presidency

1. Jayanthi Ramayya Pantulu was then a member of the

Central Legislative Assembly.
 81

1
and its resources would exceed those of any of the Provinces” .

Although the Andhra Mahasabha session for the year 1923

was not held, the year was memorable and significant as

the Andhra leaders were busy with the arrangements for the
38th annual session of the Indian National Congress which

was held at Kakinada in December 1923 under the presidentship

of Maulana Mohammad All. Konda Venkatappayya , was the

Chairman of the Reception Committee. The Andhra Mahasabha
leaders concentrated their attention on holding this
session and made it a great success. The Kakinada Congress was

memorable for more than one reason1. 2 It was perhaps the

grandest Congress ever held, for the lay-out of roads,

magnificient shamiana (tent) which became the permanent

property of the Congress, attention paid to the smallest

detail of the arrangements, salubrious weather and housing

2
of the Presidents and other leaders on the camp permises.

The next annual session of the Andhra Mahasabha of

the year 1924 was held at Madras. It was presided over

1. ^ Government of India Pile No.57-(Public) Home Public

Department, 1921.
2. Pattabhi Seetharamayya, B. , The History of the Congress,
Congress Working Committee, 1935, p.442.
 82

by Cattamanchi Ramalmga Reddy. In 1925 the session vas

held at Masulipatam under the presidentship of Sami

Venkatachalam Chetty; m 1926 at Eluru presided o\er

by Rajah Meka Venkatadri Appa Rao, the zammdar of Vuyyur;

m 1927 at Anantapur presided over by O.Lakshmana Swami Rao;
m 1928 at Nandyala presided over by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnai;
m 1929 at Vijayawada presided over by C.V.S.Narasiiriia
■v

Raju and in 1930 at Guntur presided over by V.V.Jogaiah

Pantulu.1

The Andhra Mahasabha held a special Conference at

Madras on 4 October, 1931 presided over by K.Koti Reddy and

passed a resolution urging on the Round Table Conference

to recognise the need for re-organising the Provinces
on the basis of language in the federal scheme for tke

Government of India and to reconstitute the Telugu Districts

into a separate province. V.V.Jogaiah Pantulu, Mocherla

Ramachandra Rao and the Rajah of Bobbili who were attending

the Round Table Conference were requested to place tie

resolution before the British Public. Accordingly they

placed the matter before the Under Secretary of State

1. Andhra Mahasabha- A Brief History, The Krishna Pushkaram

Souvenir, Op.Cit., p.478.
 83

for India who promised to give it due consideration.

But no positive steps were taken and the result was the
Telugu people did not get the Province they desired.

/ The 1932 session which was held at Vijayawada was

presided over by K.V.Reddy Naidu; the 1934 session at

Visakhapatnam was presided over by Deshpandya Subba Rao;

the 1936 session at Kakinada was presided over by Vemavarapu
Ramadas Pantulu. The 1937 session was a Silver Jubilee
Conference. It was held at Vijayawada under the Presidentship
1

of K.Koti Reddy from Cuddapah. The usual resolution on the

issue of a separate province declared that "for the develop­

ment of literature, civilisation, art, education, welfare

and administrative efficiency, a separate province for

the Andhras should be established immediately. The Telugu

Districts of Madras Presidency have got all the ingredients

necessary for a separate province,' such as adequate area,

population, revenue, selfsufficiency etc. And there

is every feasibility of constituting them into a separate

Province. And this Conference regrets that such an opportunity

was denied to them m the past". p By this time the Karnataka

]. Goshti, vol.XIX, No.6, September 1964, pp.179-180.

2. Proceedings of the Andhra Mahasabha of the Silver Jubilee
session held m October 1937-
 84

people also started an agitation for a separate Karnataka

Province. The Conference also passed another important
resolution saying that "The Conference supports the agitation

for a separate Karnataka Province and offers its readiness

to work along with their leaders who want to establish

provinces on a linguistic basis in all India." This Silver

Jubilee Session was a landmark m the history of the

Mahasabha since the principal resolution was aimed to solve

the differences between the Circar and Rayalaseema people^
The resolution reads that "this Conference exhorts the

people of Rayalaseema and the Andhras of other areas to

remember the great aims of their ancestors and to work

unitedly for the progress of the Andhra people. This

Conference congratulates the Rayalaseema friends for their

request to rejoin the Andhra University. And a Committee

is appointed to go into the question of all its details and

2
implications." This was achieved with the conclusion of

Sri Bagh Pact which mainly served to bring together the

people of the two areas paving the way for united efforts to
secure a separate province.

1. Proceedings of the Andhra Mahasabha of the Silver Jubilee

session held in October 1937.
2. Ibid.
 85

In pursuance of the resolution of the Silver Jutlee

Conference at Vijayawada, a Committee1 2was
3 constituted to

settle the differences between the leaders of the Rayalasesma

t 2
and Circar districts. The Committee met at Sri Bagh Place m
Madras on 16 November, 1937 and evolved a formula for
resolving these difference and this ' agreed formula came
to be known thereafter as 'Sri Bagh Pact'.^

^ The period, 1921-1937 was marked by further achievemerts

by the Andhra Mahasabha in its efforts to achieve a separate

Andhra Province. These achievements include: 1. The Non-Co­

operation Movement and and No-Tax campaign launched "by

Gandhiji were vigorously followed up by the Andhra leaders,

who were also the leaders of the Andhra Mahasabha.

2. A provision was made m the constitutional reforms

to the effect that a new province could be created by tie

1. The Committee for settling the Rayalaseema difference was

constituted with K.Koti Reddi, T.N.Ramakrishna Reddy,
Pattabhi Sitaramayya, Konda Venkatappayya, Mahaboob A_i
Baig, D.Hanumantha Rao, N.Varadachary, Pappuri Ramacharyu_u,
G. Harisarvoth am a Rao, Subbarama Reddy.
2. Sri Bagh Palace was the residence of K.Nageswara Rao
m Madras.
3. See Appendix I.
 86

Governor - Gener al-m-Council m accordance with the

wishes of the people of the country. This gave the Andhras a

ray of hope to claim for a Province for themselves.

3. An interesting feature of the 1926 Conference was

the acceptance of a resolution recommending to the Standing

Committee to concept measures for establishing the Andhra

individuality among the Andhra settlers in the Nizam's

territory, Bombay Presidency^ Central Provinces, Bengal

1
Presidency and Burma.

4. Yet another achievement during this period was the

establishment of the Andhra University. The Andhra University,

one of the mam demands of the Andhra Mahasabha was avowedly

established for the promotion of studies in the culture,

history and language of the Telugu people. As the University

came to be located m a extreme corner of Andhra, much

against the wishes of the leaders of Rayalaseema, there

arose a controversy on this. But it is interesting to

note that the then Vice Chancellor of the Andhra University,

Cattamanchi Ramalinga Reddy, who played a prominent part

m locating rhe University at Visakhapatnam himself belonged

1. The Hindu, 29 November, 1926.

 87

to Rayalaseema area. However, a little later the conclusion of

the Sri Bagh Pact settled the differences on the University

issue.
f

5. The other achievement during this period of the

movement was the passing of a resolution m the Madras
Legislative Council on 14 March, 1927. G.Harisarvoth:amaRao

raised a question m the Legislative Council to know the action

taken on the resolution of the Council regarding the

Andhra Province passed during the earlier sssion. The Revenue

Member N.E.Majori Banks stated that the resolution was
forwarded to the Government of India m accordance with

section 52-A of the Government of India Act. This invited

several queries from D.Narayana Raju, G.Harisarvothama Rao,

1
A.Kaleshwara Rao, P.Anjaneyulu and other.

6. Though the course of the movement from the year 1930

onwards was more or less a routine one, the major achievement

of the Andhra Mahasabha was the agreement of the Sri Bagh

Pact between the people of Rayalaseema and those of coastal

districts, a positive step towards unifying the Telugu

people.

1. Proceedings of the Madras Legislative Council, August 24,

19vo 1 .XXXVI, pp. 160-161.
 88

THE PERIOD FROM 1938 TO 1953

The Sri Bagh Pact between the leaders of Rayalaseema

and the Coastal Districts not only solved the major differences

among the Andhras themselves m relation to the question

of the formation of a separate Andhra Province but also

paved the way for a united action. Consequently che

Madras Legslative Assembly passed unanimously a resolution
on 30 March, 1938 for the formation of a separate Andhra
1
Province. The Assembly recommends to the Government that

the views of the Chamber of the Legislature of Madras, be

communicated, under section 290 of the Government of Incia

Act of 1935, to His Majesty-m-Council that steps might

be taken as early as possible for the constitution of a

2
separate province . Further, the Madras Council of Ministers
3
submitted a Memorandum to the Governor of Madras urging

him to move the Secretary of States to consider the demand

for the formation of a separate Andhra Province. Bait

this was rejected by the Secretary of State. There was a
feeling that the although C.Rajagopalachari supported tne

1. Proceedings of the Madras Legislative Assembly, 30 March

19W-
2. Ibid.
3. The memorandum was dated 11 August, 1938 and was signed by
T.Prakasam, P.Subbarayan, Yakub Hasan, T.S.S.Rajan,
V.I.Muniswami Pillai, S.Ramanadhan, B.GopalaReddy and
C. Raj agopalachari.
 89

resolution on the Andhra Province as Prime Minister1 2 he

* 4

was responsible for the recommendation being rejected by

the Secretary of State.^

As usual, in 1938 the Andhra Mahasabha Conference

was held at Madras,. It was presided over by Sarvepalle Radha-

Krishnan. Muttha Venkatga Subba Rao, a retired Chief Justice

of Madras High Court while inaugurating the session emphasised

thet "you cannot have a strong unified country unless the

autonomous units that go to comprise it are strong and

1

well-developed. And you cannot have such autonomous units

unless the principle of linguistic areas is recognised

and adopted".^ Radhakrishnan referring to the Andhra

Movement siad that "Just as the movement for Swaraj was not

detrimental to the world weal, likewise the Andhra Movement

cannot be injurious to the National cause. Therefore, there

was no conflict between Andhra agitation and the struggle

.4
for the Indian Swaraj." Addressing the, people of Rayalaseema

1. The Chief Ministers of the Provinces were then called as

' Prime Ministers or Premiers.
2. History of ' Andhra Movement, vol.II, Op.Cit., p.109.
3- Proceedings of the Andhra Mahasabha for the year 1938 and
History of Andhra Movement, vol.II, Op.Cit., pp.134-135.
4. Ibid.
 90

Radhakrishnan expressed the hope that the Sri Bagh Pact

would set their doubts at rest and hence there should be

nofeelings of superiority and inferiority among the

people of Circars and the Ce ded ' Districts. The Conference
endorsed the Sri Bagh Pact and thanked the Madras Legislature
for accepting in principle the formation of provinces

on the linguistic basis. The Conference also thanked

the Madras Government for recommending theformation
of the Andhra Province to the Secretary of State for

India. The other significant resolution was that "In the

areas of Mysore, Hyderabad and Orissa where there is

a large Andhra / population, the introduction of Kanarese,

Urdu, Onya as the medium of instruction and the abscence

of provision for teaching Telugu will practically lead to

the Andhras forgetting their mother tongue. So also m
the Tamil Districts where there is a large Andhra population,

the absence of facilities for teaching Telugu will lead

to the same result. Therefore the conference requested

the Madras Government and Governments of Hyderabad, Mysore

and Orissato create facilities for making Telugu the

medium of instruction for Andhras and also make provision

for the teaching of Telugu as an optional language m areas

 91

where the Andhras are not less than 20 percent".1 2 The

3 4

conference also passed a resolution empowering the Mahasabha

President to meet the Secretary of State and present

demand for the Andhra Province m person.

The Desa seva, a weekly, expressed the opinion that the

Andhra Province was as essential to Andhras as Responsible
Government was to Indians. p With this aim m view the

Andhra leaders continued their efforts for achieving the

Andhra Province^ But the All India Congress Working Committee

warned them by saying such an agitation for a separate

Andhra Province should be postponed till the achievement

of Swaraj as the attainment of Poorna Swaraj and the

creation of Andhra Province were not antoganistic to

each other. They were parts of the same movement Jfcue,' the

policy of the Congress was clearly in favour of the formation

of the linguistic1 provinces. 4 The Congress Working Committee

1. Proceedings of the Andhra Mahasabha, for the year 1938 and

History of Andhra Movement, vol.II, Op.Cit., pp.134-135-
2. Selected extracts from the Confidential Newspaper Reports
for the month of August 1933. Also G.O.No.8 of 1933 of
Public Department, Government of Madras.
3. Sundarayya, Puchalapalli, Andhra Rashtra Nirmanam: English-
samarajya Vadula Kutra, Praja Sakti Pracharnalayam,
Bezwada, 1946, p.23.
4. To some extent the Congress had given effect to the
principle m its own Constitution by the formation of
Andhra, Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujrat so far
as the Congress organisation was concerned.
/
 92

Resolution of 1938 supported the cause by saying that as

soon as the Congress got power m its hands it wzmld

tackle the issue as part of the futurescheme of the

Government of India. It called upon the people to desist

from any further agitation as it might divert the attention

from the mam issue before the country. This had icon

done by the Working Committee due to the following reasons:

1. The Congress lacks sufficient power to tackle the

question immediately.

2. It said that for the time being at any rate the

federal question should receive preference to the local

or provincial affairs.

3. It called upon the Provinces to desist from any

further agitation which the Working Committee feare might

divert the attention from the main issue.

In other words the resolution stated thatAndhras,

or any others should wait until the federal question

1
was settled.

1. Goshti, vol.IV, No.1, Bahudhanya, Aswayujam, October, 1938,

pp.1-2.
 93

The succeeding 21st session of the Andhra Mahasabha

was held at Guntur on 26th and 27th August, 1939. It
1
was presided over by Anantasayanam Ayyangar. He suggested
m his presidential address that there should be a committee
for ameliorating the grievances of the Andhras abroad
also and should help the Andhras in native States also to
attain their political independence. An interesting

development in this session was that the elder leaders

3
had to bow to the wishes of the young leaders. The pressure
from the younger sections, really the more enhusiastic
sections was becoming more and more irresistible. 4

The annual session for the year 1940 did not take

place as most of the elderly leaders including the President

and General Secretary of the Andhra Mahasabha were m

the jail for the Congress cause. Therefore, the 22nd
session of the Andhra Mahasabha was held at Visakhapatnam
on 22nd and 23rd November, 1941. It was presided over by

1. Anantasayanam Ayyangar was a member of the Central

Assembly in 1939-
2. Sree Sadhana, 2 September, 1939.
3- The Andhra Patrika, 30 August, 1939.
4. Andhra Pradesh State Archives, G.V.Subba Rao, Personal
Collections, vol.3, p.138.
 94

Maharaja Kumar Sir Vijaya of Vxzxanagaram. The President

in his address told the audience that "The British Government
frankly fear that the Andhras are too loyal to the Congress
to play the British game and they do not want another
Congress or Pro-Congress Province". The President further

observed that "m the past the Andhra Ministers, Legislators

and other high-placed persons did not bring sufficient

pressure on the all important question of creating a separate
province for Andhras. Our spokesmen at the Round Table
\ ,
Conference should have driven house the advantage with

all emphasis. It is a pity that we had thus lost a grand

2
opportunity".

The Visakhapatnam session was a land mark under

Sir Vijaya's presidency. Most of the top-leaders of the

Congress were present at this session. A new Standing

Committee was constituted. It achieved a complete unanimity

on the main issue of a separate province.It formulated

the major administrative needs of Andhras including a

separate Andhra Budget, execution of the Tungabhaira

and other irrigation projects, reuniting the Ceded Districts

1. History of Andhra Movement, vol.II, Op.Cit., p.192.

2. Ibid., p.196.
 95

for purposes of the Andhra University jurisdiction; a

separate High Court, a Co-operative Bank, Endowments

Board, S.S.L.C. Board etc., and a proportionate share for

Andhras m all the existing colleges and services unml

a separate province was created for Andhras. A new constitu­

tion was adopted for the first time in the History of

1
Andhra Mahasabha.

Among the other achievements of the Visakhapatlam

session were the creation of:

1. Andhras Abroad Department

2. Andhra Industrial Board

j ■V

3. Andhra History Committee , ^f

' 't
4. Andhra Good-Will Mission for Other Provinces v - ~-’>

5. Fund Committee

6. Propaganda Committee

7. Working Committee

There was no follow up action on most of these decisions.

However, m respect of the mam issue of a separate province

Sir Vijaya interviewed the Madras Governor twice; met

1. Goshti, Main trends m the Andhra Movement, vol.VI, No.5*

April 1943, pp.82-92.
 96

Gandhiji and several members of the Governor General's

Executive Council; and gave a copy of the Andhra Memorardum
to Sir Stafford Cripps. And his interview with the agent of

the M & S.M.Railway and his special letters to the Maharajah

of Parlakimidi and theB.N. Railway Agent regarding -the

grievances of Andhras m those areas were the land marks

in the annals of the Mahasabha history. The appointment of
an Andhra representative on the Indian National Defence

Council where there was none earlier was the result of

i
representations made by the Mahasabha President.

The 23rd session of the Andhra Mahasabha plamed

to be held at Rajahmundry early m 1943 was not held
0
owing to a ban order given by the Madras Governmeit.

Eventually, the session was held at Bellary on the 23rd

and 24th October, 1943. It was again presided by air

Vijaya.He tried sincerely to bring a uniform course of

action for the early realisation of the Andhra Province.

1. Goshti, vol.VI, No.5, April 1943, P.89.

2. The conference was banned due to a hitch between the Madras
Government and the President elect Sir Vijaya. Further it
was not only a war-period but the Quit India Movement was
also at its height.
 97

However, the later events under the aegis of the Mahasabha

1
were not significant enough in terms of achievements.

Towards the end of 1943, the Mahasabha was divided

in to two groups on ideological differences. There were two

Working Committee. Misunderstandings between the Working

President and the Secretary, between the Secretary and

some of the members of the Working Committee led to several
controversies. Consequently a League of Linguistic Provinces

with head quarters at Vijayawada was formed.

A special conference of the Andhra Mahasabha was

held at Guntur m April 1947. It was presided over by

Kumar Raj' ah of Vuyyur. Fiery speeches were delivered

and ultimately a direction wa's given to the Andhra members

of the Legislatures to withdraw their membership, which of

course was not heeded.

\
. The twenty-fifth session of the Mahasabha, the last
Conference was held again at Guntur on 13th and 14th

January, 1951 under the presidentship of G.Harisarvothama Rao.

It met under a spirit of despair as there as no likely hood

1. Goshti, vol.XIX, No.7, October 1964.

/*
 98

of settling the issue of a separate province m the near

future. In his presidential address Harisarvothama Rao

said that "there are some friends who think that, once an

Andhra Province is formed, the Mahasabha should be dissolved.

.... But the Mahasabha should live and stay for ever.

A separate province is but one of the objects of the

Mahasabha. An all round advancement of the Andhra people
is not a lesser objective. Synthesising and supporting

all associations m Andradesh which are not based on

communal or religious politics will be the main task of

the Mahasabha hereafter. And such a programme will make the

Mhasabha a permanent feature in our public life.... Just

as we have all worked together on this platform, irrespective

of any caste or religion or political differences in the

past, I am hoping that we shall be able to work unitedly

through the Mahasabha for the day when the Mahasabha
\

will become the symbol of unity among all the Andhras. I

need hardly add that, to the best of my ability, I shall

be ever prepared to serve m such a cause".1

A number of causes were attributed for not achieving

the Andhra Province at this stage. Among them, it was argued

1. Proceedings of the 25th session of the Andhra Mahasabha

held at Guntur from 13 to 14 January, 1951.

 99

that the main reason for delay m achieving the Andhra

Province was due to the total dependance on the Congress

instead of carrying the Movement independently. Prom
the beginning
i
every effort for -
the Andhra Province was
• i

looked upon as a hurdle to the Congress. The Andhra

Mahasabha leaders did not realise that a separate Andhra

2
Province could be achieved without the help of the Congress.
I *

Further, it was also'felt that because of their participation

in the national struggle for freedom and the consequent
boycott of the Simon Commission by the Andhras forfeited

the good-will' of the British Government. It must also be

admitte4 that the demand for a separate province was not

supported by the Madras ministers although there were

three Andhra Prime Ministers m the Madras Presidency

during this period.

The dual loyality of the Andhra Congress leaders for

the Congress and the Andhra Mahasabha came in the way

of progress of the Andhra Movement. Further, the Congress

leaders of different groups used the Andhra Province

issue to level allegations one against the other with the

i

1. Venkateswara Rao, Nanduri, Andhra Viplavam, Venkateswara

■ & Co., Guntur, 1946, p.22.
2. Ibid., p.22.
3- Pattabhi Sitaramayya, The Indian Express, 15 November, 1937.

I
 100

1
Congress High Command. Some High level Government Officials

and the Tamil Capitalists in general were against the

creation of the Andhra Province and its movement. This was
attributed to the Tamil people. On the other hand the
British administration tried to increase the differences

and saw that Andhra Province was not formed. p

In 1938 when the Madras Assembly passed a resolution

for the creation of an Andhra Province, the then Governor

Lord Erskine wrote to the Secretary of State for India

stating that it would result in blood shed and the Secretary

of State for India shelved it.

In those days, there was a feeling that Pattabhi

Sitaramayya did not take enough of trouble to convince

the Congress Working Committee on the issue of Andhra

Province issue. 4

It was anticipated m the early forty's that the

British Government would sanction the Andhra Province

1. Venkateswara Rao, Nanduri, Andhra Viplavam, Op.Cit., p.28.

2. Sundarayya, Puchalapalli, Andhra Rashtra Nirmanam,
Op.Cit. , p.7.
3. Ibid.
4. Venkateswara Rao, Nanduri, Andhra Viplavam, Op.Cit., p.28.
 101

without delay after the Second World War, which again

proved to be a great disappointment and a false anticipation.1 2

The idea of an Andhra Province was not seriously

pursued for many years by the leaders owing to absorbing

political pre-occupations, notwithstanding that the Congress
had definitely espoused the idea of linguistic provinces.
The real difficulty m the matter of the demand for an
Andhra Province was lack of concerted action on the

part of Andhras as well as Rayalaseema people with the

2
support of all sections.

1. Venkateswara Rao, Nanduri, Andhra Viplavam, Op.Cit., p.6l.

2. The Hindu, 15 November, 1937-