Formation of the Indian National Congress and the Moderate Phase

By the 1880s, educated Indians across the country were ready for a bigger platform. Regional organisations had shown that political action was possible, but none of them could unite Indians beyond their own cities and provinces. The question was not whether a national body would emerge, but who would build it and why. The story of how the Indian National Congress actually came into being in 1885 is itself a matter of historical debate, with two rival theories offering very different answers.

Two Competing Theories: Who Really Founded the Congress?

The Safety Valve Theory

This theory suggests that the Congress was not truly an Indian creation at all. Here is how the argument goes:

A figure named Lord Wutenburg claimed that a secret document existed containing correspondence between Lord Dufferin (the Governor-General and Viceroy of India from 1884 to 1888) and Allan Octavian Hume (a retired officer of the Indian Civil Service). Based on this claimed document and related developments, a theory took shape: Congress was founded by the British themselves to protect their economic, political, and cultural interests in India. The idea was that giving Indians a controlled space to air their complaints would prevent frustrations from boiling over into something more dangerous, like a revolt.

Later, Lala Lajpat Rai gave this theory its famous name: the “Safety Valve” theory. The image is telling. Just as a safety valve lets off steam before a boiler explodes, the Congress was supposedly created to let Indians vent their grievances harmlessly, keeping the Empire safe.

But there is a crucial problem with this theory: the secret document on which it rests has never been found. No historian has been able to produce it.

The Nationalist Theory

Indian nationalists, both before and after Independence, firmly rejected the Safety Valve explanation. Their counter-arguments were grounded in documented facts:

Political organisations already existed. Bodies like the Bombay Association, the Madras Native Association, and the Indian Association had been operating in various parts of India through the 1860s, 1870s, and 1880s. The political ground was already being prepared.
A network of leaders was already in contact. The heads of these organisations regularly met Dadabhai Naoroji in London and A.O. Hume in India. They exchanged ideas and gradually came to feel the need for a single, all-India political organisation. This was a step-by-step, organic process, not a sudden plot.
English help was sought deliberately, not imposed. Indian nationalists knew that having a few Englishmen involved would be useful. People like Hume were close to the government and understood how the administration worked. Their presence would also keep British authorities from becoming suspicious about the organisation’s intentions. In the Nationalist reading, Congress was founded by Indians with the help of the British, not by the British.

The Nationalist theory draws its strongest support from the simple fact that the alleged secret document has never turned up.

What Did the Early Congress Want to Achieve?

The objectives that the newly formed INC set for itself tell us a lot about the mindset of its early leaders. They were not firebrands seeking revolution; they were moderate reformers who believed in working within the system:

Building bridges among nationalists — Bringing together political workers from different parts of the country and promoting friendly relations among them. The goal was to replace regional isolation with national cooperation.
Putting popular demands on the record — Collecting and formulating the demands of the Indian people and presenting them formally before the government. This gave Indian grievances a structured, official voice.
Shaping public opinion — Mobilising the educated public around national issues so that the government could not dismiss Indian concerns as the complaints of a few individuals.
Fostering national unity — Developing and strengthening the feeling that Indians, despite their many differences in language, religion, and region, were one nation with shared interests.

The Specific Demands of Early Congress

When the Congress actually put forward its demands, the list was practical and reformist. These were not calls for revolution but requests for specific changes that would make the colonial system fairer for Indians:

Expansion and reform of the Legislative Council — Giving Indians more representation in the bodies that made laws affecting their lives.
Fair access to civil services — Holding the Indian Civil Service (ICS) examination simultaneously in England and in India, so that Indian candidates would not have to travel abroad at great expense just to sit for the exam.
Re-imposition of import duties on cotton goods — British free-trade policies had removed tariffs on imported cloth, flooding Indian markets with cheap British textiles and destroying local weavers. Congress wanted those protective duties brought back.
Reduction of military expenditure — A huge share of Indian revenue was being spent on maintaining the British Indian army. Congress argued that this money could be better used for the welfare of Indian people.
Spread of education — Both technical and general education needed to expand if Indians were to improve their economic condition and participate meaningfully in governance.
Separation of judiciary from executive — When the same officials made laws and judged cases, there was no check on their power. Congress demanded that the judicial and executive branches be kept separate, which is a basic principle of fair governance.

How the Moderates Operated: The Nature of the Movement

The early Congress leaders chose a very particular style of political action that defined the entire moderate phase:

Speeches, meetings, and resolutions — They organised gatherings where leaders would speak about national issues and pass formal resolutions stating their positions.
Persuasion through petitions and writing — Instead of confrontation, they relied on prayers, petitions, newspaper articles, and written representations to convince the British government to change its ways. They believed that reasoned argument would eventually win over reasonable rulers.
Strictly constitutional methods — They stayed firmly within the law. There was no talk of boycotts, strikes, mass movements, or any form of direct action. They trusted the system and tried to work through it.
Limited to the educated urban class — The moderates did not try to mobilise farmers, workers, or the rural population. Their political activity was confined to the educated classes in the cities, people who could read, write, and engage with the colonial administration in English.

How the British Responded

The British government’s reaction to the growing nationalist movement went through a clear pattern:

Hostile from the start — Contrary to any notion that the British welcomed Congress, the government was antagonistic toward nationalist forces from the very beginning.
Initial miscalculation — The authorities expected that Congress would confine itself to politely criticising specific policies, which they could safely ignore.
Growing alarm — When nationalist leaders began actively spreading their message through public meetings and pamphlets, reaching wider audiences, the government grew uneasy. This was more than the harmless debating club they had anticipated.
Lord Dufferin’s dismissal — Dufferin tried to undermine the Congress by calling it a political organisation representing a “Microscopic Minority.” By framing Congress as the voice of a tiny, unrepresentative group, he hoped to strip it of legitimacy.
Curzon’s hostility — Lord Curzon, who became Viceroy later, went further. He openly wished to see Congress on its death bed. His aggressive attitude (which would later lead to the Partition of Bengal in 1905) showed that the British establishment took the nationalist threat seriously even as they publicly belittled it.

Why the INC Was India’s First True National Political Organisation

What set the Indian National Congress apart from every political body that came before it? Several features made it genuinely national in a way no predecessor had managed:

Open membership across all communities — Anyone could join, regardless of their religion, caste, language, or region. There were no barriers to entry based on identity.
Representation of all races, creeds, and communities — Unlike the predecessor bodies that were dominated by particular groups (usually wealthy zamindars from one region), Congress drew participation from across the spectrum.
Contributions from all communities — Members from every community worked for the development and growth of the organisation. It was not the project of any single group.
An all-India perspective — Congress tackled the country’s problems from a national point of view, not a regional one. Whether the issue was civil service reform, cotton duties, or military spending, it was framed as an Indian concern, not a Bengal or Bombay concern.
Initially represented by few, but represented for all — Yes, the active membership in the early years was small, drawn mainly from the educated urban elite. But the intent and the structure were inclusive. The Congress spoke for all Indians even when all Indians had not yet joined its ranks. This inclusive vision was what the regional organisations had always lacked, and it is what made the INC the starting point of a truly national freedom struggle.