The First World War, Khilafat, and Non-Cooperation

Khadi represented the swadeshi ideal of producing and using Indian goods rather than depending on imported cloth. Spinning and wearing it linked everyday consumption with political resistance, supported village labour, and expressed national self-respect. Therefore option A is correct. Khadi opposed dependence on foreign mills; it was not merely a military uniform and was not a government tax measure. Its significance was economic, social, and symbolic.

Urban boycott faced a practical limitation because khadi was often more expensive than mass-produced foreign cloth and was not easily affordable for poorer consumers. As a result, replacing foreign cloth completely became difficult and the pace of the boycott slowed in some towns. Option A is correct. Foreign cloth had not disappeared, government schools were not all nationalised, and lawyers did not receive permanent exemption from courts.

The Non-Cooperation Movement asked people to boycott government schools because these institutions were associated with colonial control. This boycott was not intended merely to close schools. It was accompanied by the constructive effort to establish national schools that could provide education outside official colonial institutions and encourage national values. Therefore, option A is correct. Options B, C and D do not express the movement’s educational aim.

Merchants often supported the boycott of foreign cloth because it could reduce competition from imported goods and increase demand for Indian-made products. The campaign therefore connected an economic interest with the nationalist call for swadeshi. Option A correctly explains this motivation. Option B is incorrect because merchants did not have complete control over imported cloth, while C contradicts their interests and D ignores their participation in the movement.

Gandhi argued that colonial rule was sustained not only by British officials and force but also by the cooperation of Indian subjects who used its institutions, purchased its goods or accepted its authority. If people withdrew that cooperation through peaceful boycott and self-discipline, the system would lose much of its practical support. Thus option A explains why non-cooperation was seen as a route to swaraj; the other options reject or distort this reasoning.

The movement certainly used negative measures such as the boycott of government schools, courts, titles and foreign cloth. However, it also promoted constructive alternatives: khadi, spinning, swadeshi production, national educational institutions and self-reliance. These activities aimed to build Indian capacity while challenging colonial authority. Option A is therefore correct. Option B denies the boycott, while C and D contradict the movement’s objectives and mass participation.

The correct chronology is that the First World War took place from 1914 to 1918. The Rowlatt Act was passed in 1919, and the Jallianwala Bagh massacre followed in April 1919. The Non-Cooperation Movement was formally launched in 1920 after growing anger over these developments and other issues. Therefore option A gives the correct sequence. Every other option places later events before earlier ones.

A national movement becomes more mature when it develops beyond a narrow educated or urban circle and connects different social groups through a common opposition to colonial rule. During this period, students, merchants, peasants, workers and other communities participated, although their immediate motives could differ. Option A best captures this broad, organised and inclusive character. Options B, C and D indicate limitation, loyalty or political separation rather than maturity.

The First World War sharply increased the colonial government’s military expenditure. To meet these costs, the government raised taxes, borrowed money and increased prices through wartime economic pressures. Ordinary people therefore faced a heavier financial burden, shortages and growing hardship. Option A correctly states the major effect. Options B and C are the opposite of what happened, while D is incorrect because wartime recruitment, including forced recruitment in some areas, continued rather than ending.

The governing concept is the wartime financial burden created by the First World War. Britain needed additional resources to maintain military operations, so the colonial government increased taxes and raised war loans in India. These measures transferred much of the cost to Indian people. Therefore, option B is correct; the other choices were not methods of financing the war.

The governing concept is wartime revenue collection. The First World War greatly increased government expenditure, especially on defence and military administration. To obtain additional income, the colonial government introduced or expanded taxes such as income tax. Thus, option C is correct. Rewards for peasants, scholarships and free foreign cloth were unrelated to the purpose of this tax.

The governing concept is forced military recruitment during wartime. As the First World War continued, the colonial government needed more soldiers and increased recruitment pressure in Indian villages. Many rural people were compelled or strongly pressured to join the army. Therefore, option D is correct; the other actions were not the stated wartime recruitment policy.

The governing concept is wartime inflation and its effect on living standards. During the First World War, prices of everyday goods increased, while the earnings of ordinary people did not rise at the same rate. Families therefore found food and other necessities harder to afford. Option A is correct; the remaining choices contradict the economic hardship described in the period.

The governing concept is the combined social impact of famine-like crop failure and disease. Wartime price rises, taxes and recruitment had already placed pressure on people. When crops failed and epidemics spread, food insecurity, illness and loss of livelihood became worse. Hence option A is correct; prosperity, greater popularity of colonial rule and complete abolition of revenue did not result.

The governing concept is the Rowlatt Act as a repressive measure introduced after the First World War. The Act was passed in 1919 and authorised the colonial government to use extraordinary powers against suspected political activities. Therefore, option B is correct. The years 1920, 1922 and 1930 belong to later developments in the national movement and do not mark its passage.

The governing concept is the denial of civil liberties under the Rowlatt Act. It allowed the colonial government to arrest and detain suspected political activists without a normal trial, undermining due process and justice. This is why people opposed it, making option A correct. The Act neither distributed land nor reduced taxes, and it certainly did not grant self-rule.

The governing concept is Gandhi's first major nationwide protest against colonial repression. Mahatma Gandhi organised the Rowlatt Satyagraha in 1919 to oppose the Act and defend civil liberties through satyagraha, non-violent resistance and public mobilisation. Therefore, option B is correct. The other leaders later played important roles, but they did not lead the beginning of this particular campaign.

The governing concept is the use of a peaceful hartal as part of the Rowlatt Satyagraha. On 6 April 1919, Gandhi called for a nationwide suspension of normal activities, including fasting, prayer and closing shops, to oppose the Rowlatt Act. Thus, option A is correct. The other choices either supported colonial policy or were unrelated to this protest.

The governing concept is the Jallianwala Bagh massacre and its place in the Rowlatt protest timeline. On 13 April 1919, during the Baisakhi gathering in Amritsar, General Dyer ordered troops to fire on a peaceful crowd. Therefore, option B is correct. The other dates refer neither to this incident nor to its historical setting.

The governing concept is colonial repression during the national movement. On 13 April 1919, Brigadier-General Reginald Edward Harry Dyer ordered British troops to fire on the unarmed gathering at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar. Therefore, option A is correct. Lord Curzon and Lord Mountbatten held other colonial offices, while Clive belonged to an earlier period and was not responsible for this incident.