INDIA : THE DANGERS OF DELAY
By THE RT. HON. LORD MESTON
IT is difficult to overstate the value of the work done by the Joint Committee of Parliament which is engaged in examining the proposals for a new constitution in India. For over a year it has been sitting, almost day in and day out, dealing with problems of infinite complexity, listening with patience and courtesy to evidence of every colour, and now preparing a report in which, with the best will in the world, unanimity seems hardly possible. The labour is a labour of genuine patriotism. Many of the members, such as the Primate, are very busy men ; and the strain upon them must be serious.
Rumour has it that the report of the Committee cannot be presented until October. In all the circumstances, we should perhaps be unreasonable if we expected it sooner : but considerable anxiety attaches to what will happen thereafter. How long will the Cabinet require to consider the proposals ? When will the Bill be intro- duced ? How tong will it take to get through both Houses ? Will it then be in a shape to allow at least provincial autonomy to come into being at once ? There are pessimists who see no prospects of the necessary legislation going through Parliament before the end of 1935, with much preliminary work still remaining to be done in India afterwards. If there is anything in such a forecast, anxiety is justifiable.
The existing constitution came much more rapidly to birth. The Montagu-Chelmsford report, from which it originated, was published in April, 1918. In the following winter, the franchise and other important subsidiary matters were handled by two committees in India ; and complete proposals came before a Joint Committee of both Houses in July, 1919. The report of that body was submitted by its chairman, Lord Selborne, along with a complete draft Bill, within four months. The Bill went to Parliament at once and became law by Christmas of the same year.
From the first publication of the Montagu-Chelmsford report until the Act of December, 1919, the interval was exactly twenty months. Fifty months have elapsed since the Simon Commission's report, which may legitimately be taken as the starting point of the present proposals, was presented in May, 1930, and there may still be a longish journey in front of the project. The comparison is disturbing, though it would be unfair to press it too far. The scope of the present scheme, involving as it does an all-India federation, is vastly wider than that of the 1919 reforms. Its intrinsic difficulties are greater : the Hindu-Moslem antagonism, for example, had not Income so acute as it is today. In the matter of time, also, Mr. Montagu's pace was not hampered .by Round Table conferences, and the evidence taken before Lord Selborne was nothing like so voluminous as that which has been heard by Lord Linlithgow and his col- leagues. All this has to be allowed for : and we must recognize at the same time that there will be little chance of making up any leeway when the Bill reaches Parliament. Its predecessor went through in six weeks ; but the House of Commons in 1919 was more accustomed to big issues and prompt decisions than is the present Chamber. There is also every probability of strong opposition in • both Houses to the Bill in principle and to many of its crucial details. Its passage may be laborious and pro- tracted.
No one would wish to scamp the consideration of a measure of such vital moment to India and the Empire. If, however, the fifty months of gestation are to stretch to sixty months or more, the consequences may be grave. It is never wise to be certain of the fate of important legislation which is not introduced until a Parliament has run more than half its course. At the moment, it is true, no reason exists to apprehend that the present Parliament will not last its allotted span, up to .October, 1936: but the unfore3een has a habit of happening, and if for any reason the Government had to go to the country before the India Bill became law, regrettable sequels would be certain. The future of India is far too delicate an issue for platform " slogans," and far too compli- cated to be fully understood by the mass of the electorate. So, it may be retorted, are Protection and other great controversies on which the will of the people has been sought in the past. The cases, however, are not parallel : for here we should have every foolish speech, every blundering mis-statement in an election address, trum- peted through India by the Congress party as evidence of British hostility and bad faith. Infinite mischief might be done in this way. .
For mischief we need not await a general election. It may break out at any time. Lord Willingdon, by courageous statesmanship, has secured a calm atmosphere for the reception of the reforms : but he would be the last to claim that he can continue to preserve the peace if the reforms arc much longer delayed. Ordinances have quieted the more vicious section of the extremist poli- ticians, and they have just succeeded, but no more, in curbing terrorism. But the classes on whose co-operation we depend in the future have been kept quiet, not by ordinances, but by the expectation of being soon given their promised share in their own government. Defer this hope unduly, and you will throw many of our best friends into the arms of the extremists. Ordinances must lapse in time, and the Congress will have to be unmuzzled. Mr. Gandhi will conciliate his orthodox assailants with a new campaign of civil disobedience ; and if .there is no moderating influence reasonably active in our support, the new constitution will ultimately be launched in a very *stormy sea.
It has always been a reproach that, in the matter of political progress, our gifts to India have come too late. We were certainly too late in recognizing the spirit typified by the National Congress. We should not have waited for the war to start the advance embodied in the Act of 1919. If any further avoidable delay in dealing with the White Paper adds a third such error to our record, the result will be sheer calamity. There is still time for-the Prime Minister and Lord Linlithgow to avert it.
Previous page
