THE MONTAGU-CHELMSFORD REFORM SCHEME. [To TEE Eynon or see "
Sreceseon.")
Ste,—The complimentary dinner to Lord Sinha at the Savoy Hotel on March 7th formed the occasion for a further official advertisement of the Montagu-Chelmsford scheme of Indian Constitutional reform, and for an attack by H.H. the Maharaja of Bikanir upon Lord Sydenham and the Inds-British Assoeia- lion. According to the Maharaja, the sins of Lord Sydenham end the Association with which he in identified aro threefold- ries the conduct of an anti-reform campaign, the attempt to arouse the fears of the British public as to the internal con- dition of India, and the dissemination of misstatements as to the attitude towards reform of those "souls made of fire and children of the sun" to whose ranks the Maharaja of Bikanir elnims to belong.
There is nothing in the literature isoucd by the ludo-British emiation to show that this body is opposed to reform in lndia. On the contrary, it is prepared to welcome any cautious constitutional advance, designed for the general welfare of India and not based solely on the desire to appease a rather troublesome agitation. Its objections are chiefly directed Against certain features of the Montagu-Chelmsford scheme, such as the Provincial "Dierchy," the ignoring of the European and non-Brahmin populations, and the rapid extinc- tion of the British element in the public services, which are likely to render the scheme a costly -and dangerous failure. Lord Sydenham and his colleagues err at any rate in good company; for it is an open secret that most, if not all, of the Provincial Governments in India have declared themselves flatly opposed to. the " Diarchy " with its reserved and trans- ferred services, while the published accounts of the views held by the Indian Civil Service in Madras and other parts of India Appear to support the opinion of Lord Sydenham and other critics rather than the platitudes of the Secretary of State regarding the glorious future of a doomed err
So far As the charge of exciting public alarm is concerned, it does not appear that Lord Sydenham and his Association have done more than call attention to facts or circumstances in India which otherwise ran the risk of total suppression. The cablegrams from India have for months been most carefully watched and censored; and those who care more for the main- tenance of law and order in India than for experiments in democracy in a country whose social system renders democracy impossible are certainly justified in inquiring why such docu- ments as the Res:lett Committee's Report were so long with- held from the public in England, and why information of serious Hindu-]Cusalman rioting, of murders of Musalman revenue officers. and of serious politico-economic disturbances in the South of India, should be barely touched upon or remain altogether unnoticed in the Press. An Anarchist conspiracy in Bengal, backed by German money, may seem to the Maharaja of Bikanir to have little bearing upon the general question of giving wider political powers to Indians; but the public in England, who are to be asked to decide the question of the future Constitution of India, have a right to be told all facts end circumstances which bear in any degree upon the political situation. Any uttempt to suppress such facts throws very unpleasant doubts upon the sincerity of those who support the Secretary of Stand and his schemes. Lord Sydenliam's chief offence in the eyes of those-who are pouring benedictions upon the Montagu-Chelmsford proposals is that he has insisted upon the shadows as well as the sunlight being included in the pic- ture of India which is presented by the authorities to an ignorant public in this country.
Lastly, in reference to the attitudeof the Princes of India, the Maharaja's speech itself appears to conflict with his statement that Indian Princes belong to no political parties. If this is a fact, why does the Maharaja of Bikanir permithimself to act as the mouthpiece of a political attack upon Lord Sydenham and his supporters in connexion with the future Constitution of British India? With the exception of a sentence regarding the Maharaja of Petiole, which appears in Sir John Hewett's criticism of the Reform edam°, there is no ground for the Maharaja of Bikanir's statement that Lord Sydenham and his colleagues have constantly alleged that the Princes of India are hostile to reform. 'Uncertified by any proof or illuStration, the statement must be characterized as an instance of Oriental hyperbole. It seems primd facie unlikely that Lord Sydenham or any one else would make a general allegation of this character without the very strongest oral or written evidence to support it, know- Mg full well that an official arnenti by the Princes under the auspices of the Government of India would follow almost immediately, and that the 2rinces as a body would not be likely, considering their loyalty, position, and interest's, to give public expression to opinions antagonistic to those of the Secre- tary of State and the Viceroy. The Indian Princes are in some- what the some position as the Indian Civil Service. The latter may object privately to details of the Reform scheme or consider this or that provision inadvisable, but their published opinions most involve complete acceptance of the proposals of their superiors. Tho only persons in India who are permitted to express their opinion with the fullest freedom are the native politicians, who, pace their latest evangelist, the Maharaja of Bikanir, convey an entirely false picture of the condition and
desires of India.—I am, Sir, &c., FAIIJDA13. [Wo still maintain our opinion that it would be unwise to embark upon the troubled sea of the Montagu-Chelmsford scheme without an experiment If the native Princes are eager to see the Indian Government democratized on the lines of the Report, why should not one of them—for example, the Maharaja of Bikanir—offer to apply the new system, with such alterations in detail as may be required, to his own dominions? If after, say, six or seven years' trial all was well, we should be on firm ground, and could proceed to reform the rest of India. Que Messieurs Lea Maharajas cemmcnce,et.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
