BACKGROUNDS : II. INDIA
By H. G. RAWLINSON
TT has been the custom in Indian political circles, and to some extent among Britons and Americans, to describe the history of British rule in India as a contest between a hidebound democracy and a people struggling to be free. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lord - Hastings, the Governor-General who overthrew the Mahrattas, said in 18r8, "A time, not very remote, will arrive, when England, on sound principles of policy, will wish to relinquish the domination she has gradually and unintentionally assumed over this country, from which at present she cannot recede. In that hour it will be her proudest boast that she has used her sovereignty towards enlightening her subjects, so as to enable the native com- munities to walk alone in the paths of justice." Similarly, Sir Thomas Munro described our aim as ".so far to improve the character of our native subjects as to enable them to govern and protect themselves." But this does not necessarily imply the form of parliamentary govern- ment practised in Anglo-Saxon countries.
Up to 1909 the Government of India may be described as a benevolent autocracy. The legislative councils were purely advisory bodies ; they could influence but not alter the administration. The Viceroy's Executive Council met once a week behind closed doors, and no Indian was admitted to its deliberations. In 1909 John Morley, the Secretary of State for India, brought in a Bill for greatly enlarging the legislatures, and the elective principle was introduced. An Indian member was appointed to the Viceroy's Executive Council. But Morley, good Liberal as he was, had no illusions about the danger
of withdrawing British control. " There is, I know," he told the House of Commons, " a school of thought who say that we might wisely walk out of India, and that Indians could manage their affairs better than we can. Anyone who pictures to himself the anarchy, the bloody chaos which would follow from any such deplorable step, might shrink from that sinister decision." Meanwhile, the nationalist movement, the inevitable consequence of the introduction of western education by Lord William Cavendish-Bentinck in 1835, had made considerable headway, and there was a demand for con- stitutional government on colonial lines. The chief obstacle to this appeared to have been removed by the Lucknow Pact of 1916, when the Indian National Congress accepted the demand of the Moslem League for the recognition of separate electorates.
In 1917 the British Government announced the aim of British policy to be " the progressive realisation of responsible government in India as an integral part of the British Empire," and two years later the first steps were taken to bring this about. A great advance was made in provincial autonomy ; by the system known as dyarchy certain portfolios were transferred to Ministers responsible to the Legislatures, while vital subjects such as law and order were reserved to the Governor in Council. At the centre, the Executive remained responsible to Parliament through the Secretary of State. India became a member of the League of Nations and of the Imperial Conference. The constitution of 1919, however, still failed to satisfy nationalist aspirations, and the whole situation was re-examined by the Simon Commission in 1927. As Indians demanded a voice in framing their constitution, a series of round-table conferences were held in London in 193o, 1931 and 1932. The results of their deliberations were embodied in the Act of 1935, which made far- reaching changes. Full provincial autonomy was established. A federal government which was to include not only representatives of British India but of the States was to be set up. Dyarchy, abolished in the provinces, was to be introduced in a modified form at the Centre. The majority of the portfolios were to be held by Ministers responsible to the Legislature, but the Viceroy was to retain control of Defence and Foreign Affairs.
Fissiparous tendencies, however, remained strong. The Moslems hesitated to participate in a Centre where they would be in a minority to the Hindus ; the Congress Party refused to take part in a Government where the casting vote was in the hands of the " palace nominees " of the Princes, and the Princes were unwilling to sacrifice their sovereign powers. The consequence was .that, when the war broke out in 5939, the declaration of hostilities was not made subject to the prior assent of the Legislature, and the Indian National Con- gress, which had obtained majorities in seven out of the eleven prov- inces in the elections of 1937, withdrew their Ministries by way of protest. Lord Linlithgow was untiring in his efforts to bring the parties together, but in vain. The Indian National Congress Party declared that they would be satisfied with nothing short of complete independence ; Mr. Jinnah, the leader of the Moslem League, deman- ded Pakistan, or autonomous States in the areas in which the Moslems were in a majority. In March, 1942, when the prospects of a Japanese invasion of India seemed imminent, the British Government sent Sir Stafford Cripps to India with the offer of. a Constituent Assembly after the war to draw up a constitution within or without the British Commonwealth ; but this was rejected by the Congress. which demanded the immediate replacement of the Viceroy's Executive Council by a Cabinet responsible to the Legislature. When this was declared to be impossible in war-time, the Congress leaders threatened " open rebellion " and were interned for the period of the war.
Lord Wavell, who succeeded Lord Linlithgow in 1944, failed to form a Cabinet, as Mr. Jinnah refused to submit a list of names unless all Moslem Cabinet Ministers were members of the Moslem League, which would effectively shut out Congress Moslems. This was at once objected to by Congress. In March, 1946, the British Government sent to India a mission of three Cabinet Ministers. This Cabinet Mission, having failed to bring about an agree- ment, produced on May 16th a plan of its own. A Constituent Assembly was to be elected by the provincial Legislatures, each province being allotted a total number of seats proportionate to its populations, roughly in the ratio of one to a million, and in the meantime the work of the Central Government was to be carried on by a Cabinet chosen by the Viceroy from representatives of the major political parties. The most important feature of the scheme was a provision that provinces should be free to form groups with executives and legislatures.
The plan having been accepted (with reservations) by both parties, the Cabinet Mission departed on June 29th. Meanwhile, the elections for the Constituent Assembly were held, and resulted in an overwhelming majority for the Congress Party, which won 205 seats out of the 296 allotted to British India, and the Moslem League 73. The Viceroy made the best of an awkward situation when he asked Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, as representing the strongest political party in the country, to form an interim government, it being understood that an equal number of seats would be reserved for the Moslem League. This led to fierce resentment on the part of the Moslems. and a Direct• Action Day was declared for August 16th, which resulted in bitter fighting, especially in Calcutta, where 3,500 deaths were reported. Eventually, the League decided to come into the interim government, but a fresh dispute arose over the interpretation of the plan for grouping the provinces put forward by the Cabinet Mission. The Moslem League insisted that the decision to form a group should be made by the group as a whole ; the Congress supported the claim of each individual province to decide its own fate. This was particularly important in the case of the north-eastern area, consisting of Bengal and Assam, as Assam is a predominantly non-Moslem province, and Calcutta, the capital of Bengal, is overwhelmingly a Hindu city. Further complications arose over the, position of the Sikhs in the Punjab, and the attitude of the North-West Frontier Province. Eventually the Moslems refused to participate in the long-term scheme at all, and the Con- stituent Assembly met without representatives of the League or the States. Meanwhile, a bitter contest, almost amounting to civil war, is being waged in the North-West between supporters of the Moslem League and the Hindus, Sikhs and other minorities.
A mass transfer of population, such as effected in Europe, is out of the question in India. The only solution lies in the redrawing of provincial boundaries. The Punjab must be divided so as to give autonomy to districts where Hindus and Sikhs predominate, and the partition of Bengal must be revised—a need recognised in a recent speech by Jawaharlal Nehru. But these decisions can only be taken by Indians themselves, and the determination to fix a date for the British withdrawal will probably in the end have a salutary effect. It is doubtful whether any alien Power can effect the sweeping changes necessary to bring about the rehabilitation of Indian rural economy—the abolition of illiteracy and indebtedness and the fragmentation of land on the one hand, and the break-up of the great landed estates in the zemindari provinces on the other. But at least we can claim that the foundations have been well and truly laid. The greatest irrigation system in the world, 6o,000 miles of metalled roads, 40,000 miles of railways and upwards of 250,000 schools with some 12,000,000 scholars are not an unworthy accom- plishment during less than two centuries. During the period of transition India cannot stand alone ; she must range herself on the side of some Great Power. Ties of long association and a common culture point to England.
Previous page
