INDIAN DEADLOCK

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 37, 23 November 1940, Page 5

INDIAN DEADLOCK

CLAIM BY CONGRESS REJECTED.

BRITISH POLICY REVIEWED.

SECRETARY OF STATE SPEAKS.

(United Press Association —Copyright.) LONDON, November 21.

-Speaking in London to-day, the Secretai’y of State for India (Mr L. S. Amery) dealt exhaustively with the genesis of the problems standing in the way of Indian unity. He outlined the structure of Imperial India which, Jle said, under an admittedly bureaucratic system of government had imposed the British conception of the reign of law on a great continent with 350,000,000 human beings of many races and creeds. Although it was then impossible; to give India British political institutions Mr Amery contended the eventual introduction of them was made inevitable by the universal teaching of the English language, which Lord Macaulay had initiated. English education in India, he foresaw, would lead some day to a demand for English institutions. Mr Amery traced the history of these demands. He recalled British policy in relation to them as evidenced by the Minto-Morley talks in 1905 and the Montagu-Chelmsford Declaration in 1916. ' /

He also traced the' origin of the Congress Party, and pointed out that its claim to represent all India was becoming less and less acceptable to the bulk of Moslem opinion. The AllIndia Moslem League had been founded in 1906.

Mr Amery .reminded his audience that there were two India's British India and the Indian States. The Simon Commission had come to the definite conclusion that the creation of a self-governing - Dominion -in - British India was impossible. The commission, therefore, had .expressed, the opinion that ah All-India federation was the only solution.. At the same, time, it reported that the provinces were ripe l for ifuljl responsible self-government.; The commission’s findings had been dealt with by the round-table conference and the joint select parliamentary committee, from the deliberations of which the India Act of 1935 had eventuated. Responsible parliamentary! government had been given to the provinces, of British India respecting all subjects save defence and foreign policy, which remained under the Viceroy’s direct cpntrol. Congress had denounced the act, hut accepted the responsibility of taking office in seven out of the 11 provinces. Discussing the federal provisions, of the act, Mr Amery said that experience had shown the necessity of considerable modification of ! them and even of fundamental reconstruction. Congress, however, had rejected the federal provisions and demanded that a. new constitution be framed for India with a Constituent Assembly based on universal suffrage all over India, including the Indian States. Moslem Objection. Mr Amery said that the Moslem objection to the act —that power would always he put into the hands of the Hindu majority was infinitely stronger against any kind of const!; tution emerging from a Congress-con-trolled Constituent Assembly. The Moslems’ answer to the Congress demand was that they would sooner go outside India and ,set up independent states composed of the north-western and north-eastern provinces in which they were in a majority. The princes were also profoundly affected by the Congress attitude, and in the last few years had refused to join any India constituted on Congress lines. The constitutional deadlock to-day was not between a. consentient Indian national movement asking for freedom and a British Government reluctant to surrender its authority, but between the main elements of India’s own national life, The problem was not how to hasten on the devolution of that authority to , willing Indian hands, hut how to find a constitutional solution which would preserve in some practical degree at least the unity of India and avert a process of internal disintegration to. ( , which, jt,.might he impossible to set. a .’limit,- and which would certainly put an end to all hopes . of.. real democracy .and real socia) progress. , “The answer* jp -the problem is in the first instance at .any rate' for the Indians themselves to .provide,” Mr Amery said. Neither were the reservations on defence and foreign policy imposed by British reluctance to surrender control, but by India’s own external interest, hob for inernal peace and external security. Britain had built up in India a powerful military system based mainly on the Indian Army, hitherto, mainly officered and directed by British officers, together with a considerable force of British troops. Even these could not hope to defend India against aggression from Russia or, Japan without reinforcements. from the rest of the Empire. If India were declared independent to-morrow she could only gradually, over a period of years, dispense with outside support of iier defensive structure. Only by growth of India’s policy to provide for her own defence can she forego at any rate some measure of interlocking between British and Indian foreign and military policy.

FINANCE BILL ENACTED. VICEROY EXERCISES POWERS. DELHI, November 21. The Viceroy (the Marquess Linlithgow) has enacted the Finance Bill, which was rejected by the Indian Legislative Assembly by 55 votes to 53.

The Viceroy may, with the assent of his Majesty signified, after copies of the proposed enactment have been laid

before both Houses of the British Parliament, enact measures essential for the safety, tranquillity or interests of British India, or any part thereof, against the wish of the Council of State of the House of Assembly. The Finance Bill, which has now been enacted was presented to the House of Assembly on November 5. It provided for a 25 per cent, increase on all income taxes and also increased postage, telegraph, and telephone charges, yielding an* additional £4,500,000 a- year. The debate on the Bill lasted several days. Members of the Congress Party voted against the proposals and' greeted the result with cries of “Resign!” The Moslem League refrained fa\om voting.