The Press WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1946. Delhi and Cape Town

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24793, 6 February 1946, Page 6

The Press WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1946. Delhi and Cape Town

I Hindu, Moslem, and British mem- ! bers of the Indian Legislative As- . sembly, in rare unity, have once again censured tlje Government of India. Once again, their complaint is the same. The Government has failed, they say, to protect the interests of South Africa’s Indian population. In Natal, where the ' majority of the Union’s 250,000 | Indians are domiciled, it seems that i discrimination in property dealings i is to continue. The much-discussed

“ Pegging ” Act, now' three years old, is due to lapse next month; but fresh legislation now in prospect would renew its life. In 1943, the Government of India lodged nothing more than an “ emphatic ” protest. General Smuts's speech on the “ Pegging ” Bill had left no doubt, w r ith the dispassionate observer at least, that he introduced it unwillingly; and two of his Ministers also let it be seen that they thought it obnoxious. Delhi’s moderation was not wasted, for Cape Town agreed, in 1944, to suspend the act and to substitute for it consultative and voluntary machinery under the aegis of the Natal Provincial Council. Unhappily, that machinery broke down, the “ rabid racialism ” of Natal’s European population being the main cause. The Government of India moved then to' impose on South Africans in India the same disabilities as had been placed on Indians in South Africa, not only as to property rights but also as to entry, residence, trade acquisition, and franchise. The Central Assembly censured it then because it would go no further. To-day, still, Delhi is holding its hand. Nor is that unexpected. A campaign of reprisals can only harden this obstinate problem. Moreover, the fault does not rest on one side alone. That has usefully been emphasised by the commission set up by the -Union Government in 1944 to investigate Indian problems in Natal. It was not an all-European commission; it had Indian members as well. It published last June an interim report, in which it referred to the “ mutual animosity of * both sides ” and to “ non-co-opera-tion on the Indian side”; and it seriously deprecated the attitude of Indian politicians in India, “ because ‘ that attitude has encouraged local “ Indian leaders to make demands “ which they know to be grossly un- “ reasonable The commission saw no hope of negotiation while Indian politicians in India held this ground. It suggested, accordingly, as “ the “ only waj out of the present im- “ passe ”, that full and frank exchanges of view between South Africa and India should take place in South Africa, the Indian delegation to consist “ mostly of Indians “from India, who would have the “ opportunity of studying the prob- “ lems and learning the full facts here It is deplorable that Cape Town appears to have found the suggestion worthless.