TWO COURSES OPEN

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 149, 20 March 1931, Page 9

TWO COURSES OPEN

Peace or Unrest in India IMPASSIONED APPEAL Problem Is Not Insoluble -EMWRE HELD IN TRUST” (Ree. March 19, 5.5 p.m.) British Wirdes*. Rugby, .March 18. ‘Tut up tha sword,”, said the Lord Chancellor, Lord Sankey, in an impassioned plea to the House of Lords for a policy of magnanimity in India. Speaking in the House of Lords he reviewed the Round Table Conference, its results, and its effects. “Appeal to force is the bankruptcy of statecraft,” he said. “The future of India is no longer in the melting-pot. The metal of Its new constitution is being hammered out on the anvil of public opinion. It is in the nature of things that sparks should fly, but sparks fly forgotten—the true metal remains. “We never went to India to conquer. We went there to trade. The inherited genius of our race and some fostering star have given us an Empire, but it is an Empire which we hold in trust for many creeds and nations whose classes and communities are entitled to our protection. Rightly or wrongly, we have educated Indians in Western ideals, introduced them to Western institutions, and admitted them to our councils. ‘The language of their Legislative Assembly and of the Congress itself is our mother tongue. Time after, time we have made them promises. It is too late to go back. We must go forward. It is our traditional policy and has been the secret of our success.” Work of Delegates. He said that the delegates to the Conference were not plenipotentiaries. It was their responsibility to examine facts and make suggestions. The Federal Structure Sub-Committee’s report was therefore purposely drafted so as to leave many questions open, but in his view there was no problem in India that was insoluble. After reviewing the proposals put forward by the Conference, Lord Sankey addressed himself /to the future policy. Did they, he asked, desire an India, a companion by consent, or one seething with sedition? If they chose conciliation, they would gain nearly all they wished and lose but little. If repression, the military expenditure would to up, revenue returns and trading receipts would go down, and difficulties would increase. Traditional Polley. “If. Britain’s traditional policy is pursued,” he continued, “then will follow settled government, material prosperity, and the reign of law. Finance, defence, law, and order are undoubtedly important, but I am anxious for something more than the triumphs of our trade; I am jealous for the reputation of our statesmanship. ft “It is by their moral actions, not by their material successes, that Empires are judged at the bar of public opinion • and by the verdict of history.” “Let us grant a Federal Constitution to India and let our hope be that everything in it may be so ordered and settled upon the best and surest foundations that peace and happiness, truth and justice, may flourish as abundantly in India as they have done here at Home.” Lord Peel (Conservative) said that he could not help feeling that during the last few months the Government had been too ready, he would not say, to apologise for, but not to take a stand on our position in India, which gave us rights and laid upon us duties and responsibilities. What Had Been Done. Lord Reading (Liberal), referring to the Irwin-Gandhi agreement, said that the conditions in India had very greatly improved from the moment that agreement, which was brought about by the Round Table Conference, was reached. The conference therefore had enabled peace to be declared in India. A statement, issued to-day, by the Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers’ Association and the Federation of Master Cotton Spinners’ Associations, expresses disquiet at the provision in the recent agreement between the Viceroy of India and certain political leaders by which picketing is to be regarded as a legal form of propaganda, if peacefully carried out, for economic and not political purposes. Although nominally directed against all foreign goods, the boycott had been antiBritish rather than anti-foreign, and one of the worst features was the faet that it was supported by individuals who had . extensive interests in Indian cotton texti’e industries, and who were undoubtedly profiting by it. Confidence in Viceroy. In the House of Lords, speaking in the debate on India. Lord Reading said that the Round Table Conference had definitely improved the Indian outlook by removing the mistrust and suspicions previously existing, and giving Indian politician’s concern. The speaker paid a tribute to Lord Irwin’s work, and its triumph in the agreement with Mr. Gandhi as an earnest of goodwill. Lord Passfield, replying, said that the Government, was guided entirely by Lord Irwin, in whom they had the fullest confidence. and desired the co-operation of all parties regarding India. BITTER OPPOSITION Churchill Denounces Pact "A HIDEOUS SURRENDER” (Rec. March 19, 8 p.m.) London, Mar.h 19. "You will never be able to come to terms with Gandhi,” said Mr. Winston Churchill, addressing a crowded meeting in the Albert Hall organised by the India Empire Society. “Tills surrender Is a hideous act of self-mutilation which has astounded every nation in the world." Lord Burnham, who was a member of the Simon Commission, said the Irwin-Gandhi treaty must be regarded “as a triumph for lawlessness and a masterpiece of casuistry.” .