The Evening Star FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1930. THE INDIAN CONFERENCE.

Evening Star, Issue 20635, 7 November 1930, Page 8

The Evening Star FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1930. THE INDIAN CONFERENCE.

A crop of rumours is tho natural precursor to any momentous conference. The Round Table Conference on India, which begins in. St. James’s Palace next week, is no exception to the rule. The report is being disseminated that the Indian delegates have only to ask and receive. It is claimed that Lord Irwin’s speeches referring to dominion status commit Great Britain to conceding whatever tho con 9 enco unanimously demands. We have not gathered that from the speeches. The speech ot the Viceroy which followed publication of the Simon Report should bo conclusive on that aspect. The Simon Report, he said, was a weighty contribution to a most difficult problem, blit “the Simon Commission itself had not desired to anticipate the decision of tho Government, which must be reached after the Round Table Con ferenco.” That could not mean that the Government was surrendering all responsibility for a decision. The purpose of the conference is to frame proposals for a Constitution for India. It is w’orth remembering that Great Britain has a Constitution. As that works, the final decision of this issue will be ifiade by the British Parliament. There is only one qualification to be made to this statement. A Constitution which is passed by the Imperial Parliament, and ivhich does not satisfy the masses of India, will not bo likely to last long. It is a cold fact that in tho.last resort Britain can only remain in India if she preserves the goodwill of its peoples. That tho »suo will not necessarily bo decided by the Simon Commission’s report has been made clear by the British Government. That should have been always understood. There would bo qo use in holding a conference if its hands were to be tied entirely by the commission’s report. The report will merely be the most important body of evidence which the representatives of India will have before them in framing their proposals. It cannot be les* than that. Its definite suggestions for an accelerated but still gradual progress towards self-government may require amendment, but the data and the statement of conditions on which they are founded are incontrovertible. A safe plan of autonomy for India cannot proceed any faster than the slow paco of the commission’s report. Tho Labour Government may bo willing, in accordance with its theories or for the avoidance of trouble, to make far greater immediate concessions, if they are demanded, than the commission would approve. Knowledge of such a disposition on its part may have helped to prompt the. action of Sir John Simon in voting this week against the Government on a virtual motion of no coii fidence when his party had decided not to vote., But a decision of tho Government to grant anything to the mal-. contents in India would only be averting trouble with Mr Gandhi’s party to raise it up at Home. The Government would go out when its proposals were submitted to Parliament. All the indi cations are that it will go out, anyway, before many months have passed.

The outlook in Inn.a is not promising. Civil disobedience may have failed till now to do more than' a fraction of what it hoped to do, but it still requires a great deal of suppression. And each act of suppression makes a new instigation to revolt. It is difficult to see how the conference can do much good. The extreme Congress Party, which has made all the trouble in India, is not represented in it. and when it comes to proposals for self-government the delegates who are present—all except the Indian prin cs who , have self-government now- -are likely , to bo extreme enough. A great strain will at least be placed on their moderation in asking only for that which is safe for India. It is oossible, however, that the views of “ rhoderatc ” Indians may havo been exaggerated through a difference in meaning attached to “ dominion status ” in India and in Great Britain. Dominion status, which they are said to want immediately, “with safeguards regarding defence (including

the maintenance of the British Army), foreign relations, finance, and the preservation of tho interests of tho minority,” would not be understood as such in any dominion of the Crown. The proposal of the Simon Commission was that the next step forward should bo complete autonomy, including responsibility for law and order, in the provinces, while a strong Government was to be maintained by Great Britain at the centre, subject to such influence as could be brought to bear upon it by a large Legislative Assembly elected by the Provincial Legislatures. An objection to this, from some British quarters, has been that it is not possible to combine complete responsible government in the provinces with autocracy at tho centre, however benevolent. The Government of India, say these critics, when faced by some 250 members representative of Legislative Councils which wore themselves fully responsible for provincial government, instead of being strong, would be so weak that it could only acquire authority by itself becoming responsible to the Legislature. It is not by any single conference that the problem of India’s future Government is likoly to be solved.