CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

Hawera Star, Volume L, 1 December 1930, Page 5

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

FEDERAL STRUCTURE TYPES

SUB COMMITTEE TO REPORT

ELEMENTS OF FEDERATION

lUnUBli Offlcial Wireieus.) RUGBY, Nov. 28. At the first lull meeting of the enlarged. federal relations committee or the Indian, conference, Mr Ramsay ia.-Donald explained that it was proposed to have a general discussion on the heads of the subjects prepared by Lord Sankey, and then to remit them to special sub-committees, for investigation of their implications and for suggestions as to methods of overcoming the difficulties. The sub-commit-tees’ reports would be considered by a committee of the whole conference. Mr MacDonald hoped that the conference would succeed in embodying its conclusions in a series of resolutions. Alter some discussion on the proposal to amend the wording of the preamble to Lord Sankey’s document to include the word Dominion, it was agreed to regard it simply as an introduction to the head's of subjects and not as a preamble defining the character of the contemplated constitution. Lord Sankey gave an exposition of the scope of head number one, “Component Elements of the Federation.” After discussion it was agreed that a sub-committee be appointed by the chairman after a consultation with the business committee to report on the types of federal structure and their component elements. It was. later announced that the subcommittee would comprise: Chairman, Lord Sankey; from the British delegation Professor Lees Smith, Lord Lothian and a Conservative delegate to be nominated; from the Indian States delegation the Nawab of Bhopal, the Maharajah of Bikaner, Akbar Hydari, Mirza, Ismail and Colonel Haksar; from tne British India delegation, Mi’ Sastri, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, Sir O. P. Ramaswami Aiyar, Mr M. R. Jayakar, Sardar Ujjal Singh, Mr M. A. Jinnah, Sir Mohommand Shafi, Mr T. F. Gavin Jones and Sultan Ahmed.

The full committee will meet in the afternoon to consider the remainder of the twelve: heads.

Addressing the committee Lord! Sankey said the first heading might seem to invite a discussioin as. for example, whether Burma should be a component unit or whether Sind should; be separated rom Bombay or what should be the position of the North-West Frontier Province. That was not the intention. It was hoped to exclude all such matters of detail until a later period, possibly after these questions had been examined by a sub-commit-tee. What was to be considered now was the theory’ of what should' he the component elements of the federation. Theoretically there was several possiilities: (lj A union of all the States on the one hand and of British India on the other, combining to make a federation ; (2) a federation oi British India on the one side and on the'other States entering singly; (3) a federation of which the component elements were each province and each State. Three things must be borne in mind-. (1) British India was at present a unitary State divided for the purpose of convenience into provinces, not a number of provinces federated to form a State; (2) there was hardly any organic connection between the States or any two or more of them; (3) there was no organic connection between the States, or any one of them, and British India. The ties, between the Governments of India and the States were the treaties and powers resulting from th doctrine of paramountcy, but the subjects of the States were not British subjects.

Other trends of the subjects for discussion under the first head and l indie ited that general discussion should be dropped.