NO ABDICATION IN INDIA

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 19 August 1933, Page 11

NO ABDICATION IN INDIA

“J)OES tlic White Paper policy of the Government mean our abdication in India?” Sir Alfred If. Watson, until recently editor of the ‘ ‘S-tates-man,” of Calcutta, answers tliiis question in the “Daily Telegraph,” He says: “Emphatically it does not. If it did, I should be the first to say that all pa’St. pledge's and promises to the Indiaiii people, whether in Royal proclamations or in declarations by Viceroys, Secretaries' of State, or Ministers in the British Parliament, must be allowed to go by 'the board. For the retention of India is vital to the Empire. But it is merely foolish to apply! tire word ‘ abdication’ to a Oomstiltut.i'on under which the Viceroy and)

Plea for British Empire Unity

GovOrnon-Goncra 1 of India will be appointed by the King, will ha.ve under his direct control all matters relating to defence, external affairs, and oeclGSia'st.ieal administration, and wifT be given a ‘special .responsibility,’ enabling him to over-rule his Ministers where the -tranquillity of tlie State, its financial -stability and cired.it, tlve interests of minorities, discrimination- in commerce, and many other matters aire concerned.

“This ‘special responsibility’ will be in reserve, but its existence maintains the 'supreme control of the King and Parliament over all Indian affairs of the first importance. That is the reverse of abdication.”