Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAR. 13, 1935. THE INDIAN PRINCES.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 89, 13 March 1935, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAR. 13, 1935. THE INDIAN PRINCES.

Tins personal memorandum on the India Bill which has been submitted to the Viceroy by three of the Indian Princes, in which is emphasised the “necessity for making- changes in the Bill as suggested by the recent meeting of Princes and State Ministers at Bombay,” tends to confirm the serious view taken in some quarters of the resolution passed at this meeting. This surprising development was the announcement that the present form of the proposals embodied in the India Bill “cannot be regarded as acceptable to the Indian States.” "While the Indian Princes did not accept the Government’s programme m its entirety, it was understood, even though complete opinion was being reserved until the Bill had been published, that the proposals as enumerated at the Round Tabic Conferences were generally acceptable. The mover of the resolution was the Maharaja of Patiala, one of the three Princes who have made known to the Viceroy the substance of their disagreement with the Bill. The measure provides that the Princes may adhere to the new Constitution, but it will not come into operation until it is supported by rulers representing- not less than half the total population of all the States, and entitled to at least fill half the seats specially provided in the Federal Upper House. The native States comprise about twofifths of India, and two of them, Hyderabad and Kashmir, are each as large as England and Scotland put together. Others are only a few acres in area. The populations range from fourteen millions down to a matter of several hundred only, and the revenues from £3,000,000 to £3. The Simon Commission, in its monumental report, quoted the statement of Lord Irwin that in “any proposals it was essential, on every ground of policy and equity, to carry 'the free assent of the ruling Princes, and that any suggestion that treaty rights which the Princes are accustomed to regard as sacrosanct can be lightly set aside is only calculated to postpone the solution we seek.” The Butler Committee earlier, in 1928, had emphasised the necessity for great caution in dealing with a “body so heterogeneous as the Indian Princes, so conservative, so sensitive, so tenacious of internal sovereignty.” The States are under the suzerainty of Britain and the rulers have the King’s assurance that "the pledge of liis grandmother, Queen Victoria, whereby “all treaties and engagements ma.de with them or by the authority of the Honourable East India Company . ... will be scrupulously observed,” will be maintained. In such manner the privileges, rights, and dignities of the Princes are in no way unimpaired. It is asserted now, on behalf of the Princes, that the British Government has not kept to the strict line of agreement on fundamental points such as the powers of the Governor-General for federating the States and the authority of the new Federal Government of India with reference to their treaty privileges. These are important points, for the Princes’ is an autocratic rule, conservative and backward when measured by "Western standards; very few, in fact, of tlie States are progressively administered. Sir Samuel lioare stated in Parliament, when the subject was vigorously debated, that points raised by the Princes were matters of detail, but there remains the all important fact that if the Princes refuse to enter the Federation they cannot be compelled to do so. This is only one of the difficult problems facing the framing of the new Constitution. The people of the States know

very little if anything at all of responsible government, and their representatives in the event of Federation would be the nominees of their rulers. In other words, autocracy and democracy are to be asked to combine in a unified regime, in which, it is presumed, the British provinces and the States will work together, with the Princes retaining their treaty rights. There are other problems, all of which make the task of applying a democratic Constitution to India one of the most difficult to undertake.