THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1928. THE PRINCES OF INDIA.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19928, 23 April 1928, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS MONDAY, APRIL 23, 1928. THE PRINCES OF INDIA.

India is about to undergo a process of examination to determine what success has been made of the partly representative system of government now in being, and to discover whether any further instalment of the reforms authorised in 1919 can be granted. This process and the prospect that it brings are being watched carefully and anxiously by a body of rulers whose future may be greatly affected by whatever is done. The rulers of the Native States have submitted a scheme to define their future position in the constitution of India. Those who urge with enthusiasm that Britain should proceed without hesitation to the goal desired by the politicallyminded Indian, complete self-govern-ment as it exists in the Dominions of the Empire, forget that while this can be granted only to British India, there is another India which Britain cannot in honour disregard. The area of India is 1,773,000 square miles, its population some 315,000,000 people. Just over one-third of the area, and almost one-fourth of the people, are ruled' by the native Princes, whose relationship with the Empire is as a rule defined by individual treaty with the Crown, whose constitutional position relative to the reformed British India is very vaguely defined. Here is a firstclass problem, which must grow more intense if or when British India comes nearer to the independent status -for which there is much clamour, which most people believe to be inevitable with the passage of time. The Princes themselves view the outlook with what has been called "great perturbation," and everyone else must admit that their position is one for very serious, careful consideration. The status of the native Princes as rulers confirmed in this position, assured of protection against foreign attack, and required in return to keep the peace and to co-operate in various ways with the central administration, was established under the East India Company. When, after the Mutiny, the company's property was transferred to the Crown, a Royal proclamation declared what the policy toward the Native States would be. In the name of the Queen-Empress, the following promise was made:—"We shall respect the rights, dignities and honour of the Native Princes as our own; and we desire that they, as well as our own subjects, should enjoy that prosperity and that social advancement which can only be secured by internal peace and good government." That declaration contains an acknowlsdgment of the independence of the States, and a guarantee of its permanence. The Princes are the rulers within their own territories. The Government of India has steadily pursued a policy of non-intervention, has interested itself mainly in the question of succession, and has intervene# only as a last resort in the event of grave maladministration or oppression. Whenever there has been intervention, withdrawal has been effected as soon as the necessity for interference had passed. The relationship of the British Government to the States has been through political officers, generally resident in the territory. The Princes have had the.services of many British officials, but the appointment has always been a matter for the Prince himself. The troops maintained in the States are officered by Indians, but are inspected by a regular cadre of British officers. They have fought valiantly for thd Empire, notably in the Great War, but, as consistent with the independence of the States, their services have always been voluntarily offered.

With their position toward the Empire and the Crown so well and satisfactorily denned, the Indian States have in the main remained tranquilly a part of all India, yet distinct from British India. *\\ riting of these territories as one who has first-hand knowledge, Lord Sydenham has said: "In greater or less degree they have followed our methods of administration, and the most advanced can now vie with a British district." The MontaguChelmsford Report described them as being in all stages of development, patriarchal, feudal, or more advanced, with the beginnings of representative institutions to be found in a few. All, even the most advanced, had as characteristic features the personal rule of the Prince with control over legislation and the administration of justice. When, therefore, the Princes are uneasy about the future, it means the States are. They are not well content with some things which have happenetl under the present system of dyarchy. Variations of the customs tariff, an act within the competence of the Legislative Assembly, can affect the Statea profoundly, yet their voice is not heard on it. More vital to the Princes, however, is the question whether responsibility for keeping the treaties on which their independence rests will be vested in British India made autonomous. They wish to know whether the protection from foreign aggression afforded by Britain—a condition that has induced them to keep no more troops than a bare skeleton force —will still be assured them. More than all, they are anxious about, their prospect of retaining direct access to the King-Emperor through the Viceroy. This, as the cable messages show, is the chief point in their desire for a definition of their constitutional i status under the reform®.