POLICY IN INDIA

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20870, 9 November 1929, Page 13

POLICY IN INDIA

HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE. STATEMENT BY MR BALDWIN. ATTITUDE TO DECLARATION. “ABSURD TO TALK OF CRISIS.” (British Official Wireless.) (United Press Association.) (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) RUGBY, November 7. In the House of Commons to-day, Mr Stanley Baldwin (the Conservative leader) opened the debate on the British policy In India with a statement regarding his attitude towards the issue of the declaration concerning dominion status for India. He said that on Friday, September 20, the Secretary of State for India (Captain Wedgwood Benn) ar rived at Pan (France) charged with a letter from the Prime Minister, who asked him to concur in the issue of- a statement concerning dominion status in the event of the Simon Commission being consulted and agreeing and the consent all parties being obtained. He replied .that so far as be was concerned he would concur, but he could not speak for his colleagues or for his party. On October 23 he met his colleagues, and learned for the first time that the Simon Commission had not approved of the publication of Lord Irwin’s Note. Clearly a new ■ situation had arisen, and therefore he called together the ex-Secretary of State for India (Viscount Peel) and Lord Salisbury, and it was at once decided that he should write to the Prime. Minister pointing out that in all the circumstances he could not agree to the publication of the Note. It was not a true statement, said Mr Baldwin, that the “ shadow cabinet ” of the Conservative Party insisted that, he should formally repudiate his personal pledge and required him to write to the Prime Minister withdrawing his approval and support of Indian home rule. What actually happened was that as soon as he knew that the Simon Commission had refused-to take any respon-. sihility . for . the publication of Lord Irwin’s letter he met his colleagues and told them the whole circumstances of his' correspondence with the Prime Minister, and then wrote, with their approval, and not tinder coercion, his letter to the Prime Minister. Speaking oh the general subject of the pronouncement ’ of the' Viceroy of India, Mr Baldwin said that it was absurd tp talk- of a crisis. There was no crisis, and there had been none. . The situation had demanded only elucidation with regard to India’s future. ■ Mr Baldwin said: " Let us never forget that the whole of the great Indian peninsula has been for centuries fhe scene of invasions and struggles, and perliaps the best thing we have ,ever done—rif we could 'do no more—is that for a space we have given India internal peace. We have given her justice and a rule of law.I pray, that those three things—peace, justice, and the rule of law—may accom. pany India and ourselves throughout, every stage of the long and arduous journey which is before us now. At the best it is a difficult journey—a journey that -will have to be taken through a tangle of creeds and. castes and ancient interests and immemorial ,hate. We have promised India in our declaration responsible goveniment.' All parties ;in this’, country, arc agreed tnkt .that pledge shall he’-ionbured,’ and it will form the moat responsible task of the commission, of which Sir John Simon is chairman, to point' out what steps at this moment it is most desirable to take.”' Could there be any doubt whatever in ■ any quarter of the House, added Mr Baldwin, that the position of India, with full' responsible Government in the Empire when attained, in whatever form It might take, so far as the internal govern-, ment of India was concerned, must be one of equality with the other seats of the Empire? . Mr Baldwin concluded: “ No Conservative Party with which I am connected will fail in sympathy and in an endeavour to help in our time and to the utmost extent of our ability in finding a solution of the greatest political problem which is before us to-day. We cannot hope to live to see it realised. Our. work must be done in faith, so that wheu perhaps after long generations to coma there are men who will be putting the copingstones on this foundation, they happily will not forget those who toiled with faith among the foundations.” The Liberal Leader, Mr Lloyd George, said, that-he was a member of a Government' that introduced, reforms in India, and he presided over a Cabinet that not only, sanctioned but framed declarations in reference to the future self-government of India. There was no question, so far as the Liberals were concerned, of going back one single inch from those declarations. Those declarations were considered, carefully, not only by the British Cabinet; they were considered during the war at the Tmpeflal Cabinet, where there were representatives of every dominion in the British Empire, including India. He explained the nature of the pledge which was given to India and why full partnership was not conceded immediately. It was owing purely to practical difficulties. The first difficulty that never in the whole history of India had India or any part of it ever enjoyed -.the slightest measure of democratic self-government until 1919. Second. 95 per. cent, of the population was illiterate. Third, there were in the country as many different races, nationalities, ami languages as there were In the whole of Europe.. All these facts had to be taken into account. The Imperial War Cabinet in 1917, with the Prime Ministers of all the dominions present, decided that .there should be accorded to the people of India a considerable measure of self-government—limited, restricted, experimental, and tentative—but it promised—and this was where the pledge came In—gradually if the experiment was successful to extend it until ultimately India enjoyed full partnership in the Empire on equal terms with onr great dominions, but they made it clear that the ultimate goal , could only be reached by stages, and that the limit and number of those stages must be. determined carefully fropa time to. time by the success which attended the experiments at. each stage. Mr Lloyd George said ]>e regretted that while the report of the Simon Commis.elo:. was being awaited a declaration was issued, with the consent of the Government, which had created an impression in India that it was intended without delay to confer full dominion status on India. G-ntnin Wedgwood Bonn (Secretary of State for India) said the Government w" ~ not taking a new step in policy, but i f was taking in effect administrative ■‘•’n. and was declaring and interpretin'- in unmistakeable terms the existing The declaration was a restatement and an interpretation of the Montague policy. Lord Irwin’s statement meant what it said—no less and no more. The Montague policy stood as a cardinal article of faith in the British policy towards India. The first reason for the Government taking the action it did was that it was advised to do so by the Viceroy. He would like to absolve the Viceroy, because he came to England as an ambassador of peace, and bad gone hack to India as a peacemaker. There had

grown up In recent years a doubt in India about the British policy. The Viceroy said that for the removal of that doubt it was necessary to issue a clear declaration of the existing policy. The Viceroy also wanted, if possible, to get «i good atmosphere which would be better secured if they could clear up those doubts before the report of the Statutory Commission was issued. It was because those reasons appeared to the Government good and sound that it took the course it did. Mr Lloyd George had asked whether there had been any change of policy. Captain Wedgwood Benn said that, using the word in its widest sense, there had been a change. A new spirit had been Introduced, an effort had .been made to make the Indian people realise the position that they occupied in the British Commonwealth, and to give them an assurance of equality. The second change that the Government had made was far more important—namely, in regard to the conference. The conference was to be fully representative of the different parties and interests in India and in the Indian States. Sir John Simon (chairman of the Statutory Commission) said the commission had endeavoured to discharge its duties, and wotild go on discharging them. The commission was absolutely determined to do nothing which could be construed or misconstrued as the presentation of an interim report. The functions of the commission could neither be enlarged nor diminished, by any declaration or statement made by anybody whatever. Hence, he naturally asked Parliament to leave the commission to continue its work undisturbed and without parliamentary conflict. The members of the commission hud an undivided and sincere desire to serve not only India, not only Britain, but both together. One outcome of the events of the last few days was to make everybody realise that the future constitutional progress of India was one of the most complicated as well as one of the most important questions in the whole world. The Prime Minister said the declaration of the Viceroy was required because after 1019 propaganda bad been .started asking the Indian people to'believe that the British Government had departed from its policy. The declaration was necessary In order that a better atmosphere and more confidence should be established pending the publication of the report of the commission. The debate ended, the motion for the adjournment being withdrawn.

GENERAL' FEELING OF RELIEF. BRITISH PRESS COMMENT. LONDON, November 8. , (Received Nov. 8, at 10 p.m.) ■There is. .a general feeling of relief that the debate on India is over. As a member of the Statutory Commission remarked, it was unfortunate that Par- . Lament was obliged to discuss India at all. At present Captain Wedgwood Benn’s speech is not considered quite satisfac-. tory from one who holds, such high office. Several papers declare that it should havq been weightier,, steadier,, and franker. The Conservative pf.esa, which, for the past, few days, manifested anxieiy. to protect Mr Baldwin from attacks respecting his attitude, naturally devote editorials this morning to this aspect of the question.' They thoroughly commend his action throughout. The Daily Telegraph expresses the opinion that the Secretary of State mismanaged the delicate business. The Morning Post complains that the Home of Lords told one thing and the House of Commons told another thing. “ We have the Government speaking with two contrary voices; !we have the National Congress offering an interpretation which the Secretary, of. State will neitheraffirm. nor repudiate ; we have ■ confusion, and can only hope against hops that we shall not in . future have to surrender.” ' ■ ’ • The Daily Chronicle says: "It is not enough to say that Lord Irwin's statement meant what it said. The fact is the Indians interpreted it as meaning that full dominion status is to be granted forthwith. Mr Lloyd George asked for a definite statement that that interpretation was inaccurate, and Captain Wedgwood Benn ought to have replied frankly to this effect.” The Times says; "The Government case in the main is a perfectly strong one, and the Viceroy’s statement that the goal has unchanged has been welcomed in India at its face value, no more and no less. It may be predicted with confidence that the Statutory commit tee’s report has a real chance of being pondered and discussed in the country most concerned, and that, after all, is what matters most.”