A CONSTITUTION FOR BURMA.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21543, 15 January 1932, Page 6

A CONSTITUTION FOR BURMA.

; After being in session for a period of about six weeks the Burma Round Table Conference concluded its deliberations a few days ago. The Conference went about its task quietly, not receiving any conspicuous measure of publicity, and no such interest was aroused in its doings as was extended to the proceedings of the second Round Table Conference on India which immediately preceded it. The one conference was really an inevitable sequel of the other. The problem presenting itself for solution in the case of Burma was fortunately not comparable to that which is still awaiting solution in the case of India, The Burma Conference appears to have succeeded, where the other in evolving a report which records the opinion of all the parties represented and registers a substantial measure of agreement. The delegates have, moreover, in a formal resolution expressed the hope that it will serve the purpose for which they were called together. That purpose was described by Lord Peel, who presided over the discussions, as that of finding the greatest possible measure of agreement on the question of the Constitution. The particulars are not available, but it is probable, in the light of what was stated initially by its chairman, that the Conference has not gone very deeply into the question of the financial consequences of the separation of Burma from India or into technical questions such as arrangements for the defence of Burma and the formulation of a trade convention with India. It seems to have been accepted on all sides that the Burmans would never acquiesce permanently in being governed by a self-governed India. The separation of their country from India, recommended by the Montagu-Chelmsford Report, by the Statutory Commission, and by the Government of India, received the approval in principle of the Indian Conference, and was announced, before the Burma Conference began, to be the policy of the British Government. This separation means that the Viceroy of India will cease to have any official responsibility towards Burma, which will have a Governor of her own not subordinate to the Viceroy. “ It is clear,” it was observed in the Simon Report on India, “ that the separation should be so carried out as to furnish to the Burman people a guarantee of the status which their new Government would occupy and at the same time facilitate the handling of problems in which India and Burma retain a close common concern, such as defence and recruitment for their respective civil services.” The Simon Commission recognised the strength of Burman sentiment in favour of an independent status, and the constitutional difficulty of giving to Burma a satisfactory place in any centralised system designed to advance the realisation of responsible government in British India. In contrast to India, where the divisions of the population are so numerous that the minorities problem has thus far

been the great stumbling-block to agreement respecting constitutional reform, the homogeneity of Burma is that country’s most striking characteristic. The Burman, being a Buddhist, recognises none of the social divisions of caste and custom erected by Brahminism. Class antagonism is said to be notably absent among the people, and the women of Burma occupy a position of freedom and independence that is not enjoyed in India. The total population of Burma now exceeds 13,000,000, of whom Indians comprise less than seven per cent. It is a hopeful sign that the Conference which has been discussing the future destiny of the country has been able to reach, without undue delay, an harmonious conclusion, and the note of loyalty to the Throne upon which it has ended is welcome. It remains to be seen whether the report of *the Conference embodies really practical proposals for a working constitution, such as would spell the advancement of Burma towards selfgovernment as a unit of ,the British Empire, that could be carried into early effect.