INDIA POLICY

Southland Times, Issue 22497, 6 December 1934, Page 5

INDIA POLICY

BRITISH GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVE COUNCIL’S APPROVAL AMENDMENT DEFEATED (British Official Wireless.) Rugby, December 4. The Government’s policy in regard to India received, the approval, expressed by an overwhelming majority, of the Central Council of the Conservative Party. The amendment moved by the Marquis of Salisbury was defeated by 1102 votes to 390, a majority of 712. Mr Stanley Baldwin urged that the report should be supported. He insisted that the policy recommended by the Joint Select Committee was evolutionary rather than revolutionary and was inevitable in its evolution from Britain’s dealings with India throughout the whole of the last century and throughout the present century to date. “As leader of the Conservative Party and with a full sense of responsibility, ’ said Mr Baldwin, “I accept the report as a basis for legislation and I recommend this council to accept it. I tell you that in my honest opinion now is the best opportunity to give India a constitution which in itself provides the best hope of progress in the future. It is my considered judgment that with all the' changes and the chances of this wide world to-day you have a good chance of keeping the whole of that sub-continent of India in the Empire forever. I say to you deliberately that it is my firm conviction that if you refuse here this opportunity you will infallibly lose India. Believing that, I can do no other than give you the advice I do.” Mr Baldwin added that he was firmly convinced he was right in the matter, but he was not alone. He had with him the unqualified support of every one of his Conservative colleagues in the Government, and he believed it would be seen next week that he had the support of a large majority of the Conservatives in the House of Commons. A resolution approving the general principles of the report and expressing the view that the recommendations furnish a fair basis for a constitutional settlement was moved by Mr L. S. Amery and supported in the subsequent debate by, among others, Lord Derby, Lord Eustace Percy, Sir Austen Chamberlain, and Lord Linlithgow. The amendment moved by Lord Salisbury expressed readiness to accept a well-considered measure for provincial self-government, ensuring the due administration of the police services in India, but he hoped Parliament would not establish a central responsible government as recommended in the report. He said the safeguards in the report looked very well on paper, but they had no strength once they had parted with the power. Once they had established this central body there could be no retreat. Mr Winston Churchill, supporting the amendment, asked if “this production of seven years of hesitation and doubt” would satisfy anyone. The Socialist Parly would use it only as a stepping stone on the downward path and the Congress Party in India would use it only as a lever for its purposes. What other country, he asked, would behave about its great overseas possessions as they were doing? France and Holland, which were friendly countries, were amazed at the British attitude. Would Germany, who, he said, was preparing to reclaim her possessions, or Japan, who, at the other end of the world, was carving out an Empire while Britain seemed ready to be chattered out of hers? With storm clouds gathering this was no moment to plunge a great Oriental dependency into the melting pot. The amendment was also supported, among others, by Sir Henry Page-Croft, Lord Fitzalan, Sir Joseph Nall and Sir Alfred Knox. At the end of the debate after the defeat of the amendment the resolution approving the report was carried on a show of hands by an overwhelming majority.