APPEAL MADE FOR UNITY

Taranaki Daily News, 26 November 1934, Page 5

APPEAL MADE FOR UNITY

INDIAN REFORM QUESTION SPEECH BY CHANCELLOR CONSERVATIVES’ OPINION CAMPAIGN BY OPPONENTS British Wireless. Rugby, Nov. 23. Addressing Birmingham Conservatives, Mr. Neville Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer, appealed for unity on the Indian reforms question. He added that the Government had not yet decided upon its proposals, but it was unlikely that it would regret or even change recommendations supported with such a weight of authority as those of the Joint Select Committee. Mr. Chamberlain said that after three years with a three-party Government in power he did not think the country yet desired the combination to come to an end. Although in the nature of things it could only be transitory the condition of the world was such that it could not afford to lose such a stable Government. Parliament had entered upon a session of outstanding importance in the history of the British Empire, said Mr. Chamberlain. Everyone was agreed that there must be an advance towards selfgovernment in India, but not such a complete system of self-government as to deprive her of guidance and direction from Britain, which had brought her out of chaos to her present condition of peace and security. The differences which appeared in the Conservative Party on the subject were narrowed down to two things: How far they should go and how fast they should go. Mr. Chamberlain thought that after consideration the great majority of the Conservative Party would be of one mind. SAFEGUARDS AS EMERGENCY. Mr. W. E. Elliot, Minister of Agriculture, in a speech at Glasgow referring to the Indian report, emphasised that its whole scheme of an all-India federation comprising autonomous provinces and the Indian States was based on the principle of responsibility with safeguards. That did not mean that the safeguards were to be normally and continuously in operation. They were there for use in an emergency. He believed they would be fully effective in case of need, but he did not believe the existence of proper safeguards should or would prevent the steady development of selfgovernment by responsibly-minded Indians.

The general impression in Parliamentary circles created by the committee’s report, says the Times, is that a Government Bill based on it is assured of an overwhelming majority in the House of Commons.

Nevertheless, opponents of the report have already begun a campaign against it, and Lord Salisbury, one of the Conservative dissentients on the committee, is being invited to move a resolution at a meeting of the central council of the National Union and Conservative associations when on December 4 the leader of the party, Mr. Stanley Baldwin, will “take counsel” with that body in the report. There were 31 members on the joint committee and nine voted against the report, five of these being Conservatives who felt that it went too far and four being Labour members who felt that it did not go far enough. BOLD, PRACTICAL REPORT SLURS NO DIFFICULTIES By Telegraph-~Press, Assn. —Copyright. Rec. 7 p.m. London, Nov. 24. Mr. J. L. Garvin in the Observer describes the Indian report as bold in its practical contrivance and slurring no difficulties. “When the Australian Commonwealth Bill was brought down at Westminster a generation ago it was called a new thing in history, being a constitution for a continent. It was framed for about 5,000,000 souls. The Indian report concerns over 350,000,000 people, nor is India usefully described as a sub-continent. It is less so than Europe. Its land frontiers are demarcated by stupendous ramparts, whereas by comparison the elevations between Asia and Europe are low and traversable. The Timor Sea in the present age of aviation will be flown over daily when the icy thains of the Himalayan and trans-Himalayan ranges long remain a sky-cleaving obstacle. “The design of the system of federalism with safeguards is by necessity equally colossal and complex. Under it India is offered more freedom than exists in some highly civilised nations in Europe.”