Indian Council Act, 1909: The Morley-Minto Reforms ( Compromise of Power )
The Indian Council Act of 1909 was popularly called the Morley-Minto Reforms. It was a significant landmark within the British Indian political horizon and brought substantial transformation in governance in India which paved its way towards further constitutional developments in later years. Below is a comprehensive overview of the Act in point form, including the background, key provisions, impact, criticism, and elaboration for enhanced understanding:.
Background and Context
Colonial Context:-
Indian had been a colony from the initial years of the 20th century itself. Indian National Congress was formed in the year 1885 to express Indian wishes, meanwhile, the political demands for greater Indian involvement in governance acted as a pressure group to the authorities of the British.
Rise in Political Consciousness:-
The rise of the Swadeshi Movement of 1905 against the Partition of Bengal marks a turning point in India’s struggle for freedom. It witnessed a new rise in political activism along with mass protests and, most importantly, radical elements into the INC.
Muslim Political Concerns:-
The Muslim League was formed in 1906, primarily to ensure Muslim interests and check the growing effect of INC, which was viewed to represent more or less Hindu interests. The British exploited this division between Hindus and Muslims to further consolidate their reign.
Indian Aims:-
The British viceroys, like Lord Morley (Secretary of State for India) and Lord Minto (Viceroy of India) wanted reforms that should meet Indian demands without giving much power to Indians. They also wanted to assuage Muslim fears by allowing separate electorates with an eye on exacerbating frictions among communities.
Main Features under the Indian Council Act, 1909
Legislative Councils Expanded:-
The Act further enlarged the Imperial Legislative Council (the central government) and the Provincial Legislative Councils (governments of provinces).
The membership of the Imperial Legislative Council was raised to 60.
Membership in the Provincial Legislative Councils was also increased but the number varied with the province
Elected Members Introduced:-
For the first time, Indians were allowed to choose representatives to the councils. Although limited in number, the electoral roll comprised some landowners, professionals, and elites.
Even though the nominated members were still predominant, elected members make up the Indian share of these councils
A Separate Electorates for the Muslims:-
The most contentious provision of the Act was separate electorates for Muslims. Muslim electors could elect their candidates independently of the electors of Hindus.
This was meant to protect the interests of the Muslims and to get them representation in the legislative bodies, a demand from the Muslim League.
Scant Legislative Rights:-
While the number of councils increased and elections took place, their legislative rights remained minisculely enhanced.
They could present the budget but did not really control its passage.
The members of these legislatures were entitled to question and move resolutions on topics of public interest, but the debates were merely advisory, and the British executive still called the shots.
Executive Supremacy:-
This Act also reinforced British executive’s supremacy over the other legislatures. Governors-General as well as provincial governors exercised the right to veto decisions of the councils.
The councils can raise some matters but do not enjoy the mandate to challenge the government’s executive decisions or policies.
Objectives of the Morley-Minto Reforms:-
Political Representation:-
The first objective was to afford limited political representation to Indians with governance. In the guise of making the structure look representative, the British allowed Indians to participate in legislative councils; however, it did not grant them any real power.
Satisfying Indian Nationalists:-
The reforms were inducted to satisfy growing demands from Indian National Congress for greater participation in governance. The British thought that partial reforms will silence the moderate nationalists and reduce further self-governance demands.
Controlling Radical Nationalism:-
Radical nationalists demanded full-fledged independence; their influence was growing within the Indian political domain. The British wanted them to retreat by offering concessions to the moderates.
Muslim Support and Divide-and-Rule Strategy:-
The separate electorates for Muslims were designed to win Muslim leaders. The divide-and-rule policy was followed with the expectation that it would fracture the Indian nationalist movement into pieces.
Impact of the Act
Political Integration and Representation:-
The Indian Council Act of 1909 witnessed the gradual growth of a more prominent political class in India. Indians elected or nominated to the councils started taking active interest in political affairs.
Although their powers were very limited, this marked the beginning of Indian involvement in formal politics under British rule.
Emergence of Communal Politics:-
Provision for Separate Electorates The provision made the communal divide entrenched in Indian politics. This feature is construed to be a harbinger of communalism in modern India, as it deepened the division between Hindus and Muslims, which also came to create future complications for Indian politics.
Such provision was thought to be a precursor to the Partition of India in 1947.
Rise of Political Parties:-
Indian National Congress, though unsatisfied with the second-class nature of the reforms, took on a more active role in the political field. Moderates welcomed the Act as a notch forward, while radicals denounced it as woefully inadequate.
Provincializing experience served to strengthen the Muslim League. The League now regarded the Act as a triumph for Muslim demands and increased efforts at building its influence within the political process.
Preparations to Future Reforms:-
Though the reforms were incomplete, Indian Council Act 1909 prepared a ground for future constitutional development such as Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 and the Government of India Act, 1935.
Elected Representation:-
The Act brought elected representation, which further went on in the sequence of time to expand greater Indian participation in governance later on.
Criticism over Morley-Minto Reforms
Incomplete Nature of Reforms:-
Critics claimed no significant change occurred in the governance structure. Real power still remained in the British executive, and Indians had only nominal control over legislation.
Councils could debate matters but had no authority over essential issues such as finance, defense, and foreign affairs.
Exclusion of the Masses:-
Election Franchise for Elections was very limited and comprised only landowners, professions, and elites. The Indian masses in general and the rural masses in particular were excluded from the electoral processes, and thus this reform was elitist in character.
Little of the ordinary Indian masses benefited from the Act, and it was held to benefit the only educated and rich sections of the society.
Promotion of Communalism:-
Perhaps, the most controversial part of the Act was the introduction of the separate electorate for Muslims. It was stigmatized as something which enhanced the institutionalized communal division between Hindus and Muslims.
There were many Indian nationalists and INC leaders who believed the British were consciously mobilizing sects to create division among the nationalists rising against them .
Discontent from Radical Nationals:-
Radical leaders such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, and Lala Lajpat Rai condemned the reforms as a farce. They reasoned that the Act did nothing to promote India’s demand for self-rule or independence.
These leaders, with their activists by their side, continued demanding stronger and militant approaches to achieving India’s liberation from the British.
Reactions towards the Act
British Reaction:-
The British government regarded the Morley-Minto Reforms as a forward step toward an integrative and consultative system of governance. Lord Morley and Lord Minto vindicated the reforms as an Indian political aspiration adjustment with a British hold.
Indian National Congress:-
The INC responded in two different ways. Moderates including Gopal Krishna Gokhale welcomed the reforms as a mild but important advancement towards full Indian participation in governance.
However, the reform was outright rejected by radicals within the Congress, who saw such reform as merely a constrictive measure by the British with no real transfer of power.
Muslim League:-
The Muslim League adopted the separate electorates because that brought an identity and a voice to Muslims in Indian politics, which saved their interests. That further ingrained the Muslim League as a party in Indian politics because that further ingrained communal divisions.
Long-term Consequences
The separate electorates brought in by the Morley-Minto Reforms proved to be a lingering heritage of Indian politics, and, with time, escalated communal riots.
The Act was a precursor to the more significant reforms that were promised later-on, like the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms in 1919 and the Government of India Act in 1935, which further enhanced Indian representation and paved the way for eventual self-government.
It also established a precedent for political reform that slowly shifted power from British hands to Indian leaders and culminated in India’s independence in 1907.
Conclusion:-
The Indian Council Act of 1909 was narrowly prescriptive but an event of utmost significance in British India history. Formal Indians’ participation in governance and discussed introduced the concept of electorates.
Although the Act partially mollified moderate nationalists and responded to some Muslim apprehensions, it was a failure in satisfying extreme nationalists and did little to empower Indian masses at large.
While the Act marked the beginning of a series of constitutional reforms which ultimately led to Indian independence, it also planted seeds of communalism that would bear fruit long after for India’s future and its sub-continent.
Also Read:- The Montford Reforms: A Step Toward Freedom or a Symbol of Delay of 1919?