Morley-Minto Reforms (Indian Councils Act 1909) | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Indian Councils Act 1909

• The Indian Councils Act 1909, also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, was a law passed by the British Parliament that aimed to slightly increase Indian participation in the governance of British India.
• The Act made changes to the earlier Indian Councils Acts of 1861 and 1892.
• The reforms were named after Morley, the Secretary of State, and Minto, the Viceroy of India at the time. Before these reforms, there were two significant events that set the stage for these changes.

Background

Discontent among Indians because:

• The Indian Councils Act of 1892 failed to meet the legitimate wishes of the Congress.
• Lord Curzon’s imperialist policies and attitudes intensified bitterness of the intelligentsia against alien domination.
• Curzon had no sympathy for the aspirations of Indians.
• He completely officialised the Calcutta Corporation, giving it a European majority by reducing total membership by a third, through his infamous Act of 1899.
• A similar policy was pursued towards the Indian Universities in 1904, taking away their autonomy.
• In the same year (1904), the Official Secrets Act greatly extended the scope of the term “sedition”.
• The continuing economic exploitation by the British rulers led to a thesis by patriots like R.C. Dutt and Dadabhai Naoroji asserting that the impoverishment of the country was a direct result of deliberate and systematic policy by foreign rulers.
• Educated Indians were not given any share, much less their due share, in Government services and the administration.
• Indians overseas, especially in South Africa, were subjected to humiliation and indignities simply because they were Indians.
• This fanned national resentment; Indians felt it was vain to hope for improvement in conditions unless they were free in their own homeland.
• The closing years of the nineteenth century witnessed the horrors of famine and bubonic plague, bringing distress and misery to thousands.
• The people blamed the British Government for their plight.
• The climax was reached by the infamous Partition of Bengal in 1905, seen as a subtle attack on growing Bengali nationalism.
• The Bengalis felt humiliated, insulted, and tricked and resorted to vigorous agitation to rectify the wrong.
• The press, free since 1882, took ample notice of these factors and was critical of the British administration.
• While the Congress was growing stronger as the exponent of the demand for national freedom, Muslims generally kept themselves aloof.
• The initial indifference of Muslims was largely due to the policy advocated by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.
• It gradually became antagonism when the British bureaucracy, alarmed at the growing influence of the Congress, adopted a policy of “divide and rule”.
• In October 1906, a group of Muslim elites known as the Shimla Deputation, led by the Agha Khan, met with Lord Minto and demanded separate electorates for Muslims and greater representation based on their contributions to the empire's defense.
• Lord Minto promised to grant these demands, laying the groundwork for Muslim communalism.
• The Swadeshi movement and the rise of extremism prompted the British administration to consider new constitutional reforms, influenced by militant nationalism.
• When the Morley-Minto Reforms were introduced in 1909, many believed they were a response to fears of revolutionary activities.
• The appointment of Lord S.P. Sinha to the viceroy's executive council was seen as a response to pressures from terrorist activities.
• John Morley, the Liberal Secretary of State for India, and Viceroy Minto, recognized the need for reforms to restore stability after Lord Curzon's partition of Bengal.
• Morley's budget speech in 1906 hinted at introducing representative government in India, urging Minto to balance the unpopular Bengal partition with reforms.
• There was a realization that India could not be ruled solely through a “cast iron bureaucracy” and needed to share some power with Indians.
• The new policy included outright repression, concessions to moderates, and a strategy of divide and rule through separate electorates for Muslims.
• Morley and Minto proposed reforms in Legislative Councils and began discussions with Moderate leaders of the Congress in early 1906.
• The Moderates agreed to cooperate with the Government despite ongoing popular movements, leading to a split in nationalist ranks.
• The Indian Councils Act of 1909 was designed to rally Moderates in the Indian National Congress and Muslims to support British authority.
• A committee of the Viceroy's Executive Council studied the subject, and proposals were sent to England for public criticism.
• After approval by the Cabinet, the Bill was passed by Parliament in February 1909, becoming the Indian Councils Act of 1909.

Provisions of the Act

Size and Functions of Legislatures: The Act expanded the size and functions of Legislatures at both the Centre and in the Provinces.

Categories of Legislative Council Members:Members of the Legislative Councils at the Centre and in the provinces were classified into four categories:

• Ex Officio Members: Governor General and members of their Executive Councils.
• Nominated Official Members: Government officials nominated by the Governor General.
• Nominated Non-Official Members: Individuals nominated by the Governor General who were not government officials.
• Elected Members: Members elected by different categories of Indian people.
• Regulations for Nominations and Elections: The Governor-General, with the Secretary of State for India’s approval, set regulations for nominating or electing members of legislative councils and their qualifications.
• Increase in Elected Members: The number of elected members in both the Imperial Legislative Council and Provincial Legislative Councils was increased.

Central Legislature:

• Additional Members: The maximum number of ‘additional’ members was raised to 60, making a total of 69 members.
• Composition: The Central Legislature consisted of 37 officials and 32 non-officials.

Officials:

• Ex Officio Members: 9 members including the Governor General, seven ordinary Executive Councillors, and one extraordinary member.
• Nominated Officials: 28 members nominated by the Governor General.

Non-Officials:

• Nominated: 5 members nominated by the Governor General.
• Elected: 27 members elected from various constituencies.
• Territorial Representation: It was deemed unsuitable for India, and representation by classes and interests was emphasized for electing members.

Elected Members Breakdown:

• General Electorates: 13 members from various legislatures.
• Class Electorates: 12 members from different constituencies.
• Special Electorates: 2 members from British capitalists.
• Indirect Election of Members: Elected members were indirectly elected through a process involving local bodies, provincial legislatures, and the central legislature.

Provincial Legislatures: The Act of 1909 expanded the membership of the Legislative Councils in various provinces as follows:

• Burma: 16 members
• Eastern Bengal and Assam: 41 members
• Bengal: 52 members
• Punjab: 25 members
• Madras, Bombay, and United Provinces: 47 members each
• The Act aimed for non-official majorities in the provinces. However, this did not mean non-official elected majorities. Some non-officials were nominated by the Governors, ensuring official control over the Council.
• Since nominated members typically sided with the Government, officials were effectively in the majority, maintaining overall non-elected dominance.
• Elected members in the Provincial Legislatures were to be chosen from different constituencies. 
  For example, in Bombay:
  • 6 members from Special electorates (e.g., Bombay Corporation, Bombay University).
  • 8 members from General electorates (e.g., District Boards, Municipalities).
  • 7 members from Class electorates (4 Muslims, 3 Landlords).
• The membership of the Executive Councils in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay was increased to 4. The Government was also given the authority to establish similar Councils for the Lieutenant Governors.
• Muslims were granted separate electorates (only Muslims could vote for candidates in Muslim seats) and greater representation than their population proportion. Additionally, the income qualification for Muslim voters was set lower than that for Hindus.
• This was in response to Muslim concerns that a “first past the post” electoral system, like Britain’s, would subject them to permanent Hindu majority rule.

Functions of Legislative Councils:

• The roles of the Legislative Councils at both the Centre and in the Provinces were expanded.
• Members were granted the right to engage in discussions and pose supplementary questions.
• Specific guidelines were established for the discussion of budgets within the Central Legislature.
• While members could not vote, they were allowed to propose resolutions regarding:
  • additional grants to Local Governments,
  • changes in taxation,
  • new loans proposed in the Budget.
• Before submission to the Council, the Budget had to be reviewed by a Committee led by the Finance member (Chairman) and comprising non-official and nominated members in equal numbers.
• Members had the ability to discuss and propose resolutions on matters of general public interest, with the option to vote.
• However, the President had the authority to reject all or part of these resolutions without providing a reason.
• The Government was not obligated to accept such resolutions, even if passed, regardless of whether they pertained to public interest or financial statements.
• Certain topics were off-limits for discussion, including:
  • the foreign relations of the Government of India and its interactions with Indian Princes,
  • matters under court adjudication,
  • expenditure on state railways,
  • interest on debt, and similar issues.
• One Indian member was to be included in the Viceroy's Executive Council, with Satyendra Prasad Sinha being the first appointed in 1909.
• Earlier, in August 1907, two Indians, K.G. Gupta and Syed Hussain Bilgrami, were made members of the Secretary of State's India Council.
• The Indian Councils Act served as the governance framework for India for a decade until it was revised by the Government of India Act 1912.
• The 1912 Act aimed to:
  • clarify the authority of the Governor of Bengal,
  • establish a legislative council for the new province of Bihar and Orissa,
  • eliminate Parliamentary review for creating new legislative councils in provinces under a lieutenant-governor, and
  • allow for the establishment of legislative councils in provinces under chief commissioners.

Evaluation of the 1909 Reforms

• The 1909 reforms did not address the Indian political issue effectively.
• Lord Morley opposed the idea of colonial self-government, as advocated by the Congress, and rejected the introduction of parliamentary or responsible government in India. He expressed his disapproval by stating that he would have nothing to do with any system that might lead to a parliamentary setup in India.
• The reforms included narrow franchises, indirect elections, and limited powers for the Legislative Councils, rendering the concept of representative government ineffective.
• While the act introduced the principle of election, it was laden with constraints. The specifics of seat allocation and electoral qualifications were left to local governments, allowing for potential bureaucratic manipulation.
• The electorate was restricted by high property qualifications, with disparities such as lower income qualifications for Muslims compared to Hindus.
• The Government of India was empowered to disqualify any election candidate on the grounds of being politically dangerous.
• Real power remained with the Government, leaving the Councils with minimal functions other than criticism.
• The so-called constitutional reforms aimed to divide the nationalist movement by confusing the Moderates and preventing unity among Indians, particularly through the contentious separate electorates.
• The introduction of separate electorates for Muslims created a political barrier, isolating them from the broader Indian community, as noted by Jawaharlal Nehru.
• Initially, the barrier was small due to limited electorates, but it expanded with each extension of franchise.
• The separate electorate system fostered the idea that the political, economic, and cultural interests of Hindus and Muslims were distinct, rather than shared.
• Officials and Muslim leaders often spoke of the entire community regarding separate electorates, but in reality, it appeased only a small segment of the Muslim elite.
• The Congress viewed separate electorates as undemocratic and detrimental to the development of a unified Hindu-Muslim Indian national identity.
• Granting separate electorates to Muslims legitimized their minority status and distinct political identity, setting the stage for the later evolution of this Muslim identity from minority status to nationhood, a process that was long and complex.
• The Morley-Minto reforms of 1909 granted Muslims separate electorates, elevating them to an “all-India political category” but also marking them as a “perpetual minority” in Indian politics.
• Other communities felt they had contributed more to the Empire than Muslims yet received no special treatment, prompting groups like the Sikhs to demand their rights.
• In 1919, Sikhs were granted special representation, encouraging other communities to push for similar concessions.
• By the Act of 1935, groups such as Harijans, Indian Christians, Europeans, and Anglo-Indians also secured separate representation or reservations.
• The reforms fractured national unity, fostering divisions among creeds and classes, and promoting partisan identities over a shared citizenship.
• This development was seen as a significant obstacle to the principle of self-governance.
• Lord Morley’s warning about the bitter consequences of separate electorates proved prescient.
• The electoral system established was indirect, creating a disconnection between primary voters and their representatives, hindering political responsibility and education.
• While parliamentary forms were introduced, they lacked accountability, leading to unproductive criticism of the Government.
• Some members, like Gokhale, utilized the council debates to advocate for important issues like universal primary education and the plight of indentured laborers.
• The 1909 reforms offered a mere shadow of self-governance, reflecting a form of ‘benevolent despotism’ rather than genuine progress.
• These reforms were the most short-lived in British India, requiring revision within a decade.

The Act of 1909 was still important:

• The act enabled the election of Indians to various legislative councils in India for the first time, although some Indians had been appointed to these councils before.
• The introduction of the electoral principle set the stage for a parliamentary system, despite being contrary to Morley's original intent.