Constitutional Reforms, Pre-Partition.

1. Indian Council Act, 1892

The Indian Councils Act of 1892 was an important piece of legislation during the British colonial
rule of India. Here are some key points about the Indian Councils Act of 1892:

i) Limited Franchise: The act did not provide for a fully representative system, as the franchise
was still restricted. Voting rights were primarily granted to property owners and those meeting
specific income qualifications, which limited the number of eligible voters.

ii) Increased Influence: The additional (non-official) members in the legislative councils had
limited powers but provided a platform for Indian voices to express their concerns and opinions
on various issues.

iii) British Control: Despite the expansion of the legislative councils, ultimate authority and
decision-making power remained in the hands of the British government and the Viceroy of
India.

The Indian Councils Act of 1892 was a modest step towards including Indians in the legislative
process but did not meet the growing demand for more significant political reforms and greater
Indian participation in governance. Subsequent acts and reforms, such as the Morley-Minto
Reforms of 1909 and the Government of India Act of 1919, introduced more substantial
changes in the political structure of British India.
______________________________

2. Minto-Morley Reforms, 1909

The Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909, also known as the Indian Councils Act of 1909, were a set
of constitutional reforms introduced by the British government in India during the colonial era.
These reforms were named after the Viceroy of India, Lord Minto, and the Secretary of State for
India, John Morley.

Key features of the Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909 included:

i) Expansion of Legislative Councils: The reforms expanded the size of the legislative councils in
British India. Previously, the councils had limited Indian representation, but the 1909 Act
increased the number of Indians in both central and provincial legislative councils.

ii) Separate Electorates for Muslims: One significant aspect of these reforms was the
introduction of separate electorates for Muslims. This meant that Muslims would vote for their
own representatives in a separate electoral process, distinct from Hindus and other
communities.
iii) Increased Provincial Autonomy: The Act also allowed for some degree of provincial
autonomy. Provincial legislative councils gained more powers in certain areas, giving them the
authority to make decisions on subjects like education, public health, and local government.

iv) Limited Reforms: It's important to note that these reforms fell short of providing full
self-governance or substantial political power to Indians. The British government retained
control over key areas of governance and maintained a dominant role in decision-making.

The Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909 were a response to growing demands for political
representation and participation from various Indian communities. The members could discuss
the budget and move resolutions. While they marked a small step towards Indian involvement in
governance, they were still far from meeting the aspirations of the Indian nationalist movement,
which sought complete self-rule. These reforms were followed by further constitutional changes
in subsequent years, leading up to the Government of India Act of 1919 and eventually, India's
independence in 1947.
__________________________________

3. Montague Chelmsford Reforms, 1919

The Montague-Chelmsford Reforms, also known as the Government of India Act of 1919, were
a significant set of constitutional reforms introduced by the British government in India during
the colonial era. They were named after the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, and
the Viceroy of India, Lord Chelmsford.

Key features of the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 included:

i) Introduction of Dyarchy: One of the central elements of these reforms was the introduction of
dyarchy at the provincial level. This meant that certain subjects of administration were divided
into "transferred" and "reserved" categories. Transferred subjects were to be administered by
Indian ministers who were responsible to the provincial legislatures, while reserved subjects
remained under the control of British-appointed officials.

ii) Expansion of Electorates: The reforms expanded the electorate by increasing the number of
voters. The franchise was extended to a larger section of the population, although it was still
limited compared to universal suffrage.

iii) Separate Communal Electorates: The system of separate electorates for different religious
communities, introduced in the previous Minto-Morley Reforms, continued to exist. This was a
source of communal tensions in Indian politics.

iv) Central Legislative Council: The central legislative council was expanded and made partly
elective. A majority of its members were still nominated by the British government, but some
were to be elected by various categories of voters.
v) Council of State: The reforms established a new Council of State to complement the existing
central legislative council. This council had limited legislative powers and was also partly
elected.

While the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms represented a significant step towards self-governance

and increased Indian participation in the legislative process, they fell short of meeting the
demands of the Indian nationalist movement for complete self-rule and full responsible
government. These reforms, however, paved the way for further constitutional developments in
India, ultimately leading to independence in 1947.
__________________________________

4. Simon Commission, 1927

The Simon Commission, officially known as the "Indian Statutory Commission," was a British
parliamentary commission established in 1927 to examine and make recommendations
regarding constitutional reforms for British India. It was named after its chairman, Sir John
Simon.

Key points about the Simon Commission include:

i) Background: The Simon Commission was formed in response to the demands for
constitutional reforms in India and growing Indian nationalist sentiment. The Government of
India Act of 1919 (Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms) had introduced limited self-government, but
there were calls for further reforms and greater Indian involvement in the political process.

ii) Composition: The commission consisted of seven members, all of whom were British and did
not include any Indian representation. This lack of Indian members on the commission led to
widespread protests and criticism in India.

iii) Protests and Boycott: The Indian National Congress and other political groups in India
boycotted the Simon Commission because of its all-British composition. Mass protests and
demonstrations took place across the country, with the popular slogan "Simon Go Back"
reflecting the sentiment of the time. Famous Congress leader Lala Lajpat Rai was killed in the
lathi charge by the police.

iv) The Nehru Report: In response to the Simon Commission, the Indian National Congress
appointed a committee led by Motilal Nehru, with Jawaharlal Nehru acting as a secretary to draft
a report on constitutional reforms. The Nehru Report proposed a more radical vision of
self-government and dominion status for India.

v) Outcome: The Simon Commission submitted its report in 1930, but it failed to gain
widespread support in India due to the absence of Indian members on the commission. Instead,
it deepened political divisions in India.
vi) Impact: The protests against the Simon Commission marked an important phase in India's
struggle for independence. They highlighted the demand for responsible government and the
need for Indian participation in the decision-making process regarding constitutional reforms.

Ultimately, the Simon Commission did not lead to immediate constitutional changes. It was
followed by further negotiations and discussions between British and Indian leaders, eventually
culminating in the Government of India Act of 1935, which introduced significant reforms and
paved the way for a more representative form of government in British India.
__________________________________

5. Three Round Table Conferences, 1930, 31, 32.

The Round Table Conferences were a series of three conferences held in London between
1930 and 1932 to discuss constitutional reforms and the future political structure of British India.
These conferences were a significant part of the process that eventually led to India's
independence in 1947. Here's an overview of each conference:

i) First Round Table Conference (1930-1931): The First Round Table Conference took place
from November 1930 to January 1931.

- It was convened by the British government and chaired by the British Prime Minister,
Ramsay MacDonald.
- Representatives from various Indian political parties and communities attended, including the
Indian National Congress, Muslim League, and representatives from the princely states.
- Key discussions revolved around the demands of different groups, including the demand for
dominion status and the issue of communal representation.
- However, the First Round Table Conference did not result in a consensus, and no agreement
was reached.

ii) Second Round Table Conference (1931):

- The Second Round Table Conference was held in London from September to December
1931.
- Mahatma Gandhi attended as the sole representative of the Indian National Congress, and
discussions centered around his demands for self-rule and complete independence.
- The discussions during this conference were largely inconclusive, as fundamental
differences between British authorities and Indian leaders persisted.

iii) Third Round Table Conference (1932-1933):

- The Third Round Table Conference took place from November 1932 to December 1932 and
was largely boycotted by the Indian National Congress and other major Indian political parties.
- The British government engaged with the princely states and some minority groups, leading
to the signing of the "Communal Award" in 1932, which provided for separate electorates for
various communities, including scheduled castes (Dalits).
 - Subsequently, the "Poona Pact" was negotiated between Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar to address concerns related to separate electorates for scheduled castes.

While the Round Table Conferences did not lead to immediate constitutional changes or a clear
resolution of India's political future, they played a role in shaping the discussions around India's
future governance. The failure to reach a consensus during these conferences, coupled with
continued civil disobedience and political agitation in India, eventually contributed to the
Government of India Act of 1935, which introduced significant reforms and established
provincial autonomy. This act marked a crucial step towards India's eventual independence in
1947.
__________________________________

6. Government of India Act, 1935:

The Government of India Act of 1935 was a significant piece of legislation that had a profound
impact on the constitutional and political framework of British India. Here are key features and
implications of the Government of India Act 1935:

i) Provincial Autonomy: One of the major provisions of the act was the grant of provincial
autonomy. It divided British India into eleven provinces, each with its own legislative assembly
and government. These provincial governments had substantial powers in areas such as
education, health, and agriculture.

ii) Federal Structure: The act also proposed the establishment of a federal structure for India.
However, this federal structure was never fully implemented due to political and communal
tensions.

iii) Separate Electorates: The act retained the system of separate electorates for different
religious communities, which had been a source of communal tensions in Indian politics.

iv) Reservations for Scheduled Castes: It introduced provisions for the reservation of seats in
legislatures for Scheduled Castes (Dalits) and Scheduled Tribes (Adivasis). Dr. B. R. Ambedkar
was the prominent figure in this regard.

v) Bicameral Central Legislature: The central legislature was to be bicameral, consisting of the
Council of States (Upper House) and the Legislative Assembly (Lower House).

vi) Governor-General: The Governor-General was to act on the advice of ministers in matters
that were within the purview of ministers (subjects under provincial control) but could also
exercise special powers in certain situations, such as in cases of breakdown of the
constitutional machinery in provinces.
vii) Limited Self-Government: While the act expanded the scope of self-government, it still
reserved crucial powers for the British government, particularly in the areas of defense, foreign
affairs, and the governor's discretionary powers.

viii) Lack of Full Indian Consensus: The act was controversial and did not receive unanimous
support from Indian political parties and leaders. The Indian National Congress, for example,
criticized certain provisions, and the All-India Muslim League had reservations regarding
safeguards for Muslim interests.

ix) Impact on Indian Politics: The act laid the foundation for the functioning of provincial
governments with increased powers, which allowed Indians to gain valuable experience in
governance. It also contributed to the development of the political parties that would play a
crucial role in the post-independence era.

x) Long-Term Significance: Although the act did not lead to immediate independence, it was a
stepping stone toward the ultimate goal of self-rule for India. It provided a framework for
governance during the crucial period leading up to independence in 1947.

In essence, the Government of India Act of 1935 marked a significant shift in the governance of
British India, moving towards greater self-government at the provincial level and laying the
groundwork for the eventual independence of India.
__________________________________