14: Colonial Policy and Administration
Diarchy A system of double government introduced by the Government of India Act in 1919 for
the provinces of India. It marked the first introduction of democracy into the British
governance of India. It was introduced by Edwin Montagu (The Secretary of State for
India) and Lord Chelmsford (Viceroy). It separated responsibilities between the
provincial governors and elected Indian ministers. But the Indians didn't really have any
power because finances were controlled by the provincial governors. Provincial
governors controlled: law and order; justice; police; land revenue (tax) and irrigation.
Indian ministers controlled: education; public health; public works; agriculture; forests
and fisheries
Government of Viceroy retained control of major areas e.g. defence and foreign affairs. His councils
India Act 1919 remained an appointed body but it had to defend its actions before the legislative
council. The legislative council was split into: a lower house (the legislative assembly)
104/144 were elected; and an upper house (the Council of State) 34/60 were elected.
Provincial councils run by Indian minister took responsibility for local gov, health,
education and agriculture. Viceroy could legislate by decree for 6 months in an
emergency.
Significance of The British regarded the reforms as a concession to critics in the INC and hoped that
the GoIA 1919 the reforms would weaken popular support for them - it was viewed as the first step
towards the system of self-govt. It was seen as a key turning point because
independence was denied meaning demands grew but it was also the first
introduction of democracy. It intended to satisfy the demands for greater Indian
representation among the more moderate nationalists by presenting the reforms as a
step towards full Dominion status for India
1919 Rowlatt It gave the authorities harsh powers to arrest and imprison anyone who protested
Act and against British rule. It proved counterproductive, producing much resistance and tragic
Nationalism results, including the Amritsar massacre of April 1919 where General Sir Reginald Dyer
fired on demonstrators, killing 379 and injuring 1200. Gandhi led a non-violent, non-
cooperation which lasted from 1919 to 1922 which captured the imagination of the
Indian public
The Simon Review of the 1919 act in 1927. It had no Indian members. It recommended: a federal
Commission system of government to be created across India, incorporating provinces and the
princely states; the provinces to be given more power; defence, international security
and foreign affairs should remain with the British Viceroy, ensuring overall British control
Round Table They were held in London. Gandhi represented the Congress at the second. No
Conferences agreement was reached. Britain rejected self-governing status for India because of
1930/31 doubts about the competence of non-white leaders and people as well as concern for
India's strategic and economic importance to Britain
1935 It made the provinces completely self-governing (this could still be suspended in an
Government of emergency and provincial governors were still appointed by the British). It expanded
India Act the franchise from 7 to 35m people. It envisaged an all-India federation which included
the princely states. There was to be an elected Indian parliament. 1/3 would be
appointed by the princes and the rest elected. 1/3 of elected seats were reserved for
Muslims. The Viceroy remained the head of state and had the right to veto laws and
suspend the constitution. The Congress Party opposed it because it fell short of the
independence of the white dominions and because they wanted to be completely
free of British rule. Princely states rejected federal India because the wanted to retain
their independence from the rest of India. It was criticised in India for not going far
enough, and in Britain for going too far
Hindu/ Muslim Congress won control of most of the provinces. During the 1930s, the British increasingly
clashes favoured their former policy of 'divide and rule', playing on the growing divisions in the
nationalist movement. The All India Muslim League, led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah
wanted a separate Muslim state of Pakistan. The Hindu Congress movement, led by
Mohandas Gandhi wanted a united Indian state. However, they were divided by those
willing to share power with the British and those who suspected (correctly) that the
British were trying to break up the Congress by 'federalizing' India into self-governing
provinces. Gandhi preached Hindu-Muslim unity, but the Muslims viewed him with
suspicion. The British favoured the Muslim league - they suggested that the divisions
between Hindus and Muslims proved the necessity of continues British rule, since the
alternative was likely to be a bloody civil war
Diarchy A system of double government introduced by the Government of India Act in 1919 for
the provinces of India. It marked the first introduction of democracy into the British
governance of India. It was introduced by Edwin Montagu (The Secretary of State for
India) and Lord Chelmsford (Viceroy). It separated responsibilities between the
provincial governors and elected Indian ministers. But the Indians didn't really have any
power because finances were controlled by the provincial governors. Provincial
governors controlled: law and order; justice; police; land revenue (tax) and irrigation.
Indian ministers controlled: education; public health; public works; agriculture; forests
and fisheries
Government of Viceroy retained control of major areas e.g. defence and foreign affairs. His councils
India Act 1919 remained an appointed body but it had to defend its actions before the legislative
council. The legislative council was split into: a lower house (the legislative assembly)
104/144 were elected; and an upper house (the Council of State) 34/60 were elected.
Provincial councils run by Indian minister took responsibility for local gov, health,
education and agriculture. Viceroy could legislate by decree for 6 months in an
emergency.
Significance of The British regarded the reforms as a concession to critics in the INC and hoped that
the GoIA 1919 the reforms would weaken popular support for them - it was viewed as the first step
towards the system of self-govt. It was seen as a key turning point because
independence was denied meaning demands grew but it was also the first
introduction of democracy. It intended to satisfy the demands for greater Indian
representation among the more moderate nationalists by presenting the reforms as a
step towards full Dominion status for India
1919 Rowlatt It gave the authorities harsh powers to arrest and imprison anyone who protested
Act and against British rule. It proved counterproductive, producing much resistance and tragic
Nationalism results, including the Amritsar massacre of April 1919 where General Sir Reginald Dyer
fired on demonstrators, killing 379 and injuring 1200. Gandhi led a non-violent, non-
cooperation which lasted from 1919 to 1922 which captured the imagination of the
Indian public
The Simon Review of the 1919 act in 1927. It had no Indian members. It recommended: a federal
Commission system of government to be created across India, incorporating provinces and the
princely states; the provinces to be given more power; defence, international security
and foreign affairs should remain with the British Viceroy, ensuring overall British control
Round Table They were held in London. Gandhi represented the Congress at the second. No
Conferences agreement was reached. Britain rejected self-governing status for India because of
1930/31 doubts about the competence of non-white leaders and people as well as concern for
India's strategic and economic importance to Britain
1935 It made the provinces completely self-governing (this could still be suspended in an
Government of emergency and provincial governors were still appointed by the British). It expanded
India Act the franchise from 7 to 35m people. It envisaged an all-India federation which included
the princely states. There was to be an elected Indian parliament. 1/3 would be
appointed by the princes and the rest elected. 1/3 of elected seats were reserved for
Muslims. The Viceroy remained the head of state and had the right to veto laws and
suspend the constitution. The Congress Party opposed it because it fell short of the
independence of the white dominions and because they wanted to be completely
free of British rule. Princely states rejected federal India because the wanted to retain
their independence from the rest of India. It was criticised in India for not going far
enough, and in Britain for going too far
Hindu/ Muslim Congress won control of most of the provinces. During the 1930s, the British increasingly
clashes favoured their former policy of 'divide and rule', playing on the growing divisions in the
nationalist movement. The All India Muslim League, led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah
wanted a separate Muslim state of Pakistan. The Hindu Congress movement, led by
Mohandas Gandhi wanted a united Indian state. However, they were divided by those
willing to share power with the British and those who suspected (correctly) that the
British were trying to break up the Congress by 'federalizing' India into self-governing
provinces. Gandhi preached Hindu-Muslim unity, but the Muslims viewed him with
suspicion. The British favoured the Muslim league - they suggested that the divisions
between Hindus and Muslims proved the necessity of continues British rule, since the
alternative was likely to be a bloody civil war
