range and illogical movement was not yet in sight in the middle of 1921. Its effects had been greatest with the student class and with the extremists of the national party. Students temporarily deserted the colleges but returned after a few days' reflection. Attempts made by Mr. Gandhi and his Mahommedan associates to capture the Hindu University at Benares and the Aligarh College failed. Lawyers did not discontinue practising in the courts, and very few persons resigned their government posts or relinquished their titles and decorations. Nationalist politicians held aloof from the elections to the new Legislative Councils only to find that the moderates were installed in power. There was no dearth of candidates at the elections held at the end of 1920, and notwithstanding the efforts of the non-cooperators the number of voters was creditably large. But while the move- ment had not drawn to itself the middle and upper classes it would seem to have loosened authority to some extent and re- laxed the sense of law and order among the masses. In some prov- inces the tenants were urged to withhold rent from the land- lords in anticipation of the advent of swardj or national self- government outside the Empire, and agrarian disturbances in consequence resulted.
In Jan. 1921 the Duke of Connaught visited India in place of the Prince of Wales and inaugurated the new constitutions. The speeches delivered by him in opening the Legislative Assem- bly, the Council of State and the Chamber of Princes at Delhi, and the Legislative Councils of Madras, Bengal and Bombay made a deep impression. His earnest appeal, as an old friend of India, to all parties, British and Indian, " to bury along with the dead past the mistakes and misunderstandings of the past," struck a note which has found response in the proceedings of the new Legislatures and in the Indian press.
End of Lord Chelmsford's Viceroyalty. On April 2 1921 Lord Chelmsford made over the office of viceroy to his successor Lord Reading. No viceroy had been more tried by circumstances beyond his control, and no viceroy had shown more steadfast courage, patience or devotion to the highest ideals of his great office. The era will be a landmark in the history of modern India. It saw India started on the road to self-government and admitted on equal terms to a partnership in the British Empire.
ADMINISTRATION
The Government of India Act 1919 made great changes in the political structure and life of India. On Aug. 20 1917 the British Government announced in Parliament* that their policy was that of the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive realization of responsi- ble government in India as an integral part of the British Empire. Mr. Montagu, the Secretary of State for India, visited India in the ensuing winter and in association with the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, made investigations as to the reforms necessary to give effect to this policy. Their recommendations were embodied in a joint report on Indian constitutional reforms. The Morley- Minto reforms had enlarged the Legislative Councils, had introduced into them the elective element, and had given them greater powers of influencing the executive government in matters of legislation and administration. But the executive Govern- ments, Imperial and provincial, still remained Governments of officials, responsible as such to Parliament and the Secretary of State, and not amenable to popular control in India. The annual estimates of revenue and expenditure were discussed in the Legislatures, but were not voted. An official majority in the Imperial Legislative Council secured the passage of taxation laws that might be required. Though in practice the provincial Governments enjoyed a large measure of independence, they were in theory subject in all respects to the orders of the Govern- ment of India, and their revenues and expenditure were an integral part of the general revenues and expenditure of India and, as such, controlled in amount and allocation by the Govern- ment of India. The system was highly centralized and could not be otherwise, since the central Government was responsible to the home authorities for everything that was done in India.
An advance on the lines laid down in the declaration of Aug. 20 1919 involved a break with the past and a new departure.
The Montagu-Chelmsford Report. The authors of the Montagu - Chelmsford report proposed that responsible government should be conferred on India by progressive stages, together with a substantial step towards its immediate realization. By responsi- ble government they meant government by ministers primarily amenable to an elected assembly and in a secondary degree to an electorate. They recognized that India was not yet fit for re- sponsible government in its completeness, that an electorate had to be created and that the experience of its representatives would be small. They proposed therefore to confine the first stage of the advance to the major provinces, and in these provinces to set up a dual form of government, generally known as " dyarchy."
The administration was to be divided into two parts, " reserved " subjects and " transferred " subjects. The former would be ad- ministered by the governor and his executive council, and the latter would be transferred to ministers chosen by the governor from amongst the elected members of the Legislative Council. In this way Indian ministers would be trained in the practice of responsible government. The two halves of the Government would deliberate together, but each half would be separately responsible for legislative and administrative action in its own field. The governor would be the connecting link between the two. He would assist and guide the ministers, but ordinarily would not direct action to be taken against their advice. The provincial Legislative Councils would be enlarged and given substantial elected majorities. Provincial finance would be separated entirely from Imperial finance. The provincial Govern- ments were to have complete control over their own revenues and expenditure, after making each a fixed contribution to the central Government. They would enjoy a much greater measure of in- dependence of the central Government in administrative matters, and their domain of action would be definitely marked out by a formal separation of functions or subjects appertaining to the central Government from those appertaining to provincial Governments. It was not proposed to introduce " dyarchy " into the Government of India. It was thought essential to retain the Governor-General in Council's responsibility to Parliament in the whole field of the central Government. There would be no " ministry " working side by side of the executive council, and no separation of central subjects into " reserved " and " transferred." The Imperial Legislative Council, however, would be replaced by a bicameral Legislature, con- sisting of a Legislative Assembly, in which there would be a sub- stantial elected majority, and a Council of State in which the Government would have an official majority. Bills would require the assent of both Chambers, except that a bill certified by the Governor- General in Council to be essential to the interests of peace and order or good government which the Legislative Assembly refused to pass might be enacted by the Council of State alone. In the provinces the governors would be given a somewhat similar safeguard (in the form of a grand committee) against the refusal of the Legislative Council to pass essential legislation.
The Montagu-Chelmsford report left the question of the distribution of subjects into " central " and " provincial " and the subdivision of " provincial " subjects into " reserved " and " transferred " subjects to be separately worked out, as also the question of electorates and the franchise. Two committees, known as the Functions Committee and the Franchise Committee, were appointed by the Secretary of State to make the necessary inquiries in India. They submitted their recommendations early in 1919. The views of the Government of India and of the local Governments on the proposals of the Montagu-Chelmsford report and of the two committees were also obtained. A third committee inquired into the constitution and functions of the India Office and of the Secretary of State's Council. Various political as- sociations in India sent delegates to England to place their views before Parliament.
Joint Select Committee on the Bill. In July 1919 a bill embody- ing the Montagu-Chelmsford scheme, modified in the light of subsequent inquiries and information, was introduced into the House of Commons, read a second time and referred to a Joint Select Committee of both Houses presided over by Lord Selborne, which was appointed to consider it in the light of the criticisms and suggestions received after the publication of the Montagu- Chelmsford report. The committee examined nearly 70 witnesses of all shades of opinion and made important changes in the bill. These are explained in their report. They dealt at length with the political and administrative problems involved in the bill, made recommendations on a number of important matters which
